I'm not sure your goal in this conversation. I've explained it's a very very bad idea, and you want to argue, "no, actually, I've got gasoline ... well, OK, I don't have it yet, but I could get it with just a few changes". And then you're showing me tweets to support that? >>>
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JRstract
I think this is the non central fallacy - we already have laws that make it illegal to kill people and eat them, therefore there's no implementation problem AT ALL with banning meat eating (1 meat type down, 10 more to go) these laws work, to the degree that they do, bc >>>
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
demand is so rare, and cultural revulsion is so high we can arrest (some) kiddie porn viewers bc the guy at the Genius Bar is a willing reporter why is it that a ban on behavior that 0.001% do works but a ban on behavior of 50% of people doesn't ?
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JRstract
not just scale ; it's not merely "stop 100 million people instead of 100 people" it's the RATIO of willing helpers to criminals you're going to find a lot more people who help cops investigate murders than jaywalking but also, yes, the scale >>>
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
you can arrest 10 guys swapping kiddie porn with a 25 person inter-stake task force now tell me how you're going to arrest MORE than 10 people the DEA has 10,000 employees did you meet one person in SF who hasn't used drugs?
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JRstract
as a reminder: I'm also a socialcon, and that a porn-free society would be better ...but that doesn't imply that a law will get us from here to there
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
> it can help {{citation needed}}
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.