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: 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: people who want to kill, will kill if you ban guns, they will kill with knives, or something else.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-3a0389e55e1647eba0ce5ee10b1f7dad |
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: Then why do nations which ban guns have a much lower gun crime rate than the US?
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-f7062b580d694239920a3c1d118c0c55 |
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 crime comes from using the gun (or any other weapon) to violate the rights of others.
Sent2: Using illogic, skewed statistics, revisionist history all in an attempt to violate my constitutional rights, that would be you and other gun grabbers who are trying to infringe on law abiding citizens rights.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ac7c7b2630da4c9a920f0818db9aff69 |
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: Notice not one of the common sense gun control laws gun hater pilot is demanding is to punish dangerous criminals by keeping them in prison to keep guns away from them!
Sent2: So guns kept in a home appear to attract criminals rather than deter them.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-cd95fefed7ef48f3a6805c75b0568674 |
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: There is no reason law-abiding citizens need to defend themselves as they are untrained, do not have full knowledge of the law and eventually cause more harm than good by owning such weapons.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-37d0903d1ffe4387be8239676bf47c1e |
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're claiming the right to keep and bear arms applies only to a person's house, not the rest of their property, like the front yard, back yard, porch or garage.
Sent2: If the right to keep and bear arms applies within a privately owned structure designated as a dwelling then it must apply outside as well.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-93701865c5f543dd986ff2111677ff52 |
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: People constantly trumpet about how having a gun means that they can protect themselves, but first they must be able to fire the gun on another human being, something that most people find hard to do.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f44b67573d0f4ec39385eeac4f6da6a6 |
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 passionately assert that the Amendment protects an individual's right to own guns.
Sent2: It wouldn't protect the guns owned at the home of someone in the National Guard.]
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-530a7263ab96413b95a6675cb0780a39 |
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: Aren't you the one who used to complain that airlines can't choose to allow private citizens to carry guns on planes because of government regulations?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-6b456362c0b44629a2606ebb3ea4824f |
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 see you always use gun crime rates as an argument, are you totally uninterested in other types of violent crimes, what happens when all guns are banned and we only have knife crimes?
Sent2: You can not use this as evidence that the reduction in crime is due to the gun ban.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c8ce7bbbb4d7433c84595447e9d72a7f |
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 if today's well-regulated militia were the National Guard, the Second Amendment still protects an individual right to keep and bear arms.
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"
] | task146-4f82bd4f8bad4d9ca0aedd514ebb9939 |
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: Not only will the criminals still have access to guns, but they will also have the added knowledge that either the person they intend to rob does not have a gun or they are breaking the law.
Sent2: NATO, Galileo has claimed that these laws are designed to reduce criminal use of guns (which would have to mean that they target the people, not the guns).
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-8ecde87c91c14114b8e4bab3f2ef13f6 |
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: Or that someone has pointed out that gun rights advocates seem to have been panic-buying firearms in case the White House bans them?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-50a684152b3e4ac390b3f79a4cc8bb52 |
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: Simple if the gun haters did not want your guns why do gun haters only want gun control laws that law abiding citizens obey and criminals do not?
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-a87a633ae613424b89d61521d32f5379 |
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: One of the reason we are the country we are is because of our right to own guns.
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"
] | task146-9d90bb46d11645b494855f51872ab601 |
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: Whenever government mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.
Sent2: The fact that governments around the world have killed their own citizens after disarming them does not mean that they should not be armed, it means that the citizens should not be disarmed.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ef9a9ab1e13a46388bcb749495fd0802 |
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: School district employees should not be carrying weapons on campus, just as students should not be carrying weapons."
Sent2: Exactly how many shootings took place in these settings when students were allowed to not only bring their legally owned guns with them to school, but could also store them in their lockers inside the school?
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-f6670594a34b4dafb87897b95772b30b |
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: 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"
] | task146-0448889f48ea4ef695d98ca2921dd23e |
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: Thus the federal government had no power to correct these violations, rather the citizens had to rely on the police power of the states for their protection from private individuals.
