Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:31 PM   #51
wrkactjob
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roessnakhan View Post
Funny, other countries have access to the same video games, movies, and music as we do. But they're not shooting up every street corner, school, or mall.
You know that scene in Bowling For Columbine where when you opened a certain bank account they gave you a gun?...that was pretty unique to the U.S I think....make gun ownership easy enough and some people will use them 'inappropriately'.
wrkactjob is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:35 PM   #52
Andeavor
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Lake Zurich
Quick question: has anyone else heard someone shout "Stick to the script!" after the second protester interrupted LaPierre's address?

What was that about...?
Andeavor is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:35 PM   #53
LethalWolfe
macrumors Demi-God
 
LethalWolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles
I was hoping for something transcendent from the NRA today. Nope. Just tired scapegoating, myths that have been disproven time and time again.


Quote:
Originally Posted by glocke12 View Post
video games, mental illness, gun free school zones, are all to blame...

as far as video games go, I find it truly ironic that parents go out of their way to protect kids from pornography, yet allow them access to highly graphic video games..
It's part of the Puritan roots of this country. Ever notice how no one blinks an eye when a news anchor talks about the latest murder but if the word 'penis' or 'vagina' comes out of the TV it's an attention getter?
__________________
Looking For Lenny - documentary about comedian Lenny Bruce's timeless impact on stand-up comedy & Free Speech.
Netflix, iTunes, Amazon
LethalWolfe is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:40 PM   #54
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by glocke12 View Post
ever been to Manhattan? cops with machine guns are prevalent.
Yays! Let's have that everywhere!

We'll feel super-safe then!
citizenzen is online now   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:50 PM   #55
Tomorrow
macrumors 603
 
Tomorrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Always a day away
Quote:
Originally Posted by hulugu View Post
Second, ownership of guns is one of those "swing your fist ends where my nose begins" problems. You want to store a pile of guns in your garage. Go nuts. You want to plink targets at a range, shoot a deer, creepily "clean" your gun over and over? Have at it. But, the minute that gun kills somebody, that freedom evaporates.
So you're okay with people owning assault weapons, large capacity magazines, etc. as long as they don't harm anybody with them? Just making sure I understand what you're saying, because I'm pretty sure that's the same thing the NRA has been saying all along.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bradl View Post
But the NRA wasn't exactly saying that it should be 'police'. They wanted armed guards, without saying how or what they think the most advantageous scenario would be.
Okay, what kind of armed guard - keep in mind, I'm expecting this to be a uniformed, trained guard, most likely in the employ of the federal, state, or local government - would be scary to kids? Because I don't remember ever being afraid of any kind of armed security guard, cop, soldier, marine, or whatever.
__________________
I would scream just to be heard, as if yelling at the stars - I was bleeding just to feel.
You would never say a word, kept me reaching in the dark - always something to conceal.
Tomorrow is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 04:03 PM   #56
zioxide
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Quote:
Originally Posted by glocke12 View Post
ever been to Manhattan? cops with machine guns are prevalent.
Yeah, cops, not civilians. But they aren't walking down the street carrying an M60, they more likely have an MP5 or an M4 locked up in their cruisers in case they have to deal with a situation like the North Hollywood shootout.

Nobody's trying to take away the guns from the police. It's pretty obvious they need them.

But more guns are definitely not the answer either. And like Columbine proved, even having an armed sheriff on campus didn't prevent that tragedy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hulugu View Post
Second, ownership of guns is one of those "swing your fist ends where my nose begins" problems. You want to store a pile of guns in your garage. Go nuts. You want to plink targets at a range, shoot a deer, creepily "clean" your gun over and over? Have at it. But, the minute that gun kills somebody, that freedom evaporates.
So you are advocating getting rid of guns then? Because we've had 3 mass murders in the last 2 weeks and guns have been the weapon used every time.

This silly argument reminds me of when people were complaining about instituting bans on texting while driving. Some people saying that "why should it be banned, I can do it fine". Well, not everyone can do it fine, and like they used to say, "one bad apple spoils the bunch".
zioxide is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 04:03 PM   #57
filmbuff
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradl View Post
Yet it was this same amount of nothing that stopped any shootings of this type pre-Columbine
I hope you're trolling and not serious
filmbuff is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 04:19 PM   #58
webbuzz
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by APlotdevice View Post
This just puts the icing on the cake: Columbine had an armed deputy on campus.
Quote:
GOLDEN, Colo. — The first officers on the scene had never trained for what they found at Columbine High School: No hostages. No demands. Just killing.

In the hours that followed, the nation watched in horror as the standard police procedure for dealing with shooting rampages in the U.S. proved tragically, heartbreakingly flawed on April 20, 1999.

Two officers exchanged fire with one of the teenage gunmen just outside the school door, then stopped _ as they had been trained to do _ to wait for a SWAT team. During the 45 minutes it took for the SWAT team to assemble and go in, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold shot 10 of the 13 people they killed that day
Quote:
Ten years later, Columbine has transformed the way police in the U.S. deal with shooting rampages.

After the tragedy, police across the country developed "active-shooter" training. It calls for responding officers to rush toward gunfire and step over bodies and bleeding victims, if necessary, to stop the gunman _ the active shooter _ first.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_188685.html


There are other articles that state that one of the two officers, while engaging the shooters, most likely saved more lives at Columbine.
webbuzz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 04:40 PM   #59
zioxide
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Quote:
Originally Posted by webbuzz View Post
There are other articles that state that one of the two officers, while engaging the shooters, most likely saved more lives at Columbine.
This is just baseless speculation and there's no way to know if that's true or not.

Besides, these clowns are advocating for an "armed security guard", not a SWAT team, to be posted at every school. Even with new protocols and training for active shooter situations, an armed security guard isn't going to go chasing them down alone without backup. We are talking about real life here, not Jack Bauer on 24.

The fact remains is that there was an armed security guard at Columbine and it didn't prevent 13 people from getting killed.

This stunt by the NRA is just a pathetic attempt to deflect people away from the real problems and finding a real solution.
zioxide is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 04:54 PM   #60
Hugh
macrumors Demi-God
 
Hugh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Erie, PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by glocke12 View Post
and in other news I ponied up the cash to upgrade my yearly membership to a lifetime membership...was simply waiting to see what stance they took before I did that.

ETA: Its not just about video games...it is mental health issues also.
Video games are not the cause of our teens (and adults) of going on killing rampage. Prove they are, it's already proved that it doesn't, but let's hear it from your view.

Speaking of arm guards, in my high school in the early 90's (dating my self I grad in 93) had two police officers, and they where armed. Would they have been able to stop something like this? I don't think so, only one of them wore a bullet proof vest.

Now we are saying that everyone (teachers, school staff) should be armed, what happens when one of them snap from dealing with roady kids or what not?

Hugh
__________________
Hal 9000: You like your Macintosh better then me, Dave?
Hugh is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 04:55 PM   #61
webbuzz
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by zioxide View Post
This is just baseless speculation and there's no way to know if that's true or not.

Besides, these clowns are advocating for an "armed security guard", not a SWAT team, to be posted at every school. Even with new protocols and training for active shooter situations, an armed security guard isn't going to go chasing them down alone without backup. We are talking about real life here, not Jack Bauer on 24.

The fact remains is that there was an armed security guard at Columbine and it didn't prevent 13 people from getting killed.

This stunt by the NRA is just a pathetic attempt to deflect people away from the real problems and finding a real solution.
Where did I say they wanted a S.W.A.T. at each school? The Columbine Officers waited for S.W.A.T. to arrive, which took 45 minutes.

I also never said it prevented 13 people from getting killed. They may have prevented more deaths.

Are you also saying any accounts by witnesses and officers on scene are baseless?
webbuzz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 05:06 PM   #62
zioxide
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Quote:
Originally Posted by webbuzz View Post
Where did I say they wanted a S.W.A.T. at each school? The Columbine Officers waited for S.W.A.T. to arrive, which took 45 minutes.
You didn't. I was pointing out that even though they had an armed deputy on campus, he wasn't able to prevent the situation and they had to wait for SWAT to secure the situation.

That just shows that the NRA's proposal is just smoke and mirrors and won't prevent this from happening in the future.

Quote:
Are you also saying any accounts by witnesses and officers on scene are baseless?
I didn't see any first hand accounts regarding this in the article you linked.
zioxide is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 05:12 PM   #63
rdowns
macrumors Penryn
 
rdowns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by zioxide View Post
You didn't. I was pointing out that even though they had an armed deputy on campus, he wasn't able to prevent the situation and they had to wait for SWAT to secure the situation.

That just shows that the NRA's proposal is just smoke and mirrors and won't prevent this from happening in the future.

Of course it won't. A typical school building is quite large with 2 or 3 stories, dozens and dozens of classrooms and dozens of entry points. Many have campuses with several buildings. Please tell me how one armed man can effectively protect that?
__________________
The distance in time between 1980 and now is the same amount as the distance in time between 1980 and WWII.
rdowns is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 05:23 PM   #64
Don't panic
macrumors 68040
 
Don't panic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: having a drink at Milliways
Quote:
Originally Posted by glocke12 View Post
ever been to Manhattan? cops with machine guns are prevalent.
this is completely false.

i live and work there.
i walk its streets every day.
i think i would notice.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by filmbuff View Post
"How do we pay for this" is a stupid argument. It needs to be done. We usually manage to find a way to pay for things that are much less important, like invading middle eastern countries, so why can't we afford to protect schools full of children in our own country? Police departments can spare a few officers to hang out at schools and communities can pay for it.
maybe they can pay for it with property taxes levied on guns.
for each working gun you legally own you have to pay taxes that will cover the cost of having armed guards in all public places in the country.
tax amount will depend on the type of gun, starting low with hunting firearms and on an increasing scale for increasingly dangerous and powerful ones.
__________________
I do not believe in lot of things, but I do believe in duct tape.
Miles Straume
linky to stonyc's ww table
Don't panic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 05:28 PM   #65
Zombie Acorn
macrumors 65816
 
Zombie Acorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnowLeopard2008 View Post
So the NRA thinks the solution to a gun problem is to bring more guns into the equation? If you fight fire with fire, all you get is burned... and a BIGGER fire. Seriously, NRA should stand for National Retards Association. We all (in the US) have a right to bear arms*

* in connection with service in a state-organized militia.

The original intent of the framers of the US Constitution was to give citizens a right to bear and keep arms in a militia. This was so that people in each of the States could maintain a militia. Sure, we now have a national army and such, but the constitution never explicitly protected the right to bear and keep arms regardless of context and circumstance. It was only due to to horrendous decision of DC v Heller that we have this gun control fiasco in the first place.
You purposely misread the second amendment as it suits your needs. It clearly states that due to the need for the ability to create a militia the rights of the people to bare arms shall not be infringed. If no civilians are allowed to have arms there would be no way to form a militia.
Zombie Acorn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 05:31 PM   #66
ChristianJapan
macrumors Demi-God
 
ChristianJapan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: 日本
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdowns View Post
We have close to 100,000 schools in the US. Average cop makes $55,000. So you have $5.5 billion plus benefits and other overhead. Figure you need 2 cops per school as most school buildings are open 10 or more hours a day. So you have $11 billion plus about 40% overhead, so it costs us north of $15 billion a year and we've done nothing to address the issue of easy access to guns not to mention the Republicans would probably demand an equal amount of cuts in teachers to pay for it.
Money is not the issue; I'm sure the gun manufacturer and NRA will happily pay the bill; that's 200'000 more guns and put 200'000 more semi-automatics in. Good income; they can take over those 11bn; maye need to charge a bit more for regular customer [/sad sarcasm]
__________________
Member of MacRumors.com Folding@Home Team (#3446) & developer of the F@H Mobile Monitoring app
ChristianJapan is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 05:38 PM   #67
bradl
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmbuff View Post
I hope you're trolling and not serious
I'm sure as hell serious.There have only been incidents where a single person may have been shot and injured, but nothing in the magnitude of Columbine. Yes, I said it. NOTHING.

In fact, I'll go as far as to say that the only two major incidents that came close to Columbine anytime between 1970 and 2000, is Kent State, and that was from the police, and Cleveland School in Stockton, CA, in 1989. Meanwhile, Every cowboy western movie that John Wayne ever made, spy movies, Lone Ranger, and war movie that came out between then and now, plus any games had not affected nor influenced the outcome of what happened during those incidents. If they had, those influences would have been sought and made known during official investigations.

I would love for you to come up with stats that prove that armed guards have shown to make schools safer. And by all means, please do.

BL.
bradl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 05:38 PM   #68
SnowLeopard2008
macrumors 603
 
SnowLeopard2008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Silicon Valley
Send a message via AIM to SnowLeopard2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn View Post
You purposely misread the second amendment as it suits your needs. It clearly states that due to the need for the ability to create a militia the rights of the people to bare arms shall not be infringed. If no civilians are allowed to have arms there would be no way to form a militia.
Wrong. This is part of the dissenting opinion of several Supreme Court justices (Souter, Gisnburg, Breyer, Stevens) on the Heller case:

The Amendment’s text does justify a different limitation: the “right to keep and bear arms” protects only a right to possess and use firearms in connection with service in a state-organized militia. Had the Framers wished to expand the meaning of the phrase “bear arms” to encompass civilian possession and use, they could have done so by the addition of phrases such as “for the defense of themselves”.

Not only is your wording/translation of the Constitution blatantly wrong, your understanding my post is also wrong.

Here's a good long article for you to read:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/07-290P.ZD
__________________
YouTube | Twitter
MacBook Air | iPhone 5 | iPad mini | Apple TV | AirPort Extreme 802.11ac | iPad signed by Steve Wozniak
SnowLeopard2008 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 05:55 PM   #69
DakotaGuy
macrumors 68030
 
DakotaGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: South Dakota, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradl View Post
Did you miss APlotdevice's post about there being an armed guard at Columbine, and yet that didn't prevent it? I think that alone shot down your solution.

So like I said: if it were a police officer that is actually on the force, it might have merit, but won't make the school environment safer, especially due to crossfire.

Imagine the police department, let alone the police officer having to explain to the parents of a slain child that their child was killed because they were caught in the crossfire between police trying to take the bad guy down.

Then imagine the same thing with just some armed contract guard who isn't bound by such oaths that the PD and other armed services take.

BL.
I took a little of what you wrote out and I think you do make a few good points. We have a School Resource Officer in our school and I think it is a positive thing. Sure a lot could go wrong, but it is nice to know that we have someone that could respond with a firearm, proper training and a bulletproof vest if it is necessary. Of course an Officer in the building is only one aspect of security. Basically all schools need to re-evalute their security plans and make sure the plan will work. I understand that this school had good security, but adding an Officer in the school to the mix sure couldn't have hurt anything. Our Officer also does a lot of other positive things around the building and is very involved.

The point I want to make about Columbine is that there was an assault weapons ban in place when that happened. How effective was it? I am a law abiding citizen that has never had anything more then a couple of speeding tickets. I do everything right so why take away my rights? I know it is in poor form to blame the mother who was murdered, but don't we also need to look at personal responsibility? Should a person have weapons in the house if there is a mentally unstable person in the house? I'm not talking just assault weapons... I am talking ANY weapon. Considering her situation the weapons should have been locked away at a range deep in a vault or at least secured in the home where there is no possible way he could have gotten them. Taking someone who has mental issues to a shooting range? Are you kidding me? Common sense people.

You can ban assault weapons, but I can promise that won't keep them out of bad people's hands or even stop this terrible event. The only people that won't have them are people like myself who follow the law. I don't have any issues with tough regulations and a mandatory 14 day waiting period, but I do have issues with just saying... It's banned because you can't be trusted.

Don't get me wrong. This was a TERRIBLE event. One of the worse things I have ever heard happening and my heart aches for all of those involved. By the way, I am also a registered Democrat and generally agree with the party on many social issues. I believe just like two people who love each other should have the right to marry regardless of gender a good law abiding citizen should be allowed the right to own a currently legal firearm of their choice.
__________________
Mac: 21.5" iMac Core i5 2.5 Ghz "Sandy Bridge"
iPad Air 16 GB WiFi - iPod Classic 80GB - Motorola Droid MAXX

Last edited by DakotaGuy; Dec 21, 2012 at 06:00 PM.
DakotaGuy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 06:06 PM   #70
Sydde
macrumors 68000
 
Sydde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
So the solution to school rampages (which are incredibly rare) is to stigmatize anyone who might have an emotional problem (you may not have a gun) and load up schools with armed guards and/or armed teachers. Because lethal force is the only thing these frothing rampagers understand (I read most of LaPierre's rant, it was quite frothy).

