Welcome to Tactical Gamer

User Tag List

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 55
  1. #1
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    QuantumQrack's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Age
    44
    Posts
    513
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate


  2.  
  3. #2
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassVeteranCreated Blog entryTagger Second Class

    Ytman's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,699
    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    There were guns on campus during Columbine.

    Here's the thing; the video is not relevant to the current debate as it is giving a 'guns versus no guns' argument which no one is making. The current debate is about how much regulation is unacceptable and why.

    I am quite thrilled that a bill about making gun trafficking a federal crime is passing in our congress.
    "a man cannot just be; he can only be what he is by doing what he does,"
    'Virtue and the Moral Life'
    Bernard Mayo

  4.  
  5. #3
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Frequent Poster

    CingularDuality's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dallas/Ft. Worth area of Texas, USA
    Age
    39
    Posts
    17,674
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Ytman View Post
    I am quite thrilled that a bill about making gun trafficking a federal crime is passing in our congress.
    Gun trafficking is already a federal crime in the United States. Are you in another country?

  6.  

  7. #4
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassVeteranCreated Blog entryTagger Second Class

    Ytman's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,699
    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by CingularDuality View Post
    Gun trafficking is already a federal crime in the United States. Are you in another country?

    The Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation Thursday making gun trafficking a
    federal crime
    as lawmakers cast the first vote in Congress to curb firearms since
    December's horrific shootings at a Connecticut elementary school.

    The panel was also debating bills banning assault weapons and high
    capacity magazines, requiring background checks for nearly all gun purchases,
    and providing more money for schools to buy video cameras and other safety equipment.

    The committee approved the gun trafficking measure on an 11-7 vote.
    Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, was the only Republican to vote in favor of the measure, whose
    chief sponsor was the panel's chairman, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.

    Evidence was abundant of partisan clashes ahead as the two parties sparred over the need to limit firearms.
    Leahy said he hoped senators would make significant progress this week on curbing gun violence.
    Grassley said everyone wants to prevent more killings like the deaths of 20 first-graders and six staffers
    at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. But he said gun control does not work and accused
    Democrats of wanting to "impose more gun restrictions on law-abiding citizens."

    All four measures were expected to pass the committee. But their fate when the full Senate
    considers them, probably in April, is less certain. The trafficking measure by Leahy, D-Vt., was
    thought to have the best prospects, while the assault weapons ban by
    Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., seemed to have the slimmest chance.

    The trafficking bill would create penalties of up to 25 years in
    prison for people who legally buy guns but give them to others who use them in crimes.

    Democrats led by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., had hoped to reach a bipartisan
    deal on expanding federal background checks with conservative Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.
    But on Wednesday, Democrats set aside their efforts to win over Coburn after weeks
    of talks failed to resolve a dispute over requiring that records of private sales be retained.

    Their inability to craft a deal with Coburn was a blow to Democrats because of his solid
    conservative credentials and "A" rating with the NRA. His support could have meant backing
    from other Senate Republicans and even moderate Democrats, including several facing 2014
    re-election campaigns in GOP-leaning states.

    In addition, supporters of curbing guns say the Senate will have to approve legislation
    with strong bipartisan support to boost their chances of success in the GOP-led House.
    Republican leaders there have said they won't act until the Senate produces legislation.
    Democrats said they would negotiate with other Republicans and would not give up on
    eventually cutting a deal with Coburn.

    "We're confident plenty of senators already understand that this is the sweet spot
    where good policy and politics meet," said Mark Glaze, director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns,
    a gun-curb group led by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino
    whose membership includes more than 800 mayors.

    Expanding the checks is the cornerstone and most popular part of Obama's effort to rein gun violence.
    They are now mandated only for sales by the nation's 55,000 federally licensed gun dealers, not
    for private sales between individuals, like those at gun shows or online.

    An Associated-Press-GfK poll in January found 84 percent favored requiring background checks
    at gun shows. Other proposed gun curbs were supported by just over half the public.
    Thursday's Judiciary session prompted widespread efforts, especially by gun control
    advocates, to pressure recalcitrant senators and show signs of public support.
    Supporters of gun curbs planned rallies outside the home-state offices of Grassley, the
    Judiciary Committee's top Republican, and Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz.

    Former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., grievously wounded in a Tucson mass shooting
    two years ago, solicited contributions by email for the political action committee she
    and husband Mark Kelly, the retired astronaut, have formed to help elect lawmakers who back gun curbs.
    "Your contribution will help us keep the pressure on Judiciary Committee
    senators while ensuring the rest of them see our message" during Congress'
    recess late this month, she wrote.

    NRA officials said they have urged their members, said to number more than 4 million, to contact lawmakers.

    Democrats say background check records, whether kept by the individuals, manufacturers or others,
    are the only way to ensure that the checks are conducted for private sales. Coburn said such information
    could help create a federal registry of gun owners -- something that is now illegal and that the White House says would not happen.
    Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., also have been involved in the background check
    negotiations and said in a joint statement they would continue looking for a compromise with other senators.

    "Dr. Coburn is still hopeful they can reach an agreement," Coburn spokesman John Hart said Wednesday.
    Lacking agreement with Coburn, Schumer planned to seek a vote
    by the Judiciary Committee on a bill resembling a measure he initially
    proposed two years ago. It would require background checks for nearly all gun sales,
    with narrow exemptions including one for transactions between close relatives. It
    would also cut federal aid for states that don't send enough mental health records to
    the federal background check network -- a widespread problem that has fueled critics'
    complaints that the current system should be fixed before it is expanded.



    I live in the United States, a country that allowed a man who illegally sold over six hundred guns in Chicago, to only serve five years in jail. Our laws about gun violence and the sales of guns, (and how people can buy guns at Chuck's Gun Store and 'lose them' to gangsters) are very weak.
    "a man cannot just be; he can only be what he is by doing what he does,"
    'Virtue and the Moral Life'
    Bernard Mayo

  8.  
  9. #5
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    QuantumQrack's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Age
    44
    Posts
    513
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    "A bill approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday describes the newly minted crime of "gun trafficking."

    That sounds great on the surface. Digging further, however, reveals that the activities lumped under the new legal term gun trafficking — purchasing a firearm for someone who is otherwise prohibited from possessing a gun, buying guns to be illegally smuggled out of the country, delivering guns in the knowledge that they will be used in the furtherance of crimes — are already illegal under existing law."

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...ews+-+Opinion)

    I'm here all week, enjoy the veal.

  10.  
  11. #6
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassVeteranCreated Blog entryTagger Second Class

    Ytman's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,699
    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    What is your point?

    Just because something is illegal doesn't mean the punishment is currently apt.

    The legislation would make it a crime to sell a gun to a person who intends to pass it on to someone who couldn't pass a federal background check, and it would make gun trafficking a felony punishable by up to 25 years in prison.
    It might be illegal to carry own an switchblade in my state but the crime of me selling them out of my car en masse might be nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
    "a man cannot just be; he can only be what he is by doing what he does,"
    'Virtue and the Moral Life'
    Bernard Mayo

  12.  

  13. #7
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    QuantumQrack's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Age
    44
    Posts
    513
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    I was going to reply....but decided to go buy some beer instead. :-) Be right back!

  14.  
  15. #8
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassVeteranCreated Blog entryTagger Second Class

    Ytman's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,699
    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    Information that I think is pertinent if not entirely on topic that came out today;

    Six children escaped the Sandy Hook massacre during a short moment when Adam Lanza was busy reloading or dealing with a jam in his AR-15 Bushmaster Rifle. During the entire shooting spree he fired 151 bullets over five minutes reloading four times before throwing away the Bushmaster and using a pistol to commit suicide. Had he fired the same number from even 10 round magazines he would have had to reload fourteen times.

    A good man with a gun would only have needed one magazine with even seven rounds to have stopped Lanza. Instead a bad man with a gun will use multiple large magazines.

