The Coming Dark Times

The Martialist

White Belt
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
14
Reaction score
2
The Coming Dark Times
Thoughts on Today's National Elections

By Phil Elmore, Publisher, The Martialist

Throughout history, every religious and socio-political group has had or does have its dark times – the times to which it refers and proclaims, "Never again," the times for which its members prepare with grim purpose and pessimistic proclamations. For the Jews, it was the Holocaust – and it remains the spectres of anti-Semitism and, if you are a member of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, gun control. For Christians it was the persecution of people of faith throughout history, from Roman coliseums to the enforced atheism of the Soviet Union – and it remains the litigious and systematic removal of Christianity from the public sphere in contemporary American society. For modern-day Pagans it was the "Burning Times," including the infamous Salem Witch Trials – and it remains the hostility, suspicion, and discrimination of contemporary citizens whose opinions of neopagan religions are based on misinformation and misunderstanding.

For armed, prepared citizens, those whom I call martialists, the dark times are comprised of any period in which the political, social, and cultural pendulum swings towards control – control of arms, control of training, control of individual lives. For what is self-defense without the self? The right to defend yourself and the legal freedom necessary to own the tools and take the actions necessary to accomplish this goal are aspects of your self-ownership, the concept that you own you. Your are nobody’s slave and you are nobody’s property. You don’t owe anyone anything to which you’ve not agreed. You have the inalienable, unquestioned natural right to yourself – and to the products of your labors. To protect those rights, you have the right to defend yourself. More importantly, you have the right, in a free society, to be free of burdensome, invasive legislation that infringes on your right to self-protection or otherwise unjustly deprives you of your property, your time, or your life.

For example, the most recent dark times for men and women of action -- the people who are reading The Martialist, for the most part – were the eight years of the Clinton Presidency – eight years of abuse by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms punctuated by the Clintons' contempt for gun owners and anyone to the right of their political leftism. These were dark times that saw the burning to death of the Branch Davidians, for example -- people whose crimes certainly included being deluded religious nutjobs, but whose crimes certainly did not merit an horrific death sentence. These were dark times that saw a young boy, whose mother died to free him from the socialist dictatorship of Cuba, stolen at gunpoint by jackbooted stormtroopers -- a boy stolen from an American home in an American city by black-clad federal ninja wielding submachineguns. (Thanks to President Clinton, Elian Gonzales was returned to the prison-state that is modern-day Cuba, where is the property of the state.)

These were dark times that saw a marked decrease in Federal Firearms Licenses, as the government did its best to harass legal gun dealers and put them out of business. These were dark times that saw what was, at the time, the largest tax increase in history, accompanied by ever-greater government control on the liberties, lives, and livelihoods of those living and working in the United States.

For today's armed and prepared citizens, the dark time remains the Orwellian thought policing of that which is considered politically correct, coupled with the increasing pacifism and passivism of American popular culture. Ours is a culture that would rather see a woman raped than allow her to carry a gun. Ours is a culture that would bring that woman up on charges if she shot a would-be rapist. Ours is a culture that, increasingly, equates weaponry and even martial arts training with vice, with the desire to do unprovoked violence to others.

The Centers for Disease Control, as politicized a public agency as ever one could want, treat firearms like a disease. Schoolchildren, increasingly brainwashed in government schools, are indoctrinated to view all use of force as evil -- sometimes even being asked to inform on their parents’ firearms ownership, if news accounts can be believed --and come home to their horrified parents spewing politically correct clichés and revisionist history with the wide-eyed innocence of true believers (all while failing miserably to understand everything from math and reading to simple weights and measures, to say nothing of mysteries like grammar).
The coming dark times have, on occasion, seemed more distant. In post-Clinton America, it seemed -- beginning with the Republican "take-over" of Congress during Clinton's time in office -- that the tide was turning.

Americans who believe in being prepared, in living life actively and dynamically, in defending themselves and their families, breathed premature sighs of relief. These American anti-pacifists -- whom I call martialists -- even saw the expiration of the national "Assault Weapons Ban," signed into law by the first President Bush. (Lest you think that this is a polemic against a specific political party, it is not. Both Republicans and Democrats pose a threat to your liberty and have engaged in the war on self-defense. For example, George Pataki, nominally a Republican, did more harm to legal gun ownership in New York State than the infamous Governmor Mario Cuomo ever managed before him. Pataki signed into law what was, at the time, the strictest gun control in the United States.)
For a brief moment in time, the American future -- which seemed inexorably to be moving towards greater tyranny, greater statism, greater and more invasive government control, greater socialism – seemed bright.

Conservative radio hosts starting arrogantly proclaiming (while ignoring their own political functionaries’ infringements on personal liberty and failures to secure national security and individual rights) that those on the political left simply couldn’t win elections, that their ideology had been rejected by the American people, that their party or parties were dying. It was, apparently, a good time to be a martialist in the United States. It was, many thought, a good time to be an armed and law-abiding American. It was, so many hoped, a good time to be a free woman, a free man – a free citizen.

The future has gone dark.

In truth, the future always was dark. It is remarkably stupid, given the lessons of history, to rejoice when Republicans take power, for they have wrought as much damage to individual liberty as have their Democrat rivals. Substitute “right-wing” for Republicans and “left-wing” for Democrat in that sentence and the truth is only slightly different. While I do believe right and wrong exist -- and I believe ardently that what is true and morally correct is far more often characterized as “right wing” than as “left wing” -- the fact is that our society is moving inexorably towards totalitarian statism.

Recently the Supreme Court of the United States ruled -- legislating from the bench as it so often does -- that your government may take your property for almost any "public good," in what is surely the most gruesome abuse of Emminent Domain ever to be handed down by our robed masters. This is only the beginning. When your government can take anything you own for almost any reason, private property does not exist. When private property does not exist, de facto socialism has been implemented. The dark times are coming – and they have always been coming.

When I first got the idea to write this editorial, the dust was just clearing from the 2005 off-year elections. At that time, in San Fancisco, all guns were banned. It was illegal to make guns, sell guns, or own guns. You couldn’t carry a gun in the city; you could not even have a gun in your home or your business. San Francisco was thus destined to join Chicago and Washington, DC, as one the most violent cities in the nation, torn by the lawlessness that is always the result of disarming law-abiding citizens.
While it seems the law has been successfully challenged in court since that time, the passing of the San Francisco ban was not an isolated incident. Republican ballot initiatives in California were roundly voted down. Left-leaning politicians, primarily Democrats, swept the most consequential of the off-year elections nationwide in the wake of the political scandals plaguing the second Bush administration. On the opposite coast, Hillary Clinton was (and is, as of this writing) the front-runner for her party's presidential nomination in 2008 – and notoriously anti-gun Elliot Spitzer, now an Attorney General eager to sue firearm manufacturers out of existence, is poised to become the next Governor of New York State. The national and local news media are already trumpeting the "political nightmare" George Bush will face in 2006 when Democrats sweep the elections in two weeks' time. Polls across the country indicate that the Democrats will likely seize control of Congress.


Never a particularly strong president, George W. Bush has proven to be his party's worst enemy. As political conservatives have lost ground, so, too, have armed citizens lost ground. Say what you will about the other politics of the right wing in this country; complain, rightly, as much as you like about "theocracy" and other issues associated with the G.O.P. that are less than libertarian. For all the party's faults, however, it did one thing reasonably well, if at times with mediocrity: it stood up for firearms rights. The party's legitimately conservative members stood up for self-defense in the face of crime. They stood up for martialism in the face of popular culture's pacifist mantra of appeasement, self-destruction, and self-delusion.

Of course, they did this while society continued to close in around its members. They did this while, at times, aiding and abetting the very forces of “big government” they claimed to oppose. In a day and age when Congress and the President create and sign into being not tens, not scores, but hundreds of laws – from a pool of bills created in the Senate and the House that numbers in the thousands – it’s safe to say that all the really important and necessary laws (such as not murdering our neighbors or stealing their property) have been covered at some point in our more than two hundred year history. That means that with each of the thousands of possible laws your federal government tries to foist on you as an American citizen, another piece of your life is cordoned off, boxed in, and tied up.

There are now more laws on the books at the federal and state levels in the United States -- not counting the nearly limitless regulations imposed by various and sundry federal and state agencies and their faceless bureaucratic functionaries -- than any human being could possibly comprehend. No single person could keep in his or her head all of the laws he or she must follow in order to engage in any endeavor in his or her personal or business life. It simply isn’t possible. As the web of laws continues to tighten, the war on your freedom -- the war on you, your individuality, your right to self-defense -- continues apace. The war on freedom starts with the war on self-defense because a human being who can fight back is a human being who can oppose all other forms of government control, government intervention, and government theft.

As the coming dark times close in, it will become even more difficult for American martialists. Already under assault from every side in a culture that values victims over victors, defensively-minded critical thinkers are becoming increasingly rare among Americans. Think about the other gun owners you know -- and among them, think of the hardcore "tactical" enthusiasts, the ones who post in online discussion sites devoted to self-defense, the ones who spend hundreds of dollars to train with people and at institutions like Gabe Suarez, Massad Ayoob, Gunsite, Thunder Ranch, and MDTS, and Progressive F.o.R.C.E. Concepts, the ones who’ve studied or are studying martial arts and who do more than wander through life blissfully ignorant of life’s potential dangers. How many of them consider themselves, quite rightly, members of an increasingly shrinking minority? How many of them will tell you, quite honestly, that they must live in the “tactical closet” for fear that coworkers and family members will consider them paranoid, dangerous, or otherwise mentally "odd" (at best) if their beliefs about self-defense, weapons, and realistic martial arts training became known?

As bad as it has been, it's going to become much worse. Martialists -- martial artists, self-defense and combatives exponents, gun owners, survivalists, and others who believe in basic preparedness and objective reality over wishful thinking and utopian political correctness -- will become an increasingly persecuted minority. The fiction that seemed so far-fetched even during the Clinton Years will become chillingly relevant. Across this nation, martialists and like-minded armed citizens will reread Jerry Ahern's The Survivalist, The Freeman, and The Defender. They will pick up and read with shaking hands their copies of Unintended Consequences, Enemies Foreign and Domestic, and Out of the Gray Zone. They will realize with horror that there are classics of English-language literature predating these more contemporary offerings, classics that warned us of the coming dark times in voices and images that are only too clear in our 20/20 hindsight. The communist dystopia of Orwell’s Animal Farm will only too chillingly embody the attitudes of the men and women in power who presume to write laws telling us what we may and may not do. The alarmingly prescient depiction of an oppressed citizenry under constant video surveillance by a manipulative and brutal government will no longer be confined to the pages of Orwell’s 1984. Martialists will delve into a cornucopia of libertarian short fiction, the most famous examples of which involve everything from the smuggling of illicit dairy products to costumed vigilantes waging ceaseless war against the well-oiled machines of restrictive, pitiless autocracy.

If all of this sounds far-fetched, if all of its sounds like alarmism and pessimism, if none of this seems likely to occur… well, congratulations. You’re in the majority of people who think it can’t happen to them. You remember the famous condemnation of apathy in the face of oppression, don’t you? It goes something like, “When they came for the Jews, I did nothing because I wasn't a Jew. When they came for the [place persecuted minority here] I did nothing because I wasn’t a member of that persecuted minority. When they came for me, there was nobody left to stop them.”

The Martialist is more than a means to discuss weaponry, chat with like-minded individuals, and entertain you with martial theory and application. It is an attempt to give you the inspiration, the strategies, and methods for living in, coping with, and preparing for a society that hates your right to self-defense. In some ways it’s a self-help 'zine, for The Martialist gives you the means to cope -- mentally as well as physically -- with life as a persecuted minority. Specifically, it teaches you how to conduct yourself as an armed, prepared citizen in a community, state, and nation that despise you for being (or wanting to be) what you are. It teaches you what steps to take while you still can and while there are options available to you before the dark times close in. It enables you to build mental (and perhaps physical) fortifications against the onslaught of the politically correct, the passive, the power-hungry, and the pitiless.

The Martialist comprises material that I have wanted to read, and failed to find, so many times. I have wanted to read it whenever I became depressed, despondent, or dispirited. I have wanted to read it whenever I contemplated planning for the future -- a future I was not sure I was happy about meeting. I have wanted to read it for comfort, for information, and for affirmation whenever I questioned just why I was different from so many of society’s apathetic, passive, and pacifist sheep.

The Martialist is the source material I have wanted to read whenever I was worried about the coming dark times. It will be the means through which I cope with the next few years. I am writing this today because we're all in this together -- and I hope what I've written and what I will write will help you, too, to cope with the years ahead.

Best regards on November 7, 2006,

Phil
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,608
Reaction score
4,901
Location
England
A lot of the rest of the world manages to live quite nicely and happily without each citizen being armed to the teeth with guns, why can't you? Only a very small section of our police are armed, the population aren't armed and we've not quite turned into 1984 yet, if we do it won't be weapons that stop it. Have you considered how much gun carrying is actually for safety and how much is because you like the phallic symbolism of carrying arms?
 

mrhnau

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
2,269
Reaction score
34
Location
NC
A lot of the rest of the world manages to live quite nicely and happily without each citizen being armed to the teeth with guns, why can't you? Only a very small section of our police are armed, the population aren't armed and we've not quite turned into 1984 yet, if we do it won't be weapons that stop it. Have you considered how much gun carrying is actually for safety and how much is because you like the phallic symbolism of carrying arms?

I've got one friend who was severly beaten once by a group of 5 guys. quite severely injured. Now he won't go anywhere w/out his gun. I doubt he considers it a phallic symbol.

I don't like the concept of looking for phallic symbols everywhere... but thats just me :)
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,608
Reaction score
4,901
Location
England
I've got one friend who was severly beaten once by a group of 5 guys. quite severely injured. Now he won't go anywhere w/out his gun. I doubt he considers it a phallic symbol.

I don't like the concept of looking for phallic symbols everywhere... but thats just me :)

Would have having a gun saved him from a beating? With 5 men onto him wouldn't he have been disarmed and possibly shot with his own weapon? For those of use who have grown up and live without weapons being available the call for people to be armed seems strident and hysterical. I don't at all look for phallic symbols everywhere but to be honest I find all this adoration of firearms very creepy.
 

mrhnau

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
2,269
Reaction score
34
Location
NC
Would have having a gun saved him from a beating? With 5 men onto him wouldn't he have been disarmed and possibly shot with his own weapon?
He may have been injured/killed as a result, but he quite possibly may have been able to defend himself and hopefully ward off the attack w/out killing/seriously injuring someone. Using a weapon does escalate the level of potential injury and is not always a cure. He has also taken up various martial arts as a result of the attack.

For those of use who have grown up and live without weapons being available the call for people to be armed seems strident and hysterical. I don't at all look for phallic symbols everywhere but to be honest I find all this adoration of firearms very creepy.

For those of us that have grown up with guns, the call for disarmament sounds a bit silly :) Alot of people here hunt with them as well as use them for self defense purposes.

I tend to look at firearms as a kitchen knife. Its simply a tool. You can use it for many purposes. I don't -adore- my guns any more than I adore my kitchen knife, but I don't see any more logic in trying to remove my gun than removing my kitchen knife. Both can be used for violence, but I don't see an outcry for the removal of kitchen knives...

To a certain extent guns are very much a part of our culture and have been since colonization. I don't see it creepy, but honestly I find cultures that forbid firearms a bit strange :) Just what we are used to I suppose...

I assume since you are on this board that you practice some form of martial arts. Do you find it creepy that most martial arts practice some form of weaponry? Do you think cultures w/out weapons would find that a bit creepy? (well, I don't think those cultures exist, but for the sake of imagination)
 

morph4me

Goin' with the flow
MT Mentor
MTS Alumni
Joined
Sep 5, 2006
Messages
6,779
Reaction score
124
Location
Ossining , NY
A lot of the rest of the world manages to live quite nicely and happily without each citizen being armed to the teeth with guns, why can't you? Only a very small section of our police are armed, the population aren't armed and we've not quite turned into 1984 yet, if we do it won't be weapons that stop it. Have you considered how much gun carrying is actually for safety and how much is because you like the phallic symbolism of carrying arms?

What's the weapon of choice for criminals in England? Knives? Clubs? Just because people don't carry firearms doesn't mean they aren't armed.

I don't carry a firearm, my choice, my right. But, I have no criminal record, no history of mental disease or defect, and a right to bear arms under the constition, also my right. I believe there should be background checks and waiting periods, mandatory training, and a limit on the kinds of firearms that are availible to the public. I also believe that my right to protect myself and my family should not be infringed upon.

So, while I may not be in complete agreement with The Martialist, I can understand his position. I hope that at some point, as I follow this thread, that I will come understand yours.
 

Lisa

Don't get Chewed!
MTS Alumni
Joined
Jul 22, 2004
Messages
13,582
Reaction score
95
Location
a happy place
For those of use who have grown up and live without weapons being available the call for people to be armed seems strident and hysterical. I don't at all look for phallic symbols everywhere but to be honest I find all this adoration of firearms very creepy.

Not for all of us it doesn't. Canada has recently been going through changes in its gun laws. The most disconcerting thing I remember is hearing about was Gang members lobbying FOR gun control. Simply put, disarming the law abiding public makes us an easier target for them. THAT is what I call creepy.
 

Grenadier

Sr. Grandmaster
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
10,826
Reaction score
617
Would have having a gun saved him from a beating? With 5 men onto him wouldn't he have been disarmed and possibly shot with his own weapon?

This is the same assumption that almost every anti-gun person makes, that a gun in the hands of a thug makes him an invincible killer, and yet a gun in the hands of a law-abiding citizen will turn against him...

You can't have it both ways.

The answer to your question is easily seen in the archives of history. Look at the 1992 riots in Los Angeles. It wasn't surprising that many Korean-owned businesses survived the looting, arson, and destruction, simply because their owners were able to fend off the attackers with firearms.
 

SFC JeffJ

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
9,141
Reaction score
44
To put it simply, it is an inherent right of any human being to defend themself. Firearms are a very efficeint way to help protect yourself from deadly force.

There is a lot of truth in "God created men, Sam Colt made them equal"

Jeff
 

Cruentus

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 17, 2002
Messages
7,161
Reaction score
130
Location
At an OP in view of your house...
Would have having a gun saved him from a beating? With 5 men onto him wouldn't he have been disarmed and possibly shot with his own weapon?

A gun shot wound even in just one person can severely hinder the motivation of the group.

For those of use who have grown up and live without weapons being available the call for people to be armed seems strident and hysterical. I don't at all look for phallic symbols everywhere but to be honest I find all this adoration of firearms very creepy.

The "adoration" of firearms wouldn't be there if there weren't people out there afraid of them, and trying to take away peoples rights to have them. They would simply just be a part of life. But instead, we have to combat those who project their inscurities on to us and who would ademently fight to take our rights away.
 

Cryozombie

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Feb 11, 2003
Messages
9,998
Reaction score
206
A lot of the rest of the world manages to live quite nicely and happily without each citizen being armed to the teeth with guns, why can't you? Only a very small section of our police are armed, the population aren't armed and we've not quite turned into 1984 yet, if we do it won't be weapons that stop it. Have you considered how much gun carrying is actually for safety and how much is because you like the phallic symbolism of carrying arms?

My penis is quite large thank you, and I still own guns.

Why? Because, much like the local cops who refused to even take a report when I called them, my PENIS isnt gonna stop the guy who tried to break into my house.
 

bushidomartialarts

Senior Master
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
2,668
Reaction score
47
Location
Hillsboro, Oregon
I don't own guns, though I'm proficient and comfortable with their use. I don't mind guns being around and figure they're a valuable enough tool under the right circumstances. My own experience has taught me that I don't need a gun to be safe, and I've lived in some pretty foul neighborhoods. The three times I've had a gun pulled on me, having a gun of my own wouldn't have helped.

But others have had other experiences, and I respect that.

Where it all starts to look silly to me is when people start talking about needing guns in case they have to resist an overly oppressive government. That was all well and good in 1776, but really the government of today is far too powerful to beat that way. Mr. Elmore is dedicated, intelligent and well armed, but a SEAL team would end him and his six best, toughest, most heavily armed friends. The people have lost that arms race and there's no winning it back.
 

MA-Caver

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
14,960
Reaction score
312
Location
Chattanooga, TN
As I understand it... the Consitutuional right to "bear arms" was initally supposed to apply to the militia back in the 1700's in America. But of course what is the militia? Average citizens taking up arms and gathering together to fight off a greater evil than themselves i.e. at the time British invaders from King George.
Today does it apply? One would think so. But is it the National Guard today's version of the colonist's militia forces? Everyday citizens that dress in military garb and gather to train one weekend a month to have the skills necessary to ward off an invading force?
But what about us every day citizens that do not wish to "join the National Guard"? We who have the inalienable right to defend life, home and property are denied arming ourselves because supposedly they lead to incidents like Columbine and the recent Amish School shootings, or the Postal workers that went "postal" and shot up their supervisiors and co-workers, the everyday average criminal and those others who grab their guns and perform "crimes of passion".
Tragedies like these and hundreds upon thousands of examples are a way of life when the liberities to bear arms for the purpose of defense of our homes and our lives and their liberties as granted by the Consitution and Bill of Rights.
But if this country were ever again invaded by an outside entity can we trust our government to ensure our safety and quick expulsion of these invaders via the full time military and National Guardsmen without taking up arms ourselves?
I believe our founding fathers knew that it would take every man (and woman) to rise up and to fight for our freedoms against any invaders foreign and domestic (actually a military oath but I think it can apply to each of us as well).
The fact that we're apparently stuck with a two (dominate) party system of government is probably the reason why we're having said liberties slowly taken away from us. That we need to have more parties to create a wider balance and wider perception of what is just and what is freedom so that these liberties are not taken away for our greater good.
 

Grenadier

Sr. Grandmaster
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
10,826
Reaction score
617
As I understand it... the Consitutuional right to "bear arms" was initally supposed to apply to the militia back in the 1700's in America.

The dependent clause of the statement, namely "A well-regulated militia, being necessary..." is not part of the independent clause of the statement "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The independent clause exists solely on its own, and the inclusion of the dependent clause is stating but one reason why the right of the people (nowhere does it say "the right of the militia") to keep and bear arms must be preserved.

Furthermore, the Second Amendment recognizes that such a right of the people to keep and bear arms, had already existed, and merely protects what was already in existence.


Tragedies like these and hundreds upon thousands of examples are a way of life when the liberities to bear arms for the purpose of defense of our homes and our lives and their liberties as granted by the Consitution and Bill of Rights.

The lawful ownership of firearms had nothing to do with the vast majority of those tragedies.

Simply put, people will find ways to kill other people, regardless of what items are outlawed. After all, look at Jamaica, where firearms ownership is all but forbidden to its populace, yet they have one of the highest rates of violent crime in the entire world.

It's a cultural issue, not an item ownership issue.

Furthermore, we are a free society, period. In order to exist as a free society, we grant liberties that place a significant amount of trust in the average citizen.
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,608
Reaction score
4,901
Location
England
When I said adoration of guns I mean precisely that, not the use of guns as tools or as weapons. I mean the people who have cabinets full of varying guns, rifles, shotguns etc enough for a small army which they fact seem to think they are. I certainly am a martial artist, doing TMA and MMA I'm also one of the few armed police officers in this country.
 

Cryozombie

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Feb 11, 2003
Messages
9,998
Reaction score
206
Mr. Elmore is dedicated, intelligent and well armed, but a SEAL team would end him and his six best, toughest, most heavily armed friends. The people have lost that arms race and there's no winning it back.

Really? Then why hasn't that worked in Iraq? Because the enemy is "joe everyman" and that is too hard to distinguish from the local populace. Same same if it were to take place here.

Lets face it, An armed populace has a MUCH better chance of fighting off tryanny than an unarmed peasants would.

Maybe its me... but Id rather snipe at invading enemy troops with a high powered hunting rifle, than charge their machine gun emplacement with a pointy stick.
 

Latest Discussions

Top