Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 67

Thread: Mandatory gun ownership laws...

  1. #1
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318

    Mandatory gun ownership laws...

    I have to admit, every time I see that a municipality has passed a mandatory gun ownership law as a crime deterrent measure, I smile a bit. I think it's an effective measure. Many words have been written crediting the possibility of Swiss neutrality to their militia, which involved mandatory ownership of rifles by citizens. But, technically speaking, isn't it just as wrong a prohibition?

    What if you took it a step further, and had a mandatory gun possession law - you had to carry in public. (of course, you would almost necessarily have to have mandatory training with this one) Surely nobody with liberty on the mind could see this as legitimately justifiable. Right?
    Advocate freedom please

  2. #2
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    I have to admit, every time I see that a municipality has passed a mandatory gun ownership law as a crime deterrent measure, I smile a bit. I think it's an effective measure. Many words have been written crediting the possibility of Swiss neutrality to their militia, which involved mandatory ownership of rifles by citizens. But, technically speaking, isn't it just as wrong a prohibition?

    What if you took it a step further, and had a mandatory gun possession law - you had to carry in public. (of course, you would almost necessarily have to have mandatory training with this one) Surely nobody with liberty on the mind could see this as legitimately justifiable. Right?
    Yep it's wrong.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161
    Nyah, the fools would soon weed themselves out in the same manner as Wild-West-gun-fighters.

    Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life. An armed society is a polite society.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Yep it's wrong.
    +1

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I guess I'm not that edumcated. I don't understand "mandatory gun control law".

    mandatory gun ownership laws? why do I want an anti to have a gun he would not otherwise own?
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 11-11-2013 at 11:12 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    I guess I'm not that edumcated. I don't understand "mandatory gun control law".
    I don't either but then again, you are the only one in the thread who's used that phrase.
    Perhaps you meant to question mandatory gun ownership laws?

    There are two cities I can think of offhand with such laws, both happen to be in Georgia.
    There's Kennesaw, of which much has been written over the last 30 years, and the newer law in Nelson, GA.

    edit: add Spring City and Virgin, UT, Cherry Tree, PA and Greenleaf, ID to that list.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 11-10-2013 at 01:03 PM.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Perhaps tyrannical, but 100% Constitutional!
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  8. #8
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Most (if not all) of those "Must Be Armed" city ordinances have enough loop holes and exceptions anyone that doesn't want to have a gun doesn't have to. It is purely symbolic; unlike Morton Grove, Peoples Democratic Republic of Illinois' ban.

  9. #9
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Most (if not all) of those "Must Be Armed" city ordinances have enough loop holes and exceptions anyone that doesn't want to have a gun doesn't have to. It is purely symbolic; unlike Morton Grove, Peoples Democratic Republic of Illinois' ban.
    Hmm that's a pretty good point, I think. I did not think about that! Thanks for reminding me of it.
    Advocate freedom please

  10. #10
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    Perhaps tyrannical, but 100% Constitutional!
    Cite.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  11. #11
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    Perhaps tyrannical, but 100% Constitutional!

    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Cite.
    Well; I suppose we could start with the Militia Act of 1792; passed by the Second US Congress made up of many of the same men that ratified the Constitution.


    the requirements of possessing:

    “a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box
    therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to
    contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty
    balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and
    provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only,
    he may appear without a knapsack.”
    Last edited by F350; 11-11-2013 at 11:22 AM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    I know of , maybe , one person who could meet the firearm requirements in the Militia Act of 1792. My AR would not be strictly constitutional under those requirements, unless we allow for a little interpretation.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Cite.
    Article 1
    Section 8
    powers over the militia
    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    Militia act of 1792

    I'd cite the anti federalist and federalist papers, but that takes a bunch of time and I think is overkill at this point.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  14. #14
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Well; I suppose we could start with the Militia Act of 1792; passed by the Second US Congress made up of many of the same men that ratified the Constitution.
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    Article 1
    Section 8
    powers over the militia
    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    Militia act of 1792

    I'd cite the anti federalist and federalist papers, but that takes a bunch of time and I think is overkill at this point.
    This doesn't make it "constitutional" to mandate gun ownership.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  15. #15
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    This doesn't make it "constitutional" to mandate gun ownership.
    Here I'll help with your reading comprehension...

    Well; I suppose we could start with the Militia Act of 1792; passed by the Second US Congress made up of many of the same men that ratified the Constitution.
    I think they probably had a better grasp of what was constitutional than you do. You could also read The Federalist Papers, particularly # 29 by Hamilton.
    Last edited by F350; 11-12-2013 at 12:41 PM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Here I'll help with your reading comprehension...



    I think they probably had a better grasp of what was constitutional than you do. You could also read The Federalist Papers, particularly # 29 by Hamilton.
    The militia spoken of in the Militia Act, did it comprise of everyone?

  17. #17
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by georg jetson View Post
    The militia spoken of in the Militia Act, did it comprise of everyone?
    An ACT more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States.

    I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act. And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such Captain or Commanding Officer of a company, to enroll every such citizen as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of 18 years, or being at the age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as before excepted) shall come to reside within his bounds; and shall without delay notify such citizen of the said enrollment, by the proper non-commissioned Officer of the company, by whom such notice may be proved. That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  18. #18
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    An ACT more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States.

    I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act. And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such Captain or Commanding Officer of a company, to enroll every such citizen as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of 18 years, or being at the age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as before excepted) shall come to reside within his bounds; and shall without delay notify such citizen of the said enrollment, by the proper non-commissioned Officer of the company, by whom such notice may be proved. That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.
    Also read Federalist Papers #29, 46 & 59 (available on line with a little Google fu).

    Also of interesting note...

    IV. And be it further enacted, That out of the militia enrolled as is herein directed, there shall be formed for each battalion, as least one company of grenadiers, light infantry or riflemen; and that each division there shall be, at least, one company of artillery, and one troop of horse: There shall be to each company of artillery, one captain, two lieutenants, four serjeants, four corporals, six gunners, six bombardiers, one drummer, and one fifer. The officers to be
    Since there was no US military; Who owned the cannons?????
    Last edited by F350; 11-12-2013 at 02:14 PM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    I know of , maybe , one person who could meet the firearm requirements in the Militia Act of 1792. My AR would not be strictly constitutional under those requirements, unless we allow for a little interpretation.
    I personally have 3 muzzle loading rifles and 1 flintlock .62 musket.

    Since the law lasted until 1903 I think there was some interpretation; after all, according to your kind "The constitution is a living breathing document", right?

    Then there is US v Miller that essentially said only arms having relevance to "A well regulated militia" were covered by the second amendment (OH and the 1700s usage of the word "regulated did not mean chocked to death by laws).
    Last edited by F350; 11-12-2013 at 02:12 PM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Here I'll help with your reading comprehension...



    I think they probably had a better grasp of what was constitutional than you do. You could also read The Federalist Papers, particularly # 29 by Hamilton.
    Nothing is wrong with my reading comprehension. Let me help you with your reading comprehension what I asked is to cite the constitution that mandates gun ownership, something that has not been done. An act of congress does not make something constitutional. I.E. Obama care.

    The federalist papers is not the constitution it can give us a great insight on what they were thinking but it isn't constitutional. Many of the centralist statist ideas of Hamilton were thwarted by the more liberty minded anti federalist.
    Last edited by sudden valley gunner; 11-13-2013 at 10:28 AM.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  21. #21
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Nothing is wrong with my reading comprehension. Let me help you with your reading comprehension what I asked is to cite the constitution that mandates gun ownership, something that has not been done. An act of congress does not make something constitutional. I.E. Obama care.

    The federalist papers is not the constitution it can give us a great insight on what they were thinking but it isn't constitutional. Many of the centralist statist ideas of Hamilton were thwarted by the more liberty minded anti federalist.
    30 second Google search

    Article 1, Section 8

    To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

    To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

    To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

    To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

    To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

    To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

    To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

    To provide and maintain a Navy;

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
    Last edited by F350; 11-13-2013 at 10:45 AM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Nothing is wrong with my reading comprehension. Let me help you with your reading comprehension what I asked is to cite the constitution that mandates gun ownership, something that has not been done. An act of congress does not make something constitutional. I.E. Obama care.

    The federalist papers is not the constitution it can give us a great insight on what they were thinking but it isn't constitutional. Many of the centralist statist ideas of Hamilton were thwarted by the more liberty minded anti federalist.
    The constitution does not mandate gun ownership. I never contended such. A law passed by congress (or the state bodies) mandating gun ownership is constitutional is what I contend. The constitution clearly gives authority over the militia to congress (not exclusively), including the authority to arm the militia. The constitution does not state what methods congress must use to arm the militia, therefore passing a law requiring each member to procure arms does derive its authority from the constitution and does not exceed any limits imposed by the constitution: it is constitutional.

    ps an interesting thought I just had: congress has the authority to arm the militia, but does it have the authority to disarm the militia?
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  23. #23
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    30 second Google search

    Article 1, Section 8

    To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

    To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

    To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

    To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

    To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

    To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

    To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

    To provide and maintain a Navy;

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

    No where does it say it has the power to mandate gun ownership. Read your quotes you provided carefully.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  24. #24
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    The constitution does not mandate gun ownership. I never contended such. A law passed by congress (or the state bodies) mandating gun ownership is constitutional is what I contend. The constitution clearly gives authority over the militia to congress (not exclusively), including the authority to arm the militia. The constitution does not state what methods congress must use to arm the militia, therefore passing a law requiring each member to procure arms does derive its authority from the constitution and does not exceed any limits imposed by the constitution: it is constitutional.

    ps an interesting thought I just had: congress has the authority to arm the militia, but does it have the authority to disarm the militia?
    The power to raise and supply an army isn't the power to use force in mandating you are part of the army or that you must own a gun.

    The draft is just as unconstitutional.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Cincy area, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    891
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Most (if not all) of those "Must Be Armed" city ordinances have enough loop holes and exceptions anyone that doesn't want to have a gun doesn't have to. It is purely symbolic; unlike Morton Grove, Peoples Democratic Republic of Illinois' ban.
    That is true. While these mandatory gun ownership laws were passed as ordinances, they're written more like resolutions. I don't believe that Kennesaw Georgia has ever tried to charge someone with a crime for not having a gun in their home or the like.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •