Reddit reviews How to Win Every Argument: The Use and Abuse of Logic
We found 4 Reddit comments about How to Win Every Argument: The Use and Abuse of Logic. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
Used Book in Good Condition
Online resources.
Iron chariots wiki
Talk origins index to creationist claims
Atheist gems
As far as actual books on logic?
Demon Haunted World
How to win every argument
Books on atheism? Apart from the obvious ones by the four horsemen (Dawkins, Dennit, Harris, Hitchens).
Nuke the pope keeps a list.
Hope that helps
Of course, reporting to the police is good too. There is also a line for what to report. If you witness a drug deal or are offered drugs, it might be something to report. If you just see some guy who looks sketchy, that's not the best use of a police's time.
But, the problems you state is the reason it's good to get politicians involved.
When police forces aren't under the watch of political leaders, and consequently, the public, you can get degradation of their services. Complacency, thoughtlessness, filing away tips into black holes; these are all symptoms of an out-of-touch police centre with no outside stimulus. When they understand that political leaders are getting involved, it makes them more self-concious and will also weed out bad officers.
You also say that police reporting for smaller things is a resource hog, but it's not really the case. It doesn't really take much more work time to get officers to record tips. In fact, that work can be passed off to cheaper office secretaries.
The idea that small details and reports don't become useful until after the crime doesn't hold much water either, because of the steady rate in which criminals raise the stakes. Almost all the big crimes happen after a string of lesser crimes. It's also a big win to catch a criminal before he commits too many crimes, because they can be dealt with before they become pathological.
And even after the crime, more information gives the courts more to go on, so they can more accurately asses what should happen after a charge.
Also, 9/11 is a bad example. They're such different scenarios that you can't really apply one to the other confidently. When you make comparisons, look for the most similar examples you can find, like another city's statistics. Using vastly different events to shed light on municipal problems is inaccurate and can lead to wrong conclusions.
Also, I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you haven't had a lot of research into critical thinking. I'd highly recommend you read a few books on it. You can rent both of these at the public library.
There's even a kickstarter on a college level book on it. I can send you a copy when it's done.
Read this book. I'm not kidding, it's excellent, and will prevent you from making really bad posts like this again.
Why argue fairly? Unless you are in debate class, your opponent is not going to argue fairly. Learn all those debate no-nos, logical falisies, and red harrings and use them. To a trained debator you will sound like an idiot and your points will be proven invalid, but then you you also learned how to debate while learning the dirty tricks. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0826490069/ref=redir_mdp_mobile/189-7902275-7606404 this book was excellent.