Shooting of the Day
- Started
- Last post
- 2,785 Responses
- formed0
Another unarmed man shot down
- ********0
- ********-2
I was not raised in a racist home or environment. Living in the South, almost every White person has a small amount of racial awareness, simply beause of the numbers of negroes in this part of the country. But it is a superficial awareness. Growing up, in school, the White and black kids would make racial jokes toward each other, but all they were were jokes. Me and White friends would sometimes would watch things that would make us think that “blacks were the real racists” and other elementary thoughts like this, but there was no real understanding behind it.
The event that truly awakened me was the Trayvon Martin case. I kept hearing and seeing his name, and eventually I decided to look him up. I read the Wikipedia article and right away I was unable to understand what the big deal was. It was obvious that Zimmerman was in the right. But more importantly this prompted me to type in the words “black on White crime” into Google, and I have never been the same since that day. The first website I came to was the Council of Conservative Citizens. There were pages upon pages of these brutal black on White murders. I was in disbelief. At this moment I realized that something was very wrong. How could the news be blowing up the Trayvon Martin case while hundreds of these black on White murders got ignored?
From this point I researched deeper and found out what was happening in Europe. I saw that the same things were happening in England and France, and in all the other Western European countries. Again I found myself in disbelief. As an American we are taught to accept living in the melting pot, and black and other minorities have just as much right to be here as we do, since we are all immigrants. But Europe is the homeland of White people, and in many ways the situation is even worse there. From here I found out about the Jewish problem and other issues facing our race, and I can say today that I am completely racially aware.
Blacks
I think it is is fitting to start off with the group I have the most real life experience with, and the group that is the biggest problem for Americans.
Niggers are stupid and violent. At the same time they have the capacity to be very slick. Black people view everything through a racial lense. Thats what racial awareness is, its viewing everything that happens through a racial lense. They are always thinking about the fact that they are black. This is part of the reason they get offended so easily, and think that some thing are intended to be racist towards them, even when a White person wouldnt be thinking about race. The other reason is the Jewish agitation of the black race.
Black people are racially aware almost from birth, but White people on average dont think about race in their daily lives. And this is our problem. We need to and have to.
Say you were to witness a dog being beat by a man. You are almost surely going to feel very sorry for that dog. But then say you were to witness a dog biting a man. You will most likely not feel the same pity you felt for the dog for the man. Why? Because dogs are lower than men.
This same analogy applies to black and White relations. Even today, blacks are subconsciously viewed by White people are lower beings. They are held to a lower standard in general. This is why they are able to get away with things like obnoxious behavior in public. Because it is expected of them.
Modern history classes instill a subconscious White superiority complex in Whites and an inferiority complex in blacks. This White superiority complex that comes from learning of how we dominated other peoples is also part of the problem I have just mentioned. But of course I dont deny that we are in fact superior.
I wish with a passion that niggers were treated terribly throughout history by Whites, that every White person had an ancestor who owned slaves, that segregation was an evil an oppressive institution, and so on. Because if it was all it true, it would make it so much easier for me to accept our current situation. But it isnt true. None of it is. We are told to accept what is happening to us because of ancestors wrong doing, but it is all based on historical lies, exaggerations and myths. I have tried endlessly to think of reasons we deserve this, and I have only came back more irritated because there are no reasons.
Only a fourth to a third of people in the South owned even one slave. Yet every White person is treated as if they had a slave owning ancestor. This applies to in the states where slavery never existed, as well as people whose families immigrated after slavery was abolished. I have read hundreds of slaves narratives from my state. And almost all of them were positive. One sticks out in my mind where an old ex-slave recounted how the day his mistress died was one of the saddest days of his life. And in many of these narratives the slaves told of how their masters didnt even allowing whipping on his plantation.
Segregation was not a bad thing. It was a defensive measure. Segregation did not exist to hold back negroes. It existed to protect us from them. And I mean that in multiple ways. Not only did it protect us from having to interact with them, and from being physically harmed by them, but it protected us from being brought down to their level. Integration has done nothing but bring Whites down to level of brute animals. The best example of this is obviously our school system.
Now White parents are forced to move to the suburbs to send their children to “good schools”. But what constitutes a “good school”? The fact is that how good a school is considered directly corresponds to how White it is. I hate with a passion the whole idea of the suburbs. To me it represents nothing but scared White people running. Running because they are too weak, scared, and brainwashed to fight. Why should we have to flee the cities we created for the security of the suburbs? Why are the suburbs secure in the first place? Because they are White. The pathetic part is that these White people dont even admit to themselves why they are moving. They tell themselves it is for better schools or simply to live in a nicer neighborhood. But it is honestly just a way to escape niggers and other minorities.
