Upload
Login or register

jeej

Last status update:
-
Gender: female
Age: 23
Date Signed Up:2/03/2011
Last Login:12/02/2016
Location:Sweden
Stats
Content Ranking:#6117
Comment Ranking:#7862
Highest Content Rank:#371
Highest Comment Rank:#1130
Content Thumbs: 22951 total,  25704 ,  2753
Comment Thumbs: 11463 total,  13846 ,  2383
Content Level Progress: 6.6% (66/1000)
Level 220 Content: Mind Blower → Level 221 Content: Mind Blower
Comment Level Progress: 24% (24/100)
Level 305 Comments: Lord Of Laughs → Level 306 Comments: Lord Of Laughs
Subscribers:5
Content Views:887422
Times Content Favorited:2153 times
Total Comments Made:2843
FJ Points:30651
Favorite Tags: League of Legend (3) | is (2)

latest user's comments

#4 - ... Whats a whistleblower?  [+] (13 replies) 07/14/2016 on police police +7
#32 - anon (07/14/2016) [-]
User avatar
#5 - nothingtodoinlife (07/14/2016) [-]
Essentially a snitch. Cops tend to be very communal (or so Ive heard) and so being a whistleblower on their own people alienates themselves from their fellow people
#30 - mytwocents (07/14/2016) [-]
i got an interesting philospical question for u.

is it awwwwright to snitch to the police on the police ?
#18 - turbanmasher (07/14/2016) [-]
Also you don't really want someone you can't trust to be watching your back.
#47 - dudeski (07/14/2016) [-]
Them following the rules and not letting someone else in a position of power abuse said power, by breaking said rules makes the first person untrustworthy? Gotcha, cool opinion.
#52 - turbanmasher (07/15/2016) [-]
Its not my opinion, I was commenting about from the POV of a corrupt cop.
User avatar
#20 - badgoodass (07/14/2016) [-]
*while abusing your power
User avatar
#6 - jeej (07/14/2016) [-]
so, snitching on their colleagues?
User avatar
#9 - nothingtodoinlife (07/14/2016) [-]
Yup.
#8 - anon (07/14/2016) [-]
exposing corruption of your superiors.
User avatar
#7 - cancerlobster (07/14/2016) [-]
snitching on a group or organization, usually from the inside. basically a more complex and dangerous equivalent of a fast food worker tweeting out that their local manager spit in the food.
User avatar
#23 - congthea (07/14/2016) [-]
"dangerous"
User avatar
#45 - cancerlobster (07/14/2016) [-]
Circumstances vary, obviously. But the term is typically reserved for government related incidents. Whistleblowing, say, the CIA would prove hazardous to one's health I think.
#166 - Picture  [+] (1 reply) 07/09/2016 on wiggles +1
#167 - admjgg (07/09/2016) [-]
That cat makes the best facial expressions
#128 - Actually no, no they don't.  [+] (1 reply) 07/05/2016 on /pol/ on Sweden's "don't... 0
User avatar
#129 - marinepenguin (07/05/2016) [-]
Source? Because in any search I can find about Western nations and rape statistics, each rape is counted regardless of the man who raped them possibly being a serial rapist or someone who's committed multiple rapes.

That honestly doesn't even make sense. A large amount of rapists are never even prosecuted because of underreporting through official channels and that's not something that could really be verified and sorted.
#126 - marinepenguin I couldn't comment to yours anymore, so I'll jus…  [+] (3 replies) 07/05/2016 on /pol/ on Sweden's "don't... 0
User avatar
#127 - marinepenguin (07/05/2016) [-]
Yeah I'm like 99% sure every country treats it like that.
User avatar
#128 - jeej (07/05/2016) [-]
Actually no, no they don't.
User avatar
#129 - marinepenguin (07/05/2016) [-]
Source? Because in any search I can find about Western nations and rape statistics, each rape is counted regardless of the man who raped them possibly being a serial rapist or someone who's committed multiple rapes.

