Log In Forums Help
Comic Collector Live
Home :: CCL Messageboard
Find Comics for Sale
Items For Sale
All Comics For Sale
New Releases
CGC Comics
Bundled Lots
Store Locator
Search Library
Search By Title
Publisher
Story Arc
Character
Credits
Release Date
Change Request Manager
News & Reviews
Reviews
News
Our Products and Services
Get the Software
Buying Comics And Stuff
Selling Your Comics
Opening A Store
Community
Forum
Store Locator
Member Locator
Welcome Guest Active Topics
Poll Question: Should the CT Shootings Call for Gun Control?
Choice Votes Statistics
Yes! 17 36%
No! 26 56%
I'm not sure yet. 3 6%

Newtown CT Shooting: Should there be more gun control? Options
The_Valiant_One
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:04:04 AM

Rank: Administration
Groups: CCL Feature Crew, Forum Admin, Guru, Member, Super Seller

Shop at My Store

Joined: 6/7/2007
Posts: 4,823
Points: 127,158
Since there was a bit of a hot topic about the shootings in CT Friday that caused a thread to be locked, I thought I'd reopen one with a poll:

Should the government take a serious look and create possible gun legislation and control over weapons in the wake of CT?

(Note: Please comment ONLY about the potential gun control legislation. This is a VERY sensitive subject, so please be respectful to other people's varied opinions...even if you don't agree with them. This thread will be locked if it gets out of hand.)







comicuniversity
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:19:41 AM
Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member, Moderator

Joined: 4/18/2012
Posts: 1,219
Points: 4,432
YES!

And I will be very specific as to what kind of legislation I would like to see.

I would NOT want any kind of ban. In fact, I would even be open to allowing more kinds of weapons to be sold.

BUT....I would want MUCH tighter restrictions and requirements upon the people who are allowed to both sell and buy guns.

I would also like to see greater requirements as far as training before you were allowed to purchase a gun.

In this way, I think three things would happen.

1) We would make it much more difficult for people likely to use a gun for illegal violence to get one.
2) We would make it much more sure that gun owners would be able to use a gun more effectively if they ever had to.
3) We would dry up the illegal black market gun sales in this country, at least to a large degree.


I will take the Connecticut tragedy as my example, because that's where this is coming from.

1) If a staff member of the school had a weapon, and was well trained on how to use it (anyone who has ever been in a firefight knows it aint like the movies) much of the carnage could have been averted.
2) If gun buying restrictions eliminated people with mental illness, this guuy never would be able to buy guns.
3) If the mother had gone through an exhaustive vetting process and been forced to show she could safely store her guns where noone else could gain access, this would never have happened.
tedmic1962
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:31:03 AM

Rank: Large Noggin
Groups: Member, Super Seller

Shop at My Store

Joined: 8/3/2007
Posts: 394
Points: 1,182
First I want to say that what happened in Newtown was a tragic event and my heart goes out to all the families that lost their children.
Now I don't think stricter gun control legislation will change anything. Remember people have been killing each other since man first stepped foot on the land. They did not use guns. They used rocks, spears and makeshift weapons. All that stricter gun control laws are going to do is keep weapons out of the hands of responsible people and into the hands of those who should not have them.
In my 21 years as a police officer, I have seen many tragedies ranging from shootings to stabbings. Most of the shootings were done by people having stolen weapons except for two idiots who shot themselves in the ass with their own weapons but that is another story.
The same day as the tragedy in Newtown, a man walking into an elementary school in China I believe and stabbed 20 students with a knife. If someone wanted to kill anybody they can with or without guns.
I think what should be done is that parents become parents again and not their childs best friend. We have to discipline our children and show them morals. Children today are told that your parents have to respect you and that you are an individual. I don't see in the bible or any other religion where it says that. The bible says honor thy mother and father. When I grew up, you could not wear jeans to school or have them hanging down to your ass. You could not wear a baseball cap in class. This was public school. You also had to respect your teachers or you would get a whack in the head and god forbid your parents found out. They would hit you too and make you apologise for embarassing them.
Has anyone noticed the rise in childhood illnesses like autism? In my opinion it is the medication that mothers are given while they are pregnant that is causing this. Most chikdren have peanut allergies now more than ever. When I grew up it was few and far between that a child was autistic or had food allergies.
I know I got off track a bit but thgat is my rant. I hope despite what has happened that everyone has a Happy Holiday and I will say a prayer for those families in Newtown.
fenix1977
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:46:35 AM

