Isn't the "Circuit City" type threads the reason you come to DU?

[trumad]

and aren't these threads the reason this place is so special. Don't know about you, but that big old thread was one interesting read.

[Corgigal]

1. Oh hell NO

I come for all the smoking threads, then smoke my ass off while reading them. What can I say? The kids find me edgy.

[trumad]

2. LOL

That's funny.

[toddaa]

13. Sorry, but DU is smoke free. And child free

[lapfog_1]

3. That makes two references to this thread, so I must be missing something

course, I could search for it... or maybe you could just edit to add the link?

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. Here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1745824

[lapfog_1]

8. Ahh, so this is what prompted another thread that I posted to

here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1752949&mesg_id=1752985

All I did was look up the appropriate CA law and quote it.

In CA, the store must have probable cause to search your bag or detain you.

I shop at Fry's Electronics all the time, and never wait for them to check the contents of my bag against the receipt.

Not because I'm an asshole, it's just that I don't think anyone should give up their rights "just because". That's how you get people thinking that "what's the harm in tapping the phone, *I* don't talk to terrorists" and "it's OK for the President to detain those he believes are TERRORISTS, even without a trial or a hearing"

Give away a little and they will take away more.

Anyway, Fry's has had this policy (bag check) for well over a decade now... and they never stop me... or anyone else that just walks on by. Because they know they can't.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. I started that thread

and I couldn't be more pissed off at some of the responses from 'progressives'. :puke:

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

6. Generally speaking...

I come to DU for the yaks. In thongs.

[KharmaTrain]

7. I Guess People Are Forced To Buy At Circuit City

Several years ago, I bought a video camera at Circuit City that went bad right after I got it home. I tried to return it but was told all I could do is have them take the camera, send it to some sweatshop somewhere to get it working and maybe I'd have the camera working in 6 weeks. No refund, no exchange. That was the last time I have set foot in Circuit City and won't again. I'm far more offended by the poor customer service than I would be if my bags are checked (like they are at Best Buys, Frys and other places). Sorry, civil liberties don't apply to private businesses and in many cases its deserved. Don't like the intrusiveness? Then don't shop at the place...plenty of other places to get the merchandise without the hassles. Online shopping is a great start.

But, I have to admit I find these "indignation" threads amusing for the first few responses...then it heads off into sillyland...as points need to be made...no matter how off the wall they are. Gotta love DU!

[lapfog_1]

11. "Sorry, civil liberties don't apply to private businesses..."

I'll remember that next time you show up at my night club! I'll be sure to tell my bouncers that they can throw your ass out head first just because... after all, there are plenty of other night clubs you could attend, or stay home and watch TV.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

What really amazes me is that you might actually have passed high school civics class and BELIEVE what you just wrote!

Oh well, apparently there are many like you both here and in our country. Civil liberties, pathooee, who needs them!

[KharmaTrain]

14. Private Property Is Private Property

The chances you'll see me at your nightclub are less than nil, since I could find far better things to do with my time and money than waste it in a club. In fact there are many clubs I wouldn't go into just cause they can and do impose their own rules that I find restrictive...from dress codes to the type of music they play to the type of drinks they serve. If you don't like the rules...you don't go in or buy. It's called the marketplace...a great equalizer for businesses that make it difficult to shop or do business in.

If I'm so offended by a business practice...and that's what this is, then I won't do business with the place and will share my experience with others...and if they're offended then they'll do the same thing as I do. Sorry...Circuit City or your club aren't government or public property.

A PRIVATE business is just that. I don't like the government regulating social behavior...like if people can or can't smoke in a restaurant (a private business)...if the smoke is a problem, go to another restaurant. It's called freedom of choice...a wonderful thing...look it up sometime. :sarcasm:

Cheers...

[lapfog_1]

16. HERE is the LAW on the subject... at least in CA

(f) (1) A merchant may detain a person for a reasonable time for
the purpose of conducting an investigation in a reasonable manner
whenever the merchant has probable cause to believe the person to be
detained is attempting to unlawfully take or has unlawfully taken
merchandise from the merchant's premises.
A theater owner may detain a person for a reasonable time for the
purpose of conducting an investigation in a reasonable manner
whenever the theater owner has probable cause to believe the person
to be detained is attempting to operate a video recording device
within the premises of a motion picture theater without the authority
of the owner of the theater.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The key here is "probable cause"... You not wanting to show your
receipt or have your shopping bag opened is NOT probable cause.

Settled case law in CA... Which is why, whenever I leave Fry's Electronics,
I breeze right by the checkout guys... and they NEVER EVER say a word other
than to offer to check my bag. Because they've been instructed to not
detain anyone that doesn't want to be checked.

This isn't a case of "no shirt, no shoes, no service".

Its a case of detainment (arrest). Yeah, if I walk into your establishment
and I don't like X, I don't have to stay... but if YOU (mr store owner) attempt
to detain me... you'd better have a damn good reason (i.e. probable cause).

That you can't see the difference in the situations... or understand your
rights as a citizen... baffles me.

[KharmaTrain]

18. Probable Cause Is Just That

They check the receipt when I go to my local Frys and I have never thought twice about it. Why should I? Now if I had thrown in other stuff into the bag then I'd be a tad upset. Now, if someone came into your club and took a six pack out of your cooler and walked out the door...you'd be a tad upset wouldn't you? Or how about if they stashed it in a bag...you'd sure like to see what's in there. I'm sure that'd be the case if thefts were a regular occurance at your business. Now you might not have seen the person go into the cooler, but you sure have "probably cause" don't you? Or that before a patron leaves, you are sure to make sure their tab is paid in full...if someone walks out the door without paying, you're not going to stay in business very long if that becomes a widespread practice.

I hate big box stores on the whole as they are impersonal and the "customer service" is barely that. That will keep me out of their business faster than having someone see my receipt. If you find that obtrusive on your rights, again, you can show your displeasure by taking your business to a place that doesn't treat you that way.

My rights as a citizen apply in the "public square"...not in a private business.

[lapfog_1]

25. Wow...

just wow.

If I observe you helping yourself to something, I have probable cause to detain you.

If someone else observes you (a witness), I have probable cause.

If I have a surveillance system and have recorded evidence of you stealing, I have probable cause.

If you (let's say you have a purse or fanny pack) simply walk out of my establishment, and I have NOT observed you or have witnesses, I *DO NOT* have probable cause. I can always ASK to see what's in your bag, but if you don't want to show me, I have no recourse.

If someone walks out without paying, I have probable cause (again, I have witnesses to your theft). However, EVEN if I did not get paid and you walk out and I try to detain you... and you say "but I paid the waitress"... and she has left my establishment without telling me that you have not paid... I *DO NOT* have probable cause (unless *I* watch you myself). That's why, at shift change, every waiter and waitress MUST close their tickets or transfer them to someone else (if left unpaid).

You (and me) do NOT GIVE UP OUR RIGHTS by entering private property. You can be asked to leave, but you cannot be detained
or searched. Ironically, only when you enter FEDERAL PROPERTY do you give up your rights.

When you enter private property you CAN be searched (but it's voluntary, you have the choice NOT to enter). Stadiums and such routinely search patrons upon entering for things they don't want on THEIR property (like alcohol or metal bats or such). However, when you decide to leave, they must have probable cause to detain you.

I just can't believe that there are this many people that don't have a clue about the basics of civics.

What the hell do YOU think probable cause is? Someone leaving with a bulge under their jacket? What about a Sikh gentleman wearing a turban?

Shoplifting is a major problem in this country... don't you think businesses would have long ago instituted a policy of search everyone upon exit if it was legal for them to do so. Instead, they invest in RFID tracking devices to attach to all of the merchandise so that when some THING not scanned and paid for leaves, the alarm goes off (which provides the PROBABLE CAUSE!!!).

There are many resources on the net for you to research on "probable cause"... here is one.

http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p089.htm

Please read it. And then read the bill of rights.

[TahitiNut]

43. It amazes me how many idiots just don't get it. Stunning.

Since 1983, I'd just breeze by the Fry's Electronics 'receipt-checker' at the exit and say "No, thanks." Only once in many, many dozens of visits did even one get insistent - and stopped abruptly when I told him he was getting close to earning a lawsuit. If the business has any sanity whatsoever, they are sure to tell those checkers they damned better not try to detain anyone merely because they don't stop and get inspected.

[lapfog_1]

45. The receipt checkers at Frys have all (should have) taken

a course about what they can and cannot do.

They are there as a deterrent, not to catch people shoplifting. Most people (even criminals) think that the store has the "right" to inspect their bags and even their persons... so it pushes the shoplifters to "easier" targets. And, I suppose, they could track everyone like you and me that just blows by their inspectors and recognize us (and track us) the next time we enter, hoping to get probable cause to stop and search. The Vegas casinos have some very sophisticated facial recognition and tracking software... wish the airports had had such stuff before 9/11. Almost said it wouldn't surprise me to see Fry's with it.. but then I remember the system those poor slobs have for inventory checks and customer purchase tracking. Fry's is truly the cobbler who has children with no shoes.

[Pithlet]

17. It's illegal to detain a person and prevent them from leaving.

Even on private property. It isn't the policy itself that is causing the brouhaha, here. It's the fact that it is illegal for stores to hold you against your will if you don't comply. It's a store policy, not enforceable law. They can ban you for not complying. They can't detain you as if they're the police. The point is that even if one think a person is an asshole for refusing to show a receipt and making a big deal out of nothing, they're still an asshole within their legal rights, and it should stay that way. I don't want stores to operate with the same authority s the police. And even THEY can't detain you without probable cause.

[KharmaTrain]

19. Store "Secuirty" Is Another Issue

There I agree with you. I've seen renegade security in business feel like they're Barney Fife...playing badass cop...which I fully agree is illegal, but that's apart from the issue about checking a receipt.

Since I wasn't present in the store when this altercation came down, I can not attest at the behavior of the parties involved. What words were said and how they were said. Did someone threaten someone else? Were police notified? And who notified them? Also, did they have "probable cause"? Was there something in that bag that shouldn't have been in there? It's easy to throw a broad brush issue without knowing the nuances of the situation...and hearing one side never is a complete picture. I tend to think there's more to the story...there usually is.

Yes, there is a serious issue if a store can detain you against your will for no reason...and if they suspect shoplifting or another crime taking place, they better well have it documented and the local authorities called. If this wasn't the case, then I hope the person finds a good lawyer and sues the hell out of Circuit City...that'll teach them to hire Barney Fifes.

[Pithlet]

21. Exactly. That's my point.

We don't know what happened in the case of the blogger. I don't know who's guilty or innocent, there. And if a store wants to post and practice a store policy of checking receipts, I think they are within their rights to do so, even if I personally think they're ridiculous and bad customer service. They just can't enforce them with illegal tactics.

[lapfog_1]

30. No they cannot.

A store may no detain you unless they have probable cause (a witness, a surveillance system, something) that would provide a prudent and reasonable person with evidence that you have committed or are about to commit a crime. If they detain and search you, they better be able to prove that they had probable cause. It makes no difference if this is in the store, the parking lot, or the street. (parking lots are private property too, in most cases).

[donheld]

49. Does a business not have the right to

refuse to serve anyone they want? :shrug:

[fishwax]

23. why should people not shop there because they don't like the policy? Why not

politely refuse to have your bag checked, and if the store doesn't like your policy about that, they can keep you from shopping there in the future. I'm sure they reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, after all.

[KharmaTrain]

31. Private Property...What Rights Do The Storeowners Have?

When I walk into a Best Buys or Frys, I always see the checker and know my bags will be checked. I never have had a problem with this as I know the problems businesses...especially large ones...have with shoplifting. It's the cost of doing business and if I don't like that policy then I won't shop there in the future.

There are plenty of reason I avoid big boxes...customer service being first and foremost. Many of them use non-union labor and purposely keep employees under hours to avoid paying benefits. Some make a practice of bait and switch...bringing me in for the "bargain" only to be "sold out" and I'm told I can sit on a raincheck for months or buy the higher priced unit now. That I don't know about til I'm inside the store. And be assured when that happens, that's the last time I do business with that company.

When you go into a store, it's not public property. You aren't paying the bills or the taxes...not like a government building or utility. If you don't like the policy, show your displeasure by not doing business with them and telling others not to do the same. I sure won't spend money with a company that I'm not comfortable with or feel abuses their employees or customers.

Cheers...

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. Very slowly once again

They have a right to ask

I have the right to say no

Once they try to force a search to which you submit voluntarily to, careful and important words, submit VOLUNTARILY TO, and make it a forceful search, they just crossed a line... and entered territory that makes them liable and depending on how far they go, can range from assault all the way to kidmapping. It can go from a misdemeanor to a criminal complaint

The only recourse the store has when I refuse to submit to their check is to refuse me service in the future

That is their prerogative... strangely one they have failed to exericse. Perhaps because at my local stores I see more and more people refusing to submit to these VOLUNTARY searches

The only exception to this are MEMBBERSHIP stores where the policy is part of the CONTRACT you sign... see COSTCO

Now why this is such a hard concept to comprehend eludes me.

[lapfog_1]

42. Unless they have probable cause that you committed a crime - n/t

At least, that's the CA law on the subject, which I've posted the relevant paragraph to three times now on different threads... and once here. I'm pretty sure the laws in the other 49 states will be similar.

Btw, ANY citizen can effect an arrest (I see DUers here almost every day suggest that someone should do this civic duty to a certain Messrs Bush and Cheney)... IF they have probable cause. Just like the police. And it matters not a whit (as far as the law is concerned) whether it be done on private or public spaces.

However, if said citizen CANNOT show probable cause, they face (as you say) criminal and, more importantly to business owners, civil actions in a court of law (the punitive damages for illegal search and/or detainment (kidnapping) can be quite high).

This link has some entertaining examples...

http://www.aele.org/law/Digests/civil88.html

$1.5 Million for mistaken identity (but once the mistaken identity was resolved, the officers tried to cover up their mistake!)

[fishwax]

54. probable cause isn't enough for a citizen's arrest

at least not always--the laws very from state to state, but it generally applies only to felonies, and in some states you have to actually witness the crime (or have it occur in your presence) not just have probably cause ...

[fishwax]

53. storeowners have plenty of rights

they have the right to sell you products, the right to control their inventory, the right to set their own policies, the right to refuse you service if you choose not to abide by those policies, etc. That doesn't mean they have the right to search your property or detain you, though. (They may or may not, depending on circumstances, but they don't have free reign to do it whenever they want.) I suppose that's true of most property owners--when you have guests over, you have every right to ask them to leave, but forcing them to stay would usually be problematic.

Personally, I don't really have a problem showing my receipt, but I don't get the outrage at the outrage here. Store policies, as I said, don't have the weight of law--I don't necessarily feel compelled to obey all such policies, but if a store refused me service as a result of it, I'd accept that. I see this as quite different from, say, not shopping at a retailer because all their products are from sweatshops or some such thing--where a store's policies conflict with one's own morals. This situation strikes me as more of a conflict of policies--where the store has a policy to search all outgoing bags, the customer has a policy not to submit to searches without probable cause. If the store doesn't like the customer's policy, they can refuse him as a customer in the future.

[KharmaTrain]

55. I Just Came Back From Best Buys...

I'm not outraged...just partaking in a discussion. And I've also stated, I don't agree that a store should take the law into its own hands. If they suspect someone of shoplifting or have some form of probable caues, the local police, not their own Barney Fife's should be called. If the poster felt they were unjustly searched or their rights were violated, this is where courts of law can provide restitution or clarification.

That said, I just came home from a picking up some CDs at my nearby Best Buys. Right over the front door, right as I walk past the bag checkers and security station there's a sign that say "Management reserves the right to search bags and packages"...it's right there as you walk in the store. Once you go beyond that sign, you've agreed to this "condition" of doing business. If the store didn't post that sign, that's another story...or if they selectively check some bags and not others.

[fishwax]

56. I didn't mean you were outraged, just to clarify

I was just speaking in general DU/GD terms. :hi:

I'm not sure about how fully the sign comes into play, though. Suppose the customer reserves the right to refuse? I still think the only real enforcement the store would have would be to refuse them service in the future.

[KharmaTrain]

57. Signs Signs...Everwhere Is Signs...

No offense at all my friend...that's what this place is supposed to be for. If we all agreed, this place would be dead. :hi:

The reason I bring up the sign is that it faces customers coming into the store and surely are there for legal reasons rather than for "customer service". Also, I'd bet this is their safety valve for doing such searches. I find it more obtrusive when I learn that my sales transactions are being reported and sold to other marketing companies or a company is telling the government who I speak to on the phone.

Cheers...

:toast:

[Sherman A1]

27. Agreed and Well Said.

based upon my 34 years in Retail (18 owning my own business), you are absolutely correct about private property. Yes, bags can be checked and receipts expected to be produced. If the customer is offended, they can choose to shop elsewhere.

Had a shoplifter last night stealing a bottle of Seagram's 7 Crown and he was offended that he was issued a trespass warning and a summons to appear in court for his decision to steal from my workplace. Oh... Darn.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

29. You would detain someone with no probable cause?

Not showing a receipt is not probable cause.

[lapfog_1]

33. You better call your lawyer...

before you detain and/or search someone without probable cause.

It matters not what your store policy is or if you post it somewhere.

You detain someone illegally and you will find yourself in civil court (at the very least) trying to keep them from taking your business from you.

If you observe someone stealing something, or have other evidence (surveillance, RFID, etc), you have probable cause. If you search everyone that exits, or worse... only people that "appear to be poor/black/hispanic/X" you will be in a world of hurt someday.

Can't anyone here remember one of the first West Wing shows where the new nominee (Hispanic) to the supreme court was arrested in some small town in, I believe, Connecticut??? And what was the principle upon which the nominee spent the night in the local jail?
Probable cause! The cop pulled him over for "driving while brown" and illegally detained him, so instead of telling the local cops who he was, he called the White House to tell them that he wouldn't be there for the nominating press conference with the President... and the West Wing guys scrambled to go get him out of jail.

[Sherman A1]

46. First of All This isn't "The West Wing", this is reality

and I had an off duty Police Officer see him conceal the bottle. So Yes, I had probable cause and No, I don't need to call a lawyer. While I do work in Retail, I am not Stupid .

[lapfog_1]

58. Good to know (that you are not stupid).

so then why state in your post "Yes, bags can be checked and receipts expected to be produced." when you already know that you can't?

As for the West Wing episode, they were using a story line to illustrate a point of law. It is a fictional show, but the points that they were making are based in reality. The example here was "probable cause". Something that you said you had when you detained a shoplifter. If your security person had NOT witnessed them picking up a bottle and concealing it, you would not have the right to detain that person or search him. As opposed to what you stated "bags can be checked and receipts expected" (which is just nonsense).

Don't believe me or a fictional TV show, look it up... or call your attorney.

[Sherman A1]

59. Because

I was waiting for another lecture on the law from you.

[lapfog_1]

60. Well, good to know.

you're next lecture will be from a judge. Good luck with that.

[Sherman A1]

61. Ignored

[lapfog_1]

62. ditto

[Pithlet]

35. No one can detain another person without probable cause.

I really am surprised that so many people on a progressive board of all places don't realize this. No one. Not store owners. Not homeowners. Not cops. No one. Private property. Public property. Doesn't matter. Failure to comply with a store policy is not probably cause. Only actual evidence a person actually committed a crime. Store policy is not writ of law, and store owners do not have the right to act as if it were so. Store owners have the right to implement just about any policy they want to, and they can refuse to do business with people who won't comply. They can't detain them against their will, because that is illegal. The law applies to them as it applies to anyone else.

[lapfog_1]

41. The only exception that I know of is

federal (and perhaps some state) property. You give up almost all of your rights the minute you step on government property.

I worked at a federal facility for 10 years... and had my car searched, and my person searched, numerous times, in what outside the fence would clearly be an illegal search and seizure... but on federal property, so sad, too bad. Ironic but true.

And, for reference for those who DRIVE on federal property... a traffic violation is a FEDERAL CRIME, you get to go to the federal court house and sit with the drug lords and illegal aliens and gangsters and wait for your case to be called (there is no sign the form, pay the fine and leave). When your case IS called, the judge will likely be really pissed that the case is wasting the courts time, but (luckily for me) there wasn't any penalty... she (the judge) just told me to be careful not to run stop signs on base, and told the US prosecutor that she didn't really want any more minor traffic violations in her courtroom... in a voice that would have frozen hot lava.

[Pithlet]

44. Granted.

But you usually know when you're stepping on government property. And to clarify, it isn't the fact that stores are asking to see receipts or contents of bags that I find outrageous. I think it's dumb and ineffectual and crappy customer service to treat all your customers that way, but I don't think that in itself is a huge rights violation or anything. I object to the notion that they can and should be able to hold you against your will if you don't comply.

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. You can refuse future service

but you cannot ilegally detain somebody for not showing you a receipt

You can ask, but I can politely tell you to pack sand... I have not volunteered to submit to your search

You continue, detain for example, and you will be talking to lawyers.

Unless you have PROBABLE CAUSE to detain me... you cannot

[rosesaylavee]

9. I do but would appreciate

more threads about how we act out civil disobedience for the other rights we have lost these past 7 years.

For instance,

What protest can the individual or group make regarding the NSA wiretaps?

What protest can the individual or group make regarding the loss of Habeas Corpus?

What protest can the individual or group make regarding the election fraud?


And unfortunately, etc. etc. etc.

[treestar]

10. I think it is great that people are interested in that sort of issue

Shows we don't take it all for granted. And hopefully educate some that just giving in isn't always the best option.

The guy who did it apparently has money - he's young but one of those prodigy types - and so he gives back to the community by taking time and risking arrest to point out to us these things that we let slide.

It familiarizes people with the law, too. A couple of posters went out of their way to look things up in this regard - it's a great education.

[trumad]

12. Exactly----

I've always considered DU a huge community think-tank with a whole lot of smart people. Oh it pisses me off quite often...but boy have I learned a lot over the years. I say threads like these are good for DU, not bad.

[lapfog_1]

36. Many here might be smart

but I see that the education system is failing us again.

They haven't taken any basic courses on civil rights (Bill of Rights, for example).

I remember in college (so many years ago) that there was a survey of people (nation wide) where the questions where of the form...

"Do you believe that people SHOULD BE GIVEN the right to XXX"? (where XXX was one of the rights in the Bill of Rights)

It was phrased that way to make it appear that people didn't have XXX now...

Something like 58 percent of the people indicated that they should NOT be granted ANY of the rights asked about.

58 percent.

I joined the ACLU right after that and have paid my dues to them every year since.

I just thought DU would have more people like me and less of the 58 percent.

[madokie]

15. hell no I come here so I have a reason to take more pain killers and drink coffee

and to enjoy a few left handed smokes and doing all with no malaise in my heart, how about you

[trumad]

20. and what are you doing with your right hand?

;-)

[madokie]

34. if you must know, I'm rolling my little ball around

in the trackball that is ;-)

[Balbus]

22. No doubt about it.

[frogcycle]

24. no

tastes great!
less filling!

I ignored it yesterday but you had to go and start ANOTHER thread discussing it and sucked me in, got me to go look through it.

I hearby swear to go back on the wagon.

I'll not impose myself on you any further.

[IndianaJones]

26. Makes things more interesting. You are correct. nt.

[mondo joe]

28. I'm holding out for the "My asshole brother ruined my birthday" thread based on

a blog from the asshole's sister.

[gollygee]

32. The threads where we disagree are more interesting than the threads where everyone agrees

I read tons of threads I never comment on because DU is a primary news source for me. But if I agree with everyone in the thread there isn't much to say. Those threads are interesting and vital, and the biggest reason I'm here, but they aren't fun. The ones where we disagree are the fun ones.

[Wilber_Stool]

37. Not to get off topic here but,

do you know how much theft is accountable to customers? About three or four per cent. The vast majority of theft is from employees. What did they think he had in his bag? A plasma tv? A home theater system? No. A trinket hanging on a nail is more like it. They could have hired security to follow people around but they know that the cost doesn't justify the benefit. Now take a clothing store. That is where customer theft can mount up. There they do hire customer watchers. It pays off.
Another benefit of that thread was to help me bulk up my ignore list. Lots of moles and trolls on that one. Especially authoritarians. No place for them on a progressive board.

[Lilith Velkor]

38. I came for the punch and pie

I stayed for the porn.

[Richard Steele]

47. One of the reasons, yes. nm

[iamthebandfanman]

48. of course!

i love to read and listen to people complain about obsurd things that frankly take more time arguing about than actually just doing.

but oh well! what can you do ? some people just wanna be dicks about things.
lol

[Megahurtz]

50. It's More Like The Craig Threads.

:sarcasm:

:eyes:

[conscious evolution]

51. Reminds me of kudzu

It creeps across the countryside and before you know it it has blanketed everything.

[donheld]

52. Unless it isn't a circumcision thread

it ain't squat!:D

[AZBlue]

63. Not just no...Hell No.