But what about the White people that are left behind? What about the White children who, because of school zoning laws, are forced to go to a school that is 90 percent black? Do we really think that that White kid will be able to go one day without being picked on for being White, or called a “white boy”? And who is fighting for him? Who is fighting for these White people forced by economic circumstances to live among negroes? No one, but someone has to.Here I would also like to touch on the idea of a Norhtwest Front. I think this idea is beyond stupid. Why should I for example, give up the beauty and history of my state to go to the Norhthwest? To me the whole idea just parralells the concept of White people running to the suburbs. The whole idea is pathetic and just another way to run from the problem without facing it.
Some people feel as though the South is beyond saving, that we have too many blacks here. To this I say look at history. The South had a higher ratio of blacks when we were holding them as slaves. Look at South Africa, and how such a small minority held the black in apartheid for years and years. Speaking of South Africa, if anyone thinks that think will eventually just change for the better, consider how in South Africa they have affirmative action for the black population that makes up 80 percent of the population.
It is far from being too late for America or Europe. I believe that even if we made up only 30 percent of the population we could take it back completely. But by no means should we wait any longer to take drastic action.Anyone who thinks that White and black people look as different as we do on the outside, but are somehow magically the same on the inside, is delusional. How could our faces, skin, hair, and body structure all be different, but our brains be exactly the same? This is the nonsense we are led to believe.
Negroes have lower Iqs, lower impulse control, and higher testosterone levels in generals. These three things alone are a recipe for violent behavior. If a scientist publishes a paper on the differences between the races in Western Europe or Americans, he can expect to lose his job. There are personality traits within human families, and within different breeds of cats or dogs, so why not within the races?
A horse and a donkey can breed and make a mule, but they are still two completely different animals. Just because we can breed with the other races doesnt make us the same.
In a modern history class it is always emphasized that, when talking about “bad” things Whites have done in history, they were White. But when we lern about the numerous, almost countless wonderful things Whites have done, it is never pointed out that these people were White. Yet when we learn about anything important done by a black person in history, it is always pointed out repeatedly that they were black. For example when we learn about how George Washington carver was the first nigger smart enough to open a peanut.On another subject I want to say this. Many White people feel as though they dont have a unique culture. The reason for this is that White culture is world culture. I dont mean that our culture is made up of other cultures, I mean that our culture has been adopted by everyone in the world. This makes us feel as though our culture isnt special or unique. Say for example that every business man in the world wore a kimono, that every skyscraper was in the shape of a pagoda, that every door was a sliding one, and that everyone ate every meal with chopsticks. This would probably make a Japanese man feel as though he had no unique traditional culture.
I have noticed a great disdain for race mixing White women within the White nationalists community, bordering on insanity it. These women are victims, and they can be saved. Stop.
Jews
Unlike many White naitonalists, I am of the opinion that the majority of American and European jews are White. In my opinion the issues with jews is not their blood, but their identity. I think that if we could somehow destroy the jewish identity, then they wouldnt cause much of a problem. The problem is that Jews look White, and in many cases are White, yet they see themselves as minorities. Just like niggers, most jews are always thinking about the fact that they are jewish. The other issue is that they network. If we could somehow turn every jew blue for 24 hours, I think there would be a mass awakening, because people would be able to see plainly what is going on.
I dont pretend to understand why jews do what they do. They are enigma.
Hispanics
Hispanics are obviously a huge problem for Americans. But there are good hispanics and bad hispanics. I remember while watching hispanic television stations, the shows and even the commercials were more White than our own. They have respect for White beauty, and a good portion of hispanics are White. It is a well known fact that White hispanics make up the elite of most hispanics countries. There is good White blood worht saving in Uruguay, Argentina, Chile and even Brasil.
But they are still our enemies.
East Asians
I have great respent for the East Asian races. Even if we were to go extinct they could carry something on. They are by nature very racist and could be great allies of the White race. I am not opposed at all to allies with the Northeast Asian races.
Patriotism
I hate the sight of the American flag. Modern American patriotism is an absolute joke. People pretending like they have something to be proud while White people are being murdered daily in the streets. Many veterans believe we owe them something for “protecting our way of life” or “protecting our freedom”. But im not sure what way of life they are talking about. How about we protect the White race and stop fighting for the jews. I will say this though, I myself would have rather lived in 1940's American than Nazi Germany, and no this is not ignorance speaking, it is just my opinion. So I dont blame the veterans of any wars up until after Vietnam, because at least they had an American to be proud of and fight for.
An Explanation
To take a saying from a film, “I see all this stuff going on, and I dont see anyone doing anything about it. And it pisses me off.”. To take a saying from my favorite film, “Even if my life is worth less than a speck of dirt, I want to use it for the good of society.”.
I have no choice. I am not in the position to, alone, go into the ghetto and fight. I chose Charleston because it is most historic city in my state, and at one time had the highest ratio of blacks to Whites in the country. We have no skinheads, no real KKK, no one doing anything but talking on the internet. Well someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I guess that has to be me.
Unfortunately at the time of writing I am in a great hurry and some of my best thoughts, actually many of them have been to be left out and lost forever. But I believe enough great White minds are out there already.
Please forgive any typos, I didnt have time to check it.
- ramblings from a small mindinteliboy
- http://www.digitaljo…inteliboy
- And yet, arch Republican fucknut Rick Perry says drugs was the reason a white supremacist purposedly shot black people to start a race war. Drugs.face_melter
- Surely this isn't your writing!monospaced
- LOL, this is why I frequent WS forum, they pretend to be smart, but have a special ed level grasp on history while cherry picking what stats they parrot,georgesIII
- @monospaced, Hi peasant********
- i stopped reading once I hit the word, negroes. so can't really comment.Gnash
- peasant? I was just not sure if you wrote this or notmonospaced
- Fuck off mono, your sence of humor is stomach turning. And yea the kid was faded off suboxone strips. It's a prescription methadone alternative.********
- He's a murderous racist, the subs helped him not give a fuck though. It's one step down from herion addiction, really fucks with your head********
- my sense of humor? I was just a little appalled at hte language here and was asking if it was really his writing or not... is this some kind of joke satire?monospaced
- I find it hard to believe i_was wrote this, that's all. Not sure why you're even talking to me about this.monospaced
- fuck off you twit********
- excuse me? what the fuck did I do except for ask a question? holy shitmonospaced
- ********0
- yurimon-2
I'm calling this one out.
- Misrepresentation, misinformation and horse shit.Morning_star
- please tell me more morning_star,georgesIII
- yes please. mouryurimon
- Is it OK to, on one hand criticise large corporations who massage the truth and spread misinfo to then do exactly same and expect no criticism?Morning_star
- Its ok to disprove i want to know where bull is.yurimon
- Shut the fuck up, yurimon. You're not smart, you're not even a tiny bit scientific in your thinking. You're so prone to fear that you'll believe anything.nb
- Read this: https://en.wikipedia…nb
- These killers are obviously fucked up people. Is it so surprising that at some point they would have been prescribed meds or self-medicated?nb
- You are not allowed to say, "These men were on drugs and they killed therefore drugs are the cause." It's bullshit.nb
- http://www.cchrint.o…
seems there is already studies. non the less if you were smart might want more inquiry into this.yurimon - of course you have to account politics in the outrage because we all know reporting of violence and human outrage is biased as times and politics change.yurimon
- 2nd of all you dont know his past or he is associate with. its easy to control these types.yurimon
- Lulz. You accuse me of not knowing his past, but you just posted an article claiming that he was probably on meds and that was the cause of the killings.nb
- Also, that link you posted is hilarious. Read the About Us section of the site. It's basically "We have no opinion, but here is our opinion..." over and over.nb
- Hahaha.... the CCHR is a 'front' started by the Church of Scientology. Do you ever research your sources? Fucking lulz.nb
- thats a conspiracy theory...yurimon
- i see anything that is official propaganda is ok but if you god forbid go out the official view its a front. thats is scientific fo shoyurimon
- https://www.psycholo…yurimon
- yurimon-1
2 more mass shootings not much coverage?
- Not much coverage? It's on CNN. I think that counts as coverage.nb
- either you are an idiot or you are trying to instigate because obviously its not being spread all over as a huge outrage.yurimon
- Do you really not understand why these stories warrant different levels of coverage than Charleston?nb
- I completely understand. I cant speak of your level of understanding though.yurimon
- https://en.wikipedia…nb
- ^, I hope someday you can get help with that and stop hating on people who are passionate about healing of the human family and quest for truth.yurimon
- the reality is its your ego my friend. I'm here without ego and more about solving problems, hearing opinions, and oh yes truth. no ego involved in my goals.yurimon
- Oh, FFS. You get all your info from nonsense sources. You assume EVERY "official" story is a lie. You're fucking delusional. Seek help.nb
- Nobody is assuming anything. Remember I post links. you act like I wrote it. however how are you an expert of differentiating the truth and lie of your existencyurimon
- again? my delusional friend.yurimon
- georgesIII-1
seriously, what this poor soul wrote is what most stormy rainbows forum has been spewing for years, sometimes it's words for words bs, I said before that I frequent these forums just to fuck with them, so for those who don't know badhistory, it's a fantastic source for official history..
--
It turns out Li'l Dylann wrote a manifesto, and he's a history buff. The full text can be found here[1] . I am starting this thread primarily to be a place for an open discussion about this document and what it tells us about Dylann's bad understanding of bad history.
Some initial observations:
Dylann writes:
Modern history classes instill a subconscious White superiority complex in Whites and an inferiority complex in blacks. This White superiority complex that comes from learning of how we dominated other peoples is also part of the problem I have just mentioned. But of course I dont deny that we are in fact superior.--- Here he seems to be saying that a history of "white" "dominance" is an objective truth. He doesn't seem to consider the possibility that the history books might be biased in favor of Western civilization or white people, and that this might account for the "subconscious" messages he believes can be found. He calls the resultant white "superiority complex" a "problem" because it promotes complacency.
Dylann continues:
I wish with a passion that niggers were treated terribly throughout history by Whites, that every White person had an ancestor who owned slaves, that segregation was an evil an oppressive institution, and so on. Because if it was all it true, it would make it so much easier for me to accept our current situation. But it isnt true. None of it is. We are told to accept what is happening to us because of ancestors wrong doing, but it is all based on historical lies, exaggerations and myths.---In other words, the current (perceived) oppression of whites by blacks is unjustified because it has no historical foundation. Black people were not oppressed in the past, and so we white people do not deserve payback today. As an example, he writes, "only a fourth to a third of people in the South owned even one slave." He also claims to have read "hundreds of slave narratives from my state," (which, if true, can only mean that he delved into the WPA Narratives) and has found many cases of slaves who loved their masters and plantations where whipping didn't occur.
Dylann isn't wrong about his statistic, and he isn't lying about what he found in the WPA slave narratives. (I suspect, though, that instead of actually sitting down with these volumes, he read the cherry-picked selections on his white power websites.)
He is right that on the eve of the Civil War, about 25% of white households in the South included at least one slave. Dylann seems to be saying that most white people today do not deserve to be killed and raped by black people (which he interprets as revenge for historical wrongs) because their ancestors' hands were clean.However, many of these poor landless tenant farmers in 1861 took up arms to defend the Confederacy anyhow. They did so because they hoped that they could one day become slaveowners themselves. They also defended slavery by being patrollers, by voting for slaveowners, by renting and marketing slaves, by purchasing slave-produced commodities, and by parroting white supremacist doctrine.
Now up in the Appalachians, where slavery was never especially profitable, there were quite a few poor whites who opposed the Confederacy and the slave system. Important examples are West Virginia and eastern Tennessee. Most of these people were nevertheless white supremacists, and were happy that they didn't live near black folk, either slave or free. The point is that statistics about slave ownership need to be contextualized.
Dylann is also right that that many plantation owners and managers used violence against slaves sparingly, if at all. There was a neverending debate within the Old South about how to manage the workforce. What works better, the carrot or the stick? There were fans of both methods. No one took any surveys. Modern historiography, however, favors the opinion that violence was endemic within the slave society, and an absolutely crucial and fundamental aspect of it. This really isn't a controversial topic. If your master chose not to use the whip, there was always the threat, unspoken or not, that he would sell you to one of the vast majority who had no such compunctions.
---Dylann writes about slave interviews: "Almost all of them were positive. One sticks out in my mind where an old ex-slave recounted how the day his mistress died was one of the saddest days of his life."
Here we need to go into some background about how these interviews were produced. In the 1930s, the Works Progress Administration sent hundreds of field agents around the country to interview former slaves for the sole purpose of recording their memories for the sake of historical knowledge. Few of them had any background in doing interviews, most of them were white, and many of them were Southerners. So you would literally get exchanges like, "Your mistress was good to you, wasn't she?" "Yes ma'am." "You don't remember a lot of whippings on the plantation, do you?" "No ma'am." When a strange white woman appears on your porch in rural Jim Crow Alabama, you are going to be cagey about how you answer her questions. Historians have recognized for a long time that these interviews are problematic, and they have been duly scrutinized. There are over 2000 WPA interviews, and there are deep qualitative differences among them. If Dylann had succeeded in getting his drug-addled mind through 9th grade, he might have learned this.
Another point: there are many accounts of slaves crying at the funerals of their masters. Partly this was to keep up appearances, and was not a manifestation of true emotion. Another reason for tears was that often, the death of a master meant the reading of his will, and the separation of enslaved families among the heirs and creditors.
Dylann knows all about Jim Crow:
Segregation did not exist to hold back negroes. It existed to protect us from them. And I mean that in multiple ways. Not only did it protect us from having to interact with them, and from being physically harmed by them, but it protected us from being brought down to their level.It's interesting how old school Dylann's racism is. This is the classic defense of segregation which you could hear from Bull Connor and his ilk back in the day. I find it striking that this stuff is still in circulation, although maybe some of you who are more in touch with the modern white power movement won't be so surprised. The truth is that segregation, which emerged gradually in the decades following the Civil War, was employed to maintain white power throughout the South. There is no question that it was driven in part by fear of black barbarism, but the real goal was to perpetuate disempowerment, politically, socially, and economically.
Dylann on white flight:
The pathetic part is that these White people dont even admit to themselves why they are moving. They tell themselves it is for better schools or simply to live in a nicer neighborhood. But it is honestly just a way to escape niggers and other minorities.Here Dylann might have a point about how whites rationalize suburbanization, even in South Carolina. The historical fact, however, is that the number-one reason why whites left the cities from the 1960s-80s was so that they could get away from black people. The triggers were school desegregation, the growth of the welfare state, "forced busing," and rising black militancy. During the famous showdown over busing in Boston, picketers carried signs saying, "We don't want any niggers in our school" and "Monkeys get out of our neighborhood." So not all white people have been coy about their reasoning.
Dylann returns to his observations of the history classroom:
In a modern history class it is always emphasized that, when talking about “bad” things Whites have done in history, they were White. But when we lern [sic] about the numerous, almost countless wonderful things Whites have done, it is never pointed out that these people were White. Yet when we learn about anything important done by a black person in history, it is always pointed out repeatedly that they were black. For example when we learn about how George Washington carver was the first nigger smart enough to open a peanut.Wait, didn't you just say that you were subliminally turned into a white-power activist by the content of your history textbooks? This makes it sound like they're all written by bleeding-heart liberals. You might want to sort this out before, you know, you use these beliefs as foundation for some kind of radical action.
George Washington Carver, by the way, was an agricultural scientist. His main interest was to encourage nitrogen-fixing crops (especially peanuts and sweet potatoes) as a way to repair soils from the damage done by cotton in the Lower South. He founded a research lab and his work generated a buzz in Washington. At the behest of his white colleagues, he testified before Congress in 1921 to (successfully) support a tariff on peanuts. The fact that a black man was testifying before Congress as an expert was controversial national news and made him famous. His scientific work was instrumental in helping the South recover from the boll weevil infestation.
Dylann is not the first racist to make fun of Carver, which admittedly isn't that hard to do since peanuts are a humorous topic. People also liked to make fun of Jimmy Carter for being a peanut farmer, even though he was also a nuclear engineer. However, there's no question that in the history of Southern agriculture, Carver is an important figure.
Dylann loved to visit historical sites in South Carolina, and included photos of himself at these sites with his manifesto. I am having trouble figuring out from news reports exactly what those sites were. The linked article says they were "a slave plantation, Sullivan Island, South Carolina, and the Museum and Library of Confederate History."
This is cumbersome phrasing. The New York Times article on Dylann has now been revised and has dropped its own list of these sites. I haven't been to any of these places. I have my popcorn ready for the embarrassed, defensive reactions of these sites to the news that Dylann learned so much interesting history from their displays. I hope this can open up a discussion about these dipshit Confederate memorials and whether bulldozers should be applied to them.
- I didn't make any sense, in english now: I frequent stormfag forums, what dyllan has in his manifesto is word for word what I have read many times, if you wantGeorgesII
- to learn more about "official" history, there's a sub called /r/badhistory, below a post I copied which dissects the manifestoGeorgesII
- poor soul?bklyndroobeki
- IRNlun61
Was away for two weeks with no internet access and just recently heard about the Charlestown church shooting...
It's bad enough that the shooting happened, but conflating the actions and ravings of a lunatic into some representation of race relations in America is fucking crazy.
- yeah, too many people took the interstellar bait,georgesIII
- there were 2 other mass shootings that nobody gives a fck about it seems.yurimon
- There is a small but noticeable group of people that agree with this lunatic's ideology, but not the killings. This opens the discussion to be about race.nb
- http://naturalsociet…yurimon
- utopian0
Gunmen from 2 vans fatally shoot 3 in Baltimore.
The two vans — one burgundy and one white — pulled to the side of a road near the University of Maryland, Baltimore, campus Tuesday night, police said.
- fooler0
Mass Shooting In Tennessee Leaves 4 Marines Dead...
Chattanooga Shooting Suspect Identified As Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez
- sandbag1
You know what's a shame?
That this thread has 1.4k posts...
- utopian0
MURICA GUN VIOLENCE FACTOIDS
The Big Picture:
Every year in the U.S., an average of more than 100,000 people are shot, according to The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence.
Every day in the U.S., an average of 289 people are shot. Eighty-six of them die: 30 are murdered, 53 kill themselves, two die accidentally, and one is shot in a police intervention, the Brady Campaign reports.
Between 2000 and 2010, a total of 335,609 people died from guns -- more than the population of St. Louis, Mo. (318,069), Pittsburgh (307,484), Cincinnati, Ohio (296,223), Newark, N.J. (277,540), and Orlando, Fla. (243,195) (sources: CDF, U.S. Census; CDC)
One person is killed by a firearm every 17 minutes, 87 people are killed during an average day, and 609 are killed every week. (source: CDC)
---
Homicides by Weapon:
Handguns comprised 72.5 percent of the firearms used in murder and non-negligent manslaughter incidents in 2011; 4.1 percent were with shotguns; 3.8 percent were with rifles; 18.5 percent were with unspecified firearms.
13.3 percent of homicides were done with knives or other cutting instruments.
5.8 percent of homicides were from the use of hands, fists, feet, etc. (source: FBI)
---
Guns and kids:
82 children under five years old died from firearms in 2010 compared with 58 law enforcement officers killed by firearms in the line of duty (sources: CDF, CDC, FBI)
More kids ages 0-19 died from firearms every three days in 2010 than died in the 2012 Newtown, Conn., massacre (source:CDF, CDC)
Nearly three times more kids (15,576) were injured by firearms in 2010 than the number of U.S. soldiers (5,247) wounded in action that year in the war in Afghanistan (source: CDF, CDC, Department of Defense)
Half of all juveniles murdered in 2010 were killed with a firearm (source: Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention)
- instrmntl0
MAN SHOT IN THE HEAD AT CITY DINER
A 24-year-old man was shot in the head by another man around 3:45 a.m. Thursday inside City Diner at 90th street and Broadway.
The shooter walked into the diner and ordered corn beef hash and eggs when he saw the victim sitting in a booth with a woman; he went over and asked “Do I know you from somewhere?” police told the Post. The two spoke and then the shooter left the restaurant. He returned and paid for his order — the video below shows him waiting for his order, police said — but before leaving he went by the victim’s table again and shot him point-blank in the head. The bullet apparently grazed his head and he was able to get himself to the hospital, where he was listed in stable conditionThe shooter is described as a black man in his 20′s who is about 6 feet tall. Anyone with information is asked to call Crime Stoppers at (800) 577-TIPS (8477).
- He had one job.utopian
- damn. used to live across the street, was at city diner all the time.dirtydesign
- BH260
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/21/us…
father of 13 kids- 60 violations
- monkeyshine0
In contrast, you know who didn't get shot? Yup, the redneck dumbass who tried pulling a gun on cops not once but twice.
- wow, this is like perfect combo of stereo typed propaganda gold.yurimon
- stereotyped...the ironymonkeyshine
- what happens when you live in such a small town that the deputy is your little brothers best friend********
- i_monk1
The memorial to the victims of Anders Behring Breivik has been revealed.
- ********0
- ********0
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/23/us…
Killed were two adults and three children. A girl was critically injured. Two suspects --16- and 18-year-old brothers, both related to the victims -- ran out the door as police arrived, officials said.
