http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-wobraz244482678oct24,0,723332.story?coll=ny-worldnews-headlines

Quote :

"Earlier this year, support for the ban was running as high as 80 percent. But in the weeks before the referendum, both sides were granted free time to present their cases on prime-time TV, and the pro-gun lobby began to grow. Analysts said the pro-gun lobby benefited from equal time on television in the final weeks of the campaign and that they cannily cashed in on Brazilian skepticism of the police. "They ask the question: 'Do you feel protected and do you think the government is protecting you?' and the answer is a violent no," said political scientist David Fleischer of the University of Brasilia."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,173154,00.html

10/24/2005 8:15:27 AM

Quote :

"Analysts said the pro-gun lobby benefited from equal time on television in the final weeks of the campaign and that they cannily cashed in on Brazilian skepticism of the police. "

Quite a dramatic shift in public opinion. Supposedly 80% in favor the ban initially to ~64% voting against it. Or maybe the initial "polls" weren't accurate and were doctored to give a false perception of public opinion.

Do you think that actually giving the pro-gun lobby some time on television to articulate a message and defend their position (and ending the one-sided pro-gun ban message from the media) made a difference?

10/24/2005 9:29:01 AM

But why would brazilians be skeptical of their police? </rhetorical question>

http://www.m90.org/view_image.php?image_id=8282

10/26/2005 11:10:56 AM