Showtime is currently offering a free 30 day trial on their website.This is the Sacha Baron Cohen stuff I presume. From what I've heard, it's absolutely incredible, I need to find a way to watch it.
Eh... I'd be careful with that kind of generalization. There are still places in the US where you hunt to eat, and it's not terribly uncommon to start kids with a .22 or .17 'Kiddo's First Rifle' around age 5-7. I'd say 4 is too young though, in most cases. It's also not necessary for a child to have a gun, again, in most cases.If you're a good person, you don't even entertain the thought of arming young kids
I call bullshit.Eh... I'd be careful with that kind of generalization. There are still places in the US where you hunt to eat, and it's not terribly uncommon to start kids with a .22 or .17 'Kiddo's First Rifle' around age 5-7. I'd say 4 is too young though, in most cases. It's also not necessary for a child to have a gun, again, in most cases.
I just wouldn't necessarily associate it with 'bad person'.
I call bullshit.
You'd be wrong, promise. It's very, very minimal, but even minimal in the US is enough to not blanket statements, cuz it's still an appreciable number of people.I call bullshit.
If I may put on my Quibbler cos-play for a moment: When is it necessary for a child to have a gun?It's also not necessary for a child to have a gun, again, in most cases.
Per my above statements, there's some places still where having a kid practicing shooting as a youth can actually keep food on the table as a young adult, so in those cases it might be 'necessary' (presuming they don't go on to do something else with their life). Again, i'll state, this is a vanishingly small minority. I only point it out to refute to the original statement that 'only bad people let kids have guns'.If I may put on my Quibbler cos-play for a moment: When is it necessary for a child to have a gun?
Eh... I'd be careful with that kind of generalization. There are still places in the US where you hunt to eat, and it's not terribly uncommon to start kids with a .22 or .17 'Kiddo's First Rifle' around age 5-7. I'd say 4 is too young though, in most cases. It's also not necessary for a child to have a gun, again, in most cases.
I just wouldn't necessarily associate it with 'bad person'.
Do you accept there are families in America that still go hungry? If so, why would it be a stretch to believe that there are families that will go hungry if they don't hunt? While it certainly isn't common, neither is it particularly rare. You have families in conservative, rural America that have 6 plus kids and make $30k a year. If you visit rural Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming and I'm sure other states, and you'll find these people.Yeah, I find that pretty dubious. People that eat what they hunt? Sure. Places where hunting and eating the game is fairly routine? I suppose. Places where you literally hunt so you don't go hungry? Nah.
Eh... I'd be careful with that kind of generalization. There are still places in the US where you hunt to eat, and it's not terribly uncommon to start kids with a .22 or .17 'Kiddo's First Rifle' around age 5-7. I'd say 4 is too young though, in most cases. It's also not necessary for a child to have a gun, again, in most cases.
I just wouldn't necessarily associate it with 'bad person'.
While I myself didn't grow up in sort of environment, I knew people who did. It is still quite common in rural areas.Do you accept there are families in America that still go hungry? If so, why would it be a stretch to believe that there are families that will go hungry if they don't hunt? While it certainly isn't common, neither is it particularly rare. You have families in conservative, rural America that have 6 plus kids and make $30k a year. If you visit rural Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming and I'm sure other states, and you'll find these people.
Yeah that's pretty asinine. I don't have audio right now so didn't bother with the vid! Commodus' statement had nothing to specify self-defense thoughThat isn't what the bit was about though. They were talking about arming young children for self defense not hunting to put food on the table.
If are talking about children that young, then I agree.That isn't what the bit was about though. They were talking about arming young children for self defense not hunting to put food on the table.
I like this one:The ongoing Twitter dialogue is just incredible.
https://twitter.com/walshfreedom/status/1018481114158194688
Sounds like a poster here...grenades?Hey Joe, my daughter will become a "first grenader" next month. What kind of starter handgun do you recommend for her first day of school?
Per my above statements, there's some places still where having a kid practicing shooting as a youth can actually keep food on the table as a young adult, so in those cases it might be 'necessary' (presuming they don't go on to do something else with their life). Again, i'll state, this is a vanishingly small minority. I only point it out to refute to the original statement that 'only bad people let kids have guns'.
That is the stupidest thing I have ever seen. Ant that guy in the video! Who would even discuss anything with that clown. He looks like Frankenstein, What kind of idiot falls for this?
There has to be some heavy editing with that footage. Or we need to just scrap congress and start over.
Trent Lott, Dana Rohrabacher, Joe Wilson, Joe Walsh, and Larry "The science behind this program is proven. [...] Children under 5 also have elevated levels of the pheromone Blink 182 [...] to the Weez Kalifa!" Pratt.What kind of idiot falls for this?
Well, at least demand the immediate resignation of every congressman (hint: They're all Republicans in position of leadership!) in that video.Or we need to just scrap congress and start over.