24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 15,597
M
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
M
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 15,597
The amusing thing is in the last xxx shootings I have been involved in investigating(suicide, self defense, drive-by, armed robbery, etc), not once did anyone give a rats ass if the ammo was a reload or factory.

Not once.


THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL.

The Tikka T3 in .308 Winchester is the Glock 19 of the rifle world.

The website is up and running!

www.lostriverammocompany.com

BP-B2

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Originally Posted by ldholton
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by Savuti
guys are currently doing hard time because they weren't using factory ammo. One of them involved shooting the defendant's wife, he said suicide, prosecutor said murder.


I'm curious as to what jurisdiction it's okay to shoot your wife, as long as you use factory ammo?


It was an enormous clusterhump of a case. To cut it short the problematic part was what DD alluded to a few posts up. The rounds were super-soft handloads intended for his wife to shoot with almost no recoil. The result however was a load that left practically no GSR on the "victim" at a range that, the prosecution's argument went, should have had at least some GSR. The court ruled that handloads weren't admissable since it's essentially impossible to provide a testable/repeatable exemplar. You don't KNOW what THAT cartridge did until you fired it, basically destroying the evidence. Sure, you can testify that it's POSSIBLE to create a load that left the GSR signature in question but there's no way verify that the one used in the actual shooting was the same. (don't try to argue it, that's what the case said)

I don't particularly like this case since any SD ammo I can imagine anyone here would load would be roughly a factory analogue so the above wouldn't have happened with anything I, for instance, would have loaded in a SD weapon. Still, there IS the issue of factory ammo providing a vetted exemplar for forensic testing that is on MUCH firmer ground than anything a court is likely to accept from handloads.

I'm sticking with my "death by meteorite" position. You would have to be one SERIOUSLY unlucky bastage to have things turn out where the fact you were using handloads mattered...but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen.
let me ask a different way if this round that was fired in the case had been a factory round , would the guy have walked ?


Speaking absolutes here is dubious but as I understand the case the incongruity of the GSR evidence (due to the particular handload used) with the known distance (arms length) in play was the key piece of evidence that turned this case from a possible suicide to a murder charge. A factory load would A: have left GSR evidence consistent with what the ME would have anticipated and B: would have allowed for a readily available and court approved exemplar for confrimation.

At an absolute minimum a factory load would have supported the story as presented by the defence at trial. At best that evidence would have been sufficient, along with whatever else backed up the story, to have never had charges brought in the first place. Obviously we'll never know what would have happened but we do know what DID happen.


If there's one thing I've become certain of it's that there's too much certainty in the world.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Originally Posted by Mackay_Sagebrush
The amusing thing is in the last xxx shootings I have been involved in investigating(suicide, self defense, drive-by, armed robbery, etc), not once did anyone give a rats ass if the ammo was a reload or factory.

Not once.


It would take a really nasty set of circumstances for it to be an issue. Which is a good thing of course.


If there's one thing I've become certain of it's that there's too much certainty in the world.
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
Two lessons here, avoid all really nasty set of circumstances, and avoid at all costs NJ.

In common sense states this is a non issue. There is absolutely nothing that prohibits citizens from protecting themselves with any kind of ammunition.


The first time I shot myself in the head...

Meniere's Sucks Big Time!!!
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
as the firing of a round destroys that evidence.


Applies equally to factory ammo, is my point, which you have failed to grasp. And I think that lawyer is a dumbass.

IC B2

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
. It absolutely (no statement of likelihood here mind you) CAN AND HAS mattered.


Here is something else going completely over your head. All your screwy "precedent" claims to show is that the ballistics of your reloads cannot be established "with certainty" after the shooting, which would actually tend to work in your favor in the tinfoil scenarios proposed. How can they claim to prove you were using evil nasty reloads in that case?

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 31,081
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 31,081
Two points I always make:

First, just because nobody has ever been convicted because they used handloads (NJ vs Bias notwithstanding) does NOT mean nobody ever will. Smugly repeating that line will be no comfort to the first unlucky SOB who is.

Second, you can prevent that from ever happening to you simply by using factory ammo for carry and handloads for practice.


Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,811
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,811
Originally Posted by RockyRaab
Two points I always make:

First, just because nobody has ever been convicted because they used handloads (NJ vs Bias notwithstanding) does NOT mean nobody ever will. Smugly repeating that line will be no comfort to the first unlucky SOB who is.

