|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 21,911 Likes: 12
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 21,911 Likes: 12 |
Go Buzz Go...
You are winning fo sure...
If you are not actively engaging EVERY enemy you encounter... you are allowing another to fight for you... and that is cowardice... plain and simple.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 13,155 Likes: 9
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 13,155 Likes: 9 |
Earlybird,
I see it as the exact opposite. Private landowners have been impeding the public access to public land for the better part of several decades (with the support of the WY justice system) and finally a case made it through the court system that says Federal Law says you can't do it.
I would encourage you to read the court's opinion that dismissed the civil suit. Right, I have no idea who Buzz is nor am I aware of BHA, but I have plenty of experience with wealthy obnoxious landowners pushing the little guy around. They can get extremely chapped over a trophy being killed by what they call a "broke dick" when it is an animal within a short distance of the property line. Especially if they have pictures of it being on their property at some time. Being a game warden for 30 years puts you in contact with some real asses with money and a piece of property they think no one should come near. My property boarders national forest I have no quarrels with other hunters hunting there as long as they stay off my property I join other property owners that hunt deer as do our kids, grand kids, and I. My neighbors know they are not to shoot onto our property nor do we shoot onto theirs. But they are welcome to pursue a wounded deer as long as they are on foot and wearing orange after notifying one of us. I own a 40 acre tract that borders National Forest on 2 sides and a large hunting lease on the other 2 sides. The lines are well marked and that is where I send guests and occasionally hunt there myself. I would not put up with adjacent hunters firing across our place there either but I would not consider it trespass if they retrieved a deer that crossed the line before expiring. I have a 100 acre tract that also borders National Forest on 2 sides and I rent that to a cousin to hunt on with a provision that he enforce trespass. I am positive he wouldn't be unreasonable with the neighbors. We have deer out the wazoo so personally I'm not too worried about the neighbors killing one.
Patriotism (and religion) is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
Jesus: "Take heed that no man deceive you."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,949 Likes: 3
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,949 Likes: 3 |
Earlybird,
I see it as the exact opposite. Private landowners have been impeding the public access to public land for the better part of several decades (with the support of the WY justice system) and finally a case made it through the court system that says Federal Law says you can't do it.
I would encourage you to read the court's opinion that dismissed the civil suit. Civil suit should have been dismissed. No harm was done to Eshelmans property. Criminal trespass is another matter entirely and should have gotten a conviction. Nope, and the federal judge disagrees with you, so does the law. Just admit you lost, is it that hard to say you're just flat wrong? Who the fugk are you talking to ??Lost what?? I suggest hooked on phonics, it's your only move.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17 |
Earlybird,
I see it as the exact opposite. Private landowners have been impeding the public access to public land for the better part of several decades (with the support of the WY justice system) and finally a case made it through the court system that says Federal Law says you can't do it.
