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



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-05-2012, 20:48   #181
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 44,116
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by elandil View Post
The problem is that a picture was being painted based on two instances. I mean, for example, if you read thru the links, you would find out that the media is the one who contacted him about an interview. He did not go seeking it. So implying that he started the "media Circus" would be an error.
Is this the post you mean...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger
Latest news:
The AJC is in receipt of the Incident Report and a reporter is interested in having a conversation.
... I have been partially cleared to discuss the Very bare bare bones thereof.
The City of Sugar Hill has responded to the ORA request and a copy of the contract with Plaza Security is at the front desk.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 20:53   #182
elandil
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post

Leave if you need to.
I'm not leaving. I'm just reverting back to my lurker status.

The only reason I came out and commented on this was seeing someone who purports to be a LEO openly stating on a public forum that they intentionally violate peoples rights at will and will continue to do so, with no consideration to the law. I won't go into all the levels of wrongs that includes, because I said my peace on that in my initial post.

I stayed because there was an intellegent debate going on, which I was more than happy to take part in.

I revert back to lurker status because the debate has played to it's obvious conclusion. IE, neither side was swayed with the information given. Therefore, until new information comes to light, all we would be doing is repeating the same arguments ad nausem. If and when new information comes in, I will be more than happy to step back in and continue.

I always look for ways to educate myself, and am happy passing along information to others. To me a debate like this is a chance to learn something new, and I'm always looking for chances to learn. I will also be happy to answer any other questions you have. Just ask them.
elandil is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 21:00   #183
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 44,116
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by elandil View Post
No, but unless the incident began in the parking lot, it would go a long way to swaying any normal person into beliving that he was attempting to exit. He openly admits when told to leave he attempted to take the shortest route to his car.
Didn't see that post. Link?


Quote:
Originally Posted by elandil View Post
Does this mean the security guard could have thought he was ignoring him because he did not take an exit that was closer, even if it meant a longer walk to vacate? It's possible. That will be up for decision later. Can the security guard say without a reasonable doubt that he stood there and refused to leave until cops arrived to escort him off the premises? Nope. Could this have been resolved by the charges being dropped and apologies exchanged? We will never know. What we do know is we have a good chance of having new caselaw set by this incident. For good or bad, we will find out later.
New caselaw? Okay...sure.

All the rest of that is conjecture on your part - opinion.

Hopefully you can get him to post the actual complaint against the three gentlemen. At least we'll get for information from his side. Then we'll wait for the responses from the respondents...
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 21:03   #184
elandil
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Is this the post you mean...
Yes, and based upon the re-read, I retract my earlier statement. There is no clear answer as to who initiated.
elandil is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 21:17   #185
elandil
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Didn't see that post. Link?

Page 3, halfway down the page.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger
The arrest, was for 'criminal trespass' as the security guard said I refused to obey his order to leave the park. I continued on the walking path to the exit nearest my car, which is where we met the PD.
http://www.georgiapacking.org/forum/...71909&start=40
elandil is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 21:30   #186
GlockGary
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1
Already stated...

Last edited by GlockGary; 05-05-2012 at 21:34..
GlockGary is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 23:20   #187
JuneyBooney
Senior Member
 
JuneyBooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 16,774
It does sound like the man was being a bit of an antagonist towards the pd and he is suing expecting the employers/county to indemnify the officers in the lawsuit. He will have to make it past summary judgment and then hope the jury likes him. Maybe the county will pay him some money to go away.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Cool songs:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Cool car:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
JuneyBooney is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 23:45   #188
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpig View Post
Very simple, the cop is now responsible for this guys actions. If they fail to check him out and he walks across the street to McDonald's and shoots half a dozen customers it will become the Police Officers fault.
I've heard this argument, and I don't buy it. The responding officers arrive, do not observe any unlawful behavior, thus no need to demand ID. If they want to cover themselves, they can document their actions and whatever conversation takes place (that's what documentation is for - I do it all the time). I propose that ID'ing someone has little to no utility in determining if they are planning a one man 'active shooter' event, it is simply a "compliance test" - I could name off a laundry list of shooters that had no record that would have gotten them arrested prior to their event had LE had the chance to make contact before the shooting (Loughner & the Army officer are recent examples...).

This is a great thread, alot of good legal debate, but let's not forget to try to put the pieces together of how it goes down on the street. I know how the conversation goes, cause I have witnessed stuff like this...

Security Guard: "This guy's unreal, I approach and ask him why in the name of Tebow he's carrying a gun in the park... and he goes cow$#!* on me, telling me I'm just a rent-a -cop, etc"
Cop: "That's rough man, well go have a chat with this jack hole and see if he wants to talk himself into going to jail... Sir can I see some ID..."

... and he's off to the races, doing the most he can get away with, rather than the minimum necessary to get the job done.

For the record - I'm not arguing that no contact should be made. I'm arguing that ID should not be part of the equation in cases like this, cause it makes no sense.

There is a big wrinkle in the law with the ID'ing of a pedestrian. There is a reason "ID" is requested of a pedestrian as opposed to "drivers license". DL makes no sense here, but that is what the cop wants to see, and that is what most people will reflexively produce. In my state (outside of a traffic stop) you must only "identify yourself" during a detainment, but during an arrest cops may use force to procure a physical ID. During the detainment you can simply state your name and you've complied with the law (unfortunately opinions and understanding vary widely from cop to cop on this - I know 'cause I have talked to alot of you guys around the beanery table). That's why the arrest in these cases is never for "failure to show ID"... it's always some tangential result of creative thinking.

I propose that a Police Officer who does "creative thinking" to come up with a reason for arrest simply because someone takes a stand for their rights on the ID issue is just as belligerent (arguably more so) as the person being arrested.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpig View Post
I do not have any sympathy for a person who makes what should have been a nothing and ends up forcing po po to arrest him so that he can file a suit. This type of person is nothing but a thief.

Same level as the fall down artist...
I don't know Georgia law, but I don't think LE is required to arrest in a case like this. The word "forced" simply isn't applicable here. And I guarantee this guy isn't motivated by money... absolutely guarantee it! Think about it! If anything this guy tunes into Alex Jones...

From one humble civil servant to another, I think the "Papers Please" protocol is nothing but a liability and a PR bomb for the city.

Bottom line: what is it about encountering an armed man that should seem unusual or alarming, here in the land of the free and the home of the brave?

Regards,

OR
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!
OlliesRevenge is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 08:27   #189
Mayhem like Me
Semper Paratus
 
Mayhem like Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 15,610
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by elandil View Post
Um, apparently not, or else this discussion wouldn't be happening...

dude, I gotta ask. What is your vendetta against him? I could not stand Kwik, but I even had to agree that he may have made a point a time or two.
please show me where I have a vendetta against him I just don't understand him .and again you're talking about things you know nothing of ,the agency I work for has never taken him to jail .nor did we respond in this instance .

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
How do you establish intent?
Well when a naked man is chasing a woman down an alley with a butcher knife and a hard on, I figure he's not collecting for the red cross...Inspector H. Callahan
Mayhem like Me is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 08:28   #190
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 21,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
...


New caselaw? Okay...sure.

...
Slightly skeptical? You mean you don't think this is going to break new legal ground??


Quote:
Originally Posted by OlliesRevenge View Post
I've heard this argument, and I don't buy it. The responding officers arrive, do not observe any unlawful behavior, thus no need to demand ID. ...


... I'm arguing that ID should not be part of the equation in cases like this, cause it makes no sense.

There is a big wrinkle in the law with the ID'ing of a pedestrian. There is a reason "ID" is requested of a pedestrian as opposed to "drivers license". DL makes no sense here, but that is what the cop wants to see, and that is what most people will reflexively produce. In my state (outside of a traffic stop) you must only "identify yourself" during a detainment, but during an arrest cops may use force to procure a physical ID.....

...



Bottom line: what is it about encountering an armed man that should seem unusual or alarming, here in the land of the free and the home of the brave?

Regards,

OR
Officers respond to a wide variety of calls at which there is no crime but often/usually/always make an intial immediate effort to identify the parties involved in the call, often by asking for identification. This usually has to do with efficiency in that oif a report has to be prepared names and such make it a touch easier.


I undertand what you are saying about the thought of identifying yourself and not having to produce a license. However please be aware that there is a substantial group of people out there who regularly refuse to identify themselves to us, who refuse to offer any form of legitimate identification and often end up not having a drivers license or prefer not to show it (often because it is suspended.) That group is of course regular criminals. And sometimes when people act almost just like members of a group they get confused with being a member of that group.


And at where you are are there really alot of people who are openly carrying a gun or is it a bit unusual, in a statistical sense?
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.

Last edited by Bruce M; 05-06-2012 at 12:32..
Bruce M is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 10:34   #191
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 44,116
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by elandil View Post
Page 3, halfway down the page.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger
The arrest, was for 'criminal trespass' as the security guard said I refused to obey his order to leave the park. I continued on the walking path to the exit nearest my car, which is where we met the PD.

http://www.georgiapacking.org/forum/...71909&start=40
A few posts above he made this statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger
I'd say 'Dang Right', but in reality I'll have to defer any suggestions and public statements until I have advice of counsel.

I'm operating on the premise of Everything I say is discoverable and Will be used against me. In light of that, I wonder what they'd say about my convo with the Park Director last year where I specifically asked him about the park rules in light of 16-11-173. Obeying the law was important enough to double-check it with him.
Back to the post you quoted.
The arrest, was for 'criminal trespass'
  • as the security guard said I refused to obey his order to leave the park.

  • I continued on the walking path

  • to the exit nearest my car,

  • which is where we met the PD.
What we don't have is a time line, elandil.

elandil, what was the initial conversation like between Proescher and the security guard? We know Proescher admitted being rude. How long was that conversation? At what point during the conversation did the guard first tell him to leave? How did say it? What words did Proescher say in response?

I guess when Proescher puts the audio on YouTube...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
I can neither confirm nor deny the presence of a Sony ICD-PX312 recorder that may or may not have recorded any statements that may or may not have been made over a 55m:16s time period.

Exercising in a public park while armed = "Suspicious"
...then, perhaps, maybe we'll know who said what when.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 11:07   #192
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
Quote:
However please be aware that there is a substntial group of people out there who regularly refuse to identify themselves to us... That group is of course regular criminals. ...sometimes when people act almost just like members of a group they get confused with being a member of that group.
I hear you. I have no LE experience (I just get to see LEO's do their thing alot), but logic tells me that criminal's won't want the attention that OC'ing would bring. I'd be surprised if any LEO reading this could relate a story of an OC'er who also had a warrant, etc.

It all boils down to street sense & threat recognition doesn't it? Clothing, hygiene, body language, how they articulate themselves in conversation; it all paints a picture. Every experienced LEO reading this knows what I am talking about. Through experience, observation, and intuition, you can tell the difference between a "scroat" and an activist libertarian OC'er within seconds of meeting them. The same way I can differentiate between a "sick" & "not-sick" patient on an aid call as soon as I'm through the door. And let's be honest, any LEO who cannot do this should probably find a different line of work.

Quote:
And at where you are are there really alot of people who are openly carrying a gun or is it a bit unusual, in a statistical sense?
I concede it is unusual, albeit perfectly legal.

Take care Bruce
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!
OlliesRevenge is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 11:50   #193
elandil
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
A few posts above he made this statement:Back to the post you quoted.

The arrest, was for 'criminal trespass'
  • as the security guard said I refused to obey his order to leave the park.

  • I continued on the walking path

  • to the exit nearest my car,

  • which is where we met the PD.
What we don't have is a time line, elandil.

elandil, what was the initial conversation like between Proescher and the security guard? We know Proescher admitted being rude. How long was that conversation? At what point during the conversation did the guard first tell him to leave? How did say it? What words did Proescher say in response?

I guess when Proescher puts the audio on YouTube......then, perhaps, maybe we'll know who said what when.
Now you are being silly. You yourself already stated no body knows these facts except for the parties involved and their counsel. Do I know how fast he was walking? No. Do you?

And, yes. Once the case is over I'm sure that we will find out all the details. However, there are some details presently known that raise the whole issue.

1-The security guard was in the wrong and possibly commiting an illegal act in ejecting the OS for carrying a firearm.
2-The cops were in the wrong and possibly commiting an illegal act for detaining the person after a GWL was produced.

Plain and simple.

And before you start, let me remind you.

In Georgia, public parks cannot be posted as gun free zones unless it is under federal law. Which might explain why the OS passed up on several COE controlled parks to go to a Municipal one.

In Georgia, officers investigating a MWAG can ask anything they want. However, once a GWL is produced, the call is legally over. Period.

The cops admit they responded to a MWAG call. Once the GWL was produced, that was the end of that call. There was no call for CT. They chose to illegally detain, they chose to illegally search and seize property... In other words, they made their bed, they can lie in it.
elandil is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 11:52   #194
elandil
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 80
Quote:

However please be aware that there is a substntial group of people out there
who regularly refuse to identify themselves to us... That group is of course
regular criminals. ...sometimes when people act almost just like members of a
group they get confused with being a member of that
group.
How about those who feel this way go back and read the 5th amendment.
elandil is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 12:02   #195
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by elandil View Post
How about those who feel this way go back and read the 5th amendment.
Biographical information is not testimony.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 12:06   #196
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 44,858
Blog Entries: 1


Quote:
Originally Posted by elandil View Post
How about those who feel this way go back and read the 5th amendment.
Reading the 5th Amendment isn't the answer.

Reading/understanding the court rulings dealing with it is much more important than one's own opinion on it.
__________________
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

"If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters".

"A person who won't reason has no advantage over one who can't reason."

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

“Ignorance is a lot like alcohol: the more you have of it, the less you are able to see its effect on you.”


Originally Posted by Rooster Rugburn:
Didn't the whole sheepdog thing actually start right here on Glock Talk? A bunch of wannabees bought a bunch of T-shirts and took an oath to defend those who won't defend themselves?
TBO is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 12:35   #197
elandil
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
please show me where I have a vendetta against him I just don't understand him .and again you're talking about things you know nothing of ,the agency I work for has never taken him to jail .nor did we respond in this instance .

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Ummmm....


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
FYI
This guy is a first class Nimrod.
My guys have run into him on more than one occasion he has been asked to leave businesses and uses the word "sheeple"

He's a grumpy hermit.
If this was a valid LE response, please cite case #'s so we can file the ORA request. I would hate for you to be caught in a false statement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
you can be asked to leave public property especially parks for any number of reasons .
there are about 6 to 8 parks closer to his house than the 1 he was kicked out of .there is a reason he went to the park that has a full time security person .that reason was to cause a commotion and be noticed because he carries a gun mmm big man .

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Yes, but posession of a firearm is not one of them.
And unless you can swear to his intentions, that could be seen as a sladerous statement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
I know he's been asked to leave some restaurants where he likes to open carry .
Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
And how do you know?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
When you have an agenda nothing is simple...I've seen this guy he's not out getting in a cardio workout..he's a creeper.
Defamation of character much?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
you have to look at the totality of circumstances with this guy he always seems to crop up

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Again, two instances, one of which was on his own property, does not "always seems to crop up" make.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
that is a nice park there are several scenic parks around lake close to his residence .
sorry my phone keeps cutting my posts short yes that is 1 of the few that has a dedicated security

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
And as the others are "on the lake" means they are controlled by the Corps of Engineers which makes a firearm prohibited by federal law, which does trump state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
Let's just say he is called on a lot by the public that never even get dispatched. Supervisors are wise to him and know his description and vehicle.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
I reiterate, apparently not or else this would not be an issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
I have carried at least one full sized gun every day off duty for 30, years this August ,I have never had the police called on my actions... Coincidence no mindset yes.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
But, do you open carry or carry concealed? I'm betting the latter.

And, since you are LE, why don't you explain how that the actions of the responding LEO's were illegal once the GWL was produced. Please feel free to refer to OCGA and SB308 for any references you need.
elandil is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 12:41   #198
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 21,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by elandil View Post




In Georgia, officers investigating a MWAG can ask anything they want. However, once a GWL is produced, the call is legally over. Period.

The cops admit they responded to a MWAG call. Once the GWL was produced, that was the end of that call. There was no call for CT. They chose to illegally detain, they chose to illegally search and seize property... In other words, they made their bed, they can lie in it.

So in Georgia, officers can only enforce a law that they specifically recieved a call regarding? If they get a call for a burglary in progress and it turns out is is really an assault and battery are they precluded from further investigating the call? What happens if an officer happens to walk in to a robbery in progress and was not there on a call - does he need to leave and wait for a call to come in regarding the robbery? Or is there just a specific law that makes it illegal to investigate any other criminal activity at a man with a gun call? This law that makes it "illegal" - is it a criminal statute or an administrative statute or is it case law?
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.

Last edited by Bruce M; 05-06-2012 at 12:42..
Bruce M is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 12:43   #199
elandil
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBO View Post
Reading the 5th Amendment isn't the answer.

Reading/understanding the court rulings dealing with it is much more important than one's own opinion on it.
Ok, then what is the federal statute requiring me to provide an officer my identification upon request?

Because on the state level, the only times I'm required is to show a valid license upon request while operating a motor vehicle. Plus, under OCGA 16.11.36, I can be compelled to give my name and dob as identity if suspected of loitering.

Thats it. There is no requirement for me to show ID at any other time.

So, no, understanding the courts rulings is not near as important as understanding the federal and state laws you must abide by.
elandil is offline  
Old 05-06-2012, 12:45   #200
Mayhem like Me
Semper Paratus
 
Mayhem like Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 15,610
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by elandil View Post
Ummmm....




If this was a valid LE response, please cite case #'s so we can file the ORA request. I would hate for you to be caught in a false statement.



Yes, but posession of a firearm is not one of them.
And unless you can swear to his intentions, that could be seen as a sladerous statement.



And how do you know?



Defamation of character much?



Again, two instances, one of which was on his own property, does not "always seems to crop up" make.



And as the others are "on the lake" means they are controlled by the Corps of Engineers which makes a firearm prohibited by federal law, which does trump state.



I reiterate, apparently not or else this would not be an issue.



But, do you open carry or carry concealed? I'm betting the latter.

And, since you are LE, why don't you explain how that the actions of the responding LEO's were illegal once the GWL was produced. Please feel free to refer to OCGA and SB308 for any references you need.
He was arrested for no violation of GWL that I know of. This us what a court of law is for ,your version vs. The arresting officers.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
How do you establish intent?
Well when a naked man is chasing a woman down an alley with a butcher knife and a hard on, I figure he's not collecting for the red cross...Inspector H. Callahan
Mayhem like Me is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

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 15:48.




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


Users Currently Online: 1,216
348 Members
868 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42