Second, you can prevent that from ever happening to you simply by using factory ammo for carry and handloads for practice.



The way to prevent an unfair conviction is to not use a weapon in a questionable situation, the load is not the most important factor to consider




I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,008
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,008
Originally Posted by DocRocket
Sonofabitch. Ayoob had it right, after all.

Who'd a thunk it?


Well...no.

Sorry, but the fact that one lawyer tried to make handloads an issue in a court case doesn't prove a thing. To the contrary, the fact that it's only been tried in one, single case tends to prove the opposite.

I'm a criminal defense attorney and am very good friends with our county's elected prosecutor. We were sitting around one day with several other lawyers and got to talking about the Factory Load v. Handload thing and whether using handloads exposed the shooter to more risks regarding prosecution/conviction/civil suit.

One attorney astutely pointed out that, if he could pick the shooter's ammo, and then go after the shooter in court, he would prefer that the shooter use factory ammo. His reasoning was factory self-defense loads are tested against multiple other options. They are tested and re-tested. Their performance is analyzed and re-analyzed. Only when the company has decided that it has produced the "perfect" killing round does it mass produce it and sell it to the public. So when Joe Citizen buys that ammo, he is purposely buying ammo designed to do the most harm to the other guy. That decision shows more planning and evil intent than the guy who handloads and would say in court "Oh, I loaded those rounds because I got the bullets on sale and they shoot good in my gun. No, I've never tested them for stopping power or tissue damage. I just got good groups with them and have a bunch to shoot up."

So, choosing a factory loaded, purpose-built man stopper could easily put you in a worse position than packing whatever you put together in your reloading room. Ayoob should stick to marksmanship and tactics; I understand he's quite good in those fields.


Wade

"Let's Roll!" - Todd Beamer 9/11/01.
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,811
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,811



+1 Waders............



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
IC B3

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261
Originally Posted by RockyRaab
Two points I always make:

First, just because nobody has ever been convicted because they used handloads (NJ vs Bias notwithstanding) does NOT mean nobody ever will. Smugly repeating that line will be no comfort to the first unlucky SOB who is.

Second, you can prevent that from ever happening to you simply by using factory ammo for carry and handloads for practice.


DITTOS! DITTOS!


Don't vote knothead, it only encourages them. Anonymous

"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." Anonymous

"Self-reliance, free thinking, and wealth is anathema to both the power of the State and the Church." Derby Dude


Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261
Originally Posted by Waders
Originally Posted by DocRocket
Sonofabitch. Ayoob had it right, after all.

Who'd a thunk it?


Well...no.

Sorry, but the fact that one lawyer tried to make handloads an issue in a court case doesn't prove a thing. To the contrary, the fact that it's only been tried in one, single case tends to prove the opposite.

I'm a criminal defense attorney and am very good friends with our county's elected prosecutor. We were sitting around one day with several other lawyers and got to talking about the Factory Load v. Handload thing and whether using handloads exposed the shooter to more risks regarding prosecution/conviction/civil suit.

One attorney astutely pointed out that, if he could pick the shooter's ammo, and then go after the shooter in court, he would prefer that the shooter use factory ammo. His reasoning was factory self-defense loads are tested against multiple other options. They are tested and re-tested. Their performance is analyzed and re-analyzed. Only when the company has decided that it has produced the "perfect" killing round does it mass produce it and sell it to the public. So when Joe Citizen buys that ammo, he is purposely buying ammo designed to do the most harm to the other guy. That decision shows more planning and evil intent than the guy who handloads and would say in court "Oh, I loaded those rounds because I got the bullets on sale and they shoot good in my gun. No, I've never tested them for stopping power or tissue damage. I just got good groups with them and have a bunch to shoot up."

So, choosing a factory loaded, purpose-built man stopper could easily put you in a worse position than packing whatever you put together in your reloading room. Ayoob should stick to marksmanship and tactics; I understand he's quite good in those fields.


The way I look at it is this, as you are well aware we have an adversarial justice system. Both attorneys are putting on an act for the benefit of the 12 dummies making up the jury. The job of the jury is to determine which attorney put on the best performance for attorney-of-the-day award. And maybe if one is lucky justice will be served.