I would encourage you to read the court's opinion that dismissed the civil suit. Civil suit should have been dismissed. No harm was done to Eshelmans property. Criminal trespass is another matter entirely and should have gotten a conviction. Nope, and the federal judge disagrees with you, so does the law. Just admit you lost, is it that hard to say you're just flat wrong? Who the fugk are you talking to ??Lost what?? I suggest hooked on phonics, it's your only move. I suggest you go fugk yourself
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 25,997 Likes: 10
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 25,997 Likes: 10 |
You're flat wrong, there has been a lot of hunters corner crossing in Wyoming for a long time. Well before 2004, that's the reason AG Pat Crank wrote the opinion on title 23, trespass to hunt which stated corner crossing was not a violation of that Statute. What is a lot? 10? 12? 15? You're also wrong that there isn't quality hunting on checkerboard lands and that its difficult to corner cross. If its that tough, then why did 4 NR's from Missouri, kill 3 bull elk and a buck mule deer during their 2021 hunt? I can also show you a picture of a 355 bull that a good friend of mine's grandson killed by corner crossing in Natrona County just last fall. WOW! Someone killed a bull that scored some points. Does that automatically add two inches to his dick length? Or ten points to his IQ? And someone else killed three elk! So that makes it okay to infringe on private property rights of owners across the nation. You're also wrong that corner crossing won't open up significant amounts of public lands, unless you feel 8.3 million acres is not a large tract of land? You have established your self as such an habitual liar for as long as you have been posting here, that I would have to see THAT number verified by an independent source. I will ask, do you claim 8.3 million as total landlocked gov't lands, or as that behind "Corner Crossings". There is a huge difference. And yes, 8.3 million acres is a pretty insignificant amount compared to this ![[Linked Image from study.com]](https://study.com/cimages/multimages/16/fed-owned-land-map.png) That does not even include Alaska. Yes it is a pretty insignificant amount. Consider that in a single day I can hunt, on foot, 12 sections at 640 acres each, or almost 8,000 acres by myself. Or at least I could until I was forty five. Six miles in, six miles out, survey 900 yds, or more, each way from the trail as you go. Its a benefit to every US citizen, all 340 million of them, again, not sure how you conclude that as "very, very, few". You like grammatical corrections. Where the damned apostrophe? And this is pure unadulterated bullschitt, exactly typical for a grifter and conman. The ONLY person to gain benefit from this ruling is the individual who actually hikes his ass in over public ground to the aforementioned corner and subsequently hikes his ass on beyond. The other 339,999,990 people in the nation gain absolutely nothing. But you just keep on telling your lies and taking your fair share of the collection plate. Show me anything in your lifetime that's opened up 8.3 million acres of public lands, I can't and I've been at this a long time. So the fugg what! Lets just toss away private property rights for millions so a very select few can get to their supposed little honey hole without paying to do so. Wow!!! You know what Buzz, I will be impressed when I see you personally transfer your purchased property to provide access to hunters to land locked property. Get out there! Buy a fugging ranch! Donate it to the cause! Be NOBLE. Schitt, I am sure, you would not even be willing to let your neighbors kids cut across your lawn to get to the playground. Also, like I've said, I have talked with numerous lawyers and law professors since this case started. Nearly all of them reached out to me, I didn't contact any of them first. They all assured me from the beginning that the UIA applied and that a decision just like what Skavdahl stated, was to be expected. They also have stated it WILL stand up in the 10th circuit and its highly unlikely to be heard by the SCOTUS.
Its legal now in Wyoming to cross corners and if appealed, and I really hope it is, in the 10th circuit. Most certainly similar cases will now be tried in most of the Western States and equally as certain will be argued similar to last Friday's Wyoming Federal Court case.
Public land access and public land owners won big, and WYBHA was the only group that was behind supporting this case.
You can watch things happen, you can make things happen, or wonder what the f$%k happened.
Right about now, you're wondering what happened...while myself and WYBHA were busy making things happen. Yeah, yeah sure! So says every litigator before he hears the ruling from the appellate court.
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 25,997 Likes: 10
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 25,997 Likes: 10 |
Earlybird,
I see it as the exact opposite. Private landowners have been impeding the public access to public land for the better part of several decades (with the support of the WY justice system) and finally a case made it through the court system that says Federal Law says you can't do it.
I would encourage you to read the court's opinion that dismissed the civil suit. Right, I have no idea who Buzz is nor am I aware of BHA, but I have plenty of experience with wealthy obnoxious landowners pushing the little guy around. They can get extremely chapped over a trophy being killed by what they call a "broke dick" when it is an animal within a short distance of the property line. Especially if they have pictures of it being on their property at some time. Being a game warden for 30 years puts you in contact with some real asses with money and a piece of property they think no one should come near. My property boarders national forest I have no quarrels with other hunters hunting there as long as they stay off my property I join other property owners that hunt deer as do our kids, grand kids, and I. My neighbors know they are not to shoot onto our property nor do we shoot onto theirs. But they are welcome to pursue a wounded deer as long as they are on foot and wearing orange after notifying one of us. I own a 40 acre tract that borders National Forest on 2 sides and a large hunting lease on the other 2 sides. The lines are well marked and that is where I send guests and occasionally hunt there myself. I would not put up with adjacent hunters firing across our place there either but I would not consider it trespass if they retrieved a deer that crossed the line before expiring. I have a 100 acre tract that also borders National Forest on 2 sides and I rent that to a cousin to hunt on with a provision that he enforce trespass. I am positive he wouldn't be unreasonable with the neighbors. We have deer out the wazoo so personally I'm not too worried about the neighbors killing one. Sensible policies!
