6 ms·

Except when it comes to speech

by xfitm3 6y ago

SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
And firearms.
- whoknew1122 6y ago
  Unless it's Black people carrying firearms. Then conservatives love gun control: https://theweek.com/articles/582926/how-ronald-reagan-learned-love-gun-control https://theweek.com/articles/582926/how-ronald-reagan-learne... Reagan started modern gun control legislation, because Black Panthers were exercising their rights to open carry.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    This is a mischaracterization of an entire group of people based on the actions of a few. Even the NRA has pushed for protections that would benefit groups who may be discriminated against, such as promoting shall-issue or constitutional carry.
    - icandoit 6y ago
      I didn't see anything like that on their Wikipedia page. Perhaps you could share it here. I remember several years ago there were self-defense classes hosted by gay men, for other gay people in my city. Pre gay-marriage and post Matthew Shepard, obviously. My recollection was that it was entirely the gay community and no NRA outreach. It would dramatically improve my opinion of the NRA to learn that they sponsored or materially supported such an effort.
      - giantg2 6y ago
        The push to make carry permits shall-issue should be pretty evident. The point with that is so you don't have an issuing authority (like a sherriff) denying people a permit on a discriminatory basis when they otherwise met the requirements (commonly a racial issue in the past, such as when MLK was denied a permit). May-issue states like NJ, NY, MD, etc can deny a permit for people who meet the legal requirements on some other reason. Generally the wealthy and well connected are more likely to get a permit. I don't know if there are any specific outreach programs. I know they have youth programs and recently started some geared towards women. Generally these distinctions in training are made if there's enough demand to form a new training program and also if the topics would be sufficiently different. For example, the youth training would be about basic safety and marksman ship. Women can join the same classes as men, but the women's course covers different defensive tactics based on general size and strength differences as well as topics like carrying in a purse. The NRA sets the curriculum, but the actual training is provided by a certified instructor. These instructors and the businesses they are affiliated perform their own outreach. Here's an example of outreach after the Pulse attack - https://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/os-group-offering-free-classes-to-train-gays-on-guns-20161019-story.html https://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/os-group-offering-f.... My experience at events has generally been that everyone is welcome. There can be an odd person or two who have personal beliefs which are biased, but the groups as a whole are welcoming. I don't like to make assumptions about people, and I also don't go around asking everyone their business - so I have no way of knowing if the people I've met are hetero, LGBTQ, or any other personal traits. What I can say, is that I've met people whom others might have stereotyped as being LGBTQ (whether they were or not) and were not treated any differently. This has been my observation when it comes to other personal traits as well. The only trait that I know of that will land some incendiary comments might be political opinions supporting candidates which are gun control supporters. Edit: The negative side of the NRA from an LGBTQ perspective would be their support of pro-gun candidates may incidentally be supporting a candidate who's other policies may negatively impact the LGBTQ community.
    - stonogo 6y ago
      The NRA supported the Mulford Act.
      - giantg2 6y ago
        Yes, and they also set up chartered gun clubs in African American communities in the 60s. The one founded by Robert Williams is probably the most well known.
      - SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
        And the Democrats were the party of slavery. The similarly is just as that isn’t the same Democrat party as today, neither is the NRA. The NRA supporting some specific gun control schemes is what caused their coup.
        giantg2 6y ago
        They still support some gun control today when it's politically advantageous, such as the bump stock ban. Seems there's another coup based on the recent financial issues...
        SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
        Your perspective is entirely wrong from the ground level view of what happened. The NRA never supported or advocated bump stock bans. End of story really. They realized like everyone else this wasn’t a hill to die on and didn’t fight too hard, but did fight a little. Bump stocks were “legal” not by a law or any official regulation, only by the ATF’s previous judgment. The ATF, NFA Tech branch specifically was able at any time to change their mind on this, and that was the reality everyone knew. This is how the ATF operates, “judgments” they often contradict themselves on, not law. Bump stocks were a hot topic for a month and the only supporters that were worth listening to were arguing on grounds of the ATF ability to “determine”, not that they were fans of the product. In the gun world, no one liked bump stocks. So no one was really going to fight for them.
- jliptzin 6y ago
  The obvious difference is that Democrats don't advertise themselves as the party of small government and personal freedoms the way Republicans do.
honkycat 6y ago
Can you point to a specific instance of a liberal state suppressing free speech?
- nullifidian 6y ago
  https://observer.com/2019/05/kamala-harris-wants-to-ban-social-media-hate-speech-if-shes-elected-president/ https://observer.com/2019/05/kamala-harris-wants-to-ban-soci...
  - theplague42 6y ago
    Last time I checked, Kamala Harris is neither a state nor President right now.
    - flyingfences 6y ago
      Right, she was just in charge of bringing a state's cases against people and is likely about to become second in line for the Presidency.
    - nullifidian 6y ago
      Both states and Kamala can't limit speech due to the current SCOTUS absolutist consensus on the first amendment, but that doesn't mean they don't want to. If we are to judge from colleges' foray into https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_code in the 90s, the entirety of FIRE jurisprudence in the last 2 decades, and FAANG workforces demanding more censorship, colleges being a pretty close approximation of liberal views on the freedom of speech, especially future views, the moment SCOTUS lifts its absolutism, there will be numerous regulations of speech in liberal jurisdictions, and then federally.
- giantg2 6y ago
  I believe several liberal states have passed laws restricting the distribution of information related to firearms, specifically 3D printing designs. Less state related, but still state tolerated... there have been schools that fire professors for minor speech related issue (the nega nega nega incident for example). Or restrict some political movements/organizations in schools while allowing others to be promoted (look at differences in (in)tolerance of NRA and BLM).
tenpies 6y ago
And increasingly religion, especially all but one religion.
amanaplanacanal 6y ago
The Oregon state constitution guarantees freedom of expression, and the state supreme court's interpretation of that is even stronger than the national 1st amendment protection. For instance public nudity is considered free expression, and exotic dancers typically dance completely nude, and there is an annual naked bike ride through Portland.

Except when it comes to speech

by xfitm3 6y ago

Except when it comes to speech

SV_BubbleTime 6y ago

And firearms.

whoknew1122 6y ago
Unless it's Black people carrying firearms. Then conservatives love gun control: https://theweek.com/articles/582926/how-ronald-reagan-learned-love-gun-control https://theweek.com/articles/582926/how-ronald-reagan-learne... Reagan started modern gun control legislation, because Black Panthers were exercising their rights to open carry.
- giantg2 6y ago
  This is a mischaracterization of an entire group of people based on the actions of a few. Even the NRA has pushed for protections that would benefit groups who may be discriminated against, such as promoting shall-issue or constitutional carry.
  - icandoit 6y ago
    I didn't see anything like that on their Wikipedia page. Perhaps you could share it here. I remember several years ago there were self-defense classes hosted by gay men, for other gay people in my city. Pre gay-marriage and post Matthew Shepard, obviously. My recollection was that it was entirely the gay community and no NRA outreach. It would dramatically improve my opinion of the NRA to learn that they sponsored or materially supported such an effort.
    - giantg2 6y ago
      The push to make carry permits shall-issue should be pretty evident. The point with that is so you don't have an issuing authority (like a sherriff) denying people a permit on a discriminatory basis when they otherwise met the requirements (commonly a racial issue in the past, such as when MLK was denied a permit). May-issue states like NJ, NY, MD, etc can deny a permit for people who meet the legal requirements on some other reason. Generally the wealthy and well connected are more likely to get a permit. I don't know if there are any specific outreach programs. I know they have youth programs and recently started some geared towards women. Generally these distinctions in training are made if there's enough demand to form a new training program and also if the topics would be sufficiently different. For example, the youth training would be about basic safety and marksman ship. Women can join the same classes as men, but the women's course covers different defensive tactics based on general size and strength differences as well as topics like carrying in a purse. The NRA sets the curriculum, but the actual training is provided by a certified instructor. These instructors and the businesses they are affiliated perform their own outreach. Here's an example of outreach after the Pulse attack - https://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/os-group-offering-free-classes-to-train-gays-on-guns-20161019-story.html https://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/os-group-offering-f.... My experience at events has generally been that everyone is welcome. There can be an odd person or two who have personal beliefs which are biased, but the groups as a whole are welcoming. I don't like to make assumptions about people, and I also don't go around asking everyone their business - so I have no way of knowing if the people I've met are hetero, LGBTQ, or any other personal traits. What I can say, is that I've met people whom others might have stereotyped as being LGBTQ (whether they were or not) and were not treated any differently. This has been my observation when it comes to other personal traits as well. The only trait that I know of that will land some incendiary comments might be political opinions supporting candidates which are gun control supporters. Edit: The negative side of the NRA from an LGBTQ perspective would be their support of pro-gun candidates may incidentally be supporting a candidate who's other policies may negatively impact the LGBTQ community.
  - stonogo 6y ago
    The NRA supported the Mulford Act.
    - giantg2 6y ago
      Yes, and they also set up chartered gun clubs in African American communities in the 60s. The one founded by Robert Williams is probably the most well known.
    - SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
      And the Democrats were the party of slavery. The similarly is just as that isn’t the same Democrat party as today, neither is the NRA. The NRA supporting some specific gun control schemes is what caused their coup.
      - giantg2 6y ago
        They still support some gun control today when it's politically advantageous, such as the bump stock ban. Seems there's another coup based on the recent financial issues...
        SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
        Your perspective is entirely wrong from the ground level view of what happened. The NRA never supported or advocated bump stock bans. End of story really. They realized like everyone else this wasn’t a hill to die on and didn’t fight too hard, but did fight a little. Bump stocks were “legal” not by a law or any official regulation, only by the ATF’s previous judgment. The ATF, NFA Tech branch specifically was able at any time to change their mind on this, and that was the reality everyone knew. This is how the ATF operates, “judgments” they often contradict themselves on, not law. Bump stocks were a hot topic for a month and the only supporters that were worth listening to were arguing on grounds of the ATF ability to “determine”, not that they were fans of the product. In the gun world, no one liked bump stocks. So no one was really going to fight for them.
jliptzin 6y ago
The obvious difference is that Democrats don't advertise themselves as the party of small government and personal freedoms the way Republicans do.

honkycat 6y ago

Can you point to a specific instance of a liberal state suppressing free speech?

nullifidian 6y ago
https://observer.com/2019/05/kamala-harris-wants-to-ban-social-media-hate-speech-if-shes-elected-president/ https://observer.com/2019/05/kamala-harris-wants-to-ban-soci...
- theplague42 6y ago
  Last time I checked, Kamala Harris is neither a state nor President right now.
  - flyingfences 6y ago
    Right, she was just in charge of bringing a state's cases against people and is likely about to become second in line for the Presidency.
  - nullifidian 6y ago
    Both states and Kamala can't limit speech due to the current SCOTUS absolutist consensus on the first amendment, but that doesn't mean they don't want to. If we are to judge from colleges' foray into https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_code in the 90s, the entirety of FIRE jurisprudence in the last 2 decades, and FAANG workforces demanding more censorship, colleges being a pretty close approximation of liberal views on the freedom of speech, especially future views, the moment SCOTUS lifts its absolutism, there will be numerous regulations of speech in liberal jurisdictions, and then federally.
giantg2 6y ago
I believe several liberal states have passed laws restricting the distribution of information related to firearms, specifically 3D printing designs. Less state related, but still state tolerated... there have been schools that fire professors for minor speech related issue (the nega nega nega incident for example). Or restrict some political movements/organizations in schools while allowing others to be promoted (look at differences in (in)tolerance of NRA and BLM).

tenpies 6y ago

And increasingly religion, especially all but one religion.

amanaplanacanal 6y ago

The Oregon state constitution guarantees freedom of expression, and the state supreme court's interpretation of that is even stronger than the national 1st amendment protection. For instance public nudity is considered free expression, and exotic dancers typically dance completely nude, and there is an annual naked bike ride through Portland.