| Author | Post |
|---|
NavyLT
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 03:53 am |
|
bugly wrote: We can argue this point till the cows come home, but the fact remains that if you are requested to show ID, it just seems proper to show it. If you are carrying OC, it might show the appointed "good guys" that you are a stand-up kind of guy and have nothing to hide. Being belligerent has gotten me in more krap than being reasonable, and don't we all want the LEOs to trust us as much as they want to be trusted?
I'm not saying one should act like a subject, rather, it is more amicable to be honest and not appear to be hiding anything. Yes, I get it, there is a clause in the 4th Amdt. that precludes you from having to be subjected to "unreasonable searches and seizures", however, the LEO may think what he is doing is reasonable and it might be part of an ongoing investigation where you might even fit the profile of the one being sought. Go ahead, make an ass of yourself and refuse to show ID, the police and the state legislature might decide that open carry makes people into jerks and they might decide to pen some legislation against it. I don't know...
I'm a busy guy, I work 6 days a week for at least 10 hours a day, but if I'm stopped on the side of the road walking or I'm pulled over, I don't act like I'm in a rush to go somewhere and I certainly don't try to be the territorial type of jerkwad that some posters are trying to portray themselves as.
So you find it perfectly acceptable for a cop to stop you, a law abiding citizen doing nothing wrong and demand to see "your papers?!?" And then what if the cop wants to disarm you because you are doing nothing other than carrying? And then what if the cop wants to hand cuff you in the interest of officer safety while he asks you who you are and what you are doing carrying the gun that way? What if two or three cops decide to tackle you on the way out of Wal Mart because some nilly called 911 about a lunatic with a gun?
All of that has happened to perfectly law abiding citizens doing absolutely nothing wrong. So where do you draw the line? Unless a cop has actual Reasonable and Articulatable Suspicion that we are actually committing a real crime or have recently committed a real crime, we have every right, as American Citizens, for the cops to leave us the hell alone.
|
bugly
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 04:15 am |
|
NavyLT wrote: bugly wrote: We can argue this point till the cows come home, but the fact remains that if you are requested to show ID, it just seems proper to show it. If you are carrying OC, it might show the appointed "good guys" that you are a stand-up kind of guy and have nothing to hide. Being belligerent has gotten me in more krap than being reasonable, and don't we all want the LEOs to trust us as much as they want to be trusted?
I'm not saying one should act like a subject, rather, it is more amicable to be honest and not appear to be hiding anything. Yes, I get it, there is a clause in the 4th Amdt. that precludes you from having to be subjected to "unreasonable searches and seizures", however, the LEO may think what he is doing is reasonable and it might be part of an ongoing investigation where you might even fit the profile of the one being sought. Go ahead, make an ass of yourself and refuse to show ID, the police and the state legislature might decide that open carry makes people into jerks and they might decide to pen some legislation against it. I don't know...
I'm a busy guy, I work 6 days a week for at least 10 hours a day, but if I'm stopped on the side of the road walking or I'm pulled over, I don't act like I'm in a rush to go somewhere and I certainly don't try to be the territorial type of jerkwad that some posters are trying to portray themselves as.
So you find it perfectly acceptable for a cop to stop you, a law abiding citizen doing nothing wrong and demand to see "your papers?!?" And then what if the cop wants to disarm you because you are doing nothing other than carrying? And then what if the cop wants to hand cuff you in the interest of officer safety while he asks you who you are and what you are doing carrying the gun that way? What if two or three cops decide to tackle you on the way out of Wal Mart because some nilly called 911 about a lunatic with a gun?
All of that has happened to perfectly law abiding citizens doing absolutely nothing wrong. So where do you draw the line? Unless a cop has actual Reasonable and Articulatable Suspicion that we are actually committing a real crime or have recently committed a real crime, we have every right, as American Citizens, for the cops to leave us the hell alone.
So, I guess in Oak Harbor that's a big problem? I lve in the hilltop neighborhood of Tacoma, I have had ZERO run-ins with the police there or anywhere else recently. Maybe it's because I don't act weird around people or look like I'm up to something.
