Starbucks proves the Brady Bunch wrong... again.

[PavePusher]

And they are probably laughing all the way to the bank...

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/starbucks-redux-money-talks-and-b-s-walks

"Remember six months ago when the anti-gun Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and Washington CeaseFire were aghast that Seattle coffee giant Starbucks would not become their political surrogate and ban armed customers from their shops?



This column wrote about it here and here. The campaign against Starbucks had kicked off down in California (where else?) and the gun prohibition lobby tried to spread it nationally, but quickly lost traction when Starbucks did the responsible thing and merely announced that it was in compliance with, and would do business under all state and local laws. Almost immediately, the Open Carry crowd declared it would spend more time and money with their local Starbucks franchises like they did in October at a Spanaway coffee shop following a confrontation between a legally-armed citizen and an allegedly over-zealous Pierce County sheriff's deputy. We discussed that case here.



Now comes the news that Starbucks is reporting big earnings during the third quarter. The coffee giant reported yesterday that earnings had risen to $278.9 million, or 37 cents per share. That’s up significantly over last year’s third quarter earnings report of $150 million and 20 cents a share."


More at link.

:evilgrin: :applause:

[SoCalNative]

1. I refuse to patronize Starbucks

because they gave money to NutMeg's campaign.

[spin]

2. I honestly have never been in a Starbucks ...

or sampled any of their coffee. I prefer my own coffee which isn't fancy or sweet, just black and extremely strong.

Currently there are no Starbucks close to my home, but if I pass by one n my travels I plan to stop in to show my support of their stand on RKBA.

Who knows, I may actually like their coffee.

[glowing]

4. I have found this place that has the best coffee.. and I'm not a coffee person.

Its fair trade coffee.. the beans are roasted locally.. and its $2.00. Nothing needs to be added.. not fancy syrups or crap.. just coffee, soy, and a little bit of sugar...

[east texas lib]

3. Economics always trumps a failed ideology...

Gun control is a failed ideology.}(

[Hoyt]

5. With all the issues we face, packing a gun to drink coffee is way down the list.

Don't think I will ever understand. How many situations have arisen in a Starbucks where anyone really needs a gun in their pants?

[PavePusher]

6. You assume much, young jedi...

and that is why you fail.

I carry everywhere I am allowed by law. Why should I make an exception for Starbucks?

You have repeatedly claimed that no-one will ever need a firearm for self-defense in various locations. Also repeatedly, you have failed to answer how you can predict the future so accurately.

You have also been asked how you suggest people provide for their personnal security. I have never seen you answer that question either. I note that I have asked if you plan to volunteer your personnal services, as you seem to claim to be precient. Again, no answers.

Why, exactly, are you here?

[safeinOhio]

7. He has a point.

If you can not find any time that a person has needed a gun for self defense in a StarBucks, that makes it as needed as a fire extinguisher in a swimming pool. Of course the pool could catch fire, It's just that one never has. Statistics can be a powerful tool to use in everyday life.

[X_Digger]

11. Did you even google 'starbucks murder'?

http://rjellory.com/page5263230.aspx

[PavePusher]

13. Evidence for your precognitive abilities, please? n/t

[spin]

16. You ignore the fact that you don't drive your car into the Starbucks...

You have to leave it in a parking lot and walk to and from the StarBucks.

You have to admit that crime does occur in parking lots. Plus many responsible gun owners do not wish to leave their firearms behind in a car where some person may steal it. Finally, a holstered weapon is safe. The danger comes when placing the weapon in or removing it from a holster.

Therefore, there is no good reason to leave your firearm in your car when going to a Starbucks.

Plus your statement that a StarBucks is so safe that a gun is not necessary would assume that there has never been an armed robbery in a StarBucks.

