Page 1 of 74 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 1828

Thread: Ask LEO a question

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    I will entertain all questions regarding police procedures here. Keep it friendly and I willanswer all valid questions. This is your chance to understand why the police do... what they do.

    Please keep it friendly....

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:


    As a citizen of the Manassas area I am also concerned that the entire MCPD patrol shift is allowed to individually determine that they may leave their assigned patrol area, without any declared emergency, and without regard to protection of the rest of the community, for a situation where the dispatcher has clearly stated that there is no disturbance but is merely requesting a "Check stop" for a single Officer.

    Answer:
    Officers are not required to stay in there assigned areas. When an officer is assigned a patrol area it identifies WHO is responsibleto answer the callsthere first. Officers are often sent into other areas all the time.

    I have known EVERY OFFICER to respond to a call also. This is either because they are bored and had nothing else to do... or the call involved either several people or weapons.

    In the Manassas event... It involved several people and the fact that guns were present. Keeping in mind that the group was peaceable and there was no problem....it was not wrong for so many officers to respond.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Near Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    392

    Post imported post

    What should we do, or how should we handle a situation with an LEO who may become aggressive when confronting us about open carrying? Should we just cooperate with requests/demands and take mental notes of everything and later file a complaint or take further action if we feel our rights have been violated?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    72Malibu wrote:
    What should we do, or how should we handle a situation with an LEO who may become aggressive when confronting us about open carrying? Should we just cooperate with requests/demands and take mental notes of everything and later file a complaint or take further action if we feel our rights have been violated?
    When it comes to OC you know the law and you know you are legal so you have the upper hand.

    You also know that the LEO may not have been trained by the academy regarding your rights to OC.Be cooperative and polite. This is your chance to educate him in the law.

    Eventually... more LEOs will know and responding to OC events will not be a problem. Of course... There will be some that just hate the fact youOCand nothing can be done to change their mind.

    As with any contact that is bad... you should take good notes andreport it immediatelyto Internal Affairs.



  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    236

    Post imported post

    How often do you get updates on current hot button laws? The gunlaws change almost annually as do traffic and laws relating to juveniles. Are update clinics offered? Are they mandatory?

    I would hope that as an officer placing your life on the line each day, that you would keep abreast of the laws regulating items that hold the largest threat to your survival. Weapon laws seem like they would be at the top of the list.

    I would also hope that there would be training to TEACH that opinions need to be left in the locker before putting on the badge. Opinions on what should be legal do not allow you to harass someone because they are doing something you personally disagree with.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    coltcarrier wrote:
    How often do you get updates on current hot button laws? The gunlaws change almost annually as do traffic and laws relating to juveniles. Are update clinics offered? Are they mandatory?

    We have legal updates at the academy during classes we attend. More often.. we get hard copies of law updates and changes in our inbox. At every rollcallwe read a selected state code and talk about it.

    We also take time to discuss a current cases that happened or a case that went to court. How the case was won or lost.

    The state requires we obtain a certain number of legal and regular hours of academy training every two years.


  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    Hawkflyer wrote:


    As a citizen of the Manassas area I am also concerned that the entire MCPD patrol shift is allowed to individually determine that they may leave their assigned patrol area, without any declared emergency, and without regard to protection of the rest of the community, for a situation where the dispatcher has clearly stated that there is no disturbance but is merely requesting a "Check stop" for a single Officer.

    Answer:
    Officers are not required to stay in there assigned areas. When an officer is assigned a patrol area it identifies WHO is responsible¬*to answer the calls¬*there first. Officers are often sent into other areas all the time.

    I have known EVERY OFFICER to respond to a call also. This is either because they are bored and had nothing else to do... or the call involved either several people or weapons.

    In the Manassas event... It involved several people and the fact that guns were present. Keeping in mind that the group was peaceable and there was no problem....¬*it was not wrong for so many officers to respond.
    I clearly see what happened here and I am certain you do as well. I agree that the responding Officers were reacting to three primary elements in the dispatch. 1) Firearms are present, 2) There was a group of armed men involved, 3) A citizen had called 911. I have no problem with the response up to that point, and I would be disappointed if someone was not dispatched to check things out based on only these facts.

    But what has not been said (though you hit on it slightly) is that many of these Officers responded so as not to miss involvement in any event that might transpire. I agree that when on general patrol Officers have a high degree of latitude as to where they go, however in this case it is reported that there were 12 responders. No matter how you measure this response, at some point the Officers on the scene had sufficient knowledge and support to handle the situation. While opinions may vary as to the Officer perceived threat, and the required level of response, I do not think that the entire duty shift was required in a situation where the balloon never went up. That said I do not want to appear to be second guessing the first 4 or so Officers that called in. They were reacting to an unknown situation and rolled for backup to the primary.

    But as a citizen of the community, I think it is bad policy to allow the entire shift to respond to a call, unless a shots fired or Officer assistance call goes out. The Officer assigned NEVER asked for backup during the initial dispatch. Matching force would certainly be a reasonable response level if the first Officer felt a need for backup at that level. As a police training matter it is bad policy to uncover the entire community without an incident of sufficient priority to justify lowered visibility and coverage.

    Suppose this group of men was part of a larger plan to divert police attention to one side of the city while a planned criminal or terrorist action was being executed on the other side of town? By engaging the entire shift in this way the community at large is left unprotected, and response times to other possible events are lengthened. It is bad policy and it is bad policing. The line Officers should not be allowed through individual action to commit the entire shift in this way without approval of a watch commander in the absence of an actual emergency. I do not blame the Officers for this, I blame the watch Commander who allows it to happen.

    Regards
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  8. #8
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    That said I do not want to appear to be second guessing the first 4 or so Officers that called in. They were reacting to an unknown situation and rolled for backup to the primary.

    As a patrol officer, I will add that in responding to a call (doesn't matter what kind and firearms are not an issue here) and the number of persons I will be contacting is equal to the responders, we(I) consider equal numbers the same as being outnumbered. The number of officers responding to Tony's, in retrospect, appears unreasonable, but if the officers are available I will take as many as want to andcan come. Even if they just drive by my call or wait outside.

    Those of uswho accept the honor and responsibilities of a badgeandthe public's trust know how quickly a "non dangerous" even frivolous call can end in tragedy for a department. There are no routine calls. I don't have a problem with the number of officers, I have a problem with the actions once they arrived.

    Case in point: a consensual pedestrian contact with no reasonable suspicion other than a hunch. Dispatch will send a back-up unit. If I'm out with 2,dispatch will send 2 back-up units if available. If I'm out with 6,most of the watch will roll on their own just to assist/back-up. Usually, I'll say I'm code 4(OK no helpneeded) beforeall arrive. It's not policy, just practice, because we depend oneach other for our lives and care about each other. That makes for good shift unity.

    Things can go south fast, and I knowI might not be here typing if at times I wasn't strongly backed by my shift.Sometimes we are dealing with real bad people. I've been seriouslyhospitalized once and it mayhave been worse if help wasn't as close as it was.

    Over whelmingpresence is meant to be a deterrent and calming. AtTony's it wasn't and that rests on theofficers shoulders. If on occasion I've over reacted (not breaking the law or acted rudely mind you), and ruffled the feathers of good citizens, I try to explain at the end of every contact or detention why we responded the way we did. By using this method most then understand, and thank me for explaining. I'm proud to say I have never received a written complaint. I'm I always perfect? No, far from it, I've had plenty of bad days.

    thats two more Kopecs for ya.




  9. #9
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Towhat extent can dispatchers give advise, interpret the law, or decide to not send officersto a call in VA?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    cato wrote:
    As a patrol officer, I will add that in responding to a call (doesn't matter what kind and firearms are not an issue here) and the number of persons I will be contacting is equal to the responders, we(I) consider equal numbers the same as being outnumbered.
    I forgot to add this but thought about after I left the house. thanks cato.We do not want to be out numbered.

    I understand hawkflyer being upset that the rest of the city is unguarded but the officers have to do it.The officers as a group have a better chance to go home at the end of the shift. A lone officer with no backup is not good!

    The thought of criminals using adistraction to get all the officer's in one spot has been done. They also call in bogus calls to see how fast you get there.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    cato wrote:
    Towhat extent can dispatchers give advise, interpret the law, or decide to not send officersto a call in VA?
    We have Officers and Civilian call takers. They do the same as you did on call taking. They determine if it is Fire, Police, or Animal related. They try their best to not have to dispatch an officer and try to handle the call over the phone when possible.

    But... if the citizen demands an officer.. even if it is to take out the trash for them... One will be sent. The policy is.... never refuse the citizens request for an officer. A supervisor canalways override and terminate the request.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    14

    Post imported post

    As a former LEO, I agree that having as many officers on a call as possible is a good thing for officer safety. I don't see an issue in the response due to the number of people involved and the fact that firearms were also involved. What I really have an issue with is the events that took place after the response. Using their authority to encourage the owner/manager to ask the armed citizensto leave was definately wrong. Also all of the messages that were sent between officers after the incident were completely uncalled for. Why is it so difficult for some LEOs to understand that armed citizensare a good thing? Being from California, where carrying (open or concealed) is fairly well off limits for citizens, I can tell you that unarmed citizens help the crime rates rise. Now it's not to say that all armed citizens "should" be carrying because we all know that there are always some bad apples in the bunch, but if the stuff hits the fan I would rather have some armed citizens at my aid than a bunch of people standing around watching, or even worse ignoring, what is happening. Violent crime rates in states that deny citizens thier 2nd Amend. right are outrageous. Just look at the crime stats in California and D.C. for a couple of examples. The LEOs out there that frown upon armed citizens need to wise up or go to work in one of these anti 2nd Amend. states. Just my 2 cents!

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    Both LEO 229 and CATO make valid points as to backup procedures. This situations like all others must also be taken in context. Many on this forum may not remember or even have been in this area when a MCPD Officer was shot and killed in the 1980's when responding to a call of a man on the roof of a persons home with an AR-15 rifle. Sounds innocent enough until you know that the roof he was on was not his. The first responding Officer went to the rear of the building, where the moment he was sighted by the man with the rifle (now on the ground and obscured by a chest high fence) he was shot in the neck and killed. Technically speaking by the time the Officer came upon this guy, he was just a citizen legally carrying a firearm.

    We now have a number of facilities named after this Officer, and the MCPD never has forgotten the lessons of this tragic incident. So for my part as I said earlier, I will not second guess most of the backup response, but here in Manassas we have a number of sensitive facilities, and allowing for the possibility of a diversion in support of criminal or terrorist activities is required. Pulling the entire watch is just not an acceptable response in the absence of an actual incident requiring that level of response. In that event the MCPD is supposed to coordinate with the Prince William Police and the Sheriff's Office for coverage. There is currently NO evidence that this coordination took place.

    As you guys have pointed out a more proper response is for the first responder to assess the situation and call it in. This would usually occur prior to the arrival of many of the Officers.

    The fact is that this was handled poorly. I still maintain that it is a training opportunity for this department. The E-mails in the FOIA response would indicate that perhaps this department did not learn anything from the Rodney King e-mail scandal and that does not bode well for any lessons in this incident that could change the department training.

    Regards
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    The fact is that this was handled poorly. I still maintain that it is a training opportunity for this department. The E-mails in the FOIA response would indicate that perhaps this department did not learn anything from the Rodney King e-mail scandal and that does not bode well for any lessons in this incident that could change the department training.

    Regards

    I have to agree that there was a training issue here. Once onscene and it was observed that the OC group was just having dinner they could have called off the remaining officers. 2 or 3 would have been OK.

    Attempting to get the manager to kick them out was not required. They knew there was nothing they could do and this may have been an attempt to get one up on them.

    Using profanity at all is unprofessional.. and when the supervisor is standing right there tells you something about the department.

    All the text sent afterward to degrade the OC group was unprofessional and probably a violation of the use of the CPU. Many departments have standards for usage on the computers. DC officers were busted for racist comments.


    All LEOs using the computers know that everything typed in can be obtained from FOIA at any time!!!! I guess they did not know the OC group knew how to do that very well. :P

  15. #15
    Regular Member VAopencarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The 'Dena, Mаяуlaпd
    Posts
    2,147

    Post imported post

    LEO, Therein lies the problem. The first officer thought we were breaking the law. So the part about him ascertaining we were not up to trouble goes right out the window. The 2d cop kinda smoothed things over but then when all the others arrived a mob mentality grew and they were determined to force there will upon us one way or another.

    If the 1st cop would have known the law, engaged us in conversation, determined we were not thugs, no problem even if many others did show up.

    For the record, not that it should matter but I know it does, none of the 7 look like thugs, meth addicts, or any type of troublemaker. Heck over 1/2 of us are former Marines and some still kinda look the part, meaning clean cut.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    VAopencarry wrote:
    LEO, Therein lies the problem. The first officer thought we were breaking the law. So the part about him ascertaining we were not up to trouble goes right out the window. The 2d cop kinda smoothed things over but then when all the others arrived a mob mentality grew and they were determined to force there will upon us one way or another.

    If the 1st cop would have known the law, engaged us in conversation, determined we were not thugs, no problem even if many others did show up.

    For the record, not that it should matter but I know it does, none of the 7 look like thugs, meth addicts, or any type of troublemaker. Heck over 1/2 of us are former Marines and some still kinda look the part, meaning clean cut.
    How old is the 1st officer? It will take time for all the departments to get with the program and spread the word that it is a legal thing to do.

    Do all of you in the group have CWPs?

  17. #17
    Regular Member VAopencarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The 'Dena, Mаяуlaпd
    Posts
    2,147

    Post imported post

    I know 5 of us have CHP's, pretty sure the other 2 do also.

    I think Manassas PD has gotten the word now about OC being legal

    His age, haha, Someone else asked me that, I dunno, I am 45 so anyone under 30 looks like a kid to me. He was in his 20's that's about as close as I can guess.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

  18. #18
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    VAopencarry wrote:
    His age, haha, Someone else asked me that, I dunno, I am 45 so anyone under 30 looks like a kid to me. He was in his 20's that's about as close as I can guess.
    He's a rookie! You're making my heart bleed for him. He's in a lot of Sh*t right now. Just consider this, he's a fellow American, and made a mistake. Many want his scalp right now, but if you called for help sometime I know his pedal would go to the floor to help a stranger. I've been there and it's our honor to serve. Fun job to have, easy to loose.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    VAopencarry wrote:
    His age, haha, Someone else asked me that, I dunno, I am 45 so anyone under 30 looks like a kid to me. He was in his 20's that's about as close as I can guess.
    I know what you mean!!! It is hard to tell, huh?!!

    So we are looking at a rookie cop with not much experience. I'll say this.... He knows nowthat OC is permitted.


    cato and I see the same thing.... I would cut him a "little" slack. He is young and still green. Wet behind the ears. He needs to learn the laws and how to handle difficult situations.


    And for the CHP holders... Good for you! You are deemed fit tocarry hidden and that is a privilege you have been granted by the courts. One could saysafe hidden... safe exposed. It is all good.


  20. #20
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:

    cato and I see the same thing.... I would cut him a "little" slack. He is young and still green. Wet behind the ears. He needs to learn the laws and how to handle difficult situations.



    Makes me wonder how long the supervisor has had his strips. Newly promoted perhaps.

    Reminds me of when I got off of training and ended up with my training mates on the same weekend graveyard shift. Our Sgt. was newly promoted and I was the senior patrolman on duty with only 4 months on. We were flying by the seats of our pants.

    Fun times, but I definitely wouldn't want to repeat some of the crap I got away with now that I know better.


  21. #21
    Regular Member VAopencarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The 'Dena, Mаяуlaпd
    Posts
    2,147

    Post imported post

    The supervisor did no supervising, I can tell you that. The supervisor may have been a recipient of equal right laws or whatever you want to call it. There were 2 female officers there, one of them was the supervisor, I don't know which one though.

    LEO, In many ways I could 'cut him slack' in fact, it is my nature. But as you have posted, a citizen should respectful etc., as a citizen I expect the same in return from law enforcement. If he didn't act like a total ass I could look past other things.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    VAopencarry wrote:
    The supervisor did no supervising, I can tell you that. The supervisor may have been a recipient of equal right laws or whatever you want to call it. There were 2 female officers there, one of them was the supervisor, I don't know which one though.

    LEO, In many ways I could 'cut him slack' in fact, it is my nature. But as you have posted, a citizen should respectful etc., as a citizen I expect the same in return from law enforcement. If he didn't act like a total ass I could look past other things.
    I can tell you this.... To be a supervisor... all you have to do is take a test. Some people test well but have no common sense! I know many supervisors that have less than 5 years experience and some have no street experience!

    And I hear ya' regarding respect. When you get someone acting an ass.... you have to bite your tongue... Hard to do I know... But in life... you have to try to be the better man.

    Take good notes..... report the unprofessional conduct. The street level supervisor may no do anything but the 'higher ups' will.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Henrico County ,
    Posts
    537

    Post imported post

    I was thinking about this exact question earlier last night - what would be an appropriate consequence for the behavior of the officers (and their behavior differed - I don't think they all should face the same consequences).

    I tend to cringe when some folks on this board start preaching religion, but all I will say is that I am a Christian and I strongly believe in forgiveness. Furthermore, I have made serious mistakes in my life, and after apologizing and insuring my boss I knew I didn't dothings "the right way" the first time, I have been given gracious second chances - and I never repeated the same mistake.

    I can't really offer what I think is appropriate because I don't know enough. Quite frankly, it would depend on A.) if the officer truly recognized their actions were inappropriate and B.) what prior history (if any) of poor judgement or failure to follow written procedures was present. Of course, it also depends on whether or not there were any written procedures that were not followed, and what policy violations were present (the Chief has already indicated that the "appropriate use" policy for electronic communications was violated).

    I think law-abiding citizens often underestimate their ownpower, and under-estimate the stress and difficulty a job like policing must entail. Our litigious culture also makes apologizing more difficult than it should be, sometimes.

    Assuming the department fully and appropriately investigates this incident (and I experienced an extremely professional, polite and thorough internal affairs department when I was interacting with Henrico PD - they even taped their interviews with the witnesses and my friends who had been present), then there is no reason at allto be "out for the blood". I know many of us were almost as offended by the suggestion that we are "lawsuit shopping" as we were by the behavior of the officers themselves. So... What do we really want, here?

    I would be thrilled if what results from this is an even more professional, better educated Manassas PD. I would like the officers who made serious mistakes to know they made mistakes in no uncertain terms - then be forgiven and move on. We would have performed a public service, and the Manassas PD could then get back to a difficult job - and we would feel comfortable supporting them in their duties.

    If I haven't said so already. Bravo to the Tony's 7 (and to Tony, who has always welcomed open carriers).The level-headed response from the Tony's 7 is what allows open carriers to have the upper-hand here, which is what also allowed everyone to go home safely that night, and what will allow everyone to be better educated in the future.

    How we act at the Manassas meeting Monday night is going to be very important to public perception (same for the police). Media will likely be present. Let's make everyone proud.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Mechanicsville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    548

    Post imported post

    cato wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:

    cato and I see the same thing.... I would cut him a "little" slack. He is young and still green. Wet behind the ears. He needs to learn the laws and how to handle difficult situations.



    Makes me wonder how long the supervisor has had his strips. Newly promoted perhaps.

    Reminds me of when I got off of training and ended up with my training mates on the same weekend graveyard shift. Our Sgt. was newly promoted and I was the senior patrolman on duty with only 4 months on. We were flying by the seats of our pants.

    Fun times, but I definitely wouldn't want to repeat some of the crap I got away with now that I know better.

    I agree with both of you to a point. If he didn't know OC was OK, then retraining would be in order. But, and this is a big BUT, the behavior once on seen by him and all the other officers is totally unacceptable.

    I have been a leader in the Military for over 18 years and I am not a "no deficiency" type of leader. I expect my Soldiers to make mistakes, just not to repeat them. I also document their mistakes and train them not to make them again. My Soldiers always seemed to take the initiative learn faster when they understood my leadership style.

    I did put a limitation on what was an acceptable mistake also. As long as they were trying to do the right thing, looking out for the unit or other Soldiers, and not doing it for personal gain, I would excuse the mistake and retrain the Soldier.


  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Henrico County ,
    Posts
    537

    Post imported post

    I agree, Cs9c1: The officers behavior differed. Their level of experience and level of authority/responsibility also differed. Their subsequent behavior may have differed (with electronic communications, etc). I haven't heard - but did all of the officers go back in to talk to Tony,or was it just a few? Was the supervisor one of them? All of these things matter when it comes to "what is the appropriate consequence". Supervisors must be held closely accountable for their employees behavior (I say this as a Manager).

    I think we should make brief statements to the council (hopefully not too manylong-windedlessons about the second amendment. Basically, I just expect everyone to follow the rules - myself and the police included - all the time). And we should each ask a good, open ended question for the council to ponder. I think citizens of Manassas and the immediately surrounding community should have priority when it comes to signing up to speak. Hopefully, there will be at least one woman willing to speak. It can make a difference in public and LEO perception.

Page 1 of 74 1231151 ... 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
  •