Napalm

Rana said:
They are out of touch, a large percentage of their membership doesn't agree with some of their positions.
Click to expand...

How would you know what percentage of the membership doesn't agree....in any case its Irrelevant...if they don't agree they can quit.
 
christiefan915 said:
We're not arguing safe v. unsafe. We're arguing whether partial regulation of an item will inevitably lead to a ban of that item.
Click to expand...


Just take saying the Pledge or saying a prayer or having a moment of silence in public schools.....it started as partial regulation to appease a tiny minority of
protesters.....would you deny it hasn't mushroomed into something much bigger.....
 
Rana said:
I only promote regulation of ammunition and guns sold over the Internet and background checks.

This board has convinced me that anything else is not going to happen. See, in my perfect world there would be no guns, but I realize that is fantasy.
Click to expand...


In your perfect world, the biggest, meanest, strongest assholes would rule with impunity....there would be no equalizer....women would be at the mercy
of everyone that is bigger than they are....the runt of the litter would obey or be eliminated by the alphas....a lone person would have no defense against a larger
number.....your perfect world is the height of illogic and stupidity....
 
christiefan915 said:
Because it is a fallacy and your argument follows the lines of it exactly. Substitute "guns" for "pornography" in example four.

Description of Slippery Slope
The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed. This "argument" has the following form:

  1. Event X has occurred (or will or might occur).
  2. Therefore event Y will inevitably happen.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because there is no reason to believe that one event must inevitably follow from another without an argument for such a claim. This is especially clear in cases in which there is a significant number of steps or gradations between one event and another.

Examples of Slippery Slope

  1. "We have to stop the tuition increase! The next thing you know, they'll be charging $40,000 a semester!"
  2. "The US shouldn't get involved militarily in other countries. Once the government sends in a few troops, it will then send in thousands to die."
  3. "You can never give anyone a break. If you do, they'll walk all over you."
  4. "We've got to stop them from banning pornography guns. Once they start banning one form of literature firearm, they will never stop. Next thing you know, they will be burning banning all the books guns!"
Click to expand...


Your bullshit post is below your intelligence....no one said because a happens that b MUST happen....
Its like claiming that smokers MUST and WILL without doubt get cancer....obviously thats untrue....

But we must use a little common sense and acknowledge what is likely to happen.....and that is that smokers are likely to get cancer, not that they must.
and THAT is the slippery slope of giving up your rights a little at a time....sooner of later, you'll lose the right completely or have so little of it left, that
it doesn't matter.
Guns without ammunition.....a drivers license but no car.....a car but no gas.....the right of free speech, but only where no one will hear you....etc...
 
NOVA said:
Your bullshit post is below your intelligence....no one said because a happens that b MUST happen....
Its like claiming that smokers MUST and WILL without doubt get cancer....obviously thats untrue....

But we must use a little common sense and acknowledge what is likely to happen.....and that is that smokers are likely to get cancer, not that they must.
and THAT is the slippery slope of giving up your rights a little at a time....sooner of later, you'll lose the right completely or have so little of it left, that
it doesn't matter.
Guns without ammunition.....a drivers license but no car.....a car but no gas.....the right of free speech, but only where no one will hear you....etc...
Click to expand...

Geez, are you drunk? Go back and read all the posts, not just mine. STY said it was "inevitable". Note definition of inevitable:

in·ev·i·ta·ble
[in-ev-i-tuh-buhl] Show IPA
adjective
1.
unable to be avoided, evaded, or escaped; certain; necessary: an inevitable conclusion.
2.
sure to occur, happen, or come; unalterable: The inevitable end of human life is death.
noun
3.
that which is unavoidable.

The really funny thing is, you're making my argument. I spent an hour trying to explain to STY that it's not inevitable that gun regulations would lead to gun banning, and he thinks the opposite. And there you are confirming what I said, that just because "A" happens doesn't necessarily mean "B" will happen... i.e., it's NOT inevitable.

Oh, and for the record, the slippery slope fallacy came from this site: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html

You don't like their explanation, take it up with them.
 
NOVA said:
Its a strawman.....driving is not a Constitutional right.....
Click to expand...

It wasn't a straw man, dope. I didn't ignore his position, and we weren't discussing Constitution rights at that point. We were discussing whether increased regulations of anything inevitably lead to bans.

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.
 
NOVA said:
Just take saying the Pledge or saying a prayer or having a moment of silence in public schools.....it started as partial regulation to appease a tiny minority of
protesters.....would you deny it hasn't mushroomed into something much bigger.....
Click to expand...

I can't confirm or deny until you explain what the "something much bigger" is.
 
Disagree all you care to.....driving is not a constitutional right and to compare it to one is a typical strawman trait.

To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man#cite_note-book-3
 
RazorX said:
LOL


The sheep still continue to listed to that fat white guy....
Click to expand...

I've listed to him often. Once I sent him my shopping list, then a list of my top ten for 1976, then a list of American humourists (very short).
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Are you trying to tell me that society shouldn't be alarmed at the thought of Grind being turned loose on society with a plastic spoon??!!
Click to expand...

Are you trying to tell me that you are going to push the sad joke above a second time thinking that this time someone other than the board fools will laugh?
 
Darla said:
I don't think it's doing that at all. It's really highlighting the power of visual stimuli. I think it was generally accepted among the warpigs in power that America soured on Vietman in part because of the reporting coming back which had so many visuals on the nightly news. That is why they cracked down on that and we had such bullshit as "embedded reporters" for subsequent wars. And why they wouldn't allow pictures of dead soldiers coming back in coffins even. The power of the visual is astounding. And Emmett Till is another powerful example of this.

And yeah, he's right. Wherever you come down on this, you can say what you want, but if any pics like that ever leak out, this is over.
Click to expand...

for Darla
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top