It is stupid to say "there is no evidence" when they refuse to investigate. It is equally stupid to draw conclusions without evidence that it is better to ban this stuff.
I think both is likely.
What would they promote when the rise in child abuse does not stagnate or even increases after a ban?
Comments
(Old Spike)
It is stupid to say "there is no evidence" when they refuse to investigate. It is equally stupid to draw conclusions without evidence that it is better to ban this stuff.
I think both is likely.
What would they promote when the rise in child abuse does not stagnate or even increases after a ban?