Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:23:37 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

What's clear is, you seem to think defending yourself when your life is in danger or you're in danger of bodily harm and blowing someone away for trying to make off with your $150 is the same thing or the same type of thing. I say they are 2 different things. In an earlier post you advocate doing away with SYG laws because you're lumping SYG in with this. There is no way I can agree with eliminating SYG laws just because I disagree with what the guy did in the Texas incident.

FR
The problem I have with this situation is he was engaging in an illegal activity (I'm not saying that prostitution should be illegal) pretty much the same as if a drug deal went bad. I'm all for shooting thieves, burglars and looters, at least in some situations, but in this case, and maybe it's a grey area, I just don't think it was necessary. Had it been me I would have shot out one or more of her tires if I was so hard up about losing $150. If the woman had used CL as a ruse to not only get the $150 but steal other valuables in the home and was making a getaway then ok, shoot the bitch.


Well, he wasn't defending himself, was he? He used a law that said if someone steals something from you, after dark, you can use deadly force to stop them.

There is no robbery situation that holds the death penalty for the accused in any state should they go to court. But you, and some other people seem to think your "stuff" is more valuable than the thief's life.

Theoretically, based on this law (which you obviously haven't read), someone could simply *think* you are stealing something from you and shoot you. This law says that's ok. No trial, no defense, the shooter acted without finding out, but that's ok, because the law says if someone is stealing from you after dark, they can shoot you, without knowing if it is true or not.

SYG laws (which means all laws that say a civilian can use deadly force when there are other safe, reasonable options, just so you understand) put "Joe Blow" in the position of being judge and jury. There can be a safe escape, the option of calling the police, whatever, but you don't need to do that, you can take matters into your own hands and shoot them. Shoot to kill.

Those that think that is reasonable deserve the prison sentence that should go with it should they do it. Of course, I live in a state that has the sense not to have such laws on the books. Where I live, and in the majority of states in the US, this guy was clearly in no danger, and so the shooting would be murder, not even manslaughter.

But hey, you live in Florida. I lived there for two years and worked for the DOC, probation division while I was there. Saw nearly 1,000 felons a week. And I know they will issue a carry permit to just about anyone, so your support of shooting someone for theft is in keeping with the idiocy of that state.


(in reply to lovmuffin)
Profile   Post #: 241
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:26:56 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Its not new. Why dont you stop trying to belittle and actually add to the discussion. The whole point of the OP was that someone was killed for 150 dollars, and its being played down because she is "supposedly" a hooker.


Actually the whole point of the OP was that the case set a precedent for killing someone for saying no to sex. Now, obviously some of us are smart enough to realize the case sets no such precedent, but that was the point kali was erroneously trying to make.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 242
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:30:36 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

I've been wondering this exact same thing - hopefully someone will look up Texas cases and see what happens to people who murdered someone who ripped him off in a drug deal.


If the drug deal happened at night and they had a lawyer smart enough to twist this particular law the way this attorney did, then yes it is possible. Although I bet there would be a different outcome.

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 243
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:31:51 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oneechan


quote:


Does it means if a drug trade goes wrong 'cos the buyer is not happy by quality of the drug he can legitimate kill the seller that doesn't have a satisfied or refund policy?


no. quality is an entirely different issue, it doesn't really relate
a better example would be buying drugs, but getting nothing for your money. that would be the same situation.

The point here is that the woman took the money and delivered nothing at all.


Uh, no that is not the point. Many posters are trying to make that the point, but it isn't. The point is really did she deserve to be shot and killed for doing it.

(in reply to Oneechan)
Profile   Post #: 244
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:35:30 AM   
JeffBC


Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
Uh, no that is not the point. Many posters are trying to make that the point, but it isn't. The point is really did she deserve to be shot and killed for doing it.

I still want to know whether there is some lower limit on this "theft" word. What if it was $100? How about $25? Had she pocketed a spare bic pen on the way out would that count? I know those examples sound absurd. But honestly, $150 is already so beyond absurd in my mind that it's incomprehensible so any of those other numbers are pretty much the same to me.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 245
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:35:49 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: njlauren


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
I have seen only a few trying to make this a feminist issue..and they arent women.

I dunno, Kali seems pretty strong on it. I'm not quite sure where you stand.

In my mind this is not about her refusal to have sex. The only question is whether or not we think shooting someone dead for $150 is a "good" outcome.


No, it isn't, but what the defenders of the Texas law are missing is that it was an illicit transation, which inviolates the argument it was about protecting property. People have used the same example I did, if I gave you money for drugs, you gave me nothing for it, I don't have the right to shoot you for stealing my money, and even in texas they put people on trial for murder for doing just that, so how is this different?

Illicit transactions forfeit any property or contractual rights, because both parties are doing something illegal, it is a null and void transaction, and thus both side's property in effect is null and void (I know there are lawyers on here, I am not one, so I am probably not using the right terms). Put it this way, if the cops broke up this transaction, or a drug deal, the guy wouldn't get back his 150 bucks.




While I do agree with you, and we certainly don't have anywhere near enough information about this case to really conclude anything, I think that the jury was simply looking at her taking the money and leaving. This bizarre and ridiculous law gives him permission (in a sense) to shoot her for that. Because it was after dark, making it really ridiculous. Had they met in daylight and she did this, he would have had no statute to use as a defense.

Essentially, you can shoot a thief at night, but not during the day. What sense does that make?

(in reply to njlauren)
Profile   Post #: 246
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:41:58 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

th ewoman had the opportunity to give him the money back. it is not about enforcing an illegal agreement. It is about her taking money that did not belong to her and no agreement existed. Either way you lose on this one.


Where exactly in the article did he demand his money back before shooting her? If you have found a more detailed article, please by all means share it with us. However, keep it to articles relating specifically about this case as opposed to your typical post that takes up an entire page with pictures of things having nothing to do with the OP.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 247
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:44:19 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: angelikaJ


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama
The precedent this case sets is dangerous. A woman is NEVER required to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to. Ever.

I disagree. Sure, she's not required to have sex but then she IS required to return the money. If she does not it is, in fact, theft. And it is hardly a surprise that deadly force is authorized in Texas for a theft situation.

I'm not going to make this one about feminism and reproductive rights. She's a crook.


You are making a strange assumption: It is not illegal to be an escort.
She was an escort.
It is illegal to exchange money for sex; that is prostitution.

He may have expected sex, she was not required to give that, and she did not have to return the money, if she was merely his escort.



Except there is no evidence she was an escort. Of course, there is also the fact that she met him, paced for 20 minutes and then left to "give the money to her driver."

Assuming facts that don't exist really mean nothing.

(in reply to angelikaJ)
Profile   Post #: 248
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:46:27 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Is this working now? For fuck sake

BALTIMORE (AP) — A man who killed another man when a drug transaction went bad has been sentenced to 50 years in prison.

Jason K. Hamel, 33, was sentenced Tuesday. He had been convicted of second-degree murder and the shooting death of Keyva Bluitt.

According to evidence presented at trial, Hamel met three men in Federal Hill on June 20, 2008 to buy $5,000 worth of cocaine. Prosecutors say Hamel paid for and got a package, but found it contained only a T-shirt.

Officials say Hamel pulled out a handgun and fired a single shot into the sellers’ car, striking Bluitt.

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2013/03/19/man-sentenced-for-killing-when-drug-deal-goes-bad/

Im still working on the other. Someone had asked about this scenario.


You need to find one specific to Texas because they are the ones with the bizarre laws. In Baltimore, he wouldn't have been able to shoot the prostitute either.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 249
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 1:01:31 AM   
eulero83


Posts: 1470
Joined: 11/4/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
Essentially, you can shoot a thief at night, but not during the day. What sense does that make?


It can make sense in a country that allows deadly force as self defence on property crimes, that's something could be discussed a lot.
I can make an example in my country, that uses a civil law system, theft is a fellony with it's range of conviction time, and cattle theft has a different name and an higher range of conviction time, the reason the legislator set a higher conviction is this crime in rural areas can lead to social disorder. So in this case to compensate the feeling of being less protected during night law allows the use of deadly force. But this is a civil law thinking process, I know in common law depends on sentences issued.

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 250
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 1:10:35 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		Now the flip side of the coin, also from Judge Keith Dean's court: A well-connected man pleaded guilty to murder – for shooting an unarmed prostitute in the back – and also got 10 years of probation.

The killer proceeded to break the rules by, among other things, smoking crack cocaine. He repeatedly failed drug tests. He was arrested for cocaine possession in Waco while driving a congressman's car, but prosecutors there didn't press charges.

Judge Dean has let this man stay free and, last year, exempted him from most of the usual conditions of probation. John Alexander "Alex" Wood no longer must submit to drug tests or refrain from owning a gun or even meet with a probation officer. He's simply supposed to obey the law and mail the court a postcard once a year that gives his current address.

The judge's written court policies say that defendants who have broken the rules are not eligible for postcard probation. But no one can make him obey his own standards. Indeed, judges in Texas and most other states have few limits on possible punishments when defendants violate probation, which sets the stage for lawful but extreme disparities.

And "you can't tell what the reasons are," said Kevin Reitz, a University of Minnesota law professor who is one of the nation's leading experts on sentencing guidelines. "I call this a black box system. You have someone with a lot of power and no burden of explanation."

Judge Dean, a widely respected 20-year veteran of the Dallas criminal bench, said he wouldn't discuss the two cases because he might have to rule on them again someday. In general, he said, he tries to evaluate "the potential danger to the community" when someone violates probation "and what, in the long run, is going to be in the best interest of the community and the person themselves."

The judge gave Mr. Wood his special privileges without receiving a formal request, court records show. "This certainly undermines one's confidence in the judicial system around here," said Rick Jordan, who was the prosecutor on Mr. Wood's case and now is a defense attorney.

Mr. Wood, who is 46 and raises show dogs, said he has avoided prison by having top-flight legal counsel and building good relations with probation officers. His sentence is set to expire at the end of May.

http://www.dallasnews.com/investigations/headlines/20060423-scales-of-justice-can-swing-wildly.ece



_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 251
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 1:34:14 AM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline
~FR~

All this fuss, over a simple miscommunication.


"What we've got here, is failure to communicate."

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 252
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 2:05:54 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
Uh, no that is not the point. Many posters are trying to make that the point, but it isn't. The point is really did she deserve to be shot and killed for doing it.

I still want to know whether there is some lower limit on this "theft" word. What if it was $100? How about $25? Had she pocketed a spare bic pen on the way out would that count? I know those examples sound absurd. But honestly, $150 is already so beyond absurd in my mind that it's incomprehensible so any of those other numbers are pretty much the same to me.


Every time I come back to this thread there are so many pages to catch up on and the links so I'm sorry if I took a while to respond to this (although I don't recall if you replied to me). Anyway, to answer your question, theft is stealing something, and your previous example of a 25 cent stamp or her of a bic pen would be theft, and yes, it would apply based on this ridiculous law.

I did some research of my own on this, so I'm making another (or several) post on this based on what I found. You seem to agree with me, but what I found will clear up the issue of it being a type of SYG law and the danger it creates. I doubt the people who think it is ok to shoot someone for something they wouldn't even get jail time for will agree, but I've never really cared anyway, lol.

(in reply to JeffBC)
Profile   Post #: 253
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 3:41:05 AM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline
In any case, it seems as though the Texas jurists have decided to uphold the SYH (Shoot Your Hooker) law.


(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 254
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 3:52:57 AM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Judge Dean, ...

In general, he said, he tries to evaluate "the potential danger to the community" ...

"and what, in the long run, is going to be in the best interest of the community ..."



If this stipulation were to be enforced, that's 95% of the politicians gone, right there.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 255
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 4:24:56 AM   
Powergamz1


Posts: 1927
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline 		No, single jury decisions don't set precedence, especially when they go against Supreme Court rulings.


quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

I'd be willing to bet that the Texas jury was properly instructed that the law about use of deadly force in defense of property does *not* mean killing someone for keeping $150 that was allegedly tendered for an illegal act.

I'd be willing to bet that the Texas jury was properly instructed on everything they needed to reach a conviction.


So was William Kennedy Smith's jury.

Any of the legal experts here want to argue that Florida law makes rape legal?


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: njlauren
No, it isn't, but what the defenders of the Texas law are missing is that it was an illicit transation, which inviolates the argument it was about protecting property. People have used the same example I did, if I gave you money for drugs, you gave me nothing for it, I don't have the right to shoot you for stealing my money, and even in texas they put people on trial for murder for doing just that, so how is this different?

I wondered about that myself. My own end conclusion was that the law itself was fucked but there's that part also. My best guess is that it's different because she's a prostitute and nobody really cares if we shoot prostitutes.

One wonders if there was a dispute between this same guy and.... say... Michelle Obama over $150 bucks and he shot her would the jury have been so sanguine. Oh wait... this is texas we're talking about. They'd have been throwing parties.





Ok something I didn't considered is that the trial was by jury, and that's probably what i can't understand for cultural differences. Just a question to understand more, but now this sentence in common law will be part of jurisprudence? I mean are judges in any way obbligated to consider this when another person is killed for 150$? Is the "stare decisis" principle so bonding?



_____________________________

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" Anthony McLeod Kennedy

" About damn time...wooot!!' Me

(in reply to eulero83)
Profile   Post #: 256
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 4:29:03 AM   
Powergamz1


Posts: 1927
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline 		As already pointed out, that is left over language from the common law, which is obsolete and has been superceded by the state penal code.
Same thing for the elements of burglary... they used to depend on time of day, now the code is cited based on the actions.



quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady


quote:

ORIGINAL: njlauren


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
I have seen only a few trying to make this a feminist issue..and they arent women.

I dunno, Kali seems pretty strong on it. I'm not quite sure where you stand.

In my mind this is not about her refusal to have sex. The only question is whether or not we think shooting someone dead for $150 is a "good" outcome.


No, it isn't, but what the defenders of the Texas law are missing is that it was an illicit transation, which inviolates the argument it was about protecting property. People have used the same example I did, if I gave you money for drugs, you gave me nothing for it, I don't have the right to shoot you for stealing my money, and even in texas they put people on trial for murder for doing just that, so how is this different?

Illicit transactions forfeit any property or contractual rights, because both parties are doing something illegal, it is a null and void transaction, and thus both side's property in effect is null and void (I know there are lawyers on here, I am not one, so I am probably not using the right terms). Put it this way, if the cops broke up this transaction, or a drug deal, the guy wouldn't get back his 150 bucks.




While I do agree with you, and we certainly don't have anywhere near enough information about this case to really conclude anything, I think that the jury was simply looking at her taking the money and leaving. This bizarre and ridiculous law gives him permission (in a sense) to shoot her for that. Because it was after dark, making it really ridiculous. Had they met in daylight and she did this, he would have had no statute to use as a defense.

Essentially, you can shoot a thief at night, but not during the day. What sense does that make?



_____________________________

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" Anthony McLeod Kennedy

" About damn time...wooot!!' Me

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 257
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 4:31:32 AM   
Powergamz1


Posts: 1927
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline 		And once again, you are making up your own legal definitions and jumping to wild conclusions based on media hype.


quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

Actually, you are lumping all self defense *when your life is in danger* laws, under the heading of SYG.




Actually I'm not. This had NOTHING to do with self defense and everything to do with a law that says you can use deadly force when there is no logical reason for it. Much like SYG, and all the other shit.




_____________________________

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" Anthony McLeod Kennedy

" About damn time...wooot!!' Me

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 258
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 5:05:34 AM   
Brutalessons


Posts: 21
Joined: 7/3/2012
Status: offline 		Well I have just spent some hours now reading through all of these posts here and seeing the deflections for and against everything from Stand your ground and Self Defense laws, to contractual obligations and definitions of theft, to whether a law that specifys a certain condition, ie night time has relevance or is indeed superfluous in this day and age...

And all ignoring the simple fact, as stated in the various articles on the case that the man was acquitted because the jury felt that The suspect never Intended" to kill the escort. And Intent is a key word because it is the defining Motive that takes a murder from 3rd degree to 1st or separates Manslaughter from Murder.

My read is that the States Prosecuting team pushed for Murder in this case and did not allow for a lesser sentence, then was forced to try to Prove an intent that was not existent. It is very probable, even in Texas. that if the Jury had been allowed the option of convicting on a lesser charge, anything from negligent manslaughter to 3rd degree Murder, a conviction would have been a possibility. However, it is the prosecutors and the DA's office that has to include those possibilities and options in a criminal prosecution, and without them, we have this.

This has very little to do with the odd law the defense used as a defense, and while such a law might seem ludicrous to someone sitting in a Uber-metropolis with the scream of police sirens a constant background cacophony, It begins making a lot more sense when your nearest neighbor is 1 mile away and your entire life and livelihood is tied to the workings of your own hands and sweat, or the knowledge that any form of "law enforcement" support will require a 30-40 minute response. Just as your average urban dweller has difficulty in imagining that kind of "Need" the person in that rural condition would think some of the odd laws that are Germaine only to an urban environment to be similarly ludicrous and frivolous.

In the end, it is the Prosecutors office, in a capitol case that lays out the charges upon which the accused will be charged, tried and punished under. In this case, they failed to prove the facts of the case met the definition of the Crime they were charging for. The defense's use of the "after dark" clause is a red herring as are discussions of SYG, Self defense, etc. The charge was murder in the 2nd degree which requires proven Intent, and in this case, that was absent.

< Message edited by Brutalessons -- 6/9/2013 5:06:27 AM >

(in reply to Powergamz1)
Profile   Post #: 259
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 5:08:41 AM   
eulero83


Posts: 1470
Joined: 11/4/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

th ewoman had the opportunity to give him the money back. it is not about enforcing an illegal agreement. It is about her taking money that did not belong to her and no agreement existed. Either way you lose on this one.


Where exactly in the article did he demand his money back before shooting her? If you have found a more detailed article, please by all means share it with us. However, keep it to articles relating specifically about this case as opposed to your typical post that takes up an entire page with pictures of things having nothing to do with the OP.



I answer to Real0ne, too.
I don't know if it's different in your legal system, but in italy this would not have been theft as intention is mandatory for the conduct to be criminal so the voluntary action of giving the prostitute the money by the man discharge her from a theft accuse, he used deadly force in a quarrel. So to me it's not relevant if he asked them back because this was not even theft. But maybe it's different in the usa I don't know.

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 260
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094