Cricketts and Chipmunks??

Back to the small atv's, I got my son one at age 6. It goes super fast, BUT it has a key fob so I can shut it off from a distance, he must where a helmet as well. He is actually very careful with it and has not had a accident yet (8 years old now). It could easily kill him if misused, however I as a responsible parent just don't let it even come close to happening. It should go without saying...
 

Back to the small atv's, I got my son one at age 6. It goes super fast, BUT it has a key fob so I can shut it off from a distance, he must where a helmet as well. He is actually very careful with it and has not had a accident yet (8 years old now). It could easily kill him if misused, however I as a responsible parent just don't let it even come close to happening. It should go without saying...

And that evil gov dare to tell you that your child needs to wear a helmut?
 

I don't care what the govt says, I THE PARENT tell him he must wear the helmet. I own acreage and he uses it on MY land or on our PRIVATE road. But your right picker about the evil govt...:laughing7:
 

Actually most states / municipalities do have very specific laws around the placing of fencing around pools for just that reason. So that is a great example of regulation of safety for children. Good point.

Well I guess, with huge regulations on pools, and even the small kiddie pools especially made for children that the scourge of drowning has been obliterated.

Does this example show how evil pools of water are, and how effectively government can make the water scared of attacking kids?.
 

Well I guess, with huge regulations on pools, and even the small kiddie pools especially made for children that the scourge of drowning has been obliterated.

Does this example show how evil pools of water are, and how effectively government can make the water scared of attacking kids?.

I'd encourage you to start a thread on water safety if you are interested in that topic.
 

And Dave, I thought I was waiting on you for a list of questions? Feel free to start an "ask stockpicker" thread if you would like. Let me know.
 

Mr Picker.. I am sure you know something, I just haven't figured out what that may be. If you make sense one day I will ask you if it interests me.
 

Mr Picker.. I am sure you know something, I just haven't figured out what that may be. If you make sense one day I will ask you if it interests me.

Ok, I thought on another thread you were accusing me of not answering your questions?
 

Since you were not able to logically defend your psychosis I lost interest. It is, however, amusing to watch your circus sometimes.
 

I can only try to live up to your intellect and expectations.
 

David study Stocky.

A question can be answered implicitly, with varying degrees of ambiguity, by a rhetorical question (a question to which the answer is implied or known). This has been used as a mild rebuke in answers such as "Well, what do you think?" or "Why else would I say that?" or "Do you think I'm stupid?" However, the rebuke is generally not part of the answer and is not usually helpful in communicating the information requested by the question.
 

David study Stocky.

A question can be answered implicitly, with varying degrees of ambiguity, by a rhetorical question (a question to which the answer is implied or known). This has been used as a mild rebuke in answers such as "Well, what do you think?" or "Why else would I say that?" or "Do you think I'm stupid?" However, the rebuke is generally not part of the answer and is not usually helpful in communicating the information requested by the question.

Wow I didn't think I was that good - thanks.
 

David study Stocky.

A question can be answered implicitly, with varying degrees of ambiguity, by a rhetorical question (a question to which the answer is implied or known). This has been used as a mild rebuke in answers such as "Well, what do you think?" or "Why else would I say that?" or "Do you think I'm stupid?" However, the rebuke is generally not part of the answer and is not usually helpful in communicating the information requested by the question.

I'm quite flattered that you have studied me so closely. Not that I have any idea what you are trying to say - I am flattered none the less. Do you guys want to become part of the "I'm ignoring you stockpicker" club??
 

I'm quite flattered that you have studied me so closely. Not that I have any idea what you are trying to say - I am flattered none the less. Do you guys want to become part of the "I'm ignoring you stockpicker" club??

I was referring to your posts on how easy it is to answer anyone's question with a question.
 

Don't have to, onfire doing it for me.


Further, a question/answer can never answer a question completely. Although, the question/answer can be structured in a way that minimizes ambiguity, it can never be free of ambiguity. A statement/answer can be. This is why, on this site to answer with a question is ruled unresponsive, and never accepted.
 

Wow, I step away for a minute and things get heated up! I am back with my popcorn and 44 oz. soda (sorry Bloomburg) and am ready to read along again! :laughing7:
 

Further, a question/answer can never answer a question completely. Although, the question/answer can be structured in a way that minimizes ambiguity, it can never be free of ambiguity. A statement/answer can be. This is why, on this site to answer with a question is ruled unresponsive, and never accepted.

Feel free to fire away. Maybe start a thread called "opining with stocky".
 

Feel free to fire away. Maybe start a thread called "opining with stocky".

I'd love to do that But as soon as i would post it you'd see ................................Thread locked. No opinions here.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom