LOL..funny(seriously). It looks like your flooding, in other words....coming up short

 

ok... next time you encounter an aggressive driver...flip them off. Do it 100 more times and see what happens.

I can tell you I've probably done it 100 times and I don't recall ever having someone smash into the side of my car then proceed to punch me in the face.......rocket scientist.

 

its perfectly logical if you dont take any other information into account.. too bad theres too much other pertinant information to make your assumption believable/logical...its perfectly logical to try to kill someone because they made an obscene gesture towards you... again *fart*:thumbsdown:

 

Terrible...I seriously expected better. Heres what you did:


"A straw man, or straw person, argument is a logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact misleading, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted."


Nice try but your inferior argument does not offset the validity of mine. You have introduced a variable that does not apply to my stance. Thus, your argument is weak. If your logic doesn't lead you to believe the TRUTH and FACT of ignoring aggressive drivers will keep you out of trouble, then you are hopeless.

 

how is what you're doing any different than what I just did...it's called flipping the script and I don't need an internet site to tell me what that means...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

raginbull is 1000% at fault for this whole ordeal.. why? cuz i say so.. that makes more perfect logical sense lol

 

I think he is looking for something more like this.

Is it not fact that had he not been driving erratically, I would have not given him the finger?

 

The difference is I pointed it out when I did it. The reason why I used it is because your insulting and condescending *** is stubborn. You dance around the FACT that if it he didn't do it, nothing would have happened. Thus I had to use some other method to get across to you guys. I don't fricken see what the difficult part about comprehending that is. IP even ACKNOWLEDGED HIS PART in it. Again, IF he were humble and just shook his head, THIS would have not happened. CAUSE AND EFFECT!


Flip the script my ***... just came to show how ineffective your argument was!

 

Is it not fact that if you would have not given him the finger, he would not have RAMMED you INTENTIONALLY?

 

Hell you could keep playing it back. Say he just got fired from his job, and that was the reason for his poor driving.

 

HAHA yes, but the point I made is just as valid as this arguement.

 

Your right...but what is the lesson here? If you want to take the RISK of getting RAMMED or into a FIGHT then you CHOOSE to flip someone off regardless of who they are. Or, you ignore them AND WILL NOT get into trouble.

 

Thats true, but the same arguement could be used against him, and can not dictate fault.

And I can honestly say I wont flip people off any longer.

 

/thread

 

Your right cause and effect applies to him as well. However, the issue here is not addressing or validating his behaviour but rather how you could have avoided this whole situation. That was the crux of this whole argument. What could YOU not him HAVE DONE to avoid the SITUATION.