Wisconsin law would allow toddlers to hunt

[NAC4EV]

What time should be set aside for their nap???

 

[brycejones]

We can’t discuss this. World hunger must be resolved before we can discuss this.

 

[J.Wilkins]

More details please?

Are you serios cat?

 

[J.Wilkins]

We can’t discuss this. World hunger must be resolved before we can discuss this.

Nothing can be done about it anyway.

 

[shortylickens]

Today I Learned:

10 year olds are toddlers.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Yeah, somehow I think that isn't a bright idea but I do think awarding blind people CCW's is even worse.

Of course, when you can shoot a guy in the face with your shotgun and not get charged with anything then it's not that surprising, it's just "accidents happen, no way to prevent this" as per use.

But when you can shoot someone in the face and they publicly apologize to you... Youve reached a whole new level.

 

[UglyCasanova]

That only seems true in a world devoid of hunting accidents.

Would you let your kid ride a bike? What about play sports? Should the government set an arbitrary age on all things where they may get hurt? Or should it allow the parents to be parents and decide what’s best for their kid?

 

[UglyCasanova]

Today I Learned:

10 year olds are toddlers.

😀

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Today I Learned:

10 year olds are toddlers.

Tomorrow should be "reading comprehension" for the lesson.

The new law removes that restriction, leaving the minimum age up to parents to decide. It also eliminates the limit on the number of guns young hunters can carry at one time.

 

[J.Wilkins]

But when you can shoot someone in the face and they publicly apologize to you... Youve reached a whole new level.

This man knows...

Yeah, it's god damn amazing.

 

[brycejones]

Today I Learned:

10 year olds are toddlers.

Hell we have an elderly toddler in the White House so why not?

 

[J.Wilkins]

Today I Learned:

10 year olds are toddlers.

Go back to school, learn how to read, go read the fucking article...

I'll see you in a decade and half.

 

[Thunder 57]

Are you serios cat?

But when you can shoot someone in the face and they publicly apologize to you... Youve reached a whole new level.

Yes, I'm serious. Are you talking about Cheney? We all know politicians (at least the high profile ones) aren't the same as us regular folk as far as the law is concerned.

 

[bradly1101]

Also, I can quote part of the amendment and make it sound good for pro firearm types; " the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

Being "anti-gun" is so often couched as being "anti-freedom." What about one's freedom to not get shot by some random madman as in Vegas, Orlando, San Bernardino, Sandy Hook, Columbine, ......................?

 

[J.Wilkins]

Yes, I'm serious. Are you talking about Cheney? We all know politicians (at least the high profile ones) aren't the same as us regular folk as far as the law is concerned.

It was tounge in cheek but truth be told it's happened more than once and people have not been charged with hunting accidents even when they were clearly negligent. Now bring a bunch of 10 years old into the mix and you have yourself a party.

Every single person should be able to comprehend why this is a BAD idea.

 

[Thunder 57]

Being "anti-gun" is so often couched as being "anti-freedom." What about one's freedom to not get shot by some random madman as in Vegas, Orlando, San Bernardino, Sandy Hook, Columbine, ......................?

I never said anything about being anti-gun being anti-freedom, so please don't associate me with anyone who thinks that. Also, what would you say about people who say things I don't like? What about my right to not be offended?

Oh wait, I guess the answer is at least no one is shot? Doesn't mean no one dies. But then again, I guess we do have safe spaces where people can be safe from offending words. Kind of like we have gun free zones. How do they work out, though?

 

[J.Wilkins]

Being "anti-gun" is so often couched as being "anti-freedom." What about one's freedom to not get shot by some random madman as in Vegas, Orlando, San Bernardino, Sandy Hook, Columbine, ......................?

Or some kid that accidentally fired their gun without understanding that you cannot fire on a target without first knowing that your bullet will not travel beyond the terrain you can see is clear behind whatever you are shooting at?

I suggest not going into the woods at all when there are pre teen hunters roaming the area.

 

[Thunder 57]

It was tounge in cheek but truth be told it's happened more than once and people have not been charged with hunting accidents even when they were clearly negligent. Now bring a bunch of 10 years old into the mix and you have yourself a party.

Every single person should be able to comprehend why this is a BAD idea.

So fix the justice system. Don't just say, "BAN GUNS!".

 

[J.Wilkins]

I never said anything about being anti-gun being anti-freedom, so please don't associate me with anyone who thinks that. Also, what would you say about people who say things I don't like? What about my right to not be offended?

Oh wait, I guess the answer is at least no one is shot? Doesn't mean no one dies. But then again, I guess we do have safe spaces where people can be safe from offending words. Kind of like we have gun free zones. How do they work out, though?

He didn't say you did... You read an awful lot into that post. This isn't personal for him, it might be for me though since I'm about to call you an idiot which is indeed quite personal...

Your diversion and deflection is noted and completely ignored.

Idiot.

 

[J.Wilkins]

So fix the justice system. Don't just say, "BAN GUNS!".

I said "BAN GUNS"? I noted that giving the right for children who can hardly handle themselves to hunt is fucking retarded, they will fire at what they think is a target without understanding the bullet trajectory or thinking about what IF there is someone behind those trees.

Why be stupid about this? Because more guns sold equals happier gun industry and in the end, isn't that what really matters?

 

[bradly1101]

Would you let your kid ride a bike? What about play sports? Should the government set an arbitrary age on all things where they may get hurt? Or should it allow the parents to be parents and decide what’s best for their kid?

Guns are a different story. They are the only consumer product designed to easily cause harm.

 

[J.Wilkins]

Guns are a different story. They are the only consumer product designed to easily cause harm.

Don't correct him, if he thinks shooting a gun is like riding a bike he might just fix the problem by ensuring he never has children.

 

[Victorian Gray]

But they're still not allowed to smoke so all is good.

 

[J.Wilkins]

But they're still not allowed to smoke so all is good.

True... But wait, if the tobacco lobby grew as strong then the right to smoke which is certainly in the first amendment (considering how twisted the interpretation of the second is I'm fairly sure you can twist the first into a right to smoke for toddlers without doing anything that hasn't been done to the second) so it should be allowed.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

For a poor family in Wisconsin the ability of a youngster to harvest a few hundred pounds of meat during the hunting season would be a huge benefit. Multiple tags are usually cheap and available all through the rifle season. That's not counting bow, crossbow and black powder seasons.