Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Army tightens weapons policy
Fairbanks News-Miner ^ | March 19, 2006 | Margaret Friedenauer

Posted on 03/19/2006 8:25:01 PM PST by Graybeard58

A new U.S. Army Alaska policy penned this week forbids soldiers from carrying privately owned concealed weapons in public, despite being stationed in a state with one of the most liberal concealed weapons laws in the country.

The move, officials said, is in response to several incidents involving soldiers and their personal concealed weapons.

"In the last six to eight months, there has been a number of incidents involving soldiers and privately-owned concealed weapons that indicated a need to look at this policy," said Maj. Kirk Gohlke, U.S. Army Alaska public affairs officer.

Gohlke noted the trial of three Fort Wainwright soldiers currently unfolding in court. A jury is deliberating the fate of Lionel Wright, Freddy Walker and Christopher Cox, who are on trial for the August death of Alvin "Snoop" Wilkins. The three soldiers claim self defense in brandishing personal weapons during a confrontation that killed Wilkins.

Gohlke said there have been seven other instances involving U.S. Army Alaska soldiers and personal concealed weapons in Fairbanks and Anchorage although he couldn't comment on specifics.

According to the new policy, "Soldiers who fail to comply are subject to adverse administrative action or punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice or both."

U.S. Army Alaska also prohibits anyone--military or civilian--from having or transporting a concealed weapon at any time on a USARAK installation, a policy that has been in place for some time.

But Alaska law is much less restrictive. Gov. Frank Murkowski in 2003 signed into law a bill that allowed citizens to carry a concealed handgun in public without a permit.

Included in the 2003 law is that local governments cannot change the state gun law to be more open or more restrictive, but the U.S. Army Alaska can enforce policies more restrictive than state law.

Local firearms instructor Joe Nava said there are still benefits of getting a concealed firearm permit, although the state doesn't require it.

Those that acquire a permit are eligible to buy a gun from a dealer without a background check, are allowed to carry a concealed weapon in 29 other states and are entered into the police computing system as a permit holder.

But while Nava encourages permitting, he doesn't agree with the Army's policy. He said it's a right given under the U.S. Constitution and state law for soldiers, like any citizen or resident of the state, to have and carry personal weapons.

"The military is taking away (soldiers') ability to protect themselves off base and that's not right," Nava said.

But Gohlke said the policy is specific only to concealed weapons and does not affect weapons for recreation and hunting.

The policy is meant to create a safer environment for soldiers and communities, not to infringe on personal rights.

"Our interest here is simply to protect the health and welfare of soldiers and promote good order and discipline," Gohlke said. "The intent is not to restrict soldiers' rights."

Staff writer Margaret Friedenauer can be reached at 459-7545 or by e-mail at mfriedenauer@newsminer.com .


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; US: Alaska
KEYWORDS: alaska; anamericansoldier; banglist; libertarians
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last

1 posted on 03/19/2006 8:25:03 PM PST by Graybeard58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Someone on the JSOF will overturn it.


2 posted on 03/19/2006 8:27:06 PM PST by Thunder90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
The policy is meant to create a safer environment for soldiers and communities, not to infringe on personal rights.

"Our interest here is simply to protect the health and welfare of soldiers and promote good order and discipline," Gohlke said. "The intent is not to restrict soldiers' rights."

Tough to say with a straight face.

3 posted on 03/19/2006 8:27:49 PM PST by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thunder90

I meant JCOS (Joint Chiefs of Staff)


4 posted on 03/19/2006 8:27:54 PM PST by Thunder90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ncountylee

The Joint Chiefs will overturn it.


5 posted on 03/19/2006 8:28:42 PM PST by Thunder90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
Like all good liberals the General wants to cover his six first..

Not caring about terrorists who might target his people off base..

His law sucks ...but he is the General...perhaps Rummie will relieve him...

