I literally cannot understand log cabin republicans.

Like.

Seriously. I can only assume they hate themselves; and I wish somebody in their lives would tell them that they don't have to.

You wouldn’t ever intentionally aim for the gun, you’d aim for the body in every single version of this scenario.

In any scenario using firearms. They're lethal weapons. there's no way to make them not lethal. (well. Ignoring things like rubber bullets.).

Missing is too easy, and in any case, the only snipers not trained to shoot center mass are pretty much cops; where the ranges are much shorter, and you're far more likely to have bystanders being held hostage or at risk if a torso-shot doesn't immediately drop the subject.

Even then, cops are going to go for center mass if they can. For example, Trump would be dead if the shooter had shot for center mass- assuming he wasn't shooting for center mass.

There's a problem with your assertion.

Even if we go the the barest assertion that the definition of "wet" is "being covered in, or saturated, with water" ... Unless you're specifically talking about a singular water molecule (and have fun collecting just one,), water is in fact also covered in, or saturated with, water.

That is to say, water is in fact wet.

Which, is probably why Webster's defines "wet" as:

consisting of, containing, covered with, or soaked with liquid (such as water)

I heard that gag. Even though there's no sound. I heard it.

how... did I miss this community?

Utter nonsense. I already feel like I’m surrounded by children in this conversation.

Naw. What's 'utter nonsense' is that you're unwilling to consider complications and criticism.

Children voting poses a lot of problems. you (more or less) espoused 2 qualifications. the first being that they express a desire to vote. Children- especially very young children- are super easy to manipulate into wanting to do things. Tom Sawyer's fence comes to mind. "gee isn't painting this fence fun? Pay me 2 bucks and I'll let you paint!"

It's why most religious circles will have children's programs. children are way more easily manipulated into forming beliefs that are then assimilated into a world view without any conscious consent on the child's part. They become so ingrained that as adults, childhood beliefs are incredibly hard to kick; even when you come to the belief that they were wrong. those beliefs are largely adopted from the parents.

In terms of children voting, what that means is that the parents are vastly more likely to be the ones to decide who the child votes for.

the second qualification, is an apparent ability to actually vote. taking your statement literally... it should be noted that infants have a grasping reflex that causes them to hold whatever is placed in their hand.

It's utterly nonsensical that you would expect strangers to be able to adequately assess whether a child has the capacity to understand the implications of their vote, as well as ascertaining whether an expressed desire to vote is genuinely from the child, or from undue influence from those around them. And pushing this point a bit further, to also ascertain whether or not that child is truly voting for how they see things- or if their parents are some how coercing that choice.

All of this leads, then to questions about if that child is being coerced to vote outside their best interests by their parents or some other adult.

Further, to your assertion that children don't have representation. again: they do. and that representation is (presumably) elected. What they do not have is the ability to participate in the deciding who that representation will be. unless you live in some authoritarian hellhole, it's unlikely that those representatives would refuse to hear the concerns of children (or indeed, teens), where they would not refuse an adult.

Nice ad hominem, though.

When you say “hold a pencil”…. Do you mean simply holding it? Can some one help put it in their hand?

Do they have to scribble be able to scribble something? Can some one help with that?

What about the very old people who need some help with the pencil?

And this is ignoring the fact that a baby obviously cannot understand the implications of voting.

Same too with a toddler (most of whom can in fact “hold a pencil”

Edit, this is also ignoring the simple fact that children are represented; they simply cannot choose that representation.

Well I'm not American, I'm talking about my own country when I say no taxation without representation.

You understand this is a post about American politics?

In any case,

Where are you going to draw the line? Neonatals literally cannot do anything other than eat, sleep and look around at a blurry world. Do they get a vote?

What about toddlers? Who might be able to buy something with their parent’s money?

You’re going to have to set the line somewhere, and there’s going to be people disenfranchised. It’s that simple.

The age of majority, whatever that is in your country is usually the simplest and least offensive way to do it.

There are no federal sales taxes in the us, so, care to try again?

I mean, I hope she does, lol.

Also. I’m confident that while the “accusation” is something of an exaggeration- she is going to try and push through solutions; and that’s better than what the repugnants are gonna do.

Kids are paying taxes now?

“Only you can create forest fires!” -Smokey the Cat,