[Orual]

Right! Shoot the little bastards eh?

I am not sure of the heights and ages of those who congregated in the lots nor whether they were conceived out of wedlock, but I am sure that they robbed and vandalized the stores, intimidated shoppers, and that their lawlessness and unruly behavior resulted in the closing of almost every shop in that mall. Armed policemen may have made them think twice about their criminal intentions as compared to the feckless private security personnel that were hired.

To make the illogical assumption that I was advocating shooting them indicates your superficial reading of my post and a grave misunderstanding of the role of the police as protectors of the good and law-abiding individuals in our society.

[dighton]

Armed cops in malls are OK by me: not to shoot the little (insert expletive of your choice)s, but to discourage criminal activity.

That being said, it looks like the Houston raid was a major screw-up:

Raid went to 'hell in a handbasket'

[general_re]

Armed policemen may have made them think twice about their criminal intentions as compared to the feckless private security personnel that were hired.

HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT
FILMSTRIP SERIES #127/AB-4

NARRATOR: The key to successfully promoting one's point of view in any debate is ridicule. By successfully ridiculing the point of view of one's opponent, one may cause the reader of such a discussion to come to accept your own position by default.

One way to do this is by the fanciful exaggeration of the opponent's position. In this case, the fanciful exaggeration is cleverly employed as part of a false dichotomy - a twofer! The words "armed guards" have been employed by your opponent - how to respond?

Simple! Just extend and exaggerate that position to some ridiculous extreme, and then tar your opponent with that brush! Make it sound as though your opponent advocates shooting teens on sight - this has the effect of ridiculing your opponent, and attempts to force him into an extreme position by denying the existence of any middle ground. Imply that either teens must be permitted to act in any criminal manner they see fit, or they must be shot down in the streets like wild dogs.

Be sure to practice this technique - the key to successful use of this tactic is practice, practice, practice! And next time, we'll explore the techniques of the simple ad hominem attack - how to label your opponent in such a way as to make people stop listening to him. 'Till then, bye for now!