I don't think that applies if one of the sides is using rational arguments and statistics. However, during the initial COVID outbreak, there was a lack of knowledge and statistics about it, so there was some element of guesswork involved (e.g. face masks may be effective as they help with some other infectious diseases, so let's try wearing them to see if that helps).

▲ benmmurphy 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

There is a difference between 'lets try something out' and we will use the force of law to compel you to do something. A lot of people seem worried about over use of law enforcement but really its not a general problem with law enforcement but rather a problem with what laws are being enforced. They are happy to have law enforcement cracking down on people flouting a mask mandate but less happy when law enforcement is going after shop lifters.

	▲	ndsipa_pomu 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, there's often a lot of discussion about law enforcement priorities. In general, law enforcement is used to prevent harmful behaviour that disrupts society, so preventing theft is typically high up on the list. I think the people decrying shop lifters being targetted are highlighting the hypocrisy of societies that celebrate people who can steal huge amounts of money (e.g. not paying for work/services provided due to them being a large organisation) and yet demonise people who are struggling to survive and end up stealing food. I was somewhat on the fence about mask mandates (I'm in the UK by the way) as I didn't think the evidence for masks being effective was particularly strong, but I had no issue with wearing a mask in public as it seemed like a sensible precaution that wouldn't cause me any harm. Then, we had social distancing laws introduced which were fairly draconian, but most people tried to observe them. The real kicker was when Boris Johnson and his cronies were caught not following the laws that he himself had introduced.

▲ ttoinou 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

  I don't think that applies if one of the sides is using rational arguments and statistics

In most debates I follow, each sides have their own statistics to back their reality. And from a purely rational and scientific point of views, statistics do not prove anything when they mean something, they are always manipulated and most qualities of our existence cannot be measured / put into quantities anyway. Stats are not a tool to prove you're right at all.

	▲	ndsipa_pomu 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		> Stats are not a tool to prove you're right at all I agree - stats are a tool to try to figure out non-obvious links and trends to figure out what is actually happening. They can certainly be distorted (see mainstream media), but we shouldn't allow bad actors to prevent us making use of probably the best way to investigate population level effects.