Funny, I look like a hoodlum, (a rather aged one, since I'm in my mid-forties) I have tattoos, I'm 6 foot tall about 205, and still the police seem to ignore me no matter what I'm doing. Maybe I'm invisible? I open carry to work and around when I go places, and still ZERO problems. In fact I've had people ask me a lot of questions on which guns are most reliable and what the laws are on open and concealed carry. My apartment manager LOVES the fact that I and a few others openly carry. So, where's this problem with being stopped? Are you being a normal Citizen or acting like a punk? Why would a professional police officer bother with me when there are REAL problems out there? Grow up and act right and this entire post will be a moot point.
|
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 05:19 am |
|
bugly wrote: NavyLT wrote: bugly wrote: We can argue this point till the cows come home, but the fact remains that if you are requested to show ID, it just seems proper to show it. If you are carrying OC, it might show the appointed "good guys" that you are a stand-up kind of guy and have nothing to hide. Being belligerent has gotten me in more krap than being reasonable, and don't we all want the LEOs to trust us as much as they want to be trusted?
I'm not saying one should act like a subject, rather, it is more amicable to be honest and not appear to be hiding anything. Yes, I get it, there is a clause in the 4th Amdt. that precludes you from having to be subjected to "unreasonable searches and seizures", however, the LEO may think what he is doing is reasonable and it might be part of an ongoing investigation where you might even fit the profile of the one being sought. Go ahead, make an ass of yourself and refuse to show ID, the police and the state legislature might decide that open carry makes people into jerks and they might decide to pen some legislation against it. I don't know...
I'm a busy guy, I work 6 days a week for at least 10 hours a day, but if I'm stopped on the side of the road walking or I'm pulled over, I don't act like I'm in a rush to go somewhere and I certainly don't try to be the territorial type of jerkwad that some posters are trying to portray themselves as.
So you find it perfectly acceptable for a cop to stop you, a law abiding citizen doing nothing wrong and demand to see "your papers?!?" And then what if the cop wants to disarm you because you are doing nothing other than carrying? And then what if the cop wants to hand cuff you in the interest of officer safety while he asks you who you are and what you are doing carrying the gun that way? What if two or three cops decide to tackle you on the way out of Wal Mart because some nilly called 911 about a lunatic with a gun?
All of that has happened to perfectly law abiding citizens doing absolutely nothing wrong. So where do you draw the line? Unless a cop has actual Reasonable and Articulatable Suspicion that we are actually committing a real crime or have recently committed a real crime, we have every right, as American Citizens, for the cops to leave us the hell alone.
So, I guess in Oak Harbor that's a big problem? I lve in the hilltop neighborhood of Tacoma, I have had ZERO run-ins with the police there or anywhere else recently. Maybe it's because I don't act weird around people or look like I'm up to something.
Funny, I look like a hoodlum, (a rather aged one, since I'm in my mid-forties) I have tattoos, I'm 6 foot tall about 205, and still the police seem to ignore me no matter what I'm doing. Maybe I'm invisible? I open carry to work and around when I go places, and still ZERO problems. In fact I've had people ask me a lot of questions on which guns are most reliable and what the laws are on open and concealed carry. My apartment manager LOVES the fact that I and a few others openly carry. So, where's this problem with being stopped? Are you being a normal Citizen or acting like a punk? Why would a professional police officer bother with me when there are REAL problems out there? Grow up and act right and this entire post will be a moot point.
Is it just me that has major problems with this. So you think someone is making an ass of himself for excercising his rights? Sorry to say this is the sad state this country is coming to when people are brainwashed into cooperating with the police state for our own good that Navylt mentioned.
I am glad you have never been harrassed for carrying that should be no basis of telling other "hey its not so bad surrender your rights" . I have not been harrassed for carrying by LEO either I have at other times, and I tried to play the good cooperative guy and it worked against me each time, one time was the kirkland incident I had posted on another thread, every time the lawyer said I should have never volunteered any information.
|
Tawnos
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 507 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 06:06 am |
|
bugly wrote: We can argue this point till the cows come home, but the fact remains that if you are requested to show ID, it just seems proper to show it. If you are carrying OC, it might show the appointed "good guys" that you are a stand-up kind of guy and have nothing to hide. Being belligerent has gotten me in more krap than being reasonable, and don't we all want the LEOs to trust us as much as they want to be trusted?