Rank: Beyonder
Groups: Member, Subscriber

Joined: 3/16/2007
Posts: 6,589
Points: 22,201
The problem is both sides of this debate will never compromise to the point of actually getting something done. I just can't understand how someone that wants to legally purchase a gun should have a problem with a mandatory waiting period. I don't see a screening process for assault rifles or other related weapons to be that big of a deal. That is not about trying to take your fire arms away. It is about trying to make sure that the person trying to purchase a firearm can legally do so.

If you have no criminal record then why is a waiting period for a background check such an issue? Or is the issue that certain states limit the amount of rounds a clip can hold for a high velocity round? Do you need all those bullets to take down a deer? If you can take down a deer with a compound bow then you don't need a clip for your assault rifle that holds more than 10 rounds.

The real problem though is not in gun control laws because people will always find a way to get their hands on what they want. If someone wants to harm another living being they don't need a gun to do so. If anything humans have proven just how efficient we are at killing with something as simple as a rock (or for the person with office rage that stapler better be bolted to the desk or someone is gonna get stabbed in the face).

We need to address the fact that our society is not what it used to be. Sure all this technology is great but the sense of entitlement is going up while the sense of moral obligation seems to be vanishing. Heck not even moral obligation but taking responsibility for ones own actions seems to be an issue today.

I have spent the last 14 year of my life working with college "kids" and I can honestly tell you that every year it is worse. At some point parents have to step in and be parents and set the moral compass for their children. They need to teach them personal responsibility as well as self reliance. We are not helping our nation if we don't. There is a reason why we can point at those who lived and served during WWII as "The Greatest Generation". They had their heads together. They had a firm understanding of right from wrong and what it meant to be responsible for yourself and the welfare of others.

I am not saying that still does not happen..I am just seeing it less and less. It seems to take a natural disaster or horrible event such as the school shooting to remind us of what responsibility to your community is all about.



Mad Bloggings

BruceReville
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:54:45 AM

Rank: Watcher
Groups: Member

Joined: 1/21/2010
Posts: 924
Points: 2,772
Make all the laws you want - crimminals will find a way to obtain them. However there should be some changes made to the laws in some aspects as to background checks and limitations on how many weapons are registered to a user.

Right now background checks and requirements for guns for each state are not the same - a standardization of some sort should be implemented for conformity purposes.

Registration needs to be standardized as well. For example my Step-Dad was trying to obtain a weapon that is not allowed in his resident state under current legislation. So he went through his state of birth where the weapon was legal and got the gun registered there and now owns it.

Also he wnted a concealed weapons permit so that he can carry a gun in his resident state and neighboring state he works in but his resident state permit is not valid in his work state. So he went through Arizona to where that state's concealed weapons permit is valid in both states. And he is not a resident nor ever has been for the state of Arizona.

Right now there are loop holes to exploit if you know where to look.

I do believe the right to own firearms either for recreational, security, or hunting. However I do not understand why one person must have multiple weapons registered to them. Being from the south I know quite a few people who have 20-30 registered weapons. Seriously why does one person need that many guns. I scratch my head when I see someone with more than a dozen or so. I think that there should be a limit on how many an individual owns, but they should be free to choose what type of firearm they want, as long as it is a weapon that hasn't been altered from its original manufacturing.

I do understand that some weapons are considered collectibles and there are avid collectors out there who would want more than one type of weapon for their collection. Collectible weapons should be registered the same as all guns, but if it is to be a collectible then have it to where the firing mechanism is hindered, but easily reversed by a licensed weapons repairman to operable that wouldn't affect the value of the gun. Then have the weapon certified as a "Collectible".

That way you could have your registered "Live" guns and registered "Collectible" guns and then own as many as you want as long as your "Live" guns does not exceed the maximum limit.


Just When You Thought It Was Safe To Collect Again --- VARIANTS STRIKE!



BruceReville
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:55:57 AM

Rank: Watcher
Groups: Member

Joined: 1/21/2010
Posts: 924
Points: 2,772
Needs to be a "Modification Of Existing Laws" option added

Just When You Thought It Was Safe To Collect Again --- VARIANTS STRIKE!



scotteaves
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:56:19 AM

Rank: Beyonder
Groups: Approver, Approver Moderator, CCL Feature Crew, CR-Guidelines, Guru, Member, Subscriber

Joined: 6/24/2008
Posts: 5,389
Points: 421,933
Location: Hawthorne, NJ
comicuniversity wrote:
YES!

And I will be very specific as to what kind of legislation I would like to see.

I would NOT want any kind of ban. In fact, I would even be open to allowing more kinds of weapons to be sold.

BUT....I would want MUCH tighter restrictions and requirements upon the people who are allowed to both sell and buy guns.

I would also like to see greater requirements as far as training before you were allowed to purchase a gun.

In this way, I think three things would happen.

1) We would make it much more difficult for people likely to use a gun for illegal violence to get one.
2) We would make it much more sure that gun owners would be able to use a gun more effectively if they ever had to.
3) We would dry up the illegal black market gun sales in this country, at least to a large degree.


I will take the Connecticut tragedy as my example, because that's where this is coming from.

1) If a staff member of the school had a weapon, and was well trained on how to use it (anyone who has ever been in a firefight knows it aint like the movies) much of the carnage could have been averted.
2) If gun buying restrictions eliminated people with mental illness, this guuy never would be able to buy guns.
3) If the mother had gone through an exhaustive vetting process and been forced to show she could safely store her guns where noone else could gain access, this would never have happened.


+1 to much of this post. I fully support a person's right to own a gun, if that is their choice. I don't ever plan on owning a gun, but I shouldn't project my preferences on other people's rights.

I think there should be a better process to check into potential gun owners - and their families.

Unfortunately, I don't think better training would have addressed either the first or third of the first three items in post above. Training will not stop someone from getting a gun (point #1) - it will only show them how to better use the gun. Better checks into a person's history can help with potentially restricting gun purchases. Training will not dry up the black market for illegal guns - it won't have any effect at all.

As far as the last 3 points, I don't quite get #2 - weren't the weapons used registered to the mother? If so, then he did not buy any guns. And #3, well, we all know that people who know the "right" way to do things don't always follow the rules. There have been enough cases of locked, secured guns that kids have gotten their hands on because they know where the key or code is for the security device. Would there be a greater chance of avoiding tragedies such as this one if everyone secured their guns properly? Sure, but the expectation that it would never happen again is a pipe dream.

4saken1
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 5:34:54 PM

Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member, Super Seller

Shop at My Store

Joined: 8/13/2007
Posts: 2,447
Points: 10,186
I would like to see changes made to the current laws, but it's one of those topics that most politicians don't want to touch because unless they live in a strong Democratic district it can hurt their chances of being re-elected. Even if there were tougher laws passed, it would take decades before we noticed any change. Currently, there are 89 guns per 100 people in the U.S.! Unless they went house to house and started literally taking peoples guns away from them (which would start Civil War II), we just have to live with this insanity.

ComicVortex

Current specials:

Get 30% Off Select Comics
For every comic you purchase from our 'Bargain Bin' (those priced $1 or less), another comic purchased over $1 will be $30% off (refunded via PayPal). eg. If you purchase 10 'Bargain Bin' books, then 10 books purchased that are each over $1 will recieve this refund, etc.

Free Shipping

Every domestic order of 25 or more comics gets FREE SHIPPING (Media Mail). Though I can't provide Free Shipping on foreign orders, we do offer a $5 refund on postage for purchases of 25 or more comics to foreign countries or a $10 refund if you buy 50 comics (again, foreign orders only).

ukblueky
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 5:56:30 PM

Rank: Celestial
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/7/2007
Posts: 4,123
Points: 12,369
Location: Kentucky
The whole situation is sad but it will be repeated many times over through the years.The problem is there is no clear cut answer.Background checks are not full proof.I can be perfectly sane during the time I buy my gun but whose to say I wont go nuts down the road.Plus criminals dont use background checks to buy on the street.
You can limit the number of rounds per clip but that doesnt solve anything either.Instead of one clip holding 20 rounds a person buys two clips that hold 10 bullets.Its 20 bullets either way.
Parenting can only be blamed to a small percent.I've seen good parents have Aholes kids.The parents done what would be considered "proper" parenting but come a certain age a kid starts traveling down their own path to the adult they are gonna become.Society has as much blame as the parents.

Dreadnok01
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 7:05:27 PM

Rank: Large Noggin
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/24/2008
Posts: 475
Points: 1,425
Location: In my house
I worked for a retail store that sold firearms for several years and I can say that it is far too easy to purchase a gun (at least in the state of Colorado). I can also say that there is no right answer to this problem. Most people that legally purchase and own firearms never use them in violent crime. Criminals will always find a way to get a gun or find another way to kill. I fully support the right to own guns, but they should be harder to purchase. Law abiding citizens should not have a problem with laws designed to make it harder for criminals to get guns. They may find a way to get them anyway but we shouldn't make it so easy.
Dreadnok01
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 7:06:53 PM

Rank: Large Noggin
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/24/2008
Posts: 475
Points: 1,425
Location: In my house
Dreadnok01 wrote:
I worked for a retail store that sold firearms for several years and I can say that it is far too easy to purchase a gun (at least in the state of Colorado). I can also say that there is no right answer to this problem. Most people that legally purchase and own firearms never use them in violent crime. Criminals will always find a way to get a gun or find another way to kill. I fully support the right to own guns, but they should be harder to purchase. Law abiding citizens should not have a problem with laws designed to make it harder for criminals to get guns. They may find a way to get them anyway but we shouldn't make it so easy.


By the way I voted yes not to outlaw guns just to make them harder to get.
KingZombie
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 7:09:30 PM

Rank: Celestial
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/14/2007
Posts: 4,525
Points: 90,004
Location: NJ
comicuniversity wrote:
YES!

And I will be very specific as to what kind of legislation I would like to see.

I would NOT want any kind of ban. In fact, I would even be open to allowing more kinds of weapons to be sold.

BUT....I would want MUCH tighter restrictions and requirements upon the people who are allowed to both sell and buy guns.

I would also like to see greater requirements as far as training before you were allowed to purchase a gun.

In this way, I think three things would happen.

1) We would make it much more difficult for people likely to use a gun for illegal violence to get one.
2) We would make it much more sure that gun owners would be able to use a gun more effectively if they ever had to.
3) We would dry up the illegal black market gun sales in this country, at least to a large degree.


I will take the Connecticut tragedy as my example, because that's where this is coming from.

1) If a staff member of the school had a weapon, and was well trained on how to use it (anyone who has ever been in a firefight knows it aint like the movies) much of the carnage could have been averted.
2) If gun buying restrictions eliminated people with mental illness, this guuy never would be able to buy guns.
3) If the mother had gone through an exhaustive vetting process and been forced to show she could safely store her guns where noone else could gain access, this would never have happened.


I agree with a lot in this post too and I voted Yes for more gun control. I have no problem with people owning guns and carrying concealed weapons if they are registered. But I don't think the public should have access to military weaponry and as someone mentioned there are a lot of loopholes in the laws.

There are still gun shows where a background check is not done. People can still order guns through the mail. This needs to stop.

But the problem with mass killings isn't just gun control. It's more to do with monitoring people with mental health issues. Not just parents, but friends, teachers, co-workers... anybody noticing bizarre behavior needs to say something to anyone who can take some kind of action. People just don't want to get involved and then it's too late.

As for protecting schools, I think someone on site should be trained on using a gun and a gun should be locked up in a safe. Also, every teacher should have a can of mace in their desk.
comicuniversity
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 7:55:28 PM
Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member, Moderator

Joined: 4/18/2012
Posts: 1,219
Points: 4,432
I get the people who say something like, "well, people can kill people with knives and rocks."


The difference being overlooked is this guy was able to amass a 27 person body count with his big ass gun.


