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 10-29-2013, 00:19   #126
Rabbi
Lifetime Membership
The Bombdiggity
 
Rabbi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: San AntonioTexas
Posts: 29,873


Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
There is a far cry between a employer granting a optional preference point to a applicant who previously worked for the military, and considerably altering one of the basic rights from the BOR.
Again, your argument is flawed.

According to what you just said, the BOR says people cant carry like the cops do. Is that your argument?

Like I said before, you have only two choices....no one can carry or you should be able to carry like the cops do.

The cops getting to carry everywhere doenst take anything away from you....even if you think you should be able to as well.
__________________
In the world to come, each of us will be called to account for all the good things G-d put on earth which we refused to enjoy. ~ The Babylonian Talmud

Whenever you get mad as hell about it all, grab your rifle and head outside. If you are the only one there...it's not time yet

I cross my heart and hope not to die. Swallow evil, ride the sky. Lose myself in a crowded room. You fool, you fool, it will be here soon
Rabbi is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 00:22   #127
BlackPaladin
Senior Member
 
BlackPaladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Somewhere out there
Posts: 2,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBO View Post
Is not the Veteran Preference Point system in place by law?
Yes it is, I have used it myself.

Kinda nice being lumped into the group of "disgusting attitude" with You and Rabbi lol

I was away for a bit de-priming .223 brass, and cleaning primer pockets by hand. It's a lot of work.

Back on subject, you know AK, you do have a chip on your shoulder. I have usually gotten along with you in threads, but this time you are flat wrong. I mean you are coming across harshly, because you have decided "it's not fair."

Who the hell are you to tell someone, what risks their job entails? Several verified LE folks have told you already, that part of the job of LE, is to confront pure evil. The job of LE folks is NEVER over, talk to retired LE guys, if they retire in a smaller populated area, the job follows them years into the retirement. That is why the provision for the retired status LE was placed into the federal law.

You think most cops are out there thinking "man I'm cool cause I have this thing I can do that you can't." NO, it's a pain in the ass, but it is a neccessity, and I don't see many LE folks rubbing it in.

Many LE folks would love to see the idea of firearm carry expanded for qualified people (NOT the OC rifle jackasses). Maybe it will happen, I fight hard for that right for everyone.

I certainly am not pissing in the Cheerios of people who have privileges I don't in the meantime.

ETA, I feel that while this post was to the point and accomplishes that, I also need to point out that AKStick is a good guy. I may not agree with him on his viewpoint, however we do both want the same thing; i.e. carry for all who can prove a fair level of competance. I am against all people and places that wish to diminish the will of people to protect themselves.
__________________
niners club #187
moto club #600
Bull dawgs club #55
RIP Ofc. Tommy Decker #6402 CSPD

Last edited by BlackPaladin; 10-29-2013 at 06:30..
BlackPaladin is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 00:30   #128
Rabbi
Lifetime Membership
The Bombdiggity
 
Rabbi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: San AntonioTexas
Posts: 29,873


I also fervently support better carry laws for everyone....but I also support applicable training. Being a gun guy or even a high speed super military hero doesnt translate to civilian carry issues....just like being a very good street cop with lots of heavy situations under your belt, does not make you ready for infantry tactics or the like.

If you can carry in one state, why the hell not in all of them. I am all for it.
__________________
In the world to come, each of us will be called to account for all the good things G-d put on earth which we refused to enjoy. ~ The Babylonian Talmud

Whenever you get mad as hell about it all, grab your rifle and head outside. If you are the only one there...it's not time yet

I cross my heart and hope not to die. Swallow evil, ride the sky. Lose myself in a crowded room. You fool, you fool, it will be here soon

Last edited by Rabbi; 10-29-2013 at 00:31..
Rabbi is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 00:36   #129
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,168
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbi View Post
Again, your argument is flawed.

According to what you just said, the BOR says people cant carry like the cops do. Is that your argument?

Like I said before, you have only two choices....no one can carry or you should be able to carry like the cops do.

The cops getting to carry everywhere doenst take anything away from you....even if you think you should be able to as well.

And I would choose either everyone can carry, or no one.

But when you start significantly altering the restrictions placed upon one group because they're volunteeres at job A, but not any others, that's wrong.

You are only half right though. Cops getting to carry anywhere, takes nothing away from the regular joe. The regular joe not being permitted, regardless of qualification to carry in the same places, does take away, of rather places more restrictions, unjustly.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 00:43   #130
Rabbi
Lifetime Membership
The Bombdiggity
 
Rabbi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: San AntonioTexas
Posts: 29,873


Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
And I would choose either everyone can carry, or no one.

But when you start significantly altering the restrictions placed upon one group because they're volunteeres at job A, but not any others, that's wrong.

You are only half right though. Cops getting to carry anywhere, takes nothing away from the regular joe. The regular joe not being permitted, regardless of qualification to carry in the same places, does take away, of rather places more restrictions, unjustly.
You are changing you argument.

You said:

considerably altering one of the basic rights from the BOR.

now you say:

significantly altering the restrictions placed upon one group

It is obvious that you are not interested in actually having a conversation about this issue, you just want everyone to know how you feel....we all get that, you couldnt be more clear.

The problem is I dont think you want to be that guy. You are generally a very articulate and accurate fellow. You have put up a series of horrible arguments. You have avoided questions. You have no consistency in your stance. You simply only have a strong feeling.

Now you are down to nothing more than "it not fair."

I would choose either everyone can carry, or no one.

Burn everything to the ground because you dont like someone elses lot.

That is the path to everything but freedom.
__________________
In the world to come, each of us will be called to account for all the good things G-d put on earth which we refused to enjoy. ~ The Babylonian Talmud

Whenever you get mad as hell about it all, grab your rifle and head outside. If you are the only one there...it's not time yet

I cross my heart and hope not to die. Swallow evil, ride the sky. Lose myself in a crowded room. You fool, you fool, it will be here soon

Last edited by Rabbi; 10-29-2013 at 00:46..
Rabbi is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 00:46   #131
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,168
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackPaladin View Post

You think most cops are out there thinking "man I'm cool cause I have this thing I can do that you can't." NO, it's a pain in the ass, but it is a neccessity, and I don't see many LE folks rubbing it in.
YMMV, but when your defense is, if you want enhanced carry rights, you could join LE, it certainly seems that way.


But like I said, I like you guys, all three of you, and cops in general. We disagree on this topic, I think it's wrong that we have made LEO a special class with special rights for life.

The wold is unjust, and the earth continues to spin. We don't have to agree, and either way, even if we did, our oppinion on the matter is trivial at best.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 00:47   #132
BlackPaladin
Senior Member
 
BlackPaladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Somewhere out there
Posts: 2,438
I am going to hang this up for the night.

AK, I want you to know that while I could punch a wall in frustration over your viewpoint, I also know from your posts that you are a standup guy. We are not going to agree on this subject and that's that.

Someday, maybe if folks like FNfalguy can pull their collective heads out of their ass, carry will be granted to all, who meet a standard. It is a great wish of mine to see that happen someday.

I have more brass to de-prime, since it's the only way I can afford to shoot anymore.
__________________
niners club #187
moto club #600
Bull dawgs club #55
RIP Ofc. Tommy Decker #6402 CSPD
BlackPaladin is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 00:49   #133
whoops dude
Senior Member
 
whoops dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 538
Doesn't bother me. IMO Off-duty cops should have the option to have a state issued ccw and abide by all the restrictions that average joe abides by. On duty is a different story.
__________________
Firearm reviews, philosophy, shooting and more!
http://www.youtube.com/user/417BoyWonder

Deuteronomy 15:11
You cannot follow Christ and not care about others.
whoops dude is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 00:50   #134
Rabbi
Lifetime Membership
The Bombdiggity
 
Rabbi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: San AntonioTexas
Posts: 29,873


Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
YMMV, but when your defense is, if you want enhanced carry rights, you could join LE, it certainly seems that way.
The Military is the home of "if you want to do X...join the military"...because you cant do it anywhere else.

Why is that such a bad thing? Once again, it goes back to the fact that many occupations have privileges. You want to touch the things that say "do not touch" in a museum...go to work for a museum. You want to feed the animals, go to work in a zoo. You want to shoot at people out of a helicopter, well, you did what it takes to make that happen. Me bichin about it because I cant will never get me there.
__________________
In the world to come, each of us will be called to account for all the good things G-d put on earth which we refused to enjoy. ~ The Babylonian Talmud

Whenever you get mad as hell about it all, grab your rifle and head outside. If you are the only one there...it's not time yet

I cross my heart and hope not to die. Swallow evil, ride the sky. Lose myself in a crowded room. You fool, you fool, it will be here soon
Rabbi is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 00:54   #135
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,168
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbi View Post
You are changing you argument.

You said:

considerably altering one of the basic rights from the BOR.

now you say:

significantly altering the restrictions placed upon one group

It is obvious that you are not interested in actually having a conversation about this issue, you just want everyone to know how you feel....we all get that, you couldnt be more clear.

The problem is I dont think you want to be that guy. You are generally a very articulate and accurate fellow. You have put up a series of horrible arguments. You have avoided questions. You have no consistency in your stance. You simply only have a strong feeling.

Now you are down to nothing more than "it not fair."

I would choose either everyone can carry, or no one.

Burn everything to the ground because you dont like someone elses lot.

That is the path to everything but freedom.

IMO they're different ways of saying the same thing.

We have accepted that all rights, as per SC, come with reasonable restrictions.

So either by altering the basic rights to CCW, via removal of the current limitations, or by altering the limitations placed upon one group "LEOs" you've enacted the same change.

As for my coherency well typing this out on an iPhone screen whilst drinking blue moon and responding to the somewhat rapid fire posts you guys had, is rather difficult. I will admit though my argument has changed, as you guys had some good, and valid points.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 01:05   #136
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,168
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbi View Post
The Military is the home of "if you want to do X...join the military"...because you cant do it anywhere else.

Why is that such a bad thing? Once again, it goes back to the fact that many occupations have privileges. You want to touch the things that say "do not touch" in a museum...go to work for a museum. You want to feed the animals, go to work in a zoo. You want to shoot at people out of a helicopter, well, you did what it takes to make that happen. Me bichin about it because I cant will never get me there.


The big difference, to me, is that none of those things are protected rights, granted by the BOR.

CCW, is, via the 2nd. And I think anytime we start dramatically altering those for different classes is wrong.

As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I object to this law more in theory, than in practice. Because as I said, I see it as another step down the Orwellian path of some being more equal.

Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but every time we deviate down it, even for a good reason, I think that's wrong.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 01:08   #137
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,168
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoops dude View Post
Doesn't bother me. IMO Off-duty cops should have the option to have a state issued ccw and abide by all the restrictions that average joe abides by. On duty is a different story.

I think that would be a very interesting, and fitting comprimise.

The flip side, that I hate to admit, but realize now after arguing with these guys is I also hate to further limit the cops, because I myself am limited.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 06:13   #138
cyphertext
Senior Member
 
cyphertext's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,487
Stick, there are always different rules for different people. For example, here in TX, if you want to bypass the NICS background check when purchasing a firearm, get a CHL. Is that not creating a special class?

When I sold firearms at the local sporting good store, a police officer came in to make a purchase. He picked what he wanted, we did the paperwork, I asked if he had a CHL and he replied no, that he didn't need one because he was a police officer. So I called in the background check and the response was "delayed". So the TCLEOS licensed peace officer could not leave the store with the firearm, yet if he would have had a CHL, he would have left with his new gun.
cyphertext is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 07:13   #139
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,841
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harper View Post
Plot twist: DanaT is an air marshal and he doesn't know.
You are better off in your movie star job.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.

Last edited by DanaT; 10-29-2013 at 07:13..
DanaT is online now  
Old 10-29-2013, 07:15   #140
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,841
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbi View Post
Here is where you are wrong.

1. At the actual moment, you cant walk away. You will be liable.
Show us the criminal statute an off-duty cop will be charged with failure act in a situation.

Show us the statute that the off duty surgeon will be charged with criminally for not acting to help a person.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is online now  
Old 10-29-2013, 07:17   #141
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,841
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
I
I simply find the general cop attitude, that you and Rabbi/BP exhibit in this thread disgusting.
You have nailed it.

Most cops I know dont act like this.

BTW, I doubt that some peope on GT that claim to be cops are actually cops, these people just wants to be "cool" on GT.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is online now  
Old 10-29-2013, 07:27   #142
redbaron007
Lifetime Membership
A Nice Prick
 
redbaron007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Southwest Missouri
Posts: 6,283
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
And many of the new stadiums have been built with private money too.

Also, once property is leased, the leasee is the defacto property holder. Think of it like if you rent an apartment. You essentially have control of the building.

When renting commercial real-estate, think of it as a retailer renting a shop in a shopping mall, the mall owner cannot give police permission to search your store just like if you lease an apartment, and you say no to a search, the landowner cannot give permission. When you lease a property, you have many rights just as if you owned it.
Does the NFL lease these facilities? IIRC, it's the teams that lease them. However, it is assumable these franchise agreements with the teams would give the NFL some leverage over the team's lease arrangements. Which would allow them to request these draconian gun control laws.



red
__________________
TopGun *357sig* Club - #2632


R.I.P. Cajunator® ~ R.I.P. Mullah (aka El Ron)
R.I.P. GioaJack ~ R.I.P. Okie
redbaron007 is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 07:37   #143
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,841
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaron007 View Post
Does the NFL lease these facilities? IIRC, it's the teams that lease them. However, it is assumable these franchise agreements with the teams would give the NFL some leverage over the team's lease arrangements. Which would allow them to request these draconian gun control laws.



red
This is what I would assume. The teams likely lease them, but terms of being in the NFL means the contracts stipulate what the NFL teams can do.