Sent2: Amendment protects the right of the states to arm their militias.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-95fd51b1620845a3b83701bb990e16c2 |
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: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You would rather be confronted by a guy with a baseball bat because you are FAR more likely to get killed by the guy with the gun.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-372e7fda9a1f4fd4ac704cc414c46ac2 |
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 illusion that the English government had protected its citizens by disarming them seemed credible because few realized the country had an astonishingly low level of armed crime even before guns were restricted.
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"
] | task146-125f2f6ba8634f18a3ede5260c4c6469 |
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: Would you want your children to go to a school where everyone was allowed to have a gun?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f3ae2cffe0c64bb2abd783b105f8ed37 |
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 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.
Sent2: I see you always use gun crime rates as an argument, are you totally uninterested in other types of violent crimes, what happens when all guns are banned and we only have knife crimes?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-08281cb3c6c74bb5929f1b9fb3424d83 |
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: Less gun control probably means more criminals will have guns, however it also means more civilian lives will be saved.
Sent2: If that means gun control then so be it, but it does not.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-6b7404cc728a4061b99a66c22549f74f |
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
Sent2: No, but they might like to challenge the conclusion that states with less strict firearm laws are more often the source of guns used in crimes, in other states, than guns from states with stricter gun laws.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-491cc64e4a56457a8e9c8f2432fc0ceb |
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: Countries that ban guns or implement stricter laws concerning firearms have lower crime rates.
Sent2: All that I point out is that Canada, which has very strict gun control laws, also has a much lower murder rate than does the USA.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-96c820c987e34df5919cf9f80734af1e |
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: No, they just don't 'fear' in general, their fears are directed at something (madmen with guns ;)), and those that do find other ways to feel protected (usually in society rather than being a lone individual).
Sent2: The only way the person would get the gun back is if the person was found not guilty.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-363963559e2d47059acf06a055e0b2e4 |
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 argument isn't that guns promote or cause crime, it is that when crimes happen having a gun involved causes more damage.
Sent2: Their argument is hardly valid, they want to stop the selling of firearms to people because they think it will decrease the crimes and school shootings along with other dangers that are caused by guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-fbbe0acf4e294d06ae743006b5f6afd5 |
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: Unless the second amendment is recognised as an individual right, and given the full protection of law as other rights are, there is nothing to say that a law could not be passed tomorrow banning all weapons in this country.
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"
] | task146-1dccc2e19d9345f7a89a2ffbaeaf4aee |
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: ...Virtually never are murderers the ordinary, law-abiding people against whom gun bans are aimed.
Sent2: If guns are banned, the only people that will be affected will be the people that buy guns for protection from criminals, who get their guns illegally anyway.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f1b44398eedf4a3289001332627ff114 |
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: Strange how the gun control freaks wet dream idea of countries still have shooting deaths.
Sent2: Strange isn't where the law abiding are disarmed by the gun control idea of wet dream laws yet there are still firearms floating about the criminal classes.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-bd51472f01f94c5484e7a9e582a2847c |
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 America, every state that has enacted restrictive gun control has seen an increase in crime, police brutality, questionable law enforcement practices such as violations of 4th amendment rights and so on.
Sent2: Even the police forces are saying that the law is pointless as it would only serve to increase the smuggling of handguns from the US, and would likely not have any impact on the rate of handgun use in crimes.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-d1e87eed6f9747259c1ac534fd5f16af |
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: Now when you rightfully talk about how the 2nd amendment grants me the right to own a gun people won't take you seriously because you think the 2nd amendment cannot be repealed.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-145e93fa492f46ec9e446d97bcd50dca |
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: Only why would you need gun registration if guns were illegal?
Sent2: Are you sure that it is ENTIRELY illegal to own a firearm, or is it possible to obtain a permit for one?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-efda35bfed9a408d945bcf81510ccf31 |
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: Now when you rightfully talk about how the 2nd amendment grants me the right to own a gun people won't take you seriously because you think the 2nd amendment cannot be repealed.
Sent2: What it seems like you are claiming is that if the owner would otherwise let you in if you didn't have a gun, you have a right to go in by the 2nd amendment.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f8b9a6a656da4eb897c2156ec9ca41c6 |
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 control laws will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws!
Sent2: All of the gun control laws the gun haters want will only be obeyed by the law abiding citizens!
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-e39a015d51ce42e68bd33a40e306c91c |
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: In fact, it seems as if allowing people to carry guns on board aircraft made it easier for the terrorists to hijack them, as the terrorists in many cases just walked right on board with the guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-4853989bb68946c49e45277dbbf8709c |
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 are arguing in favor of charging someone with a crime after they were shown to be a victim of crime by having their private property stolen.
Sent2: The first thing you need to do when someone is charged with a crime is understand what the charge is and what must be proved.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c4dbe474de4f4b5ca727b1779555863a |
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 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.
Sent2: All of the gun control laws the gun haters want will only be obeyed by the law abiding citizens!
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-b2a7c726394947819cfa601fae77f2f9 |
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 the one who has to explain why the US crime rates are so high when other countries manage to have guns and not go nuts.
Sent2: Then why do nations which ban guns have a much lower gun crime rate than the US?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-d70c3b38823949878bac8b588e156bce |
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 registration schemes have been disabled for criminals because requiring them to register a gun they are forbidden to own would violate their 5th Amendment rights.
Sent2: if guns were banned things such like amo&things;used to build guns would be banned to so how could they build their own?????
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-720c8b6bc2cd4490bc0ac086297253cd |
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: Her: I don't think people should be allowed to carry guns.
Sent2: I think the concerns are less in my corner of the globe, because there's only a few people who are permitted to carry guns here, usually uniformed people like the Police, Armaguard people and a number of other exceptions.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-17562a7999e9475d8ef7d67c636a566f |
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: In short, the panel could find no link between restrictions on gun ownership and lower rates of crime, firearms violence or even accidents with guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-61bce446e8784bffab5cad053ca664db |
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 organized militia is equivalent to the well regulated militia of the second amendment.
Sent2: The Second Amendment isn't about a right to serve in the militia as a government owned slave.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-43e09a7d378b476faa0be1a929410038 |
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 the dicta from a maritime law case the Supreme Court commented that state laws restricting concealed weapons do not infringe upon the right to bear arms protected by the Federal Second Amendment."
Sent2: Indeed, the right to keep and bear arms���which we have explained pre-existed, and therefore was preserved by, the Second Amendment���was subject to restrictions at common law.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f1c38b15e95d480db28ecc00482bcf1f |
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 isn't a gun control law, it's an individual right, independent from militia service.
Sent2: What you've been doing isn't a debate about gun control, it's criticism of the Supreme Court for saying the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own a gun for legal purposes.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-1906f5f2dcf849c8bd2b7ecac8f3ee1b |
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: 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.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-ccee1556e37842a6a072f96f7c795a8a |
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: 1) Does having laws regulating the the ability to carry concealed weapons violate the 2nd amendment of the constitution?
Sent2: In the dicta from a maritime law case the Supreme Court commented that state laws restricting concealed weapons do not infringe upon the right to bear arms protected by the Federal Second Amendment."
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-0353565721144a2599fc35df3ee60ce7 |
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: Doesn't hold together, though - you have no evidence that criminal arms supply is unaffected by gun control.
Sent2: Therefore you feel more guns is the solution to stopping gun crime.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-99df45e5a3e94bf2b5463e912b68fb76 |
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 the one who has to explain why the US crime rates are so high when other countries manage to have guns and not go nuts.
Sent2: Please tell the murder victims in these other countries that gun control works.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-0d0ecedb8edf46e18a5e8627c3f40ca8 |
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 you previously had laws that made openly carrying weapons illegal, and you then pass a concealed carry law, if somebody is carrying a gun and it is not concealed, they are breaking the law.
Sent2: Concealed carry laws put more legal guns on the street, in stores, etc. the is More Guns on the street for defensive use.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-041d85184ed742a59e888ec8e0a1f7e3 |
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 instance I don't think that eliminating gun control is the only answer crime control is also needed.
Sent2: So an article that is entitled "Gun control doesn't reduce crime, violence, say studies" is not claiming that gun control is ineffective?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-7a758b021a2f417f8f349caec67cf539 |
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: NATO, Galileo has claimed that these laws are designed to reduce criminal use of guns (which would have to mean that they target the people, not the guns).
Sent2: 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!
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-62c3400812054b578ad1d622dac3d7c5 |
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'd love to know what firearms are made and sold but have no constitutional protection for ownership.
Sent2: I wouldn't mind it as much if there was a law that required some level of training for guns to be purchased, so we know that whoever buys these will no how to defend themselves.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-e47ee39d00474be38c0fdbdfacb34b34 |
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 right to carry concealed weapons across state lines exists only in the fertile constitutional imagination of the gun lobby.
Sent2: Lott's More Guns, Less Crime is the bible of the national movement to persuade state legislatures to pass so-called "concealed carry" laws, which permit citizens to carry concealed firearms.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-2b50ccfe24f34e7e95e8b2ebc38b3bf4 |
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: Unless the second amendment is recognised as an individual right, and given the full protection of law as other rights are, there is nothing to say that a law could not be passed tomorrow banning all weapons in this country.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-7838ff5d4e934da8b06ada15ece1e3be |
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: Keeping violent criminals in prison would do far more to reduce gun crime than banning guns.
Sent2: By that brand of logic, any gun law is specifically aimed at reducing criminal use of guns, including a complete ban.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-dbc7a4b0425d4e7cb26e22731655517d |
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 the second amendment protects a right to rebel, then it means that the people as a whole have a right to rise up and overthrow a tyrranical government rather than an individual like Timothy McVeigh.
Sent2: The whole reason why the Second Amendment exists is so that the people could defend themselves against the tyranny of their own government.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ace0183dce214a82a9a09469b1ec74d1 |
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: Saw a great article today by Michael Bloomberg (yes, that Michael Bloomberg), about where the illegal guns used in crimes come from - mainly from the states with weak gun control laws.
Sent2: So how is controlling the law-abiding going to help when murder is already illegal, it is already illegal for a convicted criminal to be even in the same room as a gun.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-98281fbeb2b74e5380ee2ce2c2401af4 |
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: Criminals enter gun free zones with guns to commit crimes against unarmed law-abiding citizens.
Sent2: Gun free zones are zones where law-abiding citizens are forbidden to have guns because law-abiding citizens obey the law about gun free zones.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-20fc8952e1e44f10a97ea13c8cf7ac26 |
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: all guns are used for is killing, they are weapons.
Sent2: Even "If criminals keep their guns",(if we were to confiscate all guns) " they wont be able to use them.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-259acd44c8404a918f764dfc72c906c1 |
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: Keeping violent criminals in prison would do far more to reduce gun crime than banning guns.
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"
] | task146-128346112de746899acf433ab9efe8e4 |
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: Therefore, the clichet term "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" comes into play.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-80b3a19f95a54f49b4f846e92ac3b4d8 |
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 are pulling the same XXXX Doc did in thinking that because I don't think more guns equals less crime that I automatically must think it means MORE crime and that gun control laws are effective and needed.
Sent2: Name me one gun control law that has been effective as crime control!!!!!!
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-84fb433893cc4e07887804ea2c18c5a6 |
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: now imagine if no criminals could get hold of a gun, you wouldn't need a protection, as no criminals have guns.
Sent2: Although I think a gun-ban should be effective since you can�t eliminate criminality entirely, and it�s the criminals, lunatics and otherwise unbalanced people that you don�t want to have guns or have an easy time getting guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-90f77928ae004e75aed5a04c009a9e73 |
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: Earlier this decade, the NRA persuaded virtually every legislature in the country to permit gun owners to carry concealed firearms ��� only Illinois and Wisconsin still completely forbid concealed guns.
Sent2: Lott's More Guns, Less Crime is the bible of the national movement to persuade state legislatures to pass so-called "concealed carry" laws, which permit citizens to carry concealed firearms.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-a706ec98e0484bdea08cf336ee5217e2 |
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 AGREE THAT CRIMINALS SHOULDN'T BE ARMED, and the laws already exist on the books to punish them when convicted criminals are caught with guns.
