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

Skip to comments.

Colorado Dems want to hold gunmakers liable in attacks (And Much More)
The Gazette ^ | February 05, 2013 9:35 AM | MEGAN SCHRADER

Posted on 02/06/2013 10:16:45 AM PST by Red Steel

DENVER — Surrounded by the survivors and the families of victims from three of the most horrific mass murders in U.S. history, Democrats on Tuesday unveiled their blue print for comprehensive gun-control legislation.

In addition to often talked about measures such as universal background checks for all gun purchases and limiting high-capacity magazines to 10 rounds of ammunition, a new bill was promised — one that would make gun owners, sellers and manufacturers strictly liable for the death and destruction caused by military style assault rifles.

Senate President John Morse, D-Colorado Springs, said his bill would ensure that in the future the manufacturers and sellers of assault weapons such as those used in Aurora and Sandy Hook will be held responsible for the events in civil court.

That liability will result in industry changes on how the weapons are manufactured and sold, he said.

“There’s enough profit here that they can figure out how to get this accomplished,” said Morse, former Fountain chief of police. “The classic case, if you will, of strict liability is transporting dynamite. You are strictly liable — if something goes wrong it’s up to you. Does that mean we don’t transport dynamite? No, we’ve found ways to make sure nothing ever goes wrong.”

Sen. Greg Brophy, R-Wray, called Morse’s proposal the most egregious of the extreme gun control policies presented Tuesday.

He likened it to holding a brewery, the distributor and the convenience store responsible for a drunken driving crash.

“There are real consequences to passing bills like these,” Brophy said.

Morse said he is a week away from filing the actual language of his bill.

Other bills are closer to being ready.

Rep. Rhonda Fields, D-Aurora, said she will introduce a bill that would limit high-capacity magazines to 10 rounds of ammunition — a move that she said would save lives when attacks occur.

“High capacity magazines are designed for one thing, to kill large numbers of people as quickly as possible,” Fields said. “They are weapons of war.”

Brophy countered that limiting the magazines would do nothing to prevent their use, pointing out they are sold as standard issue with assault weapons and are prevalent on the streets.

And if they ban them, Brophy said, criminals will only make their own.

“Barring this is only going to keep law abiding citizens from having them, it wouldn’t keep them out of the hands of criminals,” he said.

Soldiers are given 30-bullet magazines, Fields said, while James Holmes used a 100-round magazine — that reportedly jammed — when he killed 12 people in an Aurora movie theater last summer.

Among those killed in the theater shooting was Jessica Watt’s cousin Jonathan Blunk, a Navy veteran and father of two.

Watts, 28, detailed how gun violence has impacted her life, starting with her husband attending Columbine High School when the 1999 massacre occurred.

She said he wasn’t hurt physically but they have dealt with the emotional scars of that event.

Then in 2006, a girl she babysat for, Emily Keyes, was killed in a hostage situation at Platte Canyon High School in Bailey.

House Speaker Mark Ferrandino called Watts’ story “a sad commentary on the pervasiveness of gun violence in America.”

Ferrandino said Democrats also will seek a mandatory background check for all gun sales including those that occur between private parties.

He said lawmakers also are drafting legislation to address mental health needs in Colorado, including funding for state programs and other needs.

--

Proposed Gun Laws

These eight laws were proposed Tuesday by Democrats in the House and Senate but have not been filed as legislation.

• Assault Weapons Liability — would make manufacturers, sellers, owners or possessors of military assault firearms, strictly liable for any death or injury resulting from the weapon.

• Universal Background Checks — would require background checks for all gun buyers, including those who purchase from individual sellers, and would enhance mental health sharing data between state and federal agencies.

• High-Capacity Magazine Ban — A ban on the sale or ownership of any ammunition feeding devices capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

• Mental Health Support — would direct mental health professionals to notify the Colorado Bureau of Investigation of individuals who are a danger to themselves or others so they could be put in a database and rendered unable to purchase a firearm.

• Domestic Violence Prohibition — would prohibit individuals convicted of domestic violence or currently under a protective order from possessing firearms.

• In-Person Training — Prohibits training online for concealed carry permits.

• Background Check Fee — establishes a $10 fee for anyone undergoing a background check from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation to obtain a firearm.

