Message from @Fondboy
Discord ID: 620804300448464910
Lel
Legalize, you're a progressive scum.
Uh oh.
I don't think what I am saying is hard to understand
Is your assertion that if they knew people they'd rape people they were familiar with? I dont think that helps your case as much as you think
where did I say that
copy paste it
also btw Sweden had a higher rape report rate before the 2005 sex crime law was passed
The ? Is used to denote a question
*"Sweden had the highest number of reported rapes in Europe (almost twice that of England and Wales, based on 2002-2007 UNODC figures), that may or may not be attributed to the fact that in 2005 there has been reform in the sex crime legislation. That change in the legislation applies for rapes reported in 2006 and 2007 but it doesn't apply for the previous rapes reported in 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 before the change and when the reported rapes in Sweden were still the highest in Europe."*
This from the wikipedia article you didn’t bother reading
One you are free to answer
If you move to a new country you probably don't have many friends in that country
right?
so there would be a higher likelyhood if you rape someone they wouldn't know you
read it slowly
Yes, but the point is that you raped someone
That you came to another country
And raped someone
I dont know what circuit shorted here
But people tend to not feel safe on the streets with a sudden spike in stranger rapes
I'm talking about how I don't really care about the 80% number
And it suggests vetting was not done properly
We're just going to have to disagree on that one then I suppose
Which still leaves us with 58
your argument about 58% over 5 years were foreign born
rapists
noice
what would it take though?
to change your mind
How many/which of the following beliefs do you believe requires one to put forward evidence to support their claim.
The flying spaghetti monster exists.
The flying spaghetti monster does not exist.
I don't know if the flying spaghetti monster exists.
Thr first one only.
But it has nothing to do with belief.
Would there be a scenario where the second would need to provide evidence to support their claim? (Let's pretend they are claiming rather than believing)
I agreed with that...
Yes
Shit...
🤔
I meant second xD
It's considered a logical impossibility to prove a negative so never. But it almost makes impossible to prove. But I repeat myself. So it's both unassailable and indefensible.
And the 3rd option is opinion so its inconsequential
The only type of thing you can prove doesn't exist are things that entail logical or physical possibilities. Like a 4 sided triangle