These wont be small, simple contracts.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is online now  
Old 10-29-2013, 07:41   #144
redbaron007
Lifetime Membership
A Nice Prick
 
redbaron007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Southwest Missouri
Posts: 6,283
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
This is what I would assume. The teams likely lease them, but terms of being in the NFL means the contracts stipulate what the NFL teams can do.

These wont be small, simple contracts.
No doubt. Just to lease the local expo/convention building for a weekend, the lease seems to be as long as War & Peace!



red
__________________
TopGun *357sig* Club - #2632


R.I.P. Cajunator® ~ R.I.P. Mullah (aka El Ron)
R.I.P. GioaJack ~ R.I.P. Okie
redbaron007 is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 07:56   #145
Mushinto
Master Member
 
Mushinto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Melbourne, Florida, USA
Posts: 12,050
I have benefited greatly from LEOSA and other laws exempting cops from carry laws, and I will continue to do so. However, as long as the lawmakers continue to exempt LE from these laws, we will always have a problem getting law enforcement officials to support the right to keep and bear arms.

Although it is not in my self-interest, I do not support any laws exempting the police or their agencies from any gun laws. If a magazine with more than 10 rounds is necessary for me than it is necessary for anyone else.
__________________
ML

Everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about. Be kind, always.
Mushinto is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 07:57   #146
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,841
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mushinto View Post
I have benefited greatly from LEOSA and other laws exempting cops from carry laws, and I will continue to do so. However, as long as the lawmakers continue to exempt LE from these laws, we will always have a problem getting law enforcement officials to support the right to keep and bear arms.

Although it is not in my self-interest, I do not support any laws exempting the police or their agencies from any gun laws. If a magazine with more than 10 rounds is necessary for me than it is necessary for anyone else.
I like your point of view.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is online now  
Old 10-29-2013, 08:04   #147
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
Show us the criminal statute an off-duty cop will be charged with failure act in a situation.

Show us the statute that the off duty surgeon will be charged with criminally for not acting to help a person.

Not all legal obligations are within the criminal statutes.
__________________
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.
Bruce M is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 08:16   #148
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 43,611
Blog Entries: 1


609.43 MISCONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE.
A public officer or employee who does any of the following, for which no other sentence is specifically provided by law, may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both:
(1) intentionally fails or refuses to perform a known mandatory, nondiscretionary, ministerial duty of the office or employment within the time or in the manner required by law; or
(2) in the capacity of such officer or employee, does an act knowing it is in excess of lawful authority or knowing it is forbidden by law to be done in that capacity; or
(3) under pretense or color of official authority intentionally and unlawfully injures another in the other's person, property, or rights; or
(4) in the capacity of such officer or employee, makes a return, certificate, official report, or other like document having knowledge it is false in any material respect.
---------------------------
__________________
"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?

Last edited by TBO; 10-29-2013 at 08:18..
TBO is offline  
Old 10-29-2013, 08:34   #149
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,841
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce M View Post
Not all legal obligations are within the criminal statutes.
Then per GT experts its not really illegal then....
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is online now  
Old 10-29-2013, 09:11   #150
cyphertext
Senior Member
 
cyphertext's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,487
Taken from Texas Code of Criminal Procedures

Art. 2.13. DUTIES AND POWERS. (a) It is the duty of every peace officer to preserve the peace within the officer's jurisdiction. To effect this purpose, the officer shall use all lawful means.
(b) The officer shall:
(1) in every case authorized by the provisions of this Code, interfere without warrant to prevent or suppress crime;
(2) execute all lawful process issued to the officer by any magistrate or court;
(3) give notice to some magistrate of all offenses committed within the officer's jurisdiction, where the officer has good reason to believe there has been a violation of the penal law; and
(4) arrest offenders without warrant in every case where the officer is authorized by law, in order that they may be taken before the proper magistrate or court and be tried.
(c) It is the duty of every officer to take possession of a child under Article 63.009(g).
cyphertext 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 09:12.



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


Users Currently Online: 1,142
334 Members
808 Guests

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