3 Employees Killed At D.C. Starbucks
By Steve Vogel and Cheryl W. Thompson

Tuesday, July 8, 1997;

Three employees of a Starbucks coffee store near Georgetown were found brutally slain yesterday morning, sending shock waves through a community generally immune from such violence. The bodies of night manager Mary Caitrin Mahoney, 25, Emory Allen Evans, 25, and Aaron David Goodrich, 18, were found at 5:15 a.m. in a back room of the store at 1810 Wisconsin Ave. NW, in Burleith, just north of Georgetown, police said. An employee arriving for work found the bodies. All three had been shot several times. The distraught employee ran from the store and flagged down a passing Metro bus, screaming that people had been shot, according to a police supervisor. The driver of the bus notified police. Evans started working at the store part time about three weeks ago, and Goodrich had been hired several months ago, friends and relatives said. No money was taken from the store, police said.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=118&topic_id=346946&mesg_id=346958

Armed robbers hit Starbucks in NYC
Wednesday, September 17, 2008

NEW YORK (WABC) -- Police in Manhattan are searching for two armed men, caught on camera, robbing Starbucks coffee shops.

Eyewitness News is told the first robbery happened on August 29th at a Starbuck on Broadway and West 98th Street on the Upper West Side at around 5:30 a.m.

The second robbery happened on Third Avenue at 41st on the Upper East around 8 p.m.

In both cases, the men walked in, pulled out guns, tied up the store employees and then hit the cash registers and safes.
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/local&id=6396436

[lawodevolution]

20. yes a pool can catch fire

and many surfaces of water have caught fire in the past.

[Euromutt]

22. If you can't find such an instance, you haven't been looking very hard

Here's just a handful of incidents of shootings and robberies in or directly outside various Starbucks locations over the past three years:

Indianapolis, IN, April 2008: http://www.wthr.com/story/8100125/starbucks-shooting-victim-is-congressional-primary-candidate?redirected=true
Atlanta, GA, July 2008: http://www.11alive.com/rss/rss_story.aspx?storyid=118099
NYC, NY, September 2008: http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/local&id=6396436
Westbury, NY, March 2009: http://www.antonnews.com/westburytimes/2009/03/20/news/robbery.html
Salinas, CA, May 2009: http://www.ksbw.com/r/19487556/detail.html
Belsize Park, Greater London, UK, January 2010: http://www.camdennewjournal.com/news/2010/jan/armed-robbery-staff-terror-haverstock-hill-starbucks-caf%C3%A9
Seal Beach, CA, February 2010: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/police-238593-starbucks-beach.html
Howard University, DC, March 2010: http://www.thehilltoponline.com/howard-university-starbucks-robbed-1.2197121
University of Miami, FL, April 2010: http://cbs4.com/local/coral.gables.starbucks.2.1609797.html
Bryn Mawr, PA, June 2010: http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/crime&id=7506928
Carmel, IN, June 2010: http://www.wibc.com/news/Story.aspx?id=1246577
El Cajon, CA, October 2010: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/oct/14/el-cajon-starbucks-robbed-gunpoint/
Towson, MD, October 2010: http://www.examiner.com/education-headlines-in-baltimore/tu-resident-student-robbed-at-towson-starbucks-parking-lot-on-york-rd

I acknowledge these instances are merely anecdotes, not data, but they do illustrate that violent crimes can and do occur at Starbucks locations.

[one-eyed fat man]

25. Your river has, twice! nt

[mvccd1000]

32. Not really...

Just because a patron will never need a gun IN starbucks, does not mean that person may not need it wherever he or she is going to or coming from. The person may live in a rural area, or be required to carry a gun for employment. Do you honestly think it's safer for the person to handle the gun at least twice (unholstering to leave it in the car and reholstering when they get back in) and leave it in an unattended, parked vehicle rather than just leave it safely holstered and conduct their coffee transaction?

You're acting as if the person is simply beamed in to starbucks without being anywhere else before or after.

(PS - the fire extinguisher by the pool may come in handy if the grill tips over and spills flaming charcoal in the dry grass beside the house. Of course, this will never happen if the pool exists in a dimension by itself, much like your mythical crime-free starbucks.)

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hoyt]

10. LOL -- Are you sure you are fit to carry in public?

[PavePusher]

14. You seem to have anger and bigotry issues.

Bu-bye now.

:hi:

[Hoyt]

9. Don't think your personal safety is an issue in Starbucks.

Just posting one person's opinion in opposition to widespread packing in public. Seems obvious.

Have been around guns all my life, but never even thought about packing in Starbucks, Chuck E Cheeze, public parks, bars, restaurants, churches, in bed, in the shower, etc. Can't believe people do.

[PavePusher]

15. Once again I will ask you...

for evidence of your precognitive abilities.

Please address the question.

[spin]

17. Do you have a concealed carry permit?

Obviously many people who do have perits carry their firearms into restaurants and many other places which are legal in their state.

While mass murders are rare in restaurants or churches they have happened. Statistically the chances of a person being involved in a mass murder is extremely slim but still does exist. Restaurants and stores do get robbed on a regular basis and often people are shot in the process of the robbery.

Parking lots are magnets for crime and you usually leave your car in a parking lot and go into restaurants or stores. Leaving your firearm in the car means leaving open the possibility that it might be stolen. Removing and replacing your handgun in a holster offers opportunity for accidents.

You may have never considered "packing" in the places you mention but many people have (with the exception of the bed or the shower).

I will not be critical of your decision to not carry as long as you are not critical of my decision to legally carry.

[safeinOhio]

26. Yep, I had a CCW instructor

that answered a students question about carrying in places he felt unsafe by saying " why would you go any place that you felt so unsafe that you needed a gun?". This was from a NRA advanced instructor that was a retired police detective. He said he only carried when traveling and then it was only a small 22. He also said he kept all of his guns locked in a safe when he was at home as he had a great security system.

I think it is your right to carry any place it is legal to do so. I just think some people get a little carried away with it. We are all entitled to our own fears.

I personally have had a gun pulled on me 4 times in my life. Many years ago in the 60s. Every time it turned out good for me. I have a small scare on my left arm where I got bit by one of them when I took the gun away from him. Looking back, I'm glad I didn't have a gun on me all 4 times. I now carry mostly for protection against dog bites. I have been bit once and have shot a dog that was coming after me. I do a lot of walking, jogging and bike riding out in the country.

[NewMoonTherian]

40. It still don't get...

why you would have a problem with carrying in public parks or churches. With all the acrimony between people of different faiths, a place of worship seems like exactly the type of place a nutjob is likely to target. Public parks include jogging trails, and how many recent stories of attempted or successful kidnappings and rapes have begun on jogging trails?

Starbucks and resaurants are a part of people's daily routines, and it's unreasonable to force someone to remove and lock away their weapon to run in for a cup of coffee.

Bars are a different subject, and one I have trouble with. It think the public good would be better served by forbidding carry while intoxicated than by banning guns in a given location. If guns are forbidden, bars shouldn't have parking lots either.

You've given us a list of places you feel carry is uncalled-for. Would you be willing to give us a list of specific places it is reasonable?

[Hoyt]

42. A few that might be "Reasonable" -- home, dark alleys if you are dumb enough to walk through them.

For most of us, I think if one's daily routine includes a high probability of an issue where you would need a gun -- the prudent thing to do is change your daily routine, not strap a gun to your leg in public.

I'm fine with home protection, work situations where chances of an issue are high, and the like. But for the most part, I don't think 99.998726612% of us need to pack in public. I think it is a bad precedent. It is sad that so many on this forum feel the need to pack.

Besides, most 24/7 gun toters I've known -- and I know and have known a bunch -- are not near as prepared to handle a situation properly. They all think they are, but they are fooling themselves. Worse are those that think they are prepared to protect the public by being ready to stop a incident in a bank, bar, church, etc.

And, it just looks tacky having folks walk around with a gun strapped to their legs or tucked down their pants.

Just my opinion of course.

[oneshooter]

43. Concealed means CONCEALED, you will never see my weapon

Unless you are looking at the muzzle, by then it's too late.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Hoyt]

44. Are you on "ready" when you walk into Starbucks or CE Cheeze?

[oneshooter]

59. Any time I am outside I am in "Condition Yellow" I am aware of my

surroundings and what is going on around me. Do you walk around with tunnel vision, ignoring what is around you and ignorant of the possible dangers?

