21–30 of 49 posts
To those who don't like the use of this law, I think this is OK. Here's why: You live in a democracy where the popular opinion decides who's in power. You agree that's a good idea because you aren't moving to an authoritarian or libertarian country or voting to change the system. The popular opinion allowed this law, so you should accept that it's the right one according to the system. Of course there will always be…
There's a case before the SCOTUS right now that was argued back in October that has to do with something similar, where "forgotten law" (the police officer allegedly forgot what the law was for a broken tail light and pulled the person over anyway) led to a traffic stop, which led to a cursory search of the vehicle, which led to the discovery of a substantial amount of cocaine (relatively speaking). While one might a…
Another example of why legislating in a fit of passion is generally a bad idea.
I'm going to be cynical here and suggest that there was no emotion involved for the legislators themselves - they knew the consequences from the beginning. They wait for constituents to become emotional and irrational to push through shitty legislation.
Even congressmen are human, and at least some were caught up in the emotion.
Cynically (and I expect downvotes) I even imagine Bush caught up emotionally, as old-school Cold War vets Cheney and Rumsfeld finally saw a chance to pounce on popular fervor to increase executive power. Perhaps I'm wrong, but history seems on my side.
I really do not understand why some people argue that slippery slope arguments are fallacious. If there is no compelling force and no oversight that prevents an organization from doing something then by entropy alone you would expect that it will eventually be done, much less when there is a huge incentive to use it because it requires less work and red tape.
Slippery slope arguments aren't necessarily fallacious. Their quality depends on how strong of a case you can build for why/how will lead to rather than . EDIT: Don't know why I'm being downvoted. Wikipedia seems to back me up here ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope ).
Anyway, you're correct that slippery slope arguments aren't necessarily fallacious. A well-crafted one which demonstrates that sliding down the slope is inevitable can be quite compelling. One that I've always thought was particularly impressive is the line of reasoning that the political philosopher Robert Nozick employed in his book Anarchy, State, and Utopia to argue that an anarchist political system would not be viable.
I am sure our democratic system will sort this sort abuse out right away...but in reality most people in this country won't bat an eye at issues like this or mass incarceration unfortunately
This doesn't help either.... http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/august/prison-black-laws-...
To those who don't like the use of this law, I think this is OK. Here's why: You live in a democracy where the popular opinion decides who's in power. You agree that's a good idea because you aren't moving to an authoritarian or libertarian country or voting to change the system. The popular opinion allowed this law, so you should accept that it's the right one according to the system. Of course there will always be…
No. This is a Republic. Our elected representatives built and instituted this law in a power grab while the country was reeling from a terror attack.
> Of course there will always be a minority which doesn't like each law, and you happen to be a member of that minority in this case.
See the ^.
> If it does become a bigger problem that affects the majority, they'll eventually decide to vote it out. Until then, it's nothing to worry about. This is the self-stabilizing effect of democracy.
No, this is how democracies drift into authoritarianism.
I could go on, but it seems you're getting awfully relativistic, legally and ethically speaking.
Please capitalize PATRIOT. It's a tacky initialism, not the word "Patriot".
So far from protecting the actual ideals the US claims to stand for.
I really do not understand why some people argue that slippery slope arguments are fallacious. If there is no compelling force and no oversight that prevents an organization from doing something then by entropy alone you would expect that it will eventually be done, much less when there is a huge incentive to use it because it requires less work and red tape.