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 24,305 Likes: 13
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 24,305 Likes: 13 |
Just a reminder that buzzy refuses to state what radical anti hunting, anti gun groups fund BHA. The fact he refuses to state who runs, funds and directs BHA is a big clue not to to trust this pathological lying tubby grifter Earlybird,
I see it as the exact opposite. Private landowners have been impeding the public access to public land for the better part of several decades (with the support of the WY justice system) and finally a case made it through the court system that says Federal Law says you can't do it.
I would encourage you to read the court's opinion that dismissed the civil suit. Civil suit should have been dismissed. No harm was done to Eshelmans property. Criminal trespass is another matter entirely and should have gotten a conviction. Nope, and the federal judge disagrees with you, so does the law. Just admit you lost, is it that hard to say you're just flat wrong? Who the fugk are you talking to ??Lost what?? I suggest hooked on phonics, it's your only move. I suggest you go fugk yourself
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2023
Posts: 1,333 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2023
Posts: 1,333 Likes: 2 |
Oh, and for your continuing education on corner crossing, the UIA. I know you won't comprehend it, but others that actually make a difference will understand:
§1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands.
Judge Skavdahl ruled on a specific case Mackay v. Uinta Development Co. in regard to the UIA, made reference that Leo Sheep did not apply. Which was the correct ruling.
Again, I know someone of you're lack of a common education won't understand, so feel free to go pick a lock. Buzz, you are a lying piece of schitt. Come on, tell us all exactly why you felt it necessary to edit out the last RELEVANT line of the law. Apparently, your ignorant activist judge edited it out as well. §1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands: Provided, This section shall not be held to affect the right or title of persons, who have gone upon, improved, or occupied said lands under the land laws of the United States, claiming title thereto, in good faith. You stupid FUGG. Most of us here can read, and remember back more than two pages. Perhaps you are the exception. When did Eshelman homestead the piece of public property the 4 MO hunters stepped on to?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17 |
Earlybird,
I see it as the exact opposite. Private landowners have been impeding the public access to public land for the better part of several decades (with the support of the WY justice system) and finally a case made it through the court system that says Federal Law says you can't do it.
I would encourage you to read the court's opinion that dismissed the civil suit. Right, I have no idea who Buzz is nor am I aware of BHA, but I have plenty of experience with wealthy obnoxious landowners pushing the little guy around. They can get extremely chapped over a trophy being killed by what they call a "broke dick" when it is an animal within a short distance of the property line. Especially if they have pictures of it being on their property at some time. Being a game warden for 30 years puts you in contact with some real asses with money and a piece of property they think no one should come near. My property boarders national forest I have no quarrels with other hunters hunting there as long as they stay off my property I join other property owners that hunt deer as do our kids, grand kids, and I. My neighbors know they are not to shoot onto our property nor do we shoot onto theirs. But they are welcome to pursue a wounded deer as long as they are on foot and wearing orange after notifying one of us. I own a 40 acre tract that borders National Forest on 2 sides and a large hunting lease on the other 2 sides. The lines are well marked and that is where I send guests and occasionally hunt there myself. I would not put up with adjacent hunters firing across our place there either but I would not consider it trespass if they retrieved a deer that crossed the line before expiring. I have a 100 acre tract that also borders National Forest on 2 sides and I rent that to a cousin to hunt on with a provision that he enforce trespass. I am positive he wouldn't be unreasonable with the neighbors. We have deer out the wazoo so personally I'm not too worried about the neighbors killing one. I let a 70 yr old neighbor hunt my stands that are easy access just to be neighborly👍
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17 |
How many acres you got on broke back mountain buzzy??
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 25,997 Likes: 10
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 25,997 Likes: 10 |
Oh, and for your continuing education on corner crossing, the UIA. I know you won't comprehend it, but others that actually make a difference will understand:
§1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands.
Judge Skavdahl ruled on a specific case Mackay v. Uinta Development Co. in regard to the UIA, made reference that Leo Sheep did not apply. Which was the correct ruling.
Again, I know someone of you're lack of a common education won't understand, so feel free to go pick a lock. Buzz, you are a lying piece of schitt. Come on, tell us all exactly why you felt it necessary to edit out the last RELEVANT line of the law. Apparently, your ignorant activist judge edited it out as well. §1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands: Provided, This section shall not be held to affect the right or title of persons, who have gone upon, improved, or occupied said lands under the land laws of the United States, claiming title thereto, in good faith. You stupid FUGG. Most of us here can read, and remember back more than two pages. Perhaps you are the exception. When did Eshelman homestead the piece of public property the 4 MO hunters stepped on to? It is pretty simple. Draw two lines on a sheet of paper in a big cross. Easy enough right? Now start at top left and going clockwise label the four quadrants A, B, C, and D. A and C are private property. B and D are public. Now lay a dime on the paper and slide it from D to B without getting onto A or C. Not Possible!
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 24,305 Likes: 13
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 24,305 Likes: 13 |
How many acres you got on broke back mountain buzzy??
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Buzz works for the forest service and gates off FS roads so he has areas to himself and locks out to the public. the drives in in his truck and road hunts elk and deer He really supports public access. lmao
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 26,609 Likes: 19
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 26,609 Likes: 19 |
Earlybird,
I see it as the exact opposite. Private landowners have been impeding the public access to public land for the better part of several decades (with the support of the WY justice system) and finally a case made it through the court system that says Federal Law says you can't do it.
I would encourage you to read the court's opinion that dismissed the civil suit. Right, I have no idea who Buzz is nor am I aware of BHA, but I have plenty of experience with wealthy obnoxious landowners pushing the little guy around. They can get extremely chapped over a trophy being killed by what they call a "broke dick" when it is an animal within a short distance of the property line. Especially if they have pictures of it being on their property at some time. Being a game warden for 30 years puts you in contact with some real asses with money and a piece of property they think no one should come near. My property boarders national forest I have no quarrels with other hunters hunting there as long as they stay off my property I join other property owners that hunt deer as do our kids, grand kids, and I. My neighbors know they are not to shoot onto our property nor do we shoot onto theirs. But they are welcome to pursue a wounded deer as long as they are on foot and wearing orange after notifying one of us. I own a 40 acre tract that borders National Forest on 2 sides and a large hunting lease on the other 2 sides. The lines are well marked and that is where I send guests and occasionally hunt there myself. I would not put up with adjacent hunters firing across our place there either but I would not consider it trespass if they retrieved a deer that crossed the line before expiring. I have a 100 acre tract that also borders National Forest on 2 sides and I rent that to a cousin to hunt on with a provision that he enforce trespass. I am positive he wouldn't be unreasonable with the neighbors. We have deer out the wazoo so personally I'm not too worried about the neighbors killing one. That sounds like a great set up. That's as good as it gets in the deep south.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2023
Posts: 1,333 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2023
Posts: 1,333 Likes: 2 |
Oh, and for your continuing education on corner crossing, the UIA. I know you won't comprehend it, but others that actually make a difference will understand:
§1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands.
Judge Skavdahl ruled on a specific case Mackay v. Uinta Development Co. in regard to the UIA, made reference that Leo Sheep did not apply. Which was the correct ruling.
Again, I know someone of you're lack of a common education won't understand, so feel free to go pick a lock. Buzz, you are a lying piece of schitt. Come on, tell us all exactly why you felt it necessary to edit out the last RELEVANT line of the law. Apparently, your ignorant activist judge edited it out as well. §1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands: Provided, This section shall not be held to affect the right or title of persons, who have gone upon, improved, or occupied said lands under the land laws of the United States, claiming title thereto, in good faith. You stupid FUGG. Most of us here can read, and remember back more than two pages. Perhaps you are the exception. When did Eshelman homestead the piece of public property the 4 MO hunters stepped on to? It is pretty simple. Draw two lines on a sheet of paper in a big cross. Easy enough right? Now start at top left and going clockwise label the four quadrants A, B, C, and D. A and C are private property. B and D are public. Now lay a dime on the paper and slide it from D to B without getting onto A or C. Not Possible! They didn't low crawl from D to B so no part of their bodies made contact with A or C Now tell us when Eshelman homesteaded D or B?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 26,609 Likes: 19
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 26,609 Likes: 19 |
It is pretty simple. Draw two lines on a sheet of paper in a big cross. Easy enough right?
Now start at top left and going clockwise label the four quadrants A, B, C, and D.
A and C are private property. B and D are public.
Now lay a dime on the paper and slide it from D to B without getting onto A or C. Not Possible! But could you walk your fingers across that sheet of paper without touching A or C. At 4 Corners NM, is it possible to step from NM into UT without ever stepping into CO and AZ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,885 Likes: 10
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,885 Likes: 10 |
You can't do it without moving your foot through airspace immediately above CO and AZ, and I think this third dimension in the geometry of the situation was part of the dispute.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17 |
How many acres you got on broke back mountain buzzy??
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Buzz works for the forest service and gates off FS roads so he has areas to himself and locks out to the public. the drives in in his truck and road hunts elk and deer He really supports public access. lmao Ya he’s a real winner fugk that buffoon
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 15,127 Likes: 17 |
Earlybird,
I see it as the exact opposite. Private landowners have been impeding the public access to public land for the better part of several decades (with the support of the WY justice system) and finally a case made it through the court system that says Federal Law says you can't do it.
I would encourage you to read the court's opinion that dismissed the civil suit. Right, I have no idea who Buzz is nor am I aware of BHA, but I have plenty of experience with wealthy obnoxious landowners pushing the little guy around. They can get extremely chapped over a trophy being killed by what they call a "broke dick" when it is an animal within a short distance of the property line. Especially if they have pictures of it being on their property at some time. Being a game warden for 30 years puts you in contact with some real asses with money and a piece of property they think no one should come near. My property boarders national forest I have no quarrels with other hunters hunting there as long as they stay off my property I join other property owners that hunt deer as do our kids, grand kids, and I. My neighbors know they are not to shoot onto our property nor do we shoot onto theirs. But they are welcome to pursue a wounded deer as long as they are on foot and wearing orange after notifying one of us. I own a 40 acre tract that borders National Forest on 2 sides and a large hunting lease on the other 2 sides. The lines are well marked and that is where I send guests and occasionally hunt there myself. I would not put up with adjacent hunters firing across our place there either but I would not consider it trespass if they retrieved a deer that crossed the line before expiring. I have a 100 acre tract that also borders National Forest on 2 sides and I rent that to a cousin to hunt on with a provision that he enforce trespass. I am positive he wouldn't be unreasonable with the neighbors. We have deer out the wazoo so personally I'm not too worried about the neighbors killing one. That sounds like a great set up. That's as good as it gets in the deep south. That’s called winning not the other way around like buzzfugk preaches
|
|
|
|
|
573 members (1lesfox, 1beaver_shooter, 222Sako, 12344mag, 1badf350, 204guy, 61 invisible),
2,326
guests, and
1,271
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,509
Posts18,509,355
Members74,002
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/WzGRPn6x/IMG-1125.jpg)