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[X_Digger]

47. That's awfully close to blaming the victim..

ie, "You shouldn't have been in <X place> anyway..".

[Hoyt]

50. Blame the "victim." You assume something is going to happen -- it's not.

Just got back from Starbucks - nothing happened and it won't. Don't need a gun there.

Although I can't eat the food, I think I'll walk through C E Cheeze tonight unarmed and will report back my experience.

[X_Digger]

53. Tell that to Mary Caitrin Mahoney

Oh wait, you can't.. she's dead. In a starbucks.

Or Roger Kreutz. Dead.
Or Clifford Hardwick. Dead.
Or Pierre Pullins. You can talk to him. He survived a shooting. In a starbucks.

[PavePusher]

56. Evidence to the contrary has been posted repeatedly.

Your assertion has been demonstrated false.

[PavePusher]

65. Again, may we have verifieable evidence of the accuracy of your precognition?

I'll go solve world hunger while I wait...

[RSillsbee]

54. Gun Toter

As I have mentioned before I am one of those less than one percent (by your count) who did have the need of a gun. It happened right outside my apartment (clearly, changing the part of my routine that necessitated leaving my home wasn't an option) and I was able to successfully defend myself with a handgun.

If I never draw my handgun again that one time makes the hassle of being armed worth it.

Funny thing, I had no idea what was about to happen just 1 second before I needed that gun

[PavePusher]

55. Ahh, the "tacky" argument again.

Sorry, bears no weight, as it is nothing but emotion.

And you have yet to provide evidence of your precognitive skills, or provide remedies for the people who those skills fail.

[shadowrider]

58. And he has a Chuck E. Cheese fetish n/t

[Hoyt]

60. Better than a gun fetish.

[PavePusher]

64. "gun fetish"

I do not think that phrase means what you think it means.

[shadowrider]

71. I clipped my toenails yesterday. Dang, I must have a toenail fetish n/t

[NewMoonTherian]

63. My grandfather...

needed a gun to defend his life and those of two members of his family, in a church parking lot. While your estimate of the probability that a given person will need a gun at some point is 0.001273388%, my family's estimate is closer to 5%. My grandfather's is 100%. It had nothing to do with his routine; it revolved around who he was and who the attacker was.

While we're on the subject, what if it isn't as easy as you assume it is to change one's routine? What if your daily routine included waking up in the projects? Would you just move to a gated community?

Preparation is a matter on which I agree with you completely. Anyone who chooses to carry a weapon needs not only the expertise to operate that weapon, but awareness, responsibility and civility. There are civilian training courses available, but they're quite expensive and few every attend.

As for aesthetics, I respect your opinion, but I've gotta disagree with you there too. I suppose tacky is in the eye of the bemoaner.

[shadowrider]

12. Did it ever occur to you that MAYBE, MAYBE bad guys avoid Starbucks

at least recently because they ALLOW armed customers as allowed by law? HINT: Bad guys much prefer unarmed opponents such as those that frequent gun-free zones.

[spin]

18. If I was a bad guy, i would never try to rob a StarBucks ...

that would be stupid.

[shadowrider]

21. Ain't no freakin way

As an aside, this guy decided NOT to rob a waffle house

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=296404&mesg_id=296404

[safeinOhio]

36. and these guys steal 50k worth of guns

at gun point in a gun store.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fab_1195132074

[safeinOhio]

27. Do you feel safe in a gun store with all of those

guns? Google "gun store robbery".:+

[proteus_lives]

24. It's about choice.

But I don't expect you to understand that.

[safeinOhio]

35. On the other hand, it could be about fear

and the majority of people chose not to live in fear 24/7.

[proteus_lives]

62. "the majority of people chose not to live in fear 24/7."

And the anti-choice/gun folks are not in that majority.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PavePusher]

41. Well, that's certainly an interesting twist on the "guns enhance penis size" debate... n/t

[Hoyt]

52. If true, that might change my position.

[spin]

61. That only works if the guy packing is in uniform...

and a member of the military or police not the local militia.

[PavePusher]

66. Well, all my girlfriends do think I'm particularly dashing when I'm in my fatigues or Mess Dress...

[oneshooter]

68. Never had any problems when I wore my Dress Blues.

The girls, they loves a Marine!

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[PavePusher]

69. Yeah, Marines do have the better dress uniforms.

I still think my AF Service Dress Blues look like a bus driver uniform. sigh.

[oneshooter]

70. At least they ain't known as a "Pickle Suit" n/t

[NewMoonTherian]

67. That...

depends largely on the militia in question.

[lawodevolution]

19. I've been going to starbucks every chance I get

and I started after they made that decision.

[spin]

23. Wow. You must be why their sales are up!

You and others like you.

It was a smart decision to stand up to the Brady Campaign by Starbucks management.

[safeinOhio]

28. Trust me

it takes a lot more courage to stand up to the NRA than the Brady bunch. They have almost no members and very little money or power. On the other hand, most politicians suck up, big time, to the NRA. Only a few urban politicians would even think of it.

[spin]

29. And just how many members do you think the NRA has?

How many members does NRA have and how many are women?

At the present time, NRA has approximately 4.3 million members. NRA does not compile demographic information on members.
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Faq/?s=27

Let's compare it the to AARP.

AARP's 35 million membership base is 10 times the size of the National Rifle Association's, and its $800 million budget is five times that of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the country's biggest business association. In number of members, AARP is surpassed only by the Roman Catholic Church.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11076-2005Mar29.html

I do agree that the NRA packs a lot of clout for its size.

[safeinOhio]

31. That is my point

While the NRA has over 4 million members, their biggest fear is 50,000 members of the Brady bunch.

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-detroit/more-bad-news-for-the-anti-gun-crowd-as-the-brady-campaign-sells-its-member-list-to-raise-cash

While NRA membership nears 4 million members, the flagship gun control group, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, has been revealed to have just over 50,000 members.

and most of them are not armed. That's why I said it takes more courage to stand up to the NRA.

[one-eyed fat man]

33. Even that may be wildly optimistic.

As you and the article point out, the Brady mailing list contains the names of 50,000 people, but are they "dues paying members?"

One way to judge the an organization's grassroots support is to see how many folks will pony up with cash to fund their views. Because VPC has no public membership revenues, in other words, it has no dues paying members, it gets virtually all its funding from the Joyce Foundation. Philanthropic Research has a web site named GuideStar, which contains tax returns for many non-profit organizations. Returns of the Joyce Foundation show $9,475,883 spent on gun control between 2005 and 2007.

This year, the VPC took a grant cut of $115K from their sugar daddies at the Joyce Foundation. Assuming no increases or decreases, that would mean Josh Sugarmann and Kristen Rand are now siphoning nearly half of the total grant in just their salaries alone (what a sweet gig).

Also note, "As Huffman points out, 50,000 members is far below the 'about half a million members' that Brady president, claimed in a 2004. Maybe the "450,000 members" who "disappeared" quit to protest the selling of their names in violation of Brady's own published privacy policy?

Did Brady misspeak, prevaricate, dissemble or just flat out fucking lie? Again? or still?

[safeinOhio]

34. About all they do is

make idiots afraid that those few people and little money are going to take away their guns so they give lots of money to the NRA and American Gun Owners Association. Makes about as much sense as being afraid to walk from your car to the StarBucks. Life is no fun living in fear.

[lawodevolution]

45. they are not idiots

and the threat is real, no matter what you write.
The same type of anti-gun groups made the same claims that you just made that people should not fear having their guns taken away in the UK, then their guns were taken away.

Every time someone posts that no one is wanting to take anyones guns away, they are using deception either knowingly or unknowingly.