Sent2: 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'.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-59dce0014b214a43908ed6b9fc93e778 |
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: 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"
] | task146-7f285eb2a4ee4855958e54e75c7b6a1e |
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 will go to your grave trying for more and more and even more gun control.
Sent2: Try as you might, you've done nothing except go on and on and on about how criminals use guns more than honest people, and how having a gun is no guarantee of surviving a violent encounter.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-06ebaf26487c4a91903787db300ab910 |
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: The only people that're going to get shot are the ones that're trying to either hurt or kill me or my loved ones.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-35560d38eb854a5bb59fbc0178c07aca |
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 right to bear arms is explicit and clear in the second amendment.
Sent2: It was felt by many (not all) at the time that such weapons were not military weapons and thus did not fall under the protection of the Second Amendment or the right to bear arms in their own state constitutions.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f3f96b988f744270930bd5b5b551bdd6 |
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: Please tell the murder victims in these other countries that gun control works.
Sent2: My point was that the theory that more gun control leaves people defenseless does not explain the lower murder rates in other developed nations.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-1fb6737191c04a0488f3377951cf77ca |
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 gun wont kill you without someone behind it, not all people have the right reasons for haveing a gun, but does that mean people who do have the right reasons will be punished and left unarmed, and defensless?
Sent2: do you mean a gun should not be the fall back defensive???
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-eca70941383947b08d66547901e302bf |
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 order to have a 'well regulated' militia you can not bar the civilian populace of its right to keep and bear arms!
Sent2: Please note that the argument is that the reason people shall have the right to keep and bear arms is in order to maintain a well regulated militia.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-3e58da1dc7a84bfcbbe0ea74fd90ea51 |
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 didn't ban all guns, just most of them, because our farmers need them and our police need them.
Sent2: One of the reason we are the country we are is because of our right to own guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-cd1a13a47c604b479aeb28ab0b8d260f |
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 not use this as evidence that the reduction in crime is due to the gun ban.
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:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-2a89658bcaa14f8badef1d7fc2459f55 |
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 the fifteen years following the passage of Florida's concealed carry law in 1987, over 800,000 permits to carry firearms were issued to people in the state.
Sent2: In some states, some guns are just not allowed and it sticks as a law.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-6ff645bff29f48c49393d43ec52ec5e3 |
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: If so, they need to explain why they would leave some firearms, handguns say, in the hands of the people which are involved in more officer deaths than the ones they recommend banning.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-0aef5bdb1f1b4905922320ee4eb21ff4 |
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 never said anything about allowing bans on commonly owned firearms, or ammunition, or allowing for heinous restrictions that wouldn't be considered constitutional when applied to other rights.
Sent2: Machine guns are not in common use so I see no reason to believe restrictions on them would be lifted based on the ruling.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-4e795af38bbb4949b40868c5cc81aaef |
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 haven't seen anyone explain how another gun control law will fight crime, how it'll make anyone safer, how it'll put criminals away longer, etc.
Sent2: Name me one gun control law that has been effective as crime control!!!!!!
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-ea96d4f03318475d9b59d8c8abf5f2f9 |
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 stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
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"
] | task146-43bf8b43d5114480a1d0817228437d7d |
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: If individual citizens should not, in your view, be permitted to own firearms, them make your case and let the amendment process work to make your view the law of the land.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-fab4b5acd4a8412eaa80bda8ac1f2e51 |
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 realize that these anti-gun rights historians need to impress upon the 2nd Amendment a militia regulating action but there is no legal evidence of the 2nd being inspected or held to inform upon any aspect of militia powers.
Sent2: The 2nd Amendment gives citizens the rights to own a gun, not the Militia Act.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-202afe79e775440fa1c67266552ce72e |
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: While their by no means should be an outlaw of guns, I do believe restrictions should be put in place.
