input
stringlengths 1.28k
1.67k
| output
sequencelengths 1
1
| id
stringlengths 40
40
|
|---|---|---|
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If gun bans worked there would be no gun deaths in the countries that have banned guns.
Sent2: there are too many gun deaths and while there will never be a ban in America i find it appalling that so many fight to prevent gun restrictions and background checks.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-8f7f093f1fc946a9ad152a6532837573 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Felons are not allowed to buy guns.....terrorists would not be allowed to take guns on planes.
Sent2: To purchase a firearm in a commercial shop, one needs to have a Waffenerwerbsschein (weapon acquisition permit).
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ca7a62357ebb4cdbaf5a8f8e7d323a15 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Which is why the ban is a bit of a poor compromise, they've banned guns for law abiding people but they've not done enough to make sure criminals don't have them.
Sent2: Even in Japan, the nation with the most absolute strictest gun laws in the world, criminals are still getting their hands on banned guns and killing people with them.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-62159cd073b449bea309135f6f756bdb |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: They argue that the second amendment allows the people the power of weapons so that if the government intrudes on their rights they can defend themselves.
Sent2: Now that said, one has to wonder why people for gun control or anti gun types keep telling people that defend the right to bear arms that they could not win a fight.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c3cda368700648e4891067b48e1c3c11 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Anybody that wants gun control laws that infringe on the right to bear arms is a gun haters!
Sent2: A gun haters is a person that wants gun control laws that infringe on the right to bear arms or wants to ban the right to bear arms.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-470e3e063ec84906b19ce7dc8c428416 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Police do not know how many guns are in the state or where they are.
Sent2: If anything, cops will come to where you live to take your guns, seeing as they work for the government.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-bfbf2c7a0040468ab4a3f4611c933190 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: How can a people defend themselves from the government, unless they are able to maintain the same weapons as the government has?
Sent2: Now that said, one has to wonder why people for gun control or anti gun types keep telling people that defend the right to bear arms that they could not win a fight.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-98415c29bdfa4762a514bc974bef9c15 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Let's see what they get, when REAL trouble happens, and they have to stop everything, and try to load the gun!
Sent2: If people are going to carry guns for protection, they should be encouraged to put lots and lots of rounds through the gun.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-631bfec136ad43888ff84ee9ec6cf2b6 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Is your point that citizens should be allowed to have guns to defend themselves from the government or that citizens should be allowed to have guns to protect themselves from other citizens?
Sent2: We have a right to use a gun to defend ourselves and others.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-4dc884a300cf47a09e232333eecf513d |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: A criminal with a gun will feel a lot more confident in committing a crime than a criminal without a gun will just as a criminal will avoid those who have guns and target those who don't.
Sent2: Illegal firearms can be identified and linked to other firearms and to crimes and criminals.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c9eed8593e2f49e9946cce08d2f1722b |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: I really do not care particularly what gun control laws states or cities pass.
Sent2: Right now it is against the law for the government to keep a database of gun owners, that that law would have to be changed, and I think you also know this.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-0cb04c43dfdc4844a44c5f784bbd7b78 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The legal market for firearms gets killed off in hopes of hindering criminals, and instead the criminals continue buying from the black market, importing them illegally, or making their weapons themselves.
Sent2: Private citizens can never hope to acquire firearms when gun control laws exist, but all 'criminals' have instant connections to black-market arms dealers.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-693f54f002a64f82afa7502aac7d2280 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Gun hater pilot's lack of logic is to not allow law abding citizens the right to bear arms, and do nothing to protect the unarmed law abiding citizens.
Sent2: I think law abiding citizens should be allowed to carry conceled weapons.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-60dc33fc257847f49afd134930f9c414 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Another point that isn't taken in consideration in the stats that I've seen is that guns are used in self-defense but it still goes down as "gun violence."
Sent2: Using a shotgun or an AK-47 will get the job done, so I don't see the need to ban assault weapons.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f5ca2104eb564635aad59d5f314b82ce |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The reality is that in developed nations with stricter gun laws than the US there are less outlaws owning and using guns.
Sent2: Even in Japan, the nation with the most absolute strictest gun laws in the world, criminals are still getting their hands on banned guns and killing people with them.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-8cd2fa78d4524ee28d2e4295c0d5c470 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Furthermore there is nothing that would conclusively suggest denying this individual a concealed carry permit would have prevented the shooting from occurring.
Sent2: Where is the evidence to prove that a person with a concealed carry permit is going to actually commit violent acts against another?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-b73e7bc381024e068113f2ce63eed75a |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Or that the Second Amendment only keeps the federal government from passing new gun control laws?
Sent2: If the Second Amendment doesn't apply to the states then there is no Second Amendment legal protection against state gun laws (which would include any state laws that ban guns in school areas).
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-7478f362c6d14916aca6a62c3053d6a6 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Second Amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Sent2: 2) ensure that the right to keep and bear arms for a militia is not infringed.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-0587538f633c4f92ae7d7cfece1bf908 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The Founders had in mind guns that were much less powerful when they wrote the Second Amendment.
Sent2: We're talking about deadly lethal weapons that are way more powerful than what the authors of the Second Amendment had in mind.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-e763c4288170413488af06ee92489516 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: You're saying that guns should be allowed into school in order to allow some students (or teachers) to defend themselves if they were attacked.
Sent2: You propose to abolish gun free zones, and allow people to carry guns into schools.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-9e8c7a1173484e26b417fc7f184d6721 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The reality is that in developed nations with stricter gun laws than the US there are less outlaws owning and using guns.
Sent2: Yes, that must be the reason why in other developed nations where there are more restrictions on guns less defenseless people are being murdered by criminals.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-688f26867d96452f895d4f9f28d9bfab |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The embraced anti-gun rights interpretation of the 2nd was that it was a provision that had but one function and intent, to protect the "state right" to organize and control their militia from federal interference.
Sent2: Amendment protects the right of the states to arm their militias.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-fcc619601de1428382889a50518f75bd |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: I think the government has taken responsibility for the law abiding citizens by ensuring that nobody can carry a gun or other dangerous weapon on board a plane.
Sent2: I want to see, in the Constitution, where government has an affirmative duty to protect anyone much less "ensure that felons and other prohibited persons do not possess firearms.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-80f0bb6da0f245c88f37505dc08c8821 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: You can't just claim "Country A has more gun control and a lower homicide rate than Country B does" and leave it at that.
Sent2: The states with the higher numbers of minorities have the higher rates of gun control because they claim they have more crime.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-1dbff67df074479cae67035ba9cfc278 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Do you think that a gun-ban in the long run would mean that more criminals get their hands on guns or that less criminals get their hands on guns?
Sent2: All of the Gun control you call for has been tried in other countries and the Criminals Still import guns in with their drugs.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-e3c49ad0f3c2428fa43431c08548752c |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: People who follow laws, aren't causing problems with the guns they own.
Sent2: That most people can't be trusted, so we should have more laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f91f5f10fc1d4ce09d4a69428395727c |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Since there are gun deaths in countries that have banned guns, the gun bans did not work.
Sent2: I think it is interesting that gun nuts always claim that when guns are banned people will just use knives instead, yet we find that with guns prohibited there are still only 200 deaths a year from knife like weapons.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f30854c168034b79acd357584e7e1139 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: "to keep and bear Arms" - this would include any gun
Sent2: 2) ensure that the right to keep and bear arms for a militia is not infringed.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-45896ff468d24d6fb999064139ca8be3 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If there were a certain number of cases involving concealed carriers having their guns stolen right off of their person, then it might be worth noting.
Sent2: For instance, if something was written that says Gun owners should be skilled with their own firearms, but someone leaves off the s.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-4197680c39554d9eaf597514619d4e1f |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The bill would also protect gun manufacturers and dealers that have allowed their weapons to fall into the hands of criminals through their own negligence.
Sent2: The only way to prevent guns from falling in the hands of criminals is by law abiding people buying every gun that is manufactured and thus leaving no guns available for criminals to buy.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-376d199eaacf42aab83d5e911a430e42 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Felons are not allowed to buy guns.....terrorists would not be allowed to take guns on planes.
Sent2: The only way to prevent guns from falling in the hands of criminals is by law abiding people buying every gun that is manufactured and thus leaving no guns available for criminals to buy.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-7d62d4709b96407c9950961d653491cf |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: So if you want to ban guns, 1,531,764 people will get killed or injured, and you'll only take guns out of the hands of those who don't even commit gun crimes.
Sent2: The fact that you've committed murder is irrelevant and the only thing that matters is if a person has a gun?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-4487bdd3d8cc47d4a255aa7809a79ff3 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Sent2: Gun hater Sarah Brady like al gun hater blame the right to bear arms for the crimes committed with guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-60f1cb653414478f8badab5de0ae99a3 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Innocent people were butchered where no guns were permitted, while nobody is being shot full of holes in the schools where carrying a gun is permitted.
Sent2: But is the answer to take down the gun free zones...and just allow kids to carry guns to school?
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-cf7b846bd9b64c9da7db973a39690676 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Second Amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Sent2: In order to have a 'well regulated' militia you can not bar the civilian populace of its right to keep and bear arms!
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-02ead3cc0d2c439b884dc6fba1b04e26 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: You keep claiming that you're not of the anti-gun camp, that you actually support the Second Amendment.
Sent2: What stupid Americans like you don't understand is that revoking the Second Amendment wouldn't play any part on protecting anyone from criminals that're armed with guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-fecb2699227c4850b203fff592ac3275 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If gun bans worked there would be no gun deaths in the countries that have banned guns.
Sent2: Some studies used against gun have been ones showing that over 50% of homicides in the US are committed with guns, while in countries with gun bans or very strict gun control have a lower amount of gun homicides.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ebfe1012a45046bd9c06fa8009ad7722 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: and who commits crimes, Criminals, so if you take guns away from law abiding citizens insuring that criminals will still be able to get weapons will have more targets to attack because people don't have any defense against criminals.
Sent2: Law abiding citizens are not going to misuse their firearms and those with criminal records are already banned from owning guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-4868a2662ec342aface34bc4dd0a02de |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Or, to put it another way, more guns = more crime, and if we could stop the illegal gun running then we would have less guns = less crime.
Sent2: Gun controllers make us conclude that they are being disingenuous, and even using these crime factors to further their aim of more and more and more and even more gun control.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-b58ca4ea7474450d86fa88eca9d4250e |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Confession from the criminal or videotaping the transaction, or someone providing testimony that you, in fact, knew that he was a criminal, prohibited from owning a firearm, and you intended to break the law.
Sent2: Whether or not he is a felon, if you give someone a gun knowing they intend to commit a particular crime with it then you are responsible as an accessory before the fact.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ed10f0d91e3046cbab8f66edb25c4153 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: It is the right of the people (not of persons) that shall not be infringed, the right stated in the Virginia Constitution to train the body of the people in arms in order to defend the free state.
Sent2: 2nd amendment: A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall NOT be INFRINGED.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-97da0a9b4b8e4bd78389d36204e24690 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: So an article that is entitled "Gun control doesn't reduce crime, violence, say studies" is not claiming that gun control is ineffective?
Sent2: You say that gun control must not be effective because the study's conclusions about gun control were inconclusive.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-95ef796a41954d70b2fb1bc036d6d4e3 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: In sum, we hold that the District's ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.
Sent2: In sum, we hold that the District�۪s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-0bf63cd3be02412ca4ebebd0a837b481 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: So by you saying tourists are afraid to come to America because they might get shot in one of our cities, implies that gun owners are participating in criminal activities as well.
Sent2: First you say no law will ever stop criminals from getting guns but now youre saying that criminals are never gun owners.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-d923d5268e9f4a47a7e9307d5d3cd81d |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Second of all, I wholeheartedly believe in the thinking that guns don't kill people, people kill people.
Sent2: it isn't guns that kill people, is the mentality these people carry around in their heads that kill other people.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-4f9ce838083d4360aa471380d2f08067 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The criminal homicides almost always include illegally gotten guns- so that's not relevant either as gun control laws won't change that.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not affect criminals because criminals do not obey these laws.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-3eb7088a17dd4a0baa91f113a61ecc71 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Furthermore, the Founders envisioned people being armed with much less powerful weapons when they wrote the Second Amendment.
Sent2: Of course, when the founders wrote the Second Amendment they had in mind people owning much less powerful weapons than gun owners have now.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-a6ae2ac32b974ccfb6c4cf8e3b1d1ed7 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States America states that, ���A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.�
Sent2: It is the right of the people (not of persons) that shall not be infringed, the right stated in the Virginia Constitution to train the body of the people in arms in order to defend the free state.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-8c3a697f40794e5ea81a107815409c37 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: It is asserted, therefore, that the D.C. gun control laws irrationally prevent only law abiding citizens from owning handguns.
Sent2: The only people that obey gun control laws that prevent people from taking guns any where are law abiding people.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-e3884dc3c7774871939bb11b2485900b |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Law abiding citizens obey the law, there can surely be no reason to prohibit them form having guns.
Sent2: Criminals that do not obey gun control laws will be able to obtain guns and use them on the unarmed law-abiding citizens.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-24fb73ac72b94f788ee36dfa441e1b4a |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: That right there is reason enough not to give government absolute control over firearms.
