Reasonableman Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 In Georgia (USA) they are ready to murder an IQ (76) mental handicapped murder by death penalty. Against the Constitution. Chalerm is a student of Thaksin (PhD in the legal murder town of Huntsville, Texas, with the most killing by death penalty, 100% against International Law, and even 80% against US law - University of Columbia) ????? I ask the death penalty for everyone who wants the death penalty. (Wolfgang Neuss, German satirist) For the USA an IQ of 76 is considered genius German and satirist - doesn't work does it Keep trying. Why is over your head??? - need it in braille??? Are you from Georgia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Was he drunk when he made that statement? In the photo, he's bent over and supporting himself on the table edge. If he's such a great expample of disciplinarian, why are all three of his sons such rowdy punks? If he wants death penalties for drug dealers, then does that apply to dealers of Thailand's most harmful drug? Will we see liquor store owners, Seagram, Chivas, and JW executives rounded up and executed? Not likely And while Chalerm's shenanigan hypocritical grandstanding is going on, hemp is classified as a class-5 drug in Thailand, though no one has ever been stoned on hemp (can't happen, doesn't have enough THC to stone a grasshopper). Thai authorities need to learn the basics about drugs (opiates, pharma, alcohol, etc) before they can realistically criminalize them. Same old argument, like a bad joke that’s been circulated far too long, becomes boring and in the end everyone stops listening. If people want to over indulge in drink or tobacco, bugger up they’re health and help make the companies rich, that’s their problem if they have no sense of control. We are talking about hard drugs here, outfits run by criminal gangs and murderers in an industry that’s worth billions of $$$$$$. These people work and trade on fear. They will maim, kill and destroy anyone who they consider is a nuisance or a threat to them without mercy. They must be strictly controlled and never permitted to gain major power and footholds within the establishments and mainstream populations of any countries. The authorities are at war with drugs and those who are involved must be made fully aware that they are gambling with their lives and that dabbling in drugs cannot pay in the long term. These manufacturers, peddlers, dealers and transporters of suffering, misery, pain and death are not wanted in the civilised world and the quicker they are wiped off the planet the better. 30 days? How about the same day they are confirmed guilty? And save the taxpayer some money into the bargain. Drugs are the scourge of society, they destroy lives. Of course there are going to be many of you that do not agree with this and believe the penalties on those who are associated with drugs is way too harsh. The solution is simple. DON`T DO DRUGS in any shape or form and put the dealers of poison out of business, because those that buy and use drugs are also fuelling the illicit drug industry, plus all the pain and suffering that goes with it. This person is obviously a well informed individual and a politicians dream. To start with drugs do not destroy lives, it is the prohibition and efforts to control drugs that destroy lives eg the political buzz words 'War on Drugs' - yeah like the 'war on terror' etc - wars destroy lives - fact. As for 'dealers of poison', I don't actually think any of the drugs you're talking about are actually classified poisons unlike alcohol which is actually a real toxin hence 'getting intoxicated'. So are we saying we should go round shooting bar keepers and staff? If you want to really sit down and take stock- who benefits from all these 'war on' ------- (fill in the blanks). The war on terror is great for arms sales - check who's reaping the benefits from that. The war on drugs is great for driving up the prices and lining the pockets of the people who fund thebpoliticians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 In Georgia (USA) they are ready to murder an IQ (76) mental handicapped murder by death penalty. Against the Constitution. Chalerm is a student of Thaksin (PhD in the legal murder town of Huntsville, Texas, with the most killing by death penalty, 100% against International Law, and even 80% against US law - University of Columbia) ????? I ask the death penalty for everyone who wants the death penalty. (Wolfgang Neuss, German satirist) For the USA an IQ of 76 is considered genius German and satirist - doesn't work does it Keep trying. Are you from Georgia? Which Georgia would that be ? the state or the country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reasonableman Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Never mind, you lost me at "drugs do not destroy lives...". And no, I don't want to debate it again, thanks. I also oppose the death penalty. Have a good day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nisakiman Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Never mind, you lost me at "drugs do not destroy lives...". And no, I don't want to debate it again, thanks. I also oppose the death penalty. Have a good day. You've obviously been lost to the propagandists for a long time if you swallow all their guff uncritically. Sysardman is actually on the nail. It's not drugs that destroy lives, it's the prohibition of drugs that destroys lives. Even some of the brain-dead western politicians and law-enforcers are starting to wake up to the fact, although they won't have the balls to do anything about it. Only Portugal has turned their back on the dogmatism surrounding prohibition, and by doing so they've halved the number of addicts (and the attendant crime) in the last ten years. The only thing that perpetuates the vicious cycle of crime and addiction is people with a mindset like yours. Take a step back. Divest youself of all the rubbish you've been brainwashed with. Engage your brain for a few minutes. Think on the mayhem that ensued during prohibition in the USA, and the paralells with the "war on drugs" policy. And remember: PROHIBITION DOES NOT WORK. It never has, and it never will. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricku Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 I guess this same rule should not apply to cop killers. It is funny that mister tough on crime has a son who is a cop killer. How is that punishment working out for him? Wait.. Chalerm Yoobamrung's son is a cop killer?? Seriously, can someone give me a bit of info on this one? I guess there should be a few articles in the media about something like this, but I must have totally missed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reasonableman Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Never mind, you lost me at "drugs do not destroy lives...". And no, I don't want to debate it again, thanks. I also oppose the death penalty. Have a good day. You've obviously been lost to the propagandists for a long time if you swallow all their guff uncritically. Sysardman is actually on the nail. It's not drugs that destroy lives, it's the prohibition of drugs that destroys lives. Even some of the brain-dead western politicians and law-enforcers are starting to wake up to the fact, although they won't have the balls to do anything about it. Only Portugal has turned their back on the dogmatism surrounding prohibition, and by doing so they've halved the number of addicts (and the attendant crime) in the last ten years. The only thing that perpetuates the vicious cycle of crime and addiction is people with a mindset like yours. Take a step back. Divest youself of all the rubbish you've been brainwashed with. Engage your brain for a few minutes. Think on the mayhem that ensued during prohibition in the USA, and the paralells with the "war on drugs" policy. And remember: PROHIBITION DOES NOT WORK. It never has, and it never will. Yeah right, drugs are good. Addicts tell me so. Next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simple1 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 I guess this same rule should not apply to cop killers. It is funny that mister tough on crime has a son who is a cop killer. How is that punishment working out for him? Wait.. Chalerm Yoobamrung's son is a cop killer?? Seriously, can someone give me a bit of info on this one? I guess there should be a few articles in the media about something like this, but I must have totally missed it. This URL will provide necessary info: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,185060,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginjag Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Does Chalerm mean that a higher voltage is administered to the person on death row,?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunshine51 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 (edited) About all I can add is that I DO SUPPORT the death penalty no mater what country has it as long as due process is completely carried out till the end where the accused is definiely found guilty. As for Chalerm....well....poo...it's all hypocritical isn't it? As long as his son is a free man that is. Edited July 22, 2012 by sunshine51 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 (edited) About all I can add is that I DO SUPPORT the death penalty no mater whatcountry has it as long as due process is completely carried out till the end where the accused is definiely found guilty. As for Chalerm....well....poo...it's all hypocritical isn't it? As long as his sone is a free man that is. Do you include "later found to be innocent" with those that are "definitely guilty"? Edited July 30, 2012 by Maestro Deleted nonsensical part of post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunshine51 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 About all I can add is that I DO SUPPORT the death penalty no mater whatcountry has it as long as due process is completely carried out till the end where the accused is definiely found guilty. As for Chalerm....well....poo...it's all hypocritical isn't it? As long as his sone is a free man that is. Do you include "later found to be innocent" with those that are "definitely guilty"? No I don't WB..just a grammatical error on my part. To be more to the point the "guilty" must be found guilty by a jury of peers and...this is gonna open up the barstool lawyers here but WTH....I mean the opposite of later finding out the "guilty" were actually innocent...say as a result of quantitative DNA analysis etc. In the US many on death row are there not because they are actually guilty of a capital crime but they have been convicted on "best evidence"...which may or may not be true. If this doesn't explain things better then I'll try again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 (edited) About all I can add is that I DO SUPPORT the death penalty no mater what country has it as long as due process is completely carried out till the end where the accused is definiely found guilty. "The twelfth-century legal theorist Maimonides, expounding on this passage as well as Exodus 23:7 ("the innocent and righteous slay thou not") argued that executing an accused criminal on anything less than absolute certainty would progressively lead to convictions merely "according to the judge's caprice. Hence the Exalted One has shut this door" against the use of presumptive evidence, for "it is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone's_formulation //edit/source Edited July 22, 2012 by Thaddeus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunshine51 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 (edited) Thanks Thaddeus...my next lines were to say something like... If person A killed Person B, person C should not be found guilty of killing person A under any circumstances. Sadly not many Person A's admit to their crime do they? As I stated I do support the death penalty for certain crimes such as pre- meditated murder and rape and in some cases of child molestation...perhaps others depending on my mood... however the court must find the accused guilty with "absolute certainty"...and nothing else...or less. Edited July 22, 2012 by sunshine51 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Thanks Thaddeus...my next lines were to say something like... If person A killed Person B, person C should not be found guilty of killing person A under any circumstances. Sadly not many Person A's admit to their crime do they? As I stated I do support the death penalty for certain crimes such as pre- meditated murder and rape and in some cases of child molestation...perhaps others depending on my mood... however the court must find the accused guilty with "absolute certainty"...and nothing else...or less. This is a trick question because it's person B gets killed so person C cannot be guilty of killing person A - did I pass? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Never mind, you lost me at "drugs do not destroy lives...". And no, I don't want to debate it again, thanks. I also oppose the death penalty. Have a good day. You've obviously been lost to the propagandists for a long time if you swallow all their guff uncritically. Sysardman is actually on the nail. It's not drugs that destroy lives, it's the prohibition of drugs that destroys lives. Even some of the brain-dead western politicians and law-enforcers are starting to wake up to the fact, although they won't have the balls to do anything about it. Only Portugal has turned their back on the dogmatism surrounding prohibition, and by doing so they've halved the number of addicts (and the attendant crime) in the last ten years. The only thing that perpetuates the vicious cycle of crime and addiction is people with a mindset like yours. Take a step back. Divest youself of all the rubbish you've been brainwashed with. Engage your brain for a few minutes. Think on the mayhem that ensued during prohibition in the USA, and the paralells with the "war on drugs" policy. And remember: PROHIBITION DOES NOT WORK. It never has, and it never will. Yeah right, drugs are good. Addicts tell me so. Next. And it's really in the addicts best interests to lock him/her up, give them criminal records and basically treat them like pariah because they were weak willed ?? (even Adam succumbed to the forbidden fruit). Unless they have been forced into stealing to feed the habit the only victim here is the addict. I'm also not a big fan of the death penalty for the usual reason - innocents may be wrongly convicted but then there are cases like the Norway mass killer and a long list of others that just don't fall under the 'reasonable doubt' label, people like that should be kept in a cushy jail for life with 3 square meals a day, tons of money spent on them for supervision and rehabilitation etc??. These people showed no mercy to their victims and should receive the same (an eye for an eye etc) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 About all I can add is that I DO SUPPORT the death penalty no mater what country has it as long as due process is completely carried out till the end where the accused is definiely found guilty. "The twelfth-century legal theorist Maimonides, expounding on this passage as well as Exodus 23:7 ("the innocent and righteous slay thou not") argued that executing an accused criminal on anything less than absolute certainty would progressively lead to convictions merely "according to the judge's caprice. Hence the Exalted One has shut this door" against the use of presumptive evidence, for "it is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death." Really nice quote by one of those persons whose whole outlook on life is based on theory and not reality. These theorists and philosophers are talking about some Utopia where people are actually civilised but the grim truth is that despite thousands of years of evolution we are still no more civilised than dinosaurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunshine51 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Thanks Thaddeus...my next lines were to say something like... If person A killed Person B, person C should not be found guilty of killing person A under any circumstances. Sadly not many Person A's admit to their crime do they? As I stated I do support the death penalty for certain crimes such as pre- meditated murder and rape and in some cases of child molestation...perhaps others depending on my mood... however the court must find the accused guilty with "absolute certainty"...and nothing else...or less. This is a trick question because it's person B gets killed so person C cannot be guilty of killing person A - did I pass? Onlyif a shootout at the OK Corral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gemini81 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 About all I can add is that I DO SUPPORT the death penalty no mater what country has it as long as due process is completely carried out till the end where the accused is definiely found guilty. "The twelfth-century legal theorist Maimonides, expounding on this passage as well as Exodus 23:7 ("the innocent and righteous slay thou not") argued that executing an accused criminal on anything less than absolute certainty would progressively lead to convictions merely "according to the judge's caprice. Hence the Exalted One has shut this door" against the use of presumptive evidence, for "it is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death." Really nice quote by one of those persons whose whole outlook on life is based on theory and not reality. These theorists and philosophers are talking about some Utopia where people are actually civilised but the grim truth is that despite thousands of years of evolution we are still no more civilised than dinosaurs. Sounds like all your hate and negativity will claim you before Chalerm even gets a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 (edited) About all I can add is that I DO SUPPORT the death penalty no mater what country has it as long as due process is completely carried out till the end where the accused is definiely found guilty. "The twelfth-century legal theorist Maimonides, expounding on this passage as well as Exodus 23:7 ("the innocent and righteous slay thou not") argued that executing an accused criminal on anything less than absolute certainty would progressively lead to convictions merely "according to the judge's caprice. Hence the Exalted One has shut this door" against the use of presumptive evidence, for "it is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death." Really nice quote by one of those persons whose whole outlook on life is based on theory and not reality. These theorists and philosophers are talking about some Utopia where people are actually civilised but the grim truth is that despite thousands of years of evolution we are still no more civilised than dinosaurs. Sounds like all your hate and negativity will claim you before Chalerm even gets a chance. Aah come on now, there's no hate in anything I wrote and no negativity either, in fact I'm positive about society being uncivilised. I'm also old enough to have seen many things in my time and can't say that anything has convinced me that things are improving. We're now in the 21st Century and yet there's a despot having children's heads blown off and the world stands back and say's 'not my business squire I just sell him the guns'. People are still starving despite the west arguing about food mountains. And all this technology!!!! it's great to think if you are in a bad accident that somebody is on hand with a mobile phone - unfortunately it will be to record the gruesome details for Youtube and not call for help. If you have any examples of how wrong I am please enlighten us. Edited July 22, 2012 by sysardman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 (edited) About all I can add is that I DO SUPPORT the death penalty no mater what country has it as long as due process is completely carried out till the end where the accused is definiely found guilty. "The twelfth-century legal theorist Maimonides, expounding on this passage as well as Exodus 23:7 ("the innocent and righteous slay thou not") argued that executing an accused criminal on anything less than absolute certainty would progressively lead to convictions merely "according to the judge's caprice. Hence the Exalted One has shut this door" against the use of presumptive evidence, for "it is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death." Really nice quote by one of those persons whose whole outlook on life is based on theory and not reality. All life is theory, reality is what happens to other people isn't it. For your sake, I hope you never have to face some one else's theory of your reality. If you had been stitched up, framed so to speak, of committing a murder, and all the evidence presented pointed the finger at you, but it wasn't you, would you still be in favour of the death penalty? If you say yes, you are a liar, if you say no, it's probably best you don't say anything else on this subject. Edited July 22, 2012 by Thaddeus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reasonableman Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 The death penalty, like other penalties, is open to error, abuse, and manipulation for purposes other than justice. If these factors become evident at a later date, much better for the victim to be alive and exonerated than dead and cremated, imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siripon Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Thailand is a signatory to the ICCPR, International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights, members are not allowed to use the death penalty. In addition, the words 'death penalty'in the 1997 constitution were removed from the present constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maidu Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 A hard drug user (whiskey) wanting to quick kill users of other types of hard drugs. Precious. Was he drunk when he made that statement? In the photo, he's bent over and supporting himself on the table edge. If he's such a great expample of disciplinarian, why are all three of his sons such rowdy punks? If he wants death penalties for drug dealers, then does that apply to dealers of Thailand's most harmful drug? Will we see liquor store owners, Seagram, Chivas, and JW executives rounded up and executed? Not likely And while Chalerm's shenanigan hypocritical grandstanding is going on, hemp is classified as a class-5 drug in Thailand, though no one has ever been stoned on hemp (can't happen, doesn't have enough THC to stone a grasshopper). Thai authorities need to learn the basics about drugs (opiates, pharma, alcohol, etc) before they can realistically criminalize them. Same old argument, like a bad joke that’s been circulated far too long, becomes boring and in the end everyone stops listening. If people want to over indulge in drink or tobacco, bugger up they’re health and help make the companies rich, that’s their problem if they have no sense of control. We are talking about hard drugs here, outfits run by criminal gangs and murderers in an industry that’s worth billions of $$$$$$. These people work and trade on fear. They will maim, kill and destroy anyone who they consider is a nuisance or a threat to them without mercy. They must be strictly controlled and never permitted to gain major power and footholds within the establishments and mainstream populations of any countries. The authorities are at war with drugs and those who are involved must be made fully aware that they are gambling with their lives and that dabbling in drugs cannot pay in the long term. These manufacturers, peddlers, dealers and transporters of suffering, misery, pain and death are not wanted in the civilised world and the quicker they are wiped off the planet the better. 30 days? How about the same day they are confirmed guilty? And save the taxpayer some money into the bargain. Drugs are the scourge of society, they destroy lives. Of course there are going to be many of you that do not agree with this and believe the penalties on those who are associated with drugs is way too harsh. The solution is simple. DON`T DO DRUGS in any shape or form and put the dealers of poison out of business, because those that buy and use drugs are also fuelling the illicit drug industry, plus all the pain and suffering that goes with it. This person is obviously a well informed individual and a politicians dream. To start with drugs do not destroy lives, it is the prohibition and efforts to control drugs that destroy lives eg the political buzz words 'War on Drugs' - yeah like the 'war on terror' etc - wars destroy lives - fact. As for 'dealers of poison', I don't actually think any of the drugs you're talking about are actually classified poisons unlike alcohol which is actually a real toxin hence 'getting intoxicated'. So are we saying we should go round shooting bar keepers and staff? If you want to really sit down and take stock- who benefits from all these 'war on' ------- (fill in the blanks). The war on terror is great for arms sales - check who's reaping the benefits from that. The war on drugs is great for driving up the prices and lining the pockets of the people who fund the politicians. Beetlejuice's description of hard drugs, its dealers, and the harm they cause - sounds tailor made to fit alcoholic drugs. Here's a pop quiz: What is the world's (and Thailand's) #1 most harmful drug? Answer: alcoholic drinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maidu Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I guess this same rule should not apply to cop killers. It is funny that mister tough on crime has a son who is a cop killer. How is that punishment working out for him? Wait.. Chalerm Yoobamrung's son is a cop killer?? Seriously, can someone give me a bit of info on this one? I guess there should be a few articles in the media about something like this, but I must have totally missed it. He's allegedly a cop killer. And it happened in a place where hard drugs are abused (a bar) and though there were a dozen witnesses to the murder, none have the balls to speak the truth. Chalerm is too powerful to cross. He can be as ruthless as any crime boss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stiggy Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) When caught bang to rights, why not life imprisonment and confiscation of all associated associated criminal gains no chance of parol for 15-20 years.Then only granted if able to advocate the non use of drugs and severe penalties associated with importing/manufacturing it. Generally either desperate or greedy people run drugs, death penalty carries no weight with the truly desperate the greedy normally use the desperate to run the deed.. At least with a life sentence they can become a living detterent to those that are considering, surly this is more effective in the long run. Edited July 23, 2012 by stiggy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chotthee Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Drug = bad. Police = good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 About all I can add is that I DO SUPPORT the death penalty no mater what country has it as long as due process is completely carried out till the end where the accused is definiely found guilty. "The twelfth-century legal theorist Maimonides, expounding on this passage as well as Exodus 23:7 ("the innocent and righteous slay thou not") argued that executing an accused criminal on anything less than absolute certainty would progressively lead to convictions merely "according to the judge's caprice. Hence the Exalted One has shut this door" against the use of presumptive evidence, for "it is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death." Really nice quote by one of those persons whose whole outlook on life is based on theory and not reality. All life is theory, reality is what happens to other people isn't it. For your sake, I hope you never have to face some one else's theory of your reality. If you had been stitched up, framed so to speak, of committing a murder, and all the evidence presented pointed the finger at you, but it wasn't you, would you still be in favour of the death penalty? If you say yes, you are a liar, if you say no, it's probably best you don't say anything else on this subject. Well it looks like you're making the decisions for me, the people who get framed for murder are a very small minority and as such are a special case. If you say you wouldn't be happy to pull the switch on people like the Norway gunman or this new movie theatre shooter who showed no sympathy or humanity for their victims then you are a liar too. For all those who support rehabilitation and life sentences, wait till the money runs out, I bet the ones who are opposed to the death penalty are also the whingers who moan when their taxes go up - a bunch of NIMBYs the lot of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Drug = bad. Police = good. Well who can argue with that????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reasonableman Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Drug = bad. Police = good. Well who can argue with that????? Argue with what? It's meaningless drivel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now