He really misunderstood Dr. Phil's argument, and then put fallacious evidence behind his own. Let's start off with the fact that attending a session with Dr. Phil is entirely voluntary, and if you don't like watching it, you can turn it off. However, if your parent does what Facebook Dad did to you, you have no say in the matter, and there's no getting away from it. Furthermore, if he was worried about publicly humiliating his daughter, then he would have shown her the video privately on a television or done the deed live. He knew what he was getting into when he put it up on YouTube, and therefore he cannot claim that he had anything but a superfluous conviction regarding protecting his daughter's privacy at the time when he put it up- heck, he didn't even apologize for his "accident".
Now that we have established that he is either shreckless or incompetent (i.e., does not understand how YouTube works) we can continue on to his two fallacies. The first is a simple non-sequitur, teaching kids to respect their parents is not equivalent to obliterating their possessions with a hail of lead when they grumble about chores. Where he got that idea, I don't know. Furthermore, for all the "raisin' 'em right" that went on in this BBS (inhabited, I assume, by men similar to him) I hear an awful lot about people crashing cars due to peeking under miniskirts, bringing eight year olds into bars, and drug shenanigans involving parent and child alike. That's certainly not indicative of any inherent superiority in parenting style. Secondly, he attempts to prove that his style of parenting is more effective by a show of hands- I guess UFO's, ghosts, and Sasquatch are real, too! 100% of at least half a million people believe in them! It's ridiculous, the man is covering his own sorry but with mismatched facts and an argument weaker than a house of cards.
-Penguin