A society in which there are many crimes, such as thefts and murders, should not be called "lawless" That is an abuse of the meaning of words. As a suffix "less "means "without" so "lawless" means "without laws." However, a society that has no laws has no crimes, because no laws can be broken. A lawless society would, therefore, be a crimeless society. So what some have termed a lawless society should actually be called "crimeful". If the statements in the passage are true, which one of the following must also be true?
(A) A society that has laws has crimes.
(B) A society that has no crimes has no laws.
(C) A society that has many laws has many crimes.
(D) A society that has some crimes has some laws.
(E) A society that has many crimes has many

A society that has laws has crimes

Explanation: analysing the passage, it can be concluded that

Lawless=> No laws => No crimes

A crime happens when a law is broken.

Many crimes = crimeful

It is the existence of crime that brings about the development of law. If there is no crime, then of what essence is the law. The law is meant to curb criminal activities. Although as humans, its logically impossible to say that a community or society is without crime as there is always a high likelihood of a Judas amongst good people.

Option A

Explanation:

It is just simple, a society that has laws has crimes ,based in the true fact from the passage above. Laws can't exist without crimes , it is from the crimes committed that laws are drawn out. So if there are no crimes ,where do we want to draft out laws, and who would want to commit a crime so therefore from the facts highlighted from the passage and my little explanation option A is can be deduced as true, as a society with crimes has laws.

d - failures.

the only attempted british colony in north america before 1600 was roanoke, virginia, which was a total failure. england claimed several areas, including newfoundland, but made no sustainable attempts to colonize them before 1600.

answer; knowledge,reason,and judgement;