Subject: On shootings in America. 5,483 views

Cainhurst Crow Ghosts I have made 243 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 132 likes	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 15:08:00 GMT -6 Post by Cainhurst Crow on Dec 5, 2015 15:08:00 GMT -6 Increased background checks are mostly useless, a security measure that honestly gets taken care of common denominator style. The people who'd be caught and denied guns already are, people with criminal records for which owning a gun violates their parole, people with proven psychotic issues or mental issues, these are pretty much the people who can be proven that they shouldn't own a gun. The US enacted the Brady Act before, and then the National Instant Criminal Background Check System later on, which still is in charge of screening people to see if they're allowed to buy weapons or not. The problem stems that a lot of the people who go out an commit these kinds of shootings either purchase their guns illegally, from those who have stolen the guns, from the deep web, or from those smuggled in from other countries via mexico which often come from asia, the middle east, central america, and the pacific, as left overs from the war. Or, they had no prior record to actually catch, no record of mental health issues nor records of previous criminal behavior, either from the family not submitting such a report, such reports being labeled as discriminatory under the 14th amendment, or being precieved as bigoted to use by federal agencies. The latest shooter from california for example, had no record of mental illness nor any criminal behavior. According to records, he was a university graduate and recently married with a son, and had worked in government a number of years. The truth however, was that his trip to pakistan and saudi arabia, marriage to a person while abroad, and sudden shift to hardline religion as well as changing his appearance were early warning signs of a cultist behavior. However, there is no law against "being a weirdo" as I would call it, so any of the behavior he showed outwardly wasn't illegal, and thus no background check would be able to catch. You have to understand, a background check that would actually catch these types of people would violate the 14th amendment quite severly, and require discrimination based on ones physcial traits to work. Something nobody is willing to do.
Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Deleted I have made 0 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined January 1970	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 15:34:52 GMT -6 Lorn and That Goat like this Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2015 15:34:52 GMT -6 Some of the info about them makes one wonder why they weren't on the terrorist watch list, but they would have still passed a background check if they were. And you and E-Ro have both given doubt in theory as to whether background checks would do any good, but it seems to me like it's better than nothing, or it's worth a shot to see if it has a statistical impact, whether it stops these sort of high profiles cases or not. It seems like a big problem with most gun laws we've had so far is that what constitutes a 'shot' is citywide or statewide efforts, which especially in the former case are so farcically easy to bypass that why even bother having them? Yet detractors point to that as evidence that gun control doesn't work. We don't have much data for federal gun control efforts, because there hasn't been much. And what are some counter solutions for curbing violent crime, including mass shootings? Because our homicide rate, gun homicide rate and number of mass shootings is still much higher than, say, France, despite its scary Muslim enclaves and recent horrific attack.
Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Deleted I have made 0 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined January 1970	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 16:21:37 GMT -6 Lorn likes this Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2015 16:21:37 GMT -6 Dec 4, 2015 21:32:40 GMT -6 Draining Dragon said: I'm too lazy to sort out the quotes, so I'm just going to use numbers to identify which I'm responding to. 1. Their influence comes from the popular support of like-minded citizens. It might be expressed financially, but that is not the fundamental root of their power. We'll have to disagree on that. I think voters can be bought. 2. The guns used weren't assault rifles. They were all semiautomatic, and had illegal modifications. Oh! Well then, I stand corrected. Magazine size doesn't matter for a person carrying out a shooting; the time and effort it takes to carry additional magazines and reload the gun are negligible when you're dealing with unarmed targets. *If they are unarmed. And technically even unarmed targets can improvise or attack. 3. The article you linked mentions the lower number of gun deaths. It doesn't say anything about other forms of violence, nor does it account for differences in culture. Furthermore, these statistics are cherry-picked for countries that appear to support the gun control narrative. Well yes, that's the idea -- lowering the number of gun-deaths. Some other factors may play in, but there is reason to believe the laws helped. I have not seen any reliable evidence that supports deregulation. Unless, do you think you can do better? If there is anything, I would be curious to see it. 4. Gun control would be a massive expansion of government power, as we would then be that much more reliant on the government to protect us. Just ask the Black Lives Matter movement how that works out. Not sure what you're referring to -? I for one see the movement as a bit too anti-police, myself To your comments on the second amendment: the restrictions the gun grabbers advocate are hardly "reasonable." If you make it near impossible for individuals to exercise their second amendment rights, that counts as infringement. 5. While the direct victims might no longer care, the same cannot be said for their friends and family. They deserve some emotional support after this horrible tragedy. Furthermore, your so-called "better gun control" would not help keep anyone safe. Taking action is pointless if the action you take doesn't solve the problem. It is only "near impossible" if you cannot pass a background-check or want something more powerful than permitted, not that either of those things are a problem. If you can, it is quite easy. After all, the SB shooters got them.
Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Deleted I have made 0 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined January 1970	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 16:29:57 GMT -6 Lorn likes this Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2015 16:29:57 GMT -6 Dec 4, 2015 23:54:25 GMT -6 Vroom Vroom said: Dec 4, 2015 10:35:49 GMT -6 Ocelot said: You know what, you guys win. You can keep your guns. However, don't start complaining when you lose a family member to a crazy shooter. Remember its just part of the culture. Meanwhile I'm gonna continue enjoying my privileged uni life here in the netherlands, without having to worry about a crazy classmate who shoots up the place. The thing about gun control is that while it would be harder for the crazies to get guns, they'd still get a hold of them (or have them brought over in the case of some of the terrorists) more likely than not. If someone intends to commit murder, then a gun law isn't going to stop them. If we got rid of the rights to have guns, then the law-abiding citizens would be defenseless and the lawbreakers that could get a hold of guns could start breaking into homes and shooting up more people in public without a second thought. Necessarily stopping them is not really the idea, though. The idea is to make it harder, at least for particularly deadly variants. It may prevent them, or it may lead them to settle for less. It also does not prevent citizens who want to carry a weapon for their protection from doing so, either. If in some cases the laws do not make any difference and the same thing happens anyway? ...Oh well, then. Saying it can still happen anyway is not compelling reason to deregulate and allow these incidents more easily, though. Gun-control =/= anti-gun. It just means there are certain limits on owning guns. It does not mean anti-concealed-carry, either, although I do think people over-value the benefits of carrying guns in public, but that is a whole other can-of-worms. Dec 5, 2015 13:15:26 GMT -6 Cknarf said: I noticed that many people seem to lack faith in armed citizens. As if operating a simple mechanical device requires extensive training, or something. Hell, I'm willing to bet that a decent number of regular folks who carry are just as good, if not better shots than some police. Those guys only have to qualify a few times a year, you know. Nearly all of the people who jump through all the hoops and pay all the money for a carry permit are more than familiar with firearms, and shoot them regularly. In my experience, hitting the target is not all that simple. And even trained carriers/police will sometimes hit innocent bystanders -- shots that do not hit anyone directly can still ricochet or pierce walls. I read a story of a guy who killed his wife while cleaning his gun -- a shot fired off and pierced through the wall(s ... more than one wall iirc) to hit his wife in another room. Gun-safety is no joke.
Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Draining Dragon Knowledgeable I've largely transitioned over to Top Shelf Gaming at this point. Hit me up there. I have made 461 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 338 likes My gender is Male	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 16:42:17 GMT -6 Post by Draining Dragon on Dec 5, 2015 16:42:17 GMT -6 TheHYR, what exactly are you proposing? You mentioned background checks, but those are already in place. In fact, California has the universal background checks that so many gun controllers support. What would you add?
"The tree of liberty must be chopped down periodically and fed into a woodchipper. Woodchips are the mulch upon which tyranny is built." "Don't put your trust in revolutions. They always come around again. That's why they're called revolutions. People die, and nothing changes." -Samuel Vimes Join us at Johnnie Walker's new discussion forum, Top Shelf Gaming! Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Cknarf Pillar of the Community Mr. President "I don't hate people. I just feel better when they aren't around." I have made 745 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 714 likes My gender is Male	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 17:00:28 GMT -6 Post by Cknarf on Dec 5, 2015 17:00:28 GMT -6 I'd much prefer a bit of collateral damage over an absolute massacre of everyone present. Speaking of collateral damage, holy shit, NYPD. Meanwhile, a random uber driver in Chicago... Anyways, "It went off while I was cleaning it." Is one of the shittiest excuses for a negligent discharge of all time. That also applies to fapping.
BSN refugee Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Deleted I have made 0 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined January 1970	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 17:29:00 GMT -6 Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2015 17:29:00 GMT -6 Dec 5, 2015 17:00:28 GMT -6 Cknarf said: I'd much prefer a bit of collateral damage over an absolute massacre of everyone present. Speaking of collateral damage, holy shit, NYPD. Meanwhile, a random uber driver in Chicago... Anyways, "It went off while I was cleaning it." Is one of the shittiest excuses for a negligent discharge of all time. That also applies to fapping. I'm as pro gun as they come, and i'd hardly call a bunch of people in a crowded space randomly opening up in the case of an active shooter "a bit of collateral damage." Besides, how often do active shooters actually manage to kill everyone present' even when no one else is armed? Imagine the confusion, how do you even keep track of who the original shooter is? All the "armed" people would be likely to shoot and kill each other in what I can only describe as an example of Darwinism at work. And yes, cops, who are trained professionals even strugle with firing while under stress/pressure, you think chubby billy bob who logs hundreds of hours at the range each week is gonna be able to operate efficiently under pressure? There is a difference between owning a gun for home defense and enjoying shooting it and being in an active shooter situation. A big difference. It's fun to pretend and talk about what you'd do, but at the end of the day, most people who carry would be better off getting the fuck out of dodge in such a situation. The fantasy of saving the day, is not likely to happen, and will probably just lead to more damage.
Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Cknarf Pillar of the Community Mr. President "I don't hate people. I just feel better when they aren't around." I have made 745 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 714 likes My gender is Male	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 18:49:17 GMT -6 Post by Cknarf on Dec 5, 2015 18:49:17 GMT -6 As I said previously, bailing the fuck out is always plan A. And again, it really depends on the situation. I feel like you're imagining a whole firing squad of normal citizens just dumping magazines into a single aloha snackbar, mowing down everything in their path, and that's a very unlikely case. How many people would you say are actually carrying? Let's take a look at Illinois, for example. Population (state) : 12,000,000~ Active permits (statewide) : 120,000~ Population (my county): 200,000~ Active permits (county): 2,500~ So, about 1% of the population has an active permit. But how many of them actually carry every day? One third? One half? Not all of them, I'm sure. There are days when I don't have my gun on me due to restrictions on where I can carry, or sometimes, I just forget it at home. Even if eveyone was carrying their gun, that's only what, one for every hundred people? I still think one or two armed people, opposing an attacker in an active shooter situation can be a very positive thing. And it's not like you have to be a SEAL to effectively defend yourself. Even a chubby billy bob can keep a gun pointed at a doorway, which is what most instructors are going to teach you in the first place. If you can't get out, hide and cover the entrance to your spot. Don't seek out the shooter. Sure, there might be some yipee-ki-yay, motherfucker, types that'll be running towards the shit, but it sure as hell won't be my ass. Many of the people who say it'll be one giant friendly fire blood bath aren't usually gun people. You know, the same ones who propose bans on supercalifragilsticautomatic- .30 caliber clips-per-minute assault guns. With shoulder things. That go up.
BSN refugee Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Deleted I have made 0 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined January 1970	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 19:01:09 GMT -6 Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2015 19:01:09 GMT -6 Dec 5, 2015 18:49:17 GMT -6 Cknarf said: As I said previously, bailing the fuck out is always plan A. And again, it really depends on the situation. I feel like you're imagining a whole firing squad of normal citizens just dumping magazines into a single aloha snackbar, mowing down everything in their path, and that's a very unlikely case. How many people would you say are actually carrying? Let's take a look at Illinois, for example. Population (state) : 12,000,000~ Active permits (statewide) : 120,000~ Population (my county): 200,000~ Active permits (county): 2,500~ So, about 1% of the population has an active permit. But how many of them actually carry every day? One third? One half? Not all of them, I'm sure. There are days when I don't have my gun on me due to restrictions on where I can carry, or sometimes, I just forget it at home. Even if eveyone was carrying their gun, that's only what, one for every hundred people? I still think one or two armed people, opposing an attacker in an active shooter situation can be a very positive thing. And it's not like you have to be a SEAL to effectively defend yourself. Even a chubby billy bob can keep a gun pointed at a doorway, which is what most instructors are going to teach you in the first place. If you can't get out, hide and cover the entrance to your spot. Don't seek out the shooter. Sure, there might be some yipee-ki-yay, motherfucker, types that'll be running towards the shit, but it sure as hell won't be my ass. Many of the people who say it'll be one giant friendly fire blood bath aren't usually gun people. You know, the same ones who propose bans on supercalifragilsticautomatic- .30 caliber clips-per-minute assault guns. With shoulder things. That go up. Fair enough, I have little desire to debate this since at the end of the day we are on the same side here. My point is mostly if I was in this situation I would hope anyone carrying near me would not just start shooting at the original. Really sincerely would prefer they didnt lol.
Edited by Deleted [Dec 5, 2015 19:01:57 GMT -6] Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Cknarf Pillar of the Community Mr. President "I don't hate people. I just feel better when they aren't around." I have made 745 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 714 likes My gender is Male	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 19:16:37 GMT -6 Post by Cknarf on Dec 5, 2015 19:16:37 GMT -6 Dec 5, 2015 19:01:09 GMT -6 @ero said: Dec 5, 2015 18:49:17 GMT -6 Cknarf said: Fair enough, I have little desire to debate this since at the end of the day we are on the same side here. My point is mostly if I was in this situation I would hope anyone carrying near me would not just start shooting at the original. Really sincerely would prefer they didnt lol. Ten minutes into hiding from a shooter and billy bob gives you that look... SPOILER: Click to show
BSN refugee Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Deleted I have made 0 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined January 1970	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 19:23:30 GMT -6 Cknarf likes this Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2015 19:23:30 GMT -6 While good ole billy is doing that i'll be ducked behind a desk or running my ass to the nearest exit. Cause i'm alpha as fuck.
Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Lorn Pillar of the Community What are you afraid of? I have made 678 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 367 likes My gender is Male	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 20:00:26 GMT -6 Post by Lorn on Dec 5, 2015 20:00:26 GMT -6 Dec 4, 2015 23:54:25 GMT -6 Vroom Vroom said: Dec 4, 2015 10:35:49 GMT -6 Ocelot said: You know what, you guys win. You can keep your guns. However, don't start complaining when you lose a family member to a crazy shooter. Remember its just part of the culture. Meanwhile I'm gonna continue enjoying my privileged uni life here in the netherlands, without having to worry about a crazy classmate who shoots up the place. The thing about gun control is that while it would be harder for the crazies to get guns, they'd still get a hold of them (or have them brought over in the case of some of the terrorists) more likely than not. If someone intends to commit murder, then a gun law isn't going to stop them. If we got rid of the rights to have guns, then the law-abiding citizens would be defenseless and the lawbreakers that could get a hold of guns could start breaking into homes and shooting up more people in public without a second thought. Every time there has been a mass shooting, I wish there had been a couple of people who were certified gun safety users who had guns present, because then casualties may have been able to be lowered. I really have to wonder where people get the idea that they can stop a home invasion with a gun. Provided said home invaders weren't compelte morons they would ahve likely cased the house for weeks, and planned their attack accordingly. They would ideally attack at night while the home owners are sleeping, ideally bypassing security (which is more than likely if they enter from an open door/window). If the home owner(s) were awake at this time it would be a race to see if they could reach their gun in time to actually stop the invaders, but depending on where the gun is they still may be out of luck. The only times that I recall where a home owner was able to stop a home invasion was when the home owner was elderly, and they were underestimated by the invader. Dec 5, 2015 15:05:23 GMT -6 Cknarf said: I can see how multiple armed civilians could potentially make things worse. I can also see how they could make things better. It really depends on the situation, and the people involved. Where is the shit going down? A crowded stadium? A small restaurant? There are just too many variables to really say. Either way, bailing the fuck out should be everyone's first priority, there's no question there. Fuck, that's my go-to plan. Get me and the fam out of whatever goofy shit is going down. Besides, shooting people can be expensive, with all the legal trouble that might ensue even if it's clearly justified. And I have no doubt that police would handle the overall situation better than the average joe. Still, I firmly believe that some form of armed resistance is better than nothing at all. You can call the police, and they will come. Eventually. Until they get there, you are responsible for you and your own. Dec 5, 2015 17:00:28 GMT -6 Cknarf said: I'd much prefer a bit of collateral damage over an absolute massacre of everyone present. Speaking of collateral damage, holy shit, NYPD. Meanwhile, a random uber driver in Chicago... Anyways, "It went off while I was cleaning it." Is one of the shittiest excuses for a negligent discharge of all time. That also applies to fapping. Say there was a mass shooting going on and there were bystanders with guns, what would occur when law enforcement shows up on the scene? Who would law enforcement think was the original shooter? What would happen if the bystander (bystander shooter = BS) ended up shooting some other bystanders while attempting to stop the original shooter? It's a nice hypothetical legal can of worms. If the BS shot other bystanders while trying to shoot the OS could the BS be charged with murder? Would the BS be open to legal action by the families (who would likely be rather pissy at the BS for the loss of their loved ones regardless of the circumstances) of the people that were shot while the BS was trying to intervene? Would the BS be shot at and killed by law enforcement when they arrived at the scene? As for collateral damage, that's something that law enforcement generally fears in those situations. If they happened to shoot unrelated bystanders they would be open to legal action as well as possibly losing their jobs over the incident.
If you're reading this I am still failing at lurking. Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Fire Demon Banned for Spam More chocolate please! I have made 2,563 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 566 likes My gender is Male	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 20:27:43 GMT -6 Post by Fire Demon on Dec 5, 2015 20:27:43 GMT -6 Is this going to be like a weekly event in the US? Maybe they can make a reality show out if it. I mean well no one knows what to do to fix the problem.
2B or not 2B The bot with a nice bot Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Cknarf Pillar of the Community Mr. President "I don't hate people. I just feel better when they aren't around." I have made 745 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 714 likes My gender is Male	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 20:52:24 GMT -6 Post by Cknarf on Dec 5, 2015 20:52:24 GMT -6 Dec 5, 2015 20:00:26 GMT -6 Lorn said: Dec 5, 2015 17:00:28 GMT -6 Cknarf said: Say there was a mass shooting going on and there were bystanders with guns, what would occur when law enforcement shows up on the scene? Who would law enforcement think was the original shooter? What would happen if the bystander (bystander shooter = BS) ended up shooting some other bystanders while attempting to stop the original shooter? It's a nice hypothetical legal can of worms. If the BS shot other bystanders while trying to shoot the OS could the BS be charged with murder? Would the BS be open to legal action by the families (who would likely be rather pissy at the BS for the loss of their loved ones regardless of the circumstances) of the people that were shot while the BS was trying to intervene? Would the BS be shot at and killed by law enforcement when they arrived at the scene? As for collateral damage, that's something that law enforcement generally fears in those situations. If they happened to shoot unrelated bystanders they would be open to legal action as well as possibly losing their jobs over the incident. In my CCW classes, they covered what to do when police are arriving, like, toss your gun the fuck away, or have it holstered before they arrive, and have ID ready. Of course, this is assuming that the police aren't already on scene. Which they usually aren't. If cops were everywhere, all the time, then we wouldn't have to carry, see? "You are liable for every round you fire." Was another thing that came up. That goes double for non-police, because normal folks are going to have a harder time dealing with it. Because 'lol administrative leave' isn't an option for regular people like us.
BSN refugee Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Cainhurst Crow Ghosts I have made 243 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 132 likes	On shootings in America. Dec 5, 2015 23:38:00 GMT -6 via mobile Post by Cainhurst Crow on Dec 5, 2015 23:38:00 GMT -6 I'm confused why this whole mistaken identity scenario comes up over and over in these debates, when we have dozens if not hundreds of cases on record where a citizen managed to either kill a shooter or hold them at gunpoint long enough for authorities to arrive, and there wasn't this weird fog of confusion people keep bringing up. People knew who the original shooter was, and they knew who the person stopping the shooter was. Body language, witness descriptions, and just what position people are in when the police arrive, all seem to be pretty clear. Everytime I hear a "whose the original shooter" argument I roll my eyes and think people have watched too much dark knight. Additionally, if you want to curb gun murder, you should focus on rehabilitation and reforms in prison, as well as a standard prosecution procedure for gangs. 76% of guns used in crime are stolen, 65% of all people shoot are former felons, with a spike to 75% being related to previous criminal activities. Most of the death toll in the US isn't lone psychos or terrorist. They're former criminals teaching young people to be criminals, starting originizations of criminals, and maintaining these orginizations and allegances in and out of prison from either choice or deceiving themselves to think they have no choice. You do this, focus on reform and rehabilitation, and I can guarantee you'll cut crime rates by half.
Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Johnnie Walker Ghosts Top Shelf I do not like that Sam-I-Am I have made 795 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 1,629 likes	On shootings in America. Dec 6, 2015 2:57:08 GMT -6 Cknarf, Lorn, and 1 more like this Post by Johnnie Walker on Dec 6, 2015 2:57:08 GMT -6
Steam profile Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Deleted I have made 0 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined January 1970	On shootings in America. Dec 6, 2015 5:27:12 GMT -6 Johnnie Walker and Lorn like this Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2015 5:27:12 GMT -6 Forks are dangerous. Don't joke about that shit Johnny!
Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Johnnie Walker Ghosts Top Shelf I do not like that Sam-I-Am I have made 795 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined August 2015 I've received 1,629 likes	On shootings in America. Dec 6, 2015 5:55:45 GMT -6 Lorn likes this Post by Johnnie Walker on Dec 6, 2015 5:55:45 GMT -6 Don't tell me what and whatnot to joke about!
Steam profile Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Deleted I have made 0 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined January 1970	On shootings in America. Dec 6, 2015 5:59:40 GMT -6 Johnnie Walker, Fire Demon, and 1 more like this Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2015 5:59:40 GMT -6 Assault forks are not the problem, it's those high capacity tactical assault spoons. How many more innocent children must die before we come to our senses and finally remove these menaces from the hands of the public?
Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top

Deleted I have made 0 posts Right now I'm Offline I joined January 1970	On shootings in America. Dec 6, 2015 6:03:22 GMT -6 Johnnie Walker likes this Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2015 6:03:22 GMT -6 Dec 6, 2015 5:55:45 GMT -6 Johnnie Walker said: Don't tell me what and whatnot to joke about! Come at me and stop me!
Reply Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top