What you have just proved is that any prosecuting attorney worth his salt is going to be able to use the ammo issue to get a conviction weather it's factory or hand loaded ammo.

Self defense against bad guys is a lot like self defense against Grizzly attacks. In the case of Grizzlies you had better have teeth and claw marks to justify self defense. In the case of bad guys you had better have bullet holes in you to justify self defense. Otherwise one is just a mean son-of-b!tch who likes to kill people with the best factory or hand loaded ammo one can get.

There I think I have it pretty well summed up.


Don't vote knothead, it only encourages them. Anonymous

"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." Anonymous

"Self-reliance, free thinking, and wealth is anathema to both the power of the State and the Church." Derby Dude


Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,008
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,008
Originally Posted by derby_dude

What you have just proved is that any prosecuting attorney worth his salt is going to be able to use the ammo issue to get a conviction weather it's factory or hand loaded ammo.

Self defense against bad guys is a lot like self defense against Grizzly attacks. In the case of Grizzlies you had better have teeth and claw marks to justify self defense. In the case of bad guys you had better have bullet holes in you to justify self defense. Otherwise one is just a mean son-of-b!tch who likes to kill people with the best factory or hand loaded ammo one can get.

There I think I have it pretty well summed up.


I tend to agree, in principle, with what you said. You've refuted the urban legend that handloads expose you to legal jeopardy nicely. Your ammo matters not; it's the other circumstances of the shoot that determine your righteous, or lack thereof...


Wade

"Let's Roll!" - Todd Beamer 9/11/01.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
as the firing of a round destroys that evidence.


Applies equally to factory ammo, is my point, which you have failed to grasp. And I think that lawyer is a dumbass.


It absolutely does NOT apply equally. That this has to be rehashed is troubling as I'm trying to identify where you are having the disconnect. Do you know what an exemplar is in legal terminology? You understand that exemplars for factory ammo can be (indeed, are) easily obtained and uniformly tested to look for incongruities with what is forensically found at a scene? (In fact I've been told at least the major factories keep exemplar lots of their old stuff PRECISELY for this purpose.) This IS NOT the case with handloaded ammo. That last statement is not an opinion BTW but a statement directly related to actual trial conditions. Oh, and "is a dumbass" is pretty cryptic. Please feel free to elaborate, specifically, on how a lawyer who explained the issues he faced set forth by the prosecution (you DO realize HE wasn't the one throwing handloads under the bus but rather it was his job to try to fight the prosecution on the issue, right?) is being a dumbass.

Quote
Here is something else going completely over your head. All your screwy "precedent" claims to show is that the ballistics of your reloads cannot be established "with certainty" after the shooting, which would actually tend to work in your favor in the tinfoil scenarios proposed. How can they claim to prove you were using evil nasty reloads in that case?


I would give a more full answer to this but the easy one is obvious...it sure as hell didn't work out in the "favor" of Daniel Bias, did it?

Look, your contrarian stance and tone are a bit bewildering. Perhaps you've come by this honestly in dealing with some who (and I'm rehashing again since I went down this road earlier in the thread) would try to convince you that only a fool would carry handloads and that doing so is tantamount to Russian Roulette. I have repeatedly stated that it is my opinion that those who posit such an argument are at best being overwrought and at worst basically fear mongering. I believe that. I also know, for a fact, that the issue has been put to the test in a real court (not some forum where people are throwing opinions about from their keyboards) and it came out very badly when handloads played a pivotal role in the forensic evidence. Hell, it may NEVER happen again...ever. It damn sure did happen at least once.


If there's one thing I've become certain of it's that there's too much certainty in the world.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Originally Posted by Waders
Originally Posted by DocRocket
Sonofabitch. Ayoob had it right, after all.

Who'd a thunk it?


Well...no.

Sorry, but the fact that one lawyer tried to make handloads an issue in a court case doesn't prove a thing. To the contrary, the fact that it's only been tried in one, single case tends to prove the opposite.

I'm a criminal defense attorney and am very good friends with our county's elected prosecutor. We were sitting around one day with several other lawyers and got to talking about the Factory Load v. Handload thing and whether using handloads exposed the shooter to more risks regarding prosecution/conviction/civil suit.

One attorney astutely pointed out that, if he could pick the shooter's ammo, and then go after the shooter in court, he would prefer that the shooter use factory ammo. His reasoning was factory self-defense loads are tested against multiple other options. They are tested and re-tested. Their performance is analyzed and re-analyzed. Only when the company has decided that it has produced the "perfect" killing round does it mass produce it and sell it to the public. So when Joe Citizen buys that ammo, he is purposely buying ammo designed to do the most harm to the other guy. That decision shows more planning and evil intent than the guy who handloads and would say in court "Oh, I loaded those rounds because I got the bullets on sale and they shoot good in my gun. No, I've never tested them for stopping power or tissue damage. I just got good groups with them and have a bunch to shoot up."


I find this line of reasoning fascinating on several fronts. For instance:

The ammo companies would send an army of attorneys to attack that premise. How could they not? The self defense market (and I think you'd agree) is a huge one where, as you yourself point out, vast amounts of resources are spent on R&D as well as, and this is a HUGE deal with what your friend posited, marketing. A case where a DA went after FACTORY rounds specifically marketed as SELF DEFENSE ammunition could rock the entire industry if it went badly.

And then there is the law enforcement problem. I'd say the vast majority of what is marketed to civilians as SD ammo is in use by at least some LE agency somewhere. And even if not the "idea" being posited about "the perfect killing round" would immediately come under no small amount of scrutiny. Is LE to be expected to go back to low powered ball ammo in the wake of such a judgement? Or would they somehow effectively argue something along the lines of "If WE shoot bad guys with this stuff to defend ourselves that's just different than when John Q does it.".

What do you think? It's an interesting angle you've set forth.


If there's one thing I've become certain of it's that there's too much certainty in the world.
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,811
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,811



What do you do for a living?



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
as the firing of a round destroys that evidence.


Applies equally to factory ammo, is my point, which you have failed to grasp. And I think that lawyer is a dumbass.


It absolutely does NOT apply equally. That this has to be rehashed is troubling as I'm trying to identify where you are having the disconnect. Do you know what an exemplar is in legal terminology? You understand that exemplars for factory ammo can be (indeed, are) easily obtained and uniformly tested to look for incongruities with what is forensically found at a scene? (In fact I've been told at least the major factories keep exemplar lots of their old stuff PRECISELY for this purpose.) This IS NOT the case with handloaded ammo. That last statement is not an opinion BTW but a statement directly related to actual trial conditions. Oh, and "is a dumbass" is pretty cryptic. Please feel free to elaborate, specifically, on how a lawyer who explained the issues he faced set forth by the prosecution (you DO realize HE wasn't the one throwing handloads under the bus but rather it was his job to try to fight the prosecution on the issue, right?) is being a dumbass.

Quote
Here is something else going completely over your head. All your screwy "precedent" claims to show is that the ballistics of your reloads cannot be established "with certainty" after the shooting, which would actually tend to work in your favor in the tinfoil scenarios proposed. How can they claim to prove you were using evil nasty reloads in that case?


I would give a more full answer to this but the easy one is obvious...it sure as hell didn't work out in the "favor" of Daniel Bias, did it?

Look, your contrarian stance and tone are a bit bewildering. Perhaps you've come by this honestly in dealing with some who (and I'm rehashing again since I went down this road earlier in the thread) would try to convince you that only a fool would carry handloads and that doing so is tantamount to Russian Roulette. I have repeatedly stated that it is my opinion that those who posit such an argument are at best being overwrought and at worst basically fear mongering. I believe that. I also know, for a fact, that the issue has been put to the test in a real court (not some forum where people are throwing opinions about from their keyboards) and it came out very badly when handloads played a pivotal role in the forensic evidence. Hell, it may NEVER happen again...ever. It damn sure did happen at least once.


I can tell from your tone that you are sure you're much smarter than me. Yet, I am equally convinced that you're a dumbphuck. Let's leave it at that. Have a great Thanksgiving.

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411
Originally Posted by Savuti
About a year or 2 ago Ayoob responded to a thread like this, might have been on Rugerforum, can't recall.
Anyway, he cited 2 cases where guys are currently doing hard time because they weren't using factory ammo. One of them involved shooting the defendant's wife, he said suicide, prosecutor said murder.

So, you guys go ahead and keep stoking your handloads, and keep that Alfred E Neuman smile on your face. I'll continue to practice with reloads and carry factory.


