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: The language itself is not dubious or ambiguous: ���A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state.�
Sent2: Amendment militia preamble is no different: ���A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state����a state in which the citizen need not fear the ambitions of a would-be military tyrant at the head of a standing army.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-a21d79180c6343829df62c1c504810ef |
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 courts up to the supreme court have held that criminals can't be made to register guns.
Sent2: And if you have complaints about modern day gun laws such as those that ban the mentally ill and felons from possessing arms then remember that recent Supreme Court rulings already have shown their approval for such laws.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-5849d2ec671c4fb1aa0a1a751f2fef98 |
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 take away the civilian's only right to self defense, how are they suppose to defend themselves from the criminals who buy weapons and drugs from the black market illegally.
Sent2: So anybody who has a gun for self protection is now dead because they dont have guns, just the criminals.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-814dc5fa66cf4d949898190dbc9db0a9 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: People 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.
Sent2: Making guns illegal wouldn't solve anything except to take them away from people that want to defend themselves.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ed48e087cdee4f2b8d2c3d6f1e30b573 |
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 law abiding citizens should be allowed to carry conceled weapons.
Sent2: I think laws stating that you should not be allowed to carry guns onto airplanes or into schools are examples of common sense gun control laws meant to protect people.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-8b257b339e5f42af8e95fed8bec17931 |
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: Name me one gun control law that has been effective as crime control!!!!!!
Sent2: The only gun control law that is needed is the law that prohibits a person from committing a crime with a gun.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f1f44e71dabe4eb2926e9a1d4b07924a |
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: Illegal firearms can be identified and linked to other firearms and to crimes and criminals.
Sent2: Gun ban = No civilians can protect themselves using a firearm = Criminals can illegally purchase guns, like tons already do.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-45d7102b6cb7478ca1f6d0f0d1cb780a |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Sent2: You're right that gun control isn't about guns, however, but 'control' is a secondary matter, a means to an end.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c3fc49cbc06a4f6cbea485fbfa508279 |
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 free zones are areas where law-abiding citizens are forbidden to carry guns by law.
Sent2: Criminals will not be stopped from taking guns into gun free zones because criminals do not obey laws!
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-e36d242bd7d04c6eb541ef6fd15ef95c |
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 anti gun/gun control advocate way at dealing with deaths caused by guns is to limit the right to bear arms.
Sent2: Anybody that wants gun control laws that infringe on the right to bear arms is a gun haters!
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ca7e8eb6c36e4e8f914e61ea25cdb83e |
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 anti gun/gun control advocate way at dealing with deaths caused by guns is to limit the right to bear arms.
Sent2: Talking about the right to bear arms with anti-gun/gun control advocates is like talking about civil rights with racist.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c393f40745ae479bb79369e7aea09c7c |
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 bans simple ban law abiding citizens from having guns.
Sent2: One such person who is prohibited by federal law from having a firearm at all is the convicted felon:
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-034fd4c430e6400b9aca61511fc6a277 |
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 says MILITIAS have the right to carry guns, not private citizens, and that is why the militias are there to protects us and are composed of....private citizens.
Sent2: The 2nd Amendment gives citizens the rights to own a gun, not the Militia Act.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-b6257bf691b743fba53e7781c1ab2150 |
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: 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:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-45dc352780d642b19466381c21ea8937 |
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 could hypothesize that if guns are banned then law abiding citizens who usually didn't carry or own guns before the ban will be less likely to face armed opponents.
Sent2: If guns are banned, there will obviously be less guns in circulation.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-982cef40bec9480f81a6ce5f518ce374 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: But the argument that stricter gun laws in areas with more people from minority groups shows that gun control is racist is also entirely circumstantial.
Sent2: But it appears that support for gun control is higher when people are asked about specific gun laws rather than just a general question about stricter gun control.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-bd2c86fe22f641f3b49855106d97c657 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Then we should ban so stupid people can't kill people with guns.
Sent2: Something else you must keep in mind is that if we outlaw guns, the only people with guns will be outlaws, this leaves no defense for law abiding citizens.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-feaf3d5312784d26afd3463bc74ffb90 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: People who follow laws, aren't causing problems with the guns they own.
Sent2: For that matter, why not arrest people for breaking any gun law, not just those relating to handguns?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-07f9060756904b1ab738eeb1241c49d2 |
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' does not mean a ban on all self-defence
Sent2: Less gun control probably means more criminals will have guns, however it also means more civilian lives will be saved.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-664de8c321f64f6da63f5719d584ce14 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Although I still think that certain regulations need to be set in place in order to control the distribution of guns, complete gun control is not the answer; however, something still needs to be done.
Sent2: For instance I don't think that eliminating gun control is the only answer crime control is also needed.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-1222d0fcd3b84e3aa38b61c5b8c45a47 |
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 would be an inexplicable aberration if it were not read to protect individual rights as well.�
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"
] | task146-6b73512490b34433bd0537c671f3f84e |
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 bans simple ban law abiding citizens from having guns.
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"
] | task146-28b6c900a9324c30bb535a32b12dd01c |
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 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.
Sent2: The criminal homicides almost always include illegally gotten guns- so that's not relevant either as gun control laws won't change that.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f488d0d5a1f2432985587e443ba68fc4 |
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: Once we disarm law abiding citizens, the only armed civilians around will be criminals who would never willingly give up their weapons.
Sent2: Law abiding citizens are not going to misuse their firearms and those with criminal records are already banned from owning guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-60e9472ee3ee469eab40edd919f76288 |
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's also silly to argue that the Second Amendment only protects arms in common use.
Sent2: Here's the thing...the Second Amendment and the right to be armed for your own defense isn't just a right, it's a fundamental, human, and individual right.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-4971059c51214685b697a15c59368353 |
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: Usually it is 'oh look out look out, them gun nuts are going to do something.
Sent2: If it was just a gun thing then they could go from internation flights from countries with no guns, but it isn't.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-cbf3a15b51324d8387d672403006699e |
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 many crimes are prevented each day because of the mere presence of a gun or even the suspicion that the victim or someone near by has a gun?
Sent2: The only way the person would get the gun back is if the person was found not guilty.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-01d2e3f5eb074f6b81215d3290a196d7 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The criminal homicides almost always include illegally gotten guns- so that's not relevant either as gun control laws won't change that.
Sent2: Name me one gun control law that has been effective as crime control!!!!!!
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-df470eefff824267805d730a5bef0b7d |
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 Right to Keep and Bear Arms, or any of the other rights guaranteed by the Constitution are to be abridged, they must ne done so by legal means, i.e. constitutional amendment.
Sent2: an attempt to undermine the Constitutional rights of gun owners legally to own and operate, KEEP AND BEAR, guns and other weapons of war (arms) that are enshrined in the 2A and now the XIVth Amendment.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-4de4b88631d24907a726615783995c03 |
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 not the legal gun doing the crime it is the illegaly owned guns, so if you take my guns the criminals have no one to stop them since they have guns we don't.
Sent2: Therefore you feel more guns is the solution to stopping gun crime.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c7a284bab99e45aa83d5bae705cd0431 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If gun bans worked there would be no gun deaths in the countries that have banned guns.
Sent2: 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-fb2aea9c6e4a4191b6debef5591cb5ef |
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: Illegal firearms can be identified and linked to other firearms and to crimes and criminals.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-cf79e4e6d8d642228dcddb84821f5098 |
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: Should guns be controlled, that would give people the right to demand that you surrender your weapons, just as the state currently demends that you hand over all terrorists, drugs and illegal material.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-6e6f3764d47a4cb4b200039f07c9626a |
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: We have more crime than fully armed countries not because we don't have guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-313f3d13baf8490b9ecfcd2cec085f83 |
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 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.
Sent2: It's pointless people with criminal backgrounds aren't buying guns from gun stores (all of which already run background checks) there are no background checks on the black market and laws won't change that.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-bc9a51ddaeb444729362f5cf401ea9b9 |
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: #NAME?
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"
] | task146-71fa48abd2ce4fdda96540f565a2561b |
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 looked at gun ownership, drug use and a history of physical fights and found that each of these factors is associated with a higher homicide rate in the home.
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"
] | task146-9b637d65778d425b8a4ed1f3f2bb2ec0 |
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: As said,I think the people of the USA are quite capable of deciding about their own gun laws without a Brit getting involved but to make guns freely available to British citizens would be a bad, bad idea.
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"
] | task146-26d8ed764bd944e88fe7f9bf2d18bd95 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If guns would be made illegal, then only criminals would have them.
Sent2: Illegal firearms can be identified and linked to other firearms and to crimes and criminals.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-292cf49ea0c84fb19f5c0df3e3a4a8ef |
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: Bad Gun control are things that hinder a lawfull person from being able to purchase and use firearms.
Sent2: People like Brady blame the gun and say because one man uses a gun to harm someone then no one can be trusted with guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-8ed1a95fdb2f4938b88aa0c8b686fbd5 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: The reality is that in developed nations with stricter gun laws than the US there are less outlaws owning and using guns.
Sent2: Some studies used against gun have been ones showing that over 50% of homicides in the US are committed with guns, while in countries with gun bans or very strict gun control have a lower amount of gun homicides.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-88af8a4f556342f984546524fbe75efa |
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 gun free zones can do, is keep law-abiding citizens from having guns.
Sent2: Criminals enter gun free zones with guns to commit crimes against unarmed law-abiding citizens.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-9efddd69c56f41a4962bbe238c4c0841 |
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: Those are all the government, if it has gotten as far as the people, and the government (the president, the congress, the supreme court) has decided on gun control, who's going to arrest them for it?
Sent2: Police do not know how many guns are in the state or where they are.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-1f851b15684c4c5192997700585caf10 |
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 should protect gun laws because of crazy people who go out of control with them and guns these days are getting more advanced and easier to get
Sent2: If it was just a gun thing then they could go from internation flights from countries with no guns, but it isn't.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-5966257e73fd49178b4c4b918f4b5c6a |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If today we were to ban guns all the law abiding citizens would give up their firearms and protection.
Sent2: where gun control laws prohibit good law abiding citizens from carrying a gun to protect themselves and others.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-a0b2fbe9ff4443f391b1e723d230d537 |
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: Making a gun free zone does nothing to prevent guns from entering it.
Sent2: You propose to abolish gun free zones, and allow people to carry guns into schools.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-6cae1a3fb14f44afa4e6398a17160acf |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If this is the case then gun control laws will have no effect on who carries melee weapons, so you argument falls apart because 'the law abiding' can remain armed.
Sent2: If this is the case, then gun laws have a provable effect on how 'armed' criminals are - more gun control = less gun-carrying criminals, fact.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-0564dbb0e5d0459db701d10bd8c044e9 |
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: 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?
Sent2: Now if you want gun control laws that limit or ban the right to bear arms you are a gun haters.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-44f118514ccb4b479b8b2e7ed5af982e |
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: Obviously, using the second amendment to oppose laws regulating such weapons is highly questionably."
Sent2: Why are there gun control laws in place that haven't been ruled unconstitutional, since obviously the antigun position doesn't matter, and the second amendment is clear enough all by itself?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-8f447635817d4305956a34355aa09eae |
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: Would you want your children to go to a school where everyone was allowed to have a gun?
Sent2: You're not allowed to assemble your gun, not even in event of a break in, you're not allowed to load it, or take it from one room of your house to another.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-96fb5d65ee9947398e5b83a3606c67f4 |
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: We have guns and we still have crime and lots of gun deaths.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c7696f96035f475ab6acd010487eba2b |
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: Simply put, you should have to prove that the gun control you seek will do what you say it will do before burdening the Constitution with a load up of Liberal wishes and hopes!
Sent2: So I think gun control on the magnitude you want would effect it, how could it not?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-4abf50d10a3c4640b21760ab9b7271fb |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Government does not possess the authority to enact a total ban on firearm owners actually transporting their firearms, it violates the "bear" of the "keep and bear" provision of the second amendment.
Sent2: Who can believe that the right to keep and bear arms could survive "community storage," with gun owners needing to ask government bureaucrats for permission to obtain access to their own guns?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-7431c7289c1f460b893c8f45a0fd3749 |
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 believe,after all you have said demeaning the 2A, Constitution and self-defense, that you should be allowed to purchase and use a gun in times of civil unrest or an attack on your home and family?
Sent2: You're not allowed to assemble your gun, not even in event of a break in, you're not allowed to load it, or take it from one room of your house to another.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-9fdee46961fe4b34a1800564d8f514ad |
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 without this preamble the second amendment would still only protect a right in connection with militia service.
Sent2: The organized militia is equivalent to the well regulated militia of the second amendment.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-6662e0c7276a48df808c12b40dcefea2 |
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 only gun control law that is needed is the law that prohibits a person from committing a crime with a gun.
Sent2: But that does not change the fact that the law has made the individual into a prohibited person, so that her gun possession is, in itself, a federal felony.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-b541c5cca4d94595bf6be0f76f2ee193 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Then we should ban so stupid people can't kill people with guns.
Sent2: Since there are gun deaths in countries that have banned guns, the gun bans did not work.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-08fed31d8955400e81703d132b326332 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: If gun control will not affect criminal ownership of guns and people will always be able to get a firearm if they want, why should a government make the effort to ban firearms as a precursor to atrocities?
Sent2: That will take the criminals off the street and with them off the street there are no gun control concerns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-694ce0b0281443548c1bbfa05e534742 |
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: Guns are dangerous even though when they are banned people will still make them people think that they will still use them less people will use them less deaths will be by guns.
Sent2: If guns are banned, the only people who will surrender them are those who commit nearly no gun crime at all.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-1439e6c4aaa94ff0b55e4eec625802ed |
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 seriously cannot believe that someone out there really thinks that we should allow EVERYBODY to carry weapons onto an airplane!
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-3723ee0e214241c38ee0ee3e4e8054d4 |
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: The organized militia is equivalent to the well regulated militia of the second amendment.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-56e5e739728841db88cd81c406ae6b0e |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: But is the answer to take down the gun free zones...and just allow kids to carry guns to school?
Sent2: You propose to abolish gun free zones, and allow people to carry guns into schools.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-0dd3389e625043a783e7a906f52205e3 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: I do see the sense in some measures such as restricting access to guns for people who have committed violent crimes.
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-cfd91b66549443e59196120b00a44ffe |
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 we allow banning of AP bullets, big bullets will be next, then shotguns, then pistols, then hunting rifles, then bows and arrows, then knives, then nail-clippers, then bats.
Sent2: If we're going to ban guns,we might as well bans knives,fireworks,and even computers.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-f204ecce379749fc9f4b6e81ccac218f |
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 that do not obey gun control laws will be able to obtain guns and use them on the unarmed law-abiding citizens.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not affect criminals because criminals do not obey these laws.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-b724b351cd0e4d8f829fbed2ec5a0181 |
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 laws stating that you should not be allowed to carry guns onto airplanes or into schools are examples of common sense gun control laws meant to protect people.
Sent2: Her: I don't think people should be allowed to carry guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-8f27778c5cda4b89baafe4de4cdd43c4 |
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: Bad Gun control are things that hinder a lawfull person from being able to purchase and use firearms.
Sent2: Gun control should be left to the person holding the gun.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-34e1d24069744fd9a3d3fb3ccdcfa37e |
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 also say that when people commit a crime with a gun these people need to be punished not the law-abiding citizens!
Sent2: And as far as carrying in public, as long as I have commited no crime, then why should anyone need know I have my gun.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-518f4f317e4044a591ba6aebf1a43a20 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: People that defend the right to bear arms that demand laws that punish criminals by keeping them in prison thus keeping guns away from them.
Sent2: How can a people defend themselves from the government, unless they are able to maintain the same weapons as the government has?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-2b0f4d725a5349f687a476d169df2016 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: But is the answer to take down the gun free zones...and just allow kids to carry guns to school?
Sent2: School district employees should not be carrying weapons on campus, just as students should not be carrying weapons."
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ef2e7414af4b4332b5c886121d5a1f73 |
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 we're going to ban guns,we might as well bans knives,fireworks,and even computers.
Sent2: If we look at D.C. we can see that people who had registered their guns before the gun ban were allowed to keep their guns after the ban took effect.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-0b198418e4cf41a89a0a6bef6e6888b7 |
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: Guns are dangerous even though when they are banned people will still make them people think that they will still use them less people will use them less deaths will be by guns.
Sent2: Some people who want to ban guns try to use simplistic arguments to suggest that murder rates are tied to the number of guns available for criminal misuse; and they suggest more guns = more crime and less guns = less crime.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-7c0fa3d627b94042bbba723804639bec |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: It is asserted, therefore, that the D.C. gun control laws irrationally prevent only law abiding citizens from owning handguns.
Sent2: Guns in the hands of law abiding citizens save lives, the statistics back this up from EVERY country EVER to introduce gun control.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-708903809fb5453a83c955d20accb17e |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: You have been shown the facts that most criminals get their guns from family members or they steal them, even from cops.
Sent2: Gun owners don't drive into crowds of people simply because they had a gun in their car.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-260c2663747242d5a25837c9ac0d1ade |
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: Common sense gun control laws the gun haters want will only affect the law abiding citizens, not the criminals.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-0e003ffd8c3c4be093b9bca0de234912 |
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: I think laws stating that you should not be allowed to carry guns onto airplanes or into schools are examples of common sense gun control laws meant to protect people.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-7c05fe97f907450fbae7c92ca5818f2e |
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 gun owners are just ordinary people who happen to own a firearm.
Sent2: Guns are becoming more easier to purchase and people are becoming more insane.humans are killing more innocent people everyday!
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-bc4ed815b35544f58ad9bc2941231b0a |
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: Using a shotgun or an AK-47 will get the job done, so I don't see the need to ban assault weapons.
Sent2: And as far as carrying in public, as long as I have commited no crime, then why should anyone need know I have my gun.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-116c3dbb99b2402fa3d3a46375360170 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: People who follow laws, aren't causing problems with the guns they own.
Sent2: The only people that obey gun control laws that prevent people from taking guns any where are law abiding people.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-92accfb4dfde482b8e21d3327c7e159c |
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: VoR you keep saying that your for reasonable gun control but yet all your false idols keep chiming in here on a TOTAL gun ban, government confiscation, and allowing elitists to continue to carry.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-b9a07af6dec84fc0a2903cca78d1042d |
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 we recognize that gun control laws can reduce the number of criminals owning guns although not disarm every criminal.
Sent2: Name me one gun control law that has been effective as crime control!!!!!!
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-529319ef806e4566a6f519cf286d5c31 |
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: First you say no law will ever stop criminals from getting guns but now youre saying that criminals are never gun owners.
Sent2: Just to be clear, you're saying that only gun laws, somehow, are unable to deter criminal acts?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-d17a7654408242bfaeb1d4b176a7fc78 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: People that defend the right to bear arms that demand laws that punish criminals by keeping them in prison thus keeping guns away from them.
Sent2: Making guns illegal wouldn't solve anything except to take them away from people that want to defend themselves.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-041034ad6dc4459a904ad8b880ea2980 |
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 was never about individual gun ownership, it's only purpose was proper case of a government organized and controlled militia."
Sent2: Yeah, thing is that the second ammendment makes the point that guns should be allowed because a _well organised militia_ is an important tool for a nation.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-9a046f18635345b5b901fac857574815 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Do you think that a gun-ban in the long run would mean that more criminals get their hands on guns or that less criminals get their hands on guns?
Sent2: Don't you think most citizens are as able to take care of themselves without a bunch of nanny gun grabbers trying to take their rights and guns away in the face of criminal misuse?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-6c73d763283542499d33e991e2eaddc3 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: Police cannot do this, and indeed do not themselves even claim to be able to do so.
Sent2: Ok, so are the gun haters claiming the police department are giving the guns criminals use for crime back to the criminals?
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-f25a946df52b4c0688288c880f45866a |
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 tell them what was meant when the law passed, but even these gun owners do not care what was meant, they only care what the law says!
Sent2: We support letting people who already have guns actually being allowed to carry them, but I haven't seen anyone saying that we have to get hundreds of thousands of more guns bought up and distributed.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-3b092294467541ef801d601f1c655cb1 |
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: And as far as carrying in public, as long as I have commited no crime, then why should anyone need know I have my gun.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-c68b762b553243c6b8ac4dce8a93e909 |
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 was never about individual gun ownership, it's only purpose was proper case of a government organized and controlled militia."
Sent2: The organized militia is equivalent to the well regulated militia of the second amendment.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-0c1d417154f0420aaf97880ae60af2a9 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: A criminal with a gun will feel a lot more confident in committing a crime than a criminal without a gun will just as a criminal will avoid those who have guns and target those who don't.
Sent2: A law-abiding gun nut who uses their gun in committing a crime, is a criminal, and not law-abiding.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-ef75a3876461446eb63a50ed65f2c3e5 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: I do not believe OTHERS should not have guns, I think criminals and psychos who are yet to convict a gun crime should not have guns.
Sent2: Illegal firearms can be identified and linked to other firearms and to crimes and criminals.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-1dd0d22c8fed4b9a9534e6b82af253a5 |
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 looked at gun ownership, drug use and a history of physical fights and found that each of these factors is associated with a higher homicide rate in the home.
Sent2: Presumably, the cops knew if there was a gun in the homicide house since they searched it (even if it was not used in the homicide.)
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-abd01a026ded433ea9b89213be08d9f7 |
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 gun owners are just ordinary people who happen to own a firearm.
Sent2: Many people who would never dream of shooting a person can own a gun simply for the artistry of a well made machine, people hunt with guns as well.
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-de3a606c583546b4aa7e694f6e600acc |
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 respond to your opponents comments that you have taken "the right to keep and bear arms" statement and used it without the context specifically "the well regulated militia".
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-624e28161863437c8a8ba68285e8c029 |
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 tell me Brady, exactly what gun control laws HAVE saved lives.
Sent2: So, no, I wouldn't say there was any "gun control" as you (Galileo) tried to pass off as early gun control laws.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-84891601452848cc9b0c41ea98c756b0 |
Definition: We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Gun Control) into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.
Positive Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Ian brought up the point that guns make you more likely to kill a person.
Sent2: You can't be a man unless you're swinging a gun, and no matter how many guns you buy, it's still missing for you .
Output: Not similar
Positive Example 2 -
Input: Sent1: Gun haters will stop when the right to bear arms is banned!
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output: Similar
Negative Example 1 -
Input: Sent1: Gun control will not work because criminals do not obey gun control laws.
Sent2: Gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting guns.
Output: Not similar
Now complete the following example -
Input: Sent1: People who follow laws, aren't causing problems with the guns they own.
Sent2: Which is why the ban is a bit of a poor compromise, they've banned guns for law abiding people but they've not done enough to make sure criminals don't have them.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-e715e00ce1ed4c45b3afb32fb4c1d429 |
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: Which gun right laws do you support?The right to ban them?you are as anti-gun as they come.Galileo no offense, because you make no pretense about it.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-141b71e0f6b349c983ebb564a65a3480 |
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, no, I wouldn't say there was any "gun control" as you (Galileo) tried to pass off as early gun control laws.
Sent2: You say that gun control must not be effective because the study's conclusions about gun control were inconclusive.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-9e05c664a1b442df82a5842fbdb00979 |
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 if you want gun control laws that limit or ban the right to bear arms you are a gun haters.
Sent2: Gun haters will do any thing to ban the right to bear arms!
Output:
| [
"Similar"
] | task146-e88b171bf57c432eb6c563a901d04b32 |
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: We border two countries one of which is quite corrupt, what makes you think that criminals can't get guns.
Output:
| [
"Not similar"
] | task146-bfaf3317680c47fd9483b580578dbbc4 |