Familiarity breeds contempt; UNfamiliarity, fear

[Librarian]

While many of us properly revile legislators for their apparent lack of technical knowledge of firearms or practical knowledge of human behavior, at least some would seem to be operating from sound sociological principles.

We see the case of Britain, where firearms in lawful hands have become relatively rare; we see California's prohibition on inheriting 'assault weapons'; we see the public reaction to open carry.

Reading Bruce Schneier's site this morning, he posts this:

Fear and Public Perception

This 1996 interview with psychiatrist Robert DuPont was part of a Frontline program called "Nuclear Reaction."

He's talking about the role fear plays in the perception of nuclear power. It's a lot of the sorts of things I say, but particularly interesting is this bit on familiarity and how it reduces fear:

You see, we sited these plants away from metropolitan areas to "protect the public" from the dangers of nuclear power. What we did when we did that was move the plants away from the people, so they became unfamiliar. The major health effect, adverse health effect of nuclear power is not radiation. It's fear. And by siting them away from the people, we insured that that would be maximized. If we're serious about health in relationship to nuclear power, we would put them in downtown, big cities, so people would see them all the time. That is really important, in terms of reducing the fear. Familiarity is the way fear is reduced. No question. It's not done intellectually. It's not done by reading a book. It's done by being there and seeing it and talking to the people who work there.

So, among other reasons, terrorism is scary because it's so rare. When it's more common -- England during the Troubles, Israel today -- people have a more rational reaction to it.

Similar to terrorism, guns become scarier when rare. I don't believe there is any question that some elected officials and legislators know this and act accordingly.

[pullnshoot25]

Sounds about right.

[Liberty1]

see the public reaction to open carry.

Boy am I opening a can or worms...but,

In my observations of "open carry" both in CA and outside the public's reaction is to go about their business as if there was nothing unusual (even for those who actually notice).

The one 911 caller (and only occasionally at that), the police spokesperson, the politician, and news reporter are the exception. And granted the last three, pre incorporation and pre Sykes or Palmer, are the ones to be concerned about.

I will agree with the analogy however when the issue is directly presented to Joan or John Q. Public for their opinion when they have no grounding in the issue culturally.

[jnojr]

Boy am I opening a can or worms...but,

In my observations of "open carry" both in CA and outside the public's reaction is to go about their business as if there was nothing unusual (even for those who actually notice).

The one 911 caller (and only occasionally at that), the police spokesperson, the politician, and news reporter are the exception. And granted the last three, pre incorporation and pre Sykes or Palmer, are the ones to be concerned about.

Not too long ago, I read an article about UOC here in San Diego. There was a part where the police reaction to a "man with a gun" call was described as (paraphrasing) "Is he doing anything with the gun? Just carrying it? Sorry, that's legal, nothing we can do."

A year ago, that call would have resulted in an immediate dispatch of multiple officers who might very well not know that the mere act of carrying was legal.

That, I say, is progress. You can never eliminate the edge cases, but you can push them farther and farther out towards the edge.

[pullnshoot25]

Not too long ago, I read an article about UOC here in San Diego. There was a part where the police reaction to a "man with a gun" call was described as (paraphrasing) "Is he doing anything with the gun? Just carrying it? Sorry, that's legal, nothing we can do."

A year ago, that call would have resulted in an immediate dispatch of multiple officers who might very well not know that the mere act of carrying was legal.

That, I say, is progress. You can never eliminate the edge cases, but you can push them farther and farther out towards the edge.

S&W 686 as a fashion accessory

[CitaDeL]

I would say the OP's article on the 'Nuclear Reaction' could be true of guns, even here in California. Liberty1 is correct- open carry in most cases has not resulted in notable reactions in most instances.

Now the hard part may be reasoning out why. A nuclear power plant is certainly capable of more damage than a handgun. But you could walk past a handgun without noticing it-a nuclear reactor on the other hand, not so much. The question then is; Is it the percieved danger that people react to, or is it how dangerous it actually is? And that brings the debate back over to familiarity- having no personal experience with either a nuclear power plant or a handgun, how is one to measure the level of fear of those objects unless it is exposure to those very things?

The exposure unfortunately coming from the anti-gun media in greater volumes than it appears to be coming from the proponents of the 2nd amendment.

[jdberger]

Boy am I opening a can or worms...but,

In my observations of "open carry" both in CA and outside the public's reaction is to go about their business as if there was nothing unusual (even for those who actually notice).

The one 911 caller (and only occasionally at that), the police spokesperson, the politician, and news reporter are the exception. And granted the last three, pre incorporation and pre Sykes or Palmer, are the ones to be concerned about.

I will agree with the analogy however when the issue is directly presented to and Joan or John Q. Public for their opinion when they have no grounding in the issue culturally.

Funny - I was thinking the same thing....

[JeepsRcool]

Yep, the more people see guns, that arent killing or shooting people by them selves, the less the people will fear them...

[yellowfin]

NYC is a textbook example of this. If it costs $340 and 6 months to get a permit for a rifle or shotgun and $1000 and that for a pistol, who out of 12 million is likely to know someone who has done that?