We Must Ignite This Couch Message Boards

« 1 (2) 3 4 5 ... 9 »

 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 8172
Quote:

zwaaa wrote:
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
Social media is mainly a place where adolescents (of any age) post narcissistic self-advertisements in an attempt to make friends via the internet.



Classic 1818 dismissive BS.

Move along.


Prove it wrong.

You can't?

Move along.

Posted on: 3/16 12:07 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12958
Quote:

joedaddyski wrote:
I wouldn’t expect anything less 88, you make its sound good but, under it all is still progressive socialist jiber jaber.


Then I guess the founding fathers were progressive socialists. There is a good contingent of folks on here who are brainwashed and really ignorant of the political and religious history and philosophies of this country.

Posted on: 3/16 7:29 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12958
Quote:

EERY wrote:
There is a difference between working together for the common good, and demanding that others lose their God given rights as defined in our Republic’s Connstitution. There is a reason we have a Bill of Rights, so a person or group of people can not legally infringe on those established rights. To go against anyone of those individual rights, is to go against the fabric by which our Republic was built on.


Are you saying you believe there is a God given right to own an AR-15?

Posted on: 3/16 7:31 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 8172
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

joedaddyski wrote:
I wouldn’t expect anything less 88, you make its sound good but, under it all is still progressive socialist jiber jaber.


Then I guess the founding fathers were progressive socialists. There is a good contingent of folks on here who are brainwashed and really ignorant of the political and religious history and philosophies of this country.


Including you. You dont know anything about the civil war, was offended by a robert e lee statue, don't know anything about the 2nd amendment or gun rights, or any of the world history of countries that took the guns away from citizens. Read up at least before you try to comment.

Posted on: 3/16 9:13 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 2937
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
There is a difference between working together for the common good, and demanding that others lose their God given rights as defined in our Republic’s Connstitution. There is a reason we have a Bill of Rights, so a person or group of people can not legally infringe on those established rights. To go against anyone of those individual rights, is to go against the fabric by which our Republic was built on.


Are you saying you believe there is a God given right to own an AR-15?


Im saying that a person has a God given right to defend them self (amongst other God given rights). Are you saying that a mass killings would never happen as long as people are denied access to AR-15s?

Posted on: 3/17 12:43 am
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
12/9/2009 10:45 am
From durham, nc
Posts: 5222
Is there no line in defending yourself? For example, can I bury landmines in my yard to protect myself? How about a robotic gun on my roof that shoots automatically when someone enters my property? Why can’t I own and shoot a tank or Apache helicopter to protect myself?

My point is that 2nd amendment or not...the government draws the line somewhere. Most Americans agree that there has to be a line somewhere. We just disagree where that line should be.

Posted on: 3/17 6:15 am
_________________
Most folks are as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln

I don't stand by anything. ~Donald J. Trump
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 8172
Yes damnit!

Posted on: 3/17 8:18 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 2937
There is a line already established. I personally think bump fire stalks cross that line. Why can’t they adjust the fully automatic law wording to cover bump fire stalks as well? It is my opinion that once a bump fire stock is added to a semi-automatic rifle, that it then functions as an assault rifle.

There is a vast number of weapons a person could use to level a large amount of devastation in a building full of unarmed children, and predominantly soft adults.

Yes I do believe that a situation could arise that a person would need a low recoil high capacity rifle to defend themselves or their loved ones. Yes such an instance is rare, but it can and eventually will happen to someone.

As for me and my house, if only two to three people are attempting to get at me and my loved ones, they won’t be so lucky to be met with a mere 223 round.

I’ve harvested enough deer to know that a Winchester 30-30 150 grain soft point (2,300fps) levels a substantially larger wound channel than a 223 55 grain soft point (3,800fps). That’s why I don’t deer hunt with a 223, because a person has to be pretty much a sharp shooter to ensure taking a deer cleanly. Perhaps I’d try if I had more time to practice. For most people it is better used for varmints.

Here is an online calculator to show the difference of energy between the two. Just plug in the numbers I provided. 30-30 = 30 caliber and 223 = 22 caliber. For what it’s worth, a lot of people consider a 30-30 to be a moderate at best hunting round.
http://www.n4lcd.com/calc/

Posted on: 3/17 10:00 am
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12958
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
There is a difference between working together for the common good, and demanding that others lose their God given rights as defined in our Republic’s Connstitution. There is a reason we have a Bill of Rights, so a person or group of people can not legally infringe on those established rights. To go against anyone of those individual rights, is to go against the fabric by which our Republic was built on.


Are you saying you believe there is a God given right to own an AR-15?


Im saying that a person has a God given right to defend them self (amongst other God given rights). Are you saying that a mass killings would never happen as long as people are denied access to AR-15s?


Where in the world do you get that from? All I did was ask you to explain your point with specificity.

There is a problem when you start talking about "God given rights" because you introduce religion into public policy debates. The right to self defense is not bounded by religion. Certainly everyone can agree with the principle that people have the right to self defense regardless of their religious views. There is no need to say it is "God given." Why would God need to grant a right to do what is natural and which is universally accepted? The bigger problem with your broad statement is that any right has limits. For instance, it is generally accepted in western civilization that you cannot use deadly force simply to protect property because we value life more than property. More to the point, you cannot use deadly force unless you are met with deadly force.

Back to the issue from your post: you stated that people are infringing on other's rights. Who is doing the infringing? What rights are at issue? The 2nd Amendment does not say that gun ownership is a God given right that cannot be limited or regulated. It has never been interpreted to say that, and even Justice Scalia said that it grants a limited right. The 2nd Amendment isn't implicated by the restrictions being proposed.

My point is this: we are all in this Democracy together, and our contract with one another is to put the common good first, despite what the neoliberals on this site will tell you. We are not a nation of individuals--the country was literally created "in order to form a more perfect union." We are stronger as a collective body than as a group of individuals. This includes being willing to part with a specific type of gun that you use as a hobby if it will help reduce the likelihood that other people will die. There is a legitimate public policy debate over whether any measure will reduce or increase the number of injuries and deaths related to gun use. But I cannot imagine a religion that says that God prefers hobbies over lives.

Posted on: 3/17 11:04 am
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 8172
I honestly cant believe there are people stupid enough that protest to have their rights be taken away.

Posted on: 3/17 2:43 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 8172
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
There is a difference between working together for the common good, and demanding that others lose their God given rights as defined in our Republic’s Connstitution. There is a reason we have a Bill of Rights, so a person or group of people can not legally infringe on those established rights. To go against anyone of those individual rights, is to go against the fabric by which our Republic was built on.


Are you saying you believe there is a God given right to own an AR-15?


Im saying that a person has a God given right to defend them self (amongst other God given rights). Are you saying that a mass killings would never happen as long as people are denied access to AR-15s?


Where in the world do you get that from? All I did was ask you to explain your point with specificity.

There is a problem when you start talking about "God given rights" because you introduce religion into public policy debates. The right to self defense is not bounded by religion. Certainly everyone can agree with the principle that people have the right to self defense regardless of their religious views. There is no need to say it is "God given." Why would God need to grant a right to do what is natural and which is universally accepted? The bigger problem with your broad statement is that any right has limits. For instance, it is generally accepted in western civilization that you cannot use deadly force simply to protect property because we value life more than property. More to the point, you cannot use deadly force unless you are met with deadly force.

Back to the issue from your post: you stated that people are infringing on other's rights. Who is doing the infringing? What rights are at issue? The 2nd Amendment does not say that gun ownership is a God given right that cannot be limited or regulated. It has never been interpreted to say that, and even Justice Scalia said that it grants a limited right. The 2nd Amendment isn't implicated by the restrictions being proposed.

My point is this: we are all in this Democracy together, and our contract with one another is to put the common good first, despite what the neoliberals on this site will tell you. We are not a nation of individuals--the country was literally created "in order to form a more perfect union." We are stronger as a collective body than as a group of individuals. This includes being willing to part with a specific type of gun that you use as a hobby if it will help reduce the likelihood that other people will die. There is a legitimate public policy debate over whether any measure will reduce or increase the number of injuries and deaths related to gun use. But I cannot imagine a religion that says that God prefers hobbies over lives.


Why dont you lobby for the ban of hammers, knives, cars, cigarettes, alcohol, doctors. (Negligence in a hospital kills more than guns annually) etc etc.? All of which kill are used to kill more than guns.

Protecting my family isnt a hobby.

This is telling when so-called ‘gun deaths’ are first broken down into categories. At least 1/2 of firearm-related deaths are suicides. Gun homicides must then be categorized as justifiable, accidents, negligent homicides, and murders, so where crime is concerned, that means even more lives saved by the defensive use of guns for every life lost to the criminal misuse of guns.

Where the use of guns for self-defence is concerned, it should be noted that most of the time a shot is not fired.

You are just folowing the mindless masses. Guns arent a problem. They save more lives than take.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.thetrut ... in-criminal-gun-uses/amp/

Take your holier than thou bullshit and shove it up your ass. You are wrong about this topic and you always will be.

Posted on: 3/17 2:55 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/29/2008 4:48 pm
From Deadwood, Lakota Territory
Posts: 8421
Individual Rights and Individual Freedoms!!!

The right of the private citizens to own private property.

The right to self-defens.

The right to keep and bear arms.

We The People ...

Funny, I don't see the part where the government is all powerful. And where the people need to beg the government for protection.

Posted on: 3/17 3:55 pm
_________________
Liberal, Progressive, Socialist, Globalist Fascists in BOTH parties are trying to take over the U.S.A.

Help us Eric Cartman, YOU are our only hope.
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12958
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
I honestly cant believe there are people stupid enough that protest to have their rights be taken away.


They aren't. They are arguing for restrictions that are not prohibited by the second amendment.

Posted on: 3/17 10:00 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12958
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
There is a difference between working together for the common good, and demanding that others lose their God given rights as defined in our Republic’s Connstitution. There is a reason we have a Bill of Rights, so a person or group of people can not legally infringe on those established rights. To go against anyone of those individual rights, is to go against the fabric by which our Republic was built on.


Are you saying you believe there is a God given right to own an AR-15?


Im saying that a person has a God given right to defend them self (amongst other God given rights). Are you saying that a mass killings would never happen as long as people are denied access to AR-15s?


Where in the world do you get that from? All I did was ask you to explain your point with specificity.

There is a problem when you start talking about "God given rights" because you introduce religion into public policy debates. The right to self defense is not bounded by religion. Certainly everyone can agree with the principle that people have the right to self defense regardless of their religious views. There is no need to say it is "God given." Why would God need to grant a right to do what is natural and which is universally accepted? The bigger problem with your broad statement is that any right has limits. For instance, it is generally accepted in western civilization that you cannot use deadly force simply to protect property because we value life more than property. More to the point, you cannot use deadly force unless you are met with deadly force.

Back to the issue from your post: you stated that people are infringing on other's rights. Who is doing the infringing? What rights are at issue? The 2nd Amendment does not say that gun ownership is a God given right that cannot be limited or regulated. It has never been interpreted to say that, and even Justice Scalia said that it grants a limited right. The 2nd Amendment isn't implicated by the restrictions being proposed.

My point is this: we are all in this Democracy together, and our contract with one another is to put the common good first, despite what the neoliberals on this site will tell you. We are not a nation of individuals--the country was literally created "in order to form a more perfect union." We are stronger as a collective body than as a group of individuals. This includes being willing to part with a specific type of gun that you use as a hobby if it will help reduce the likelihood that other people will die. There is a legitimate public policy debate over whether any measure will reduce or increase the number of injuries and deaths related to gun use. But I cannot imagine a religion that says that God prefers hobbies over lives.


Why dont you lobby for the ban of hammers, knives, cars, cigarettes, alcohol, doctors. (Negligence in a hospital kills more than guns annually) etc etc.? All of which kill are used to kill more than guns.

Most of the items you posted aren't "used" to kill people. They are considered the cause of death, but a doctor or a cigarette aren't weapons. People aren't proposing a ban on all guns. They are proposing a ban on weapons that are more effective and efficient at killing large groups of people in a short period of time. The basis for their proposal is that this ban has been effective in both the United States and other countries.

Quote:
Protecting my family isnt a hobby.


I never said it was. Nobody is denying you the right to protect your family.

Quote:
This is telling when so-called ‘gun deaths’ are first broken down into categories. At least 1/2 of firearm-related deaths are suicides. Gun homicides must then be categorized as justifiable, accidents, negligent homicides, and murders, so where crime is concerned, that means even more lives saved by the defensive use of guns for every life lost to the criminal misuse of guns.

Where the use of guns for self-defence is concerned, it should be noted that most of the time a shot is not fired.


Do you have actual statistics to support this?

Quote:
You are just folowing the mindless masses. Guns arent a problem. They save more lives than take.


Do you have statistics that support that AR-15's and similar weapons "save more lives than take?" I doubt you do because I doubt that they do. That is what we need to know.

Quote:
Take your holier than thou bullshit and shove it up your ass. You are wrong about this topic and you always will be.


And there it is. More internet bullying. At some point you might realize that this is a sign of weakness, not strength. How are you still on this website?

Posted on: 3/17 10:20 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 8172
There is literally a link providing you the sources you asked for. And then you complain when posters call you an idiot.

Posted on: 3/17 10:29 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 2937
Quote:
Eers88 wrote: Where in the world do you get that from? All I did was ask you to explain your point with specificity.

There is a problem when you start talking about "God given rights" because you introduce religion into public policy debates. The right to self defense is not bounded by religion. Certainly everyone can agree with the principle that people have the right to self defense regardless of their religious views. There is no need to say it is "God given." Why would God need to grant a right to do what is natural and which is universally accepted? The bigger problem with your broad statement is that any right has limits. For instance, it is generally accepted in western civilization that you cannot use deadly force simply to protect property because we value life more than property. More to the point, you cannot use deadly force unless you are met with deadly force.

Back to the issue from your post: you stated that people are infringing on other's rights. Who is doing the infringing? What rights are at issue? The 2nd Amendment does not say that gun ownership is a God given right that cannot be limited or regulated. It has never been interpreted to say that, and even Justice Scalia said that it grants a limited right. The 2nd Amendment isn't implicated by the restrictions being proposed.

My point is this: we are all in this Democracy together, and our contract with one another is to put the common good first, despite what the neoliberals on this site will tell you. We are not a nation of individuals--the country was literally created "in order to form a more perfect union." We are stronger as a collective body than as a group of individuals. This includes being willing to part with a specific type of gun that you use as a hobby if it will help reduce the likelihood that other people will die. There is a legitimate public policy debate over whether any measure will reduce or increase the number of injuries and deaths related to gun use. But I cannot imagine a religion that says that God prefers hobbies over lives.


I had been up for 24 hours, so I decided to wait to respond to this when I had the capacity to dive in deeper.

When speaking of God given rights, I am referring to the text laid out in the Declaration of Independence.
Quote:
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/


There might not be a need to say something is a God given right, but there is nothing wrong with doing so either. If you choose to call it a universal right instead, I'm not going to buck up on you about that. I know that you are referring to separation of church and state. To say that religion has no place in public debate is going a bit far. Everyone has a system of values. Just because mine derive from a belief in a Divine Creator and the relationship that accompanies, does not mean that I should have to withdraw myself from public debate. To demand that I should, would be utilizing the power of the state to suppress my freedom of choice and my right to free speech. The whole idea of the concept of separation from church and state derives from a written conversation between the Danbury Baptist Association and Thomas Jefferson. The Association was concerned that a new form of government might become oppressive of the church's ability to practice their faith freely as they see fit. They were concerned that the government would assume the roll of head of the church as was done in England. In the letter Jefferson says specifically that the legitimate powers of the state reach actions only, and not opinions. The actual wording of "separation of church and state" is found nowhere in the constitution.
https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

I did not specifically say that people were infringing on others rights. I specifically said that the reason the Constitution and Bill of Rights exist is to keep a person or a group of people from infringing on those rights. The reason most of us on the opposition side to a ban of such a specific weapon is not because we feel that we just absolutely can't live without an AR-15. Heck I don't even own one. We oppose such actions, because we understand that engaging in such a ban will not solve the problem. There are plenty of other firearms and weapon choices that could cause the same amount of destruction or worse. Banning a specific sporting rifle is simply a knee jerk reaction, and when the next bad guy comes along, back the left will be demanding another item for their trophy case.

I am not saying that the Second Amendment cannot be regulated or limited. I have referenced regulations and limitations on this very thread. As I sit here and type these words, I understand that I cannot legally own a fully automatic firearm, an RPG, or an explosive device. Now some on the right would argue that the Second Amendment covers an individual's right to posses such things. I do not share in that opinion.

In conclusion, I feel that in this republic in which we elect our officials democratically, we have a law set above all that grants us certain inalienable rights. These rights grant us the freedom to pursue life and happiness. Being free as an individual that is granted such rights gives me the ability to come together with other free individuals in my family, church, community, state, and country to build a better life and a future. When we start diminishing the rights of the individual, we diminish everyone's ability to come together for a common good. The absence of individual rights is the centralization of power. The more we centralize power, the less the whole gets to choose what is best for themselves and the group.

Posted on: 3/18 12:48 am
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Pitt Hater
Joined:
6/26/2010 9:15 am
Posts: 2366
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
There is literally a link providing you the sources you asked for. And then you complain when posters call you an idiot.

Classic. I like how you did that.

Posted on: 3/20 11:26 am
_________________
montani semper liberi & est ratio liberalismi aegritudinis animi
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/29/2008 4:48 pm
From Deadwood, Lakota Territory
Posts: 8421
Sadly, I was watching news clips where they were talking to the students protesting in D.C. And when asked about the 2nd Amendment ...

almost every student said the 2nd Amendment was OUTDATED.

Now, we all know DAMN well they did not come up with that on their own. It is clear that the teachers and the education system in general is brainwashing our young people.

They have clearly not been taught the founding principles of this great Nation and how they all tie together.

Individual Rights, Individual Freedoms, and the Right of the Individual to OWN Private Property. THOSE are the Rights that set this great Nation apart from colonial Europe and civilizations throughout history in general.

And the Founding Fathers knew that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms would be VITAL in protecting those Rights.

The 2nd Amendment will NEVER be outdated.

Which goes back to the original points of this thread. These students, while they may be intelligent; they lack the proper education and requisite experience to grasp the fact that they lack the WISDOM necessary to fully understand the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Outdated??? Wake Up Kids.

Posted on: 3/30 3:47 pm
_________________
Liberal, Progressive, Socialist, Globalist Fascists in BOTH parties are trying to take over the U.S.A.

Help us Eric Cartman, YOU are our only hope.
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 8172
Quote:

sg44gold wrote:
Sadly, I was watching news clips where they were talking to the students protesting in D.C. And when asked about the 2nd Amendment ...

almost every student said the 2nd Amendment was OUTDATED.

Now, we all know DAMN well they did not come up with that on their own. It is clear that the teachers and the education system in general is brainwashing our young people.

They have clearly not been taught the founding principles of this great Nation and how they all tie together.

Individual Rights, Individual Freedoms, and the Right of the Individual to OWN Private Property. THOSE are the Rights that set this great Nation apart from colonial Europe and civilizations throughout history in general.

And the Founding Fathers knew that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms would be VITAL in protecting those Rights.

The 2nd Amendment will NEVER be outdated.

Which goes back to the original points of this thread. These students, while they may be intelligent; they lack the proper education and requisite experience to grasp the fact that they lack the WISDOM necessary to fully understand the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Outdated??? Wake Up Kids.


You forgot the part where every amendment is void if a kid cries on national television then its okay to take our guns away.

Posted on: 3/30 4:24 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The Wisdom Gap
Suspected Punter
Joined:
1/16/2012 2:30 pm
From Florida via Lewisburg
Posts: 76

Posted on: 3/30 6:00 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 



« 1 (2) 3 4 5 ... 9 »




Login
Username:

Password:

remember me





Copyright © 2004-2011 wemustignitethiscouch.com All Rights Reserved