• Campus Safety — prohibits concealed carry on college campuses in Colorado.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Extended News; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: banglist; democrats; govtabuse; guncontrol; idiots; liberalfascism; secondamendment; tyranny

1 posted on 02/06/2013 10:16:52 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
How about instead we hold politicians and judges personally liable for all the criminals they turn out into the streets and encourage to come to the United States under their open border policies?
2 posted on 02/06/2013 10:21:08 AM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
Using this same "logic", they should go after car manufacturers also.
3 posted on 02/06/2013 10:21:48 AM PST by South40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

By this same logic they should arrest everyone in a neighborhood where a crime was committed and hold them all responsible for the actions of another.


4 posted on 02/06/2013 10:24:03 AM PST by Darksheare (Try my coffee, first one's free.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

“Senate President John Morse, D-Colorado Springs, said his bill would ensure that in the future the manufacturers and sellers of assault weapons such as those used in Aurora and Sandy Hook will be held responsible for the events in civil court.”

While this retards try to find some excuse to get the actual shooter away from the electric chair on some sort of BS mental excuse.


5 posted on 02/06/2013 10:24:13 AM PST by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Liberals’ ultimate goal is to have the fascist state where every Greenie/Lefty/Gay/Keynesian/PC thought can be implemented with the force of SWAT Teams not fearing their brains being splattered while kicking in doors.

Liberals live in a world of fantasy and intentions outweigh results, whereas we know that results matter, the intentions can be used in as part of the defense in a court case, but little else.

Liberals also cannot stand guns because they fear how THEY would act if given a loaded Glock...they are so angry, so jealous and with no foundation of morality, apt to kill or maim.

This is why most killers are Leftists, from Manson to Loughner...Mao, Stalin, etc. The Occupy crowd rapes, shoots heroin and kills people...the TEA Party just wants a chance for taxes to be lowered and people act civilized.

There is no difference. Colorado is just a symptom of the Liberal gun-grabber agenda.


6 posted on 02/06/2013 10:27:07 AM PST by wac3rd (Somewhere in Hell, Ted Kennedy snickers....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik
It really is a stretch to think up this crap....on the other hand the camels nose is under the tent...they want your guns..all of them...but they can have them...its confiscation...total confiscation....do not believe what they say....Trial Lawyers love this stuff...liability is what is destroying the USA..but you can bet in very liberal states they will pass this stuff...
7 posted on 02/06/2013 10:29:13 AM PST by Youngman542012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Any state that passes legislation like this should be cut off by all firearms manufacturers for any new weapons/ammo contracts/buys. Local dealers should do the same. Do what Barrett did to CA. Cut them off.


8 posted on 02/06/2013 10:30:13 AM PST by IYAS9YAS (Rose, there's a Messerschmitt in the kitchen. Clean it up, will ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40
Using this same "logic", they should go after car manufacturers also.

And car dealers, and gas stations, and convenience stores...

9 posted on 02/06/2013 10:33:19 AM PST by VRWCmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

I hope the pie-eyed DemonRATs keep it up.

They are phenomenally over-reaching.

I hope the American Soviet Press lauds their efforts 24/7 and on every front page above the fold.

Many of these Demons will be crushed in the next election.

Many of the RINOs that go along for the ride with the Demons will be ousted by Tea Party candidates in the primaries.

Make it so ...


10 posted on 02/06/2013 10:34:00 AM PST by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
So, if somebody gets behind the wheel of a Ford Taurus, and deliberately runs somebody over, should Ford Motor Company be held responsible?
11 posted on 02/06/2013 10:34:06 AM PST by GreenHornet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

“How about instead we hold politicians and judges personally liable...”

Assault Weapons Liability — would make manufacturers, sellers, owners or possessors of military assault firearms, strictly liable for any death or injury resulting from the weapon.

If I were a Colorado politician with any balls, I would attach a personal liability amendment to this bill each and every time that it came up. The amendment would include the stipulation that not only current members of the legislature be held liable, but that the liability would be in perpetuity, regardless of whether that person was in office or not.
The people who do their damage often leave and can never be held accountable for the really awful legislation that they inflict on the people. My proposal follows them until death wherever they may be.

They will hide behind sovereignty and state that they are protected by it. But when you try and legislate the citizens’rights away, their claim to sovereign protection ends.


12 posted on 02/06/2013 10:40:04 AM PST by Stormdog (A rifle transforms one from subject to Citizen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

who are we going to hold responsible for lightning?


13 posted on 02/06/2013 10:41:39 AM PST by JohnBrowdie (http://forum.stink-eye.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GreenHornet

Also, if a drunk driver causes an accident where people are injured or killed, and it’s determined that the driver drank a number of bottles of Budweiser beer, should the victims or their families be allowed to sue Anheuser-Busch?


14 posted on 02/06/2013 10:42:18 AM PST by july4thfreedomfoundation (November 6, 2012.....A day that will live in infamy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

I remember a case in Seattle about 25 years ago. A woman gave birth to a baby with FAS. They sued Jim Beam (IIRC) and lost. I remember it because I was waiting at the bus stop outside the courthouse the afternoon after the couple lost the case and the local news media interviewed me and asked my opinion.

It ended up on the evening TV news that night and the next day I was in court on a jury on another case and there was some hushed conversation between the attorneys and the judge. They then excused the entire jury except me and asked if I was the one in the news story. I said I was. They then wanted to know if it would affect my opinion on the current case. I said it was not germane to our case and they let it go.

Heck, the case I was involved with was about a guy who lost his leg because a doctor used artificial vein to fix a problem.

But this whole post is TMI.

Bottom line is that it’s ridiculous to hold a manufacturer responsible for the missuse of their product. They should only be responsible when it fails to function properly. And when a bad guy uses a gun to shoot a person, it functioned properly. The shooter is the problem.


15 posted on 02/06/2013 10:42:40 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Will Colorado Dems hold automakers liable in accidents?.


16 posted on 02/06/2013 10:46:18 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

How about we hold politicians responsible for all the lives they ruined?


17 posted on 02/06/2013 11:00:30 AM PST by I want the USA back (Don't try to understand the liberal "mind." It's impossible for normal people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

Exactly. The morons on the left are always pulling this kind of idiocy without thinking. Imagine what this would do to the price of a car. Democrats are a bunch of morons.


18 posted on 02/06/2013 11:10:27 AM PST by FlingWingFlyer (Now Playing. Obama II - The Revenge of My Father.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

I guess it would be a good idea to allow ambulance chasers to sue the biological parents too for creating a criminal or crazy kid. Go lawyers!!!


19 posted on 02/06/2013 11:15:27 AM PST by FlingWingFlyer (Now Playing. Obama II - The Revenge of My Father.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FRiends

Please help get the FReepathon in gear.
Donate today.



Click the Pic


Support Free Republic

20 posted on 02/06/2013 11:15:33 AM PST by deoetdoctrinae (Gun free zones are playgrounds for felons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GreenHornet
Does that mean I can sue the manufacturers of my silverware for causing me to gain weight??
21 posted on 02/06/2013 11:21:11 AM PST by bikerman (Gun control does nothing to stop gun violence. But then, Washington specializes in the art of doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Some think these Moroons are looking for the Dem skids to be greased as they aspire for higher office if they pass these idiotic Colorado laws.


22 posted on 02/06/2013 11:22:40 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

I like TMI posts, they give depth to the point.


23 posted on 02/06/2013 11:27:41 AM PST by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

God-d**ned insanity. Should United and American Airlines been held “responsible” for the attacks on 9/11? How about the makers of the boxcutters?

Liberalism truly is a mental disease.


24 posted on 02/06/2013 11:49:20 AM PST by ScottinVA (Gun control: Steady firm grip, target within sights, squeeze the trigger slowly...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Communists America on the way. America if being destroyed.


25 posted on 02/06/2013 11:53:53 AM PST by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik
What is the difference between the AR-15 and a Remington auto-loader? Answer,,,The AR -15 is an ugly gun and the Remington is not ugly. Forgive me if it is not the Remington but they work the same way.
26 posted on 02/06/2013 12:18:22 PM PST by ANGGAPO (Layte Gulf Beach Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Youngman542012

They aren’t expecting all this to pass. At most, they are hoping to get an AWB and magazine size limit. What they are REALLY after is universal checks. No matter how you cut it, they’ll INSIST this has to be tracked. This is registration and that is just confiscation not yet accomplished.

They’ll say it’s just a registry of “law abiding citizens” what’s wrong with that? They’ll say they aren’t going to confiscate anything, it’s all grandfathered! They’ll say you have nothing to fear if you obey the laws. Until the next Newtown, or Aurora or some other whacked-out Democrat educated nutball breaks existing laws and kills a bunch of kids.

Law-abiding...you have nothing to fear. We just want to ‘track’ you......that’s what Hitler said when he made the Jews sew those little yellow stars on their coats....


27 posted on 02/06/2013 12:45:40 PM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bikerman
Does that mean I can sue the manufacturers of my silverware for causing me to gain weight??

Yes. You can also sue the company that made the dishes that you used, as well as the manufacturer of your stove and refrigerator. Also, have your lawyer go after the supermarket where you bought your groceries, and the farmers who originally produced the food. You're going to be a very wealthy individual!

28 posted on 02/06/2013 12:47:22 PM PST by GreenHornet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ANGGAPO
What is the difference between the AR-15 and a Remington auto-loader?

Not much.

Maybe we should publicly cover the guns in pink color to make the DUmmies feel better.

29 posted on 02/06/2013 1:04:28 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
There's also a bill introduced in Congress for mandatory mental health reporting from the states to the NCIC. There's already a mandatory 5-year federal prison sentence under the Violence Against Women Act for possessing firearms/ammunition while subject to a restraining order. Some restraining orders are based on allegations yet permanent (judges' discretion).

Those are the incremental moves toward eventually banning everyone from owning firearms. Too many voters are involved in minor domestic violence and mental health situations. If the new bills are passed, affected voters will lobby and vote against the rest of us, IMO. Many veterans may also be caught up in being banned by allegation. And which group will be banned from possessing firearms or ammunition next?


30 posted on 02/06/2013 1:44:15 PM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
"Assault Weapons Liability — would make manufacturers, sellers, owners or possessors of military assault firearms, strictly liable for any death or injury resulting from the weapon."

That one wouldn't even work in court. It's already failed.

"Universal Background Checks — would require background checks for all gun buyers, including those who purchase from individual sellers, and would enhance mental health sharing data between state and federal agencies."

That one won't pass. It was written to fail.

Those are the straw men, written to get attention and be knocked down. During the '90s, there were the VAWA and the Million Mom March. Both were planned and backed by a very long list of business, academic and political feminist/socialist organizations. That was the beginning. They're getting what they wanted. Most of you will realize that within a couple of years or so.


31 posted on 02/06/2013 1:54:50 PM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop
RMGO has updated their bill watch webpage with the latest DUmb gu grab and growing wish list.


Updated 02/06/13

Strongly OpposeStrongly OpposeStrongly Oppose

RMGO Oppose 
or Support

Bill Number

Sponsors

Subject (check bill for official full title)

Location
(where is the bill, as of update)

Status

Strongly

Support

SB 9 Sen. Scott Renfroe/Sen. Ted Harvey/Rep. Lori Saine Authorization for Concealed Carry in Public K-12 Schools Senate Judiciary Comm. Dead
Strongly Support SB62 Sen. Kent Lambert/Rep. Lori Saine Civil Liability for No-Firearms Businesses Senate Judiciary Comm. Dead

Strongly
Oppose

HB 1043 Rep. Mike Foote Definition of a Deadly Weapon House Judiciary Comm. In committee--Scheduled for hearing on Thur, Feb 7 at 1:30PM, room 0112
Strongly Support  HB 1048 Rep. Justin Everett/Sen. Kevin Grantham Use of Deadly Force in a Place of Business(expansion of "castle doctrine") State, Veterans & Military Affairs Comm. Dead
Strongly Support HB 1085 Rep. Perry Buck/Sen. Scott Renfroe Change Posession of Weapons by Previous Offender House Judiciary Comm. In committee--Scheduled for hearing on Thur, Feb. 7 at 1:30PM, room 0112
Strongly Support  HB 1169 Sen. Greg Brophy/Rep. Steve Humphrey Brady Bypass for Permit Holders State, Veterans & Military Affairs Comm. Currently waiting for a hearing date
Strongly Support SB 140 Sen. Vicki Marble/Rep. Lori Saine No Federal Laws Concerning Colorado Firearms Introduction Pending In committee--Scheduled for hearing on Tue, Feb. 13 at 1:30PM, room 353
Strongly
Support
 HB 1162 Rep. Chris Holbert/Sen. Owen Hill Constitutional Carry House Judiciary Comm. In committee--Scheduled for hearing on Tue, Feb. 19 at 1:30PM, room 0112
Strongly
Support
 HB 1170 Rep. Steve Humphrey/Sen. Owen Hill Authorization of Concealed Carry in K-12 Schools House Judiciary Comm. In committee--Scheduled for hearing on Tue, Feb. 19 at 1:30PM, room 0112
Strongly
Support
 HB 1187
Rep. Lois Landgraf/ Sen. Kevin Lundberg No New Federal Firearms Laws State, Veterans & Military Affairs Comm Currently waiting for a hearing date
Strongly
Oppose
Sen. John Morse/ Rep. Beth McCann

"Assault Weapons"responsibility act No Details Sponsor yet to introduce but reportedly working on it
Strongly
Oppose
Rep. Rhonda Fields / Sen. Mary Hodge "High Capacity Magazine" Ban No Details Sponsor yet to introduce but reportedly working on it
Strongly
Oppose
Rep. Claire Levy Campus Carry Ban No Details Sponsor yet to introduce but reportedly working on it

Strongly Oppose

Rhonda Fields/ Sen. Morgan Carroll Mass background checks on all gun purchases No Details Sponsor yet to introduce but reportedly working on it

Strongly Oppose

Rep. Beth McCann Government oversight of personal mental health records No Details  Sponsor yet to introduce but reportedly working on it

Strongly Oppose

Sen. Evie Hudak/Rep. Beth McCann  Restrict Gun Access for People Accused of Domestic Violence   No Details  Sponsor yet to introduce but reportedly working on it

Strongly Oppose

Sen. Lois Tochtrop/ Rep. Jenise May   Forced Additional Training Requirements to Obtain CCW Permit  No Details  Sponsor yet to introduce but reportedly working on it

Strongly Oppose

Rep. Lois Courty/ Sen. Rollie Heath  Increased Tax for Gun Purchase to cover Background check  No Details  Sponsor yet to introduce but reportedly working on it

32 posted on 02/06/2013 2:35:03 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: familyop

I’ve started a D head count based on comments made in the press. These three House assemblymen are likely or probable votes against anti-2nd Amendment legislation. We need 5 Dems total to defeat their bills and all the Rs to stand firm. And I’m not counting the possibility of “absent” or “present” votes.

- Vigil, Edward D Alamosa

- Garcia Leroy D Pueblo

- Mike McLachlan D Archuleta


33 posted on 02/06/2013 2:52:28 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: familyop

One more ping to you... :^)

A short YouTube clip of RMGO making a statement to the Press at the state capital that they are going to go after the politicos in their districts who vote for these Unconstitutional laws.

“Dudley Brown: Gun Owners Reject Colorado Gun Bills”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YWFzYApjA9Q


34 posted on 02/06/2013 3:10:08 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
"One more ping to you... :^)

A short YouTube clip of RMGO making a statement to the Press at the state capital that they are going to go after the politicos in their districts who vote for these Unconstitutional laws.
"

'Dudley Brown: Gun Owners Reject Colorado Gun Bills'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YWFzYApjA9Q"

Great video, great plan! Up here on the Range, I've met more than a few young contractors, ranchers and others, who like their firearms along with their environmentalism, "green" energy, "organic gardens," Democrat politics, partying, etc. Democrat politicians surely stand to lose them, if any of those anti-Second-Amendment bills pass. Firearms along with dire predictions about the future (dire predictions disseminated much by liberal sponsors of the mainstream media, from what I've read) are very much in style and have been for a few years.

Great plan: to talk directly to constituents in every district and let the opposition know about that in advance. A few speeches directly to constituents in advance to let the opposition know what may come is a great move, too.

BTW, regarding "partying," it might be possible that many of the constituents caught-up in minor mental and domestic quarrel issues tend to lean liberal while also valuing their Second Amendment right. From what I've seen of the local scene, liberals are certainly involved in much of the DUI business.

It's definitely wise for partying folks to put firearms and other tools away and out of reach when indulging or having little family conflicts, but should every one of them lose their constitutional rights for the rest of their lives because of one occurrence in each of their lives?

Only a little something extra to address or not, and it could be done with better rhetoric than mine.


35 posted on 02/06/2013 3:37:33 PM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Every gun maker should stop selling guns in Colorado. Tell the cops if they want new guns they can go into the next state and buy them.


36 posted on 02/06/2013 9:46:02 PM PST by Terry Mross (Who long before America is no more?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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