My question is, suppose we provided faculty and staff with those long shot tazer things, how might that work? The probes can embed in clothing, short of the actual skin (heavy camo outfits) and still deliver a felling charge. My take is that the shooters usually want to go out in a blaze, if they survive, twitching on the floor as a teacher zips a plastic wire-tie around their wrists, how much more humiliation (good deterrent, that) could you ask for. These people tend to be suicidal, why not deny them that?
__________________
You got to be a spirit. You can't be no ghost.
Sydde is online now   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 06:59 PM   #71
SLC Flyfishing
macrumors 65816
 
SLC Flyfishing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh View Post
Video games are not the cause of our teens (and adults) of going on killing rampage. Prove they are, it's already proved that it doesn't, but let's hear it from your view.
I don't think anyone thinks that the video games actually cause anyone to become a homicidal maniac, but that what they do is desensitize players to wanton violence. When the objective of the game is to mow-down as many people as possible before you are killed or run out of ammunition then what else are kids supposed to learn? Add to it that some poor saps spend many hours (10+ in some cases) with these things, and supplement them with gory movies and violent music and it suddenly paints a picture of violence as acceptable.

No, what these games do is give disturbed youth a template for killing large amounts of people efficiently. That combined with mental derangement and/or or hopelessness is what (in my opinion) is at the heart of the problem.

Does that make sense?
SLC Flyfishing is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 07:06 PM   #72
SnowLeopard OSX
macrumors 6502a
 
SnowLeopard OSX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Southern California
It's a completely ridiculous suggestion... I mean, can you imagine how many people you would deter from the teaching profession if they were required to go through hurdles of mandatory gun training courses and knowingly took the risk/responsibility of having to shoot and kill someone on the job?

The NRA is really testing a lot of people's patience. I can't believe they'd make such an incredibly stupid suggestion -- especially just days after the Newtown shooting.

They never cease to amaze me.
__________________
iPad 4th gen Black/ 32GB/ iOS 7.0
iMac G4 1.0 GHz/ 1.25 GHz PPCG4 (7445)
iPod |Classic Black/ 80GB|U2 edition 20GB
iPhone |4S White/16GB/ iOS 7.0|3G White/16GB iOS 4.2.1
SnowLeopard OSX is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 07:07 PM   #73
Thomas Veil
macrumors 68020
 
Thomas Veil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Reality
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdowns View Post
I watched the so-called press conference with my mouth agape. I didn't expect much different from them but never did I imagine them digging in like they did.
"Mouth agape" pretty much describes my reaction.

The way they went silent right after the event, you would have had reason to believe that they were reconsidering their position. Then a week later they come out with this. To suggest that we place guns in one of the last few gun-free zones...it is to make your jaw drop.

What about churches and mosques? We've had a few of those shot up recently. Arm priests and ministers.

Libraries! Think of it: we could have stacks of hollow fake books, concealing weapons just waiting to be used against would-be homicidal bibliofiles. You know, like this guy.


I'm sure there are other ideas, but I can't think about them right now. I've got to go install a gun rack in the shower. Because you just never know.

In all seriousness, this was pretty much one of the most unbelievable, tone-deaf, in-the-bubble reactions I've ever heard to anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rmwebs View Post
...Blaming video games? Really?...
And comic books. Let's not forget comic books.
Thomas Veil is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 07:25 PM   #74
sikkinixx
macrumors 68020
 
sikkinixx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Rocketing through the sky!
Thank JesusAllahBuddha I'm a teacher in Canada rather than the States. Bloody lunacy.
__________________
sikkinixx is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 07:25 PM   #75
Mac'nCheese
macrumors 68020
 
Mac'nCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLC Flyfishing View Post
I don't think anyone thinks that the video games actually cause anyone to become a homicidal maniac, but that what they do is desensitize players to wanton violence. When the objective of the game is to mow-down as many people as possible before you are killed or run out of ammunition then what else are kids supposed to learn? Add to it that some poor saps spend many hours (10+ in some cases) with these things, and supplement them with gory movies and violent music and it suddenly paints a picture of violence as acceptable.

No, what these games do is give disturbed youth a template for killing large amounts of people efficiently. That combined with mental derangement and/or or hopelessness is what (in my opinion) is at the heart of the problem.

Does that make sense?
I think your phrase "combined with mental derangement..." should pretty much end the conversation over the fault of video games in shootings. Even if they do contribute, no one would take away the rights of every one else to play these games because a very few can't handle em. That's like saying we should take away all alcohol because some can't handle it. Or all guns cause some misuse them. Etc etc.
Mac'nCheese is offline   1 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:11 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC