Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:40:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2015 18:21:55 GMT -5
....and if he reloaded his weapon five times, someone could have jumped him while he was reloading, but they didn't. If ONE person- let alone many- in that room jumped him, the outcome would have been different.
And if that "one person" had been a 98 pound woman... do you think she'd have been much of a match for him if she'd "jumped on him" versus shooting him when she was behind a pew or something?
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,722
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
Member is Online
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Jun 20, 2015 18:27:28 GMT -5
I'm late to this and couldn't decide who to quote on seniors having a gun. I am one who has a 380 automatic. But I've had a gun since 1989. I go to the shooting range about twice a year. I don' carry it with me all the time but it goes on the road when I travel alone and it sits on night stand by bed at night. One in the chamber and full clip and safety is off. Hope I never have to use it but enter my home uninvited and I will protect myself.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:40:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2015 18:28:48 GMT -5
After reading what you have written here deziloooooo I'm not sure I understand why you think is a game to encourage an elderly parent to be trained to use a weapon (gun) if one is needed by them. This an age thing for you? Only the young are capable? Do you know them?
As a senior who lives with other seniors..{over 55 community..} who also associates with other seniors who have experienced violence , participated in..VFW as well as volunteer at Veteran Hospital..Young and old are there...and most of us have realized and come to grips with the fact that we are not the young studs { not referring to the sexual aspects but that too probably } that we were 40 or more years ago. Eyesight, strength, agility, reflects...we admit diminished and we were trained well and many of us had experience in doing and participating, leading others....yet today we mostly agree , not really up to confrontation..not that we wouldn't try..last resort.. To see that one is hoping to have a 75 year old mother put themselves in a active situation..and assuming she is probably in good health but still 75..assuming is not experienced beyond just possible some rudamentery fire arm experiences if that..yep..I have to ask ..why? Is she really in such situations though granted as the thread is mentioning these situations are popping up in the weirdest places but still...However, if who ever is the one is comfortable with arming his mother or was it grandmother...so be it..I still ask ..Why... To put it in perspective..I am experienced..I have partaken and done it..but knowing my current capabilities ... no I have no interest in acquiring a permit to carry...at least at this time...though down the road...we'll have to see...If I was younger and more youth capable..different story.. However...the premise of the thread...should for those who are capable, pass the venting...because of what I see happening today here , in the world...for those who want to ..should we make it easier and actually acceptable to carry, and when we see such folks ..{even when done discreetly...it is easy to spot actually..coats, jackets ride up...clothes don't fit properly..drag a bit..} don't get our knickers all in a uproar..just accept it...not the case for most of us today though for me , getting to accept it more...have gotten away with my thoughts of the past of.." You idiot..why? ".. For the record, I hope she NEVER has to use her concealed weapon. Never. Not ever. So no, I'm not "hoping to have a 75 year old mother put themselves in a active situation"... I'm hoping that if she NEEDS TO, she can.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 20, 2015 18:33:15 GMT -5
....and if he reloaded his weapon five times, someone could have jumped him while he was reloading, but they didn't. If ONE person- let alone many- in that room jumped him, the outcome would have been different.
And if that "one person" had been a 98 pound woman... do you think she'd have been much of a match for him if she'd "jumped on him" versus shooting him when she was behind a pew or something? What pew? It happened in a basement meeting room. I'm sure if a 98 pound woman jumped him, others would have joined in. You think they'd just sit there while he pistol-whipped her?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:40:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2015 18:42:22 GMT -5
And if that "one person" had been a 98 pound woman... do you think she'd have been much of a match for him if she'd "jumped on him" versus shooting him when she was behind a pew or something? What pew? It happened in a basement meeting room. I'm sure if a 98 pound woman jumped him, others would have joined in. You think they'd just sit there while he pistol-whipped her?
Well... I did say "or something"... but you missed the entire point of my question. What chance would she have if "she jumped him" vs. "she shoot him from a distance or from behind something"? Which one has a lower likelihood of HER getting seriously injured? The truth that anti-gun people don't want to acknowledge is... guns, in the hands of people that ONLY want to protect themselves and/or others, CAN save lives. And it's still true as it always has been. The best defense against a bad guy with a gun is... a good guy with a gun.
|
|
MJ2.0
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 24, 2014 10:27:09 GMT -5
Posts: 10,972
|
Post by MJ2.0 on Jun 20, 2015 22:12:25 GMT -5
Are you seriously asking me if I think a person who murdered 9 people in cold blood deserves to die? No, I am asking you if you want the other prisoners to murder the guy. Not "want" so much as "if this guy somehow magically finds himself in general popp, you don't have to act with lightning speed to get him out."
|
|
MJ2.0
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 24, 2014 10:27:09 GMT -5
Posts: 10,972
|
Post by MJ2.0 on Jun 20, 2015 22:13:11 GMT -5
No, I am asking you if you want the other prisoners to murder the guy. And, from me, do you support no consequence to those who do murder the guy? Of course they should be punished - it's not The Purge.... yet.
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Jun 20, 2015 22:31:14 GMT -5
And fixed for you.
This little scum bucket has a history of hatred.
Even his clothing was adorned with symbols/badges of certain groups. In the pic, he's holding a Confederate flag, and a weapon. The expression on his face speaks volumes.
The little punk didn't attend school, or care about an education - his mission was to kill - and it was planned - targeting a specific group.
The shootings were premeditated. I hope the trial is swift and he's dealt with according to the crimes he committed (again, premeditated murder against a specific group). There's only one punishment fitting of him.
The only redeeming factor is that he was stopped (at least for now) while he's still young - and before he did more harm or got involved in more serious hate groups. The ones with the white robes & hoods comes to mind.
Trouble is, the trial will drag out, then likely he'll end up in a Penitentiary - as a worst case scenario.
And there he'll have food, clothing and shelter - as well as access to a library, a college education, television, internet, and probably a gymnasium or exercise facilities - all costing HIM nothing for the next 20+ years (or less) - but costing his victims their lives - and the families of the victims having to live with the events/tragedy for the rest of their days - all while society pays to keep the scum bag living with free room & board and an education (if he so chooses - which I doubt) while he waits out his sentence and goes through appeal after appeal.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,484
|
Post by billisonboard on Jun 20, 2015 22:35:40 GMT -5
And, from me, do you support no consequence to those who do murder the guy? Of course they should be punished - it's not The Purge.... yet. Put him in general popp and tell the others what he did - no fuss no muss. Wow.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jun 20, 2015 23:35:58 GMT -5
Why what? Why did I give them that gift? Why did she get a permit? Why is she a "pistol packin' granny"? Why is it related? Why is she 75+? Why did she do it "THIS YEAR"? Why did I give the gift to both her and her husband? Why did they take the class this spring? Why did the place use a "card" instead of a paper "gift certificate"? Sorry Richard..my question still is why??
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:40:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2015 23:54:48 GMT -5
Why what? Why did I give them that gift? Why did she get a permit? Why is she a "pistol packin' granny"? Why is it related? Why is she 75+? Why did she do it "THIS YEAR"? Why did I give the gift to both her and her husband? Why did they take the class this spring? Why did the place use a "card" instead of a paper "gift certificate"? Sorry Richard..my question still is why?? And my question is still... why what? Tell me what you want to know the why about, and I'll happily answer you.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jun 21, 2015 0:32:35 GMT -5
Sorry Richard..my question still is why?? And my question is still... why what? Tell me what you want to know the why about, and I'll happily answer you. ...... .......
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:40:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2015 2:04:59 GMT -5
And my question is still... why what? Tell me what you want to know the why about, and I'll happily answer you. ...... ....... Ummmmmm.... that doesn't QUITE clear up your question. LOL
|
|
ktunes
Senior Member
show your world to me...
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:10:29 GMT -5
Posts: 3,885
|
Post by ktunes on Jun 21, 2015 2:06:11 GMT -5
should be any eye for an eye...they should let a family member put a gun to his head...
|
|
Ombud
Junior Associate
Joined: Jan 14, 2013 23:21:04 GMT -5
Posts: 7,593
|
Post by Ombud on Jun 21, 2015 5:32:38 GMT -5
No way to tell the actual comparison as one excludes threats & one doesn't
|
|
MJ2.0
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 24, 2014 10:27:09 GMT -5
Posts: 10,972
|
Post by MJ2.0 on Jun 21, 2015 7:23:07 GMT -5
Of course they should be punished - it's not The Purge.... yet. Put him in general popp and tell the others what he did - no fuss no muss. Wow. Well I mean you're not giving them the weapons nor are you forcing them to kill him.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,515
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jun 21, 2015 14:28:11 GMT -5
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jun 26, 2015 8:18:45 GMT -5
Has it been determined the father did not give the gun to him? The first few days it was reported the father gave it to him as a gift. I have seen other reports he bought the gun himself.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jun 26, 2015 8:20:13 GMT -5
Is this a racist killing? Is it a terrorist killing? It is a racist terrorist killing?
Is there even a difference?
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,484
|
Post by billisonboard on Jun 26, 2015 8:25:18 GMT -5
Is this a racist killing? Is it a terrorist killing? It is a racist terrorist killing? Is there even a difference? IM(not so)HO Yes No No Yes
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jun 26, 2015 8:34:52 GMT -5
Is this a racist killing? Is it a terrorist killing? It is a racist terrorist killing? Is there even a difference? IM(not so)HO Yes No No Yes The reason I posted the question was there is talk of why this is not considered an act of home grown terrorism. Some people feel it meets all the guidelines of the Federal government. I consider it a racist killing. I also think it meets the standard as set forth by the government as a terrorist act. I am not sure as you can qualify it as both.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:40:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2015 13:54:20 GMT -5
I hope you noticed all the places you listed are the mostly gun restricted areas. Does that tell you anything about gun control, and the reason these mentally unstable people choose those venues ? What it tells me is it's too damn easy for a mentally unstable person to get hold of a gun. If we're at the point we have to arm ourselves so we can safely attend church prayer groups I think we need to declare our society a failure. So your answer to failed restrictions, is more restrictions ? Guess what my description of insanity is. Is your definition of a successful society, a totally controlled one ? More restrictions on firearms will not change mans propensity for violence, it started long before firearms were invented. It will also continue long after firearms are obsolete. One way to reduce violence is to get ones thought process in alignment with the reality that humans always can and will kill one another. Restricting the weapon du jour has been tried and failed for millennia. That is because mans mind is the ultimate weapon. One of the downsides of being the most intelligent critter on this planet. Once that is realized, it might be a first step towards a more peaceful society.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,902
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 26, 2015 14:36:04 GMT -5
What it tells me is it's too damn easy for a mentally unstable person to get hold of a gun. If we're at the point we have to arm ourselves so we can safely attend church prayer groups I think we need to declare our society a failure. So your answer to failed restrictions, is more restrictions ? Guess what my description of insanity is. Is your definition of a successful society, a totally controlled one ? More restrictions on firearms will not change mans propensity for violence, it started long before firearms were invented. It will also continue long after firearms are obsolete. One way to reduce violence is to get ones thought process in alignment with the reality that humans always can and will kill one another. Restricting the weapon du jour has been tried and failed for millennia. That is because mans mind is the ultimate weapon. One of the downsides of being the most intelligent critter on this planet. Once that is realized, it might be a first step towards a more peaceful society. OK, let's do a little thought experiment. Let's both think of societies in which everyone carries guns around with them, all the time, and let's judge whether these are peaceful, well regulated societies where justice and freedom is a sacred right and where criminal activity is negligible because all the upstanding citizens are packing heat. When I think of places where everyone has guns I think of Syria, of Somalia. I think of Deadwood. I think of some of the South American countries where drug cartels have overrun law enforcement. I'm trying hard, really I am, but I can't think a single blissful utopian society where everyone is always wearing a gun that isn't a dangerous, lawless place. Can you name one single first world country where all the citizens are armed and their homicide/murder rate from guns is lower than ours? If this is the only way for people to live content and happy lives, why don't all the other first world countries issue hand guns to all their citizens?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:40:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2015 14:52:41 GMT -5
So your answer to failed restrictions, is more restrictions ? Guess what my description of insanity is. Is your definition of a successful society, a totally controlled one ? More restrictions on firearms will not change mans propensity for violence, it started long before firearms were invented. It will also continue long after firearms are obsolete. One way to reduce violence is to get ones thought process in alignment with the reality that humans always can and will kill one another. Restricting the weapon du jour has been tried and failed for millennia. That is because mans mind is the ultimate weapon. One of the downsides of being the most intelligent critter on this planet. Once that is realized, it might be a first step towards a more peaceful society. OK, let's do a little thought experiment. Let's both think of societies in which everyone carries guns around with them, all the time, and let's judge whether these are peaceful, well regulated societies where justice and freedom is a sacred right and where criminal activity is negligible because all the upstanding citizens are packing heat. When I think of places where everyone has guns I think of Syria, of Somalia. I think of Deadwood. I think of some of the South American countries where drug cartels have overrun law enforcement. I'm trying hard, really I am, but I can't think a single blissful utopian society where everyone is always wearing a gun that isn't a dangerous, lawless place. Can you name one single first world country where all the citizens are armed and their homicide/murder rate from guns is lower than ours? If this is the only way for people to live content and happy lives, why don't all the other first world countries issue hand guns to all their citizens? Wow that's a lot of meandering subjects with a lot of make believe thrown in, and yet humans continue to kill each other. My answer is that I choose to live in the this country where the right to own a firearm and use it in self defense is legal. There are a lot of people here who feel the same way. You already know there are no countries anywhere, first, second, or third world, where "all" the citizens are armed. Striving for utopia is a lost cause. The road to hell is paved with control freaks trying to save the world.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:40:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2015 7:20:26 GMT -5
So your answer to failed restrictions, is more restrictions ? Guess what my description of insanity is. Is your definition of a successful society, a totally controlled one ? More restrictions on firearms will not change mans propensity for violence, it started long before firearms were invented. It will also continue long after firearms are obsolete. One way to reduce violence is to get ones thought process in alignment with the reality that humans always can and will kill one another. Restricting the weapon du jour has been tried and failed for millennia. That is because mans mind is the ultimate weapon. One of the downsides of being the most intelligent critter on this planet. Once that is realized, it might be a first step towards a more peaceful society. OK, let's do a little thought experiment. Let's both think of societies in which everyone carries guns around with them, all the time, and let's judge whether these are peaceful, well regulated societies where justice and freedom is a sacred right and where criminal activity is negligible because all the upstanding citizens are packing heat. When I think of places where everyone has guns I think of Syria, of Somalia. I think of Deadwood. I think of some of the South American countries where drug cartels have overrun law enforcement. I'm trying hard, really I am, but I can't think a single blissful utopian society where everyone is always wearing a gun that isn't a dangerous, lawless place. Can you name one single first world country where all the citizens are armed and their homicide/murder rate from guns is lower than ours? If this is the only way for people to live content and happy lives, why don't all the other first world countries issue hand guns to all their citizens? Think of a country like that? no... How about a city? Ever hear of Kennesaw, Georgia... the city that, BY LAW requires gun ownership? Here's their "violent crimes" statistics for the years 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 (from their city "Crime Statistics" page): Yes... you read that right. 1 murder, 0 manslaughter, and 2 rapes in FOUR years. ETA: and that's not "gun crimes" that's VIOLENT crimes (which would include any "gun" ones)... Hmmm... wonder if the thought that every fricking household HAS TO have a gun in it had any effect on crime there...
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,147
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 29, 2015 13:00:24 GMT -5
Is this a racist killing? Is it a terrorist killing? It is a racist terrorist killing? Is there even a difference? i am not sure there is a difference between "racist violence" and "terrorism". interesting observation.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,147
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 29, 2015 13:06:32 GMT -5
OK, let's do a little thought experiment. Let's both think of societies in which everyone carries guns around with them, all the time, and let's judge whether these are peaceful, well regulated societies where justice and freedom is a sacred right and where criminal activity is negligible because all the upstanding citizens are packing heat. When I think of places where everyone has guns I think of Syria, of Somalia. I think of Deadwood. I think of some of the South American countries where drug cartels have overrun law enforcement. I'm trying hard, really I am, but I can't think a single blissful utopian society where everyone is always wearing a gun that isn't a dangerous, lawless place. Can you name one single first world country where all the citizens are armed and their homicide/murder rate from guns is lower than ours? If this is the only way for people to live content and happy lives, why don't all the other first world countries issue hand guns to all their citizens? Think of a country like that? no... How about a city? Ever hear of Kennesaw, Georgia... the city that, BY LAW requires gun ownership? Here's their "violent crimes" statistics for the years 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 (from their city "Crime Statistics" page): Yes... you read that right. 1 murder, 0 manslaughter, and 2 rapes in FOUR years. ETA: and that's not "gun crimes" that's VIOLENT crimes (which would include any "gun" ones)... Hmmm... wonder if the thought that every fricking household HAS TO have a gun in it had any effect on crime there... small scale examples are probably not that useful. Japan has a near prohibition on firearms and only had 442 murders last year. Switzerland has compulsory firearms and only had 46. it appears, to me anyway, that it has nothing to do with gun laws. it is something else. don't ask, i don't really know. but it is more "social".
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,147
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 29, 2015 13:08:31 GMT -5
OK, let's do a little thought experiment. Let's both think of societies in which everyone carries guns around with them, all the time, and let's judge whether these are peaceful, well regulated societies where justice and freedom is a sacred right and where criminal activity is negligible because all the upstanding citizens are packing heat. When I think of places where everyone has guns I think of Syria, of Somalia. I think of Deadwood. I think of some of the South American countries where drug cartels have overrun law enforcement. I'm trying hard, really I am, but I can't think a single blissful utopian society where everyone is always wearing a gun that isn't a dangerous, lawless place. Can you name one single first world country where all the citizens are armed and their homicide/murder rate from guns is lower than ours? If this is the only way for people to live content and happy lives, why don't all the other first world countries issue hand guns to all their citizens? Wow that's a lot of meandering subjects with a lot of make believe thrown in, and yet humans continue to kill each other. My answer is that I choose to live in the this country where the right to own a firearm and use it in self defense is legal. There are a lot of people here who feel the same way. You already know there are no countries anywhere, first, second, or third world, where "all" the citizens are armed. Striving for utopia is a lost cause. The road to hell is paved with control freaks trying to save the world. i agree with you about control freaks, but i don't think sensible regulation and control are the same thing. i think they CAN be quite similar, but i don't think they ARE similar in practice, GENERALLY SPEAKING. many arguments are made on the basis that even a little regulation is unacceptable. i don't think that is a rational argument, any more than a complete ban on weapons is.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:40:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2015 13:00:17 GMT -5
Wow that's a lot of meandering subjects with a lot of make believe thrown in, and yet humans continue to kill each other. My answer is that I choose to live in the this country where the right to own a firearm and use it in self defense is legal. There are a lot of people here who feel the same way. You already know there are no countries anywhere, first, second, or third world, where "all" the citizens are armed. Striving for utopia is a lost cause. The road to hell is paved with control freaks trying to save the world. i agree with you about control freaks, but i don't think sensible regulation and control are the same thing. i think they CAN be quite similar, but i don't think they ARE similar in practice, GENERALLY SPEAKING. many arguments are made on the basis that even a little regulation is unacceptable. i don't think that is a rational argument, any more than a complete ban on weapons is. The only problem I see with a "little bit of regulation" is the fact that all to often it is used as stepping stones for ever increasing regulation, not just for firearms either.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,147
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 1, 2015 14:42:18 GMT -5
i agree with you about control freaks, but i don't think sensible regulation and control are the same thing. i think they CAN be quite similar, but i don't think they ARE similar in practice, GENERALLY SPEAKING. many arguments are made on the basis that even a little regulation is unacceptable. i don't think that is a rational argument, any more than a complete ban on weapons is. The only problem I see with a "little bit of regulation" is the fact that all to often it is used as stepping stones for ever increasing regulation, not just for firearms either. not in my experience.
|
|