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.

(AP)   Apparently sometime in the past ten years the NYPD added anti-aircraft missiles to its arsenal   (hosted.ap.org) divider line 193
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

14134 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Sep 2011 at 5:30 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



193 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-09-26 08:21:21 AM

Sid_6.7: stolenlogin: or they could just scrabble some F-16's. I assure you they can do that much quicker than they can get a drone in the air

They could probably loiter drones in the airspace for a long time for the cost of keeping F-16's ready to scramble on the ground.


The big issue is every so often the drone's go unresponsive and they have to send a jet up to shoot them down. I've heard a couple USAF pilots piss and moan about the only thing they shot in Afghanistan were Predators that blue screened. The drones would be cheaper, but the general populace would freak out when we had to send someone up to splash the defective ones.
 
2011-09-26 08:21:35 AM

Harry Freakstorm: Any NIKE sites left around Manhattan?


Nah, those factories all went overseas.
 
2011-09-26 08:21:41 AM

TommyymmoT: Had I had advance knowledge of 9/11, and had a ground to air missile, I wouldn't be known as the hero who saved all those people at the World Trade Center.

I would be remembered as that asshole who shot down that plane, and killed all those people.


People would wonder how you could claim to know in advance that those planes were going to be crashed into WTC.
 
2011-09-26 08:22:09 AM

ronaprhys: Magorn: I'm reasonably certain that the NYPD using a SAM to take down a plane, without getting authorization from the Feds would itself be an illegal act of terrorism

Probably not. I'd say they're allowed to use deadly force to prevent what they feel to be a crime (especially when the life and/or limbs of bystanders are at risk). This is a logical extension of that.

I'm not saying I necessarily support this, just pointing out that it's not that much different than shooting at a car trying to run a cop/civilian down, etc.


Which is interesting when one considers the US military has to get authorization from the freaking President to do the same thing in the same situation.
 
2011-09-26 08:24:07 AM

SharkTrager: NewportBarGuy: Also... "take down a plane" could also refer to a traditional takeover of an airplane on the tarmac that is held hostage. I'm assuming this is what he will say to clarify this. Or, we're now giving AA to police departments and that should terrify everyone.

I saw the interview. He meant shooting down a plane.

Our police have become a virtual branch of the military. What a convenient way to get around the Constitutional prohibition of using the military against the populous.


You have to stop thinking logically and catching on to the grand idea. That's how you end up on lists; and if history has taught you anything, you don't want to be...on a government compiled list.
 
2011-09-26 08:24:59 AM

6655321: Reminds me of the actions of Idi Amin and Hitler. As long as a government was abusively controlling its own citizens, the rest of the world did not concern themselves.


All right, everybody, this signaled the end of the serious portion of this thread. Everyone head home, it's going to be all nonsense and 4chan-lite trolls from here.
 
2011-09-26 08:30:03 AM

dittybopper: In the US, the homicide rate is about 6.1 per 100,000 overall. If you just include "European Americans", who by the way are the most likely to legally own guns, the rate is actually just 2.7 per 100,000


Why don't you quit tip-toeing around and say what you really mean: "it's the blacks."

I'm not sure what that has to do with a commissioner of a civilian police department making terroristic threats, though.
 
2011-09-26 08:34:39 AM
It is more than likely that NYC does not possess anti-aircraft missiles. Those weapons are under strict government arms controls and are never to be released to municipal authorities. IF, and that is a big IF they did, those weapons would remain in possession and under the protection and control of a military unit.

It is more feasible that the city possesses unmanned aerial drones capable of either being kinetically directed to take down an aircraft (driven into the aircraft itself) or loaded with conventional ground explosives that can be directed to explode into an errant airliner. It is also feasible that there are specialized NYC Police helicopters that can be loaded with heavy caliber weaponry capable of firing on low flying planes.
 
2011-09-26 08:35:28 AM
New York City is just prepping for the eventual and inevitable Chinese invasion.
 
2011-09-26 08:37:02 AM

SharkTrager: Which is interesting when one considers the US military has to get authorization from the freaking President to do the same thing in the same situation.


Technically, that's because there's a Constitutional prohibition against using the military against civilians. The police are there to stop crime, so this could be considered one of their normal duties.

Big picture, though - I'm not happy with this. I believe there's an underlying philosophy inherent to the Constitution. One that, by design, makes it harder on the police and government to do things. Warrants, laws restricting actions, privacy rights, trial by jury, innocent until proven guilty, etc. All of these things give the civilian populace the benefit of the doubt and force the police to work harder. This is a Very Good Thing as, when enforced, it limits and prevents the police or the government from arbitrarily restricting and violating rights.

Considering the chance of a terrorist attack via planes is exceedingly small, this is excessive.
 
2011-09-26 08:38:46 AM

Amos Quito: From your link:

upload.wikimedia.org

"A Spitfire using its wingtip to "topple" a V-1 flying bomb"


Necessity is the mother.


That is all kinds of badass.
 
2011-09-26 08:40:15 AM

Scorpio Rex: dittybopper: In the US, the homicide rate is about 6.1 per 100,000 overall. If you just include "European Americans", who by the way are the most likely to legally own guns, the rate is actually just 2.7 per 100,000

Why don't you quit tip-toeing around and say what you really mean: "it's the blacks."

I'm not sure what that has to do with a commissioner of a civilian police department making terroristic threats, though.


I think what he's saying is that if you're white you don't have to worry as much.
 
2011-09-26 08:48:15 AM

NewportBarGuy: Also... "take down a plane" could also refer to a traditional takeover of an airplane on the tarmac that is held hostage. I'm assuming this is what he will say to clarify this. Or, we're now giving AA to police departments and that should terrify everyone.


It took them 41 shots to take down Amadou Diallo. I wonder how many stingers it would take them to bring down an airliner?
 
2011-09-26 08:49:15 AM
It's just a .50 cal M2 they have that can be building/helicopter mounted. Pic of a M2 (new window)

Problem is, unless they get a crapload of warning, that's not going to be very useful.
 
2011-09-26 08:54:09 AM

Charlie Freak: Scorpio Rex: dittybopper: In the US, the homicide rate is about 6.1 per 100,000 overall. If you just include "European Americans", who by the way are the most likely to legally own guns, the rate is actually just 2.7 per 100,000

Why don't you quit tip-toeing around and say what you really mean: "it's the blacks."

I'm not sure what that has to do with a commissioner of a civilian police department making terroristic threats, though.

I think what he's saying is that if you're white you don't have to worry as much.


How are mixed-race incidents accounted?
 
2011-09-26 08:55:03 AM

Handsome Jack Manitoba: I'd guess they must have RPGs, and think they can take down a plane with those...


You'd have to be one hell of shot to knock down a fast moving plane with an RPG.
 
2011-09-26 08:57:14 AM

BurnShrike: MickeyRaptor: According to MSNBC, the NYPD also has "operatives" stationed in Abu Dhabi, Amman, Montreal, Toronto, Singapore, Paris, and other cities.

Get those farkers out of my country! We have enough trouble with our own cops, let alone foreign ones that don't have to answer to our public (not that it stops the RCMP or anything)


The "operatives" in question are usually just analysts and work in the open with full support of the local law enforcement community. Usually liaisons that feed possible intel reports back to NYC.

For the real dirty work, Bloomberg likes to hire contractors (i.e. private investigators) like he did in Virginia to try and prove they could violate gun purchasing laws. They were caught red-handed.
 
2011-09-26 08:58:09 AM

jjorsett: NewportBarGuy: Also... "take down a plane" could also refer to a traditional takeover of an airplane on the tarmac that is held hostage. I'm assuming this is what he will say to clarify this. Or, we're now giving AA to police departments and that should terrify everyone.

It took them 41 shots to take down Amadou Diallo. I wonder how many stingers it would take them to bring down an airliner?


Ohhhh, now that's good! You win for today, Sir! Take the day off and go get a beer.
 
2011-09-26 09:05:07 AM
I wish the persons "in charge" would not go around demonstrating their incredible stupidity and worrysome lack of any leadership skills whatsoever.
I need the illusion of competence "in charge" and these fools keep speaking.

/maybe is just me
 
2011-09-26 09:05:57 AM
Yes, the fearsome Fuggeddaboudit AA system, often yoused in conjunction with Whaddayoulookinat laser-guided missiles.
 
2011-09-26 09:08:46 AM

Scorpio Rex: dittybopper: In the US, the homicide rate is about 6.1 per 100,000 overall. If you just include "European Americans", who by the way are the most likely to legally own guns, the rate is actually just 2.7 per 100,000

Why don't you quit tip-toeing around and say what you really mean: "it's the blacks."


Because I'm comparing like to like, Europeans to the descendants of Europeans, to show that access to legal guns, or lack thereof, doesn't significantly contribute the homicide rate.

Since you brought it up, however, yes, full half of the homicides in the US are due to violence in the black community, but again, it isn't access to guns: In theory, they have the same legal access as whites in the US do*, yet they end up being victims of homicide at a much higher rate.

Some people think that poverty is the reason, but that's not true. We can control for the effects of poverty by dividing the number of homicides in both the black and white communities by the number of people in the lowest economic strata in both those communities. In the United States, there are more than twice as many whites living in the lowest poverty level (50% or lower than the official poverty level) than blacks (10.120 million vs. 4.215 million) Source: US Census Bureau Poverty Tables.

In 2007, there were 5,512 white non-Hispanic homicide victims, and 8,746 black non-Hispanic homicide victims. Source: CDC WISQARS Injury Mortality Report

If you do the math, that's (5512/10120000)*100000 = 54.46 white homicides per 100,000 very poor whites, and (8746/4215000)*100000 = 207.49 black homicides per 100,000 very poor blacks.

In other words, even controlling for poverty, the homicide rate in the black community is roughly 4 times higher.

You can't blame a difference in where they live, either: Both poor blacks and poor whites overwhelmingly live in urban areas. I believe the rates are 92% and 86% respectively, IIRC.

So why the difference? Melanin content?

Of course not. Personally, I think it's cultural. You learn your values from your parents, but if you don't have a strong family, the transmission of those values can break down, and we've seen that happen over the last 50 years in the black community. With perverse incentives for women to have children early and to stay unmarried, and to keep having children, and zero incentive for fathers to marry and to participate in the rearing of their children, this breaks down the traditionally strong black family structure. Something like 2/3rds to 3/4ths of black children are born out of wedlock. That's *GOT* to mess up the transmission of cultural values and norms against violence. I actually think that LBJ's "Great Society" programs have killed more people than they ever saved.

There isn't an easy answer to that problem. I know gun control certainly isn't going to work: It didn't work for the decades that handguns were completely banned in DC and Chicago. We do need to find an answer, though. How many doctors, artists, scientists, inventors, and leaders never get the chance to fulfill their destinies and help all of mankind simply because they were born black and they ended up on the wrong side of the law, or a gun, simply because of where they were born? How would Barack Obama's life turned out had be been born to a single black woman in Compton or Harlem, and not had the advantages of a semi-privileged upbringing?

I'm not sure what that has to do with a commissioner of a civilian police department making terroristic threats, though.

It's only tangentially related, but it's to stave off the "Hey, us suave and urbane Europeans are smarter/better/civilizier than you 'Merkins" comments that tend to, and already have, crop up in threads like this.

*This isn't *QUITE* correct: The last vestige of the old Jim Crow laws are the laws in cities with large black populations that make it very tough to own a gun, especially if you are very poor. They are written to be facially race neutral, but they overwhelmingly effect blacks more than whites.
 
2011-09-26 09:08:47 AM
If George W. Bush could launch our complete nuclear arsenal this concern about the NYPD having AA capability seems positively quaint.
 
2011-09-26 09:08:58 AM
So instead of having terrorists fly a plane into a building, the NYPD is gonna shoot down the plane, and have it crash into some buildings.


Brilliant.
 
2011-09-26 09:10:28 AM

zedster: Amos Quito: Relatively Obscure: Spike strips attached to balloons.


That or the airborne "pit maneuver"

the brits kind of did that to V1s in WWII Link (new window)

//I knight myself sir buzz killington


That, sir...is farking AWESOME.

They needs to remake COD1 and make this an additional air assault level.
 
2011-09-26 09:12:21 AM

AHumbleSoldier: It is more than likely that NYC does not possess anti-aircraft missiles. Those weapons are under strict government arms controls and are never to be released to municipal authorities. IF, and that is a big IF they did, those weapons would remain in possession and under the protection and control of a military unit.