But then Minetta deliberately drags his feet keeping our commercial and cargo pilots unarmed...
6 posted on 03/19/2006 8:31:30 PM PST by joesnuffy (A camel once bit our sister..but we knew just what to do...we gathered rocks and squashed her!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

After driving away from the club parking lot, the dispute escalated when Wilkins and friend Joel Bruney confronted the three men near 25th Avenue. Shots were fired, Wilkins was hit, and Bruney took him to the Fairbanks Memorial Hospital emergency room, where he was pronounced dead shortly thereafter.

By that time, Walker, Cox and Wright had been detained at the Fort Wainwright main gate as they entered the post.

Crail told the jury to expect testimony that would support the claim that the three defendants were unprovoked in the shooting death of Wilkins. She displayed three firearms found in the soldiers' vehicle when they were stopped at the Army post; a 12-gauge shotgun, an AK-47 and a .40-caliber handgun. Crail said she could show that all three defendants had fired their weapons, while Wilkins, who she said had an unloaded shotgun, never fired during the altercation on 25th Avenue.

But Carney said it was Wilkins who was looking for a fight and emphasized her point by playing an explicit recording of Wilkin's music to the jury that specifically named "Ground Up."

The lyrics included lines like, "We'll lay you down and teach you homage" and "We'll put you six feet underground."

Carney went on to say the three defendants were simply enjoying a night out on the last weekend before their deployment to Iraq with the 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team. The firearms found in the soldier's car had been used earlier that day for target shooting at the South Cushman shooting range.

Carney said the altercation began when Wilkins reportedly reached inside the car occupied by Cox and Walker, grabbed a bandana and set it on fire. She said the soldiers drove off from the club but were followed by Wilkins and Bruney to the area of 25th Avenue, at which point the shooting occurred.

"The state would like you to believe they, by defending themselves, that there was some illegal use of a weapon," Carney said.

Carney and attorney Geoffry Wildridge, representing Wright, said they would show that Wilkins threatened the soldiers and put them in fear of their lives to the point that the soldiers felt they had to defend themselves.

"They didn't expect Fairbanks to turn into Baghdad," Wildridge said. "They had every reason to believe they were going to be killed."

The prosecution presented several witnesses who were in the area of the shooting in August. Each testified to hearing shots that night. Some said they heard shotgun rounds and pistol rounds, and others said they could not specify what kind of firearms they heard.

The trial continues today and is expected to take several days.

http://www.news-miner.com/Stories/0,1413,113%257E7244%257E3258038,00.html


7 posted on 03/19/2006 8:31:51 PM PST by Donald Meaker (You don't drive a car looking through the rear view mirror, but you do practice politics that way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Aren't there, like, big animals in Alaska that you just might need a gun to keep from eating you?


8 posted on 03/19/2006 8:31:51 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thunder90
I meant JCOS (Joint Chiefs of Staff)

I knew what you meant when you typed "JSOF" it never even occurred to me that "JSOF" was wrong.

9 posted on 03/19/2006 8:32:03 PM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

So soldiers can be trusted with weapons civilians can't have,
but can't be trusted with weapons civilians can have?


10 posted on 03/19/2006 8:33:40 PM PST by Boundless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Alaskans: If you're carrying for bear protection, must the gun be visible, or can you have it under your coat?


11 posted on 03/19/2006 8:35:00 PM PST by Uncle Miltie (The Prophet Muhammed, Piss Be Upon Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven

wont change... the army is a political organization.


12 posted on 03/19/2006 8:36:33 PM PST by Btrp113Cav
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven

When confrontimg a bear the best protection would be, to be within your weapon. (A tank)


13 posted on 03/19/2006 8:36:37 PM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

"PC" army we have now.


14 posted on 03/19/2006 8:38:16 PM PST by Btrp113Cav
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: albertp; Allosaurs_r_us; Abram; AlexandriaDuke; Americanwolf; Annie03; Baby Bear; bassmaner; ...
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
15 posted on 03/19/2006 8:39:12 PM PST by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
"Our interest here is simply to protect the health and welfare of soldiers and promote good order and discipline," Gohlke said. "The intent is not to restrict soldiers' rights."

How very liberal, he has good intentions as he takes away the soldiers civil rights.

16 posted on 03/19/2006 8:42:52 PM PST by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
"Our interest here is simply to protect the health and welfare of soldiers and promote good order and discipline," Gohlke said. "The intent is not to restrict soldiers' rights."

so taking away thier guns in a state where almost everybody including gun grabbers are armed is going to protect them how exactly ?

17 posted on 03/19/2006 8:42:57 PM PST by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58; 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub; smoothsailing; All

.


Just for the LOVE of it:



MEL's -PASSION- sparked by -WE WERE SOLDIERS-

http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1085111/posts



(The Words)
http://www.Freerepublic.com/~ALOHARONNIE

(The Pictures)
http://www.Freerepublic.com/~JLO

.


18 posted on 03/19/2006 8:43:16 PM PST by ALOHA RONNIE ("ALOHA RONNIE" Guyer/Veteran-"WE WERE SOLDIERS" Battle of IA DRANG-1965 http://www.lzxray.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee; DaveLoneRanger; Mr. Mojo; Joe Brower

ping


19 posted on 03/19/2006 8:43:30 PM PST by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
I have often felt compelled to carry a weapon for protection but you dont necessarily have to carry concealed. I have never worried about nor had anyone give me any guff over carrying in the open.


20 posted on 03/19/2006 8:44:03 PM PST by Delta 21 ( Democrats -- a 40 year war on poverty and still no exit strategy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

For active duty soldiers, you are never really off duty so the USA can control this. But this is a clear case of CYA here.


21 posted on 03/19/2006 8:44:17 PM PST by stm (You can fix a lot of thing s, but you can't fix stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

The military has long had these policies. Certain branches in the military, and those include the Military Police and the JAG Corps, are made up mostly of GFW's (look it up at Kim du Toit's site) and led by girls (of both XY and XX chromosomes, but girls nonetheless).

Not surprising that it's from these branches that the military's gun grabbers, and the Democrats' "veteran" candidates, come from.

"What did you do in the Army, granpa? Were you a hero in Iraq?"

"No, grandson, I was a lawyer in Alaska, safe and comfortable, working about 20 hours a week to try to put soldiers in Leavenworth for possessing handguns."

However, every Army lawyer we can have in Alaska trying to screw the troops, is one who isn't in the combat zone trying to aid the enemy.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F


22 posted on 03/19/2006 8:44:23 PM PST by Criminal Number 18F
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RJL

The liberal was posted to AK because it is a low priority.


23 posted on 03/19/2006 8:44:23 PM PST by Thunder90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Ef it, I'd carry anyway.


24 posted on 03/19/2006 8:44:50 PM PST by Supernatural (When they come a wull staun ma groon, Staun ma groon al nae be afraid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Btrp113Cav

The general is probably a Clinton holdover. He is in AK, and NOT in IRAQ because of this


25 posted on 03/19/2006 8:46:00 PM PST by Thunder90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven
Alaskans: If you're carrying for bear protection, must the gun be visible, or can you have it under your coat?

They say that the most important thing to do if you are carrying a handgun for protection against grizzly bears is to file the front sight down. That way it doesn't hurt so much when the bear shoves it up your ass.

-ccm

26 posted on 03/19/2006 8:46:29 PM PST by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Donald Meaker
Carney said the altercation began when Wilkins reportedly reached inside the car occupied by Cox and Walker, grabbed a bandana and set it on fire. She said the soldiers drove off from the club but were followed by Wilkins and Bruney to the area of 25th Avenue, at which point the shooting occurred.

Wilkins went looking for trouble and found more than he bargained for. Too bad.

27 posted on 03/19/2006 8:48:54 PM PST by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Thunder90
The Joint Chiefs will overturn it.

The policy of "no concealed carry on post" even in those states that allow it has been in place for many many years now. The Joint Chiefs have never overturned that. Why do you think they would overrturn this? And the JCS doesn't get involved in this kind of thing anyway, it's always left up to those in charge locally. I think you're wrong.

28 posted on 03/19/2006 8:52:42 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Delta 21
I have often felt compelled to carry a weapon for protection but you dont necessarily have to carry concealed. I have never worried about nor had anyone give me any guff over carrying in the open.

Depends on the state. Here in Texas open carry is illegal unless you are a LEO.

29 posted on 03/19/2006 8:54:49 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Donald Meaker
Wilkins and friend Joel Bruney confronted the three men near 25th Avenue. . . . Crail said she could show that all three defendants had fired their weapons, while Wilkins, who she said had an unloaded shotgun, never fired during the altercation

Big deal. If this man approached their car with a shotgun (loaded or unloaded) and made threats-- especially if he pointed it anywhere near them-- then it's a clean shoot in self defense, and the three soldiers are heroes. Praiseworthy homicide, to use Mark Twain's term.

Each testified to hearing shots that night. Some said they heard shotgun rounds and pistol rounds, and others said they could not specify what kind of firearms they heard.

I've shot tens of thousands of rounds from dozens of models of rifles, shotguns, and pistols. I could tell a small caliber pistol from a centerfire rifle or shotgun, but I would find it impossible to tell an AK-47 report from that of a 12-ga. shotgun, at least to the degree of certainty required to put a man behind bars.

-ccm

30 posted on 03/19/2006 8:57:02 PM PST by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
Depends on the state.

Yep, here in Illinois you might go to jail for thinking about carrying a gun.

31 posted on 03/19/2006 8:58:38 PM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ccmay; All

Alaska carry law states that any citizen who has the RIGHT to, may carry concealed OR open a firearm, without permit. It goes on to say that no Borough(counties) may impose a law stricter than that set forth by the state govt. The only places that a weapon CANT be carried are state and federal office buildings, and Govt schools. Banks used to be off limits, but that law was repealed a few years ago, so you can carry, concealed or open in a bank in AK.


32 posted on 03/19/2006 8:59:04 PM PST by intenseracer (ANWR: America Needs Working Roughnecks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ccmay
They say that the most important thing to do if you are carrying a handgun for protection against grizzly bears is to file the front sight down. That way it doesn't hurt so much when the bear shoves it up your ass.

That was written before S&W introduced the Model 500 revolver chambered for the .500 S&W round.


33 posted on 03/19/2006 8:59:25 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
That was written before S&W introduced the Model 500 revolver chambered for the .500 S&W round.

I want one. How much?

34 posted on 03/19/2006 9:01:02 PM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: paul51

Agreed. Same fact situation, but with the car marked "POLICE", and nobody would be on trial.


35 posted on 03/19/2006 9:01:50 PM PST by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

"bout 995 for a S&W Model 500 here at the Fred Meyers in Wasilla


36 posted on 03/19/2006 9:03:26 PM PST by intenseracer (ANWR: America Needs Working Roughnecks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

Alaska is ok to carry concealed without a permit. Im sure its ok to carry in the open. New Mexico is open carry only ( at least it was a few years back) and in Kansas open carry is ok. (With restrictions, of course, just like concealed carry.)

Definatly best to know the rules.

I have always thought that if I was carrying a gun, if everyone around me knew that I was, it was ok with me. Not being bold or anything but the possibility of me pulling and using it is made obvious to everyone, and is in direct proprtion to any threat around me.


37 posted on 03/19/2006 9:03:44 PM PST by Delta 21 ( Democrats -- a 40 year war on poverty and still no exit strategy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
"Our interest here is simply to protect the health and welfare of soldiers and promote good order and discipline," Gohlke said.

Oh barf. Here, let me pull this little phrase out of my bag of phrases so they'll leave me alone.

I've never understood why the Army makes it so damn difficult to have a personally owned weapon on post. I knew a guy that got busted just for having a few .45 rounds in his desk.

Utterly ridiculous.

38 posted on 03/19/2006 9:03:53 PM PST by VeniVidiVici (What? Me worry?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Does this apply to the Alaskan National Guard???


39 posted on 03/19/2006 9:05:52 PM PST by Thunder90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici

Oh another thing about carrying in AK, If you are pulled over, the only thing you have to do is inform the officer that you have a firearm in the vehicle. thats all they want to know, its not illegal, they just want to know


40 posted on 03/19/2006 9:09:11 PM PST by intenseracer (ANWR: America Needs Working Roughnecks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58; All

.


Transcript: Gen. PETER PACE on 'FOX News Sunday'

http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1546978/posts

.


41 posted on 03/19/2006 9:12:05 PM PST by ALOHA RONNIE ("ALOHA RONNIE" Guyer/Veteran-"WE WERE SOLDIERS" Battle of IA DRANG-1965 http://www.lzxray.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
Gun grabbers will have conniptions over this one! On the one hand, anything that takes guns away is good, but on the other hand, they're the ones who say the only people who have a Second Amendment right are soldiers... whoops! Seems this policy wants to disarm soldiers, but no one else. What's a poor gun grabber to do?
42 posted on 03/19/2006 9:16:59 PM PST by coloradan (Failing to protect the liberties of your enemies establishes precedents that will reach to yourself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
They let the Army have firearms? Who knew?

Seriously, the issue here is clearly one of training. I don't see why the military doesn't treat rules of engagement as seriously within the United States as it does without. You have to know this stuff if you're going to bear arms responsibly and it is the military's job to bear arms. A General assigned to Alaska who doesn't communicate Alaska ROE to his troops is a General who is cutting corners on his job, and prohibiting them from carry where it's legal is not the solution. IMHO.

43 posted on 03/19/2006 9:24:42 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thunder90

Wouldn't bet the house on it.
The Jount Chiefs will not utter a word, the military dosen't like guns not under their control.
Jack


44 posted on 03/19/2006 9:35:05 PM PST by btcusn (Giving up the right to arms is a mistake a free people get to make only once.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

This guy Maj. Kirk Gohlke is a real jerk. The US army has relegated its Alaskan personnel to 2nd class citizenship.


45 posted on 03/19/2006 9:36:25 PM PST by kimosabe31
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: btcusn

Make that Joint Chiefs
Jack


46 posted on 03/19/2006 9:41:00 PM PST by btcusn (Giving up the right to arms is a mistake a free people get to make only once.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

All it means is don't shoot anyone or get in any gun related trouble while you are off post. As my old Drill Sergeant used to say, "If you're going to do something wrong, do it right."


47 posted on 03/19/2006 9:42:18 PM PST by claudiustg (Delenda est Iran!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: claudiustg

Absolutely, at least regarding Alaska. You'd want to brief your people about local rules wherever they are - those are much more restrictive in Maryland, for example, than Texas. In Idaho you can be arrested for owning too few firearms... ;-)


48 posted on 03/19/2006 9:52:14 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Well RATS!!
I had hoped Nebraska would pass its "Carry Bill", so I could "Gift" the cost of a permit to my neighbor. He is active duty, Air Force, in Omaha. He is the kind of person that should be armed. He has the training, judgement and Attitude. If the JCOS won't let Servicemen be our best neighbors, we are screwed.


49 posted on 03/19/2006 10:12:21 PM PST by PizzaDriver (an heinleinian/libertarian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thunder90
The Joint Chiefs will overturn it.

Hardly. High-ranking officers are no better than politicians, eager to please and appease.

No personally-owned firearms were allowed on any of the bases I've ever been stationed at/lived on. Not to say that people didn't have them, mind you, but if you were caught and were disliked by the brass...

50 posted on 03/20/2006 1:02:44 AM PST by Alien Gunfighter (Isolationism now! This ain't the 40s!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson