Not correct. Refugees stay in entry-point countries until their refugee application is processed, which can take months. Meanwhile, many of them seek to find illegal ways to move up north.
I don't see how what I said and what you said is mutually exclusive, or why what I said is incorrect. Refugees get to the entry-point countries, where they are met with squalid conditions in camps, aggression from locals and media, so they just pack their things and move somewhere else.
I'm sure that people who escaped war don't give a shit about having papers - they just want to be treated like people, not dogs, so if you put them in a camp with horrible conditions it's only natural that some of them will go somewhere else, whether they have papers or not. I still don't see how my original statement is incorrect.
If they want to be treated as people, maybe they should not try to forcefully and violently break through borders, throw away food they are offered by volunteers because it's "not halal", or set fires to their own camps. To be treated as a human being, you have to first behave like a human being.
So it's okay for them to break the rules because they have escaped the war and at the same time it's wrong for the countries obeying the rules and laws to protect the borders.
Because....reasons...
I never said it's ok for them to break the rules or wrong for countries to protect their borders. The original question was "why do refugees go all the way to sweden, instead of staying in the first eu country". I've tried explaining why, not defending them.