maddogchen
Diamond Member
- Feb 17, 2004
- 8,903
- 2
- 76
we should organize an ATOT boycott of the company. But i'm too lazy, who wants to be in charge of this?
Originally posted by: maddogchen
we should organize an ATOT boycott of the company. But i'm too lazy, who wants to be in charge of this?
Sure why not just give them a toy gun, or knife. Or mabey we can give them little toy military vehicles.Originally posted by: Thraxen
OH NO WERE GOING TO BE OFFENDED, QUICK BAN IT!
Normally I would be with you and your sarcasm, but sometimes you have to use some common sense. These things were in bags of candy that are clearly going to have a high probability of winding up in kids hands without the parents realizing what the toys are exactly. That's simply wrong and should be dealt with.
Originally posted by: SampSon
Sure why not just give them a toy gun, or knife. Or mabey we can give them little toy military vehicles.
Toy guns and knives and military mockups send MUCH better messages than this little toy does.
Sure why not just give them a toy gun, or knife. Or maybe we can give them little toy military vehicles.
I didn't miss the point at all. There isn't much room for you to make a point. Though I understand what you are trying to say.Originally posted by: Thraxen
Sure why not just give them a toy gun, or knife. Or maybe we can give them little toy military vehicles.
I figured you would miss the point and give me that response. The point was that these toys were distibuted in bags of candy, which doesn't really give parents a fair shot at deciding if it's appropriate for their kids. If some idiots want to make toys like this, it's fine with me. But they shouldn't be allowed to distribute something so clearly distasteful in this manner.
A parent should be checking out the toys their child is using regardless if it came in a bag of candy, a box, a tinfoil ball or a bag of crack. So "because it is in a bag of candy" really isn't relevant.
Lame reasoning? Never had to care for children I take it.Originally posted by: Thraxen
A parent should be checking out the toys their child is using regardless if it came in a bag of candy, a box, a tinfoil ball or a bag of crack. So "because it is in a bag of candy" really isn't relevant.
Whatever... that's lame reasoning. You have to draw a line somewhere and I think most people would agree that this is clearly past that point.
Lame reasoning? Never had to care for children I take it.
But advocating killing and the military and violence, yea, that's perfectly fine.
Originally posted by: iwearnosox
Here's a pic of it.
Originally posted by: Trygve
Originally posted by: iwearnosox
Here's a pic of it.
I'm not at all convinced that anybody was thinking of 9/11 or that the plane was "crashing" into the building. My guess would be that somebody was just making yet another variation on the "spinning object between two supports" toy that's been made for centuries and felt like having it be a plane doing the spinning.
I've got something like that with a wooden bear between two trees; if we were all hyped up about a well-publicized bear attack, I'm sure there would be similar calls to ban this toy, even if it's from the 1800's.