>we've seen thought the history of time that it's ok to punish
otherwise-acceptable behavior as long as it acts as an insurance in order to
prevent more harmful acts.
I doubt there's actually any evidence for it. It's not that I don't understand
the rationale behind it, it's that I reject it. Outlawing something merely
because of the potential for abuse/escalation is almost always a slippery
slope argument of the fallacious kind.
I doubt there's actually any evidence for it. It's not that I don't understand the rationale behind it, it's that I reject it. Outlawing something merely because of the potential for abuse/escalation is almost always a slippery slope argument of the fallacious kind.