James W. Currin, of Wilmington, North Carolina is a staunch supporter of both the NRA and the Second Amendment. Just ask him. Or you can read his recent letter to the editor, Gun bills go too far in Friday’s Wilmington Star News. Currin is philosophically opposed to constitutional carry.
Two bills being considered in the N.C. House … would eliminate the requirement to obtain a permit in order to carry a concealed weapon. Both bills are completely irresponsible.
Then he provides his bona fides:
I strongly support both the Second Amendment and the NRA, but…
Yes, Currin is what David Codrea refers to as a “big but” supporter of the Second Amendment; “Of course I support the Second Amendment, BUT …”
The nice thing about Currin and his ilk is that they’re relatively easy to identify; just watch them any time someone proposes treating the Second Amendment as if it protects a natural, fundamental, and inalienable, human, individual, civil and Constitutional right to own and carry the weapon(s) of your choice. That’s when you’ll see these “big but” supporters start sweating, their eyes twitch and you can almost hear their knickers knot up.
“Oh well we don’t want to be extremists” they’ll whimper. “We’re not opposed to common sense safety measures” they’ll whine. And you’ll find that they keep opposing “irresponsible” legislation that tries to remove some of the 20,000 unconstitutional restrictions and infringements on a civil right that’s supposed to be absolute.
Anyway, to continue with Jim’s reasoned objections,
I strongly support both the Second Amendment and the NRA, but to eliminate the requirement that individuals have at least the basic skills to safely use a firearm is irrational.
I don’t know about Jim, but before I got my permit to carry (hereinafter PTC), heck, before I even got my first pistol, I made sure I knew the rules of gun safety, learned Minnesota’s applicable laws, and thought about the implications of owning a weapon. How would I store it, would it be safe in my home, what would happen if someone broke in and threatened me; in short I thoroughly examined the implications of having a gun.
When I bought my first pistol (and second, and third and …), as soon as I got home I read the owner’s manual to learn the specifics of that weapon. I even taught my housemate the Four Rules, and took him to the range to familiarize him with pistols and gun safety. Indeed, I know a bunch of permit holders and gun owners (shocking, I know) and, except for those who grew up in shooting families, just about every single one of them went through a similar process before getting their first weapon and/or permit.
In fact, I only know of one person who didn’t do any prep work before she got her gun and permit, a Brady Campaign board member, anti-gun protestor and author named Heidi Yewman. She wanted to make the point that you can be a completely irrational, irresponsible idiot and carry a gun, and oh boy, did she.
Jim continues:
Also, the conceal permit approval process provides a background check that excludes many criminals and individuals with a history of mental health issues from having legal access to a concealed firearm.
First, as a non-big-but supporter of the Second Amendment, it’s my belief that the sole reason someone should not be “allowed” to exercise their natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil and Constitutional right to own and carry the weapon of their choice is if they are locked up, either in prison or in a mental health/chemical dependency treatment program. As Codrea so eloquently puts it, anyone who can’t be trusted with a firearm can’t be trusted without a custodian.
Second, those criminals and mentally ill are prohibited by law “from having legal access to” any firearm, concealed or not. Now, who here thinks that not having a PTC will deter any of those folks from carrying a gun?
Third, I would argue with the claim that these checks exclude “many” unauthorized folks from getting a permit. I don’t know how it works in North Carolina, but in Minnesota the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension keeps track of PTC statistics and issues an annual report.
According to a 2016 report, there were 73,880 applications and 585 denials. Of those denials, 171 were because the sheriff decided the applicant was a “danger to self or others” (see above for “then why are they walking the streets?”) and 20 were for failure to take an approved PTC class. So as many as 394 permits could have been denied for criminal histories. In other words, slightly more than ½ of 1 percent of applicants which certainly does not meet my personal definition of “many”.
Currin finishes with gem:
Approval of these bills would significantly increase the danger to law enforcement officers and communities in general.
Really? How?
Is someone who would be willing to shoot a cop going to be discouraged by not having a PTC? Or will people who no longer pay $80 and submit their fingerprints somehow become horrific dangers to the community?
I don’t think that the legislators are the ones who are being irrational here Mr. Currin.
So many big butters…..favorite kind of butter is the pretend constitutionalist that defends individual liberties BUT gives full support of government control over peoples medical decisions.
