10 minutes ago, kevvy said:

What is the difference between a rock spider , a rapist or a sadist ? why does the rock spider have to have his name withheld . So , you live in a street and there is a rock spider living next to you , are you ok with not knowing he is a rock spider, because his name is withheld? the police check their computers , their actions , witnesses  etc etc , before charging them.  yes you are the idiot

Okay...what is so difficult to understand about the term "wrongly accused"?

So...YOU live in a street and someone MISTAKENLY thinks, YOU are a rock-spider!

Of course you are innocent, but local news and social media are now making your name and address public...until...surprise...you get exonerated!

In the meantime, enjoy one or two weeks of social shaming, maybe loosing your job...

 

DO YOU GET MY POINT NOW?

The system of putting names out, bares the risk of naming and shaming INNOCENT PEOPLE!

Is that so hard to understand?

 

 

14 minutes ago, DM07 said:

Okay...what is so difficult to understand about the term "wrongly accused"?

So...YOU live in a street and someone MISTAKENLY thinks, YOU are a rock-spider!

Of course you are innocent, but local news and social media are now making your name and address public...until...surprise...you get exonerated!

In the meantime, enjoy one or two weeks of social shaming, maybe loosing your job...

 

DO YOU GET MY POINT NOW?

The system of putting names out, bares the risk of naming and shaming INNOCENT PEOPLE!

Is that so hard to understand?

 

 

It isn't hard to understand. Well apparently for some.

All it needs is a leading question to a young child and some social media and bang...you are wrongly labelled a paedophile for the rest of your life regardless of if the police didn't bother to press charges due to the ridiculousness of the situation or if the courts find you innocent. 

Due process is there for a reason (to account for stupid people) and should be followed. 

Edited July 6, 20188 yr by wildewillie89

On 7/5/2018 at 12:59 PM, DM07 said:

Some facts and sources to back up this total BS?!

Why should I provide sources if you've already decided it's BS? The fact that it was hyperbolic by design seems to have completely gone over your head as well. I usually don't stoop to having discussions with clueless individuals such as yourself, but I'll make an exception since you seem completely unable to do the most basic of research yourself.

 

To start off we have the very much infamous "If you're married to a child" brochure which was released a while back, listing do's and don'ts if you're married to a child: https://www.thelocal.se/20180329/swedish-agency-backtracks-following-child-marriage-brochure-storm

 

Then we have the fact that husbands have been allowed to live with their child brides even though the government knows they are married: https://sputniknews.com/europe/201709251057665752-sweden-migrants-child-marriage/

 

Then we have the ruling Social Democrats Party voting against a proposition to not recognize marriages with children that have been carried out in other countries: https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/26/swedish-parliament-ban-child-marriage-resistance-government-parties/

 

Maybe you should think before posting and not write like a neanderthal, lest you make a fool out of yourself again. I'm done here.

40 minutes ago, Myran said:

Why should I provide sources if you've already decided it's BS? The fact that it was hyperbolic by design seems to have completely gone over your head as well. I usually don't stoop to having discussions with clueless individuals such as yourself, but I'll make an exception since you seem completely unable to do the most basic of research yourself.

 

To start off we have the very much infamous "If you're married to a child" brochure which was released a while back, listing do's and don'ts if you're married to a child: https://www.thelocal.se/20180329/swedish-agency-backtracks-following-child-marriage-brochure-storm

 

Then we have the fact that husbands have been allowed to live with their child brides even though the government knows they are married: https://sputniknews.com/europe/201709251057665752-sweden-migrants-child-marriage/

 

Then we have the ruling Social Democrats Party voting against a proposition to not recognize marriages with children that have been carried out in other countries: https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/26/swedish-parliament-ban-child-marriage-resistance-government-parties/

 

Maybe you should think before posting and not write like a neanderthal, lest you make a fool out of yourself again. I'm done here.

Breitbart!?

Yes...you are absolutely done here!

 

You know what: let me elaborate on this a bit more!

Your original statement was, that the Swedish Government has no problem with the matter at hand...and then you provide a link to an article, that quotes a brochure, that clearly says "you are not allowed to marry an underaged girl in Sweden" and "you are not allowed to have sex with an underaged girl in Sweden" and they also state, that it doesn't matter, if in the country of origin, all that may be allowed!

Maybe I am not getting the point - after all you already stated that I might be a bit stupid- but how is saying "you are not allowed to do this or that" actually the same as "not caring about an issue"?

In the other article, it was stated, that although separation of underaged girls from their "husbands" is difficult, the Swedish Government will continue to try and do so!

Now I am not a lawyer (or Swedish) and I have no idea why these difficulties arise (I assume, because it is a relatively new situation, which has to assessed thoroughly), but again: how is dealing with this situation the same as "not caring"?

So I stand with my first comment: BS!

 

Edited July 6, 20188 yr by DM07