Sent2: Are you saying that trying to avoid being murdered isn't a good enough reason for owning or using a gun?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-2ece2ca81dfe48f5ae18565352dd760a |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Crime rates equals criminals which means if guns are illegal, they must be getting them from somewhere, hmmm, i wonder where, black market or illegal selling across borders anyone?
Sent2: The legal market for firearms gets killed off in hopes of hindering criminals, and instead the criminals continue buying from the black market, importing them illegally, or making their weapons themselves.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-e5b3add335c145c4828daf1b9d4d8034 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Or, to put it another way, more guns = more crime, and if we could stop the illegal gun running then we would have less guns = less crime.
Sent2: When we factor in the usefulness of guns for self-defense against violent criminals, it's clear that normal gun owners are at less risk of criminal victimization.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-3ef79e2a30954534aaac6d634a3165c6 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: But I do not believe that a gun ban will make us any safer.
Sent2: Though I think we're gun obsessed in our culture, and a lot of times, we can defend ourselves more effectively without guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c781b1487647448a8dbf285b30ec94fd |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: It also give the right to equipment with which you could execute murders, armed robberies and other violent crime.
Sent2: You can debate that without guns there would be more deaths to other weapons although you can't debate it would be to the same extent as gun murders and crimes would be.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ebf31c871c1146d78b4bfc10312e8e46 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If that means gun control then so be it, but it does not.
Sent2: It's just that on these forums, the words 'gun control' usually refer to extremely tight gun laws, or outright banning of guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-04a8724309a24a6ea4ba531400b0ec6e |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The criminals already have plenty of guns, that means that ending gun ownership will play no real part in ending gun possession by criminals.
Sent2: The problem is that widespread guns means greater criminal access to guns which means greater criminal gun use which means bad things.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-e3e444a1119d46989997df196ec880dc |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: I really do not care particularly what gun control laws states or cities pass.
Sent2: The people that want gun control laws are the ones using the militia lie.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-b0f180a5f6d840c5b7a68a6b950793b5 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Government does not possess the authority to enact a total ban on firearm owners actually transporting their firearms, it violates the "bear" of the "keep and bear" provision of the second amendment.
Sent2: In sum, we hold that the District's ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-d6c8c9bc0d74451eb8a0015a519c933c |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The first part indicates the importance of the militia, the second part illustrates that the people may be part of that well regulated body or not without infringement of their right to keep and bear arms.
Sent2: THE SECOND AMENDMENT- A well regulated militia,being necessary to the security of a free state,the right of the people to keep and bear arms,shall not be infringed.PERIOD.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-500974105c5244939fc5c20f92ad455f |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Why do people that want what they call reasonable limits on the right to bear arms believe criminals will obey a law stating criminals cannot have guns?
Sent2: Which is why the ban is a bit of a poor compromise, they've banned guns for law abiding people but they've not done enough to make sure criminals don't have them.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-c605c0073a1e44508ed88ad5800d69a6 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Even in Japan, the nation with the most absolute strictest gun laws in the world, criminals are still getting their hands on banned guns and killing people with them.
Sent2: Look at Washington D.C. By far the absolute strictest laws in the entire nation, they STILL need gun shot sensors because people are STILL being shot and killed on a regular basis!
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-e8c0cae3be62481bb05c6de59f95e760 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Federal law doesn't give them authority to require sale reports of multiple shotgun and rifle sales, only handguns.
Sent2: Exactly how would multiple sales reports filed in rifle purchases qualify as "the right thing?"
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-d007d66ada4145989554c252c339273e |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Perhaps if other types of firearms were as strictly regulated as machine guns are then we could make some real progress in reducing gun violence and murder.
Sent2: We have a right to use a gun to defend ourselves and others.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-1fc891eaadb44697b534fcd21c29ed5b |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If this is the case then gun control laws will have no effect on who carries melee weapons, so you argument falls apart because 'the law abiding' can remain armed.
Sent2: Now if you want gun control laws that limit or ban the right to bear arms you are a gun haters.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-e98d5207f2084270a15f6f68fc6c6c6b |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: However, even though there were less deaths, there was a surge in gun crime, death and non-death related, after the ban on guns.
Sent2: Since there are gun deaths in countries that have banned guns, the gun bans did not work.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-f42d4226b46d4bf882ec3fc283bedee8 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: if one wants to own a gun i have no qualms with them but if they wish to own guns such as a AK47 and AK74u they should be dealt with in a more civilized manner to protect the people.
Sent2: So if its cause people in high crime areas want to buy guns for protection then why do they only want protection against gun murders but not other crimes.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-1e35e980de624e4583f5719350f3c927 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Some people will argue that there should be little or no gun regulation, while others will argue that there should be as much regulation as the courts will allow.
Sent2: Perhaps if other types of firearms were as strictly regulated as machine guns
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-4b5de44987e34007b2839af4b390591d |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Let's see what they get, when REAL trouble happens, and they have to stop everything, and try to load the gun!
Sent2: Usually it is 'oh look out look out, them gun nuts are going to do something.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-494ed8a632ab406ab0e2521189da0bbd |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: But I do not believe that a gun ban will make us any safer.
Sent2: I believe in gun control (and wrote this piece to satirize pro-gunners) because I hate guns and want to see them all banned, which is why I own guns and also enjoy reading firearms-related literature.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-7e19d4a663f240628702c8e273dc7461 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: A criminal with a gun will feel a lot more confident in committing a crime than a criminal without a gun will just as a criminal will avoid those who have guns and target those who don't.
Sent2: Ok, so are the gun haters claiming the police department are giving the guns criminals use for crime back to the criminals?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-0111f5c35b59441483c52b225b65163a |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: I do not support more funding for law enforcement + gun restrictions on the same bill before Congress.
Sent2: The only law I even somewhat support is banning guns in certain areas like schools and colleges.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-8fa41dc8192c47adbe1e00608d403548 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Although I still think that certain regulations need to be set in place in order to control the distribution of guns, complete gun control is not the answer; however, something still needs to be done.
Sent2: In my view I think that complete gun control helps solve a major problem in crime and it would allow people to feel safer because they wouldn't need to have a gun to protect themselves.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-bae63042414240e8bd818bde4257e7c3 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: They didn't shoot someone because they were criminals, they because criminals because they shot someone, Your point boils down to 'Laws do not work because people disobey them-we should have no laws'.
Sent2: Which is why the ban is a bit of a poor compromise, they've banned guns for law abiding people but they've not done enough to make sure criminals don't have them.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-862675f812ba4186a5a2817391f3b16f |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If today we were to ban guns all the law abiding citizens would give up their firearms and protection.
Sent2: Gun laws and bans are put in place that only affect good law abiding free citizens.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-4aea137b87344a8d9b142af784ffe4fd |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: To inact a law that makes a crime of illegal gun ownership has no effect on criminal ownership of guns.
Sent2: If this is the case, then gun laws have a provable effect on how 'armed' criminals are - more gun control = less gun-carrying criminals, fact.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-212688c90fe0447cb5e3fdd6783c0945 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: We measured firearm protection as an attempted or completed crime in which the victim reported using a gun to attack or threaten an offender.
Sent2: We have a right to use a gun to defend ourselves and others.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c0558908d71949eba16ca207d1b1e496 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Confession from the criminal or videotaping the transaction, or someone providing testimony that you, in fact, knew that he was a criminal, prohibited from owning a firearm, and you intended to break the law.
Sent2: But that does not change the fact that the law has made the individual into a prohibited person, so that her gun possession is, in itself, a federal felony.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-06849d1a604e485d9dba50d139e933a3 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Then compare it to areas with less gun control laws, such as Texas and Arizona (where concealed carry permits are fairly easy to obtain).
Sent2: Firearms deaths fall as millions obtain permits to carry concealed guns
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-7277014024d041908574a2d751a2e4c7 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: So if you want to ban guns, 1,531,764 people will get killed or injured, and you'll only take guns out of the hands of those who don't even commit gun crimes.
Sent2: Only why would you need gun registration if guns were illegal?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-413e8ba9b0a84de9a74c95f4713d6d50 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Some advocate banning Assault Weapons, and you yourself have put forth several arguments that the 2nd amendment is not an Individual Right, and it applies only to a states right to form a militia.
Sent2: The 2nd amendment only protects a states right to own a Militia.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-afcb3a9f278245a7ba93895b0d2c411d |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: However criminal organizations can still smuggle weapons and get assault weapons but the ban on weapons could lower the murder rate and hinder organizations from bulking up with annihilating firepower.
Sent2: Keeping violent criminals in prison would do far more to reduce gun crime than banning guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-dfd523fba6874574a559065860379a57 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: You have been shown the facts that most criminals get their guns from family members or they steal them, even from cops.