Sent2: Whether to hunt, protect their homes or defend themselves from a tyrannical government, many Americans believe that the government has no right to restrict their access to firearms.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-a9371d66c9a6428c86088cc640a9bb76 |
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 most gun crimes are committed by illegal firearm holders then it means that legal ownership of firearms combined with government monitoring can have a positive effect.
Sent2: The argument isn't that guns promote or cause crime, it is that when crimes happen having a gun involved causes more damage.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-30521be7cf5449f893bd30c19ab4f85c |
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: Most parents today don't buy their kids toy guns and certainly not realistic replicas.
Sent2: I already said children could tote around their parents guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-53ecd5af90fa464fa8684af67ba3f50d |
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: Are you saying that since all guns have been banned for civilian use in Countries like England, that murders by guns and gun crimes have gone to absolute zero there?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ceb3c59933bd4401aeb5cf8f916e3d47 |
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 don't believe guns are good for anything, and I see no use in having them, but I believe it is everybody's right to produce or keep one, as it is just a weapon like anything else.
Sent2: Again, I don't think anybody will argue that owning a gun prevents crime.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-93eed33d42d04a3eada58f2431680aa9 |
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 private companies should be able to restrict freedom of speech as well as any other parts of the constitution?
Sent2: The medium of 'free speech' has changed, but that does not affect that free speech should still exist - just as with the other constitutional points (with a few exceptions, if you believe Bush).
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-a29dfdac8d2545c8866bed0b77fd850d |
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: 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.
Sent2: 2) ensure that the right to keep and bear arms for a militia is not infringed.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-d8337b1c86964aeb8a237e2974437149 |
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 legal to own weapons in this country, they are just tightly controlled, and as a result we have far less gun crime (particularly where it's not related to organised crime).
Sent2: No, but they might like to challenge the conclusion that states with less strict firearm laws are more often the source of guns used in crimes, in other states, than guns from states with stricter gun laws.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-07f2b8a9add14d7db292b53533fb520c |
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 AGREE THAT CRIMINALS SHOULDN'T BE ARMED, and the laws already exist on the books to punish them when convicted criminals are caught with guns.
Sent2: The reason we ban felons from being armed (which I don't agree with, either they're still in jail or they are considered law-abiding citizens in my book.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-127ea914439d44d4ab42e7694344234f |
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: DC doesn't need to have an age restriction on gun ownership, because no matter what their laws say, you still have to be at least 18 to pass a federal background check to buy a gun.
Sent2: No it's federal law that you have to run background checks in order to keep your FFL (federal firearms license) which allows you to legally sell guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-9458e8f5de4e488f99944be58214e602 |
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: I haven't seen anyone explain how another gun control law will fight crime, how it'll make anyone safer, how it'll put criminals away longer, etc.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-88d9fe3dcda546f5bc5f1c2348c6ec63 |
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: You can not use this as evidence that the reduction in crime is due to the gun ban.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-5f0c9f637dee46938005ed5e4105447d |
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 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.
Sent2: I also say that when people commit a crime with a gun these people need to be punished not the law-abiding citizens!
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-a54b61dee9c242939eee3cdf3627c413 |
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: Also once you become an agent of the government you stop having right, you have authorities and you're controlled by the people the Constitution is supposed to protect you against.
Sent2: Do you think that private companies should be able to restrict freedom of speech as well as any other parts of the constitution?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-6e02395fa8c44b7ea1bd67e6f91dc7e4 |
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 don't even carry a gun concealed nor openly, but I have to defend what is right, just because it is right!
Sent2: I really can't do that if I don't have a gun do I. Your responsible for your own protection, not me.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-d0bcef3c142540e39ab47e0c686659f1 |
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: I would support any law that target criminals, but I will not support you as long as you target lawfull gun owners.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-9eb6f9e30c564a59b7713b6180796d17 |
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 control doesent solve anything in fact it makes crime go up because the criminals will always get their guns and your only disarming the law abiding citizens thus making them easy victims from the criminals.
Sent2: Strange isn't where the law abiding are disarmed by the gun control idea of wet dream laws yet there are still firearms floating about the criminal classes.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-cc32fec23f7d4886a00b7ff7c3e79970 |