Bias is Bipartisan: Studies find Liberals just as Narrow-Minded as Conservatives

We conservatives already knew this, but it's probably a big surprise to liberals.

I wonder if any will read this?

© Lucy Nicholson / Reuters

New scientific research has revealed that liberals – like conservatives – are just as likely to avoid opinions they dislike.

Research has exploded the popularly held view that people with a liberal stance on political issues are more rational than their conservative counterparts. Two new studies have revealed that bias is one of the few issues that gets bipartisan support.

The snappily titled paper, Liberals and conservatives are similarly motivated to avoid exposure to one another's opinions’, published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, found that liberals were just as averse to listening to opposing viewpoints on controversial issues as their conservative counterparts.

The aversion applied to issues such as same-sex marriage, elections, marijuana, climate change, guns and abortion.

Interestingly, the researchers found that around two out of every three people gave up a chance to win extra money so they could avoid hearing opinions that differ from their own.

A separate paper, At Least Bias Is Bipartisan: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Partisan Bias in Liberals and Conservatives, which is actually a combination of 41 studies, reached the same conclusion, finding no difference in partisanship between liberals and conservatives.

In an article in the New Scientist, science writer Alex Berezow uses the example of progressive bastion Seattle to explode some of the myths surrounding liberals’ supposed love of science and rational thinking. Berezow notes that Seattle children have a lower polio vaccination rate than Rwanda and only five states have a lower MMR vaccination rate than Washington.

"If liberalism translated into embracing science, we would expect places like Seattle to have vaccination rates of 100 per cent," Berezow says. He notes that the city also rejects GMOs and other facets of biotechnology.

Berezow argues that the rise of partisan news outlets and social media has contributed to a narrowing in the range of opinions people are exposed to because it enables people to create alternative realities “full of self-reinforcing platitudes and free of any pesky information that might upset fragile world views.”

Seattle's ‘Gun Violence Tax’ Defeats NRA Challenge in Court Ruling

Two shots at the NRA on one day

(See post below)

© George Frey / Reuters

Seattle, Washington is now the second city in the country with a “gun violence tax,” thanks to a judge’s ruling. 

The National Rifle Association and other gun rights organizations say it violates state law and are planning to appeal the decision.

King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson called the city’s action a "lawful exercise of Seattle's taxing authority" on Tuesday, but the imminent appeal will argue it violates Washington state law that prohibits localities from legislating gun laws.

Sales of firearms and ammunition, in the meantime, will be taxed to generate funding for programs aimed to research and prevent gun violence. The Seattle City Council originally passed the law unanimously in August, with an aside that mandates gun owners notify authorities when firearms are lost or stolen.

There is a law against using federal funds for gun violence research? It's an incredibly asinine law that violates all common sense, decency, and sanity. It's only purpose is to prevent the public from knowing the depth of the violence caused by guns and the incredible ease with which one can access weapons in America. In keeping the public in the dark, arms merchants can continue to sell guns with neither restriction nor conscience regardless of the carnage. 

So, I applaud Seattle and Chicago for finding a way of funding gun violence research without using federal money.

"We are going to fight this vigorously in defense of a state preemption law that has served Washington citizens well for more than three decades," Alan Gottlieb, founder of the pro-gun rights group Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), told reporters.

"It is unconscionable for Mayor Ed Murray and the City Council to codify what amounts to social bigotry against firearms retailers and their customers," Gottlieb wrote in a statement.

The tax of $25 per gun and 2 to 5 cents on ammunition rounds will drive customers out to neighboring cities, hurting local businesses, critics of the city law say. City officials predict the taxes to raise as much as $500,000 annually.

Modeling the ordinance after what Cook County, Illinois and Chicago have adopted, Seattle City Council President and sponsor of the law Tim Burgess says it is a "legitimate and appropriate way to raise revenue for gun safety research and prevention programs,"

"Judge Robinson saw through the NRA's distorted efforts to put gun industry profits ahead of public safety," Burgess added.

In other words, he's a Democrat!

The NRA, SAF, and the National Shooting Sports Foundation joined with two gun owners and two local gun store owners to sue the City Council in August, referring to the city law as "a piece of propaganda."

"It’s unfortunate the court chose to ignore the law and embrace the Seattle City Council’s anti-gun agenda," Lars Dalseide, NRA spokesman, said in a statement.

According to Public Health-Seattle and King County, from 2006 to 2010 the average number of shooting deaths was 131, with 536 being hospitalized for gunshot wounds. Officials also noted that the medical treatment of 253 shooting victims at Harborview Medical Center in 2014 cost $17 million in total direct costs – and taxpayers were responsible for $12 million of it.