Page 12 of 14 « First<1011121314>
Topic Options
#57665 - 07/27/11 09:54 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Of course knife wielding maniacs don't do as much damage as gun wielding maniacs but it's not that those maniacs are a normal phenomena. It's like serial killers; you'll always have them but they tend to be a minority compared to normal killers.

But the real issue is that when the State takes your weapons, it robs you of an option. It tells you it is for your own good and that there are cops protecting you. But none is protecting you, it is impossible unless they're going to put one cop next to each civilian. And then a cop next to that cop just to make sure the first cop will never freak out.

The truth is that you're on your own and that the only one being able to protect you when needed are you yourself. A gun isn't going to save you by definition but it adds an option towards the improvisation you'll have to do when shit hits the fan. It might be just the thing needed to make sure you, or those you love, survive. It might not be needed at all but when you got no weapons, anyone with them always has a big advantage.

In the end, it all is about having them protect you, or trying it yourself. The odds the cavalry will be there in time were never that great. That's why they have the body bags ready.

D.

Top
#57666 - 07/27/11 10:09 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: ]
Nemesis Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2175
Loc: US
But then what do you do when a member of the military takes out innocents, as in the case of the Fort Hood in the US shootings a couple of years ago? He's more than qualified to handle a firearm, is in a position of authority. When people like him start taking people out, who/what is the average citizen supposed to turn to?

It's marginally easier for Australia to limit contraband, by virtue of it being surrounded by water on all sides. Europe and the US don't have that option. We have Mexicans digging tunnels into the US, smuggling drugs, weapons and migrant workers in and out of the country.

I don't see what the big deal is, since the majority of gun-related deaths consist of suicides. If someone wants to be an idiot and Kurt Cobain themselves, who are we to say "no, jump off a bridge instead please"? We need to maintain that high suicide rate to counteract the illegals sneaking over the borders ;\)
_________________________
Nothing is sacred.

Top
#57674 - 07/28/11 12:39 AM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Diavolo]
Nyte Offline
member


Registered: 10/19/09
Posts: 380
Loc: Ohio
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
But the real issue is that when the State takes your weapons, it robs you of an option. It tells you it is for your own good and that there are cops protecting you. But none is protecting you, it is impossible unless they're going to put one cop next to each civilian. And then a cop next to that cop just to make sure the first cop will never freak out.

The truth is that you're on your own and that the only one being able to protect you when needed are you yourself. A gun isn't going to save you by definition but it adds an option towards the improvisation you'll have to do when shit hits the fan. It might be just the thing needed to make sure you, or those you love, survive. It might not be needed at all but when you got no weapons, anyone with them always has a big advantage.

In the end, it all is about having them protect you, or trying it yourself. The odds the cavalry will be there in time were never that great. That's why they have the body bags ready.

D.


Diavolo, you are completely correct!

I have a question for anyone that is arguing against owning a gun. Have any of you ever had to call the police because someone shot at your home? When our front window was hit by the idiot that shot up the neighborhood houses with a bb gun, I called the police and simply told them our house had been shot at. While on the phone with them, they never asked what kind of gun/bullet or what was hit. They didn't ask anything other than if anyone had been hit. When I told them no it took them better than 20 minutes to get here (we live exactly 3 minutes from the police station and that's IF you catch the 2 lights in between). I know it was just a bb gun but the police didn't know that, nor did I, until a bit later. However, I realized that night it is up to us to take care of ourselves. PERIOD.

I NEVER wanted a gun in my home but will have one by this winter. I've registered for a class and will get to handle a few different types of hand guns to see which one I prefer. Both of my boys will also go to gun classes. It's no longer an option and we don't live "in da hood" but in what was a very decent area. It's filtering down and soon this won't be a town that's worth a shit either (a lot like my other half's home town).

It's simple really. CYOA and any way you need to!

As for that looneypieceofshit....He will deserve all that he hopefully gets. The least he could have done was go after those that directly affected him, not teens, not kids. They hadn't affected him and shouldn't have been his target. He's a pussy and hopefully a "Big Bubba" will find him in jail or someone will when they shuttle him back and forth for trial.
_________________________
If only just for today.....

Top
#57687 - 07/28/11 04:14 AM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Diavolo]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
But the real issue is that when the State takes your weapons, it robs you of an option. It tells you it is for your own good and that there are cops protecting you. But none is protecting you, it is impossible unless they're going to put one cop next to each civilian. And then a cop next to that cop just to make sure the first cop will never freak out.


In a well working society there is no huge need to actively protect everyone by manpower. In a healthy culture shootings are not common. The feel of a need for firearms point more to the society being sick than anything else. Obviously there is a big difference here. In Sweden I think very, very few are worried about gunfire (no one I have ever known have expressed worries about this). In the US it seems like people are very worried about it (out of the americans I know many have expressed their worries about firearm in direct relation to themselves). I dont know about Belgium but I think it says more about a countrys general culture and situation really.

 Originally Posted By: Nyte
I have a question for anyone that is arguing against owning a gun. Have any of you ever had to call the police because someone shot at your home?


No that hasnt happened to me and there is a good reason for that. These things barely happens in Sweden at all. Im sure you can find one or two examples here and there but in general it is a non-existent phenomenon over here. Now I realize this has to do with alot more than strict gun control. Hoever I think that strict gun control is one part of this reason.

To argue the rights for anyone having a gun because other people has a gun will only lead to circle reasoning and such politics wont go to the source of the problem - that being that loads of people walk around with guns!

I dont think you can fight gun related crime by increasing the amount of guns in circulation even among the so called "good people". The way to decrease it is to decrease the amount of guns avaliable for people to use - legal or not.

Top
#57697 - 07/28/11 11:03 AM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
A well working society and a healthy culture are indeed the issue. I don't know what age you are but when looking back, do you see improvement?

I know, things always looked better in the past and much of what we think these days is affected by a direct global communication but I remember quite well that we didn't lock our doors when I was young, or our cars. I remember quite well immigrants never were a problem. I grew up in an area which had coal mining, so immigrants were a normal thing to us. I went to school with Greeks, Polish, Italians...etc. I still know many of them and the differences are solely a matter of some typical names, or some slight genetics.

Now mind you, I fully understand that times change, that societies evolve. But strangely, the more “civilized” we have become, the more problems appeared. The more tolerant and open-minded, the more we get fucked it seems. When looking around, I see a whole lot more cops. But the population surely did not increase at that rate.

Now, I'm surely not going to say it is all to blame at those last generation immigrants. It isn't. It is us. Somewhere we traded something valuable to gain our precious individuality, for our insatiable urge to consume and apparently, that what we sacrificed to this appears to be essential. Maybe it was our individual responsibility, our sense for our own community.

We squandered our own culture, gave our own responsibility to the government who gladly accepted it, and focused solely on that what matters, we ourselves. Christianity robbed us of our values, and now we freely traded in our souls. For some mirrors and cheap jewelry.

We became children again, without care, without responsibility, and upon the first sign of trouble, crying for our Mother.

A well working society and a healthy culture are indeed the issue.

D.

Top
#57699 - 07/28/11 12:45 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Diavolo]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
You are right on the money.

When I was young we never left the car unlocked but usually didnt bother to lock the doors to our house while at home. In the summertime we often had the doors wide open to create a draft (is that the word Im looking for?). To be honest I wouldnt be surprised if they still do the same in that area today. In the countryside people still dont lock their doors that frequently. Today I always lock my door even though we havent had any problems with break-ins and such. The culture has changed to better safe than sorry I guess.

Immigrants themselves are not the biggest problem. The biggest problem is us - the society they come to. We allow them to alienate themselves when we shouldnt, for example, let them settle down wherever they want. They should be strategically placed so that they had to conform to the culture and thus become a part of society. The biggest immigration related problem in Sweden today is that they all settle in the same place (big city suburbs) and there they depend on eachother, not the Swedish society, and thus they never enter our society. Heck, people have been here for 10+ years and cant speak Swedish and then survive only on allowances.

It may sound strange to some Satanists but we need to strengthen our culture and not let everyone choose for themselves what is good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable. To create a healthy nation we need a healthy culture. I wholeheartedly agree when you wrote that "we became children again, without care, without responsibility, and upon the first sign of trouble, crying for our Mother."

A healthy society needs values and Id rather live in a healthy society than an unhealthy one. The cream will always rise to the top anyway. We need to reclaim our culture and strengthen it. Otherwise we will continue to degenerate.

Top
#57700 - 07/28/11 12:55 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Diavolo]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
I see improvements in many areas. In others, not so much.

Our curse is that we forget. It seems our problems today (many of which are simply manufactured out of nothingness) are huge, but they are only relative to those forgotten issues. For example, you cite cops increasing faster than population - but (in the US anyway) violent crime has been decreasing for decades. The year of Columbine had less school shootings than previous years. But nobody gets paid to keep you well-informed ;\)

That's a separate issue from the consumption mentality. Really, I'm not clear that it could be any different. Humans have evolved to fight for survival and breeding, but there's no universal directive on what to do with disposable income. I discovered the original Star Trek on Netflix last night, and I remember thinking that if there's no money needed in a few hundred years, 99.9% of the population will be couch potatoes and just a few will join Star Fleet. That's just the nature of the species. People get the government they deserve. Oh, and that reminds me of this:

 Originally Posted By: Alexander Tytler
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage.


Yes, yes, it's apocryphal, but the sentiment is the main point, not the accuracy of the quote. After food and shelter are safely taken care of, what real needs does the average man have, if he does have the spark of the black flame in his heart?
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
#57701 - 07/28/11 01:59 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Autodidact]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
You are indeed right, the moment our basic needs are met, we become slackers. It might be argued that the natural human condition is being economical; if effort is not needed, there will none be done, and only through pressure human rises above their current status. Through suffering, learning comes.

In our current societies, our basic needs are met. Almost under all conditions. Our focus shifts from improvement towards distraction. It shifts from the outside to the inside. The societal and governing political memes promote pure individuality; an equality in being. Every concern is purely about us. We are constantly distracted and provided new distractions. We are addicted to these distractions. We can't live without television, we can't live without a steady flow of new movies, new music, new games. We need to be entertained all the time, at all costs. We can't handle not being entertained.

We stumbled from the industrial age into the entertainment age. We are truly Homo Ludens. No responsibility, no vision, only entertainment in mind. And at the same time our democracy shifts into a subtle tyranny. It is our nanny solving our problems and keeping us safe. We grant it all power it demands as long as we just keep being entertained. And at the same time, we weaken from within.

We are living in a bubble which can't but collapse but as long as we are watching Big Brother, we don't even notice. We simply do not care.

D.

Top
#57715 - 07/28/11 07:47 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Sean the Mystic]
magnitudo Offline
banned
stranger


Registered: 07/22/11
Posts: 33
Loc: Italy
I can see here in Europe that there is an invasion of other people strangers. It could be better an union of cultures but the fact is that they want to take the control. Every race want to take the control here in Europe and the Europe responds with a closed partitocracy without love for the European people. So I hope in an Europe that live in peace and so that everyone help who is in difficulties and not against them. The violence is not a response. R.I.P. in Norway.
_________________________
magnitudo magic peace friendship

Top
#57717 - 07/28/11 07:54 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
Who is then to judge who is worthy and not?


If someone tries to kill you, they are worthy of themselves being killed first.

 Quote:
There will also be an increased number of people dead that didnt in the slightest deserve it.


Doubtful. More people with guns = More "good" people with guns = criminal types will have to think twice about pulling their gun on someone.

 Quote:
If a country bans guns except for people who have a sepcific use for them (like hunters) they will become less avaliable to the vast majority of the countrys inhabitants. Its not rocket science.


There's this thing, maybe you've heard of it, it's called lying. One could easily say they have specific use for it when in reality it is different from what they say. Also, people (like hunters) could still use their gun for other purposes. It's not rocket science.

 Quote:
The number of guns might not decrease but the avaliability will and there will perhaps be fewer new industries started to produce hand guns in said country.


If the number of guns remains the same, there can be no decrease in availability. There will always be gunsmiths. Ranging from your large companies like Glock, H&K, Mossberg et al. to your garage gunsmith.

 Quote:
And again, my argument is that less guns, legal or illegal = less deaths of all kinds related to gun violence.


And again, good luck decreasing the number of guns. I'm not giving mine up and I don't no anyone else who is willing to either. To quote Heston, "You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead hands!"

 Quote:
In a country with strict gun control there will be less guns and therefore the access to them wont be as high and therefore deaths and violence by gunfire will be reduced.


And instead you will see an increase in other types of violence. People use guns to kill because it is quick and easy. But, gun or not, if someone wants to kill someone else they will find a way.

 Quote:
I dont have numbers but I doubt that a ban on guns will create more deadly violence.


It's not that it would create more, it's that it would just create a different type. On the other hand, it could create more. A ban on guns is not the same as the removal of all guns from a country. It just means that criminal types would be the only ones with guns. Some (like me) would be criminals simply because they refused to turn in their guns whereas others are the ones that will capitalize on the lack of guns and use their having one to their advantage. Thus creating more gun violence.

 Quote:
What do you think would be the difference between two identical countries, with the same laws, only that one of them had strict gun control and the other not?


The difference would be that I would only want to live in one of them.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#57760 - 07/29/11 03:51 AM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: 6Satan6Archist6
 Quote:
Who is then to judge who is worthy and not?


If someone tries to kill you, they are worthy of themselves being killed first.


See its not that easy. There are something called laws and you will have to be assembeled to a court if you killed another person. Ultimately its not you who decides whats wrong and right in the view of society. Of course we have our own morals and ethics but we cannot count on them but has to see the big picture.

 Quote:
Doubtful. More people with guns = More "good" people with guns = criminal types will have to think twice about pulling their gun on someone.


It also means more "bad people" with guns. And "less experienced" people with guns. And "less responsible" people with guns. I doubt a criminal would think twice about using a gun just because other people might have one. Over here they dont use guns because people in general dont have them so there is no need for guns - what a noble concept, eh?

 Quote:
There's this thing, maybe you've heard of it, it's called lying. One could easily say they have specific use for it when in reality it is different from what they say. Also, people (like hunters) could still use their gun for other purposes. It's not rocket science.

If the number of guns remains the same, there can be no decrease in availability. There will always be gunsmiths. Ranging from your large companies like Glock, H&K, Mossberg et al. to your garage gunsmith.


If a country bans guns the avaliability of them will decrease even if the number of guns in the world stay the same. less people will own a gun and even less will use it. Its the same as with drugs in a healthy society. In Sweden marijuana is banned and in the Netherlands its legal. The avaliability is larger in one country and the use is larger in one country. The amount avaliable in the world is still the same. laws do make a difference if enforced.

 Quote:

And instead you will see an increase in other types of violence. People use guns to kill because it is quick and easy. But, gun or not, if someone wants to kill someone else they will find a way.


I think that other types of deadly violence might increase but never reach the same level of deadly violence as there would be if guns were legal all along. Yes if someone really wants to kill another person he will do it no matter what. There is a huge difference in the mortality rate depending on what weapon is used.

 Quote:
The difference would be that I would only want to live in one of them.


I am very happy living in a country where we dont even have to bother being afraid to be shot at because it practically doest happen here. Who draws the shortest straw? The one who is so concerned about his safety that he has to own a gun to feel safer even in his own neighbourhood or the one living in a society that is practically free from gun violence and is not concerned to arm himself with any weapon?

With that said I think its time to for me to leave the discussion since we're both just repeating our arguments and its clear that neither will make the other one change his (her?) mind.

Until the next time...

Top
#57764 - 07/29/11 08:55 AM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
The issue is that we are fed the idea that gun control does solve "things". The problem is, we don't really know what those "things" are it solves but we still think that it is very good.

But did you ever see evidence? I mean, real numbers detailing which "things" are actually solved?

D.

Top
#57771 - 07/29/11 12:18 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
See its not that easy. There are something called laws and you will have to be assembeled to a court if you killed another person.


Actually, it is that easy. Self-preservation is the highest law and if someone is presenting an immediate threat to my well-being I can and will react with deadly force. Sure, it might go to court but an act of self-defence will be seen as such.

 Quote:
I doubt a criminal would think twice about using a gun just because other people might have one.


Oh really? A thought experiment: if you were planning on robbing someone at gunpoint would you choose your victim out of a crowd of people leaving an NRA meeting or would you rather rob someone who is leaving an anti-gun rally?

 Quote:
If a country bans guns the avaliability of them will decrease even if the number of guns in the world stay the same.


Only for people who are willing to obey the laws. Those are not the type of people you should be worried about anyway. So, again, the banning of guns will not help a damn thing.

 Quote:
In Sweden marijuana is banned and in the Netherlands its legal. The avaliability is larger in one country and the use is larger in one country.


The Netherlands has a lower amount of marijuana use than the USA. Prohibition still doesn't work.

 Quote:
Over here they dont use guns because people in general dont have them so there is no need for guns - what a noble concept, eh?


It is better to have and not need than to need and not have.

 Quote:
I think that other types of deadly violence might increase but never reach the same level of deadly violence as there would be if guns were legal all along.


And I believe it would meet that level. This is, of course, merely speculation on both are parts and there is only one way to find out.

 Quote:
I am very happy living in a country where we dont even have to bother being afraid to be shot at because it practically doest happen here. Who draws the shortest straw? The one who is so concerned about his safety that he has to own a gun to feel safer even in his own neighbourhood or the one living in a society that is practically free from gun violence and is not concerned to arm himself with any weapon?


Not everyone who buys a gun does so out of fear. I like shooting and cleaning my guns, it's relaxing for me. Where I live is generally a safe place. Most of the crimes out here consist of DUI, petty theft and drug sales/possesion. I'm not worried about being shot - unless I am in Portland - in which case I am more worried about being shot by the police than anyone else.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#57775 - 07/29/11 04:48 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
I like your direct and no nonsense approach 6. Just thought I'd add some thoughts not so entirely unrelated.

I can't condone what Captain Norway went about doing but Noble caste was always the barbarian caste. No fabricated laws or convenient fiction can decide over Nature's law, the master, with a natural Nature, barbarian in every terrible sense, in possession of unbroken strength of will and desire for power, man of prey.

I can only think of two types of people who are exemplary of such barbarism— one kind is utterly despicable if not only for aiming at children, women, the other is Noble if not only for destruction of his lesser, peasantry sub-male.

I'd posit that it is a man's masculinity that decides on his actions most of all over any other psychological factors. Do we see women committing homicidal atrocities on the same scale as us menfolk? Surely not. I can see that Captain Norway was misogynistic and also fundamentalist Christian in his opposition to matriarchy.

Inspired by my readings of the 2083 manifesto, a few thoughts. Although affirming many aspects of current affairs, Captain Norway was deftly afraid that matriarchy would lead to androgyny (neither clearly masculine nor clearly feminine) taking over in society, hence ruining his idealisation which was in all knowing to him "malign optimism" a deliberately made impossible and unrealistic goal for which to build reason for atrocity upon it's ruination.

His view of matriarchy is false. We could use the example of feminism which has no opposite and is naysaying in counter to abuse on the side of patriarchy, a double negative, it's an abstraction, now, matriarchy and patriarchy in classical indo-European societies lived for and appreciated their differences, the opposites thrives from their appreciation of one another. In this Jesuitical patriarch disequilibrium we have as a society, it's no surprise that despicable males run rampant— there is no natural aristocratic culling of the ranks. What on earth am I illiterately scrawling about?

In an enclosed society of herd moralists, the utilitarian opportunist feels confident and safe, until faced with his natural master, and inevitable conclusion... It's all a matter of the Jesuitical society being self assured that none are left to their own devices, and sure enough, this is true for the most part among their caste, however, what develops in plain sight is the psychopath who's thoughts are so deeply esoteric and malevolent that all societies laws and morality does is cultivate more repressed rage and provide a convenient veil of deceit. \:\)

 Quote:
Actually, it is that easy. Self-preservation is the highest law and if someone is presenting an immediate threat to my well-being I can and will react with deadly force. Sure, it might go to court but an act of self-defence will be seen as such.


There's the reality of it plain and simple. So true. You can kill in defence of family too. Acting in self defence or in defence of another is generally accepted as legal justification for killing an assailant. Although any form of "baiting" is completely illegal.

The laws of self defence are very clear, and we can't stress this enough can we.


Edited by Hegesias (07/29/11 05:18 PM)
Edit Reason: censor
_________________________


Top
#57779 - 07/29/11 06:54 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Nyte Offline
member


Registered: 10/19/09
Posts: 380
Loc: Ohio
 Originally Posted By: 6Satan6Archist6
 Quote:
I doubt a criminal would think twice about using a gun just because other people might have one.


Oh really? A thought experiment: if you were planning on robbing someone at gunpoint would you choose your victim out of a crowd of people leaving an NRA meeting or would you rather rob someone who is leaving an anti-gun rally?


Ever see the story about the dipshit that tried to rob a gun shop? The end result is Priceless! I "Snoped" it just to be sure but here it is....lmao

http://www.snopes.com/crime/dumdum/gunshop.asp

 Originally Posted By: 6Satan6Archist6
 Quote:
If a country bans guns the availability of them will decrease even if the number of guns in the world stay the same.


Only for people who are willing to obey the laws. Those are not the type of people you should be worried about anyway. So, again, the banning of guns will not help a damn thing.


Banning guns will only help the criminals because "average Joe" is now pretty much defenseless if he abides by the law. Banning guns would help one thing....the criminals.

The comparison is like apples and oranges here. 311 million plus compared to a country of 9 million plus. Illegals abound, drugs abound, crimes abound and honest citizens that should be able to protect themselves and another country that has "closed" boarders, "limited" illegals, and drugs are dealt with....Yeah, not a comparison at all. But then again, I do believe Nemesis and even Diavolo (in a round about way) pointed this out all ready. If the situations had been comparable, that would be one thing, but they're not.
_________________________
If only just for today.....

Top
Page 12 of 14 « First<1011121314>


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.033 seconds of which 0.004 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.