If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mainichi Daily News)   Hangman's noose awaits octo-granny's feared tentacles   (mdn.mainichi.co.jp) divider line 58
    More: Weird  
•       •       •

13672 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Dec 2004 at 4:02 AM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



58 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2004-12-28 04:13:12 AM
That's a bit old to be killing people.
 
2004-12-28 04:13:43 AM
This article fights a losing battle against the English language.
 
2004-12-28 04:15:30 AM
Japan... Tentacles... Grannies...

I think someone is running out of porn ideas.
 
2004-12-28 04:18:25 AM
three in a row, that's... weird
 
2004-12-28 04:20:19 AM
Who learned them how to spoke?
 
2004-12-28 04:26:13 AM
I'd hit it.
 
2004-12-28 04:27:12 AM
What was this article about again? I lost interest after the second sentence.
 
2004-12-28 04:29:12 AM
2004-12-28 04:13:12 AM Fuzzmosis

That's a bit old to be killing people.


call me silly, but if one of her victims was a relative of yours, your opinion might be a little different

i always wondered why those who opposed the death penalty want us to have so much compassion... except of course, for those whom the murderer killed without benefit of judge or jury
 
2004-12-28 04:32:17 AM
According to a currency converter, 50 mil. yen is around $485k. Adjust for inflation since 1985 and DAMN.

Also according to the site, one yen is about 97/100th of a cent.
 
2004-12-28 04:33:29 AM
circletimessquare:

i always wondered why those who opposed the death penalty want us to have so much compassion... except of course, for those whom the murderer killed without benefit of judge or jury

Ever hear of two wrongs not making a right?

Also, I'm not assuming you're Christian, but I find it funny that the same people who typically seem so concerned about religious values also seem to find no problem in executing people, despite the fact that one is supposed to let God make the judgments.
 
2004-12-28 04:35:36 AM
circletimessquare

i always wondered why those who opposed the death penalty want us to have so much compassion... except of course, for those whom the murderer killed without benefit of judge or jury

I don't see how objection to the death penalty in any way denotes a lack of compassion for victims or victims' families.
 
2004-12-28 04:43:36 AM
Sid_6.7

Don't forget to adjust for the economic bubble in the 80's. The yen was actually stronger than the dollar.

Also, I'm not assuming you're Christian, but I find it funny that the same people who typically seem so concerned about religious values also seem to find no problem in executing people, despite the fact that one is supposed to let God make the judgments.

True, but I find a lot of people that disagree with the killing of inmates also approve the killing of one's own unborn child. The world is filled with such opposing ideals.
 
2004-12-28 04:52:39 AM
I swear to god I thought the headline said, "Hangman's noose awaits octo-granny's feared testacles"

very disapointed
 
2004-12-28 04:54:19 AM
Sid_6.7
Let God Judge where they go when they die, let some dude in a robe judge if they are a menace to society and should be removed from it. Or should we not judge anyone? And never jail anyone because who are we to say they are wrong? To hell with society...
 
2004-12-28 04:54:53 AM
lol, huesofblue...me too. I was beginning to think that japanese people were THAT much cooler. :D
 
2004-12-28 05:01:31 AM
I think we should rename "death penalty" to "retroactive abortion". Give the fundies something to think about.

/or, rename "abortion" to "pre-emptive capital punishment".
// applying both rules, we get "death penalty" == "retroactive pre-emptive capital punishment"
///my head asplode.
 
2004-12-28 05:04:45 AM
My Ipod is Bigger Than Yours

There're worlds of difference between removing some schmuck from society and giving him/her the ole' nap-time needle.
 
2004-12-28 05:21:09 AM
I'm a Christian. One thing I've always found odd is that some who identify themselves as Christians are either on the one hand Pro Death-Penalty and Anti-Abortion, or on the other hand Pro-Abortion and Anti-Death penalty. It seems odd to be opposed to killing someone locked up in a womb but in favor of killing someone locked up in a cell. Likewise it seems odd to be in favor of terminating an innocent fetus, but opposed to killing a hardened criminal. It would seem, and please correct me if you see a flaw in my logic, that the only way to be consistant would be to either support, or oppose both at the same time.

Myself, I point out that were the only 1st world nation (other than Japan) to use the death penalty, and we carry out more abortions than any other country. We seem to be killing a hell of a lot of people. And the Feti and Convicted criminals share one thing in common. Neither of them can defend themselves when we come to put them down.

Of course, you always run the risk of killing a wrongfully convicted person. By that same logic, a Fetus did nothing to deserve being sliced up into smaller pieces and vaccumed out to be thrown out as medical waste.

Is it just me? Or does it seem we've decided that when somebodys life gets inconvienent for us to deal with, either having to house a prisoner in jail or to raise a child from infancy, that a good option is to KILL THEM.
 
2004-12-28 05:24:39 AM
Not to mention that killing the offender does not resurect the dead. Thus we have killed someone and acomplished nothing. Laci Petersons mom said, after her son-in-law was sentanced (to death) that there were "no winners". As long as the DP exists we'll be forced to have miles of Red Tape to insure it does not get used wrongly. As long as the tape is in place it will always cost more to kill someone than to let them live.

::sigh:: I need to find one of those forms that you can file with the police requesting that if you are ever murdered that the offender not be sentanced to death.
 
2004-12-28 05:26:15 AM
"Too old to be killing someone"
You guys RTFA?
They even said towards the end that the Japanese government is reluctant to kill people over 70, so she probably will never be executed.
Call me wonky (c'mon!) ... but doesn't it make MORE sense to kill someone over 70?
 
2004-12-28 05:31:23 AM
An old lady is just a young lady in wrinkly skin.
 
2004-12-28 05:32:33 AM
fuzzyslippers

True, but I find a lot of people that disagree with the killing of inmates also approve the killing of one's own unborn child. The world is filled with such opposing ideals.

An interesting, but ultimately flawed comparison, for the simple reason that many supporters of abortion (myself included)do not regard a fetus as a human life.

You can certainly argue with my opinion in that regard, but not that my support of abortion and objection to the death penalty is in any way "inconsistent."
 
2004-12-28 05:51:53 AM
Lethrup

I'm curious. Define the beginning of 'human' life, as you see it.
 
2004-12-28 05:58:16 AM
circletimessquare:
The last time we had an execution here (famous WA prison), there were two candle-light vigils at the fence. One for the murderer who was to be put to death, the other was for the little girl he brutally murdered in cold blood.

And for all the people who put CTS down. Remember that the Bible says "Thou shalt not murder". People often misquote this to justify their own opinion against capital punishment. In reality, God is saying 'If he murdered his fellow man, send him to me so we can have a chat'

/all murder is killing
//not all killing is murder
///dead people commit no more crimes
 
2004-12-28 06:20:12 AM
King_Web

I'm curious. Define the beginning of 'human' life, as you see it.

Fair enough. All distinctions of this kind are necessarily arbitrary, but I believe "life" begins sometime immediately after the first trimester (weeks 13-19). It is during this time that a fetus begins making active and independent movements, indicating to me some sort of awareness and the capability to respond to stimuli. (Perhaps I should note, as consistency seems a big issue tonight, that for this reason I support euthanasia in instances where patients have clearly made their wishes known beforehand in cases of extreme "vegetablism.")

12inpianist

Remember that the Bible says "Thou shalt not murder". People often misquote this to justify their own opinion against capital punishment. In reality, God is saying 'If he murdered his fellow man, send him to me so we can have a chat'

Forgive me, but I don't see where the good Lord made a distinction.
 
2004-12-28 06:46:58 AM
God didn't say anything. Some guy claims God told him that thou shalt not murder.

That doesn't hold up in court.
Murder on!
 
2004-12-28 06:56:31 AM
All about the death penalty in Japan..

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engASA220011997
 
2004-12-28 06:58:55 AM
Numbers 35:27 (New International Version)

and the avenger of blood finds him outside the city, the avenger of blood may kill the accused without being guilty of murder.

Distinct?

/Clicky for context, nitpickers
 
2004-12-28 07:21:55 AM
From 12inpianist's link:
28: The accused must stay in his city of refuge until the death of the high priest; only after the death of the high priest may he return to his own property.

So... you get a temp ban? Then the Pope has to die?
How did this catch on again?
 
2004-12-28 07:34:25 AM
This woman has serious mental problems. I don't even understnd how this would happen. =P She lives for sixty years or so, then discovers insurance fraud, and then a little later becomes a vicious killer. Just weird.
 
2004-12-28 07:34:53 AM
12inpianist

That's exceptional, but also a slight misreading of the text. What the verse you quote references is "accidental" murder, or murder that is unintentional. For intentional and premeditated murder, it seems God advocates swift execution. Wow.

Here's my question as a non-believer: The passage from Numbers that you quote clearly says that killing a perp is not "murder" and an internal check within the same translation (Exodus 20) indeed says "Thou shalt not MURDER." Fine. But I checked other translations on that site (KJB in particular) and they are not "internally" consistent. In other words, the KJB clearly says "Thou shalt not KILL."

I'm beyond thinking that different translations can be "externally" consistent. In other words, I don't think they could all match up with each other. But two Christians following two different translations, would clearly have different interpretions of the SAME PASSAGE. Is there a "more holy" translation? One seen as "better" than the rest? How does the church reconcile this?
 
2004-12-28 07:41:04 AM
I pulled this argument off of a website ran by a preacher I ran into once. For what it's worth...

"CAPITAL PUNISHMENT"


INTRODUCTION

1. Whenever an execution is imminent, questions are often raised...
a. Should capital punishment be acceptable in a civilized society?
b. Is it morally right for a government to administer capital
punishment?
c. What is the purpose behind capital punishment, and is it
accomplished?

2. How do we find the answers to such questions?
a. We could turn to various sources, and receive conflicting answers
b. For Christians who believe the Word of God to be complete and
all-sufficient (2 Ti 3:16-17; 2 Pe 1:3), we must look to it for
the answers

[In this study, we shall endeavor to glean from the Bible what it has
to say on the subject. Turning to the book of Genesis, the book of
beginnings, we read of...]

I. THE BEGINNING OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

A. BEFORE THE FLOOD...
1. Cain received protection from God against capital punishment
- Gen 4:13-15
2. Lamech, descendant of Cain, presumed even more protection
against capital punishment after killing a young man - Gen 4:
23-24
3. By the time of Noah, mention is made of the corruption and
violence which had filled the earth - Gen 6:11-12 (might this
be the consequence of a society without capital punishment?)
4. God's solution for the wholesale corruption and violence:
capital punishment on a mass scale! (i.e., the flood) - Gen
6:13

B. AFTER THE FLOOD...
1. Man is immediately given an awesome responsibility - Gen 9:5-6
a. God now requires a reckoning from those who kill
b. He now requires a killer to be killed by his fellow man
2. The reason God requires this of man: "For in the image of God
He made man"
a. To kill one created in God's image is a serious offense
worthy of death!
b. Because man is created in God's image:
1) He possesses the ability to exercise justice and
righteousness
2) He is capable of being a worthy administrator of capital
punishment

[While the evidence is scarce, it appears that before the flood people
took God's word to Cain as a license to kill without consequence. With
the flood, God Himself administered a form of capital punishment upon
the violent and corrupt. After the flood, He charged man with the
responsibility to take the life of those who shed blood.

Now let's take a look at...]

II. CAPITAL PUNISHMENT UNDER THE OLD COVENANT

A. GOD GAVE THE LAW TO GOVERN THE NATION OF ISRAEL...
1. The Law was both a civil and religious law, and has served as
the basis for criminal justice in many other civilizations
since first given by God
2. In it, we find that capital punishment was proscribed for the
following crimes:
a. Premeditated murder - Exo 21:12-14
b. Parental abuse - Exo 21:15
c. Kidnapping - Exo 21:16
d. Cursing parents - Exo 21:17
e. Striking an expecting mother which causes the child to be
born prematurely and dies - Exo 21:22-25
f. Failure to keep a killer animal from killing - Exo 21:28-29
g. Killing a thief in revenge - Exo 22:2,3
h. Sorcery - Exo 22:18
i. Bestiality - Exo 22:19
j. Adultery - Lev 20:10
k. Incest - Lev 20:11-12
l. Homosexuality - Lev 20:13
m. Marrying both mother and daughter - Lev 20:14
n. Being a medium or spiritist - Lev 20:27
o. Breaking the Sabbath - Num 15:32-36

B. WAS THE LAW A GOOD LAW?
1. Paul said that it was "holy and just and good" - Ro 7:12
2. While the religious aspects of the Law was temporary (Ga 3:23-
25), the civil law served its purpose well: to govern and
preserve a nation
3. Who would be so presumptuous to say they could improve upon
such a civil code of ethics?
a. Many have arrogantly presumed they could do better
b. And countries have gotten worse, not better!

[Certainly under the Old Covenant capital punishment was ordained of
God. But we live under the New Testament, not the Old; what does the
New Testament say?]

III. CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

A. THE PURPOSE OF THE NEW COVENANT...
1. Unlike the Old Covenant, the New Covenant is not designed to
govern or regulate civil governments
a. It is designed for those in Christ's kingdom, which is
spiritual in nature - Jn 18:36
b. Its purpose is to help man achieving and maintaining a
right relationship with God
c. So for the most part, it does not concern itself with
telling men of the world how to regulate their civil
affairs
2. But in defining our relationship to civil authorities while
subject to a Higher Law, there are references which reveal
God's attitude toward capital punishment

B. REFERENCES TO CAPITAL PUNISHMENT...
1. Take a look at Ro 13:1-7
a. Governmental authorities are established by God
b. They serve as ministers of God, as "an avenger to execute
wrath on him who practices evil"
c. When a government fulfills its responsibility upon those
who are evil...
1) It "does not bear the sword in vain"
2) This is a clear allusion to the administration of
capital punishment!
-- Thus the NT supports the government's right to exercise the
death penalty!
2. Consider what Paul said in Ac 25:11
a. He was willing to die if he "committed anything worthy of
death"
b. A clear implication that in Paul's mind some crimes were
worthy of death!

[While the New Testament is focused upon the responsibilities of
disciples of Jesus in His spiritual kingdom, there is certainly no
indication that it is wrong for government to administer capital
punishment when necessary. The principle established in Gen 9:5-6,
given to all of mankind before the Old Covenant, remains a
responsibility placed upon the governments of men!

But what about objections commonly raised whenever the issue is
discussed?]

IV. COMMON OBJECTIONS TO CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

A. THE BIBLE SAYS "THOU SHALT NOT KILL"!
1. The word "kill" is best translated "murder"
a. Cf. Exo 20:13 (NKJV, NASV, NIV)
b. This command forbids killing with malice and premeditation
2. In the next two chapters, God prescribes the death penalty for
nine different crimes! - e.g., Exo 21:12-17
-- The command not to murder is directed toward individuals; one
must ignore the context and twist the Scriptures to apply it
to the issue of capital punishment!

B. THE BIBLE SAYS THAT GOD HAS NO PLEASURE IN THE DEATH OF THE
WICKED!
1. It is true that God says He has no pleasure in the death of
the wicked - Ezek 18:32
2. But consider the context of this statement:
a. The soul that sins shall die; one shall not bear the
iniquity of another - Ezek 18:4
b. Certain sins makes one worthy of death - Ezek 18:10-13
c. God encourages the wicked to repent and do what is right
- Ezek 18:21-23
d. But even the righteous person who begins to do wickedness
shall die if they do not repent! - Ezek 18:24
-- The whole thrust of the passage is this: repent before it
is too late; God may have no pleasure in the death of the
wicked, but that doesn't prevent Him from carrying it out!
(cf. God's death penalty on 24,000 in the plains of Moab
- Num 25:1-13)

C. CAPITAL PUNISHMENT DOESN'T WORK, IT DOESN'T DETER CRIME!
1. This is true to a certain extent, when it is not carried out
quickly - cf. Ecc 8:11
a. But it does prevent the person executed from ever killing
again!
b. Its ineffectiveness in preventing crime by others is an
argument against our system of administering capital
punishment, not the idea of the death penalty itself
2. "Determent" is not the only purpose, there is also the issue
of "justice"
a. Justice demands that the punishment fits the crime
b. As God explained when He proscribed the need for capital
punishment: "For in the image of God He made man" - Gen 9:6
c. Some crimes are so heinous, any punishment less than death
is not justice!

D. INNOCENT PEOPLE ARE SOMETIMES PUT TO DEATH!
1. This can happen...
a. But again this an argument that pertains to a system in
which capital punishment is administered
b. It not an argument against the idea of capital punishment
itself
2. In the Old Testament...
a. Capital punishment could not be applied unless the crime
was seen by two or more witnesses - cf. Deu 17:6
b. If a single witness made an accusation that proved false,
it could fall back on him! - cf. Deu 19:15-21
3. Personally, I prefer to seeing the death penalty limited to
certain cases...
a. In which there are two or more eyewitnesses, and there is
no doubt
b. Where the conviction is not dependent upon laboratory
evidence
-- Where there are no eyewitnesses, then perhaps the maximum
penalty should be life in prison (in case the laboratory
evidence is later proved faulty)

CONCLUSION

1. Does God approve of capital punishment? We have seen...
a. That God gave mankind the responsibility of carrying it out after
the flood
b. God's own illustration of justice in the government He gave to
Israel
c. How Christians today are to acknowledge the right and
responsibility given by God to governments to be His ministers in
avenging wrath on the evildoers

2. Certainly any civilized nation abhors violence and bloodshed; but
civilization cannot exist...
a. With violence and corruption running rampant
b. When government fails to administer justice with punishment that
fits the crime

3. How does God view governments that fail to carry out their
responsibility to execute wrath to the evildoer?
a. As with anything that takes away justice: woe! - Isa 5:20-23
b. As with anyone who fails to fulfill their responsibility: cursed!
- Jer 48:10

Many may refuse to accept what the Bible has to say about capital
punishment. But let those who profess to be Christians and accept the
Bible as inspired acknowledge that capital punishment is ordained of
God!
 
2004-12-28 07:43:05 AM
Say you live in San Fran. You accidentally kill someone. You flee to Oakland. Knowing that there was a guy in San Fran waiting for you to come back so that he could legally kill you, as long as the mayor was still around, would you go back?

Yes, there are some politics involved. But this was more to preserve innocent life as well as weed out the guilty. Back then, you didn't have several last-minute presidential pardons that released murderers, cheats, and rapists onto the streets.
 
2004-12-28 07:44:07 AM
Lethrup

"I'm beyond thinking that different translations can be "externally" consistent. In other words, I don't think they could all match up with each other. But two Christians following two different translations, would clearly have different interpretions of the SAME PASSAGE. Is there a "more holy" translation? One seen as "better" than the rest? How does the church reconcile this? "

Yes some translations are better than others. For example, the KJV was written four hundred years ago and had 9 bas texts that it was translated from. Since that time ~5000 more ancient text have been found and english has changed. That is what led to the NKJV which is a significantly better translation of the bible.
 
2004-12-28 07:48:00 AM
I dunno... my objection to the death penalty isn't from some "thou shalt not kill" mentality... I'm very much of the "eye for an eye" school. However, the American court system is so muddled and incompetent that innocent people are frequently incarcerated and sometimes put to death. The death of 100 guilty people doesn't make up for that one innocent life, IMO.
 
2004-12-28 07:51:54 AM
Lethrup:
Kill and Murder have been interchangeable in English written text, most often in recent times, due to the translator seeing a word in the original language and reading with his own slant. A certain faith *coughCatholiccough* has often been the cause of this. Not that they are worshipping the wrong God, but some of their methods are a little misguided.

When a priest preaches to the masses that you shall not kill, he's leaving out the part that says you won't be drawn and quartered if it's an accident. This part of the message is lost on many people, who begin to believe that any death is wrong regardless. Thus you have a mistranslation reading "kill" instead of "murder", as well as people trying to stop murderers from recieving the death penalty because "death is wrong".

Does this answer your question?
 
2004-12-28 08:09:31 AM
12inpianist

An interesting semantic point. I think we agree that there is a difference between "kill" and "murder," regardless of modern usage. As I said before, I am a non-believer, but your textual reference has taught me something about the Bible that I did not know. Cheers.

I continue to object to the death penalty on a secular level, however, because of the fallability of the court system and the ever-present possibility that innocent people could be put to death.

Zurel_Darrillian

The KJV may indeed, as you say, be one of the worst translations, but it is certainly, and incontrovertably, the most beautiful.
 
2004-12-28 08:20:29 AM
Lethrup

There are a few other messages that are often the subject of misinterpretation. (Can you pronounce misinterpretation? Nice try.) One is that God "Hates queers/baby killers/pick one. I was brought up to believe that all people should be equally loved, but. Love the sinner, not the sin.

As you are a secularist, I would like to know how you judge right from wrong. What set of rules do you abide by, if any?
 
2004-12-28 08:24:01 AM
Your mom goes to college.
 
2004-12-28 08:58:10 AM
12inpianist

As you are a secularist, I would like to know how you judge right from wrong. What set of rules do you abide by, if any?

This is a common misconception of secularists - that because we don't believe in God we have no concept of right and wrong.

From "Reflections on Ethics:"

By the Secular idea of right we mean that conduct which is beneficial both to the individual and to the community -- conduct that is in agreement with an enlightened conception of human duty...The Secular notion of right and wrong is based upon reason and experience, which are the surest guides known to man.

To say I do not believe in God does not imply that I do not believe in abstractions larger than myself. Communities, governments, and nations are all examples of abstractions I acknowledge and support. The doctrine I subscribe to is one termed "secular humanism." I do good with no expectation of rewards or punishments after death.

You can read more about secular humanists on their website, www.secularhumanism.org
 
2004-12-28 08:58:36 AM
"She used a similar ploy after lopping off one of her brother-in-law's toes to get more money"
must be a nihilist..
 
2004-12-28 09:06:48 AM
MODS? Can we please delete the whole capital punishment / religion debate? It's really a waste of time, and these people's opinions smell awfully similar to something I left in the loo this morning.
 
2004-12-28 09:35:30 AM
Hanging seems so.....Gaijin. Why don't they lop off her head with a Samurai sword like they did to American GI's in Leyte gulf in WW2?
 
2004-12-28 09:56:08 AM
12inpianist
Where does it say that being "queer" is a sin? I don't recall "Thou shalt not be a homo"
not that it's a choice anyway


lumping in "queers" with baby killers is grade-A asshattery

/thread jack
 
2004-12-28 10:23:45 AM
I'm rather surprised this made the papers to begin with. From what little I know about the Japanese justice system, they tend to keep capital punishment cases hush-hush (possibly out of respect for the relatives of the executed?)
 
2004-12-28 10:48:50 AM
Shadrach

Apparently you missed the misinterpretation part. I didn't say that God hates queers. Some people do, though.

Since there are complaints about this "waste of time" discussion about religion, I'll just post my favorite Bible linke and let you look up homosexuality for yourself.
Bible link here

If you don't like religion, or don't like my link, DON'T CLICK IT! You know who you are.
 
2004-12-28 11:38:11 AM
When she screamed out at you in anger, she did so with a fierceness that would rival any of the toughest yakuza.

Oh man, that line had me laughing so hard I almost started crying. Rival any of the toughest yakuza hahahaha...

/still laughing
 
daz
2004-12-28 11:48:43 AM
Tentacles?

Octopussoi?



In case the image doesn't work:
http://www.comcentral.com/images/tvshows/drawntogether/102a.jpg
 
daz
2004-12-28 11:54:38 AM
For those dragging out the bible to justify or not justify capital punishment, whenever you start getting legalistic about Christianity (Judaism is all about legalism), you've missed the whole point entirely.

Whenever you start using the bible to justify actions that are questionable, you've probably already missed the boat and you're just trying to rationalize yourself into a sin.

It seems pretty clear to me that Christ wouldn't have intended for us to be judge, jury, and executioner. That decision is far too serious to be executed by severely flawed and conflicted humans like ourselves.

Christ would've wanted us to try to show the person the light. Show him/her why their evil is evil and what they can do to put their lives back on the right track.

Granted, some people are not rehabilitatable (is that even a word?), but I don't see how we can justify killing someone now when time and the holy spirit may change the person from within.

In summary, I think it's hasty and wrong to write someone off for all eternity. It's not our place to judge someone with such finality like that.
 
2004-12-28 11:57:16 AM
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
/Satans greatest trick is convincing man he does not exist
 
Displayed 50 of 58 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report