Oh, not this again. Take your science denial somewhere else. If clowns like you were in charge leaches would be the peak of medical science.
Science denial coming from you is maximum irony. Thanks for laugh serge, you’re always comic relief.
I don’t think any sane person considers what you’re peddling “science”. Not since the Inquisition was a thing, anyway.
Peddling the truth that there are no real vaccine safety studies is insane? More comic relief serge.
Other than, you know… centuries of medical data. Unproven abnormal effects in a tiny fraction of 1% of the population are irrelevant, even if true, when weighed against the death cause by even a single major pandemic.
Welcome to basic math. You don’t get to put the lives of millions in danger because of your Luddite delusions. If you try, those millions have a right to shoot you in the face. It’s self defense.
‘Centuries of medical data’..says the guy that has never produced an ounce of verifiable scientific data to back his opinions. Serge, you DO understand almost all vaccine safety studies are epidemiological, right? I can’t imagine you would try to have this conversation without having some knowledge on the subject, especially if you’re going to support its mandatory use against individuals who do not want it. And you DO know that nearly every epidemiological vaccine safety study compares vaccinated groups to other vaccinated groups? And you DO know that nearly every vaccine clinical trial that uses control groups uses other vaccines or vaccine ingredients for the control group? Of course you do, otherwise you’d have to admit you’re an idiot, and that you’ve been arguing for mandating a medical procedure without knowing the backround facts and complete lack of verifiable safety backing the medical procedure you want to force on others.
Oh really? Want to compare death rates from Polio pre and post vaccine? Versus polio vaccine side effects?
Glad to see you blow you off the complete lack of safety tests, or maybe it’s just your complete lack of knowledge on this subject? Produce some data, I’ll be happy to explain it to you. Not that you’ll understand it. BTW, as far as your comment about putting ‘millions at risk’…so at least your admitting your vaccines don’t really work. Glad you cleared that up.
You have no idea what you’re talking about or how epidemiology works. Go home little Luddite. So long as you live in a society where communicable disease is a thing you have no “right” to refuse basic precautions for protecting public health. This has been settled law since English common law became a thing.
If you’re not “comfortable” with the risk of taking a vaccine feel free to move your diseased ass to some third world hellhole that won’t “infringe” your “right” to be a Typhoid Marry.
Love how you toss a few names like a child, then run away when your BS is called. All too familiar. BTW, glad you mentioned typhoid, another disease that declined along with the rest of the infectious diseases, except there was no vaccine for typhoid. We still do have some freedoms left here in America that communists like yourself have not yet eliminated; the right to remain stupid, which you proudly exercise.
That would be because none is needed Typhus is a BACTERIAL infection you retarded cunt. Antibiotics work just fine. Vaccines are only necessary for VIRAL infections.
Though you calling me a commie is generally all the provocation I need to put your ass in the ICU.
Oh, so we don’t vaccinate for pertussis? And antibiotics were the cause of the decline of incidence? Don’t think so Who’s the retarded cunt? Comic relief from the gallery all day long with you.
I’m done arguing with you. You got your M.D. off the back of a cereal box. Let me make one thing clear. If a member of my family is harmed by your anti-vaccine bullshit, I will track down every single person advocating this bullshit and impale them on their own front lawns.
You’ve proven 1 thing, that you’re mentally unstable and unable to control yourself when confronted with facts and opinions that don’t fit your mentally unstable worldview. Maybe the gun control advocates have some valid points on peoples mental health requirements and gun ownership. And good luck with that impaling comrade. Good riddance.
“Leaches¿!”
Just bore holes in his head to let out the evil spirits!!
Or bleed him. Get that bad blood out!
Dude, I’m not even arguing against you, but this litterally the I only thing you ever comment about. Or more like try to hijack every thread with. Isn’t there a truthaboutmedicine you could visit?
Not true, I comment occaisinally this is not even the first comment here today. If the subject is about ‘butters’ and their hypocritical approach to rights, how is is my comment hijacking the thread? Serge responded because he’s a huge ‘butter”, he’ll preach gun rights all day and at the same time preach North Korean style medical care.
Um… “he’ll preach gun rights all day and at the same time preach North Korean style medical care.” Coming from the person who basically acts like vaccines will turn your kids into retarded Devil-worshipping Angela Dworkin robots… Yeah, no. Go scribble in a different corner please, thank you.
Impressive non-reply klp, but no surprise there.
It’s all the reply a cretin like you is entitled to. Now shut up and take your medicine.
Serge, you’re a credit to statist/communists everywhere. If you like North Korea style control over its public so much, I hear there’s openings in Kim Jong-un’s military.
Hey cunt. You’re a credit to tinfoil hat wearing luddites everywhere. Vaccines have saved billions of lives from mass epidemics in the 20th century alone. If you don’t want to do your part to make sure that things like polio and other fun 19th century bullshit aren’t a concern, feel free to move your diseased ass to a deserted island in the middle of nowhere.
Cunt? Real sciencey you fraud. Caitlyn Jenner identifies as a women, you identify as someone with an opinion that matters, makes sense.
Let me simple it up for you. I think anti-vaccine idiots like you need to be put up against a wall and shot. Infectious disease is not something you play around with because you read a few papers by some fringe hacks based on science you are not qualified to understand, much less judge. You clowns are a clear and present danger to human civilization and need to be hunted down like the disease spreading vermin you are.
You’re basically a retard playing with the nuclear launch codes because you think the lights on the box look shiny.
Pretty telling of your character that you think that people who question the safety of untested, and known to be dangerous, pharmaceutical products should be shot. You must make your fellow comrades glow with envy. People like yourself are one of the reasons the 2nd Amendment exists.
Pg2, what is the point of providing you with a cogent, coherent, and well-articulated reply? I’ve done as much before on other posts and your response has been to figuratively (and literally) plug your ears and make autistic shreiks. You don’t care what anyone else had to say. You disregard data that does not conform to your biases. You act like no one has any idea of what they speak except you, and you state as such. You’re as bad an anti on this stuff. No one brought up ANYTHING about vaccines in the OP. So why do you always steer the conversation to that? Go find a different group of people to have a pseudo-scientific circle jerk with. NOBODY WANTS THAT SHIT HERE.
@KLP, You have provided CDC and pharmaceutical industry talking points, aside from that I don’t recall you ever posting anything cogent or coherent on this subject. I explained my reason at the top of this thread, and if you missed it or didn’t understand it, not my problem.
Aaannnddd right back to square one with you. Whatever dude. Go quaff some elixers of essence most vital and let us know when the human body can rewrite the laws of physics and chemistry.
@KLP, more nonsense. Surprise, surprise. If you ever want to actually discuss something for real, let me know, until Ill assume you chose to remain a perimeter troll.
KLP, if you have some data you want to throw out there, go for it. Otherwise I’m not interested in hearing any more of your opinion.
Noir nailed this in about 20 seconds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6azdr0InSLo
Can’t repeal the Declaration of Independence. Can’t replace it either without some serious bloodshed. Permission for the RTKABA is right understood to be granted to all, BUT in America, we demand it from each other, and we demand a positive expose of the knowledge of that mutual demand.
Anything else is tyranny on tip-toe, and deserves to be outed, and given a public middle-finger-salute (even in church) whenever it rears its ugly POS [and typically (D)] head.
So, middle-one high and FU to all gunlover-butts out there.
Can’t repeal the DOI because it’s not a law. the Constitution on the other hand is and that that is where you will find the 2nd Amendment.
Yes BUT the Second Amendment doesn’t grant, only guarantees against governmental interference, a per-existing right to keep and bear arms; hence, repealing the Second deosn’t eliminate the pre-existing right, it only eliminates the guarantee.
Dherp doesn’t sound like she’s from here.
The 2nd Paragraph of the Declaration of Independence describes all of the things that we’ll uphold (we attempt to preserve the codification of how we’ll accomplish it in our Constitution. t’s imperfections, however very slight [specifically that it can be foolproof in construction, but it cannot fing un-illogical-moron itself] do not / will never diminish what we Declare, and we are essentially on our third version of the Constitution). The Second amendment is not what you grant me, it’s what we grant each other, or you can go find the 2nd Amendment, and the rest of the Constitution in your a_ _.
WRONG. The Declaration of Independence (among other documents/ideas) is the FOUNDATION of law in the US.
If Fudds like this had their way selling us out, we wouldn’t have concealed carry available in most states. No doubt, back when that was up for discussion this doofus was one of the ones saying “I support the Second Amendment, BUT I don’t see the need for just anyone to carry a gun around with them everywhere they go.”
Just another big BUT Bozo!
I find your response overly verbose. The fact is, his theories have been tested before in several other states. In every single case, they turned out to be unfounded. We were right, he was wrong, we’re done here.
Your response is verbose and off point. RKBA is about rights, not research. Otherwise it just devolves into “My biased study can beat up your biased study.”
Things he would never say:
“I strongly support the 1st Amendment, but to eliminate the requirement that individuals have at least the basic knowledge of religion and rhetoric to safely speak or worship in public is irrational”
“I strongly support the right to vote, but to eliminate the requirement that individuals have at least the basic civic knowledge to safely exercise the franchise is irrational”
I have a CCW permit in NC. Only advantage is it speeds up the purchase process. A CCW serves as your background check at your LGS.
Yeah… and up in Illinoisistan I have to wait 3 days every time I want to pick up a new handgun despite the ISP FOID check being instantaneous and me owning several dozen firearms of all makes and models. Hopefully, this waiting period nonsense will hit the SCotUS soon. It’s blatantly unconstitutional.
Why are waiting periods unconstitutional? I am not being facetious; we have a ten day waiting period here in California, and the Ninth Circuit says that those waiting periods are a valid exercise of the police power in the furtherance of public safety, notwithstanding the fact that it applies to those persons who already own guns, including CCW holders and C&R licensees.
I would still say it is, because state governments could use that legal footwork to imply some rediculously long waiting periods, like 6 months, or a year, or even more. I’m actually surprised they haven’t tried it yet. Waiting that long would certainly be considered an infringement.
In order for any law to be universally obeyed there must be a rationale for it, something which the law’s “rational man” can look at and say, “Yeah, that makes sense.” I also live in a state where there is a waiting period when you purchase a handgun. Ostensibly, it is to prevent someone who is pissed for whatever reason from going from the place where he is pissed to an LGS, purchasing a handgun, and then returning to the person/place where he took umbrage and shooting someone to death. It would take one hell of a lawyer to get someone like that off on a 2nd degree murder “heat of passion” charge, would it not? Of course it would, even if the person returned IMMEDIATELY from the LGS and did the dirty deed. It would still be murder in the 1st degree, as it required malice aforethought and planning prior to the act, the actions of a rational mind. Ergo, waiting periods to prevent murder with a firearm are irrational.
2A protects the right to keep and bear arms, the people’s republic and the 9th circuit are saying you are not allowed to keep or bear arms for 10 days (that’s unconstitutional) because you might end up being a criminal. They are assuming your guilty until you can prove you’re innocent
The idea is to prevent heated crimes of passion, although most of those crimes are committed with any weapon that is readily available.
Anytime a judge tells you that something is alright because it exercises police powers to ensure public safety (or anything similar) you should run like hell. That is traditionally the mantra of dictators and oppressors
putting an arbitrary limit or delay in exercising a right is by definition infringement.
serge is following the line of thought that “a right delayed is a right denied” and that line of thought has some validity to it. If they can make the waiting period 10 days then why not 20 days? Why not a year? 10 years? It’s also certainly an infringement on your right to KABA because it sets a time frame for when you can KABA. Not now, 3 days hence (or 10 or whatever) is when your rights start.
Further, there’s the logical side to this. serge points out that he already has his “good citizen” paperwork in order and that the check is effectively instantaneous. He, and the state, both know that he owns a number of firearms already. So what’s the point of the waiting period for him? Were he truly going to go commit some dastardly deed it stands to reason that he’d use a gun he already has and do that deed today. Further, someone serious about committing some crime will simply wait through the period and then commit the crime, if they’re in the mood to buy from an FFL. If not they’ll buy a stolen burner out of some guy’s trunk in an alleyway and go do the deed.
Then there’s the issue of people who don’t own a gun but actually need one. “What’s that ma’am? Your psycho ex is off his meds, out of jail and trying to kill you? Sorry, we have a waiting period in this state. Hopefully he doesn’t kill you within the X day window before you can pick up this gun. Assuming he doesn’t kill you, see you in X days!” has got to be the goddamn dumbest thing ever said and that’s what a waiting period tells someone who’s in legitimate fear for their life today.
Waiting periods are paint-chips-for-breakfast retarded. They’re absolutely useless to stop or deter crime and they hobble law abiding citizens who need to protect themselves today rather than next week.
So yes, the courts have said that the law may place “reasonable restrictions” on the RTKABA however the debate then turns to what is “reasonable”. Is a law that serves no purpose in preventing or deterring crime, undermines the rights of the law abiding, and effectively says to people who need protection today, as opposed to some point in the future, “GFY and hope you don’t die before your rights kick in” a “reasonable” restriction? I would argue that it is not.
Hey guys, I’m from NC… and If I had to guess; the subtle message I read/interpret between the lines here in the story might just be our wonderful distorted southern class system; being the why he might not want to arm everyone here in NC, constitutionally. I love NC, however this state is full of racists, bigots and some of the most unintelligent legislators ever.
For example, please examine the recent mess of HB2 or the transgender bathroom bill here.
God forbid the cross dressing transsexual in that bathroom stall is also packing heat, what ever has this world come too…
“I love NC, however this state is full of racists, bigots and some of the most unintelligent legislators ever.”
Bullsheet. I spent my first 25 in PA and the second 25 in NC and I hear a lot more rascist comments back in PA when I visit the parents. I live in rural NC and I have yet to hear the N word ONCE in those 25 years.
Politicians are universally stupid in every state.
Translation : “I’m a strong supporter of the second amendment BUT I don’t believe it applies to normal citizens. I don’t want anyone besides the military or police owning guns, cause you know everyone else is potentially dangerous to society.”
People like you and your agenda are the reason 2A was written so clearly
In NC a CCW is somewhat hard to get, but is recognized by at least 38 other states, not bad. Open carry with no permit legal (as long as you are of course). And cops don’t bother you. Also with the CCW you can buy as many guns as you want without NICS, just fill out the 4473. To get a CCW here you have very thoroughly checked out, way more than a NICS check. Constitutional Carry would be nice for the folks who can not afford the process. I would still keep mine up, but it would be nice for my wife (we have not spent the funds for that since she would not carry 100% of the time like I do).
NC still has a pistol purchase permit system and a criminal penalty for carrying a conceal handgun in privately posted property, but yet somehow constitutional carry is the priority? The sad truth is that, inside both bills HB 69 and HB 201 is a change that will increase the penalty for carrying in these situations. I support the 2nd amendment, I believe the NFA is a gross violation of our constitutional rights and I believe unequivocally that responsible civilians, like many of us, should be allowed to own fully automatic suppressed, short barrels weapons if we want to, BUT I also think constitutional carry is a stupid issue to push when there are so many other, more important pro-2A issues to fight. Although like you, Dan, I too studied and trained to be safe, proficient and law-abiding with my firearms, anyone who has spent more than an hour at a public range knows that people like you and I are in the minority in that respect. I’m not saying that the government should be responsible for setting a standard for concealed carry but, I also think a lot of people out there, simply need a lot more practice and/or training in proficiency and safety before they get on the range, let alone carry in public. If that makes me a “big but” supporter, than I guess I’ll have to accept it.
At least NC is talking about it. It will NEVER happen in California, where unlicensed concealed carry was banned more than a century ago and the (unlicensed) open carry ban coming up on 50 years. Even if the Supreme court ultimately declares that there is a right to bear arms outside the home and mandates “shall issue,” California still won’t go constitutional carry.
My best friend lives in Arizona. He is a gun owner and recreational shooter. He believes that the right to bear arms is limited to the militia by the first clause of the Second Amendment, and that Arizona law allowing anyone to carry open or concealed (and anyone who carries) to be completely insane. The Ultimate Fudd. TTAG should give out prizes, little Fudd statues..
General rule for all “pro-gun” advocates for gun control:
If he has to tell you how pro-gun he is, it’s because he’s anti-gun and lying about it.
Isn’t NC that one southern state with the retarded handgun purchasing permit system that magically disappears if you have a CCW?
Yes. Pistol Purchase Permit costs all of $5 and permits up to 5 handguns to be purchased. If you run out you can get another. CCW permit does away with that.
Vestiges of racism and democrat party politics at its finest. Whom do you think the pistol purchase permits were designed for?
Re:…..refers to as a “big but” supporter
I thought the proper terminology for these type of folks are…..”But-heads” ?
Doesn’t matter, NC is a purple state with a Democratic Governor. No pro gun bills are going to be getting through for a while and honestly, the state is sinking fast. It will be blue in 10 years despite the crazy amounts of gerrymandering.
Wake the frell up sheeple. Permits are to make sure the Gestapo knows you have a weapon. Permits are a way of control of the sheeple. Criminals do not get government permits. SO to protect yourself from the Gestapo and the criminals you do not get a permit. I live in NC, I was stopped by the Gestapo, when he found out I had a permit, he rough me up and took my weapon. Got my weapon back canceled my permit. The Gestapo is the enemy. because they are taugh the same thing, “WE the People” are the enemy
Another reason to do away with permits…
While while waiting for mine to be renewed, I found myself self-censoring, it has a cooling effect on the freedom of speech.
If only there was a good way to weed out the mouth-breathing riff raff. The kind that troll gun sites and forums, have NDs in front of military recruitment centers and brandish their rifles in Chipotle. Call me crazy but I don’t think these types of people should be allowed to carry.
I always enjoy reading your articles Dan. This one might be a little on the extreme side, but you do a good job of point-by-point debating Currin’s letter.
I don’t like the current CCW in NC. The cost for one, the fingerprinting for another. I can open carry without giving my prints, but to put my coat over my gun means the government gets them? No logic, unless you follow the left’s view that people who have passed a background check and a mental health check are going to become violent felons. And the fingerprints helps law enforcement… how?
Liberals are against requiring photo-ID for voting because it discriminates against blacks and poor. Those same liberals seem to turn a blind eye to the (discriminatory) cost of self-defense, don’t they? A CCW class, permit and fingerprint fees could run nearly $200. Then the cheapest (decent) firearm runs about $200 – $250 more. Where are the liberals running to defend minority rights now? They like to forget that the original purpose of sheriff’s department purchase permitting was to prevent blacks from purchasing firearms.
One thing Currin mentioned that you might have addressed in more depth is his claim that the new bills would be eliminating “the requirement that individuals have at least the basic skills to safely use a firearm.” Well sorry Mr. Currin, we don’t really have that requirment now. Proficiency just means you can hit a target at reasonable distances – or at least that was my CCW class. It may be different for others.
I would like to suggest that it isn’t invasive to require an individual complete a course focusing on safety issues and the legality of firearm presentation and use. This can be presented at little or no cost by law enforcement, sponsored by local firearms dealers, or by state certified instructors. I know it would be argued that this is an “infringement” by some, but such training aids the carrier as much as the general public. Even our beloved Justice Scalia implied that no rights are intended to be unlimited.
For instance, it never occurred to me that it was illegal to draw a gun on someone robbing my house when there was no evidence they possessed a firearm. I could not only be arrested but lose my right to carry, just by trying to protect my property. These laws are important to know, and I don’t think the bulk of average firearm owners know them.
Also, we as a community of firearm owners cannot over stress the need for safety. Eric Hummel, of Indiana is an ironic example. Last week, in the process of teaching his boys safe handling of a gun, he shot and killed his daughter. He forgot that he had reloaded his gun. If Eric had only observed that all important rule, “there is no such thing as an unloaded gun,” his daughter would be alive, and Eric would not face years – or life, in prison.
In my view, a permit has value to the carrier, because it simplifies communication between him/her and law enforcement during traffic stops or other encounters, but it need not be costly, invasive, or burdensome. I am allowed to purchase a firearm with a simple background check; that, and a safety certificate, should be enough.
All that said, let me finally say that I recognize the tug-of-war between the pro-gun and anti-gun group. If we give an inch, we may have to fight a tougher battle over the next mile. But we can also look back at gun rights over the last couple of decades, and with the exception of a few anti-gun states, we have won, and continue to win most of the battles.
I don’t believe the current bills will make it all the way this time. But each time the constitutional carry enters NC legislation, it gets closer and closer. Absent of passage, my recommendation to the law makers is to revisit the permitting process. Simplify, economize, and only require what matters.
Finally, to those anti-gunners who argue that cars must be registered, and drivers must be licensed, so why not guns and gun owners? Well, about as many people are killed by cars each year (33,000), and far more injured (2.2 million) by registering and licensing (NHTSA figures for 2010). I don’t call that very successful.
Comments are closed.