Should companies sell/provide adult goods to kids?

[Sandy Johnson]

Are dildos and dick piercings illegal right now to be provided to a 6 year, or are those businesses forced to ID people and make sure they are adults before selling/providing those things? So yes, you are correct.

I'm not trying to change your minds because I know you're stubborn. I'm trying to have a conversation to exchange ideas about the concepts and reasonings behind your position in contrast to mine(and most of society).

If 6 year old me and my 6 year old friends were able to buy dildos.. holy shit those would have been epic sword fights until someone lost a tooth or got a bloody nose.

 

[Swayzeexpress]

Are dildos and dick piercings illegal right now to be provided to a 6 year, or are those businesses forced to ID people and make sure they are adults before selling/providing those things? So yes, you are correct.

I'm not trying to change your minds because I know you're stubborn. I'm trying to have a conversation to exchange ideas about the concepts and reasonings behind your position in contrast to mine(and most of society).

Who cares, your question was ambiguous at best. ID has nothing to do with being an adult.

Serious ?, no joke, I honestly can't tell if you are a chick pretending to be a dude?

 

[75cruisin]

Helmet laws have always been BS, and like I said I can only imagine the states that have must have done so for financial reasons.
I would not be able to guess any other reason why they would do it.

Seat belt laws are mostly BS also but more of a grey area, except when you have another passenger in the car. That passenger wears a belt and survives accident, but your body becomes the thing that ends up killing them because you were not buckled.

Car seats. Yeah, since the kid can't make decisions for himself and isn't able to say "Hey, stupid parent, buckle me in" perhaps those laws are legit.

So....wait, when i become a passenger all my cognitive adult brain transforms into a child brain?

I can, as an adult, choose to ride in the vehicle but then I cant choose to wear a seatbelt or not?

See again how its not the idea behind the law, but enforcement and expansion. The slippery slope. the "in your best interest". Why not just educate people better and then they choose? Invest in better teaching, more realistic courses. Like taxes, better driver training, how to read/understand insurance medical and auto etc, how to budget based on income.

I am all for safety and personally wont move a vehicle until all belts are on. But thats my choice from experience and stories from here. I dont text and drive or drive distracted because I ride my motorcycle 20,000 miles a year and holy fuck its dangerous. But not so much from how I drive, but other people.

Tickets dont scare me into not breaking laws. Recovering from injuries scares me.

See the difference? being educated/experienced will provide a better foundation for saferr more self sufficient people. Being told dont because its illegal doesnt change a person.

 

[ExWrench]

Helmet laws have always been BS, and like I said I can only imagine the states that have must have done so for financial reasons.
I would not be able to guess any other reason why they would do it.

Seat belt laws are mostly BS also but more of a grey area, except when you have another passenger in the car. That passenger wears a belt and survives accident, but your body becomes the thing that ends up killing them because you were not buckled.

Helmet laws are as legitimate as seat belt laws IMHO.
I don't understand how you made that distinction

 

[75cruisin]

Helmet laws are as legitimate as seat belt laws IMHO.
I don't understand how you made that distinction

I think he is saying helmet only saves the user, and seat belts other people like his example of the passenger in a vehicle....but didnt realize that its the same scenario. You ride two up and the passenger also needs a helmet.

 

[ExWrench]

I think he is saying helmet only saves the user, and seat belts other people like his example of the passenger in a vehicle....but didnt realize that its the same scenario. You ride two up and the passenger also needs a helmet.

Or he / she just doesn't GAF about motorcyclists . . . unless they're chillruns

 

[75cruisin]

Or he / she just doesn't GAF about motorcyclists . . . unless they're chillruns

fair point

And since we have laws we know that anybody on a motorcycle on the street is over the age of 16. bascially an adult so fuck em

 

[[486]]

I'm not trying to change your minds because I know you're stubborn. I'm trying to have a conversation to exchange ideas about the concepts and reasonings behind your position in contrast to mine(and most of society).

Stupid Hoe - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Splib]

A helmet would also reduce automobile driver and passenger fatalities. Not too popular an idea.

 

[Animalmother]

 

[75cruisin]

So....wait, when i become a passenger all my cognitive adult brain transforms into a child brain?

I can, as an adult, choose to ride in the vehicle but then I cant choose to wear a seatbelt or not?

See again how its not the idea behind the law, but enforcement and expansion. The slippery slope. the "in your best interest". Why not just educate people better and then they choose? Invest in better teaching, more realistic courses. Like taxes, better driver training, how to read/understand insurance medical and auto etc, how to budget based on income.

I am all for safety and personally wont move a vehicle until all belts are on. But thats my choice from experience and stories from here. I dont text and drive or drive distracted because I ride my motorcycle 20,000 miles a year and holy fuck its dangerous. But not so much from how I drive, but other people.

Tickets dont scare me into not breaking laws. Recovering from injuries scares me.

See the difference? being educated/experienced will provide a better foundation for saferr more self sufficient people. Being told dont because its illegal doesnt change a person.

Yota Up anything?

So did you mask up since it was a government law for the safety of the masses?

 

[Yota Up]

Yota Up anything?

So did you mask up since it was a government law for the safety of the masses?

It was never a law. Stop lying.

 

[Steve300xcw]

that a yes or a no?

 

[75cruisin]

So....wait, when i become a passenger all my cognitive adult brain transforms into a child brain?

I can, as an adult, choose to ride in the vehicle but then I cant choose to wear a seatbelt or not?

See again how its not the idea behind the law, but enforcement and expansion. The slippery slope. the "in your best interest". Why not just educate people better and then they choose? Invest in better teaching, more realistic courses. Like taxes, better driver training, how to read/understand insurance medical and auto etc, how to budget based on income.

I am all for safety and personally wont move a vehicle until all belts are on. But thats my choice from experience and stories from here. I dont text and drive or drive distracted because I ride my motorcycle 20,000 miles a year and holy fuck its dangerous. But not so much from how I drive, but other people.

Tickets dont scare me into not breaking laws. Recovering from injuries scares me.

See the difference? being educated/experienced will provide a better foundation for saferr more self sufficient people. Being told dont because its illegal doesnt change a person.

So nothing to reply to here?

Yota Up anything?

So did you mask up since it was a government law for the safety of the masses?

It was never a law. Stop lying.

sorry law vs mandate.

While a law is a directive that comes with its own enforcement mechanism, a mandate is a requirement that may or may not come with specific penalties for non-compliance. Compliance with a mandate is often tied to the receipt of federal funds.

Semantics, answer the question. Stop avoiding my counter points.

EDIT:
forgot you avoided the what industry you work in

 

[Yota Up]

So nothing to reply to here?



sorry law vs mandate.

While a law is a directive that comes with its own enforcement mechanism, a mandate is a requirement that may or may not come with specific penalties for non-compliance. Compliance with a mandate is often tied to the receipt of federal funds.

Semantics, answer the question. Stop avoiding my counter points.

EDIT:
forgot you avoided the what industry you work in

First reply: So we should get rid of all laws?
Second: No, I never abided by any mandates. I never put on a mask, I never kept my family inside. We carried on with life 100% normal regardless of any mandates. If you remember, I was George Washington against the masks right from the start, while a lot of people, including here, were still a little worried and uncertain and thought maybe they helped a little. I was also against the vax right from the start. And after all this time, I was right all along on every bit of it.

Your little definition of law vs mandate is stupid because it neglects to mention the most important distinction, and that is how it comes to exist and the process used to establish a law vs mandate. Mandate = one idiot can have a stupid thought at 2am and it instantly becomes a mandate.

I ignore mandates if I don't agree with them. I follow the law even if I don't agree with it.
I'll go ahead and take a guess here that you don't understand the difference and this makes no sense to you and you'll come back trying to split a hair or substitute something else irrelevant.

I don't work in the porn industry, don't work for government, don't work for the law, don't work for an IP provider, so I have no dog in the fight from that angle so tell me how it has anything remotely to do with the subject. I would like to see you propose a theory of "If you're a plumber, then you're more likely to be pro porn getting into the hands of kids but since you're against that I'm gonna guess you're in the restaurant business instead". Go ahead, take your shot.

 

[Sparkmechanic]

Yota Up anything?

So did you mask up since it was a government law for the safety of the masses?

Not law "policy".

 

[75cruisin]

First reply: So we should get rid of all laws?
Second: No, I never abided by any mandates. I never put on a mask, I never kept my family inside. We carried on with life 100% normal regardless of any mandates. If you remember, I was George Washington against the masks right from the start, while a lot of people, including here, were still a little worried and uncertain and thought maybe they helped a little. I was also against the vax right from the start. And after all this time, I was right all along on every bit of it.

Your little definition of law vs mandate is stupid because it neglects to mention the most important distinction, and that is how it comes to exist and the process used to establish a law vs mandate. Mandate = one idiot can have a stupid thought at 2am and it instantly becomes a mandate.

I ignore mandates if I don't agree with them. I follow the law even if I don't agree with it.
I'll go ahead and take a guess here that you don't understand the difference and this makes no sense to you and you'll come back trying to split a hair or substitute something else irrelevant.

I don't work in the porn industry, don't work for government, don't work for the law, don't work for an IP provider, so I have no dog in the fight from that angle so tell me how it has anything remotely to do with the subject. I would like to see you propose a theory of "If you're a plumber, then you're more likely to be pro porn getting into the hands of kids but since you're against that I'm gonna guess you're in the restaurant business instead". Go ahead, take your shot.

Pretty emotional reply. Sorry I thought we were having a discussion here.

You kinda crossed over my education and seatbelt bit but thats cool. Ill take that as you think its a good point. I dont think I said get rid of all laws, anywhere. So Im gunna assume here you got triggered

My point on the mask thing was its the government telling us whats best, kinda like laws. But thank you for being our noble leader. You must be some big pharma researcher to know right off the bat that the vaxx was bad. Ill skip over the rest to not spit on your hairs

You follow the law? Dont you drive your uninsured unregistered 4runner every so often? You never speed? You ever spit on a sidewalk in Sac? thats illegal.
SMC 9.04.040 provides that:

“No person shall expectorate … on any sidewalk in the city.”

I have no theories on the gibber gabber you are trying to get a rise out of me with. I was curious just because you have flexed your job a few times and how awesome it is. It can help add some levity to arguments. But you stay being sassy and secretive.

 

[Yota Up]

Nope. Don't speed. 4runner is registered and insured, otherwise it would never touch public street. Don't spit on sidewalks in Sac, but sometimes spit on dirt in the wilderness.

I knew Covid itself was bullshit the moment the numbers came from the cruise.
I knew masks didn't work after doing my research on Spanish Flu and why people were released from jail over masks.
I knew the vax was bad based on early data from other countries that took it before we did.

Are you gonna put your balls on the table and make any claim about job industry and how it can relate to any position on this subject or not?
I can. Here is an example.
If you are a teacher, my guess is 80% you are liberal.
If you are a hunting guide, my guess is 90% you are conservative.

Now you go.

 

[bgaidan]

Nope. Don't speed. 4runner is registered and insured, otherwise it would never touch public street. Don't spit on sidewalks in Sac, but sometimes spit on dirt in the wilderness.

I knew Covid itself was bullshit the moment the numbers came from the cruise.
I knew masks didn't work after doing my research on Spanish Flu and why people were released from jail over masks.
I knew the vax was bad based on early data from other countries that took it before we did.

Are you gonna put your balls on the table and make any claim about job industry and how it can relate to any position on this subject or not?
I can. Here is an example.
If you are a teacher, my guess is 80% you are liberal.
If you are a hunting guide, my guess is 90% you are conservative.

Now you go.

You must work for the government because you're 100% retarded.

 

[Yota Up]

You must work for the government because you're 100% retarded.

You must be very smart because you rarely say anything of substance but we can always count on you for a quick sentence with brainless insults in every thread. You never grew up.

 

[Mikenike]

Pretty emotional reply. Sorry I thought we were having a discussion here.

You kinda crossed over my education and seatbelt bit but thats cool. Ill take that as you think its a good point. I dont think I said get rid of all laws, anywhere. So Im gunna assume here you got triggered

My point on the mask thing was its the government telling us whats best, kinda like laws. But thank you for being our noble leader. You must be some big pharma researcher to know right off the bat that the vaxx was bad. Ill skip over the rest to not spit on your hairs

You follow the law? Dont you drive your uninsured unregistered 4runner every so often? You never speed? You ever spit on a sidewalk in Sac? thats illegal.
SMC 9.04.040 provides that:

“No person shall expectorate … on any sidewalk in the city.”

I have no theories on the gibber gabber you are trying to get a rise out of me with. I was curious just because you have flexed your job a few times and how awesome it is. It can help add some levity to arguments. But you stay being sassy and secretive.