Pete


well, obviously, in a spouse homicide the issue of handloaded ammo couldn't possibly be the deciding factor. if it was really a suicide, the ammo in the gun is irrelevant. if it was murder, same same.

I don't think either of the cases Mas cited really support his proposition, because in a criminal case the ammo is irrelevant to the issue of guilt.

if there is any added risk, and I really don't think there is, it would be in a civil case where it would be used to inflame a jury into a psycho verdict.

I carry factory because I like HydraShoks and so does my Kimber, but if I accidentally had a mag of reloads in it, I wouldn't lose a wink of sleep over it.



Proudly representing oil companies, defense contractors, and firearms manufacturers since 1980. Because merchants of death need lawyers, too.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
as the firing of a round destroys that evidence.


Applies equally to factory ammo, is my point, which you have failed to grasp. And I think that lawyer is a dumbass.


It absolutely does NOT apply equally. That this has to be rehashed is troubling as I'm trying to identify where you are having the disconnect. Do you know what an exemplar is in legal terminology? You understand that exemplars for factory ammo can be (indeed, are) easily obtained and uniformly tested to look for incongruities with what is forensically found at a scene? (In fact I've been told at least the major factories keep exemplar lots of their old stuff PRECISELY for this purpose.) This IS NOT the case with handloaded ammo. That last statement is not an opinion BTW but a statement directly related to actual trial conditions. Oh, and "is a dumbass" is pretty cryptic. Please feel free to elaborate, specifically, on how a lawyer who explained the issues he faced set forth by the prosecution (you DO realize HE wasn't the one throwing handloads under the bus but rather it was his job to try to fight the prosecution on the issue, right?) is being a dumbass.

Quote
Here is something else going completely over your head. All your screwy "precedent" claims to show is that the ballistics of your reloads cannot be established "with certainty" after the shooting, which would actually tend to work in your favor in the tinfoil scenarios proposed. How can they claim to prove you were using evil nasty reloads in that case?


I would give a more full answer to this but the easy one is obvious...it sure as hell didn't work out in the "favor" of Daniel Bias, did it?

Look, your contrarian stance and tone are a bit bewildering. Perhaps you've come by this honestly in dealing with some who (and I'm rehashing again since I went down this road earlier in the thread) would try to convince you that only a fool would carry handloads and that doing so is tantamount to Russian Roulette. I have repeatedly stated that it is my opinion that those who posit such an argument are at best being overwrought and at worst basically fear mongering. I believe that. I also know, for a fact, that the issue has been put to the test in a real court (not some forum where people are throwing opinions about from their keyboards) and it came out very badly when handloads played a pivotal role in the forensic evidence. Hell, it may NEVER happen again...ever. It damn sure did happen at least once.


I can tell from your tone that you are sure you're much smarter than me. Yet, I am equally convinced that you're a dumbphuck. Let's leave it at that. Have a great Thanksgiving.


Just...wow. Not only have I made no attempt at an ad hominem attack I've repeatedly stated that, as a matter of PROBABILITY of it (carrying handloads) being an issue, we probably wouldn't be in all that much disagreement. The ONLY point of contention is that, somehow, I'm failing to get across that there is actual courtroom precedence that handloads can muddy up the forensic evidence IF that evidence turns out to be pivotal. How and why you'd want to personally attack me for that...whatever.

Hope you also had a good Thanksgiving. (And aren't a Lions fan)


If there's one thing I've become certain of it's that there's too much certainty in the world.
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,628
S
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
S
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,628
There was a time when you could improve on factory ammo with your handloads, those days are gone. Buy a couple or three boxes of the one that trips your trigger, they'll last years as carry ammo since you really don't need to rotate them very often.

Then duplicate that load with cast or plated bullet reloads and practice, practice, practice, practice.

It really ain't hard.



'Four legs good, two legs baaaad."
----------------------------------------------
"Jimmy, some of it's magic,
Some of it's tragic,
But I had a good life all the way."
(Jimmy Buffett)

SotG
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
249 members (12344mag, 257 mag, 300jimmy, 01Foreman400, 2UP, 10Glocks, 24 invisible), 1,703 guests, and 903 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,592
Posts18,397,932
Members73,815
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.211s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.9183 MB (Peak: 1.1124 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-28 10:37:02 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS