Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: AND WHY ?


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: AND WHY ? Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:00:09 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline 		And before you start all the crap about getting killed with knives etc, the survival rate of being shot is much lower than a knife wound AND if you aren't near your assailant you aren't likely to die like you could from a distance by a gun.

I wasn't taking about the assault rate going up because of those weapons, I was talking about the murder rate doubling because of the people killed with knives and clubs, there was no increase in the firearm crimes. Thus, according to you, since the murder was doubled because of these weapons the assualt rate must have gone up even more. And the last time I checked a person with their head smashed in with a tire iron is just as dead as one who is shot.

_____________________________

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 freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:00:12 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

And leaves out one very important detail.
The crime rate since those laws were passed are no lower than they were beforehand, the laws had no effect.
New Zeland had a "massacre" at the about same time if anything expanded gun rights, and have had as good a result as Australia.

You really ought to learn to read critically instead of imposing your own ideas into what others write. I said nothing about the crime rate in Australia. Go back and read again.

Secondly, your comments about the gun ban in Washington D.C. and the homicide rate are bogus.

the gun ban was passed in c1976. The homicide rate began to spike upwards in c1986. It peaked around 1992. After that it dropped precipitously and was already equal to the low 1976 rate when the Court ruled in Heller in 2013(?) So, the gun ban and homicides in DC are not correlated in any way.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:00:23 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Yes.
With the caveat that each and every firearm is individually registered and licensed (unlike the US).


So that the government can easily collect them when they want.
Don't dismiss this as paranoia, CA, NY and Conn. have all done this.

Sure they could.
But we have no fear that they would do that.
You guys are paranoid they might take away your toys.

Guns aren't banned in CA or NY and they haven't gone round collecting them have they.

Makes your argument moot.
And yes, it is very much paranoia.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:02:13 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

And before you start all the crap about getting killed with knives etc, the survival rate of being shot is much lower than a knife wound AND if you aren't near your assailant you aren't likely to die like you could from a distance by a gun.

I wasn't taking about the assault rate going up because of those weapons, I was talking about the murder rate doubling because of the people killed with knives and clubs, there was no increase in the firearm crimes. Thus, according to you, since the murder was doubled because of these weapons the assualt rate must have gone up even more. And the last time I checked a person with their head smashed in with a tire iron is just as dead as one who is shot.

I wasn't talking assault either.
You do like to twist words.

A few hundred (if that) bashed to death.
Several THOUSANDS shot.
No contest.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:03:38 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline 		Uh, folks, a bit of useful information:

Mass shooting deaths from January 2009 through December 2015 in the US: 396

Mass shooting deaths from January 2009 through December 2015 in France: 540

In France, to buy a firearm, a hunting licence or a shooting sport license is necessary. All semi-automatic rifles with a capacity greater than 3 rounds, all handguns and all rifles chambered in 'military' calibers, including bolt action, require permits. These are known as B1, B2 and B4 type permits. Firearms are divided into eight categories that determine the regulations that apply to their possession and use. France also sets limits on the number of cartridges that can be kept at home (1000 rounds per gun).

And lets fact facts, France has some pretty restrictive gun laws, but those laws did not prevent those deaths in mass shootings, now did they?

All the shootings in France involved military style assault rifles with high capacity magazines, and most likely all of those weapons came into the country from outside.

So, logic thus implies that banning or placing even more strict guidelines on who can purchase and what they can purchase is not a perfect solution, nor does it eliminate gun crime.

So the argument 'less guns equals less crime" is not necessarily true.

So, then the argument is "there is more gun crimes in the US because anyone can go and buy a gun."

Again, not true, accurate, or even remotely accurate.

However, once more, lawmakers around the world have stated that the US has one of the most comprehensive set of firearms regulations in the industrialized world.

The problem is not the lack of laws, but the enforcement of the laws we have.

Back ground checks are great, except that the reporting of the very things that would prevent someone from buying a gun are not mandatory. It is strictly voluntary, and not even at the state level but at the local level as well.

But what really gets me is the fact that the Americans who are screaming "ban guns" are the same shit brained idiots who scream "invasion of privacy" every time some congressman introduces a law to make it mandatory to report people who have been diagnosed with a mental illness that has a high incidence of violence associated with it.

Yeah, President Obama signed an order that enabled doctors to report this information, meaning he signed an executive order that states that doctors cannot be sued because they reported the information.

But it still did not make it mandatory.

But it IS mandatory for a person who had his driver's license suspended for repeatedly being arrested for driving while intoxicated (even if that person had never been involved in an accident of any kind) to a national data base which insures that person will not be issued a license in any other state.

The anti gun people agree with that since it is a matter of 'public safety.'

It sure as hell invades the privacy of that individual.

Hell if your license is suspended for an unpaid traffic ticket, you cant get a license in another state for as long as ten years.

So, why is drunk driving conviction related license suspension a matter of public safety but the reporting of a person with a mental illness linked to violence not one?


_____________________________

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 #: 85
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:04:55 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Please explain to me how a nation wide gun ban would have kept all those people (and this is where the crime increase came from) in DC from being beaten and stabbed to death, as opposed to opening people in the rest of the country to the same fate.

Crime increase, yes.
Deaths from stabbings, yes.
Subtract the deaths and serious injuries from gun use..... pales into insignificance.

A small increase in a small number is still small.
A near complete eradication of a huge number makes a big difference.
You guys just can't see that.


You haven't been paying attention at all.
The increase in violence doubled, strickly do to the increase in knife and club murders. They exceeded the number of firearm murders in DC. Contrary to your mythology the numbers did not pale in significance, they turned DC into the most dangerous city in the country. What does it take to get this through your head.

_____________________________

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 freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:04:56 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

DGU is a specific US term, but no.
If you shoot someone, for whatever reason (even in self-defense), if that person dies, the shooter faces a murder charge.
If it can be proved that it was a justified defense, that sentence is very likely to be commuted to a suspended sentence of manslaughter or dismissed altogether.
There is no automatic right to self defense with a firearm.

Be honest, there is no right to self defense, that alone makes your laws a violation of human rights. Even a dog has the right of self defense.

Again, twisting words.

Read what I typed.
There is no automatic right to self defense with a firearm.

_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:06:44 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Not here, no.
They were effectively banned in 1997.
And most people see no need to have one either.

That is a ban.
You have already disproved your claim.
We tried that in DC and all we got was a bunch of people stabbed and beaten to death.

Not at all.
If there were NO guns to be had, take away ALL the gun stats and see what's left.
A surprisingly small number compared to what was the total beforehand.
Think about it.


After the ban more people were knifed and beaten to death than had ever been shot in DC, think about 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 freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:06:54 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Not at all.
We are not banned from owning guns, only certain types of guns and how many.
It means we have stricter rules on what you can own and where you can use them.


You just make it very hard to own one, ban some, and tell yourself that you are only keeping them out of the hands of the wrong people, which is practically everyone. The thinking of brainwashed sheep.

Not hard to own one at all.

The difference being, we don't have a gun culture.
We don't WANT to own one.

And interestingly, even our gangs don't usually own guns of any sort - not usually.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:09:02 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

It is nobody's "job" to keep firearm ownership down to any level.
But yes, you have to justify why you want a firearm and it has to be licensed separately from other firearms.

And he had better never let the "wrong" person have one.
Same thing.
If a paper pusher has to make a decision and must prove going one way and not prove the other way he will make the safe decision. Another idea sold to sheep.

Pen pusher doesn't make any decision whether the person is to have a license or not.
If the applicant meets the criteria, they get issued with a license unless they are prohibited from having one.

Where do you get all this crap from??



_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:12:19 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Not here, no.
They were effectively banned in 1997.
And most people see no need to have one either.

That is a ban.
You have already disproved your claim.
We tried that in DC and all we got was a bunch of people stabbed and beaten to death.

Not at all.
If there were NO guns to be had, take away ALL the gun stats and see what's left.
A surprisingly small number compared to what was the total beforehand.
Think about it.


After the ban more people were knifed and beaten to death than had ever been shot in DC, think about it.

Cite please??

ETA: According to the Washington Post, there were 220 homicides in DC so far in 2016.
22 by beating.
29 by stabbing.
153 by shooting.
Check it out

That seems to disprove your premise.
Think about it.


< Message edited by freedomdwarf1 -- 9/26/2016 1:24:44 PM >

_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:24:40 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Not here, no.
They were effectively banned in 1997.
And most people see no need to have one either.

That is a ban.
You have already disproved your claim.
We tried that in DC and all we got was a bunch of people stabbed and beaten to death.

Not at all.
If there were NO guns to be had, take away ALL the gun stats and see what's left.
A surprisingly small number compared to what was the total beforehand.
Think about it.


After the ban more people were knifed and beaten to death than had ever been shot in DC, think about it.

Cite please??

You claim to know so much about the stats here you cite.
The between the time of the ban and 2000 the murder rate with firearms was unchanged, but the murder rate doubled. I am telling you what actually happened you are giving me pie in the sky wishful thinking.
If you don't have these figures how are you so sure it
A Failed
B That the crime increase was because of "lax" laws in VA.
C And you haven't explained why, don't feel bad, neither has anyone else, why the crime rate in Va was so much lower than in DC, even in Fairfax.
Fairfax is about 2 feet away from DC.
If you have all the facts to know you are right , you already know what I am saying is true, you just don't want to face it, because it spoils your fantasy.

_____________________________

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 freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:31:01 PM   
tamaka


Posts: 5079
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


So, why is drunk driving conviction related license suspension a matter of public safety but the reporting of a person with a mental illness linked to violence not one?



Because the person with the drunk driving conviction committed a crime but the person with the mental condition (even if it is a condition that has been somehow shown that the condition can be linked to violence) did not commit a crime and should not be discriminated against.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 1:33:36 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Not here, no.
They were effectively banned in 1997.
And most people see no need to have one either.

That is a ban.
You have already disproved your claim.
We tried that in DC and all we got was a bunch of people stabbed and beaten to death.

Not at all.
If there were NO guns to be had, take away ALL the gun stats and see what's left.
A surprisingly small number compared to what was the total beforehand.
Think about it.


After the ban more people were knifed and beaten to death than had ever been shot in DC, think about it.

Cite please??

You claim to know so much about the stats here you cite.
The between the time of the ban and 2000 the murder rate with firearms was unchanged, but the murder rate doubled. I am telling you what actually happened you are giving me pie in the sky wishful thinking.
If you don't have these figures how are you so sure it
A Failed
B That the crime increase was because of "lax" laws in VA.
C And you haven't explained why, don't feel bad, neither has anyone else, why the crime rate in Va was so much lower than in DC, even in Fairfax.
Fairfax is about 2 feet away from DC.
If you have all the facts to know you are right , you already know what I am saying is true, you just don't want to face it, because it spoils your fantasy.

No fantasy bama.
You haven't backed up ANY of your facts.
You twist words.
Not made any legit cites.
And your figures are fantasy.

I've given you cites and facts.
Go bury your head up your ass.
You just can't imagine a world without your precious toys.
The stats all over the net prove you are wrong.

Even when you come up with something half sensible, it proves to be crap.
EG: 50% rise in a very tiny insignificant number is still a tiny insignificant number.
Near eradication of a huge number in the thousands is waaay more significant than your 50% rise in a small number.

Lets take my previous post.
Deaths by stabbing AND beating in 2016 so far is 51.
Even with a 50% rise on that figure, it's still only 76.
Deaths by shooting is 153 - more than twice the deaths by stabbing and beating together even with a 50% rise.

Maths bama. Do the maths.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 2:02:25 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Yes.
With the caveat that each and every firearm is individually registered and licensed (unlike the US).


So that the government can easily collect them when they want.
Don't dismiss this as paranoia, CA, NY and Conn. have all done this.

Sure they could.
But we have no fear that they would do that.
You guys are paranoid they might take away your toys.

Guns aren't banned in CA or NY and they haven't gone round collecting them have they.

Makes your argument moot.
And yes, it is very much paranoia.


Yes, not all of course, one kind at a time.
Again for a person who thinks they have all the facts you are remarkably ignorant.

_____________________________

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 freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 2:09:40 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

And before you start all the crap about getting killed with knives etc, the survival rate of being shot is much lower than a knife wound AND if you aren't near your assailant you aren't likely to die like you could from a distance by a gun.

I wasn't taking about the assault rate going up because of those weapons, I was talking about the murder rate doubling because of the people killed with knives and clubs, there was no increase in the firearm crimes. Thus, according to you, since the murder was doubled because of these weapons the assualt rate must have gone up even more. And the last time I checked a person with their head smashed in with a tire iron is just as dead as one who is shot.

