Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 118 posts

Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind

#101

Post by hga »

bmelton wrote: post #84
meritt wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This graph is focused on expansion of rights, not retraction.

With a few exceptions, gun rights have, for the most part, expanded over the past couple of decades. More and more states are adopting some form of carry laws, and to my knowledge, those that have expanded gun rights have never reversed. The one notable exception that comes to mind is Colorado, with its ammo capacity ban, but even that's sort of up in the air at the moment.

There's a new line of attack you might not be aware of. Well protected by his own armed security Bloomberg is now the most effective gun controller (he and his people engineered the Colorado debacle, and gerrymandering is likely to keep it all), and he's pursuing deceptive transfer laws through state initiatives, with initial success in Washington state.

These laws ostensibly regulate private transfers, but in the fine print are aimed directly at hindering the creation of new gun owners and otherwise trapping us in flypaper, by criminalizing the lending and renting of guns even under supervision. The Washington state officials say they won't enforce that part of the law, but....

Next up are Nevada and Oregon, last time I heard about this.

Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind

#102

Post by glial »

mokus wrote: post #91
glial wrote: post #25

From the last graph, it seems like the rate of change (if that's what you'd call it) is closely related to the time period in which the change is taking place, or at least the time period in which the change started. I wonder if this has to do with a general increase in malleability of (judicial) opinions, or faster information transfer, or something else.

Perhaps it's a sampling bias - a slow change that started recently may not yet have been detected to be included on the graph (or may not have enough reliable data to support inclusion).

True, that's an interesting point.

Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind

#103

Post by bmelton »

hga wrote: post #101
bmelton wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With a few exceptions, gun rights have, for the most part, expanded over the past couple of decades. More and more states are adopting some form of carry laws, and to my knowledge, those that have expanded gun rights have never reversed. The one notable exception that comes to mind is Colorado, with its ammo capacity ban, but even that's sort of up in the air at the moment.

There's a new line of attack you might not be aware of. Well protected by his own armed security Bloomberg is now the most effective gun controller (he and his people engineered the Colorado debacle, and gerrymandering is likely to keep it all), and he's pursuing deceptive transfer laws through state initiatives, with initial success in Washington state. These laws ostensibly regulate private transfers, but in the fi…

The Oregon situation was particularly questionable, and I was saddened that I591 was narrowly defeated.

The chaos agent in me was hoping that 591 would pass alongside 594, to see how the state would have to reconcile directly conflicting bills. Sadly, 591 was massively outspent.

Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind

#104

Post by ufmace »

M8 wrote: post #41

I wonder how quickly will this one get recognized, at the moment it's just an underground movement on Reddit and "Manosphere" etc.: http://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.h...

I am impressed at the level of downvotes and vitriol shown towards these subjects on here. I think some of the points are either nonsense or stretching things a bit and I don't agree with all of the conclusions, but there are definitely real issues here, and ignoring and suppressing them will only make the eventual backlash worse. Especially with high-handed methods like downvotes and single-sentence dismissals as garbage.

Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind

#105

Post by DanBC »

ufmace wrote: post #104
M8 wrote: post #41

I wonder how quickly will this one get recognized, at the moment it's just an underground movement on Reddit and "Manosphere" etc.: http://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.h...

I am impressed at the level of downvotes and vitriol shown towards these subjects on here. I think some of the points are either nonsense or stretching things a bit and I don't agree with all of the conclusions, but there are definitely real issues here, and ignoring and suppressing them will only make the eventual backlash worse. Especially with high-handed methods like downvotes and single-sentence dismissals as ga…

The obvious analogy is race. Talking about race is hard enough. When someone posts a link from Stormfront about how The Jews Did It then there's no point even trying to engage them in discussion.

Parent's link was fucking garbage.

Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind

#106

Post by hga »

bmelton wrote: post #103
hga wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a new line of attack you might not be aware of. Well protected by his own armed security Bloomberg is now the most effective gun controller (he and his people engineered the Colorado debacle, and gerrymandering is likely to keep it all), and he's pursuing deceptive transfer laws through state initiatives, with initial success in Washington state. These laws ostensibly regulate private transfers, but in the fi…

The Oregon situation was particularly questionable, and I was saddened that I591 was narrowly defeated. The chaos agent in me was hoping that 591 would pass alongside 594, to see how the state would have to reconcile directly conflicting bills. Sadly, 591 was massively outspent.

When you're fighting the 13th wealthiest person in the world, who can also get other billionaires to join in at least for Washington state (note to others, there were Washington state initiatives), you're going to get outspent heavily. We haven't yet figured out how to counter him, and like e.g. the BATFE, might not until there are enough atrocities to wake people up to the threat. Which would require an anti-gun state's people passing one of these, and the state then using it as more flypaper. Less likely with less viciously anti-gun states like Washington.

Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind

#107

Post by bmelton »

hga wrote: post #106
bmelton wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Oregon situation was particularly questionable, and I was saddened that I591 was narrowly defeated. The chaos agent in me was hoping that 591 would pass alongside 594, to see how the state would have to reconcile directly conflicting bills. Sadly, 591 was massively outspent.

When you're fighting the 13th wealthiest person in the world , who can also get other billionaires to join in at least for Washington state (note to others, there were Washington state initiatives), you're going to get outspent heavily. We haven't yet figured out how to counter him, and like e.g. the BATFE, might not until there are enough atrocities to wake people up to the threat. Which would require an anti-gun st…

On the up-side, at least you haven't run into the "confiscation through anonymous tip line" issue, yet.

I am hopeful that, eventually, for-cost registration schemes will eventually go the way of the dodo, as I personally equate them to a poll tax, so either the laws will be rescinded on those grounds, or FFL fees will be eliminated, which should ameliorate at least some of the issue.

I'm a long way from Washington. Is the current interpretation of I594 being applied to temporary transfers? I'm in Maryland, and we have a similar transfer limitation, but were at least able to press the AG into issuing a formal opinion on some aspects of the law, though the specifics of it currently elude me.

Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind

#108

Post by hga »

bmelton wrote: post #107
hga wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're fighting the 13th wealthiest person in the world , who can also get other billionaires to join in at least for Washington state (note to others, there were Washington state initiatives), you're going to get outspent heavily. We haven't yet figured out how to counter him, and like e.g. the BATFE, might not until there are enough atrocities to wake people up to the threat. Which would require an anti-gun st…

On the up-side, at least you haven't run into the "confiscation through anonymous tip line" issue, yet. I am hopeful that, eventually, for-cost registration schemes will eventually go the way of the dodo, as I personally equate them to a poll tax, so either the laws will be rescinded on those grounds, or FFL fees will be eliminated, which should ameliorate at least some of the issue. I'm a long way from Washington. I…

I'm in Missouri, so paradise compared to Maryland, and initiative wise better than Washington. Heck, our recent constitutional amendment on the subject (http://ballotpedia.org/Missouri_Right_to_Bear_Arms,_Amendmen...) ought to make such an initiative impossible, but the one very bad thing about the state is our courts. So I'm not following Washington state closely, but as I recall there was an "on pain of lawsuit" AG opinion/pledge not to prosecute on temporary transfers. Or see Colorado where the authorities promised not to prosecute folks who left their guns with friends during the nasty flooding not long after the Bloomberg laws passed.

But of course each state's enforcement will be different, and subject to change. The really nasty states didn't start out enforcing their laws in truly nasty ways until the zeitgeist changed enough and laws aimed for blacks and disfavored immigrants were applied to all but the anointed.

Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind

#110

Post by lkbm »

goodcanadian wrote: post #99
lkbm wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need someone to bring a case to court, yes, but do you need a court case and widespread popular support? Interracial marriage hit 50% approval in the US in the mid-nineties.[0] It was made legal (nationally) in the 1960s. [0] http://www.gallup.com/poll/28417/most-americans-approve-inte...

You seem to have focused on my secondary comment rather than my main point. My point was that judges are a product of society as much as anyone. They may make rulings that are unpopular, but they will rarely make rulings that are unthinkable within our society. As for your example of interracial marriage, there is a stark difference between disapproving of something and thinking it should be a crime.

Yes, it has to be thinkable, but I don't know whether or not judicial decisions closely follow public opinion. With interracial marriage, it doesn't _seem_ to have. (I'll agree there is a difference between disapproval and favoring criminalization, I've seen no data on percentage thinking it should be decriminalized, so I use the data I do have, with a grain of salt.)

My issue is I don't have any data to say whether the judiciary follows closely public opinion, or comes from something else--luck of the draw in who happens to be sitting on the court, for example. (e.g., the change that switched national minimum wage from unconstitutional to A-OK seemed to primarily involved FDR putting friendlier judges on the bench, not an outcry from the public.)

Post reply on HN