Close call...

[Treo]

absoultely agree with you, IF that is what I saw. however, having lived in asia and it taking me a good year to feel comfortable with college girls looking like they are 14yo...the hit-girl you posted dressed up in anime and participating in THAT level of violence did not make me feel I was looking at an 11yo. you could put that same outfit on my 42yo asian wife and she would look pretty close.

but perhaps we should discuss YOUR bent, KNOWING that girl is 11yo, participating in THAT level of violence, AND using her as your identity icon. that is kinda creepy.

darn, I swore I would never participate in these 'boring to everyone else' tagents.

I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this ^ but Chloe Moretz ( Mindy Macready/ Hit Girl) was 11 /12 when this move was filmed. Her parents were (apparently) OK w/ her being in it even though the character is the antithesis of their stated Christian values. She has stated in interviews that the movie and the dialogue were a job to her and nothing more and that she took the role because she viewed it as “challenging”. She has also stated more than once that if she ever uttered a word of Hit Girl's dialogue she'd be grounded until shortly after the second coming.

IMO if her parents had no problem w/ her appearing publicly as Hit Girl My using her for an avatar should be no problem and those who know me "get it". That said, in the clip that I posted Hit Girl is clearly prepubescent (In a couple of the shots "she" is a male stunt double) and any reference to her taking off her costume is out of line

[charlieinthebush]

I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this ^ but Chloe Moretz ( Mindy Macready/ Hit Girl) was 11 /12 when this move was filmed. Her parents were (apparently) OK w/ her being in it even though the character is the antithesis of their stated Christian values. She has stated in interviews that the movie and the dialogue were a job to her and nothing more and that she took the role because she viewed it as “challenging”. She has also stated more than once that if she ever uttered a word of Hit Girl's dialogue she'd be grounded until shortly after the second coming.

IMO if her parents had no problem w/ her appearing publicly as Hit Girl My using her for an avatar should be no problem and those who know me "get it". That said, in the clip that I posted Hit Girl is clearly prepubescent (In a couple of the shots "she" is a male stunt double) and any reference to her taking off her costume is out of line

Thanks for the backstory. I've never heard of the girl or the movie. However, your explaination re-enforces my last post. That is, posting a one minute clip of a pre-pubescent girl (NOT her avatar) participating in R rated violence is just as disturbing as if she were participating in an R rated sex scene. And to be OK with it because her "christian" parents are OK with it is kinda weak.

I enjoyed the adult movie "Hitman" with Timothy Olyphant, but using an 11yo girl at the same level of violence is, to me, abusive to her physically, emotionaly, and citing "christian values" in there somewhere, it's also spiritually abusive. That is exactly how I feel considering my own 12yo daughter.

We don't know each other, so I'm in no position to judge you in any way, so I can only react to what I've seen you say/post in the last 24 hours; but I strongly suggest you disassociate yourself with the impression you presented with that clip.

[SGB]

Well said, SGB.

BTW, I don't see anything in 790.10 that says the display of the gun must be intentional for there to be a violation.



Seems like a large percentage of the population in Florida is scared of an American carrying a gun...

We had licensed open carry for 100 years before 790.06 and a couple of weeks of unlicensed open carry prior to the legislature passing 790.053 ........... It's the Florida Sheriffs Association in league with the Florida Retail Federation that got our latest attempt to re-institute licensed open carry killed.

ETA: As to 790.10 charges would be determined on an "objective" origin rather a "subjective" origin. The “objective” origin encompasses the circumstance of viewing your actions with the firearm reflecting such exhibition as being done in an irrationally attacking manner, or being done in a way that generates an unreasonable risk of injury to other individuals or assets. Unless your circumstances occurred in these manners, there is not a basis of an established criminal offense.

[Grognard Gunny]

She doesn't look old enough to legally "take it off" even if she wanted to. (Heh. Heh. Heeeeeeh!)

GG

[Grognard Gunny]

...... and, just like "real life", the antagonists can't shoot worth a damn! (YAWN!)

GG

[NavyLCDR]

We had licensed open carry for 100 years before 790.06 and a couple of weeks of unlicensed open carry prior to the legislature passing 790.053 ........... It's the Florida Sheriffs Association in league with the Florida Retail Federation that got our latest attempt to re-institute licensed open carry killed.

Personally, if I were a police officer and as a civilian, I would feel safer and rather be able to see what kind of gun a person was carrying and how they were carrying it rather than wonder what they have hidden.... but that's just me, I guess.

[Grognard Gunny]

.... and while I was posting, got indications that my observations were correct concerning her apparent age.

As for "youth violence", ain't anything worse there than what every third kid in the US sees on his PC/X Box/what have you.... except the "kid" gets to "manouver" the shooter/hero in his/her killing spree. (another YAWN!)

GG

[Treo]

Hit Girl Kicks ASS!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zReWj...eature=related

Next subject

[charlieinthebush]

Hit Girl Kicks ASS!!!!

YouTube - ‪Kick-Ass Drug Lord Fight scene‬‏

Next subject

next subject sounds good to me. just keep in mind the next time you accuse another man (maybe you're a boy, or a girl, I don't know) with a very thin veil, of pedophilic tendancies, to expect a bit of introspection thrown back attchya.