I noticed that slippery slope fallacy is used to defend status quo. Like "If we legalize soft drugs, then it will significantly increase probability that we will legalize hard drugs too in the future. So let's keep soft drugs banned".
It occurred to me that we can spin something similar in order to ATTACK status quo. Like, "Currently alchohol is legal. Let's ban it. If we ban it, then it will significantly decrease probability that we will legalize soft drugs in the future, which consequently will significantly decrease probability that we will legalize hard drugs in the future".
Is it still slippery slope fallacy or something else?