That honestly doesn't even make sense. A large amount of rapists are never even prosecuted because of underreporting through official channels and that's not something that could really be verified and sorted.
#123 - Rape is included in violent crimes, right? At 2005 we changed …  [+] (1 reply) 07/04/2016 on /pol/ on Sweden's "don't... 0
User avatar
#125 - marinepenguin (07/04/2016) [-]
Violent crime would include rape, but broadening the spectrum of rape wouldn't increase the violent crime numbers. It would create a jump in rape numbers that leveled off and began to increase or decrease based off previous trends. But increasing the spectrum of rape, that's simply a subsection of the larger group of violent crime, won't increase the perceived rate of violent crime. Now if we were talking purely about rape, you'd have a point as the numbers would be slightly inflated.

But let's say that it even did matter. The the rate of violent crime is increasing at a fairly stable rate from 2002 onward, so the decision to broaden the spectrum of rape in 2005 had essentially zero effect on the overall average increase in violent crime.
#119 - Okay, but here's the thing. You think that guns will solve thi…  [+] (3 replies) 07/03/2016 on /pol/ on Sweden's "don't... 0
User avatar
#120 - marinepenguin (07/03/2016) [-]
No, I'm stuck on the idea of having the right to self preservation. That includes firearms.

Obviously now we're seeing higher rates of violent crime in Sweden than the US, but without the guns. Guns themselves statistically have no correlation with rates of violent crime. In fact, the best correlation you can find with rates of violent crime in the US, is the number of black people living in an area.

Also, more people drown in the US every gear than are killed by firearms.
#123 - jeej (07/04/2016) [-]
Rape is included in violent crimes, right? At 2005 we changed our law, making each separate case of rape count as 1. If we have a rapist, that rapes his wife 15 times, that counts as 15 cases of rape, 15 violent crimes, instead of just 1.
That is why our rate significantly increased from that year forward and why our score might shock you. I don't think any other country counts it like this.
Also, rape is just not rape in Sweden. It's different kinds of sexual assaults.
User avatar
#125 - marinepenguin (07/04/2016) [-]
Violent crime would include rape, but broadening the spectrum of rape wouldn't increase the violent crime numbers. It would create a jump in rape numbers that leveled off and began to increase or decrease based off previous trends. But increasing the spectrum of rape, that's simply a subsection of the larger group of violent crime, won't increase the perceived rate of violent crime. Now if we were talking purely about rape, you'd have a point as the numbers would be slightly inflated.

But let's say that it even did matter. The the rate of violent crime is increasing at a fairly stable rate from 2002 onward, so the decision to broaden the spectrum of rape in 2005 had essentially zero effect on the overall average increase in violent crime.
#110 - Not sure how to work that website. Looks pretty weird in my br…  [+] (5 replies) 07/02/2016 on /pol/ on Sweden's "don't... 0
User avatar
#112 - marinepenguin (07/02/2016) [-]
It counts up to 2010, but it's over a long period of time.

Both your sources showed an increase in violent crime as well btw.
#119 - jeej (07/03/2016) [-]
Okay, but here's the thing. You think that guns will solve this.
A lot of swedes are like me. If guns would become legal, I still wouldn't get one.
Bigger chances are that the bad people would make sure to get one before doing a bad thing.
The thought of this would create even more fear, and those who would obtain the weapons wouldn't be interested in learning properly about it, just enough to carry it.
Wasn't usa the place where someone had a bank that handed out guns if you opened up a bank account? Do we want more school shootings? Do we want kids that accidentally finds their parents gun and blows it off? Do we want people to get to choose between another human beings life or death by the click of a trigger?
You're really stuck on the idea of it only being used in self defense.
If I ever felt like there was a possibility of me getting raped, I would be able to bring a weapon whether or not it's legal, and then have the jury settle it in court.
But I don't.
User avatar
#120 - marinepenguin (07/03/2016) [-]
No, I'm stuck on the idea of having the right to self preservation. That includes firearms.

Obviously now we're seeing higher rates of violent crime in Sweden than the US, but without the guns. Guns themselves statistically have no correlation with rates of violent crime. In fact, the best correlation you can find with rates of violent crime in the US, is the number of black people living in an area.

Also, more people drown in the US every gear than are killed by firearms.
#123 - jeej (07/04/2016) [-]
Rape is included in violent crimes, right? At 2005 we changed our law, making each separate case of rape count as 1. If we have a rapist, that rapes his wife 15 times, that counts as 15 cases of rape, 15 violent crimes, instead of just 1.
That is why our rate significantly increased from that year forward and why our score might shock you. I don't think any other country counts it like this.
Also, rape is just not rape in Sweden. It's different kinds of sexual assaults.
User avatar
#125 - marinepenguin (07/04/2016) [-]
Violent crime would include rape, but broadening the spectrum of rape wouldn't increase the violent crime numbers. It would create a jump in rape numbers that leveled off and began to increase or decrease based off previous trends. But increasing the spectrum of rape, that's simply a subsection of the larger group of violent crime, won't increase the perceived rate of violent crime. Now if we were talking purely about rape, you'd have a point as the numbers would be slightly inflated.

But let's say that it even did matter. The the rate of violent crime is increasing at a fairly stable rate from 2002 onward, so the decision to broaden the spectrum of rape in 2005 had essentially zero effect on the overall average increase in violent crime.
#108 - Not sure I trust cut out statistics.  [+] (7 replies) 07/02/2016 on /pol/ on Sweden's "don't... 0
User avatar
#109 - marinepenguin (07/02/2016) [-]
It's from the Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics

www.ucrdatatool.gov
#110 - jeej (07/02/2016) [-]
Not sure how to work that website. Looks pretty weird in my browser.
Either way, is that from 2016 then?

I've found two websites that counts up to 2014 and a report from 2015.
www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Sweden/United-States/Crime
www.osac.gov/pages/ContentReportDetails.aspx?cid=17421
User avatar
#112 - marinepenguin (07/02/2016) [-]
It counts up to 2010, but it's over a long period of time.

Both your sources showed an increase in violent crime as well btw.
#119 - jeej (07/03/2016) [-]
Okay, but here's the thing. You think that guns will solve this.
A lot of swedes are like me. If guns would become legal, I still wouldn't get one.
Bigger chances are that the bad people would make sure to get one before doing a bad thing.
The thought of this would create even more fear, and those who would obtain the weapons wouldn't be interested in learning properly about it, just enough to carry it.
Wasn't usa the place where someone had a bank that handed out guns if you opened up a bank account? Do we want more school shootings? Do we want kids that accidentally finds their parents gun and blows it off? Do we want people to get to choose between another human beings life or death by the click of a trigger?
You're really stuck on the idea of it only being used in self defense.
If I ever felt like there was a possibility of me getting raped, I would be able to bring a weapon whether or not it's legal, and then have the jury settle it in court.
But I don't.
User avatar
#120 - marinepenguin (07/03/2016) [-]
No, I'm stuck on the idea of having the right to self preservation. That includes firearms.

Obviously now we're seeing higher rates of violent crime in Sweden than the US, but without the guns. Guns themselves statistically have no correlation with rates of violent crime. In fact, the best correlation you can find with rates of violent crime in the US, is the number of black people living in an area.

Also, more people drown in the US every gear than are killed by firearms.
#123 - jeej (07/04/2016) [-]
Rape is included in violent crimes, right? At 2005 we changed our law, making each separate case of rape count as 1. If we have a rapist, that rapes his wife 15 times, that counts as 15 cases of rape, 15 violent crimes, instead of just 1.
That is why our rate significantly increased from that year forward and why our score might shock you. I don't think any other country counts it like this.
Also, rape is just not rape in Sweden. It's different kinds of sexual assaults.
User avatar
#125 - marinepenguin (07/04/2016) [-]
Violent crime would include rape, but broadening the spectrum of rape wouldn't increase the violent crime numbers. It would create a jump in rape numbers that leveled off and began to increase or decrease based off previous trends. But increasing the spectrum of rape, that's simply a subsection of the larger group of violent crime, won't increase the perceived rate of violent crime. Now if we were talking purely about rape, you'd have a point as the numbers would be slightly inflated.

But let's say that it even did matter. The the rate of violent crime is increasing at a fairly stable rate from 2002 onward, so the decision to broaden the spectrum of rape in 2005 had essentially zero effect on the overall average increase in violent crime.