    The gun utilized for all the murders of the first graders, teachers, and staff, the AR-15 Bushmaster, and its 30 round magazines, were only allowed to be possessed after the Assault Weapons Ban expired. Adam Lanza would not have had the AR-15 otherwise. Today we are talking about guns because of a terrible massacre that was at least increased in scale due to the expiration of the Assault Weapons Ban.

    At some point the 'Freedom of Speech' is regulated; I can not yell 'Fire!' in a theater if there is no fire.

    I wonder when the Newtown Effect will die.
    "a man cannot just be; he can only be what he is by doing what he does,"
    'Virtue and the Moral Life'
    Bernard Mayo

  16.  
  17. #9
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Gill's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Silverthorne, Colorado
    Age
    34
    Posts
    2,445
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    There's a flaw in your assertion: they escaped during a reload/jam, yet what happened during the other four moments when Lanza reloaded? The likely answer is that the weapon had a malfunction that he did not know how to quickly correct. Maybe a stovepipe, maybe a double/triple feed, maybe a failure-to-extract. Only the investigators know.

    My point being that reloading a magazine is not a technical process requiring a massive amount of time. An person given rudimentary, basic, "this is how you do it, now try" knowledge of reloading a magazine can accomplish the action in seconds.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=b2Upjn5DR0o

    The above is hardly scientific proof, but it gets my point across, especially the last portion of the video that attempts to demonstrate the erroneous assumption that you can rush someone or flee during the gunman's reload.

    The gun utilized for all the murders of the first graders, teachers, and staff, the AR-15 Bushmaster, and its 30 round magazines, were only allowed to be possessed after the Assault Weapons Ban expired. Adam Lanza would not have had the AR-15 otherwise. Today we are talking about guns because of a terrible massacre that was at least increased in scale due to the expiration of the Assault Weapons Ban.
    Supposition. Had he not had access to an "assault weapon", he could have used a shotgun, a hunting rifle, handguns, revolvers, a baseball bat, a chainsaw, a machete, a rock, or his fists.

    After all, Harris and Klebold managed to kill 15 and wound 10 during Columbine armed with shotguns, 9mm carbine, and 9mm semiautomatic handgun. Had their two 20 lbs propane bombs they planted in the cafeteria gone off, the death toll would have been much, much higher.

    On April 20, Harris was equipped with a 12-gauge Savage-Springfield 67H pump-action shotgun, (which he discharged a total of 25 times) and a Hi-Point 995 Carbine 9 mm carbine with thirteen 10-round magazines, which he fired a total of 96 times.

    Klebold was equipped with a 9 mm Intratec TEC-9 semi-automatic handgun with one 52-, one 32-, and one 28-round magazine and a 12-gauge Stevens 311D double-barreled sawed-off shotgun. Klebold primarily fired the TEC-9 handgun, for a total of 55 times.
    Klebold had a ridiculous 52 rd magazine that he apparently used up and reloaded with a smaller magazine (going by the round count). Harris had 13 ten-round magazines! I thought that 10-rd magazines are supposed to make it so that you can't kill a lot of people.... >.> Large magazine or small magazine, reload times don't much matter. Harris reloading that style of shotgun is much more dexterious and requires more time, as you load each shell individually. He still was able to fire his shotgun 25 times.

    For further evidence that new laws only punish the law-abiding, look no further than the recent manhunt in California with Dorner. Dorner was armed with weapons and weaponry attachments that are HEAVILY-regulated under Federal guidelines (Class III NFA weaponry) and are illegal to possess in California. He still committed crimes with them.

    A good man with a gun would only have needed one magazine with even seven rounds to have stopped Lanza. Instead a bad man with a gun will use multiple large magazines.
    You are assuming that someone with a magazine holding a grand total of seven flipping rounds would have prevailed against someone who possessed enough ammunition on his person to fire 151 rounds of 5.56mm?

    I'm a police officer. I have 45 rds of .40 cal ammunition for my Glock. If I encounter a situation that permits it, I am NOT going toe-to-toe with a man armed with a rifle whilst only armed with my pistol. I'm grabbing my AR. With 30 rd magazines.

    This is all will serve nothing in the way of preventing another massacre. You have to find and prevent the person, not the weapons. That includes reevaluating the "civil right" to be crazy and unstable.

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

    edit: The nature of my post is contentious, but I mean you no offense, ytman.
    Last edited by Gill; 03-15-2013 at 02:42 AM.


  18.  

  19. #10
    Achievements:
    SocialYour first GroupVeteranCreated Album picturesCreated Blog entry

    Skud's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Age
    24
    Posts
    8,333
    Blog Entries
    20
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Ytman View Post
    There were guns on campus during Columbine.

    Here's the thing; the video is not relevant to the current debate as it is giving a 'guns versus no guns' argument which no one is making. The current debate is about how much regulation is unacceptable and why.

    I am quite thrilled that a bill about making gun trafficking a federal crime is passing in our congress.
    Feinstein admits she wants complete disarming of the civilian populace
    Skud

  20.  
  21. #11
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    QuantumQrack's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Age
    44
    Posts
    513
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    Something I never realized about the NRA. (in the beginning of video)



  22.  
  23. #12
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Siantis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Cape Cod, MA, USA
    Posts
    347
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Ytman View Post
    At some point the 'Freedom of Speech' is regulated; I can not yell 'Fire!' in a theater if there is no fire.
    You are not gagged when walking into a theather. The word isn't magically erased from your vocabulary. You are NOT punished BEFORE you MIGHT do something. The law will punish those who do so, however, which keeps people from doing it.


    @Quantam: Gun control in this country started out with racial undertones. The idea was to keep firearms out of the hands of Native Americans and slaves.


    "You have to go out, you don't have to come back."

    Dredgeisms: "NO! GoNooowwwBARRELROLL!" - "There WILL be NO desync!"

  24.  

  25. #13
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassVeteranCreated Blog entryTagger Second Class

    Ytman's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,699
    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    Koopa I am all too often a person of contention I know it well and take no offense. I hold great importance that anything worth a darn is worth emotion and disagreement; its the foundation of our union and the general American experiment. Fair warning, as race issues are brought up here, I will be very contentious for that particular rebuttal.

    I've read all responses and think it best to tackle them simultaneously.


    ======Contentious Part======

    The whole debate of gun regulation is quite complex and riddled with history, history of which I will not rewrite to color the issue in another way; the NRA was not founded to protect 'freed slaves from the KKK' and the numbers of black people saying it does not make it true. Furthermore to claim that 'gun control' started with racial undertones is inherently fallacious and flies in the face of the greater point of that corrupt society. There is a grand canyon worth of difference between denying blacks rights based only on their skin and the xenophobic fear that embodied far too much of this country; and laws, dating back to the very foundation of our country, that restricted for all men guns and their use.

    A fair piece of history is that gun control existed, as noted in the dissent of the Heller ruling, beyond merely regulating sale to Native Americans (who at the time were not citizens, and we were actively aggressively taking their lands) in the form of ordinances which forbade gunpowder storage, regulated transport, and even prevented the bringing a gun on the premise of a building.

    Furthermore, if history is any lesson that you want, freedom of blacks, against tyranny, was not enforced by any weapon or by any threat of force. Rather years of protest and civil discourse brought about rapid change, change which polarized our country politically and still taints us today. Of note is the way in which a certain party mocks our president saying that he can't possibly be an American or that he is lazy or that, and I quote, 'It is good politics to oppose the black guy in the White House.' Recently the city of Detroit was even 'taken over' in what any person wanting freedom and public representation would call a vast tyrannical usurpation of government power.

    To phrase the argument, and might I add that the February 'Black History Month Aware' NRA spokespeople got me stoked pretty bad (this has a large part to do with my response here), in the way you've done is very offensive and completely wrong. Would you even know that those sheriffs that want to oppose any theoretical federal law are of the same ilk that did not show up during the riots in response to the 'Freedom Riders'? Gun rights and the rights of a 'color' of people are two completely separate issues; historically and currently. I would think it best that we are past issues like this and we only talk about the control of guns in the public space. At the very least 'Urban' Persons is a more general term.


    ==========

    The Columbine Shooting and Newtown offer two completely different cases of the same style of offense. Here is specifically the difference.

    ~9:35am ; 9:46~9:49am*

    11:19am ; 12:08pm

    You see there was at most only 14 minutes of a shooting spree at Sandy Hook and I am being generous until the full report comes out on Monday (which reports that the spree inside the school took only five minutes). Compare to a spree of 29 Minutes at Columbine. I will talk more about the shooting once I read the report, but now I will talk about the myth of 'reloading/jamming' not providing critical response time for the victims. In fact most of the recent sprees; Tuscon, Aurora, and Newtown all had moments where the weapon malfunctioned or the operator made a mistake during reloading.

    In Tuscon the shooter was tackled after firing all of the rounds of his extended magazine from his pistol, a magazine size that many can not justify as a capable 'self defense' item.

    In Aurora the shooter could not fire his AR-15 after the 100 round magazine jammed.

    In Newtown the shooter encountered some operating trouble allowing six children to escape.

    Now, I understand not wanting to go against a bad guy with a 30 round Semi-Automatic Civilian version of the M-16/4. My point of him not being able to use said gun, or said magazine, then seems apt (assuming the Assault Weapons Ban was still in place). You I think just underlined exactly my point; the public presence of these heavy powered, spree suited, weapons creates an arms race between the good guys and the bad guys. As a police officer will you always walk around with your AR-15 on your person? Is the threat of you coming toe to toe with a Fully Automatic Sub-Machine gun worth the free manufacture and unregulated sale of the item?

    Speaking of the control of guns in the public space I would like to re-re-re quote Benjamin Franklin, as I see his common quote has been brought up.

    All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention. Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it.
    I would love it for us to explicitly talk about this concept as posited by Benjamin Franklin. To me he only claims a Bow, not even a gun! (perhaps because guns in their time were less efficient than bows for hunting), as exempted from being able to be regulated by the 'Public'. Today we regulate a great deal of things, (a well regulated militia not so much), and guns happen to be one of those such things.

    The argument to be able to own a firearm is indisputable. The argument to which firearm you 'ought to be allowed to own and bring with you everywhere' is something far far different. I am much more interested in that. To this case I would bring up the fact that the citizen can not own an grenade launcher and they certainly have no Federal Right to own one of these arms. Furthermore the Supreme Court decided that there was no Federal Right to own a 'Sawed Off Shotgun' and I do believe there are now also laws against tampering with a gun's firing mechanism after a certain point.

    Finally the argument to what oversight is morally right and simultaneously purposeful towards public safety is another related issue I am intent to discuss.

    Skud I would like a direct quote please, hopefully peer reviewed. Furthermore what Senator Fienstein might want and what she can actually do are two separate things.
    "a man cannot just be; he can only be what he is by doing what he does,"
    'Virtue and the Moral Life'
    Bernard Mayo

  26.  
  27. #14
    Achievements:
    SocialYour first GroupVeteranCreated Album picturesCreated Blog entry

    Skud's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Age
    24
    Posts
    8,333
    Blog Entries
    20
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj4AcjyuV38

    Really, YT...

    Please open your eyes. This woman is also extremely supportive of the administration's drone policies... It's not a coincidence at all.
    Skud

  28.  
  29. #15
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran5000 Experience Points


    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Age
    27
    Posts
    1,046
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Thought this was an Interesting Video Concerning the Gun Control Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Skud View Post
    Feinstein admits she wants complete disarming of the civilian populace
    That's nice. Feinstein doesn't speak for me or for a lot of people who do want increased regulation (or hell, enforcement of existing regulation.)

    edit: Seriously, what is your obsession with Feinstein? Should I start finding the most odious Republican positions available and constantly inform you of them as if it discredits your argument entirely? Its...I don't understand how large portions of this country have devolved into team-based politics. Feinstein is not on my team. Obama is not on my team. And the fact that you assume that anyone who posts threads about gun control automatically supports everything Feinstein says is...strange. Why is that?

  30.  
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Back to top