I'm not saying one should act like a subject, rather, it is more amicable to be honest and not appear to be hiding anything. Yes, I get it, there is a clause in the 4th Amdt. that precludes you from having to be subjected to "unreasonable searches and seizures", however, the LEO may think what he is doing is reasonable and it might be part of an ongoing investigation where you might even fit the profile of the one being sought. Go ahead, make an ass of yourself and refuse to show ID, the police and the state legislature might decide that open carry makes people into jerks and they might decide to pen some legislation against it. I don't know...
I'm a busy guy, I work 6 days a week for at least 10 hours a day, but if I'm stopped on the side of the road walking or I'm pulled over, I don't act like I'm in a rush to go somewhere and I certainly don't try to be the territorial type of jerkwad that some posters are trying to portray themselves as.
When OC, I often carry no ID. How is it making an ass of myself for refusing to say where I live, or how old I am? I give my name and phone number, the least required to procure FOIA information. Anything else can be used as a basis for discrimination, my address can put officers near my place looking to ticket me for violations, real or perceived. My age can cause my to be subjected to ageism (you're too young! raaah!). The fact is, I have no reason to give anything to officers who are requesting it without legal reason.
|
NavyLT
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 04:19 pm |
|
bugly wrote:
So, I guess in Oak Harbor that's a big problem? I lve in the hilltop neighborhood of Tacoma, I have had ZERO run-ins with the police there or anywhere else recently. Maybe it's because I don't act weird around people or look like I'm up to something.
Funny, I look like a hoodlum, (a rather aged one, since I'm in my mid-forties) I have tattoos, I'm 6 foot tall about 205, and still the police seem to ignore me no matter what I'm doing. Maybe I'm invisible? I open carry to work and around when I go places, and still ZERO problems. In fact I've had people ask me a lot of questions on which guns are most reliable and what the laws are on open and concealed carry. My apartment manager LOVES the fact that I and a few others openly carry. So, where's this problem with being stopped? Are you being a normal Citizen or acting like a punk? Why would a professional police officer bother with me when there are REAL problems out there? Grow up and act right and this entire post will be a moot point.
No, in Oak Harbor it is not a big problem. It WAS a small problem, once. And a responsible open carrier, stood his ground with the police (for the most part, although he did cave in and show ID), followed up with the police to show them their error, several members of this forum came a long way to lend support, and we kept it from becoming a big problem. However, that same OC'er did tell the cop he was full of doo doo, did tell the cop he was not going to cover up his gun, and did tell the cop to just cut through the B.S. and make an arrest if he actually believed that any law was broken, but I guess that was being an ass.
The only way we are going to keep this from becoming a big problem is if we do what we can when it is still a little problem to insist that cops actually follow laws they are guided by as well.
Last edited on Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 04:20 pm by NavyLT
|
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 04:28 pm |
|
| Well put NavyLt....and good job handling your encounter.
|
bugly
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 06:11 pm |
|
So, I'm to hold my ground, get either beaten or arrested and have to go through the legal process to prove a point?
Sorry, I think it better to NOT be confrontational, and if my rights are violated, I do follow up with the department and make sure it sticks.
The issue at hand is whether or not to show ID, not to show your "papers", et-al...
There are far better reasons to be confrontational with others, this is not, IMHO, one of those. Perhaps my parents raised me to be respectful of authority figures (including police officers), and some of yours didn't, that doesn't change the fact you should at least be courteous to someone who could very easily lock you up and make up a story about you that you can not refute. (It could happen, and I'm not saying it does very often).