He isn't going to tell you because finding out he scrubs the toilets at the local supermarket is going to shatter the credibility he doesn't have.

 

[Sandy Johnson]

He isn't going to tell you because finding out he scrubs the toilets at the local supermarket is going to shatter the credibility he doesn't have.

Or maybe it's nobody's business what he does for work. I might not agree with him, but you guys sound like a couple of old hens trying to stir the pot in their local neighborhood.

 

[bgaidan]

You must be very smart because you rarely say anything of substance but we can always count on you for a quick sentence with brainless insults in every thread. You never grew up.

Oh no. I've angered the janitor. I must repent.

 

[Yota Up]

Oh no. I've angered the janitor. I must repent.

Indeed. Look at me rage. I'm punching holes in the drywall, for sure.

You are so articulate and your argument was so compelling that it forced me to reexamine my views and see the error of my ways.
Clearly, with your level of intellect and sophisticated command of our English language, your job must be rocket scientist? No, wait. Lawyer or judge? Maybe doctor? Whatever it is, I'm certain that only the top percent of our society can do what you do. Because you're the one that accomplished the impossible to show me where my thinking went wrong in such a detailed and effective way.

Everyone else failed where you succeeded. All it took was you calling me retarded. Wait...100% retarded. May I ask then what 50% retarded is?
I hope you will treat us to more than just a single sentence because we are all very hungry to benefit from your wisdom and knowledge.

 

[Sandy Johnson]

May I ask then what 50% retarded is?

Now I'm no geneticist(aw shit, now we're talking about MY job), but I think that's if you only have full retard on either your mother's side or your father's side while the other parent was a quantum physicist. A good example would be Stephen Hawking.

...I'm going to hell, aren't i?

 

[Yota Up]

Now I'm no geneticist(aw shit, now we're talking about MY job), but I think that's if you only have full retard on either your mother's side or your father's side while the other parent was a quantum physicist. A good example would be Stephen Hawking.

...I'm going to hell, aren't i?

That's a decent approach.

I instantly went back to the 1971 Supreme court ban on IQ tests in schools because too many blacks scored 85 and were considered retarded and placed in special ed classes.

So if 85 IQ was the baseline for retarded and we treat that as 100% retarded, a 50% retarded person would have an IQ of 92.5. So basically, if you have one white parent and one black parent?

One-way ticket, please.

 

[ExWrench]

So if 85 IQ was the baseline for retarded and we treat that as 100% retarded, a 50% retarded person would have an IQ of 92.5. So basically, if you have one white parent and one black parent?

Sorry to break it to you, but IQ isn't a percentage - there are scores above 100

 

[WLDWUN]

Sorry to break it to you, but IQ isn't a percentage - there are scores above 100

I know I should stay out of this but....

he is not saying that 100 is the highest, just that is the average. which is correct.
if a score of 85 is considered "retarded", then 92.5 is "half retarded".

68% of the population falls between 85 and 115.
95% is between 70 and 130
I believe a score of 70 or less is considered a learning disability.

 

[bgaidan]

Indeed. Look at me rage. I'm punching holes in the drywall, for sure.

You are so articulate and your argument was so compelling that it forced me to reexamine my views and see the error of my ways.
Clearly, with your level of intellect and sophisticated command of our English language, your job must be rocket scientist? No, wait. Lawyer or judge? Maybe doctor? Whatever it is, I'm certain that only the top percent of our society can do what you do. Because you're the one that accomplished the impossible to show me where my thinking went wrong in such a detailed and effective way.

Everyone else failed where you succeeded. All it took was you calling me retarded. Wait...100% retarded. May I ask then what 50% retarded is?
I hope you will treat us to more than just a single sentence because we are all very hungry to benefit from your wisdom and knowledge.

My background and profession has been discussed on here plenty of times. I don't try to hide it.

So what are you trying to hide?

Sorry to break it to you, but IQ isn't a percentage - there are scores above 100

Well he's retarded, soo.....

 

[Animalmother]

I know I should stay out of this but....

he is not saying that 100 is the highest, just that is the average. which is correct.
if a score of 85 is considered "retarded", then 92.5 is "half retarded".

68% of the population falls between 85 and 115.
95% is between 70 and 130
I believe a score of 70 or less is considered a learning disability.

So twiced times barely retarded is average IQ? What does full retard x genius equals to?