4 ms·
Again, the burden of proof is (or should be) on the state here. And there are no stats showing that this is dangerous, because it isn't.
by tarboreus 9y ago
Again, the burden of proof is (or should be) on the state here. And there are no stats showing that this is dangerous, because it isn't.
- new299 9y agoYou seem to be arguing with a point I'm not trying to make. But if you are suggesting that the decision should be fact based and present an argument with supporting statistics. Then those statistics should be relevant to your argument. The statistics presented in the article were not relevant. If it is not dangerous, it should be possible to show this with data... the data presented in the article is poor and doesn't support his case well.