In light of recent high-profile shootings, Friday's World News with Charles Gibson featured a report that seemed to lament the absence of public calls for additional gun control. While not directly advocating new gun laws, the report cited statistics often used by those who support gun control. Before correspondent Pierre Thomas cited a poll showing 60 percent of Americans "favor stricter gun control laws," Gibson introduced the piece: "Well, there are 230 million guns in America. There are more guns than there are adults. In the past incidents, like the one in Kirkwood, would rekindle debate over gun control. But as ABC's Pierre Thomas reports, gun control advocates are now mostly silent." (Transcript follows)
After listing several recent instances of gun crimes, pointing out that some guns were bought legally while others were "taken from family members," Thomas continued: "What, if anything, can be done to stop the violence? Polling shows three-quarters of Americans believe the Constitution guarantees the right to own guns. But six in ten Americans favor stricter gun control laws. And yet, even those who support more restrictions on guns admit they've been losing ground."
After a soundbite from gun control advocate Paul Helmke, who complained that "politicians are afraid to talk about" gun control, Thomas relayed that those who oppose gun control are more likely to voice their views: "The politicians who are talking are the ones who support gun owner rights. Just today, 55 Senators and more than 250 Congressmen filed a brief to the Supreme Court opposing Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban."
Then came the report's only argument against gun control as made in a soundbite by Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison who argued that "maybe if these people had had their own weapons to defend themselves, maybe some of these things wouldn't have happened."
Thomas concluded: "For the most part, that's the argument that appears to be winning."
For ABC, this was only the latest example of such reports favoring more gun laws. In April 2007, after the Virginia Tech shootings, reports on Good Morning America and World News similarly lamented the absence of new gun control initiatives, and on World News, also anchored by Gibson, correspondent Brian Ross portrayed Virginia's "lax" gun laws as being at fault. In July 2007, World News Sunday suggested that opposition to gun control by rural areas in Pennsylvania was to blame for Philadephia's murder rate. Also in July, World News with Gibson incorrectly implied that a murder suspect in New York City bought his gun from a gun store in Virginia, ignoring the fact that the gun's original owner had purchased it legally, and contended that criminals often go to shops for their weapons.
Below is a complete transcript of the report from ABC's World News with Charles Gibson from Friday February 8:
CHARLES GIBSON: Well, there are 230 million guns in America. There are more guns than there are adults. In the past incidents, like the one in Kirkwood, would rekindle debate over gun control. But as ABC's Pierre Thomas reports, gun control advocates are now mostly silent.
PIERRE THOMAS: One week in America. Outside Baltimore, a 15-year-old boy charged with killing his parents and two brothers. Five women shot dead in a clothing store outside Chicago. Three people murdered in a suburban Maryland restaurant. In Los Angeles, a man kills three family members and a police officer. Then, last night, a city hall becomes a shooting gallery. And this morning in Baton Rouge, a nursing student guns down two of her peers before killing herself. Handguns were the weapon of choice in many of the shootings. Police suspect the guns were purchased legally in some cases. In others, taken from family members. Or bought on the black market. What, if anything, can be done to stop the violence? Polling shows three-quarters of Americans believe the Constitution guarantees the right to own guns. But six in ten Americans favor stricter gun control laws. And yet, even those who support more restrictions on guns admit they've been losing ground.
PAUL HELMKE, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence: The conversation about what to do about guns is not happening. Almost universally, regardless of party, regardless of ideology, regardless of which office they're running for, the politicians are afraid to talk about it.
THOMAS: The politicians who are talking are the ones who support gun owner rights. Just today, 55 Senators and more than 250 Congressmen filed a brief to the Supreme Court opposing Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban.
Senator KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON (R-TX): People believe that they should have the right to defend themselves. Maybe if these people had had their own weapons to defend themselves, maybe some of these things wouldn't have happened.
THOMAS: For the most part, that's the argument that appears to be winning. Pierre Thomas, ABC News, Washington.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
"No free man shall ever be
February 9, 2008 - 04:33 ET by rbosque"No free man shall ever be de-barred the use
of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and
bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in
government." - Thomas Jefferson
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free,
in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
- Thomas Jefferson
"The said constitution shall never be
construed to authorize congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samuel
Adams
"The great object is that every man be armed.
Everyone who is able may have a gun." - Patrick Henry
"Americans need never fear their government
because of the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the
people of almost every other nation." - James Madison
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the
whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially
when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee Founding Father
"I believe there are more instances of the
abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of
those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
Meditate on those thoughts Charlie.
Because every time one of
February 9, 2008 - 07:20 ET by USA4freedomBecause every time one of these shootings happen its in a “gun free zone”.
How many shootouts happen at gun shops? Where every one has a gun strapped on their hips? (go into a gun shop and see if that is not true).
Let just say that you life stinks, and you want to die but go out in a way that makes you famous. You want to find a place that you can create the most death and destruction to make the news and for them to look at every thing you have ever said and done for your entire life. On every channel,24/7. Weeks of being on every weekly news magazine, every talk show, front page of every major newspaper, talked about on the blogs, and internet. They will show pictures of them, look at his house, talk to his friends, put on TV any picture of him and his guns, or the writings or better yet his videos. How embarrassed his parents will be (which he probably loves because he hates them). This has to be a wet dream of every looser in the world.
The only thing that keeps you from reaching this kind of notoriety is body count. (or maybe someone famous).
So now that we have decided what I want to do to become famous, how to I get to that body count where every one will know my name, (and my wrath).
Some choices.
Police department.. hell no these people would kill me in a second, I will make the news, but I want to be famous.
A military base.. the men are trained to kill people, I will make the news, but I want to be famous.
Gun shop.. every one there has a gun, at the most I could only kill one or two before they kill me, again, news but I want immortality.
Better choices for mass murders.
Schools (always a favorite, killing children will create extra sympathy) no defense, no on there “by law” can carry a gun, (except the killer). Every one will be grouped up in rooms with only one door in and out. The perfect killing zone.
Churches, extra sympathy these people are praying to God (even God did not have sympathy for these people). No one has guns, (well except Jeanne Assam, in Colorado Springs). Again lots of people, with only afew ways in and out, no defense.
The mall, “by law” most malls will not let you carry guns, good place, lots of people, a few security guards but for the most part they don’t carry guns, just radios. More exits but still no defense.
Your place of work, no guns, you know the lay of the land,and the people that probably make fun of you will die. Again, no defense.
The latest killings, in the city council, no guns “by law”, lots of people in a room with only one exit (I think). Filled with the peopleyou hate most. Does anyone wonder why he left the note that stated: the truth will come out. He knew they would look through his things, he wanted the world to see how pissed he was. Who did he kill first? The police officer, why,because he was the only one with a gun!!!!! Then he took the officers guns and kept killing.
Most of the mass murders put a lot of time and effort into these killings. They pick the place, the time, and the people. If you look at all of these things, they don’t look that dissimilar. If you are a wolf, you don’t hunt tigers.
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party,the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
Thanks for these quotes.
February 9, 2008 - 16:50 ET by HumanEventsThanks for these quotes. What would really be terrific is if a Republican would say some of these quotes in a speech. And then when the media and Dems have a huge hissy fit, the Republican can say, "Oh, so you strongly disagree with Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Patrick Henry."
Amen rbosque
February 10, 2008 - 09:15 ET by sentforth5And ya know, I believe the original gun was a thrown rock.As long as there are rocks lieing around there will always be guns. Lieing? Laying? Lord I get stoopider ever day.
They can have my gun when
February 9, 2008 - 08:16 ET by ROTORHEAD77They can have my gun when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers!
Elect Obama, or Billary, and see what happens.
I think an interesting thing
February 9, 2008 - 08:25 ET by USA4freedomI think an interesting thing has happened, I think that for a large part, they so over reported in the news that it just becomes back ground noise after while. That is why the killers have to push the body count, to be famous.
IMHO, I think mass killings will drop off after while with more and more people with the right to carry.
Both my wife and I have a concealed weapon permit. I will not become sheep.
For those people that think less guns=less crime, look at Florida.
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party, the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
Gee, maybe, just maybe
February 9, 2008 - 08:28 ET by 10ksnookerGun control, which is all about not allowing law abiding citizens to own guns, is about as stupid an idea as gun free zones, gun free towns, gun free states, and now we have the evidence gun free countries.
Anyone notice how the new gun free country of England now has a per capita crime rate exceeding the US and other developed countries. So much for that stupid idea. Illegal guns, don't you just like that term, are now big business in England.
Two things seem to work better than anything else, armed citizens and criminals behind bars.
When you have two uniformed cops shot by an attacker, do you really think that any stupid law that says you can't have a gun would stop that suicide attack? Wasn't it illegal for the attacker to have a gun in the council meeting? Why yes, I believe it was -- Sigh.
BTW, isn't murder against the law, or did the liberals abolish that law?
10, great points. I love how
February 9, 2008 - 08:35 ET by USA4freedom10,
great points. I love how the MSM always ignore how killing some one is illegal, but that killer will look at the "no guns allowed" and walk away, thinking, dam if that sign was not there I would have killed everyone!
Maybe I should break in (there are no "do not break in" signs) and steal the "no guns allowed" sign, then come back next week and kill everyone.
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party,the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
The Real Problem
February 9, 2008 - 08:31 ET by kdoliverThe real problem here is not guns, but the media's obsession with the voyeuristic. Reality TV and U-Tube have made it possible for anyone to be famous for 15 seconds. A study done a couple of years showed that in the 15-19 age group that more kids wanted to be famous that successful. That tell you a lot.
So this nut job, decides he wants to be famous because he was upset. He could have done it with a car if he did not have access to guns. The press refuses to look at the real reasons behind shootings. They would not like what they see.
http://thelazytriathlete.blogspot.com/
It's downright hilarious
February 9, 2008 - 09:07 ET by motherbeltIt's downright hilarious when they quote such statistics as:
a poll showing 60 percent of Americans "favor stricter gun control laws,
Most people have no idea what our current gun-control laws are. The pollsters never tell people that the vast majority of the guns used to commit crimes were obtained illegally. And neither the pollsters nor the respondents ever specify what those "stricter gun control laws" might be.
My bet is that if you asked that 60% just what they would want enacted, the answers would be a slightly more adult variation of a kindergartener's generic Don't let bad people have guns.
I seem to recall. That when
February 9, 2008 - 09:49 ET by ZippyI seem to recall. That when Chuck Shumer, took over the Defeatocrats reelection committee. He told them if you want to get money from the DNC, don't talk about Guns/Hunting etc.
I think, I read that here.
Would that be the same Chuck
February 9, 2008 - 09:56 ET by USA4freedomWould that be the same Chuck Shumer that has a permit to carry a gun?
As he is trying to take our right to have one...
Look I think we should hire Rosy's body guard to beat up Chucky..
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party,the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
Just to tag on to what you said,
February 9, 2008 - 14:18 ET by Wilbur747last year, I read that there are some 22,700 gun laws in the country. I don't think that even the hoplophobic lib lawmakers even know what laws they pass from year to year.
The libs want to be able to
February 9, 2008 - 10:15 ET by ahusserThe libs want to be able to choose the rights they like. They make the flimsy case that only a militia can bear arms. That the 2nd amendment is a collective not an individual right. All the other amendments in the bill of rights are individual rights and it would be absurd to assume that the right to bear arms is a collective right in a sea of individual rights. The other point is the founding fathers thought it was so important they made it the 2nd Amendment. Apparently it was important and high on their list. I just wish the language had been plainer. People killing people with guns is a high profile example. But some of the other amendments take lives also. How many criminals get away with murder because of the 4th amendments or the 5th amendments, or the right to have a jury of your peers, or that the government must prove you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. How many are let go due to lack of evidence and kill again. No one says let's give up our rights so these evil people will pay for their crimes. The dirty secret is that the right to carry states have lower crime rates and I have not seen any news stories about permitted persons killing anyone other than justifiable homicide. The true shame is that the privilege of carrying a concealed weapon by a any law abiding citizen should be the law of the land.
Good points. The same folks
February 9, 2008 - 10:47 ET by motherbeltGood points. The same folks who want to take away that right, are the ones who howl the loudest if any number of a suspect's rights are tampered with when he's arrested and tried.
Gun Control
February 9, 2008 - 11:04 ET by misterbee241"What, if anything, can be done to stop the violence?"
Nothing. It's in our nature. Cain killed Abel with something didnt he? He didnt have a gun. The best we can do is lock up the bad guys and protect ourselves. When the bad guys cant get guns they'll use something else. The human mind works that way.
There is none so blind as they that won’t see. Jonathan Swift 1667-1745
Notice the graphic behind
February 9, 2008 - 11:19 ET by ahusserNotice the graphic behind Gibson. "Gun Violence" which to me implies these guns just get up and kill people and you don't see a sign which says knife violence or baseball bat violence or shod foot violence. It is so absurd to blame an implement and keep a somber straight face. More magical thinking on the libs part: "Once we ban guns the bad men will go away and we will live in peace and harmony where no one is hurt or killed by the bad guns".
People aren't violent, guns are
February 9, 2008 - 11:24 ET by kgThe two biggest killers of humans is guns and SUVs. Without them all would be rosey and right in the world.
You are right!
February 9, 2008 - 13:27 ET by DEVILDOCMOMDon't let those SUV's carry guns...that's the solution. :) Just in case this is misinterpreted, I have a CCW.
AP News flash...
February 9, 2008 - 14:30 ET by Wilbur747AP News flash..."A couple driving a Yugo were killed today on highway 10 by an SUV. A gun was found in the vehicle and the SUV was immediately arrested and now awaits formal charges by the Pima County DA. More at 11."
BTW, both my wife and I have our CCWs and carry almost everywhere. Since she never shot a gun before, I paid for some formal lessons for her. She is an absolute crack shot! Even better than me and I've been shooting since age 6 and have extensive military firearms training! I guess machismo got in the way of hitting the target! Notice I use the liberal tactic of blaming something else other than my own faults!
I'm waiting for the lawsuit against a mall following a shooting here in Tucson. "...if I only been allowed to carry my gun..."
I would love to say
February 10, 2008 - 22:17 ET by DEVILDOCMOMthat I am a crack shot, but I'm not...we were out at the range today and I am improving. I practice at about 15 to 20 feet. I did have all my shots in the head of the figure, but the grouping was not that tight. Of course a good head shot or two ought to do it.
My son always carries, my husband figures he has never needed a gun except when he was in the Army. We do discuss this viewpoint. When I am more comfortable and practice more I will carry something small-.380 or so which will fit in my pocket even in a holster. I do like my son's CZ, it has a nice feel. He has a variety of weapons and I am trying them out.
I'm willing to bet most
February 9, 2008 - 15:41 ET by rbosqueI'm willing to bet most killers are Democrats. Certainly in the realm of abortion.
Cheney and gun control
February 9, 2008 - 15:59 ET by bigtimerSpeaking of gun control...good for V.P. Cheney...he went against the administration too.
I sure wished he would have run for President!
Plus I just want to mention that one of the guys in that Missouri town that survived the massacre of sorts, he was shot in the hand and will be okay, I am glad for that, but he is a real dweeb in my opinion, he said "I can see the need for gun control now, that is one of the first things that comes to mind"...instead of the fact that two deputy's that had guns were killed if memory serves....these people never learn.
What drives me crazy BT...
February 9, 2008 - 16:43 ET by Wilbur747is that these people (and libs) don't understand the basic fact: criminals do not care about laws or any gun-control restrictions. That's why they're criminals. Are there ANY criminals who care whether or not guns are allowed in their town? No!
Murder is illegal, yet many gang members of MS-13 commit murder with illegally aquired guns to become 'initiated', much like the Mafia "making their bones". So what makes anyone think that gun control will work?
Gun control laws DO NOT WORK. Period. D.C. has the most restrictive gun control laws in the country yet has one of the highest violent crime rates in the country.
BTW, President Cheney sounds REAL good!
president Hutchison?
February 9, 2008 - 23:18 ET by catnamedjakeNow that's a woman that would be good for America. As long as there are crazy people and there are guns, people will be shot. Morons with guns does not have anything to do with the 2nd amendment. Gun control, ptooie. Mind your business "Nanny".
They're just Insurgents, relax
February 9, 2008 - 23:30 ET by JayTeeYou guys are getting all excited over a few Insurgents running around trying to exercise some Free Speech.
Are you suggesting we Pull out of Baltimore, and not do a Police SURGE to stop the violence ?
Actually, I think you are justifying even more guns to protect myself from the Insurgency.. . . and Kay Baily from Tx is correct, and as you say "For the most part, that's the argument that appears to be winning".
Concealed Carry licenses
February 10, 2008 - 01:40 ET by jefflebowskiI believe that every able and honest American should have a Concealed Carry permit. My 66 year old Mother just got hers. She now has a much better chance of protecting herself if she needs to.
Criminals don't follow laws. This is something that liberals will never understand or admit. Guns don't get up by themselves and shoot people. But I refuse to be at the mercy of some lowlife bent on harming me or my family.
And yes, I'd even protect a liberal if I saw them being robbed or beaten...well, maybe not Keith Olbermann or Rosie McDonald or UpChuck Schumer or.... well, maybe I ought to rethink that proctecting of liberals thing.
jefflebowski...Is it your
February 10, 2008 - 02:01 ET by Jerjefflebowski...Is it your position that every American citizen should be able to carry any firearm of any type, anywhere, at any time?
Jer
Jer,
February 10, 2008 - 02:13 ET by R D HelmWell, fortunately, this guy had his with him, otherwise his family would most likely be burrying him three days hence. Something tells me that somewhere down the road, this guy saved another innocent person from suffering the same fate he nearly met himself.
Better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it, I always say.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
R D...Question: Would you
February 10, 2008 - 02:45 ET by JerR D...Question: Would you feel comfortable sitting in Fenway Park at a Yankees-Sox game among 30,000 beer-swilling fans, all of whom were packing heat?
Jer
Jer, it is against the law
February 10, 2008 - 03:58 ET by jefflebowskiJer, it is against the law for those with Concealed Carry licenses to carry a gun if they are going to drink alcoholic beverages. How many bars do you read about that were shot up by honest citizens with CC permits?
Concealed Carry
February 10, 2008 - 03:56 ET by jefflebowskiNo, not "every" American citizen...only law abiding, sentient and capable citizens who show the ability and judgement to carry a firearm.
My position is that you could arm an honest, law abiding person with a nuclear weapon and nobody would be harmed.
Anti-gun ideology
February 10, 2008 - 13:28 ET by jrichABC’s anti-gun ideology is very typical and very
obvious. When they whine about “the absence of public calls for additional gun control”
they are actually whining about the fact that most Americans do not want a
totalitarian government infringing their 2nd Amendment rights to implement self-defense.
A majority of Americans (currently 48 states provide for
some form of concealed carry) favor provisions for personal self-defense--as made possible
by carrying a concealed handgun.
Liberals (including most MSMs) give public, lip service to
personal self-defense, but organize, support, and work to remove any and all
practical implements for insuring self-defense. A so-called “right” with no method of implementation is NOT a
right.
ABC cannot have, and really does not want an honest
discussion of the detrimental effects of self-defense-infringement (what
liberals call “gun-control”), because they adamantly refuse to mention the
obvious fact that mass shootings overwhelmingly, everywhere in the world, have
occurred in victim-disarmament zones (what liberals call “gun-free” zones).
repeatedly thumbed their nose at the US Constitution
August 19, 2008 - 21:59 ET by EdwardGun Controllers Among Us, Marin County California Courts, http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3749. Most liberal Marin County Ca has repeatedly thumbed their nose at the US Constitution, then imposed their illegal actions onto a Nevada citizen. What's next? I was pleased to see the recent US Supreme Court ruling about gun control. Along with others that are challenging previous court rulings and laws in light of the recent US Supreme Court ruling, one more challenge desperately needs to be immediately mounted. That is the blanket all-inclusive law that a person with any sort of restraining order against them is not allowed to have any sort of a gun. Based on my experience as a Deputy Sheriff, that is bad law and I have always believed that is unconstitutional. It is also even worse law when the restraining order is obtained by default and a contemptible law when obtained through breaking the court’s own rules to get the default in the first place. It is a gross denial of civil rights. In one of my Among Us stories I’ve been following and reporting on, exactly that happened. When husband is caught in bigamy living a double life, wife changes locks to Reno family home. According to the Reno police report, that home is immediately violently broken into. Two well-secured doors were broken down. The second door was so well secured that the only way to get in was to break that door frame and surrounding sheet rock. This is exactly what happened according to the witnesses, Reno police report and photographs. It took 45 minutes to an hour to break through those two doors. The garage door was then blocked shut. The home is thoroughly ransacked, a knife is taken to their bed. According to the Truckee Meadows Community College police and Pat Slavin, there is then an attempted break-in of wife’s locker at Truckee Meadows Community College. Average criminals breaking into a home take a minute to enter that home. If more than that, they immediately move on to the next home. To take the hour and hard work it did to break through those two door, thoroughly ransack the home and take a knife to the bed is evidence that wife is in danger. The attempted break-in at Truckee Meadows Community College is evidence that the wife remained in danger and the danger was escalating. Wife has no history of violence. Husband does have flip-flop history. The evidence is there that the wife desperately needs a gun for protection. Wife, who has lived in Reno since summer 1995, files for a divorce in Reno, Nevada. Husband does an end run and cheats. He files for a restraining order in Marin County, California, 200 miles away, although wife has not lived there since summer 1995 nor does she visit there due to her disabilities restricting her ability to travel. Husband has wife served with Marin County California court papers in Reno on a Thursday evening while she is teaching an evening credit class at Truckee Meadows Community College. According to those court papers, a court hearing was scheduled by husband in Marin County California for first thing that Monday morning for a temporary restraining order against wife. Therefore, wife thinks she had only 8 business hours that Friday to find and hire a California attorney. Didn’t happen. So wife mails pro per response to Marin Court and husband’s attorney. Illegally, husband gets a 3-year default restraining order against wife and wife is threatened with prison if she has a gun for protection although recent evidence proved she desperately now needs a gun. Problems, here is an illegally obtained restraining order, and the gun restriction is illegal. For several reasons. First, it is illegal for service to be 36 hours before a court hearing. Therefore, husband, his attorney and/or the Marin County courts falsified the date of service. Second, a gun prohibition is unconstitutionally illegal. As the US Supreme Court just recently again affirmed. Third, a blanket restriction of a gun prohibition in every restraining order is unconstitutionally illegal. As the US Supreme Court just recently again affirmed. Fourth, wife had mailed her pro per response to the Marin County court, so that court issuing a default order is illegal. Fifth, a California court issued a default order against a Nevada citizen that they have no legal jurisdiction over. Sixth, Novato, California police have threatened to jail the wife based on this illegally obtained order. “You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus.”- Mark Twain. Marin County California is the most liberal county in America. They have repeatedly evidenced that they are willing to break several laws, repeatedly thumbed their nose at the US Constitution, imposed their illegal actions on a Nevada citizen, threatened a Nevada citizen, and terrorized a Nevada citizen. Who and what’s next? Sources and further readings: Washoe District Court, Marin County (California) Superior Court, Reno Police Department reports, Twin Cities (California) Police reports, Sausalito (California) Police reports, Marin (County California) General Hospital medical reports, Now You Call It Madness (But I Call It Love ), A List of Questions I Promise Not To Pose , Cheaters Among Us, Olson , California’s Legal Secret Marriage Racket , Get All Those Instructors You Can – Or Maybe No t, Bigamists Among Us, Olson, Flip Flop RERs Among Us, James K. Olson .
http://sf.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3870, http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3630,
http://sf.broowaha.com/article.php?id=1873,
http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3481,
http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3687,
http://sf.broowaha.com/article.php?id=2900,
http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3690,
http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3334,
Copyright © 2008 Craig BEd