|
OT assault weapons ban coming to an end
If you get a chance, tune into Nightline tonight.
TONIGHT'S FOCUS: For 10 years, it has been illegal in this country to manufacture or distribute some of the most deadly semi-automatic guns in the world. The majority of the public supports this ban and at least by some measures, gun violence has abated. So why are most of the Congress, the President, and the Democratic contender for the White House all looking the other way while this law is set to expire next week, returning these assault weapons to the streets? In 1994, Congress passed, and President Clinton signed the assault weapons ban, effectively making 19 different types of semiautomatic firearms and high-capacity magazines illegal. Of course, this wasn't a complete ban - guns already on the market were exempted and an additional 650 types of semiautomatic weapons commonly used for self-defense, hunting and target practice were allowed. Critics and supporters of the ban agreed that the law had flaws. But now, 10 years later, polls show most Americans support the law. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On 8 Sep 2004 12:38:31 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: some of the most deadly semi-automatic guns in the world Guess nobody ever told you how the Congress critters' staff decided how to define an "assault weapon." Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I copied in my post. I think you should send them an email immediately. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On 8 Sep 2004 15:23:58 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I copied in my post. Why am I not surprised? I don't know... perhaps you're just stupid? Or, perhaps you're not interested in listening to the issues. You decided that I was the one who made this up, but when you found out it was ABC, you attack them instead as left wing I suppose. Go back to sleep Mr. Poodle, your bark is much less than your yap. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... If you get a chance, tune into Nightline tonight. TONIGHT'S FOCUS: For 10 years, it has been illegal in this country to manufacture or distribute some of the most deadly semi-automatic guns in the world. ...... The fact of the matter is that these rifles are no more "deadly" than an other gun. There only "flaw" (if you will) is that they look like the REAL Assault Rifles used by the military. They are intended for civilian target shooters who must (by the rules) use guns that look like current military rifles to compete in military matches. Check the stat's - how many murders are committed with them? In 1994, Congress passed, and President Clinton signed the assault weapons ban, .... Yes and anticipating that the price of these guns would more than tripple a federally licensed gun dealer named David Koresh bought 100+ legal semi-auto receivers - the part BATF considers a gun - and an equal number of BATF approved kits to make these into heavy-barreled target rifles. BATF then FBI attacked and killed him and over 50 fellow Branch Dividians. Sometime later DC police arrested two men carrying illegal full-auto Uzi machine guns that had been illegally brought into the country after the ban. They were released and these illegal machine guns returned when it developed that they worked for Senator Ted Kennedy. .... Of course, this wasn't a complete ban - ........ Do you know the difference between a banned rifle and a legal target rifle? The banned rifle has a bayonet lug. How does that make it more deadly? But now, 10 years later, polls show most Americans support the law. Not in my neck of the woods. |
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote
Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I copied in my post. I think you should send them an email immediately. Weren't they the ones who got caught rigging Chevy PUs to explode? |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On 8 Sep 2004 17:03:00 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: You decided that I was the one who made this up, but when you found out it was ABC, you attack them instead as left wing I suppose. Really doesn't matter whether you made it up or some young ABC staffer made it up. It was a silly statement. Silly or not, it's a fact. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Vito wrote: "Jonathan Ganz" wrote Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I copied in my post. I think you should send them an email immediately. Weren't they the ones who got caught rigging Chevy PUs to explode? I think that was another network, but you never know. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 08:17:51 -0400, "Vito" said: The fact of the matter is that these rifles are no more "deadly" than an other gun. There only "flaw" (if you will) is that they look like the REAL Assault Rifles used by the military. You got it, Vito. The story, of which Jon is apparently ignorant, is that when the Congress critters' staffers were writing the definition of "assault weapon" their method was to go through a gun catalog and pick out features that made a weapon _look_ like a real assault rifle. Any weapon with those features was designated an "assault weapon" regardless of how it actually operated. Mr. Poodle is clearly the ignorant one. He thinks that it's ok to put more guns on the streets. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
|
In article ,
