Las Vegas...

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 5 months ago - 6 years 5 months ago #302902 by
Replied by on topic Las Vegas...
After spending time with friends and family and a night of sleep, I'm slowly coming to terms with the enormity of this event, and I really do appreciate everyone who has participated in this conversation so far and allowed me to vent a lot of frustration. This feeling of helplessness is not typical for me and it is not very Jedi in my mind either, so I am doing what I can to feel useful. Part of that is donating a few dollars (thank you, Ros, for the link). Part of that is speaking my opinion about gun control policy, even if it is just beginning the conversation. Again, I appreciate everyone here who has been patient with me while I do what feels right to me right now, even though it is certainly motivated by emotion at the moment.

Putting the gun issue aside, the gravity of this whole thing is pulling on me hard. The numbers are turning into names, and some are names that I know. A third of the victims of this attack are from Southern California. My home. Many I had never known or met, but a few are people I had. They were regulars at events put on by the radio station I work for, or they were in the radio business with me. Twenty of our listeners we gave tickets to are still unaccounted for. Three of our advertising clients that we sent to the show were shot. All three are alive, but still in the hospital. The stories just keep coming...

WARNING: Some of these stories are upsetting or a bit graphic, so I'm putting them in a spoiler:
Warning: Spoiler!


Beyond the human factor, this has happened in one of my very favorite places. Las Vegas holds a special place in my heart. I asked my wife to marry me on the casino floor of the Palms. I married her eight months later at the Flamingo. I've watched L.A. Kings hockey games and seen Justin Timberlake, Green Day, and Pink perform at the MGM Grand. I just watched Bruno Mars perform at the new T-Mobile Arena. I was at the very same Route 91 Harvest Festival the last two years and stood on the ground where people lost their lives.
We're good friends with Martin the bartender at the Nine Fine Irishmen inside the New York New York. My older brother and I both had our Bachelor Parties in downtown Vegas. I've go-karted, indoor skydived, driven a Lamborghini, and been on the tallest observation wheel in the world in this town. While it is called "Sin City", it is still the backdrop to some of my best memories. I won't let this ruin the city I love, but I must admit it hurts to see it wounded this way. Thank the Force for guiding the First Responders and others in a remarkable response to an almost impossible situation, and it is heartwarming to see the community come together in support of each other.

I share this today because all of this is very real. I know none of this is my fault, but the guilt is there. There was no way to know that someone would destroy lives and test a city's emergency response on what was supposed to be a night of music, dancing, and fun, but sometimes I can't shake the feeling that we sent people to their end. These feelings make me feel like I need to do whatever I can to make something right, and right now that feels like taking automatic weapons and semi-automatic weapons off the table and discussing what is actually a reasonable expectation of being "armed" in the country according to the 2nd Amendment. I'm not after anyone's guns or their freedoms. I'm asking people to be logical rather than driven by fear and just talk about it. Not everyone will agree with me and I respect that, but I have to do something. This is my start. Going forward, I will do my best to remain respectful and open to any ideas and solutions to gun violence. We are to be instruments of peace, and together I know we can do better.

Thank you all for listening.
Last edit: 6 years 5 months ago by . Reason: Fixed the spoiler

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 5 months ago - 6 years 5 months ago #303101 by Lykeios Little Raven
Replied by Lykeios Little Raven on topic Las Vegas...
Thank you for sharing, Senan. It's heart breaking to read some of those stories of victims/survivors.

When I was listening to the news reports come out about the attack on NPR I just started to cry. It was just so simultaneously sad and enraging.

Maybe this time we'll finally try to do something about these kinds of attacks, but I'm not holding my breath.

“Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man.” -Zhuangzi

“Though, as the crusade presses on, I find myself altogether incapable of staying here in saftey while others shed their blood for such a noble and just cause. For surely must the Almighty be with us even in the sundering of our nation. Our fight is for freedom, for liberty, and for all the principles upon which that aforementioned nation was built.” - Patrick “Madman of Galway” O'Dell
Last edit: 6 years 5 months ago by Lykeios Little Raven.
The following user(s) said Thank You:

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 5 months ago - 6 years 5 months ago #303115 by
Replied by on topic Las Vegas...
Last night (Wednesday) we proceeded with a Country concert at a local fair featuring the band LOCASH that we had planned for months. It was a difficult decision I had to make, but I spoke with the artist and both frontmen in the band agreed that it would be best to go forward and show that there is nothing to be afraid of. Music has a way of bringing people together and helping us to heal, and the band fully embraced this idea. Chris and Preston avoided the urge to make the stage a soap box, and instead focused on their fans. There was no talk of gun control or of the killer. There was only compassion for the victims and unity for the rest of us. There was no anger on display. It was good to have a sense of normalcy after such a crazy week so far.

LOCASH is a very positive, upbeat group of guys, and they showed it last night playing all of their own stuff and also covering Purple Rain from Prince and Waterfalls by TLC. The crowd was loving it, including two loyal listeners of my radio station who were at Route 91 Harvest Festival in Las Vegas on Sunday. Both were wounded in the attack, but were able to leave the hospital and go home. One still has a bullet in her leg that will be there forever. Both decided to follow through with their plans to come to this show, despite their injuries and the trauma both experienced last weekend. In a very touching and emotional moment, LOCASH invited them and others on stage to honor them during a song. It was bittersweet seeing people come together and support each other, knowing that some friends and family will never be coming home.

VIDEO of "I Love This Life"

I've seen so many inspiring stories of courage and strength in just the past three days, but the road to recovery is going to be a long and hard one. Along with grieving the loss of those killed and dealing with horrific physical injuries, many also suffer psychologically from survivor's guilt and PTSD. I know my workplace is still far from normal. I've seen more than one coworker just break down in tears for no real reason other than thinking about what has happened. I'm not going to lie. Just writing this has brought me to tears more than once. It is natural to be emotional and to experience the pain that something that this can cause, but we will get past it.

It is important to remember in times like this that there is help out there. A grief councilor has been in our building the last few days and will be here for the rest of the week. She has been extremely helpful in helping us to deal with the seemingly constant barrage of heartbreaking stories coming at us on social media and the news. If you or someone you know is having a tough time dealing with this or any other traumatic situation, please reach out. There are councilors and other professionals that can help us come to terms with things that no person should have to handle alone. Together, we can support each other and find a way to move forward and live our lives free of fear while still honoring those who won't have that chance. We are resilient by nature, and the healing will come in time.
Last edit: 6 years 5 months ago by . Reason: Added video link

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 5 months ago #304399 by
Replied by on topic Las Vegas...

Senan wrote:

jag1993 wrote: There's is a right to own firearms. Making them illegal and/or forbidden it's manufacturing removes that right.


The 2nd Amendment was written when people owned muskets that fired one bullet at a time. It was meant to protect the citizenry from an over zealous government controlled military. Do you think your guns will stop the U.S. Military from entering your house with a tank now? Do you think an automatic weapon is the same as a musket? Applying the 2nd Amendment of 1789 to modern firearms legislation is a special kind of dumb. We've updated nearly every other outdated part of the Constitution except this one.

jag1993 wrote: High capacity magazines is a subjective term. Some states already outright limit how much ammo you can buy and use.


False. It doesn't have to be arbitrary or subjective. Every magazine in existence can be limited to whatever we choose. Only allow five rounds in a magazine available to the public for any gun. Period. That can be done. No more subjectivity. State law is not federal law. If the federal law limits ammo, the states have to follow it.

jag1993 wrote: Some places already have waiting periods. The other issue of waiting periods is states and municipalities are streatching this period without due process (another right).


Again, federal law would supersede any state or local law, and the fact that local law enforcement and municipalities are extending waiting periods is not without due process. It is written into their laws to do so. The cops can also change the speed limit without my vote or permission. Public safety issues can be reflected in immediate changes to legislation as is allowed for in the original legislation. And due process is not a "right", it's a process the government is supposed to follow under certain circumstances, but the government can also change that process.

jag1993 wrote: The issue of selling to mentally ill people has been distorted. The original bill concerning mental health and guns wasn't supported due due process rights again.