He couldnta done that with a rock or knife.
4saken1
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 8:02:30 PM

Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member, Super Seller

Shop at My Store

Joined: 8/13/2007
Posts: 2,447
Points: 10,186
One thing I would like to point out is that the right to bear arms was given for the sole purpose to allow for citizens (in the form of militias) to protect themselves against the government. Whatever other argument one might have in favor of owning guns is moot WRT the Constitution.

To that end, the 2nd ammendment, as it applies to the modern world, is pretty lame unless you allow for citizens to purchase RPG's, tanks, missiles, and the like. Really, what are gun owners going to do when a drone comes and takes out their house?

Just sayin'! Either change the Constitution to include self defense, allow people to own advanced weoponry, or get rid of it altogether, because it doesn't really mean squat in today's times and people just use it to justify whatever they want it to mean anyways!

ComicVortex

Current specials:

Get 30% Off Select Comics
For every comic you purchase from our 'Bargain Bin' (those priced $1 or less), another comic purchased over $1 will be $30% off (refunded via PayPal). eg. If you purchase 10 'Bargain Bin' books, then 10 books purchased that are each over $1 will recieve this refund, etc.

Free Shipping

Every domestic order of 25 or more comics gets FREE SHIPPING (Media Mail). Though I can't provide Free Shipping on foreign orders, we do offer a $5 refund on postage for purchases of 25 or more comics to foreign countries or a $10 refund if you buy 50 comics (again, foreign orders only).

comicuniversity
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 8:07:16 PM
Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member, Moderator

Joined: 4/18/2012
Posts: 1,219
Points: 4,432
KingZombie wrote:
comicuniversity wrote:
YES!

And I will be very specific as to what kind of legislation I would like to see.

I would NOT want any kind of ban. In fact, I would even be open to allowing more kinds of weapons to be sold.

BUT....I would want MUCH tighter restrictions and requirements upon the people who are allowed to both sell and buy guns.

I would also like to see greater requirements as far as training before you were allowed to purchase a gun.

In this way, I think three things would happen.

1) We would make it much more difficult for people likely to use a gun for illegal violence to get one.
2) We would make it much more sure that gun owners would be able to use a gun more effectively if they ever had to.
3) We would dry up the illegal black market gun sales in this country, at least to a large degree.


I will take the Connecticut tragedy as my example, because that's where this is coming from.

1) If a staff member of the school had a weapon, and was well trained on how to use it (anyone who has ever been in a firefight knows it aint like the movies) much of the carnage could have been averted.
2) If gun buying restrictions eliminated people with mental illness, this guuy never would be able to buy guns.
3) If the mother had gone through an exhaustive vetting process and been forced to show she could safely store her guns where noone else could gain access, this would never have happened.


I agree with a lot in this post too and I voted Yes for more gun control. I have no problem with people owning guns and carrying concealed weapons if they are registered. But I don't think the public should have access to military weaponry and as someone mentioned there are a lot of loopholes in the laws.

There are still gun shows where a background check is not done. People can still order guns through the mail. This needs to stop.

But the problem with mass killings isn't just gun control. It's more to do with monitoring people with mental health issues. Not just parents, but friends, teachers, co-workers... anybody noticing bizarre behavior needs to say something to anyone who can take some kind of action. People just don't want to get involved and then it's too late.

As for protecting schools, I think someone on site should be trained on using a gun and a gun should be locked up in a safe. Also, every teacher should have a can of mace in their desk.



YES! Totally agree. And, mental health issues are not currently covered in background checks. In fact, nothing relating to medical stuff whatsoever is.
So, complete whackjobs have absolutely no problem aquiring guns in this country.
Nerdgasm_Comics
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 10:08:18 PM

Rank: Eternal
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/11/2011
Posts: 249
Points: 1,074
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
First off I just want to say I do not own a firearm, I am familiar enough with them to handle one safely though.
The main problem with banning guns or strict gun control laws is that the only people who would be willing to surrender their firearms are the law abiding citizens, leaving the criminals heavily armed and knowing full well that a majority of citizens won't be. I'm not saying crime rates will dramatically spike nor will they decrease dramatically either. There is a reason our forefathers made it a point to include the second amendment in the US constitution.

"Get your Nerd ON!"




If you find a comic in my Inventory that doesn't have a cover scan or one in approval. Send me a PM with the issue name and number, and I'll give you $1.00 in store credit per issue!

If you can't find what you are looking for at my store try these AWESOME stores!
Alpha Comics, Comics Castle, Gryphon Comics and Games, Curious Goods & Comics II, EastBay Comics, HeroLand Comics, The Comic Book Stop,



comicuniversity
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 10:17:39 PM
Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member, Moderator

Joined: 4/18/2012
Posts: 1,219
Points: 4,432
Nerdgasm_Comics wrote:
First off I just want to say I do not own a firearm, I am familiar enough with them to handle one safely though.
The main problem with banning guns or strict gun control laws is that the only people who would be willing to surrender their firearms are the law abiding citizens, leaving the criminals heavily armed and knowing full well that a majority of citizens won't be. I'm not saying crime rates will dramatically spike nor will they decrease dramatically either. There is a reason our forefathers made it a point to include the second amendment in the US constitution.



I keep hearing this argument.

The obvious answer is.....Then why have Any Laws whatsoever? If we have a law against murder, then only criminals are murderers......or any number of other equally difficult to understand argments. It's difficult for me to understand that thinking. It just sounds like a tagline without much actual substance.
If, as a nation, we decide it is no longer necessary for your average citizen to have guns, then we should embark on that path, rather than ignore it, basically, because it would be hard.

Afterall, every one of the arguments you hear like; "hey. people who want to kill are gonna kill. Guns are not." can easily be turned around. I mean, people say they want gns for self defense. If there are no more guns, then learn how to defend yourself with your hands, or that knife, or rock or whatever everybody talks about.

As far as criminals being heavily armed and knowing most citizens aren't.....I believe that it is already a VERY rare criminal who gives a rats ass about regular citizens one way or another once they decide to commit an act of gun violence. They are going in guns drawn expecting to die anyways.
comicuniversity
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 10:23:34 PM
Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member, Moderator

Joined: 4/18/2012
Posts: 1,219
Points: 4,432
A kid.....a friggin' kid.....in a high poverty, high crime, high street and gun violence area, once explained to a room full of peers (who largely loved guns and shooting and violence), that he was glad he didnt have a gun the day he got beat up by a guy larger than he was, because when he was lying there on the ground, he was so enraged, he wanted that person dead. If he had a gun at that time, he said he would have shot him dead. But, mere hours later, after calming down, he realized that it was only a loss in a fight and he was already over it.


thank Christ the kid didnt have a gun. He took a beating and that sucks....but nobody is dead.
tedmic1962
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 4:50:28 PM

Rank: Large Noggin
Groups: Member, Super Seller

Shop at My Store

Joined: 8/3/2007
Posts: 394
Points: 1,182
comicuniversity wrote:
I get the people who say something like, "well, people can kill people with knives and rocks."


The difference being overlooked is this guy was able to amass a 27 person body count with his big ass gun.


He couldnta done that with a rock or knife.


Just like Timothy Mcvie blew up a building and 19 children with fertilizer and a truck rental.

The gun he used were his mothers. Not that he went and bought them.
SuperSoldier124
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 4:59:45 PM

Rank: Celestial
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/3/2007
Posts: 2,937
Points: 8,872
Location: Falcon, Colorado
comicuniversity wrote:
I get the people who say something like, "well, people can kill people with knives and rocks."


The difference being overlooked is this guy was able to amass a 27 person body count with his big ass gun.


He couldnta done that with a rock or knife.
big ass gun? he had a .22 and 9mm. those are both realistically small calibers. big or small he would have racked up body count. he was shooting small children and defenseless adults. he could have achieved this as was stated with any weapon. Maybe someone should noticed he was a nut case.

add me on xbox live and PSN

PS3: wartorn11b
360: precious blood1

Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

This page was generated in 0.456 seconds.

ADVERTISEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
All images on comic collector live copyright of their respective publishers. © Copyright 2008, MidTen Media Inc. GOLO241