Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 69

Thread: Some thoughts on fixing the proliferation of 30.06 and 30.07 signs next session

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Humble
    Posts
    15

    Some thoughts on fixing the proliferation of 30.06 and 30.07 signs next session

    Some thoughts on fixing the proliferation of 30.06 and 30.07 signs next session

    Since our victory this last legislative session with open carry and reducing the criminal penalty for violation of 30.06 from a class A misdemeanor to. Class C misdemeanor, we have some more work to do.

    As most of you have noticed, there have been a rash of 30.06 and 30.07 signs being posted. The liberal hoplophobes that walk amongst us have succeeded in scaring the public into posting 30.06 and 30.0 signs everywhere.

    Despite the fact that LTC holders are statistically the most law-abiding segment of the population.

    Despite the fact that 30.06 signs have never stopped the crime from being committed.

    Despite the fact, that almost no one opened carries anyway.

    The signs that are being posted are often noncompliant signs.

    I myself have noticed the signs being posted on the doors themselves. That is a problem because if someone is holding the door open for you as you walk to the building, you would not see the offensive 30.06 or 30. 07 sign.

    Lots of these signs are merely vinyl letters posted on a clear glass background. It is hard to distinguish these signs from all of the other signage that businesses post near their entrances.

    I have a proposal for tweaking laws in the next legislative session that's would fix most of these problems.

    Read on. What do you think?


    The next session. We need to make some changes

    1. 30.06. No more 30.06 for private businesses. If you can't see it. . . . The only lawful 30.06 would be for places that are statutorily prohibited i.e. courts. Voting places etc. Require bars i.e. 51% places to post 30.06.

    1.5. 30.05 remains. Business owner may ask you to leave for concealed or open carry.

    2. 30.07. Letters must be 6" tall. Black letters on white background. Only mounted on non moving surfaces at All entrances

    3. 30.07 class c misdemeanor and can't loose ltc. Or simply decriminalize 30.07.

    4. Tort immunity for business that do not post 30.07. Strict liability for damages arising from criminal activity for business that do post 30.07

    5. Landlords may not put anti LTC language in lease i.e. 30.06 and 30.07 Language.

    Www.TexasGunTrust.com

  2. #2
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Honestly, I don't support this.

    1. I haven't seen a proliferation of new signs.

    2. Unless there is a real problem with a current sign, we don't need to change the sign requirements. We should not change the sign requirements for the purpose of invalidating all current signs and "wiping" the slate, arbitrarily forcing all businesses that want to prohibit to re-post.

    3. We don't need to make it more difficult for a business to give notice that they don't want firearms in their establishments. The bottom line is that the notice should be reasonable and apparent. If a sign is innocently and unintentionally missed, obviously there should not be a stiff penalty. If a sign is posted improperly where it isn't reasonably noticeable visible, obviously it shouldn't be considered valid notice. But further increasing the sign requirements here is not with the purpose of making sure the signs are more reasonably apparent or visible - at least ulteriorly it's so that it's more difficult to post so that there are fewer legal signs.

    4. The focus next session should not be on tweaking the establishment's LTC framework, the focus should be on promoting and passing constitutional carry.
    Advocate freedom please

  3. #3
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,881
    considering this appears to be a shameless first post to be blatant advertising to call attention to sean cody, esq., Houston attorney at law whose practice appears to be strictly a pusher of NAF trusts where there are far and few handguns capable of automatic fire...

    i recommend the thread be deleted since the there are so many fragrant violations of forum policy.

    especially with comments such as, quote: Despite the fact, that almost no one opened carries anyway. unquote.

    additionally, none of his proposals are enforceable w/o significant $$$ for a citizen to run through the judicial process to get relief.

    stealth...now you know whom you are in bed with...

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 03-13-2016 at 07:06 PM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  4. #4
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    especially with comments such as, quote: Despite the fact, that almost no one opened carries anyway. unquote.
    Somehow missed that part - thanks for calling it out.

    In the spirit of trying to turn the thread into something productive, what WOULD be a good way to "fix" the (supposed?) "proliferation" of 30.0x signs? Broadly, I think, all of the goals of OCDO work to that end... A more general acceptance of OC by the public will probably lead to fewer prohibitions by businesses. More specifically, when public opinion is more swayed, education/information directed at business owners and managers specifically, non-confrontationally, I would think might be a worthwhile effort. The no guns/no business type cards are an example of this.

    There may be plenty of other good methods, but I think that legislation aimed against businesses is the wrong approach.
    Advocate freedom please

  5. #5
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597
    Have not seen many 30.06/07 signs. Would leave it to the free market, and my actions such as No Guns-No Cash cards given to managers to enjoy.

    Not sure if Texas law allows apartment leases to restrict you not owning guns in your home castle - be it residence and/or car/truck.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  6. #6
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,278
    Simple solution, no gun, no money. If, and when they are victims of crime, and gun friendly business is not as much they might figure it out.

    I see no problem with finding ways to educate the public they are not as safe in a gun free zone. Nothing stops legal offering information to the public on public property near the business. Once the customers understand that gun free zones are not crime free zones the bow might break.

    As much as we hate the gun control crowd they are good at spreading fear. OC groups need to spread lack of fear through being prepared.
    Last edited by WalkingWolf; 03-13-2016 at 08:36 PM.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  7. #7
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,881
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Somehow missed that part - thanks for calling it out.
    In the spirit of trying to turn the thread into something productive, what WOULD be a good way to "fix" the (supposed?) "proliferation" of 30.0x signs? Broadly, I think, all of the goals of OCDO work to that end... A more general acceptance of OC by the public will probably lead to fewer prohibitions by businesses. More specifically, when public opinion is more swayed, education/information directed at business owners and managers specifically, non-confrontationally, I would think might be a worthwhile effort. The no guns/no business type cards are an example of this.
    There may be plenty of other good methods, but I think that legislation aimed against businesses is the wrong approach.
    unfortunately, the discussions re private property prevail...period ~ signs not withstanding...

    so tell me stealth, et al., do you and your compatriots really want the legislative to relegate their precious time that signs must be this or that size; or they must unequivocally state this or that?

    this will cause you and your compatriots, at large, to spend every waking hour chasing signs... instead of pursuing greater adventures such as change the BS bovine crap you accepted from the last legislature...

    wake up...as stated numerous times...the LGBT campaign has succeeded in overcoming religious, bigotry, legislative savants, judicial challenges to SUCCEEDED.

    and here you are worried about crap like the size & wording on bloody signs?

    get a clue for goodness sakes and as previously stated...come up with an objective, lower objectives you would accept; set up viable plans w/alternate concepts when you hit road blocks...

    geeezzzz....

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  8. #8
    Lone Star Veteran DrMark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Hampton Roads, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,553
    Quote Originally Posted by sc-texas View Post
    Some thoughts on fixing the proliferation of 30.06 and 30.07 signs next session
    Hey, I recognize you! We met at Shot Show (in Orlando) in 2009.

    Welcome to OCDO.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Humble
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 03-15-2016 at 06:16 AM. Reason: deleted superfluous reference/link

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Humble
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    unfortunately, the discussions re private property prevail...period ~ signs not withstanding...

    wake up...as stated numerous times...the LGBT campaign has succeeded in overcoming religious, bigotry, legislative savants, judicial challenges to SUCCEEDED.....

    ipse
    Finally someone gets it. Whenever I say this is am told that we are not born this way so that doesn't apply. Lol.
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 03-15-2016 at 06:15 AM. Reason: deleted superfluous reference/link

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Humble
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Honestly, I don't support this.

    4. The focus next session should not be on tweaking the establishment's LTC framework, the focus should be on promoting and passing constitutional carry.
    Would that eliminate the 30.06 and 07 signage issue?

    Would that trump property rights of businesses open to the public?
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 03-15-2016 at 06:11 AM. Reason: www.AtomicLabRat.com

  12. #12
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    considering this appears to be a shameless first post to be blatant advertising to call attention to sean cody, esq., Houston attorney at law whose practice appears to be strictly a pusher of NAF trusts where there are far and few handguns capable of automatic fire...

    i recommend the thread be deleted since the there are so many fragrant violations of forum policy.

    especially with comments such as, quote: Despite the fact, that almost no one opened carries anyway. unquote.

    additionally, none of his proposals are enforceable w/o significant $$$ for a citizen to run through the judicial process to get relief. ...
    I agree wholeheartedly.

    sc-texas needs to go somewhere where his "ideas" will be more appreciated, like the Texas CHL Forum, where they're similarly "informed" about open carry.

  13. #13
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by sc-texas View Post
    Would that eliminate the 30.06 and 07 signage issue?

    Would that trump property rights of businesses open to the public?
    First of all, I haven't conceded that there is a sign issue, and I would be willing to argue there is NOT one. Secondly, no, as I said in my first post, those property rights should NOT BE "trumped" by the legislature on our behalf. That's not something we should pursue at all, much less should we make it the focus of the session.

    The licensing scheme, and the remaining underlying prohibitions, are abridgments of our rights. A local business putting up a 30.06 sign, while obnoxious and probably ignorant, is not an abridgment of our rights.
    Advocate freedom please

  14. #14
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,881
    down the hole to expend resources to fix something which ain't broke, and property owners could put signage up which simply state "NO BLOODY GUNS" and patrons can not come in...period.

    and the wheels on the train go round and round all day long...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAy33dmuH58

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  15. #15
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    Simple solution, no gun, no money.
    This one element. But there may be others.

    The homosexuals did not content themselves to just economic boycotts. They pushed for anti-discrimination laws and other legal recognition of their "rights" (real, imagined, invented, matters not much at this point) to be who they are and to be respected and have their dignity recognized throughout society.

    So long as gun owners are willing to be the only unpopular group against which blatant discrimination in places of public accommodation is legally and socially permissible, we will get a lot of legal discrimination.

    Even the libertarians among us might recognize the difference between allowing a business to refuse service, and the s/State imposing criminal penalties for the peaceful violation of a private, discriminatory business policy.

    The real solution is to chip away at the criminal penalties for violation of a private policy. Do "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" policies get criminal enforcement? What about "Coat and Tie Required" policies? Or only if someone refuses to leave when asked?

    Alternatively, if a business wants the government to enforce its private policies via criminal penalties, that business ought to accept some liability for creating a hazardous environment.

    Or, the libertarian gun owners can stand firmly on their principles of respecting the "right" of business owners to discriminate against perfectly legal, normal, peaceful conduct, and find that carrying a gun is a major hassle and limits where they can receive basic services in the public sphere.

    Why are we so much less offended by "No Gun Carriers Allowed" than we would be by "No Irish", "No Coloreds", "No Catholics", or "No Homosexuals"? Why don't we call out anti-self-defense bigotry for what it is and equate it both socially and legally to these other bigoted policies?

    I'm not a Texan, so I don't have a dog in this one. Just offering some thoughts.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by sc-texas View Post
    Would that eliminate the 30.06 and 07 signage issue?

    Would that trump property rights of businesses open to the public?
    Many states give no legal weight to any form of signage. If you have a business that is open to the public, you still have the right to refuse service to anyone, and the right to trespass anyone, for any reason that does not violate a civil right.

    But the law doesn't require customers to stop at doors and read the signs (the same ones the robbers ignore.)
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  17. #17
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    Many states give no legal weight to any form of signage. If you have a business that is open to the public, you still have the right to refuse service to anyone, and the right to trespass anyone, for any reason that does not violate a civil right.

    But the law doesn't require customers to stop at doors and read the signs (the same ones the robbers ignore.)
    I know you are talking about in other states, but just in case someone unfamiliar is reading, in Texas these signs (30.06 and 30.07 signs) do indeed have legal weight, and while the law may not explicitly require one to stop and read signs, it does still prohibit carrying past properly posted signs whether you bothered to read it or not.

    Now, I hadn't considered that some states don't give any form of sign any legal weight to begin... That's very interesting, and probably a model worth considering for Texas, if it can be made to be consistent with Texas' other various relevant laws and still respectful of private property rights.
    Advocate freedom please

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Humble
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    considering this appears to be a shameless first post to be blatant advertising to call attention to sean cody, esq., Houston attorney at law whose practice appears to be strictly a pusher of NAF trusts where there are far and few handguns capable of automatic fire...
    Let me see. Since I am a LTC holder and I open carry and I am a criminal Attorney I have a dog in this fight.

    I have seen the issues with 30.06 and I have been affected by the proliferation of signs so you really have no clue about me. Maybe you should read up.

    i recommend the thread be deleted since the there are so many fragrant violations of forum policy.
    Okay. Blah. Blah. Delete something you don't like instead of offering some constructive suggestions.

    especially with comments such as, quote: Despite the fact, that almost no one opened carries anyway. unquote.
    Maybe you have missed the facts since you are from Texas. The facts are that seeing an open carrier in Texas is very rare. Almost no one is open carrying. I am. I have stopped shopping guide at numerous stores because they posted 30.06 and/or 30.07 signs.

    additionally, none of his proposals are enforceable w/o significant $$$ for a citizen to run through the judicial process to get relief.
    Did you bother reading anything I wrote or just start whining?

    stealth...now you know whom you are in bed with...

    ipse
    I'm easy to find if you have any questions. The website makes it really easy to call me up if you can't figure out who I am.
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 03-15-2016 at 06:11 AM. Reason: www.AtomicLabRat.com

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Humble
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by HPmatt View Post
    Have not seen many 30.06/07 signs. Would leave it to the free market, and my actions such as No Guns-No Cash cards given to managers to enjoy.

    Not sure if Texas law allows apartment leases to restrict you not owning guns in your home castle - be it residence and/or car/truck.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The signs have exploded around Houston.

    30.06 and 30.07

    I have been getting numerous email notices from 3006.org for two months
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 03-15-2016 at 06:10 AM. Reason: www.AtomicLabRat.com

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Humble
    Posts
    15
    Constitutional carry is optimal.

    If we don't get it, and we should, but if we dont, a few tweaks would help.

    Wisconsin has a statute that provides businesses immunity from suit for the actions of a ltc holder

    Oklahoma has a statute that 30.06 could be modeled on.

    Oklahoma Law

    "D. The carrying of a concealed or unconcealed firearm by a person who has been issued a handgun license on property that has signs prohibiting the carrying of firearms shall not be deemed a criminal act but may subject the person to being denied entrance onto the property or removed from the property. If the person refuses to leave the property and a peace officer is summoned, the person may be issued a citation for an amount not to exceed Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00)."
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 03-15-2016 at 05:37 AM. Reason: deleted superfluous reference/link

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    I know you are talking about in other states, but just in case someone unfamiliar is reading, in Texas these signs (30.06 and 30.07 signs) do indeed have legal weight, and while the law may not explicitly require one to stop and read signs, it does still prohibit carrying past properly posted signs whether you bothered to read it or not.

    Now, I hadn't considered that some states don't give any form of sign any legal weight to begin... That's very interesting, and probably a model worth considering for Texas, if it can be made to be consistent with Texas' other various relevant laws and still respectful of private property rights.
    Thank you for clarifying that I was providing it as a model, and that Texas does not enjoy freedom from signage.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Humble
    Posts
    15
    Texas is not as gun friendly as we would like you to believe. We are trying to catch up.
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 03-15-2016 at 05:38 AM. Reason: deleted superfluous reference/link

  23. #23
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,881
    as previously stated...the signage issue should be the least of your worries if you are seeking OC w/o a permit.

    everyone in their brother will hound the legislature to 'fix the signage issue' and there and only there will their energies be expended making the signage purdy and conform to some wonderful criteria.

    btw SC, tell me my quote: additionally, none of his proposals are enforceable w/o significant $$$ for a citizen to run through the judicial process to get relief. unquote which you challenged with this comment: quote: Did you bother reading anything I wrote or just start whining? unquote

    so SC here is your proposal you posted on your very first try on this forum: quote
    The next session. We need to make some changes


    1. 30.06. No more 30.06 for private businesses. If you can't see it. . . . The only lawful 30.06 would be for places that are statutorily prohibited i.e. courts. Voting places etc. Require bars i.e. 51% places to post 30.06.


    1.5. 30.05 remains. Business owner may ask you to leave for concealed or open carry.


    2. 30.07. Letters must be 6" tall. Black letters on white background. Only mounted on non moving surfaces at All entrances


    3. 30.07 class c misdemeanor and can't loose ltc. Or simply decriminalize 30.07.


    4. Tort immunity for business that do not post 30.07. Strict liability for damages arising from criminal activity for business that do post 30.07


    5. Landlords may not put anti LTC language in lease i.e. 30.06 and 30.07 Language.

    whom is going to enforce your proposals?

    whom is going to pay the legal fees if a business doesn't meet number 2 or 4 or 5?

    is a potential resident going to plow through the judicial system if landlords put the language in their contracts?

    number 1 business already have the right to ask you to leave... right? so why have signage?

    oh i know your law office will represent the resident challenge the landlord or you will assist the business who puts up the wrong sized sign...for free...right?

    seems i did read your post sc but you failed to comprehend mine...

    back to the issue at hand...you are pushing specific signage criteria to your legislature to assist a business which already has the right to throw your silly butts out on a whim...instead of developing objectives, getting a viable plan together, finding resources, and pushing that way...ok...i get it...

    it worked so well this latest time didn't...p4p w/profit center still intact...

    as the piper stated...LGBT went to the courts to get what they felt were their stated objectives...sure a lot of it was pro bono work...hint

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 03-15-2016 at 01:29 AM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  24. #24
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post

    as the piper stated...LGBT went to the courts to get what they felt were their stated objectives...sure a lot of it was pro bono work...hint

    ipse
    I don't think it was pro bono - I think if you were to peel it back you would find grants, awards and other ways Federal funds were channeled to those agitating for extra-Constitutional emanations and penumbras...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  25. #25
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,881
    Quote Originally Posted by HPmatt View Post
    I don't think it was pro bono - I think if you were to peel it back you would find grants, awards and other ways Federal funds were channeled to those agitating for extra-Constitutional emanations and penumbras...

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    most of the grassroots entities are 501 entities, eligible to apply for grants...

    i think i mentioned that the GLBT, by what ever means succeeded in reaching their objectives...

    btw, how is your OC permit doing in your back pocket?

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

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
  •