No, the orignal legislation adding people with mental illness tot he background check list for firearms was presesnted by Obama in 2013 after Sandy Hook and then torpedoed by Trump and the current Congress (Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun-checks-people-mental-n727221) after the NRA had given them huge campaign contributions. The Obama-era regulation was also contested by the NRA and gun lobbyists, but was enacted according to "due process". It was law until the current administration rolled it back to be on the good side of gun lobbyists with a lot of money. Follow the money and look at the history of gun legislation and you'll see it has nothing to do with "due process" and everything to do with dollars.

jag1993 wrote: If we limit the money allowed to donations it risks infringing on individual right to speech.


We already limit donations. They limit what I am allowed to donate to any one candidate as a private citizen. (Source: https://transition.fec.gov/info/contriblimitschart1718.pdf)
Corporations and lobbyists are supposed to be held to the same standard, but they skirt the rules using Political Action Committees that can receive donations and then spend it on behalf of candidates without the candidate actually touching the money. This isn't a free speech issue. You can support whomever you wish and be as vocal as you like about it, but that doesn't mean you can buy candidates or elections. We have laws against just that so our elections are not influenced unduly by financial and foreign powers (cough cough RUSSIA cough cough). That system has been corrupted by PACs. It's the main motivation behind current campaign finance reform being proposed currently.

jag1993 wrote: Should I go on?


Yes, please explain why any private citizen would ever need an automatic or semiautomatic weapon. Ever. Then explain why anyone properly trained would ever need more than eight rounds in your weapon of choice to defend their home.

jag1993 wrote: These have all been proposed and refuted for a reason. Claiming the other side is a part of the evil because they disagree with your policy ideas does not bring a solution.


The reason these policies are refuted is greed for power and financial gain. I'm not claiming the other side is evil. Who is the other side, anyway? If it's the NRA, much of their actions are morally reprehensible and I do disagree with their mission, but I don't call them evil. I call them irresponsible. I'm providing evidence that the lack of gun control results in mass casualty events and this can be stopped by enacting policies that nearly EVERY OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED NATION has figured out. The solution already exists and it is practiced everywhere but here in the U.S. These are facts. Americans are 4.3% of the world population but own 43% of privately owned guns. This is an American problem, not my personal policy.


Senan, you misunderstand the right of self-defense. You also misunderstand your obligation to respect the rights of others and the peaceful exercise of those rights. As well as the era in which the 2a was crafted.

The right to arm oneself is an intricate part of our nature. To be able to defend oneself from assault using equal or greater force is a necessary right.

You ask the question "who needs" without realizing that you have no right to determine that nor have a right to anyone's explanation. That would make them subservient to you. As Campbell stated, "society should serve man, not man serve society."

During the time of the 2a, when the States rightfully superseded federal law, muskets were not the only weapons. They were even working on machine guns. Ever heard of the Puckle gun?

Federal law is only supreme using powers GRANTED to them by the States. The Nations of the USA. The 2a was written as a guarantee that The People's right to bear arms will not be infringed so that the States could guarantee trained militia. A remedy to what happened during the revolution. In other words, you're personal right of arms is so you can own them. THEN seek state institutions for training. That's the purpose of "well regulated".

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 5 months ago #304414 by
Replied by on topic Las Vegas...

Jaedon Adar-Barnaby wrote:

Senan wrote:

jag1993 wrote: There's is a right to own firearms. Making them illegal and/or forbidden it's manufacturing removes that right.


The 2nd Amendment was written when people owned muskets that fired one bullet at a time. It was meant to protect the citizenry from an over zealous government controlled military. Do you think your guns will stop the U.S. Military from entering your house with a tank now? Do you think an automatic weapon is the same as a musket? Applying the 2nd Amendment of 1789 to modern firearms legislation is a special kind of dumb. We've updated nearly every other outdated part of the Constitution except this one.


Seen a MeMe that illistrated something akin to this....lets see.....*Google Searches* Ah ha!

Attachment 1st-amendment-2nd-amendment.jpg not found



It is not about the word for word black and white message of law that we should aim to follow. But the spirit that it implys to a Just system.

The laws of the past were made to protect the citizen's from it's government. Yes. We have evolved from muskets....That is not the point. There is no reason to "Fix" something if it is not broken. Our rights to bear arms and our rights to free speech are not broken. It has worked from the moment of creation to now and it will continue to work because the spirit of American Freedom is what it means to be an American. That includes my right right to carry a gun down the street and shoot idiots who try to shoot me.

Attachments:

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 5 months ago #304416 by
Replied by on topic Las Vegas...

Jaedon Adar-Barnaby wrote: Senan, you misunderstand the right of self-defense. You also misunderstand your obligation to respect the rights of others and the peaceful exercise of those rights. As well as the era in which the 2a was crafted.

No, I don't. I own guns and fire them responsibly quite often. I own a shotgun to protect my house. I also know based on the crime statistics in my community that I don't need one. My obligation to respect the rights of others to own guns is predicated on gun owner's obligation to respect my right to LIFE, which comes first. Being a U.S. citizen does not obligate me to respect gun owners over others. I am to respect the LAW, and the whole point of this thread is that the LAWS are ineffective or inadequate. By the way, I think you'd be hard pressed to convince anyone that this shooter was "peacefully exercising his rights". The NRA should be screaming at the top of their lungs that this guy does not represent responsible gun owners, but the NRA is silent because they know the laws they lobbied for are the ones that let this guy get his arsenal and legally modify them to be automatic weapons with one purpose, to kill people.

I am quite familiar with the Constitution and the era it was written in. It was a major focus of my college education. It was crafted in the same era as the Declaration of Independence and every other Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Many of those Amendments have been scrutinized and the Constitution itself has been amended an additional seventeen times since the Bill of Rights. It is a living document that was not meant to function only in the era it was written, but also for the future. That is what makes it so unique in human history.

Jaedon Adar-Barnaby wrote: The right to arm oneself is an intricate part of our nature. To be able to defend oneself from assault using equal or greater force is a necessary right.

No, it is uniquely AMERICAN culture, not human nature, as is evidenced by the fact that every other nation in the world with strict gun control does not have the issues we do with mass shootings. Shooting six hundred people at an outdoor concert with semi-automatic weapons is not normal human nature. Your argument doesn't even apply to the case we're discussing. He wasn't defending himself. He was using weapons designed for military use to kill a lot of people quickly. Show me an instance where someone needed to fire a thousand rounds defending their house or family and I'll buy your argument.

Also, you can still meet perpetrators with equal force without a gun. If people attacking you only have fists, you can meet them with fists. Your greater force can be a bat. You don't need a gun to match someone without one. And by the way, you don't have a "right" to meet force with equal or greater force. You have a right to defend yourself and your family on your own property. If we're out on the sidewalk and you punch me and I shoot you in response, I'm going to jail. You don't get to determine what force is justified. The law does that.


Jaedon Adar-Barnaby wrote: You ask the question "who needs" without realizing that you have no right to determine that nor have a right to anyone's explanation. That would make them subservient to you. As Campbell stated, "society should serve man, not man serve society."

You are not subservient to me when I say that. We are ALL subservient to the LAW. I'm not the one determining who needs a gun. The LAW does that, and the laws are clearly flawed if one individual can own forty guns LEGALLY and bring fifteen of them into his hotel room in order to murder fifty-eight people. And yes, you do have to explain yourself. That's what a background check is for. Regretfully, we don't do that enough either. Maybe is we asked why someone is buying a thousand rounds of ammunition, we might catch some people before they start using it to murder people. I have no control over you and your guns, but law enforcement does, and I can propose that the rules they enforce get changed so that I don't have to wear body armor to the next festival I go to. Campbell said society should serve man, not ONE MAN, and this murderer certainly wasn't serving society or visa versa. Society should be serving the six hundred people he shot or caused to be injured, and their lives far outweigh any burden placed on this guy by some inconvenient gun laws. I don't think Campbell would appreciate you using his quote to defend a guy it clearly does not apply to.

Jaedon Adar-Barnaby wrote: During the time of the 2a, when the States rightfully superseded federal law, muskets were not the only weapons. They were even working on machine guns. Ever heard of the Puckle gun? Federal law is only supreme using powers GRANTED to them by the States. The Nations of the USA. The 2a was written as a guarantee that The People's right to bear arms will not be infringed so that the States could guarantee trained militia. A remedy to what happened during the revolution. In other words, you're personal right of arms is so you can own them. THEN seek state institutions for training. That's the purpose of "well regulated".

Ever heard of a bazooka? A Tomahawk Missile? A nuclear bomb? Face it. Times have changed. Your guns aren't going to protect you from the U.S. Military, and your militia is not going to save you or your state from a North Korean nuke. And how many private gun owners are seeking state institutions for training? Gee, maybe that is something that should be REQUIRED of gun owners since it was the whole point of 2A to begin with?!? At least we can agree that guns and militias should be "well regulated", which they clearly are currently not. Laws today should not be meant to address some antiquated weapon from the 1700's. They need to work now. Puckle Guns weren't available the way an AR-15 is today, or everyone back then would've owned one and the Revolutionary War would have been a LOT different.

And Amendments to the Constitution are not States "superseding" federal law. It's the other way around. The Constitution IS FEDERAL LAW. It applies to the three branches of the FEDERAL government, not States. That doesn't mean that states get to ignore federal law. It means that the Constitution AS FEDERAL LAW grants certain rights to States, including any rights not specifically listed in the Constitution and its amendments. It can also be amended to take those rights away from States, as was the case with the 13th Amendment that outlawed slavery despite half the States literally starting a war over it, or, one of the three Federal branches of government can supersede the State's laws. That's what Executive Orders from the President do, that's what the Supreme Court does as is the case with Roe V Wade, and it is literally the entire point of our Congress. Representatives from the STATES come to Washington DC to write FEDERAL laws that apply to everyone, despite what State laws say.

I'm not trying to be rude or combative, but the argument for owning military grade weapons to protect yourself from the government is old and tired. It is no longer relevant. The 2nd Amendment is not untouchable, despite what the NRA would have us believe. It is an important part of our history, but parts of it it should be just that now, history. Women can vote and slavery is illegal now. It's time we update gun legislation as well.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 5 months ago #304417 by
Replied by on topic Las Vegas...

Senan wrote: By the way, I think you'd be hard pressed to convince anyone that this shooter was "peacefully exercising his rights". The NRA should be screaming at the top of their lungs that this guy does not represent responsible gun owners, but the NRA is silent because they know the laws they lobbied for are the ones that let this guy get his arsenal and legally modify them to be automatic weapons with one purpose, to kill people.


Except that - That. Is not the case. Our laws has nothing to do with how the MULTIPLE shooters gained such weaponry....and FANTASTIC Tactics.

In fact.....some are suggesting the shooter in question wasn't even the shooter. That he had been shot dead hours if not days before the actual shooting. Some of the theories and stories out there are quite.....Interesting.

Im pretty sure even if we had the strictest of gun laws....people would have still died that day.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 5 months ago #304418 by MadHatter
Replied by MadHatter on topic Las Vegas...
Senan if we are going to talk about this then you must do so accurately. He did not make those weapons automatic. An automatic weapon is one that fires continuously as long as the trigger is held down or a burst fire weapon fires a set burst of rounds per trigger pull. He did neither of those things. A bump fire stock was what was used and all that does is take advantage of the recoil of the weapon to pull the trigger more rapidly than most people can normally. But the fact remains that it is NOT automatic as one bullet per one pull of the trigger is still what happens.

The in a civil war the US will not nuke or even likely use missiles against its own people. The collateral damage would be so great that it would turn the general populous against them losing the war. Tanks and the like CAN be defeated by ground troops. Don't believe me? Take a look at Afghanistan and its resistance to both the US and the Russian armies with nothing but what they could carry and captured weaponry. A civil war in the US would be much the same. So yes it is a relevant statement.

Further owning a gun does not inherently belay or risk your right to life. Not anymore then my owning a car. It is only when you break the law with those items. Further, you site the whole low mass shootings in other nations. That is ignoring the fact that they do still have mass killings with bombs and trucks. And ya know what I can do to a shooter? Club them from behind with a rock. I can't stop a truck or bomb anywhere near as easily as a shooter. So it's the people, not the objects that need fixing. Because if they can still do regular mass killings in Europe that has the laws you want it does not matter what is passed here.

Finally, your right to self-defense does not end at your property line. You should not need to sit there and get beaten or hope you are faster than the attacker just because you are in a park or at Walmart.

Knight of the Order
Training Master: Jestor
Apprentices: Lama Su, Leah
Just a pop culture Jedi doing what I can
The following user(s) said Thank You:

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 5 months ago #304419 by
Replied by on topic Las Vegas...

Trisskar wrote:

Jaedon Adar-Barnaby wrote:

Senan wrote:

jag1993 wrote: There's is a right to own firearms. Making them illegal and/or forbidden it's manufacturing removes that right.


The 2nd Amendment was written when people owned muskets that fired one bullet at a time. It was meant to protect the citizenry from an over zealous government controlled military. Do you think your guns will stop the U.S. Military from entering your house with a tank now? Do you think an automatic weapon is the same as a musket? Applying the 2nd Amendment of 1789 to modern firearms legislation is a special kind of dumb. We've updated nearly every other outdated part of the Constitution except this one.


Seen a MeMe that illistrated something akin to this....lets see.....*Google Searches* Ah ha!

Attachment 1st-amendment-2nd-amendment.jpg not found


Umm... the 1st Amendment says "speech" AND "press", but I get the point. It is still irrelevant. Printing presses aren't being used to murder mass numbers of people.

Trisskar wrote: It is not about the word for word black and white message of law that we should aim to follow. But the spirit that it implys to a Just system.

Exactly. The NRA and gun owners should stop citing the word for word 2nd Amendment unless they are going to join a "well regulated state militia" and actually defend themselves from the government. If that isn't the intention, there's no need to bare arms according to the letter of the law. Defend your house with your AR-15. I'm not trying to take your guns, but you don't get to cherry pick the parts you like while ignoring the rest and then say it is still relevant.

Trisskar wrote: The laws of the past were made to protect the citizen's from it's government. Yes. We have evolved from muskets....That is not the point. There is no reason to "Fix" something if it is not broken. Our rights to bear arms and our rights to free speech are not broken. It has worked from the moment of creation to now and it will continue to work because the spirit of American Freedom is what it means to be an American. That includes my right right to carry a gun down the street and shoot idiots who try to shoot me.

Something is broken one man can kill or injure almost six hundred people. If you think this was the intention of the 2nd Amendment, to protect the right of one man to own over forty guns and use them to kill innocent people at a concert, then it isn't only the law that is broken. Nobody said the right to free speech was broken, but I still can't yell "Fire" in a theater because it is dangerous. This guy wasn't talking. He was shooting. And no, the 2nd Amendment has not "worked until now". If it did, a teenager would not have been able to murder school children in their classrooms with a weapon made specifically to kill people in a MILITARY theater. Giving people access to weapons designed solely to kill a lot of people very quickly is not "American Freedom". It is American irresponsibility. In fact, it is taking freedom away.

If the guy on the street doesn't have a gun, you won't need to shoot him. You won't even need to carry. All you have to fear is an oppressive government coming to violate your rights. If only that were true, as the 2nd Amendment would have it. But it isn't. Pull your head out of the sand and look at the lives actually being lost around you. That guy on the street is shooting at you because the 2nd Amendment has been broken for so long that we may never be able to fix it.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 5 months ago #304420 by MadHatter
Replied by MadHatter on topic Las Vegas...

Senan wrote:
If the guy on the street doesn't have a gun, you won't need to shoot him. You won't even need to carry. All you have to fear is an oppressive government coming to violate your rights. If only that were true, as the 2nd Amendment would have it. But it isn't. Pull your head out of the sand and look at the lives actually being lost around you. That guy on the street is shooting at you because the 2nd Amendment has been broken for so long that we may never be able to fix it.


This is misguided. Should a women who is five foot one and who weight one ten have to go hand to hand with a linebacker-sized guy using a bat or machete? Should she have to pray her short legs get her away faster than his long ones? Or would a gun equalize the situation? There are plenty of deadly tools that will NEVER be banned and they favor the strong. The weak are equalized via a firearm.

Knight of the Order
Training Master: Jestor
Apprentices: Lama Su, Leah
Just a pop culture Jedi doing what I can
The following user(s) said Thank You: OB1Shinobi

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: ZerokevlarVerheilenChaotishRabeRiniTavi