I have to assume there was some sarcasm in there that I’m missing.

Why would you attack a civilian at a football game just because you hate their government?

It’s all good

Lol for a moment I honestly thought you meant me.

True but I guess the way I’m reading it is reading is reading regardless of how you read.

The article is just saying they don’t read for pleasure. Regardless of the format

Curious what is the alternative to reading?

Maybe I’m missing it but where in the article does it say “reading books”? Reading can be done via a tablet or even a phone. You can check out a digital book from the library. The article as far as i can tell just says they don’t enjoy reading for pleasure

1,700?

Wow!

That is a good point.

Thank you. Probably will help. Will try those settings.

Good point. Thank you

Thank you for a solid answer.

What would be a real world problem on voting for those judges?

Maybe, maybe not.

On an airplane is absolutely bad place to start shit.

Wait are you saying I’m not special?

If you can’t beat 'em, beat them up

Me I think it’s a good idea. I’m not an insurance agent and not wealthy.

But when these things happen people need a way to rebuild. They need money. Where else is the cash going to come from?

No cash? Now what?

The flying squid was there. First hand experience

I’ve never heard of that legal distinction, but I want you to go talk to any parent of a 13 year old and ask how they refer to a 13 year old and the vast majority will call those people a child and also call them a teenager. A ton of teachers will do the same thing.

At age 19 you are still a teenager but in the eyes of the law many times you are considered an adult.

So it is fair to call a 13 year old a child because basically they still are.

At 13 they basically are still children