[one-eyed fat man]

72. You keep telling us not to worry.

The whole anti-gun movement has been based on shifting goalposts and changing rules. Time and time again they redefine what they claim are "reasonable" or "common sense" prohibitions while in all cases every one of the organizations' charters calls for the complete elimination of civilian gun ownership. Let me emphasize that, while you naively deny what gun control groups want they have no qualms about stating their goals.

"We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily - given the political realities - going to be very modest. Of course, it's true that politicians will then go home and say, `This is a great law. The problem is solved.' And it's also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time. So then we'll have to start working again to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen the next law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal - total control of handguns in the United States - is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years. The first problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second problem is to get all handguns registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition - except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors - totally illegal." Pete Shields, Handgun Control Incorporated, 1976-The New Yorker

They even outlined a few of the intentional deceptions they planned on using to achieve their eventual goal.

"Handguns should be outlawed. Our organization will probably take this stand in time but we are not anxious to rouse the opposition before we get the other legislation passed." - Elliot Corbett, National Council For A Responsible Firearms Policy, 1969, Washington Evening Star.

"The semi-automatic weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons — anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun — can only increase that chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons." — Josh Sugarman, 1988, Violence Policy Center.

Their apologists piously bleat about registration and gun crime, yet their leaders boldly proclaim:

"I don't care about crime, I just want to get the guns." - Senator Howard Metzenbaum, 1994

"Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic — purely symbolic — move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation." - Charles Krauthammer, 1996, Washington Post

Leaders of the gun control movement have unashamedly and publicly proclaimed how they intend to reach their goals. They have shown themselves to be complete, total and absolute liars, except for ONE TRUTH:

"Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal." - U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, December 1993

Anyone, and I do mean ANYONE, who fails to take them at their word is an idiot. They may have suffered setbacks in the courts. They may not have sway in public opinion like they did fifteen years ago, but they have not changed their spots. They have written time and time again that their goal is complete elimination of private gun ownership. They have stated they are willing to do it incrementally, "one slice at a time" until they get the whole loaf. They have stated the use of deceit and deception is perfectly acceptable to the extent it furthers their goals. As long as groups like Brady, the VPC, and the monied elites that fund them, like the Joyce Foundation, Bloomberg, and Soros exist they are a threat.

Every time one of them denies "wanting to ban all guns" I can only ask, "Were y'all lying then are are y'all lying now?

And to any dope dupe carrying their water, "How many times does a liar have to lie to you before you quit bending over to pick up the soap?"

"The prohibition of private firearms is the goal."
"The prohibition of private firearms is the goal."
"The prohibition of private firearms is the goal."
"The prohibition of private firearms is the goal."
"The prohibition of private firearms is the goal."

[spin]

46. Why does the Brady Campaign only have 50,000 members ...

because they are like the boy that cried wolf.

For years and years, every time a state considered passing "shall issue" concealed carry, the Brady Campaign was busy telling the media and the voters that passing such a law would lead to a return to the "Wild West".

It never happened and eventually people just stopped listening to the Brady Campaign.

[jazzhound]

30. Same here...........

.............and I e-mailed Starbucks and informed them of this fact.

[onehandle]

37. They closed hundreds of stores and slashed costs left and right.

Also during a recession, sales at 'small sins' stores such as ice cream shops and coffee houses go up, because a $5 treat is cheaper than a big screen TV.

Additionally, sales are up since they added 100% free WiFi in July.

Anyone going there more or less to support or boycott them had no effect whatsoever.

[lawodevolution]

39. Pro gun individuals certainly had a positive effect

Many of my friends and family members get coffee there now. These are customers they didn't have before. The opposite could have occurred, they could have lost customers. They made a good decision.

[cleanhippie]

48. Probably, but it's nice to see you admit that the boycott was pointless...

and irrational.

[onehandle]

49. I did not boycott. I was at a Starbucks two days ago.

You don't know me.

[cleanhippie]

51. I never said you did boycott. Why so defensive, we are in agreement?

[oneshooter]

57. Proof of your so far unfounded assertions? n/t