7 ms·

Remember 8 years ago when Obama was taking office and gun sales shot through the roof because everyone thought Obama was going to 'take their guns'? Perhaps th

Remember 8 years ago when Obama was taking office and gun sales shot through the roof because everyone thought Obama was going to 'take their guns'? Perhaps the fear here, as was then, is not entirely justified. Just because something is possible does not make it probable. But if it gets people off their ass and organizing to defend their positions, all the better.

soneil 10y ago
It does strike me as a bit of an over-reaction - but a perfectly harmless one at that. If they’re completely wrong and off-base, the result is simply too many backups. I think I’m okay with that.
epistasis 10y ago
That's a ridiculous comparison. Obama had never made any moves about "taking guns." Trump has campaigned on climate change being a "hoax" and has denigrated the science for years. Then before taking office he's already asking for lists of individuals that generate this data, when there is absolutely no use for this list other than intimidation. If Obama had asked for registry of all the gun shops and their owners a month before taking office after years of calling for taking away guns, then, sure, go ahead and make the comparison. Otherwise its just a misleading false equivalency.
- peterwwillis 10y ago
  The comparison is valid because both are examples of people trying to justify their fears of what may happen because of what they see as a clear intent, when there is no actual proof of intent. The fact that a candidate may have asked for lists of client scientists after calling climate change a hoax, and that from this alone you extrapolate that he must be aiming to delete their data, is association fallacy.
  - epistasis 10y ago
    >what they see as a clear intent, when there is no actual proof of intent. You have ignored the actual contents of my post. On one side of this, the "what" is nonexistent or completely fabricated. On the other side, there are unprecedented and chilling political demands. The view from 30,000 feet can make dissimilar things look similar, but that doesn't mean that it's the best view. Details matter.
sp332 10y ago
But instead of being afraid of an unprecedented action like taking people's guns away en masse, this threat is to publishing research. There's plenty of precedent for research being de-funded and the results buried.
Melk 10y ago
I don't see how conspiracy theories are relevant. When did Obama say he was going to 'take their guns'? This is what Trump said: "That includes canceling billions in climate change spending for the United Nations" https://www.bna.com/trump-says-plan-n57982082131/ https://www.bna.com/trump-says-plan-n57982082131/
hash-set 10y ago
Obama ordered something quite awful called "Fast & Furious" which was an extremely cynical attempt to allow gun smuggling to Mexico (with full knowledge of the government) and then use the ensuing violence and chaos as a political axe to try and chop down the 2nd Amendment. This is not a conspiracy theory, it actually happened.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  Except for the fact that a program with that name existed, no, those aren't facts and, yes, it's a conspiracy theory. And it's a conspiracy theory that actually distracts from the real problems with Fast and Furious and the rest of the gunwalking scandal.
  - hash-set 10y ago
    How the hell is it a conspiracy theory?
- dang 10y ago
  You've been using HN primarily for politics, and partisan politics at that. This is an abuse of the site, and we eventually ban accounts that do it. We're also going to add this explicitly to the site guidelines (though it's already implied by them). I realize that it was the GP comment that pushed the thread in this wrong direction, but the thing to do in that case is gently nudge it back, not shove it off a cliff.
  - peterwwillis 10y ago
    Partisan? What the hell are you talking about? I'm apolitical, I don't vote, and my comment was a plea to see this from a different perspective. It's bi-partisan. And how the hell do I use the site PRIMARILY for politics? I must have tens of thousands of comments here. I made a plea for rationality in the face of over-reaction and fear. A comment on a post about politics. I even said I was glad this was organizing the opposition to Trump; was that the problem?? This is nuts.

soneil 10y ago

It does strike me as a bit of an over-reaction - but a perfectly harmless one at that. If they’re completely wrong and off-base, the result is simply too many backups. I think I’m okay with that.

epistasis 10y ago

That's a ridiculous comparison. Obama had never made any moves about "taking guns." Trump has campaigned on climate change being a "hoax" and has denigrated the science for years. Then before taking office he's already asking for lists of individuals that generate this data, when there is absolutely no use for this list other than intimidation. If Obama had asked for registry of all the gun shops and their owners a month before taking office after years of calling for taking away guns, then, sure, go ahead and make the comparison. Otherwise its just a misleading false equivalency.

peterwwillis 10y ago
The comparison is valid because both are examples of people trying to justify their fears of what may happen because of what they see as a clear intent, when there is no actual proof of intent. The fact that a candidate may have asked for lists of client scientists after calling climate change a hoax, and that from this alone you extrapolate that he must be aiming to delete their data, is association fallacy.
- epistasis 10y ago
  >what they see as a clear intent, when there is no actual proof of intent. You have ignored the actual contents of my post. On one side of this, the "what" is nonexistent or completely fabricated. On the other side, there are unprecedented and chilling political demands. The view from 30,000 feet can make dissimilar things look similar, but that doesn't mean that it's the best view. Details matter.

sp332 10y ago

But instead of being afraid of an unprecedented action like taking people's guns away en masse, this threat is to publishing research. There's plenty of precedent for research being de-funded and the results buried.

Melk 10y ago

I don't see how conspiracy theories are relevant. When did Obama say he was going to 'take their guns'? This is what Trump said: "That includes canceling billions in climate change spending for the United Nations" https://www.bna.com/trump-says-plan-n57982082131/ https://www.bna.com/trump-says-plan-n57982082131/

hash-set 10y ago

Obama ordered something quite awful called "Fast & Furious" which was an extremely cynical attempt to allow gun smuggling to Mexico (with full knowledge of the government) and then use the ensuing violence and chaos as a political axe to try and chop down the 2nd Amendment. This is not a conspiracy theory, it actually happened.

dragonwriter 10y ago
Except for the fact that a program with that name existed, no, those aren't facts and, yes, it's a conspiracy theory. And it's a conspiracy theory that actually distracts from the real problems with Fast and Furious and the rest of the gunwalking scandal.
- hash-set 10y ago
  How the hell is it a conspiracy theory?
dang 10y ago
You've been using HN primarily for politics, and partisan politics at that. This is an abuse of the site, and we eventually ban accounts that do it. We're also going to add this explicitly to the site guidelines (though it's already implied by them). I realize that it was the GP comment that pushed the thread in this wrong direction, but the thing to do in that case is gently nudge it back, not shove it off a cliff.
- peterwwillis 10y ago
  Partisan? What the hell are you talking about? I'm apolitical, I don't vote, and my comment was a plea to see this from a different perspective. It's bi-partisan. And how the hell do I use the site PRIMARILY for politics? I must have tens of thousands of comments here. I made a plea for rationality in the face of over-reaction and fear. A comment on a post about politics. I even said I was glad this was organizing the opposition to Trump; was that the problem?? This is nuts.