4 ms·
Do you really want to go down the rabbit hole of discussing just how many fallacies you stuffed in a one-liner? Is that what passes for discourse on HN nowadays
by CodeMage 5y ago
Do you really want to go down the rabbit hole of discussing just how many fallacies you stuffed in a one-liner? Is that what passes for discourse on HN nowadays?
- b112 5y agoThe claim was, most people were obeying the law, so rather than fix the supposed problem (misuse of the law to target specific categories of people unfairly), just get rid of the law. Murder has more people obeying that law, therefore, it should be looked at more eagerly with the same optics. Looking at how only 91% of people are obeying a law, is an absurd and ridiculous method to determine if the law should exist. You speak of logistical fallacies, but this entire premise is a fallacy. Fix the problem, fix what leads to inequal application of the law. Removing this law, will not prevent every other law, even the charging of people of colour with murder, which happens excessively as well, when they are innocent. Ridiculous!