Good for all of you that stand up for your rights, it makes things soooo much easier for the rest of us, now that we're labeled as "radicals", or "wackos"
|
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 07:11 pm |
|
The idea is not to be confrontational, don't get me wrong. It is to calmly assert your 'Authority' remember respect is a two way street, and these "authorities" work for us. If they make it confrontational, that is their problem. But if you initially refuse unlawful requests, and are demanded to show your I.D. (wich is your papers) then you have a case in court for the violation of the 4th. But if you immediately acquies to requests of officers than you don't, you gave up your rights.
I am not trying to berate or demean your stance, you do what you feel is best for you. But your compromising, does enable the polices feelings they have the right to do what they are doing.
|
compmanio365
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 07:18 pm |
|
bugly wrote: So, I'm to hold my ground, get either beaten or arrested and have to go through the legal process to prove a point?
Sorry, I think it better to NOT be confrontational, and if my rights are violated, I do follow up with the department and make sure it sticks.
The issue at hand is whether or not to show ID, not to show your "papers", et-al...
There are far better reasons to be confrontational with others, this is not, IMHO, one of those. Perhaps my parents raised me to be respectful of authority figures (including police officers), and some of yours didn't, that doesn't change the fact you should at least be courteous to someone who could very easily lock you up and make up a story about you that you can not refute. (It could happen, and I'm not saying it does very often).
Good for all of you that stand up for your rights, it makes things soooo much easier for the rest of us, now that we're labeled as "radicals", or "wackos"
Yup, cause damn it all, freedom is a "radical" and "wacko" idea. Better just hand over those papers, Comrade.
|
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 07:35 pm |
|
Look Bugly don't get discouraged because others don't feel the same as you do. I hope you are open carrying because in just doing that you are standing up for a right you are making a statement. That encourages me, but personally my feelings are if we don't stand up to unlawful orders, who will.
Get your toes wet slowly, don't just jump in if not comfortable. I think you will find once you assert yourself once it gets easier and you feel better and liberated. Similar to open carrying, the first few times might be a little nerve wracking, but after awhile its natural and liberating.
|
Phssthpok
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 702 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 06:31 pm |
|
ShooterMcGavin wrote: RCW 9A.76.020
Obstructing a law enforcement officer.
(1) A person is guilty of obstructing a law enforcement officer if the person willfully hinders, delays, or obstructs any law enforcement officer in the discharge of his or her official powers or duties.
One of a LEO's duties is to investigate situations. Therefore, if you are holding back your driver's license when requested (i.e. 'investigating'), it could be argued that you are obstructing a LEO in the discharge of his duties. Right?
I would then suppose one could claim that any excercise of your rights is an obstruction of justice. They certainly don't make these laws easy to follow and retain your rights!
Look at it this way.
If the officer is investigating a set of circumstances regarding a particular situation (say..a Qwikee-mart holdup), and you match the description, but cannot provide an alibi, then your specific identity should not be a factor in the investigation. It wouldn't matter. The officer could detain you (he WOULD have valid RAS at this point) for the purposes of returning you to the scene of the crime for visual ID by the victim. Again, your name, age, and address have no bearing on this situation at this point.
Note also, that the fifth protects you from being compelled to provide evidence against yourself, so if you ARE the one who help up the Qwikee-mart, you wouldn't have an (honest) alibi, but you also could not be arrested for 'obstruction' simply because you kept your yap shut! They can detain you for further investigation, but they cannot force you to provide any information yourself.
Same goes for your ID; if it is a direct factor in the investigation (you were NAMED as the robber) then being forced to provide ID would violate the fifth as it would incriminate you. SCOTUS said as much in Hiible.
|
Washintonian_For_Liberty
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 07:07 pm |
|
bugly wrote: NavyLT wrote: bugly wrote: We can argue this point till the cows come home, but the fact remains that if you are requested to show ID, it just seems proper to show it. If you are carrying OC, it might show the appointed "good guys" that you are a stand-up kind of guy and have nothing to hide. Being belligerent has gotten me in more krap than being reasonable, and don't we all want the LEOs to trust us as much as they want to be trusted?
I'm not saying one should act like a subject, rather, it is more amicable to be honest and not appear to be hiding anything. Yes, I get it, there is a clause in the 4th Amdt. that precludes you from having to be subjected to "unreasonable searches and seizures", however, the LEO may think what he is doing is reasonable and it might be part of an ongoing investigation where you might even fit the profile of the one being sought. Go ahead, make an ass of yourself and refuse to show ID, the police and the state legislature might decide that open carry makes people into jerks and they might decide to pen some legislation against it. I don't know...
I'm a busy guy, I work 6 days a week for at least 10 hours a day, but if I'm stopped on the side of the road walking or I'm pulled over, I don't act like I'm in a rush to go somewhere and I certainly don't try to be the territorial type of jerkwad that some posters are trying to portray themselves as.
So you find it perfectly acceptable for a cop to stop you, a law abiding citizen doing nothing wrong and demand to see "your papers?!?" And then what if the cop wants to disarm you because you are doing nothing other than carrying? And then what if the cop wants to hand cuff you in the interest of officer safety while he asks you who you are and what you are doing carrying the gun that way? What if two or three cops decide to tackle you on the way out of Wal Mart because some nilly called 911 about a lunatic with a gun?
All of that has happened to perfectly law abiding citizens doing absolutely nothing wrong. So where do you draw the line? Unless a cop has actual Reasonable and Articulatable Suspicion that we are actually committing a real crime or have recently committed a real crime, we have every right, as American Citizens, for the cops to leave us the hell alone.
So, I guess in Oak Harbor that's a big problem? I lve in the hilltop neighborhood of Tacoma, I have had ZERO run-ins with the police there or anywhere else recently. Maybe it's because I don't act weird around people or look like I'm up to something.
Funny, I look like a hoodlum, (a rather aged one, since I'm in my mid-forties) I have tattoos, I'm 6 foot tall about 205, and still the police seem to ignore me no matter what I'm doing. Maybe I'm invisible? I open carry to work and around when I go places, and still ZERO problems. In fact I've had people ask me a lot of questions on which guns are most reliable and what the laws are on open and concealed carry. My apartment manager LOVES the fact that I and a few others openly carry. So, where's this problem with being stopped? Are you being a normal Citizen or acting like a punk? Why would a professional police officer bother with me when there are REAL problems out there? Grow up and act right and this entire post will be a moot point.
Bugly, have you even read my thread on my detainment? It is a problem in more places than people think. Just because you've had zero problems does not mean others have not. It is because we stand up for our rights that people like you never encounter what WE fight to stop. If we never stood up for our rights, you would have problems. It is in all likelihood that someone came before you as the trailblazer and dealt with the problem so all those to follow would not have the same issue.
Don't be so quick to give up your rights... because they'll just keep encroaching further and further until you have no rights left.
|
bugly
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 08:04 pm |
|
I'm just failing to see where answering a simple question (should that occasion arise) is a violation of my rights. I do have the right to refuse, but also the right to comply if I so wish. I don't think identifying myself is a problem, nor do I think it's a violation of my rights. The officer has a badge, clearly stating who he is......
If, however, an officer were to be a jerk toward me when asking, or decides I am somewhere I am not supposed to be, screw 'em, I wouldn't give him time of day in that case. Most of the times I've been asked it's been polite and calmly asked, so I don't have issues with that. Seems I'm the only one here that's been treated with civility or something, since the rest of you guys want to act medieval when confronted.
|
NavyLT
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 08:18 pm |
|
bugly wrote: I'm just failing to see where answering a simple question (should that occasion arise) is a violation of my rights. I do have the right to refuse, but also the right to comply if I so wish. I don't think identifying myself is a problem, nor do I think it's a violation of my rights. The officer has a badge, clearly stating who he is......
If, however, an officer were to be a jerk toward me when asking, or decides I am somewhere I am not supposed to be, screw 'em, I wouldn't give him time of day in that case. Most of the times I've been asked it's been polite and calmly asked, so I don't have issues with that. Seems I'm the only one here that's been treated with civility or something, since the rest of you guys want to act medieval when confronted.
bugly,
The biggest point we are trying to make is that we are NOT acting medieval, we are NOT being jerks, we are NOT being confrontational, we are NOT being any of those things. All we are saying is that we, as law abiding Americans, have every right to be left the hell alone by the cops, regardless of if the customer sitting across the restaurant from us is comfortable or not. Every time you have responded, you have called us some kind of name, or said we were acting in some way inappropriately. Why is it so difficult to admit that the inappropriate behavior that we are talking about is on the part of the police?
First it starts with, "Who are you?" Then it moves to, "Can I see some ID?" Then it moves to, "Can I see your CPL (for open carrying!)" Then it's "You know you could lose this CPL". Then "How about you just cover it up." Followed by, "Maybe you should just leave." It doesn't matter if the cop is as sweet and nice as can be and is wearing an Easter bonnet. What matters is that we have every right to shop, and eat, and watch a movie, unmolested by the police as anyone else does.
|
bugly
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 08:29 pm |
|
Understood, but if you look at a lot of the posts on this thread, the responses have been advocating opposition to the police. They are NOT the bad guys. Some are just doing what they think is best for society, I know not all of them are like that, but I figure I have nothing to hide and will continue to be courteous toward them as long as they are the same toward me. Asking for my ID is not, IMHO unreasonable, since I am carrying a deadly weapon on my side. I figure that if we were all more friendly toward the police, they will eventually understand that we are not bad guys either. It's a give and take situation.
Yes, it seems to be a PITA to show ID, but its no different that showing it to a cashier when you purchase with a credit card or you're buying an age-restricted item.
The name-calling is a bit over the top, but understand that many people out there refuse to see that there is a problem with refusing to cooperate with LEOs when they are just doing their job. I have seen people who are not carrying anything asked for their ID many times and what's the difference in those cases?
|
compmanio365
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 08:34 pm |
|
Sorry bugly, but they ARE the "bad guy" IMHO. Police are the standing army the founding fathers warned us about, and now we are forced to deal with them and fight them to exercise our rights at every turn. Them "just doing their job" conflicts with MY rights. They swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, and they violate that oath every time they harass a law abiding OCer just because they are "doing their job". I don't buy it, and it's sad that you have so willingly played along with their statist game to circumvent your rights without a fight.
|
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 08:55 pm |
|
| And I don't think any of us here opose the police when they are carrying out their duties we hire them to do within the scope of the law and our rights. If they step outside that scope, yes oppose, that is our civil duty. In my opinion.
|
bugly
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 09:11 pm |
|
Now we're coming closer to the point. Absolutely oppose when the scope of authority is breached. A simple ID request is not that breach. When it becomes more, such as; "I need to run your info", even though you've done nothing, force them to comply with the law by asking them what you're being charged with. If they refuse, you have them by the 'nads. But until there is a REAL breach in confidence with them, thee is no reason to be confrontational, it just makes it harder for the rest of us to continue open carrying without harassment. If all the police see when they talk to open carryers is; confrontation and refusal to even be civil, they WILL step up the harassment and they WILL make it difficult to even own guns, since this is becoming a more liberal, tree-hugging state. Note I said difficult, not impossible, they do have the means to shut down manufacture of guns and place restrictions on ammunition supply.
All I'm saying is; don't screw it up for the rest of us by trying to be a tough guy when the cops want to talk to you. after a stop or two (if that even happens) they'll get to know who you are by sight and leave you alone for good. If you confront them or decide to be a hard case, they WILL harass you and like I said before, they'll recognise your face.
|
NavyLT
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 09:30 pm |
|
bugly wrote: Now we're coming closer to the point. Absolutely oppose when the scope of authority is breached. A simple ID request is not that breach.
The US Supreme Court has said that is a breach.
|
antispam540
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 10:55 pm |
|
NavyLT wrote: bugly wrote: Now we're coming closer to the point. Absolutely oppose when the scope of authority is breached. A simple ID request is not that breach.
The US Supreme Court has said that is a breach.
+1
|
Current time is 01:39 am | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|
|
|
