GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-19-2011, 05:24   #1
21Carrier
Until I Gota 29
 
21Carrier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoover, AL
Posts: 3,037
A reminder about shot placement

I ran across this link while reading a thread over at The High Road. The thread was about bullets hitting bone, and someone posted this link. I must warn you, the contents are GRAPHIC! It contains morgue photos of a dead assailant shot by police officers.

Apparently, what happened was that three officers got into a gun-fight with this guy, and were unable to stop him with their Glock 22s. They used 180gr Gold Dots. They stopped the fight by shooting him with their M4s loaded with 55gr and 75gr Hornady TAP bullets. They shot the guy 6 times with their Glocks, and another 11 times with the M4s (107 rounds were fired!!!). The reason this link even exists is that the cops were very concerned with the performance of their G22s and Gold Dots, and their medical examiner said that most of the .40S&W rounds penetrated about ONE INCH.

Well, the story and concerns were forwarded to the FBI's Ballistic Research Facility, and they conducted an investigation. This looks to be their report (or at least a brief form of it). It never fully explains if the one inch penetration was true, and why these rounds failed to penetrate, but they do say that the .40S&W ammo did NOT fail, and voice some skepticism.

In the end, they reinforce how important shot placement is. This assailant was not on any kind of drugs (besides "trace" amounts of marijuana) and just kept fighting, even after the 17 shots. It sounds like he was taken away in CUFFS, not in a body bag. This just goes to show how critical shot placement is. Seventeen rounds, and he kept on going. This makes me really wonder about the amount of ammo I carry. Is 21 rounds enough?

Before clicking here, you have been warned! This link is GRAPHIC!!!

http://concealedcarryholsters.org/wp...e-Shootout.pdf

P.S.- The fact that they included the photo of the very ironic tattoo on his forearm is kind of funny. There was no reason to show the photo, as it showed no gunshots.

Last edited by 21Carrier; 08-19-2011 at 05:28..
21Carrier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 06:37   #2
G33
CLM Number 296
Re-Assigned
 
G33's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: With G29
Posts: 57,053


Miami again.
__________________


"I'd wager G would waterboard a salmon."--tous

"...those without swords can still die upon them." --Eowyn
G33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 08:23   #3
rcd567
Senior Member
 
rcd567's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Near Glenwood, Iowa
Posts: 323
Very interesting. My old department has been involved in several officer involved shootings where the Glock 22/40 caliber have been less than ideal. With the exception of one gunfight where the suspect was shot in the head. The suspect died instantly.
__________________
Don't pick a fight with an old man, if he's too tired to fight, he'll just kill you.
rcd567 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 12:18   #4
10mmneal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3
Some inconsistencies in tests

Let me start out by saying I am not a cop, medical examiner or forensics/ballistics expert. I am a scientist though. Reading through the report, I can draw one conclusion from this article: there is a lot more going on here. i.e. Early in the report the state that the suspect was shot first in the arm, breaking it. The fire fight happened and the suspect was shot and killed by the .223 rounds (likely from one striking the aorta and the another piercing and collapsing the lung). The end of the report contradicts this timeline indicating the suspect was shot in the arm last. Additionally, there is also no discussion of barrier penetration, or examination of the suspects clothing in the report. The conclusion of the report should be that this was a waste of time and answered no real questions concerning the terminal performance of the .40 S&W rounds in the case in question. Sorry to hijack the thread.

Neal

Last edited by 10mmneal; 08-19-2011 at 12:19.. Reason: spelling
10mmneal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 16:40   #5
ModGlock17
Senior Member
 
ModGlock17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lalaland USA
Posts: 2,620
Hit rate: 17 hit / 107 shots ===> 15.8% hit rate at 20feet (less than 7 yrds)

THAT, Gentlemen, is alarming. The people to protect you, can't use their own weapons.

Additional problem is the ammo failure. There has to be some changes in policy.
ModGlock17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 16:46   #6
ModGlock17
Senior Member
 
ModGlock17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lalaland USA
Posts: 2,620
I think a 22LR 40gr HP going at 1350fps would have done the job.

Assailant had 3.5min to kill officers, and they must have been shooting at his direction WITHOUT looking.
ModGlock17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 16:51   #7
dsa1115
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 535
Pistols aren't the most reliable stoppers, however I find it impossible to believe that 180 grain Gold Dots in .40SW only had 1 inch of penetration. It just doesn't seem plausible.
__________________
G26, G17, G34, G21 gen4
dsa1115 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 17:00   #8
ModGlock17
Senior Member
 
ModGlock17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lalaland USA
Posts: 2,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsa1115 View Post
Pistols aren't the most reliable stoppers, however I find it impossible to believe that 180 grain Gold Dots in .40SW only had 1 inch of penetration. It just doesn't seem plausible.
The only thing can be plausible is that the rounds burnt slow, as in partial combustion, as in moisturized, as in soaked at one time, as wet in the waist day-in day-out in the rain.

Our basic assumption is that the rounds were "fresh", which is not necessarily true. We don't know their policy regarding carry rounds, as they need to use them at the range after certain time on the belt. It's likely that they were kept on officers' belt, whereas the M4 was kept inside the vehicles.

Crimping of the rounds does not provide hermetical seal to the powder, nor does the primer insertion. Given temperature, pressure, and humidity, moisture can be inside the case. In experiments and demonstrations, Rounds that are fired underwater are likely rounds that were just taken in the water and moisture has not a chance to reach the powder.

If it was true that these rounds penetrated less than an inch, then PLACEMENT wouldn't have mattered much. Whoever made that conclusion, wasn't the bright bulb.

Last edited by ModGlock17; 08-19-2011 at 17:17..
ModGlock17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 22:04   #9
21Carrier
Until I Gota 29
 
21Carrier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoover, AL
Posts: 3,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10mmneal View Post
Let me start out by saying I am not a cop, medical examiner or forensics/ballistics expert. I am a scientist though. Reading through the report, I can draw one conclusion from this article: there is a lot more going on here. i.e. Early in the report the state that the suspect was shot first in the arm, breaking it. The fire fight happened and the suspect was shot and killed by the .223 rounds (likely from one striking the aorta and the another piercing and collapsing the lung). The end of the report contradicts this timeline indicating the suspect was shot in the arm last. Additionally, there is also no discussion of barrier penetration, or examination of the suspects clothing in the report. The conclusion of the report should be that this was a waste of time and answered no real questions concerning the terminal performance of the .40 S&W rounds in the case in question. Sorry to hijack the thread.

Neal
I know, I also noticed the inconsistencies in the "report". I would like to read the ACTUAL report, as this seems to be a "pretty picture book" version to post on cop forums. Apparently, this incident spread around the cop forums and caused quite a fuss about the effectiveness of the .40S&W. The FBI's BRF stepped in with this investigation.

They mention that the assailant was wearing a down jacket, but I can't imagine that it stopped the rounds. Also, one thing that was REALLY weird to me was that they said all the GDs were fully expanded, yet only penetrated 1 inch. I can tell you from personal testing that Gold Dots do NOT expand in just anything. It takes a good bit of hydraulic pressure to get them to expand. Maybe his down jacket was soaking wet? I am very skeptical of the whole thing. I just wish I could find the actual report, and find out what the BRF attributed to stopping the rounds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ModGlock17 View Post
Hit rate: 17 hit / 107 shots ===> 15.8% hit rate at 20feet (less than 7 yrds)

THAT, Gentlemen, is alarming. The people to protect you, can't use their own weapons.

Additional problem is the ammo failure. There has to be some changes in policy.
I agree. This is BEYOND scary, and absolutely pitiful. I'm not saying I would do much better, but I think I would. Especially in a sustained firefight (like this) when you would likely have a minute to gather your wits and slow things down.

By talking to cops on this forum, and in person, I have come to the realization that MOST police are not gun people, and don't take their guns or shooting skills seriously. Many cops (even ones here on GT) freely admit that they only shoot their guns four times a year (when forced to by the department). That is INSANE. I shoot AT LEAST once a week, and almost always TWICE a week (sometimes three, in cooler weather), and I KNOW I would struggle in a firefight for my life. I can't imagine how bad a cop would do that may not have ever fired a gun before they became a cop, and only shoots a few times a year.

I remember talking to a guy in General Glocking who is an officer, and was talking about how he HATED his G22, and how he couldn't shoot it for crap. He freely admitted that be barely made the qualification score. Furthermore, he admitted that he only shot it 4-5 times a YEAR. I tried to give him a reality check, and make him realize that there's a good chance that gun will have to save his life, and he should start shooting it weekly. I don't know if it helped, but I hope it did, both for his sake, and those he protects.

I can't imagine that these Gold Dots ACTUALLY failed to penetrate more than an inch without some sort of homemade body armor (he was ambushing the cops, after all) or barrier. Or perhaps the rounds were damaged. Whatever the case, policies need to change for police officers' shooting requirements. I think they should be required to practice AT LEAST twice a month. NO professional is expected to stay proficient at their job when practicing so little. You wouldn't expect Peyton Manning to win Super Bowls if he only practiced 4 times a year, would you? Why should that amount of practice be acceptable when we are talking about life and death?

Last edited by 21Carrier; 08-19-2011 at 22:08..
21Carrier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 22:20   #10
Angry Fist
Lifetime Membership
The Original®
 
Angry Fist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 24,496
That's why they make 10MM!
__________________
I want rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, s**t-kickers, Methodists, and the GTDS.
Angry Fist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 23:33   #11
inspectorjj
Senior Member
 
inspectorjj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angry Fist View Post
That's why they make 10MM!
Short and to the point. I resemble that remark.
__________________
Comparing a 10MM to a .45 is like comparing Major League Baseball to Softball. One of them anybody can do and the other is strictly for men......JJ
inspectorjj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2011, 03:25   #12
Glock40man
Senior Member
 
Glock40man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,776
Interesting, I too would like to see the report.
__________________
________________________
.... you put a whole new shine on the word overkill. "When you need it, and don't have it.... you sing a different tune."- M. Gross
Glock40man is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2011, 12:15   #13
TDC20
Senior Member
 
TDC20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 581
It's hard to believe with that many rounds flying that this guy could have been so lucky as to NOT get a .40 round in the vitals area (heart or lungs). This is the first time I have seen or heard about this case, so I don't know any background on it, though the inconsistencies between the blog and the alleged FBI response are glaring.

Looking at the picture of the torso of the body, it's pretty hard not to notice how "clean" the heart/lung area is of any bullet wounds. The exception is a wound off to either side of the center of mass. Based on this, I am guessing that the guy was using some kind of makeshift body armor that was protecting his vitals. This can be so easily done with common household items that the police probably didn't want to publicize it for that reason. Again, pure speculation on my part, but it just looks too good to be that lucky. That could also explain some of the low hit ratio for # of shots fired. A larger percentage of them could have impacted exactly where they were supposed to.

Why so many rounds in the lower abdomen, groin, and hip area? I'm guessing that it was perhaps an area not protected by the suspect's barricade at some point. Also maybe because the makeshift body armor did not protect him there?

Shot placement is certainly the issue here for not stopping the shootout. However, I have never tried shooting with a quadruple dose of adrenaline and someone shooting back at me, so I hesitate to criticize. I thought it was pretty good thinking in that situation for the officer who had the presence of mind to grab the M4.

The one round in the neck that didn't expand (based on the x-ray) is at an odd angle unless it was fired at an odd angle and ended up there. It looks like there is a frontal wound on the body in that location, so I'm guessing that this round was either a ricochet or entered after penetrating some type of barricade that bled off much of it's energy, destabilized it, and perhaps clogged the HP cavity. If that was the case, then there was no bullet failure at all really.

One other thing I found interesting was the FBI report seemed to over-emphasize the ineffective nature of the .223 TAP ammo, while standing firm on the effectiveness of the .40 S&W Gold Dots. In this case, the .223's were effective because they were the only rounds penetrating the vitals. I guess what the FBI was trying to do was dispel the "myth" that the .40 Gold Dots didn't work but the .223 TAP did. My only problem with that in this case, is the M4 was a more effective weapon choice than the service pistols. I think it would be a mistake for the FBI to overlook that as a lesson learned and not add it to future training.

