- Joined
- Apr 4, 2007
- Messages
- 8,578
Yeah, it means that cop sucks, and should have never had that job.
When I was younger (now I'm 38..."Back when I was a kid...") we all had toy guns...even the girls in the neighbourhood had toy guns.
Cap guns, water guns, they mostly looked real, because that what we wanted as kids.
Yet, a funny happened...or rather didn't happen...cops didn't shoot us.
Because they were able to use this marvelous thing which used to be standard issue; a brain.
Do you also disapprove of toy hammers and saws?
The real versions of those can be dangerous too.
Yeah but there are a lot of shoulda woulda couldas. And unfortunately there are a lot of bad cops and stupid people and you cant eliminate them. Im 34, not that much younger than you. And I played with toy guns all the time. And that was when they looked identical to the real thing and were weighted as the real thing. But again that doesnt mean I think it was a good Idea. Sure at the time it seemed right because I wanted one. But I also wanted to sleep with my 6th grade teacher but it wouldnt make it right. I dont justify my decisions and values by basing them on the past mistakes of others. I think for myself and dont automatically default on what has been done in the past. I try NOT to repeat history. Especially historical mistakes. To answer your question I think dangerous items should stay just that. Dangerous. Introducing unneeded complacency I feel is a poor choice. Children will always mimic their parents. We cant change that. But we can change how they associate with those dangerous objects. Id rather a child pick up a stick and pretend its a hammer. Because there is a genuine sense of make believe and using ones imagination. Giving a child a replica of a dangerous object I feel can lead to problems as they now associate the image of that object with a safe one.