You're right in that I could be saying that, but I think my reasoning isn't fallacious, facetious maybe, but not fallacious.
It would be wrong if you could garantee no more restrictive laws based on reactionary law makers.
Patriot Act? Freedoms restricted under the guise of protecting freedoms.
I've had this talk with a number of people. They argue that if you have nothing to hide why hide?
Well, what if they make something illegal that is a basic right.
What if alcohol was illegal?
What if being homosexual was illegal?
What if being black meant you were not allowed to vote?
What if being female meant you were not allowed to vote?
But your right, it's not like the US has a precedent of have laws like that.
All crimes are committed by the living, therefore living is a crime (Judge Death, 2000AD)
If you introduce an ID card (basically formalising/simplifying your social security number system) and nationalise the driver's licenses the right wingers will freak and they will dedicate all their efforts in stopping it. This will allow the health care reforms to settle in and become accepted.
...where in Seattle does she work?
They are called computers simply because computation is the only significant job that has so far been given to them.