22 Dec

The Truth About The Right To Keep And Bear Arms

                                       

“I don’t think legitimate sportsmen are going to say, ‘I need an assault weapon to go hunting,’” Cuomo said, according to the New York Times. “There is a balance here — I understand the rights of gun owners; I understand the rights of hunters.”

Cuomo indicated the state will likely force some kind of permit process on owners of semi-automatic “assault weapons.” In addition to generating revenue and expanding the size and reach of government, the effort will allow the state to confiscate the weapons of citizens who do not comply.

Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it,” the governor said.

constitutionThis is the governor of one of the largest states (population-wise) in the country! We have devolved to a point in the gun rights argument that we’re reverting back to the very thing from which e sought independence. The Declaration of Independence lists several grievances that led to the Revolutionary War.

King George was an oppressive ruler. He quartered troops in private homes to keep the citizens in check. He forced sailors to take up arms against fellow contrymen. He taxed them into oblivion without any representation. He made up laws on the fly to deal with trouble makers and denied them due process.

In Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England (1803), St. George Tucker, a lawyer, Revolutionary War militia offcer, legal scholar, and later a U.S. District Court judge (appointed by James Madison in 1813), wrote of the 2nd Amendment that, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government.”

Yes, I’m a nerd. I read and RESEARCH the meanings of the Constitution, especially the most fundamental and important of our rights. Delving into the Appendix, Tucker explains further the meaning of the 2nd Amendment (emphasis is mine).

This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty …. The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.

secondamendmentSound familiar? Today’s progressive movement has sought to turn the 2nd Amendment’s meaning into something it isn’t. Our lofty politicians – protected with their throngs of security guards, armored vehicles, and other protections – and their lapdog media have succeeded at convincing the “low information voters,” as Rush Limbaugh likes to say, that this right is meant to apply to hunters only. Or in your home only.

In addition, they have tried to tell us that even if we were hunters, we “don’t need those kinds of weapons for hunting.” Nearly every argument I have with a progressive gun grabber usually incorporates the statements that there is no use for any type of magazine that can carry more than 10 rounds or to own a weapon that looks black and evil. Personally, I think that’s racist that they are trying to ban so-called “black rifles.”

Another constitutional scholar to our Founders, William Rawle, wrote a book in 1829 called, “A View of the Constitution of the United States of America.” In this book, he talks about the reach and authority of the 2nd Amendment while also discussing the limitations on those that would attempt to circumvent it. He, rightly so, points out that the 27 words that make up the 2nd Amendment are composed of two, separate clauses; not one run-on sentence. Of the first clause (a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state), he writes:

Although in actual war, the services of regular troops are confessedly more valuable; yet, while peace prevails, and in the commencement of a war before a regular force can be raised, the militia form the palladium of the country. They are ready to repel invasion, to suppress insurrection, and preserve the good order and peace of government. That they should be well regulated, is judiciously added. A disorderly militia is disgraceful to itself, and dangerous not to the enemy, but to its own country. The duty of the state government is, to adopt such regulations as will tend to make good soldiers with the least interruptions of the ordinary and useful occupations of civil life. In this all the Union has a strong and visible interest.

Some would point to the National Guard and say that this is what constitutes the “well regulated Militia” of the 2nd Amendment. However, such is not the case. The National Guard is frequently called upon to take on standing military operations. Our politicians and government have done a stellar job at preventing “the people” from forming their own “well regulated Militias” by labeling such groups as extremist, hate, or seditious collections. Can anyone honestly say that if our government became so corrupt as to turn on its own people that the National Guard would be in place to oppose the regular military forces? We all know that the Guard’s troops are equipped with mostly secondhand equipment and arms. If – and this is a very long shot – the country was ordered into martial law either the National Guard would be called up to augment the active forces or would be defeated without support if it stood up for the people.

This is why militias comprised of “the people” are included in the Constitution. Imagine if the people were allowed to form these militias in Los Angeles before the LA riots. Neighborhoods of people could defend their homes and businesses. Heck, one only needs to look at this picture from the riots of what property owners were doing to defend and protect their property. These citizens were protecting Korea town.

Korean-men-defending-Koreatown-during-the-1992-LA-riot

There are videos online of the LA Riots of literal gun battles between looters and armed merchants protecting their assets. There were no police officers anywhere nearby and it was left to the citizen to protect himself and his belongings.

But, Rawle pointed out the distinctions in his book between the two clauses in the 2nd Amendment and there are two. Of the second clause – the right of the people to keep and bear arms – he said the following:

The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious (ie: criminal – CJ) attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.

Rawle also understood that such rights are encumbered with certain responsibilities. Just because you have a right to “keep and bear arms” doesn’t mean you have a right to be an ass. Obviously, there is a certain etiquette to exercising all of our rights. For example, you can’t shout “FIRE” or “BOMB” in any crowded environment so as to induce panic. Rawle identified the limitation to exercising your 2nd Amendment rights this way:

This right ought not, however, in any government, to be abused to the disturbance of the public peace.

An assemblage of persons with arms, for an unlawful purpose, is an indictable offence, and even the carrying of arms abroad by a single, individual, attended with circumstances giving just reason to fear that he purposes to make an unlawful use of them, would be sufficient cause to require him to give surety of the peace. If he refused he would be liable to imprisonments.

In other words, ordering a Big Mac with fries and a Diet Dr. Pepper with a pistol in your hand would probably be defined as a “disturbance of the public peace.” Walking around the mall with an AK strapped to your back would probably also qualify as “an indictable offence.”

Rawle makes it quite clear that “the People” refers to individuals and not the military, or Militia. This isn’t someone over 200 years after the amendment was written trying to opine as to the true meaning of its words. This is of a man who was present during the debates and knew what the Founders meant when it was written.

onenationundersocialism

Another founding contemporary was Justice Story, a Supreme Court Associate Justice appointed by James Madison in 1811. He wrote a book called “Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States” in 1833. Again, this is a man that was present for the ensuing discussion and explanatory speeches by the Founders and writers of our Constitution. He obviously never imagined that we would have such Constitution-hating liberals filling offices to which they were sworn to protect and defend the very thing they hate.

The modern-day Democrat party talks more about the need to change the Constitution – and specifically the need to change the 2nd Amendment – than they talk about defending and supporting it. Without studying the words of those actually present during the 1880s to 1890s, they deign to just make up stuff and simply define that sacred document as “living” and “breathing.” Mayor Bloomingturd and Governor Cuckuomo obviously never “duly reflected upon the subject” of the meaning of the 2nd Amendment.

The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.

In his essay “Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution,” which was published in the Federal Gazette on June 18, 1789 Tench Coxe wrote that it is the responsibility of the people (again, speaking as individuals) to be the final check on government. He writes:

As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.

I could go on and on. There is simply no factual basis behind the 2nd Amendment referring specifically to hunting or even that it was intended to restrict certain arms simply because of their physical appearance. Today’s liberal elite and their zombie-like followers won’t “carry [them]selves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed” as Thomas Jefferson wrote to William Johnson in 1823 (please read the great book, “The Complete Jefferson” to find other nuggets of intellectual knowledge on the founding of this country). Instead, they assign new and evolving meaning that suits their collective agendas.

“The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” — Thomas Jefferson

Perhaps, this is really why the rulers in Washington are so intent on taking away our weapons. Let there be no doubt now as we engage our intellectual inferiors on this subject about the true meaning and intent of our Founders when they debated and passed the Bill of Rights and specifically the 2nd Amendment. It’s time to put gun control to bed once and for all.

And as for the belief that “if we just ban high capacity magazines, the shooter won’t kill as many people” I offer you the following video on just how long it takes a trained or practiced shooter to change the magazine on these so-called “assault rifles.”

YouTube Preview Image
This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, Constitution, Mass Murders. Bookmark the permalink. Saturday, December 22nd, 2012 at 10:02 pm
| 2,486 views

339 Responses to The Truth About The Right To Keep And Bear Arms

  1. Richard Wheeler says: 251

    Bees Looks like no NFL team wants Tebow and he’s expected to play in the Canadian Football League (CFL) next year.lol 449 t0 go

    ReplyReply
  2. Redteam says: 252

    @Richard Wheeler: Nope, Bees, don’t listen to him, Tebow will be in the NFL next year. you’ll see.

    ReplyReply
  3. Richard Wheeler
    did you mention that TEBOW HURT HIS CHEST CAGE BADLY AND WAS OUT FOR TRYING TO HEAL THAT VERY PAINFUL ACCIDENT,
    I would have not known if he hadn’t been in a commercial

    ReplyReply
  4. Richard Wheeler says: 254

    Bees Tebow is fine and played in Jet’s final game. Many great QB’S have played in CFL. Maybe you’ll get to see him play.

    ReplyReply
  5. Richard Wheeler
    I’m glad to know he’s fine
    thank’s for the info,
    we can do it, we need us all together,

    ReplyReply
  6. CJ
    what do you think of my choice,
    M 16, FOR ME, and for the women of this country who want to be able
    to defend them and children, against evil,
    HEY, I WANT MINE WITH A CROSS CARVED IN IT
    NOTHING WRONG WITH AN EXTRA PROTECTION,
    yes POWER IS MINE SAID THE LORD

    ReplyReply
  7. CJ says: 257

    @ilovebeeswarzone: Everyone should have an M16 or M4 style rifle. It is the duty of every citizen to possess the means to defend their homeland from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

    ReplyReply
  8. C J
    coming from a HERO,
    WE BETTER BELIEVE IT,
    THANK YOU

    ReplyReply
  9. Redteam
    have you ever heard of an underground deep in,being an airport very busy,
    connected with ALIENS, LANDING AND GOING, COVERED BY A BUSY MILITARY
    AIRFORCE, THE NAME OF FRESNO IS THERE AT THE UNDERGROUND FACILITY,
    THE PROGRAM ON TV IS ; CHASING UFO. AND THOSE 2 TEAMS ARE SERIOUSLY CHECKING IT
    WITH TALK WITH ON LOOKERS EXPERIENCES,
    VERY INTERESTING

    ReplyReply
  10. Hard Right says: 260

    @CJ:

    Let’s not leave out the AK-47 or versions thereof.
    :)

    ReplyReply
  11. retire05 says: 261

    If you want to know what happens when people are disarmed, and it becomes illegal to sell them firearms, ask the Cherokee…………………..or the Apache…………………….or the Navajo………….or the Creek……………or the, oh well, you get the drift.

    ReplyReply
  12. CJ says: 262

    @Hard Right: oh yeah. Since I have several versions of both and love shooting both.

    ReplyReply
  13. retire05
    hi,
    the INDIAN CHIEF OF A TRIBE IN WESTERN CANADA
    went on hunger strike so to get PRIME MINISTER TO GIVE A MEETING ABOUT TREATYS she is a woman of strong character.
    TO BE DISCUSS, HE FINALY AGREED FOR THE 11 JANUARY,
    AND IN ALL THE PROVINCES THERE ARE THE MULTIPLE TRIBES DOING STANOFF SO TO SUPPORT HER,
    as we know the INDIANS TREATYS have been not well met and obeyed,
    she want to seriously discuss it where she find it threaten and overlook,

    ReplyReply
  14. Redteam says: 264

    @ilovebeeswarzone:
    ilOVebEEswARzoNE, no, have not heard of it, but I will check it out, sounds interesting.

    ReplyReply
  15. Redteam says: 265

    @ilovebeeswarzone: found the series, set it to record on the 15th on Showtime.

    ReplyReply
  16. I found it on my shaw satellite space channel,
    you might find it interesting,
    I stayed a bit on the next show also about a man come back on earth after millions of years,
    I learned the whole CONTINENT WILL HAVE MERGE TOGETHER,
    CAN YOU BELIEVE HAVING TO LEARN ALL THOSE TONGUES
    bye

    ReplyReply
  17. retire05
    they are afraid of the people with guns, instead of focusing on criminals
    trying anything to get guns,
    that ‘s hiding their intent to control all the people and it’s the wrong intent hidden
    under the NEWTOWN MASSACRE, they even where not happy about the teacher armed,
    mean again their intent is not for helping the school children and teacher,
    no it’s control definitely, you see the TSA IS BIGGER THAN STARTED AND MORE ROBUST,
    WHERE THEY KNOW THAT THE TRAVELERS HATE THEM,
    but they won’t change any thing, their intent is not on the people’swish to have it gone,
    it only serve the intent of OBAMA to give it to his union’s brotherhood, LOOK HOW FAST IT HAS BEEN UNIONYZE AFTER IT STARTED, AND THEY EXPANDING TO TRAINS AND OTHER SOON.

    ReplyReply
  18. Richard Wheeler says: 268

    Bees #256 says “want my rifle with a cross carved in it” You can kill in the name of Jesus. Righteous.

    ReplyReply
  19. Richard Wheeler
    not exactly, I would have kill criminal and find strength from JESUS,
    because I’m not a killer like the one I would have been force to kill,
    like all the gun owners are not killers, but they can kill the criminals
    if attack or see it happening, to save lives, as a MARINE YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I MEAN

    ReplyReply
  20. retire05 says: 270

    @Richard Wheeler:

    There was a time, and a president, who was not afraid to ask for God’s protection as he sent soldiers into battle. How is that any different than asking for God’s protection against any enemy that would want to harm you? Do you think those soldiers were going into battle with Welcome Wagon gift baskets, or the best firearms thast our nation could build?

    I suggest you read FDR’s public prayer, given on the radio, on June 6, 1944. We were not always the Godless nation, with Godless men running it, that we are now.

    “Oh, but that is different” you will say, “We were at war.” Well news flash, Richard, anyone who tries to harm my family, or me, is at war with me and I will use whatever means I can to defeat them, and I will pray that God makes my aim true.

    ReplyReply
  21. retire05
    wow that was so well express,
    thank you

    ReplyReply
  22. retire05 says: 272

    Harken we beseech Thee, O Lord, to our prayers and deign to bless with the right hand of Thy Majesty this sword assault weapon with which They servant desires to be girded, that it may be a defense of churches, widows, orphans, and all Thy servants against the scourge of pagans, that is may be the terror and dread of all evil-doers, and that it may be just in both attack and defense.

    ReplyReply
  23. RETIRE05
    WHAT A NICE PRAYER, ESPECIALLY MADE FOR IT THE GUN OWNER,
    THANK YOU AGAIN
    I really like it

    ReplyReply
  24. Richard Wheeler says: 274

    Bees Are you really concerned about someone attacking you or are you just puffing your chest and flapping your wings like some others on here? Do you live in fear because you are not armed? Seriously.

    ReplyReply
  25. Richard Wheeler
    I am feeling what the good people are feeling,
    I was attack about 3 times some pass years, so I know the feeling , the fear was there too,
    WHO KNOWS IF YOU’RE SAFE, BUT TO BE PREPARE GIVE YOU A CERTAIN SECURITY,
    SO I’m projecting my views and feeling.

    ReplyReply
  26. Richard Wheeler says: 276

    Bees Do you plan to purchase a rifle and learn to use it? I ASK THIS VERY SERIOUSLY.

    ReplyReply
  27. Scott in Oklahoma says: 277

    @Richard Wheeler: Here’s a concept that may be foreign to you Richard… I carry a gun nearly every time I leave the house. Not for my own protection, not because it might make me feel like a bad ass, and not because of any kind of paranoia. I carry a gun just on the off chance that I find myself at the wrong place, at the wrong time, and see the need to step up to the plate to stop a violent attack from continuing. Like the armed civilian in the Oregon mall, who stepped up and probably saved many lives by confronting an armed assailant. The thought of going through the rest of my life knowing that had I been adequately prepared (armed), people would not have gotten injured or killed is not something I want to live with. The Lubby’s incident in Texas changed my life and the way I feel about carrying a firearm and having the ability to head off a tragedy. It’s not fear that causes me to be armed, it is a genuine concern for the safety of others.

    ReplyReply
  28. Scott in Oklahoma
    thank you, for making it precise to why we want to have a weapon,
    that is the right why.

    ReplyReply
  29. Richard Wheeler
    I just notice the black MOON
    JUST BE CAREFUL, SHE CAN BRING BAD THINGS,
    I always notice it. many times, the mentaly ill get influence by that MOON.

    ReplyReply
  30. Richard Wheeler says: 280

    Scott Whatever floats your boat. I get pleasure in feeding the homeless and volunteering at Wounded Warriors.
    Bees Do you plan to buy a rifle so you can protect yourself and others?

    Semper Fi

    ReplyReply
  31. Richard Wheeler
    it ‘s in my mind yes

    ReplyReply
  32. Richard Wheeler says: 282

    Bees Let me know when it becomes reality rather than fantasy.

    ReplyReply
  33. Scott in Oklahoma says: 283

    @Richard Wheeler: You really don’t understand Richard. My being armed has nothing at all to do with being getting pleasure. You, on the other hand, have mentioned before your feeding the homeless and the WWP. Here’s the difference; I do what I do out of my self imposed obligation to others, hence my 35 years of public service. You, on the other hand, volunteer mainly out of selfishness and your ability to brag that “you serve others less fortunate”, making yourself look superior in your own eyes. I have known many people like you, who get great pleasure out of belittling others to make themselves look better. That obviously floats your boat.

    ReplyReply
  34. Richard Wheeler says: 284

    Scott Plain and simple I help those in need and less fortunate almost everyday. You’re in some macho fantasy which is substantially less likely to transpire than you being hit by lightning.
    How am I ‘belittling’ wounded Vets by helping them out as needed?

    Semper Fi

    ReplyReply
  35. Richard Wheeler
    don’t you ruffles your feathers,
    Scott is one of us, we like him too

    ReplyReply
  36. Scott in Oklahoma says: 286

    @Richard Wheeler: You seem to have a comprehension problem, or maybe I’m just not clear enough. The wounded vets are not the ones you belittle, anyone who doesn’t meet your “standard of giving” are your targets. Your little comments about my supposed “macho fantasy” are a perfect example. If you knew me, and knew my history, you would realize how far off the mark your opinion of me is. But hey, it’s your world too, and you are not significant enough in mine to have the ability to insult or belittle me. And I now believe any response to you will be a waste of time, so I won’t bother anymore.

    ReplyReply
  37. Redteam says: 287

    @retire05: FDR was pretty much a phony. He got the US into WWII to improve the economy, mostly his.

    ReplyReply
  38. Richard Wheeler says: 288

    Scott This started with me asking Bees if she planned to purchase and learn to safely use a rifle.
    You jumped in and accused me of belittling people.
    On this beautiful Sabbath I remind all of Christ’s message to help “the least ,the lost and the lonely.” Have a blessed day.

    Redteam FDR into WWII to improve the economy.You think it better if we’d stayed out?
    Hope only the bad guys are killed by guns in the hands of civilians. That’s an understatement.

    ReplyReply
  39. Redteam says: 289

    @Richard Wheeler: Richard, I’d like to know that each family in the US has a rifle in their home (with the exception of felons and nuts) and I’d like for every criminal to know that every home has firearms. I hope only the deserving ones get shot with them.

    ReplyReply
  40. CJ says: 290

    @Redteam: Amen to that! May more violent criminals find the business end of an AR.

    ReplyReply
  41. Redteam
    regarding the ‘FELONS’ IT’S NOT RIGHT TO PUT THEM ALL ON THE SAME LABEL,
    SOME ARE NOT A DANGER TO SOCIETY
    as a matter of fact most of them are not even deserving the name so easily spread,and they have paid
    their debts to society who still call them felon no more should be attach to them,
    they are AMERICANS, THEY ARE UNABLE TO FIND WORK BECAUSE THEY MADE ONE MISTAKE AND
    REGRET IT,AND PAID FOR IT,
    THEY SHOULD BE PART OF THE SOCIETY AND ACCEPTED IN THE WORK PLACE,
    THERE IS MANY HUNDREDS THOUSAND OF THEM, RENDERED MISERABLE, SOME MORE WHO CANNOT RECOVER FROM HAVING BEEN SO REJECT BY SOCIETY who for many are worse and corrupt
    who get away with it, and by measure would not compete with many felon as far as decency.
    that felon label must be out of the society and given to only the dangerous people who deserve it,
    the other must be rid of the label anywhere it is found by a company, so to give their life back to AMERICANS WHO SUFFER FOR A LIFETIME BECAUSE OF ONE MISTAKE

    ReplyReply
  42. Redteam says: 292

    @ilovebeeswarzone: Well, I do agree it should be on a case by case basis. But if the crime involved the use of a deadly weapon, it would be a ‘no’.

    ReplyReply
  43. Redteam
    yes if the person has use one of those to commit the crime he is accused of,
    I agree to that, and I like the case by case instead of the word
    branding them all in that word as one homogenic group
    bye

    ReplyReply
  44. Redteam
    there could be exception if they have join the MIITARY,
    but I HEARD THEY ARE NOT ACCEPTED IN THE MILITARY,
    THAT IS TROUBLING, BECAUSE THE DISCIPLINE WOULD BE VERY GOOD TO THEM.

    ReplyReply
  45. Redteam says: 295

    @ilovebeeswarzone: No, Bees, I’ve been in the military and one thing you do not need is a lot of felons. I wouldn’t want to have to bunk next to a rapist or child molester, or murderer

    ReplyReply
  46. Redteam
    why did you pick those, my pick is not those,
    it’s for example one who beat up a pervert friend of his divorce wife who try to rape his son,
    why in the hell was he convicted, another at 17 rob a bicyle, another made an error
    on a cash return change, and was accuse of doing so willingly, at a young age he was mix up by a customer big mouth, another was sending a collector sword to his brother at the mail box place, he did not know it was illegal, another for being caught with drug small amount for himself,
    thing like that where they end up in prison and rehab for a year, there is a post full of those
    and they are the one I think where over accused

    ReplyReply
  47. Hard Right says: 297

    @Richard Wheeler:

    Macho fantasies?
    Says the guy who’s challenged others to meet him face to face. Talk about suffering from delusional macho fantasies.
    Scott has you pegged. You help others strictly to feed your oversized and unearned ego.
    You are a hypocritical and narcissistic P.O.S.

    ReplyReply
  48. Hard Right
    hi,
    I would like the rifle that the wife of DR POL USE TO SHOOT
    THE CANTALOUP ON THEIR PROPERTY.

    ReplyReply
  49. Richard Wheeler says: 299

    H.R You’re a sad, lonely and frustrated old fool.
    Semper Fi

    ReplyReply
  50. Richard Wheeler
    okay same to you
    semper fi

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>