Ironbark

Val cites an example of bad behaviour by some people after viewing pornography. This is just another case of ad hoc ergo procter hoc. Because two events occured together it does not mean there was a causal relationship. He tells us for example that "young ringers cut loose on the Aboriginal girls" after watching pornography. He does not tell us if they were also drinking alcohol for instance. Was it alcohol or pornography or some other reason (they had been out for a long time working and had come into town planning to "have fun". He makes the false assumption that because they watched pornography just before that must be the only reason they "cut loose". the question that should have been tested is how many times had they watched pornography and NOT cut loose before you can establish any sort of link.

Then there is the simple argument of why punish the majority for the actions of the minority. No one suggests banning cars because some people drive badly.