felton wrote: On 9 Sep 2004 12:51:59 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) wrote: In article , Vito wrote: "Jonathan Ganz" wrote Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I copied in my post. I think you should send them an email immediately. Weren't they the ones who got caught rigging Chevy PUs to explode? I think that was another network, but you never know. It was NBC's Dateline program that did the GM gas tank program. Well, there you have it ABC isn't credible. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On 9 Sep 2004 12:51:25 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: Silly or not, it's a fact. Which "it" are you talking about? The silly statement is that "assault weapons" as defined by the current law are "the most deadly semi-automatic guns in the world" Don't change the subject! :-) -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On 9 Sep 2004 12:53:30 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: Mr. Poodle is clearly the ignorant one. He thinks that it's ok to put more guns on the streets. You're smoking something again, Jonathan. I merely pointed out the foolishness of your "the most deadly semi-automatic guns in the world." Twernt mine dog breath. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message Mr. Poodle is clearly the ignorant one. He thinks that it's ok to put more guns on the streets. That's precisely what the so-called assault weapons ban did. Since it didn't exclude those guns already manufactured and/or imported, hundreds of thousands (probably millions) of semi-auto, paramilitary weapons were sold to people who figured such guns would be scarce on down the road. Just another example of governmental good intentions ****ing up and causing the exact opposite effect, which seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Max |
In article k.net,
Maxprop wrote: "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message Mr. Poodle is clearly the ignorant one. He thinks that it's ok to put more guns on the streets. That's precisely what the so-called assault weapons ban did. Since it didn't exclude those guns already manufactured and/or imported, hundreds of thousands (probably millions) of semi-auto, paramilitary weapons were sold to people who figured such guns would be scarce on down the road. Just another example of governmental good intentions ****ing up and causing the exact opposite effect, which seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Violent crime dropped under the Clinton administration. It's now on the rise again... thanks to Bu**** and company. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
Jonathan, Thanks for the information. I'm going out to stock up on some more
assault rifles. Will you be able to buy some in California? I'd recommend the H&K model 91 for some real firepower. Get at least a dozen 30 round magazines. Gilligan "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... If you get a chance, tune into Nightline tonight. TONIGHT'S FOCUS: For 10 years, it has been illegal in this country to manufacture or distribute some of the most deadly semi-automatic guns in the world. The majority of the public supports this ban and at least by some measures, gun violence has abated. So why are most of the Congress, the President, and the Democratic contender for the White House all looking the other way while this law is set to expire next week, returning these assault weapons to the streets? In 1994, Congress passed, and President Clinton signed the assault weapons ban, effectively making 19 different types of semiautomatic firearms and high-capacity magazines illegal. Of course, this wasn't a complete ban - guns already on the market were exempted and an additional 650 types of semiautomatic weapons commonly used for self-defense, hunting and target practice were allowed. Critics and supporters of the ban agreed that the law had flaws. But now, 10 years later, polls show most Americans support the law. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article . net,
Gilligan wrote: Jonathan, Thanks for the information. I'm going out to stock up on some more assault rifles. Will you be able to buy some in California? I'd recommend the H&K model 91 for some real firepower. Get at least a dozen 30 round magazines. No, but I'm not that far from Nevada... :-) -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
Good Advice Gilligan..... but no armory is complete without a .Barnet .50
cal. Good to see you back..... now all we need is Capt. Neal! CM "Gilligan" wrote in message ink.net... | Jonathan, Thanks for the information. I'm going out to stock up on some more | assault rifles. Will you be able to buy some in California? I'd recommend | the H&K model 91 for some real firepower. Get at least a dozen 30 round | magazines. | | Gilligan | | "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message | ... | If you get a chance, tune into Nightline tonight. | | TONIGHT'S FOCUS: For 10 years, it has been illegal in this country to | manufacture or distribute some of the most deadly semi-automatic guns | in the world. The majority of the public supports this ban and at | least by some measures, gun violence has abated. So why are most of | the Congress, the President, and the Democratic contender for the | White House all looking the other way while this law is set to expire | next week, returning these assault weapons to the streets? | | In 1994, Congress passed, and President Clinton signed the assault | weapons ban, effectively making 19 different types of semiautomatic | firearms and high-capacity magazines illegal. Of course, this wasn't a | complete ban - guns already on the market were exempted and an | additional 650 types of semiautomatic weapons commonly used for | self-defense, hunting and target practice were allowed. Critics and | supporters of the ban agreed that the law had flaws. But now, 10 years | later, polls show most Americans support the law. | | | -- | Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) | http://www.sailnow.com | "If there's no wind, row." | | | |
Gilligan wrote:
Jonathan, Thanks for the information. I'm going out to stock up on some more assault rifles. Will you be able to buy some in California? I'd recommend the H&K model 91 for some real firepower. Get at least a dozen 30 round magazines. That's a nice gun. I don't know why you'd need that many magazines though. At one point in my life I had an FN-FAL. Accurate, easier to clean than the H&K... a little clunky though. The real pick of the bunch IMHO is the H&R T-48. Hey Gilly what do you think of a stainless Ruger G-1 to carry on the tugboat? With a bayonet, of course! DSK |
I'm not familiar with the G-1 but I have a stainless Mini-14. The chamber is
oversized so it can fire that cheap steel cased Russian ammo no problem. My Contender won't chamber the Russian ammo, probably because of the laquered cases. Make sure along with guns you also have cigars and whiskey (single malt). The FN is a fine weapon. .308 ammo is expensive nowadays. As you know, I heartily approve of firearms on boats. How's your trawler doing? Have you gone on any long cruises? Do you tow a small daysailer behind? "DSK" wrote in message ... Gilligan wrote: Jonathan, Thanks for the information. I'm going out to stock up on some more assault rifles. Will you be able to buy some in California? I'd recommend the H&K model 91 for some real firepower. Get at least a dozen 30 round magazines. That's a nice gun. I don't know why you'd need that many magazines though. At one point in my life I had an FN-FAL. Accurate, easier to clean than the H&K... a little clunky though. The real pick of the bunch IMHO is the H&R T-48. Hey Gilly what do you think of a stainless Ruger G-1 to carry on the tugboat? With a bayonet, of course! DSK |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On 9 Sep 2004 15:26:06 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: Twernt mine dog breath. You quote it, you own it. So I guess Bush owns: "I don.t think you can win the war on terror. But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world." and also "we will win the war" the next day. Sounds like a flip flopper to me. What do you think Dave? -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
Gilligan wrote:
I'm not familiar with the G-1 but I have a stainless Mini-14. My understanding is that the G-1 is the same as the Mini-14 chambered for W.308, and possibly made in a couple of other 7mm rounds. Never seen one though. .... The (Mini-14's) chamber is oversized so it can fire that cheap steel cased Russian ammo no problem. My Contender won't chamber the Russian ammo, probably because of the laquered cases. I would think that an oversized chamber would have accuracy issues, as well as problems with feeding and erosion. Steel cased ammo sounds like bad news, isn't it a problem for the ejector as well? T/C makes some great weapons. If one shot will do the job, the Contender is probably the best. ... Make sure along with guns you also have cigars and whiskey (single malt). Whiskey, check. I like to carry a variety including some single malt. But cigars? Why? ... The FN is a fine weapon. .308 ammo is expensive nowadays. Less so if you handload. It's almost necessary, also a major time sink, but you can put together a much wider range of loads and tailor the propellant. At one time I was very fond of boat-tail rounds which are impossible to find in commercial loads. How's your trawler doing? Have you gone on any long cruises? Do you tow a small daysailer behind? Right now the trawler is CASREP'ed with a bad exhaust injection elbow... expected at around 2,000 hours which is right about where we are. I'll replace it with a stainless one, which should outlast everything else. The hardest part of the job is getting the exhaust hose off the outlet barb. Should be running fine by next weekend! When are you coming by? So far we've cruised from St Augustine up to NC, to the Chesapeake, to Charleston SC... that included a side trip up the Waccamaw R to Conway SC, which was very cool. We've also double or triple covered the Neuse, Trent, Pamlico, & Pungo Rivers, locally. Lots of cool places around, mostly very isolated & remote. Nyet on the small daysailer, so far. We pack a canoe, though. Here is the hull design for the sailing dinghy I'm building http://community.webshots.com/album/82561569ZSrzNA What do you think of the lines? The plan is to put an oversized cat rig on it, using the leftover old mainsail from the Hunter 19, or maybe one of my old Lightning mains. Should be fun! Regards Doug King |
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message Violent crime dropped under the Clinton administration. It's now on the rise again... thanks to Bu**** and company. I know, dammit. Look at all those hurricanes, thanks to Bush and company. Max |
"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message Good Advice Gilligan..... but no armory is complete without a .Barnet .50 cal. Jesus, Mooron--what are you anticipating?? Or is that a "hunting gun?" :-) Max |
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote
Mr. Poodle is clearly the ignorant one. He thinks that it's ok to put more guns on the streets. It's not only OK, it is better to have more guns on the streets so long as they are in the hands of competent law abiding citizens. Cities and states with the most restrictive anti-gun laws have the worst crime rates and vice versa. Meanwhile, states that passed versions of the Florida law allowing concealed carry saw a drop in crime. Remember, if there had been one armed person on each highjacked plane, 9/11 could never have happened and police would still have to get warrants to search our homes. |
"DSK" wrote in message At one point in my life I had an FN-FAL. Accurate, easier to clean than the H&K... The FN-FAL is the supreme paramilitary weapon. High quality, accuracy, as you pointed out, and very collectable. You should have hung onto it. Max |
"DSK" wrote in message Right now the trawler is CASREP'ed with a bad exhaust injection elbow... Guess I missed something--what trawler did you acquire, Doug? Max |
Maxprop wrote:
The FN-FAL is the supreme paramilitary weapon. ??? Actually, the select-fire (ie can be fully auto) version is the standard issue infantry arm for many many countries. Mine was a Spanish made single fire one... a darn nice rifle but not particularly valuable. People looked at me funny when I went deer hunting with it. ... High quality, accuracy, as you pointed out, and very collectable. You should have hung onto it. You're right there, but then I've never liked to accumulate a mountain of possessions... until I got married, I moved a lot. DSK |
Maxprop wrote:
Guess I missed something--what trawler did you acquire, Doug? This one http://community.webshots.com/photo/...76569411zLxjAQ We still have the Johnson 18, which I will probably never sell. DSK |
So, what you're saying is that either Fox is right all the time or that
ABC (Rather is on another network) are dishonest and biases. I think I'll go with ABC over Fox. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On 8 Sep 2004 17:03:00 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: You decided that I was the one who made this up, but when you found out it was ABC, you attack them instead as left wing I suppose. Speaking of which it looks like ABC and Dan Rather are about to join the NY Times and Jayson Blair in that select group of journalists with egg on their faces because they were willing to accept any evidence that makes the kind of story they want to tell, without regard to the veracity of that evidence. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 "Michael Moore...may win an Oscar for the kind of work that got Stephen Glass, Jayson Blair, and Jack Kelly fired"--NPR's Scott Simon |
Actually, that's not true. NYC is a great example. They've got extremely
strick gun laws and violent crime is way down. Turns out California also has strict laws and mostly won't be affected very by the Federal ban being lifted, although it is possible that guns of this type may be smuggled in from Nevada and other less restrictive states. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Vito" wrote in message ... "Jonathan Ganz" wrote Mr. Poodle is clearly the ignorant one. He thinks that it's ok to put more guns on the streets. It's not only OK, it is better to have more guns on the streets so long as they are in the hands of competent law abiding citizens. Cities and states with the most restrictive anti-gun laws have the worst crime rates and vice versa. Meanwhile, states that passed versions of the Florida law allowing concealed carry saw a drop in crime. Remember, if there had been one armed person on each highjacked plane, 9/11 could never have happened and police would still have to get warrants to search our homes. |
The long guns you're talking about have folding stocks and flash
suppressors. There is no good reason for "honest citizens" to own these things without a permit. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 10:27:09 -0400, "Vito" said: Mr. Poodle is clearly the ignorant one. He thinks that it's ok to put more guns on the streets. It's not only OK, it is better to have more guns on the streets so long as they are in the hands of competent law abiding citizens. Cities and states with the most restrictive anti-gun laws have the worst crime rates and vice versa. Meanwhile, states that passed versions of the Florida law allowing concealed carry saw a drop in crime. Call me an agnostic on this one. The above argument is less than compelling. Correlation is not the same as causation, and one might as persuasively argue that high crime rates made the citizens of those cities and states more amenable to gun control. I think the best you can say is that current gun control laws don't seem to have much impact one way or the other. So far as the assault weapons ban goes, that's not surprising since as you say the objective of the law was not to ban assault weapons but to ban weapons that look like assault weapons. And despite a small number of highly publicized events involving rifles, I'm not at all persuaded that long guns are a major problem. |
Does this make any sense to anyone besides Max?
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Maxprop" wrote in message ink.net... "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message Violent crime dropped under the Clinton administration. It's now on the rise again... thanks to Bu**** and company. I know, dammit. Look at all those hurricanes, thanks to Bush and company. Max |
This one
http://community.webshots.com/photo/73345252/76569411zLxjAQ It was nice of Billy Jean King to come paint your boat. RB |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:49:31 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: So, what you're saying is that either Fox is right all the time or that ABC (Rather is on another network) are dishonest and biases. I think I'll go with ABC over Fox. I don't think I said anything at all about Fox, but you're welcome to try to show otherwise. I may be welcome, but I'm not interested in your TV watching habits. That's television Horass, not transvestites. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:53:31 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: Does this make any sense to anyone besides Max? Of course. It's called metaphor. He's suggesting that correlation is not causation. You do understand that concept, don't you? So, you're saying that Pat Robertson has nothing to do with diverting the path of hurricanes?? -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Vito wrote: "Jonathan Ganz" wrote Mr. Poodle is clearly the ignorant one. He thinks that it's ok to put more guns on the streets. Remember, if there had been one armed person on each highjacked plane, 9/11 could never have happened and police would still have to get warrants to search our homes. Actually, that's not necessarily true, since the hijackers were trained to deal with air marshalls. In any case, that's not equivalent to butting guns on the streets, unless you're advocating regular citizens to carry guns on planes. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:52:51 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: The long guns you're talking about have folding stocks and flash suppressors. There is no good reason for "honest citizens" to own these things without a permit. I believe those two items are among the long laundry list of items that the Congress critters' staffs decided make a gun look "scary." It all boils down to one's approach. If you subscribe to the philosophy that everything should be forbidden unless it is specifically authorized by the guvmint, then you ask (as you do) whether there is a reason to allow honest citizens to own such things. If you subscribe to the philosophy that individuals should be able to do as they wish unless there is a good reason for the guvmint's forbidding it, then you ask whether there is a good reason to forbid honest citizens from owning such things for whatever their reason might be. I find it hard to believe that your average criminal out to slaughter children on playgrounds is going to be affected much one way or the other by whether his gun has a flash suppressor. Well, the laundry list includes not allowing abortions in any circumstances. That's certainly of great interest to the Bu**** administration. Are you suggesting there is a good reason for regular citizens to own guns like this? Also, this has nothing to do with the "average" criminal. It does have to do with wackos who can walk into a store and get a semi-auto rifle and 1000 rounds without much effort. Or, it's about the bank robbers like those in LA who stood down 350 cops. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote
The long guns you're talking about have folding stocks and flash suppressors. There is no good reason for "honest citizens" to own these things without a permit. A "permit" to own a paramilitary weapon? WTF? First you say there is no good reason for them, then you want to issue permits for people to do so? Frankly, I think you've got it exactly backwards... there is no reason for the gov't to restrict their ownership. A citizen should be allowed to buy & own whatever he wants & can afford... from motorcycles to electric guitars. It is the misuse of these items that is a problem for the community and thus becomes an issue for the gov't to address. I have no problem with banning convicted felons, or ex-wife stalkers, from owning firearms. Makes good sense to me. However, I have a big problem with the gov't telling me what I can and can't do, when I have a lifelong record of good citizenship. Considering the number of fatalities & severe injuries around the home, perhaps you'd advocate banning, or requiring permits, to own such things as lawn mowers & certain types of cleaning supplies? Cars kill far more people than guns, and yet we make little or no effort to restrict their use. Vito wrote: .... The only differences between a pre-ban AR-15 and a new (legal) AR-15 is that the former has a bayonet lug and the latter does not - and oh yes, the latter comes with a 5 round magazine but literally millions of pre ban magazines are available. I think you'd agree that neither a bayonet lug nor a flash suppressor make the gun any more or less deadly. Oh, no. The flash supressor makes the gun much more deadly because it makes it difficult to return fire. The bayonet lug makes it more deadly because with a bayonet, you can finish off the wounded & kill people when you're out of bullets... DSK |
|
"Maxprop" wrote in message hlink.net... | | "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message | | Good Advice Gilligan..... but no armory is complete without a .Barnet ..50 | cal. | | Jesus, Mooron--what are you anticipating?? Or is that a "hunting gun?" :-) Long Distance, Calling...... :-) CM |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:11 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com