Bloomberg has been known to violate federal laws, and in fact had to be slapped down by the federal government for doing just that outside of his legal jurisdiction. It wouldn't surprise me to learn they might have a MANPAD or two.
 
2011-09-26 09:12:55 AM
Shooting down a plane that is already flying over the city isn't really much of a solution, unless your goal is to spread the damage randomly.
 
2011-09-26 09:15:17 AM
eas81 Quote 2011-09-26 07:26:34 AM
labman: Fly a police helicopter into it?

Came to say this also a small plane as well. Also Fark Fails me really no one rememebers this come on people we have the technology:


The hardware, weaponry and surveillance systems depicted in this film are
real and in use in the United States today.
 
2011-09-26 09:16:47 AM

SirEattonHogg: eas81 Quote 2011-09-26 07:26:34 AM
labman: Fly a police helicopter into it?

Came to say this also a small plane as well. Also Fark Fails me really no one rememebers this come on people we have the technology:

The hardware, weaponry and surveillance systems depicted in this film are
real and in use in the United States today.


...except, of course, for "whisper mode".
 
2011-09-26 09:17:57 AM

raggtopp: zedster: Amos Quito: Relatively Obscure: Spike strips attached to balloons.


That or the airborne "pit maneuver"

the brits kind of did that to V1s in WWII Link (new window)

//I knight myself sir buzz killington

That, sir...is farking AWESOME.

They needs to remake COD1 and make this an additional air assault level.


Riiight. Formation flying sells.

If they ported something like that to a video game, it'd involve the V1 making defense maneuvers and it'd have to have a tail cannon, otherwise you'd all fall asleep.
 
2011-09-26 09:19:40 AM
Sid_6.7
They tried pigeons, but they aren't large enough. So they tried two pigeons taped together. They couldn't fly fast enough. So geese it is.


Swallows, man, Swallows. They're the avian equivalent of a C-17.
 
2011-09-26 09:21:10 AM

dittybopper: SirEattonHogg: eas81 Quote 2011-09-26 07:26:34 AM
labman: Fly a police helicopter into it?

Came to say this also a small plane as well. Also Fark Fails me really no one rememebers this come on people we have the technology:

The hardware, weaponry and surveillance systems depicted in this film are
real and in use in the United States today.

...except, of course, for "whisper mode".


You leave Blue Thunder alone, there are damsels in partial undress to spy on!
 
2011-09-26 09:21:47 AM

Sid_6.7: The real problem is that people love complaining. If you don't have a police force equipped to take down a suspect who has body armor and an assault rifle (new window), while all they have are handguns and shotguns, then they're incompetent and stupid.


Sure, it takes 50-100 high-powered rifles and an APC to take down a guy wearing kevlar, right? Right?
 
2011-09-26 09:22:07 AM
So when the US splinters into nations states NYC will be able to defend itself from the things from New Jersey
 
2011-09-26 09:25:09 AM

JagYui: To be fair, there are such things as MANPADs (not a male equivalent to a feminine hygiene product). So they could have some SA-7's bought on the black market or something.


Ignoring the whole absurdity of the NYPD buying missiles on the black market, you might want to google the topic of MANPADs v airliners. Cliff notes version - a few decades of experience has shown that unless the shooter gets very lucky, you aren't going to bring one down with a warhead that small. Ditto for gun-based systems. Unless you're using a cannon with a high rate of fire (like the phalanx system), you aren't going to deliver enough destructive power to stop the target - not to mention you've got to actually hit it. Even good old Ma Deuce isn't going to bring down an airliner before it hits its target.

CeroX: If i remember correctly, wasn't there an article here on fark a while back about NY and LA getting reaper drones, and everyone flipping out about them spying on citizens?

Seems to me an MQ-9 might have the capability to bring down an airliner. It's not like an airliner has the dexterity of an f-16 or anything... I'm sure the "pilots" could get a missile lock on a 747...


No, but it does have roughly a 2:1 speed advantage. Kinda hard to make an interception when you can't run the target down from behind. All you've got is one shot at something close to a head-on pass.

The police commissioner's talking out his arse, and/or he's totally ignorant about what it would take to down an airliner.

It's possible he's talking about a small general aviation plane, in which case he doesn't have any capability that a police force equipped with a helicopter and a few automatic weapons doesn't also possess.

Oh, before I leave:

dittybopper: Conclusion: It isn't the guns, it's the culture. You learn your values from your parents, who learned their values from their parents, and so on back into time. Is it any wonder that the descendants of people from region X have a similar homicide rate to those who still live in region X


You're 100% right, but you posted facts that don't fit the proper political agenda so:

www.gifbin.com
 
2011-09-26 09:27:36 AM

JustGetItRight: dittybopper: Conclusion: It isn't the guns, it's the culture. You learn your values from your parents, who learned their values from their parents, and so on back into time. Is it any wonder that the descendants of people from region X have a similar homicide rate to those who still live in region X

You're 100% right, but you posted facts that don't fit the proper political agenda so:

www.gifbin.com


I've been called worse, by people better than you ;-)
 
2011-09-26 09:28:52 AM

DeathByGeekSquad: dittybopper: SirEattonHogg: eas81 Quote 2011-09-26 07:26:34 AM
labman: Fly a police helicopter into it?

Came to say this also a small plane as well. Also Fark Fails me really no one rememebers this come on people we have the technology:

The hardware, weaponry and surveillance systems depicted in this film are
real and in use in the United States today.

...except, of course, for "whisper mode".

You leave Blue Thunder alone, there are damsels in partial undress to spy on!


Pity I just took the last bok choi.
 
2011-09-26 09:31:39 AM

Charlie Freak: raggtopp: zedster: Amos Quito: Relatively Obscure: Spike strips attached to balloons.


That or the airborne "pit maneuver"

the brits kind of did that to V1s in WWII Link (new window)

//I knight myself sir buzz killington

That, sir...is farking AWESOME.

They needs to remake COD1 and make this an additional air assault level.

Riiight. Formation flying sells.

If they ported something like that to a video game, it'd involve the V1 making defense maneuvers and it'd have to have a tail cannon, otherwise you'd all fall asleep.


There could easily be a mission involving flying your plane from one V-1 to next.

You're thinking too simple if you have to give the V-1 AI and guns. You focus on the "6 inchs below the V-1 wingtip" part.

You don't have to actually FLY a plane because it's COD so it would all be done through QTEs anyway.
 
2011-09-26 09:39:33 AM
I saw that story and shook my head at the LEO's carrying automatic weapons. Way to go Osama. That used to be the kind of thing you only saw on your stompling grounds, not ours. Kudos to you, sir, if posthumously.
 
2011-09-26 09:49:45 AM

miss diminutive: Maybe they're going to install some giant mirrors on skyscraper rooftops to make some kind of city-wide, Archimedes heat ray?

Planes don't fly at night, right?


Kefka is not amused
 
2011-09-26 09:52:51 AM
So lemme get this straight.

Arizona wants to help control the borders, since the feds can't or won't do it.
Feds get all sandy vag about it and sue to make sure the law isn't enforced.

NYC wants to knock airliners out of the air, in case feds forget to.
Feds don't see that as usurping their primary reason for being, go all Alphonse and Gaston and furnish the weapons.

Difference? Arizona has a Republican governor, so gets sued.
NYC had a Democratic Mayor, so gets help.
 
2011-09-26 09:55:21 AM

ha-ha-guy: Sid_6.7: stolenlogin: or they could just scrabble some F-16's. I assure you they can do that much quicker than they can get a drone in the air

They could probably loiter drones in the airspace for a long time for the cost of keeping F-16's ready to scramble on the ground.

The big issue is every so often the drone's go unresponsive and they have to send a jet up to shoot them down. I've heard a couple USAF pilots piss and moan about the only thing they shot in Afghanistan were Predators that blue screened. The drones would be cheaper, but the general populace would freak out when we had to send someone up to splash the defective ones.


Hmph... they fly drones down here in Louisiana all the time. The national guard and the state police work together in using them. For a while they were using some sort of drones over the I-10 Atchafalaya bridge to clock speeders (the 14th longest bridge in the world); well that is what they claimed but they made a lot of pot bust during that time period, I think they were using thermal imagining to find the drug runners. I don't see why the NYPD and the New York National guard may not have a deal where they have access to a predator drone armed to take down a plane; I don't see why everyone is assuming the guy is referring to anti aircraft missiles.
 
2011-09-26 10:01:34 AM

NewportBarGuy: Also... "take down a plane" could also refer to a traditional takeover of an airplane on the tarmac that is held hostage. I'm assuming this is what he will say to clarify this. Or, we're now giving AA to police departments and that should terrify everyone.


Especially since everyone flies planes!


/ ;)
 
2011-09-26 10:02:17 AM

NewportBarGuy: $20 says he thinks he can do it with a .50 cal sniper rifle.


I'm not gonna front the $20, but in other articles it says inside sources and saying exactly that. They mount a Barrett .50 on a helicopter and that's their AA weapon.

Of course I'm laughing a bit inside on the prospects of a sniper shooting down a full speed jetliner with a sniper rifle. Not to mention how much *more* damage to the city and people would happen if said jetliner was downed onto a city neighborhood.
 
2011-09-26 10:05:24 AM
Apparently sometime in the past ten years the NYPD added anti-aircraft missiles to its arsenal


Well, either that, or they now empoly Ian McKellen.
 
2011-09-26 10:14:58 AM

Sid_6.7: HAMMERTOE: In the wake of 9-11, who have they treated like the enemy? A TSA agent pretty much has to overtly and egregiously feel up a toddler before attention is given to the gross overreaction of the system. Meanwhile, those who make the rules create special exemptions for their selves.

The real problem is that people love complaining. If you don't have a police force equipped to take down a suspect who has body armor and an assault rifle (new window), while all they have are handguns and shotguns, then they're incompetent and stupid.

If they invest in the required tools, training, etc. to be able to respond to extreme threats, then suddenly they're an evil military force.

And people will whine and biatch and moan either way. Even if you go out of your way to try and find a happy medium, people will complain.


False dichotomy is false. In the US the police have gone from one extreme to another.

The LA shootout would have ended quickly had officers been issued slugs for their shotguns (Wouldn't have penetrated the kevlar, but would have killed via blunt force trauma.) , a mini-14, or even a bolt action 223 rifle would have done the job. After that event the transition from shotguns to semi-auto 223 rifle's was reasonable. Handing out anti-aircraft weaponry, automatic weapons, and APC's to the police is not reasonable.

If someone is being a jerk in an airplane the only things the cops should do is get their N-number, follow them, and arrest them when they land as was done for decades.
 
2011-09-26 10:17:58 AM

AHumbleSoldier: It is more than likely that NYC does not possess anti-aircraft missiles. Those weapons are under strict government arms controls and are never to be released to municipal authorities. IF, and that is a big IF they did, those weapons would remain in possession and under the protection and control of a military unit.

It is more feasible that the city possesses unmanned aerial drones capable of either being kinetically directed to take down an aircraft (driven into the aircraft itself) or loaded with conventional ground explosives that can be directed to explode into an errant airliner. It is also feasible that there are specialized NYC Police helicopters that can be loaded with heavy caliber weaponry capable of firing on low flying planes.


Either later options would likely require the military being in close control as to prevent a panicked reaction and accidental shoot down. The extra couple fo layers of command and control that slows things down is actually a benifit in this situation.
 
2011-09-26 10:21:58 AM
From the documentary Men in Black, I understand NYPD may have anti-intergalactic spaceship weaponry.
 
2011-09-26 10:24:33 AM
These are not snowblowers.

i26.photobucket.com
 
2011-09-26 10:25:40 AM

Uncle Wiggly: Well, NYFD has those little boats with those little squirter things.


Wanna know how I know you don't live anywhere near NY?
 
2011-09-26 10:33:28 AM

SharkTrager: NewportBarGuy: Also... "take down a plane" could also refer to a traditional takeover of an airplane on the tarmac that is held hostage. I'm assuming this is what he will say to clarify this. Or, we're now giving AA to police departments and that should terrify everyone.

I saw the interview. He meant shooting down a plane.

Our police have become a virtual branch of the military. What a convenient way to get around the Constitutional prohibition of using the military against the populous.


The Posse Comitatus Act is a law, not a constitutional prohibition.
 
Displayed 50 of 193 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report