Because, after all...(read signature)
__________________
A handgun is only good for fighting your way to a rifle.
TDC20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2011, 13:43   #14
21Carrier
Until I Gota 29
 
21Carrier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoover, AL
Posts: 3,037
I agree that the guy must have been using body armor or a barricade. You are right that homemade body armor would not be too hard to make. That neck shot is weird, and I agree that it must have been a ricochet. I think ALL of the pistol shots might have been ricochets. Who knows, it's just good to hear all the good guys made it out alive.
21Carrier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2011, 15:32   #15
Attack
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsa1115 View Post
Pistols aren't the most reliable stoppers, however I find it impossible to believe that 180 grain Gold Dots in .40SW only had 1 inch of penetration. It just doesn't seem plausible.
I was thinking the same thing. The penetration was more than an inch. It stated that six .40 rounds were recovered. Of those five expanded. The very next line it says that it is impossible to expand the .40 with one inch or less penetration.
Attack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2011, 18:12   #16
rcd567
Senior Member
 
rcd567's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Near Glenwood, Iowa
Posts: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModGlock17 View Post
Hit rate: 17 hit / 107 shots ===> 15.8% hit rate at 20feet (less than 7 yrds)

THAT, Gentlemen, is alarming. The people to protect you, can't use their own weapons.

Additional problem is the ammo failure. There has to be some changes in policy.

Actually that percentage is about on par with the information gathered by the FBI in National Stats. Lots of studies show that officers tend to point and shoot (a lot of the time while moving) at the bad guy. It's nothing like quarterly qualification, the targets aren't shooting at you. The fight or flight phase of your psyche hasn't kicked in. And finally a guy that shoots 100% on the range doesn't always shoot "lights out" during a gunfight. In Vietnam they said it took something like 50,000 rounds to kill one bad guy. But until you've "been there", you'll find it hard to understand.

And believe this...the Police are not there to protect you. They're there to mop up afterwards and to file the paperwork. It's up to you to protect you and yours.
__________________
Don't pick a fight with an old man, if he's too tired to fight, he'll just kill you.
rcd567 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 01:14   #17
21Carrier
Until I Gota 29
 
21Carrier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoover, AL
Posts: 3,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcd567 View Post
And believe this...the Police are not there to protect you. They're there to mop up afterwards and to file the paperwork.
Oh, so they are janitors/file clerks. No wonder they get paid crap.
21Carrier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 06:24   #18
bac1023
Senior Member
 
bac1023's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 87,395
I remember seeing this years ago.

Interesting indeed.
__________________
.

1911 Buyer's Guide
bac1023 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 08:08   #19
rcd567
Senior Member
 
rcd567's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Near Glenwood, Iowa
Posts: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Carrier View Post
Oh, so they are janitors/file clerks. No wonder they get paid crap.
When off duty, I used to tell people I was a garbage man.

Which was somewhat true. Every week I picked up the garbage on the street and next week the street was full of garbage again.
__________________
Don't pick a fight with an old man, if he's too tired to fight, he'll just kill you.
rcd567 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 16:45   #20
ModGlock17
Senior Member
 
ModGlock17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lalaland USA
Posts: 2,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcd567 View Post
And finally a guy that shoots 100% on the range doesn't always shoot "lights out" during a gunfight. In Vietnam they said it took something like 50,000 rounds to kill one bad guy. But until you've "been there", you'll find it hard to understand.

There is a psycho effect, an involuntary human reaction to exploding rounds and muzzle blast (from the receiving end) that can reduce grown men to crying babies.

Happened to many new GIs who just came off the plane in Nam.

FOr the police force, regular range time will help dull this reaction. I don't see how a policeman can be proficient with his gun unless he spent thousands of rounds at the range initially, then a regular regiment after that. One goal is to be accurate with the gun, but the other is to get regularly reminded of the gun blast sound.

Last edited by ModGlock17; 08-21-2011 at 16:49..
ModGlock17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2011, 19:41   #21
rcd567
Senior Member
 
rcd567's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Near Glenwood, Iowa
Posts: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModGlock17 View Post
There is a psycho effect, an involuntary human reaction to exploding rounds and muzzle blast (from the receiving end) that can reduce grown men to crying babies.

Happened to many new GIs who just came off the plane in Nam.

FOr the police force, regular range time will help dull this reaction. I don't see how a policeman can be proficient with his gun unless he spent thousands of rounds at the range initially, then a regular regiment after that. One goal is to be accurate with the gun, but the other is to get regularly reminded of the gun blast sound.
Your pretty accurate with that line of thinking, but cities neither budget the overtime, ammo, or range time required.

To be really good you need to practice until everything becomes second nature. One way is to try out and get accepted as a SWAT team member. The training at that level comes closer to what your talking about.

The problem with most agencies is they give you five minutes training on 200 subjects, your a jack of all trades but a master of none. I used to tell recruits it takes about 5 years to become a decent Officer.
__________________
Don't pick a fight with an old man, if he's too tired to fight, he'll just kill you.

Last edited by rcd567; 08-25-2011 at 19:44.. Reason: Edit to add....
rcd567 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2011, 07:48   #22
Jitterbug
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 938
I just spent some time with a family member who is a Southern California Sheriffs Deputy, a large agency, when the subject came around to guns, the individual said they were given a 50 round box of 9mm ammo per month to quality with on their primary, a Beretta 92, and they qualify monthly.

The worst thing was practicing with the back up, a 442, which appeared to be seldom done, the officer said they didn't like, nor could handle it well due to the recoil. I asked if they did any qualifying with a shotgun or carbine and the answer was no.

My wife later said gee we shoot much more then that on a weekend and is concerned since the deputy is a family member, I offered to help them out, when they come out to visit later this year, especially in regards to the 442.

The officer isn't into guns, it's just a tool of the trade, it's probably doubtful a "shooting trip" will be included when they come out to visit, due to time limitations and since there is other family here in Colorado, I'm going to push for it though.

They did say that there were many officers, mostly ex-military who are really into guns, gung-ho, practice often and know what they are doing and not necessarily SWAT types.

As far as that report, it's been circulating for awhile and on one forum I visit which is comprised of LEO and Military types, it's said to be of questionable validity.

Last edited by Jitterbug; 08-26-2011 at 08:39..
Jitterbug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2011, 18:13   #23
21Carrier
Until I Gota 29
 
21Carrier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoover, AL
Posts: 3,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jitterbug View Post
The officer isn't into guns, it's just a tool of the trade,
And that is the problem. To cops, their guns are just tools, and that's technically what they are. However, it seems they fail to realize the importance of being proficient with that tool. I've heard it time and time again that when in a gunfight, you revert to training and muscle memory, and reasonable thought goes out the window. How can you expect to perform well when you only fire 50 rounds a month? The simple answer is: you can't. That is just a tragedy waiting to happen.

I think it all stems from the typical thought that tells all of us that it will never happen to me. Officers view their sidearms as tools, but not as LIFE SAVING tools. It seems they don't admit that there's a VERY real possibility that one day the ONLY thing that will stand between them and their grave is that heavy, uncomfortable pistol. It is far more likely that an officer will get into a situation in which he will have to use his pistol to save his life. I think they view it as a tool to stop criminals, when it should be seen as a tool of self preservation.

Whatever the case, I think our police need a reality check. When GTRhino and I got kicked out of our usual shooting venue, we stayed and talked to two Hoover cops for a while. Upon questioning, they didn't know what model guns they carried (besides Glock and 1911), nor did they know what ammo they used. While it's not realistic to expect all officers to be gun nerds like us, I would expect more basic knowledge. Maybe it's just the erroneous civilian view that cops are "gunfighters" and should therefore know the tools of their craft. I guess it's also important that MOST cops will never fire their weapon in anger, but when the issue is life and death, there is no room for hindsight. All I know is that if I were a cop, I would train until I could literally hit targets with my eyes closed.
21Carrier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2011, 19:05   #24
ModGlock17
Senior Member
 
ModGlock17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lalaland USA
Posts: 2,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Carrier View Post
. All I know is that if I were a cop, I would train until I could literally hit targets with my eyes closed.
Tiger Woods did practice at dusk so he wouldn't see the ball, essentially hitting the golf ball with his eyes closed. That taught him how to trust his feel of the swing, and trust his club.

I agree with you. Here's a video that really bothers me. A drunk man coming at the young officer from a couple of car lengths, and the officer kept missing the man until the man got close to the other side of the car (5 ft). Horrible shooting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7AOVqnL9xM
ModGlock17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2011, 07:08   #25
Jitterbug
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 938
I agree to an extent, but as rcd567 pointed out they are trained in 200 subjects and master of none and there is more to police work then gun handling.

We, tend to view them as experts in firearms, I suppose since they carry one openly everyday it's just assumed, not to mention the Hollywood factor.

I will say that overall their proficiency with firearms has come a long way in general in the past 20+ years, I've shared the same range on occasion with those in some form of LE and in general they do much better nowadays then they used to, and we're generalizing many can handle a firearm quite well.

The same argument can be said of the shooting skills of many who've served in the military.
Jitterbug is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:57.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 808
197 Members
611 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42