I wasn't talking assault either.
You do like to twist words.

A few hundred (if that) bashed to death.
Several THOUSANDS shot.
No contest.


Stabbings and clubings increased to the point that even though firearm murders staid at the same rate the murder rate dubbled, can't you get it through your head that this isn't a few hundred, it is in the thousands and by 2000 while the rate with firearms was unchainged the rate with other weaoons had exceeded it. Think about it that can't mean an insignificant increase, it means a massive increase.
The DC government insisted that the ban worked because the % of murders with guns went down, attempting to deflect from the fact that if you have 80 gun murders out of 100 murders that is a higher % of murders with guns than 80 out of 200 but that in no way indicates that the program worked.

_____________________________

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 freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 2:13:45 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

DGU is a specific US term, but no.
If you shoot someone, for whatever reason (even in self-defense), if that person dies, the shooter faces a murder charge.
If it can be proved that it was a justified defense, that sentence is very likely to be commuted to a suspended sentence of manslaughter or dismissed altogether.
There is no automatic right to self defense with a firearm.

Be honest, there is no right to self defense, that alone makes your laws a violation of human rights. Even a dog has the right of self defense.

Again, twisting words.

Read what I typed.
There is no automatic right to self defense with a firearm.

So if someone breaks into my house and I run a butcher knife through his heart since I didn't use again self defense is a legitimate plea?
That is so stupid it never occured to me.
If I am defending myself it doesn't matter what tool I use, at least not to a rational person.

_____________________________

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 freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 4:08:59 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Yes.
With the caveat that each and every firearm is individually registered and licensed (unlike the US).


So that the government can easily collect them when they want.
Don't dismiss this as paranoia, CA, NY and Conn. have all done this.

Sure they could.
But we have no fear that they would do that.
You guys are paranoid they might take away your toys.

Guns aren't banned in CA or NY and they haven't gone round collecting them have they.

Makes your argument moot.
And yes, it is very much paranoia.


Yes, not all of course, one kind at a time.
Again for a person who thinks they have all the facts you are remarkably ignorant.

And how many legal guns have they 'confiscated'??
Got a figure for that??
Coz as far as I can see, CA and NY are still full of guns.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 4:12:35 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Stabbings and clubings increased to the point that even though firearm murders staid at the same rate the murder rate dubbled, can't you get it through your head that this isn't a few hundred, it is in the thousands and by 2000 while the rate with firearms was unchainged the rate with other weaoons had exceeded it. Think about it that can't mean an insignificant increase, it means a massive increase.
The DC government insisted that the ban worked because the % of murders with guns went down, attempting to deflect from the fact that if you have 80 gun murders out of 100 murders that is a higher % of murders with guns than 80 out of 200 but that in no way indicates that the program worked.

Can you cite any figures??
And of course it's ancient and old hat now.

It failed because it was designed to fail.
Just like my bubble gum example; there was no way it could ever have worked.
Unless of course you can cite some figures rather than pluck them out of thin air.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: AND WHY ? - 9/26/2016 4:17:36 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

DGU is a specific US term, but no.
If you shoot someone, for whatever reason (even in self-defense), if that person dies, the shooter faces a murder charge.
If it can be proved that it was a justified defense, that sentence is very likely to be commuted to a suspended sentence of manslaughter or dismissed altogether.
There is no automatic right to self defense with a firearm.

Be honest, there is no right to self defense, that alone makes your laws a violation of human rights. Even a dog has the right of self defense.

Again, twisting words.

Read what I typed.
There is no automatic right to self defense with a firearm.

So if someone breaks into my house and I run a butcher knife through his heart since I didn't use again self defense is a legitimate plea?
That is so stupid it never occured to me.
If I am defending myself it doesn't matter what tool I use, at least not to a rational person.

If you can prove your life was in danger or being threatened, yes, you can legitimately kill with a knife or anything else - but NOT a gun.

Why is that??
Quite simply because guns can kill at a distance rather than close combat.
Making a defense for using a gun takes a shitload more convincing that you were being threatened from a distance than at close range.
If your assailant was not near you, you can't be threatened other than by words unless you can prove they were throwing items that could kill you.
Quite simple really when you think about it.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: AND WHY ? Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   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

0.109