If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.
"God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
-C G Jung
When people resort to slippery slope arguments, they deal in absolutes and argue, not from the position of what is actually advocated, but where it might lead. As such, they are indulging in fallacious reasoning, since they are dealing in hypotheticals. Indeed, one could just as easily argue that lack of such regulation will lead to people having the right to walk around with suitcase nukes. After all, if we are to argue the extreme end product at one end, why not the other?
Instead of dealing in the absolutes of slippery slope fallacies, though, why not deal with the issue in terms of where along a continuum we wish to place the ownership of weapons? We already restrict which kinds of weapons can be owned by which kinds of people, and so perhaps an honest recognition of this fact might go a long way towards avoiding many of the fallacies being offered by those favoring less restriction rather than more. It isn't an all or nothing proposition. It never has been and it never will.
Last edited by Gardener; 01-29-13 at 12:39 PM.
"you're better off on Stormfront discussing how evil brown men are taking innocent white flowers." Infinite Chaos
Can't we just turn Congress off and then turn it back on again?
Semper Fidelis, Semper Liber.
Stolen fair and square from the Capt. Courtesey himself.I spit at lots of people through my computer screen. Not only does it "teach them a lesson" but it keeps the screen clean and shiny.