From: koontzd@lrcs.loral.com (David Koontz )
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 94 14:02:24 PST
To: karn@qualcomm.com
Subject: Re:  4th ammendment and Cryptography
Message-ID: <9401282158.AA01998@io.lrcs.loral.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



>From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>

>Once again, I would like to say that tying cryptography to the Second
>Amendment is exceptionally bad strategy for the Cypherpunks.

I agree with this.  I don't agree personally with liberal democrat
interpetations of the 2nd Amendment.  The first 10 amendments are
the 'Bill of Rights' and are individual rights.

>Worst of all are the complete loonies (some apparently on this list)
>who assert that guns are an essential protection against a tyrannical
>US Federal Government.

>I am a strong believer in the right to protect one's personal privacy
>through strong cryptography and other purely peaceful means. I'm not
>trying to violently overthrow the government, and I'd rather not be
>associated with gun fetishists who give the strong impression that
>they are -- it can only hurt the cause I believe in.

I'm not a democrat, republican, socialist or facist.   Please don't
give my rights away to support your point of view for some other
imagined or real right.

 I am not now nor have I in the past advocated the violent overthrow
    of the United States.

Resolved:  The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with the right to
           Privacy, with or without respect to cryptography as a
           means to insure privacy from others or the State.

--------

Life Time member of the NRA, who believes Pierre comes on rabid.

Libertarian.

Gun owner who receives no vicarious pleasure from guns.
(They don't qualify as fetish items)

--------
A Country that can have a McCarthy era has no business giving more
power to its government.