Sent2: So guns kept in a home appear to attract criminals rather than deter them.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-6c8481aca9af43048c2a434e447cb12e |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If guns are banned, the only people who will surrender them are those who commit nearly no gun crime at all.
Sent2: Some people who want to ban guns try to use simplistic arguments to suggest that murder rates are tied to the number of guns available for criminal misuse; and they suggest more guns = more crime and less guns = less crime.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-2fa56cd4d153476aab0a63959bcbb0d1 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The laws the gun haters want will keep the right to bear arms from the law abiding citizens!
Sent2: Common sense gun control laws the gun haters want will only affect the law abiding citizens, not the criminals.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-7ce44b2e7f5e4094a4b6c37b519572f4 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: I think the 2nd Amendment does apply to modern guns.
Sent2: Comparing the 2nd amendment to other 'rights' doesn't really apply if I am seeking to remove the second amendment.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-cd68bf8757754fe281ff0ed562401db6 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Before the Brady Law any criminal could walk into a gun store and easily purchase a gun.
Sent2: It's pointless people with criminal backgrounds aren't buying guns from gun stores (all of which already run background checks) there are no background checks on the black market and laws won't change that.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-183cf2b2cf834644a00562d4ec820f0e |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If guns would be made illegal, then only criminals would have them.
Sent2: The legal market for firearms gets killed off in hopes of hindering criminals, and instead the criminals continue buying from the black market, importing them illegally, or making their weapons themselves.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-042e775cd35445f9a8b432ca6651c0b9 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: In other words the Miller case interpreted the Second Amendment to mean one has the right to own militia type weapons.
Sent2: The Miller Court said that the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment should be read with the militia end in view.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-0b28864deccd4ec983042c03bbac9788 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: This is just as unrealistic a view that saying gun laws will prevent all crime- of course some criminals will not obey the law- that is what makes them criminals!
Sent2: Your advocating total violation of the constitution to prevent criminals from stealing guns from law abiding citizens.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ff74340e1a604d24a938ac812481f417 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The higher rate of gun ownership by criminals is far outweighed by the threat of citizens owning guns.
Sent2: states with higher rates of household firearm ownership had significantly higher homicide victimization rates for children, and for women and men.States With Higher Levels Of Gun Ownership Have Higher Homicide Rates
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ab36365a5bd14fb0b4c40419ab22c70a |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: I feel like existing laws need to actually be enforced and new ones targeted at those they are created for and not at legal law abiding gun owners.
Sent2: because I've made a legitimate point that not all gun owners abide by the law?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-bc3bc2a8d5694c729cc3396b83af26c0 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: because I've made a legitimate point that not all gun owners abide by the law?
Sent2: Gun control laws do not deprive gun ownership for those who do not follow laws.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-c313d33e32804c26983a1bf2b317e45a |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If anything, it has ruled in favor of gun control, saying in the Miller case that "The Second Amendment must be interpreted and applied with a view to its purpose of rendering effective the Militia."
Sent2: In the Miller case, the court essentially ruled that the second ammendment does indeed convey an individual right, but that the right in question is dependant on the type of weapon (i.e must be suitable for military use).
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-093f5f3b3ac94c58bd16121309dcb6c7 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Since they've never done this it's only safe to assume that they hate absolutely any kind of gun and want them all banned outright without exception.
Sent2: It is interesting how people that want to ban the right to bear arms never apply their logic to the rights they like.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-e127fd262ef340b880c3517bc7b9443f |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: For every one crime gun that California exports, we get more than two crime guns imported back into our state."
Sent2: We must be doing something right because our violent crime rates are dropping while your native country keeps rising in spite of gun and knife bans.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-cf04bf4e2ae641e48abd5fe88318929e |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: That will take the criminals off the street and with them off the street there are no gun control concerns.
Sent2: So anybody who has a gun for self protection is now dead because they dont have guns, just the criminals.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-95446419769c46f9993c94507c311b53 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters think banning guns will make criminals stop being criminals.
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-5f9cdaee959c4186b063c0c56aea44a8 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If guns would be made illegal, then only criminals would have them.
Sent2: If you take away the civilian's only right to self defense, how are they suppose to defend themselves from the criminals who buy weapons and drugs from the black market illegally.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-0360702b7e494bbda27bb661defc00e6 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: To inact a law that makes a crime of illegal gun ownership has no effect on criminal ownership of guns.
Sent2: Gun ownership is a protected right, and the fact that criminals use guns in the commission of crime will never change this fact.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-3956b74523c54cfca7288d04a5e3f2b6 |