Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns.


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. Page: <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 12:51:13 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

As for your second sentence: No, I admit that doesn't make sense to me. The grammar of it throws me, somehow. Could you rephrase it?

The sentence, correcting a typo by adding the missing word, was...

the argument fails because its claim against prevention and protection presumes knowledge of the degree to which tyranny would exist [in] the absence of the right.

What I'm saying here is that the level of tyranny might be worse in the absence of the right, and since we cannot know the degree to which it has motivated the government to exercise a measure of cautionary restraint, there is no basis for the claim that it has been an outright failure, "a complete dud."

K.




(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 261
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 1:03:53 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
This is hard to think out, though Kirata and JLF have at least tried, rather than pointing out how powerful the regime is here. And yes I said regime. And if Bernie Sanders does not make the nomination I will say REGIME alot louder.

We almost never vote for anyone here, it is always against someone else. there was a time when people actually wanted Ron Paul and if not for the interference of the party, he might well have become President. He had nationwide support. In fact he collected more outside of Texas, because people know he is in a national institution, not a Texas one and he affects all states. I supported him even with my absolutely diametrically opposed views on abortion. bottom line is if congress does not give him an abortion bill he cannot sign it, plus there are enough people around who will not wait, and they will have the clout to get heard by a court and the law would be immediately struck down.

Bottom line is that this government is going to run out of credit. they have been out of money for a long time, and are still looking for a place to steal enough gold to give back to Germany. Just divide ten trillion by 300 million. they expect this to be paid back with our sweat and wealth, not theirs.

Right now, we got probably about two million ready to go. But they know that is not enough. So far most are relatively disenfranchised and did not even respond to the poll saying 29.4 % of registered voters that a revolution would be necessary in a few years. These people do not vote. Think of the percentage of them, think of how many people there are here and then think about the dismal voter turnout.

Actually, I think the Blacks are going to start it. The ones who work, not n_____s. The ones who are just as fine upstanding people as anyone, not druggies n shit. It seems Whites have lost that spirit to kick ass. I don't know much about anything else but I think Europeans and Asians will be on the side of the government. But see there are alot less of them now. most of the Europeans are many generations into this country and have inherited the chutzpah, and will get radical when the time comes.

Anyway, other than the demographics, we got other factors. the government will consider any such action terrorism, but there is a limit. When the military is ordered to fire into a crowd, some of them will refuse. Same with police. The ones who refuse need to get away from them right away or they will be eliminated ad they know it, which will bring them, their weapons and knowledge into our fold. I betcha Chris Dorner would be on our side.

Anyway, to all the foreigners who want to call us barbaric for having weapons, I say they are jealous. Beecause for them it is too late. When they take your guns they are never ever giving them back. And the mass of legislation they produce proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that they care not one iota for you or anyone else, but their family and friends.

They also know that they are stealing from you and fucking you over at every turn, and they know you are among the most arrogant mufukas on the planet. (that is why companies want to hire foreign workers and there are like classes on hoe to get those H1B visas for your imported servants, err, workers) they also know how many are crazy, other types of belligerent, believers of Constitution as it was written and intended, and NOT interpreted. And then there are the Rambo types, who are actually dangerous but useful. Like fire, which is how one of the founders described government.

Bottom line, you can interpret all day long. you can postulate that no resistance would be effective against this force. you can also postulate they do no wrong because lawmakers decide what is right and wrong, and that would be wrong.

But the bottom line here is if you come to take my guns, you are getting them lead first. If that is suicide by cop then fine. Sheeple give up their method of self defense, and that means from the government or the other criminals. I got fucking rights, not privileges.

Almost everyone I know agrees. Not giving them up. There is nothing anyone can say that will change that. Even shooting me will not change my stance on it, I have been shot. And back then (1985) I was so drunk that if I had a gun I would have still been shot. But still, too bad, it was my fault. It changes nothing. The Law is the Law. And the fucker who shot me, I do not want to take his gun but if I ran across him I would take his life. And not lose one minute of sleep over it. Try to kill me you better fucking succeed.

Y'all trying to say it is a love affair with guns or something, we disagree. We believe that guns area killing tool, so if you run into a situation where you have to kill someone it is better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. We know some people are a bit too careless, but so what ? SO WHAT. They and their folks die more than we who think about our actions and keep dangerous things out of the reach of children or crazy people. SO WHAT. Let them all shoot each other accidentally. Let them shoot themself three times cleaning the gun. (that might be an urban legend but it is so funny I had to include it)

Let the stupid people kill themselves, in fact help them. You know they BREED !

T^T

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 262
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 1:04:29 PM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

As for your second sentence: No, I admit that doesn't make sense to me. The grammar of it throws me, somehow. Could you rephrase it?

The sentence, correcting a typo by adding the missing word, was...

the argument fails because its claim against prevention and protection presumes knowledge of the degree to which tyranny would exist [in] the absence of the right.

What I'm saying here is that the level of tyranny might be worse in the absence of the right, and since we cannot know the degree to which it has motivated the government to exercise a measure of cautionary restraint, there is no basis for the claim that it has been an outright failure, "a complete dud."

K.






It's absurd to argue that there is no basis for the claim. There are many examples of nations where the state of democracy is just fine without having a population that is free to arm itself.


_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 263
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 1:09:10 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
Not here.

T^T

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 264
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 1:32:02 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

As for your second sentence: No, I admit that doesn't make sense to me. The grammar of it throws me, somehow. Could you rephrase it?

The sentence, correcting a typo by adding the missing word, was...

the argument fails because its claim against prevention and protection presumes knowledge of the degree to which tyranny would exist [in] the absence of the right.

What I'm saying here is that the level of tyranny might be worse in the absence of the right, and since we cannot know the degree to which it has motivated the government to exercise a measure of cautionary restraint, there is no basis for the claim that it has been an outright failure, "a complete dud."

K.






It's absurd to argue that there is no basis for the claim. There are many examples of nations where the state of democracy is just fine without having a population that is free to arm itself.




Yeah, and there are some shining examples of what happens when the citizens have no way to protect themselves, but that always eludes those that live in the contentment of the delusion that their government can be trusted.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 265
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 1:38:03 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

As for your second sentence: No, I admit that doesn't make sense to me. The grammar of it throws me, somehow. Could you rephrase it?

The sentence, correcting a typo by adding the missing word, was...

the argument fails because its claim against prevention and protection presumes knowledge of the degree to which tyranny would exist [in] the absence of the right.

What I'm saying here is that the level of tyranny might be worse in the absence of the right, and since we cannot know the degree to which it has motivated the government to exercise a measure of cautionary restraint, there is no basis for the claim that it has been an outright failure, "a complete dud."

K.






It's absurd to argue that there is no basis for the claim. There are many examples of nations where the state of democracy is just fine without having a population that is free to arm itself.




Yeah, and there are some shining examples of what happens when the citizens have no way to protect themselves, but that always eludes those that live in the contentment of the delusion that their government can be trusted.

Guns don't prevent democracy, but they can protect it.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 266
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 2:42:29 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
One more point, while it has been raised that a armed citizenry cannot possibly defeat a modern army without outside help, an armed citizenry can make the cost of trying to enforce laws that restrict basic civil and human rights quite high.

Thus the question to those who are screaming the 2nd amendment is an outdated concept becomes, "would you rather walk meekly to the hangman's noose, or fight to the bitter end, defying the tyranny that has come for you?"

Personally I would rather die fighting for what I believe in than to meekly hand it over.

But then that is the very thing that makes Americans different than every other nationality. We fought for our independence once, and the majority of us would do it again. Its kind of an "in the blood" thing.



_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 267
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 2:45:48 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
One more point, while it has been raised that a armed citizenry cannot possibly defeat a modern army without outside help, an armed citizenry can make the cost of trying to enforce laws that restrict basic civil and human rights quite high.

Yeah, we saw that movie, called the Civil War. Dont mean shit. the government will spend a trillion dollars to get you for the robbery of a one cent stamp from the post office.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 268
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 3:55:59 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

Personally I would rather die fighting for what I believe in than to meekly hand it over.


For Christ's sake, JLF ....

All that'll happen is that the US government - or an agent of one or other of its many, many security forces - will one day decide that you might actually be a problem. Then some skinny greenhorn agent, fresh out of college, will arrest you. Then a bunch of bored flunkies will raid your house and take all your guns. Or not - because you'll not have access to them any more anyway.

You won't 'die fighting'. It'll be much, much more bland, undramatic and straightforward than that. You'll simply be taken out of the equation - discreetly, quietly and efficiently. That's how the modern state works.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 269
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 4:13:30 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

Anyway, to all the foreigners who want to call us barbaric for having weapons, I say they are jealous. Beecause for them it is too late. When they take your guns they are never ever giving them back. And the mass of legislation they produce proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that they care not one iota for you or anyone else, but their family and friends.


Termy, firstly - nobody here has called American gunsters 'barbaric' for having weapons. That's just something that various American windbags bang on about, the better to keep the whole convo in their preferred comfort zone. Secondly, we all know that the State doesn't 'care for us'. The anarchists have been saying that for centuries - and the anarchists are mostly European, not American. We know this stuff.


quote:


Bottom line, you can interpret all day long. you can postulate that no resistance would be effective against this force. you can also postulate they do no wrong because lawmakers decide what is right and wrong, and that would be wrong.

But the bottom line here is if you come to take my guns, you are getting them lead first. If that is suicide by cop then fine. Sheeple give up their method of self defense, and that means from the government or the other criminals. I got fucking rights, not privileges.


How would any agent of the State take you out of the picture, Termy? Me - I'm untrained as a cop of any sort. But I would have enough sense to get you when I thought you might be lying drunk in bed, or hopping out to the shop early in the morning .... That's just me, knowing what I know about you just from these forums. Of course your government will know far more about you and your habits than I do.

It is *such a piece of cake* to eliminate an ordinary citizen who leads an ordinary sort of life, no matter how bristling with firepower he might be. Every time you go to sleep, every time you open the door to the postman, every time you chat to some agreeable-looking chap in a uniform or a suit (who doesn't look like a gangsta, or Mexican, or even black) and it doesn't cross your mind that he's a danger - all those times, your guns are worthless - because you can get arrested and that will be that.

A gun will be as useless against State power for you as my fists would be against our own - nearly always unarmed - police are here in the UK. The gun makes not one iota of a difference. It's just a feelgood thing - in the same way as my mum giving me a silver cap-gun to shoot the monsters when I was a little kid.

< Message edited by PeonForHer -- 10/28/2015 4:15:52 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 270
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 4:27:15 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

As for your second sentence: No, I admit that doesn't make sense to me. The grammar of it throws me, somehow. Could you rephrase it?

The sentence, correcting a typo by adding the missing word, was...

the argument fails because its claim against prevention and protection presumes knowledge of the degree to which tyranny would exist [in] the absence of the right.

What I'm saying here is that the level of tyranny might be worse in the absence of the right, and since we cannot know the degree to which it has motivated the government to exercise a measure of cautionary restraint, there is no basis for the claim that it has been an outright failure, "a complete dud."

K.







OK, K. But that's a very, very cautious and mild sort of a claim, depending as it does on the counterfactual in history - the great imponderable of 'how things might have been'. Myself, for any real sense of the possible truth - I'd set about comparing that to the societies of other countries of the First World but whose citizens are generally unarmed.

All I'll say is this: I know that some American gunsters are of the belief that they're able to live a vastly freer life there in the USA, due at least in part to their gun-ownership, than us here in Europe - but I don't think you'd be silly enough to make that claim, yourself.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 271
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 5:13:29 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

There are many examples of nations where the state of democracy is just fine without having a population that is free to arm itself.

Indeed, it certainly seems to be working out well for Portugal...

Anibal Cavaco Silva, Portugal’s constitutional president, has refused to appoint a Left-wing coalition government even though it secured an absolute majority in the Portuguese parliament and won a mandate to smash the austerity regime bequeathed by the EU-IMF Troika. ~UK Telegraph

K.

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 272
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 5:40:24 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

Personally I would rather die fighting for what I believe in than to meekly hand it over.


For Christ's sake, JLF ....

All that'll happen is that the US government - or an agent of one or other of its many, many security forces - will one day decide that you might actually be a problem. Then some skinny greenhorn agent, fresh out of college, will arrest you. Then a bunch of bored flunkies will raid your house and take all your guns. Or not - because you'll not have access to them any more anyway.

You won't 'die fighting'. It'll be much, much more bland, undramatic and straightforward than that. You'll simply be taken out of the equation - discreetly, quietly and efficiently. That's how the modern state works.



It is statements like that.....

Jesus, a British version of Jerry Fletcher.

There are a few of us on this board (educated opinion) that are probably far more knowledgeable about covert ops than most, both domestic and "over seas operations."

Having served in a spec ops unit during the Saint Ronald years, I can say with some degree of certainty, that you have no freaking clue.

So, I suggest, you quit talking out your ass.



_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 273
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/28/2015 6:03:05 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Anibal Cavaco Silva, Portugal’s constitutional president, has refused to appoint a Left-wing coalition government even though it secured an absolute majority in the Portuguese parliament and won a mandate to smash the austerity regime bequeathed by the EU-IMF Troika. ~UK Telegraph

Well, damn. Doesn't Silva know that's the Supreme Court's job?

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 274
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/29/2015 5:01:32 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

While not a fallacy, it's a pretty unrealistic scenario in the sense of succeeding...

Ah well, I think that if there was an over-reach of Federal power sufficiently egregious to enrage a large enough majority of Americans that they would demand a change in government and make clear their intention to resist further impositions, the Federal government would be looking at a difficult situation. To start killing its own citizens in towns and cities all across the nation would only enrage more people, and quickly erode any remaining support among members of the armed forces. I think the government would collapse long before there would be any relevance to a debate about the effectiveness of irregular warfare against organized military.

K.


Fair points, though I think a military coup in this country would be far smarter than that -- taking control of major institutions and infrastructure overnight, so you wake up in the new regime, vs. having the chance to face off in a shootout.


(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 275
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/29/2015 9:13:50 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"For Christ's sake, JLF ....

All that'll happen is that the US government - or an agent of one or other of its many, many security forces - will one day decide that you might actually be a problem. Then some skinny greenhorn agent, fresh out of college, will arrest you. Then a bunch of bored flunkies will raid your house and take all your guns. Or not - because you'll not have access to them any more anyway."

So you are fine being a serf and knowing that any descendents will be as well, maybe worse. You already need a license for a TV set, what is next ? And you think that the ONLY possibility of stemming this tide should be taken away because a few people are nuts with guns and shoot the wrong people, right ?

Well have it your way. WE DO NOT WANT IT, AND NEVER WILL.

If you want my guns, come and get them. But do it without guns, maintain your principles ! and don't forget, you get the lead parts first. Best to just stay the fuck away really.

T^T

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 276
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/30/2015 4:00:29 AM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

"For Christ's sake, JLF ....

All that'll happen is that the US government - or an agent of one or other of its many, many security forces - will one day decide that you might actually be a problem. Then some skinny greenhorn agent, fresh out of college, will arrest you. Then a bunch of bored flunkies will raid your house and take all your guns. Or not - because you'll not have access to them any more anyway."

So you are fine being a serf and knowing that any descendents will be as well, maybe worse. You already need a license for a TV set, what is next ? And you think that the ONLY possibility of stemming this tide should be taken away because a few people are nuts with guns and shoot the wrong people, right ?

Well have it your way. WE DO NOT WANT IT, AND NEVER WILL.

If you want my guns, come and get them. But do it without guns, maintain your principles ! and don't forget, you get the lead parts first. Best to just stay the fuck away really.

T^T


Er ... OK, Termy ... whatever.


_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 277
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/30/2015 6:36:20 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

One more point, while it has been raised that a armed citizenry cannot possibly defeat a modern army without outside help, an armed citizenry can make the cost of trying to enforce laws that restrict basic civil and human rights quite high.

Thus the question to those who are screaming the 2nd amendment is an outdated concept becomes, "would you rather walk meekly to the hangman's noose, or fight to the bitter end, defying the tyranny that has come for you?"

Personally I would rather die fighting for what I believe in than to meekly hand it over.

But then that is the very thing that makes Americans different than every other nationality. We fought for our independence once, and the majority of us would do it again. Its kind of an "in the blood" thing.




Fucking laughable, given the history of the world. I know history, or at least accurate history, is not your strongpoint, but even so your claim is absurd.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 278
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/30/2015 11:01:40 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

One more point, while it has been raised that a armed citizenry cannot possibly defeat a modern army without outside help, an armed citizenry can make the cost of trying to enforce laws that restrict basic civil and human rights quite high.

Thus the question to those who are screaming the 2nd amendment is an outdated concept becomes, "would you rather walk meekly to the hangman's noose, or fight to the bitter end, defying the tyranny that has come for you?"

Personally I would rather die fighting for what I believe in than to meekly hand it over.

But then that is the very thing that makes Americans different than every other nationality. We fought for our independence once, and the majority of us would do it again. Its kind of an "in the blood" thing.




Fucking laughable, given the history of the world. I know history, or at least accurate history, is not your strongpoint, but even so your claim is absurd.




Accurate history? As in that taught in the School system of the UK?

Your lack of knowledge of British Colonial Policy from the 1600's would fill volumes.



_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 279
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 10/31/2015 5:16:35 AM   
blnymph


Posts: 1598
Joined: 11/13/2010
Status: offline
trying to sum it up again:

you need your weapons for:
a) fighting another British invasion
b) being prepared for the next civil war
c) resistance against a tyrannical government (which some say you already have ...)

and

d) threatening/fighting your bad neighbours
e) killing boars (which later purposes, as I understood it so far, are, however, not covered by your constitution)

any other I missed so far?

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 280
Page:   <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. Page: <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   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

0.160