Webmaster Forum

Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Controversial Social Issues Discussions concerning controversial social issues. Topics include politics, religion, culture, social and economic issues, etc. Respect required at all times.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Share |
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2013, 12:07 PM
txshellie's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-04-08
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 2,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Should Parents Bear the Crime?

The recent shooting of Chris Lane by bored teenagers in Okalahoma has to beg asking the question.....

Why aren't their parents in jail as well?

If your pit-bull kills someone, you are arrested and held responsible.

At what point are we as a society going to hold people responsible for the behavior of their minor (apparently unsupervised) armed children?

In case you aren't up to date on the Lane issue:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/chris-lane-...ry?id=20038748

As a side issue, in light of this article ... it's hard to believe this one....

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ace-not-factor

Here is an excerpt from one of the mother's comments:

She says her son was behaving normally on the day of the shooting.

"He seemed like he always was, he told me he loved me. Then he said he was going to go and hang out, it's the same thing every day," she said.

"He didn't act no different than any other day. Every kid likes to fight but as far as getting in trouble, he's never been in trouble."


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-2...lief27/4899776

What are your thoughts?
__________________
Shellie
Owner, Christmas Light Source
 
Reply With Quote

Advertisement

Advertisement

  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2013, 12:49 PM
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-06-07
Location: Denver
Posts: 2,345
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by txshellie View Post
The recent shooting of Chris Lane by bored teenagers in Okalahoma has to beg asking the question.....

Why aren't their parents in jail as well?
We should probably dig up every ancestor they have and lock em up too. Must have been something to do with how they raised each other through the generations.

There comes a point where people need to be responsible for their own actions and in a lot of ways a 16 year old is hardly a child anymore. They make decisions be it good or bad. In this case extremely bad and they will need to pay the price for it.

I don't see any mention of anything that indicates the parents played a part in the murder from the article you mention. Am I missing something? How were the parents involved?
 
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2013, 01:05 PM
txshellie's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-04-08
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 2,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
The parents gave their children access to guns.

Or didn't get rid of the guns they kept in the house.

Or, they negligently allowed their boys to have firearms without their knowledge in their own homes. They paid for phones and cars and insurance for the boys. They enabled them to behave the way they did.

At some point, the parents turned a blind eye to the boys' behavior and attitudes.

I would like to believe that at age 16, teens are grown enough to be held solely responsible for themselves, but I don't think that's the case - at least not in this century. Until a child is 18, parents have to shoulder the burden of their kid's behavior.

If some neighbor's kid broke a window in your house or smashed into your car, would you send the teen a bill or their parent?

Shouldn't we expect a similar level of responsibility when it comes to real crime?
__________________
Shellie
Owner, Christmas Light Source
 
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2013, 01:17 PM
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-06-07
Location: Denver
Posts: 2,345
iTrader: 1 / 100%
I don't see anything in what you said the parents did that was illegal.

Parents can own firearms and can keep them in their home.

Most parents let kids who have their licenses use a car and supply a phone. Makes life much easier to not play chauffeur and be able to reach their kids when they need to.

Using this same type of logic should we go after the car salesman who sells a car to someone who occasionally drinks alcohol and later gets drunk and has an accident?

The kids did it. Putting the parents in jail just makes a terrible situation that much worse by destroying more lives that do not need to be.
 
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2013, 01:30 PM
txshellie's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-04-08
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 2,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Well, a bartender who serves a man too many drinks is liable if the same customer kills someone while driving.

Parents can have arms in their homes but are criminally liable if the child shoots themselves with the gun.

So, is it just an issue for the parents if the child kills themselves but not if it's someone outside of the home or part of a crime?

Should we expect parents not to know they have a problem if things like this are going on in their own home:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...the-fun-of-it/

We're not talking about young men using their car to go back and forth to swim team practice.

Perhaps people are cutting their kids loose too soon for the sake of convenience?

I think that jail time might be an effective motivation to keep your kids from turning out to be murderers.

At least a night in jail and community service.....
__________________
Shellie
Owner, Christmas Light Source
 
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2013, 01:41 PM
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-06-07
Location: Denver
Posts: 2,345
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Sorry but I could not disagree more.

Punishing people who had no part in the crime nor intent for the crime to be committed is silly. Including the bartender.

Last edited by swedal; 09-11-2013 at 01:46 PM.
 
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2013, 02:11 PM
txshellie's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-04-08
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 2,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by swedal View Post
Sorry but I could not disagree more.

Punishing people who had no part in the crime nor intent for the crime to be committed is silly. Including the bartender.
Did you think that my including the bartender way hypothetical? Sorry if I wasn't clear.

It is a crime in most states to serve alcohol to drunk people....

http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/couri...ccd712bca.html

Whether it seems silly or not, do we have to answer for things that are in our circle of responsibility?

i guess the issue at hand is where that circle begins and ends.

If parents aren't responsible for the children they gave birth to and are raising in their own homes I guess, to me, that doesn't make sense.

So, if your dog kills a child, you go to jail. Is it logical that you receive no penalty if your 15-year old kills a child - other than perhaps a need to move to a new town?

There are plenty of people who go to jail when they are responsible for something that hurt people without it being their intent. They created the situation for harm. They are at least liable in civil court.
__________________
Shellie
Owner, Christmas Light Source
 
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2013, 02:28 PM
Cricket's Avatar
No Longer Active
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 10-13-03
Location: Texas
Posts: 42,181
iTrader: 0 / 0%
IMHO the problem is finding balance between how much a parent is obligated to do vs how much they are able (by law) to do. One of my boys went through a stage in middle school that he wanted to be anywhere but school. He literally hated it and when he did go he found as much trouble as possible. I would put him on the bus and somehow he wouldn't end up at school. I started driving him to school and somehow he still didn't make it to class. Then I started receiving threats from the truancy officer that I could be fined or even jailed if he missed more school, yet a parent is not allowed to stay on school grounds through her child's classes to force him. (Keep in mind my son was also at least twice my size at the time.) At the point he flat out decided he was not going to go and no one was going to make him (I couldn't physically force him in a vehicle) I called the truancy officer and told him YOU figure it out then. The officer came over and talked to my son for about 30 minutes and then left without him. WAIT! WUT? Now what?

I ended up homeschooling that one and in the end it really was the best for my son.

My point is that sometimes a parent does everything right and it still goes wrong so if you are going to start holding the parents responsible, you really have to be able to see the bigger picture.
 
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 09-12-2013, 01:15 PM
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 10-30-11
Posts: 736
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by swedal View Post
Sorry but I could not disagree more.

Punishing people who had no part in the crime nor intent for the crime to be committed is silly.
Exactly. Even if it was a dog that hurt someone on it's own. The owner shouldn't be put in jail. Because it was the dog that did the harm not the owner.

So NO. A parent shouldn't be put in jail because of a crime their kid committed.

Chad
__________________
AnswerPail
Question and Answer Website.
Webmasterbabble.com Webmaster Forum
 
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2013, 07:53 AM
snakeair's Avatar
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 12-31-07
Location: Medford, NJ
Posts: 54,771
iTrader: 3 / 100%
I have a short story to tell about a personal experience that is somewhat related.

Back in highschool, we had a lot of parties in the neighborhood when peoples parents went out of town. One party it was huge (we all underage at time) and the cop's got called up by a neighbor. Pretty much we all ran into the woods and was hiding after we got a tip about the police.

My friends parents didn't get arrested even though there was about 30 underange kids drinking but they was put on notice that 1 more party could lend them in jail for serving underage kid's. Yet they was not home at the party the police in my town would still charge them.

Well, no parties at my one friends house ever after that. We still scared of his father after he ripped us a new one a few day's later.

The police said, the parents was responsible as there home was serving underage kid's and what if one of us drove home and got into a bad car wreck? They'd go after the parents besides charging the person who was directly responsible.

There are to many law's in the USA and some are just stupid. If a person does a crime and knows it's a crime but underage, the kid needs to be charged and maybe slap a fine on the parents to teach them a lesson to control there kids a little better.
__________________
Staff @WPArena.com
 
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2013, 08:37 AM
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-06-07
Location: Denver
Posts: 2,345
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by snakeair View Post
There are to many law's in the USA and some are just stupid. If a person does a crime and knows it's a crime but underage, the kid needs to be charged and maybe slap a fine on the parents to teach them a lesson to control there kids a little better.
I am guessing from this that you don't have any teenage children.

Look at it this way. How well did your parents "control" you as a teenager? If they allowed you to attend underage drinking parties it would seem not that well.

Individuals who break the law should be the ones held responsible for their own actions. Not the people who did not even know there was a law being broken.
 
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2013, 08:45 AM
snakeair's Avatar
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 12-31-07
Location: Medford, NJ
Posts: 54,771
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Parents didn't know but as a teenager, you tend to go against your parents orders every now and then to see if you can sneak by. (I did get my arse handed to me as all parents got notified)

With Gun's, parents need to keep there own gun's locked up and not have a key in an easy to find place when they not around. I have no problem with kids using guns but as long as they was trained on how to use a gun and all the does and don'ts.

I just found this story below which shocked me. Parents need to tell there kids that you don't make threats in school because they take it seriously now.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...-cops-say?lite
__________________
Staff @WPArena.com
 
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 09-16-2013, 05:20 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,751
iTrader: 5 / 100%
I think people need to start thinking about a few things.

1. Parents are responsible for their children. Yes. But their children are not mindless automotons who do exactly as they're told. As Cricket pointed out, parents quite often do the best job they can but kids rebel against their parents. It's a natural part of growing up. And sometimes that rebellion manifests itself in illegal activity. It's just normal behaviour.
2. Holding someone responsible for the crime of another doesn't make logical sense. People who are not slaves make decisions for themselves and act on those decisions. It's part of being a free human being. To expect someone to "control" their children is to expect them to teach their children to be slaves and that slavery is acceptable. We try to teach our children the very opposite (to be free and independent) for a reason.
3. If we, as adults, can't get through a single day without breaking a law (and most of us can't when you really think about it), then how could we expect younger developing humans to do that?
 
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 09-17-2013, 04:07 PM
TechWizard's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-26-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
What is the answer? Something I think has been contemplated by many minds, a lot of governmental minds at that, be them actually part of the government or professionals in their field that have been paid or tasked by the government to contemplate answers to a growing dilemma which is pre- and post-adolescent violence.

It is true that 30 to 40 years ago many of us as kids at the age of 4 or 5 labeled one or more as our boyfriends and girlfriends. Other than through our observation of teenagers and family we really had no idea what a girlfriend or boyfriend was but knew that we had one. Many of us boys even went out of our way and picked on that specially selected girl which often included chasing them down on the playground and giving them a peck on the cheek, some probably even gave a pat on the but as that is how we saw our parents treating one another at home so it must be an acceptable way of showing how much we like them.

As children of the 70's we lived an innocent life, those shows of affection were seen as just a child's way of being a child. In school most boys could be found with their newest and coolest pocket knife in their pocket, we often played cowboys and indians, cops and robbers, even played as though we were the bridge officers of the Enterprise chasing down Klingons with our phasers.

Though it wasn't the most common thing we actually had disagreements as kids, these disagreements often led to one or more boys getting into arguments which then led to those that one the opposite sides of the argument getting into an actual fist fight. There was sometimes a winner of the fistfight and that was usually the one that got their way, cause after the fight was over we were once again friends just as we were before.

As a child I also moved several times, each time I moved though I didn't realize it I had to learn an entirely different dynamic as I made new friends. Every place I lived was actually different. Under no circumstances would I list me as a typical child, actually quite the opposite as the level of my fighting and other things was higher than the average, as was my intelligence. Whether this was a factor of my behavioral pattern or not could be open to debate but during the day (Prior to ADD and Drugs) I was just seen as a boy that was at times rambunctious.

This long statement hopefully is leading thoughts to a few different areas. Are kids allowed to be kids these days? Do parents or teachers or even other friends sit down and talk to each other about how what you see on cartoons or now video games isn't real, or what the difference between what is real and what is play really is?

At what age do children these days begin taking behavior control drugs? A question of mine has always been that if a child has not learned how to live with their emotions and channel them in a way that is not destructive or in a way that society could generally except and they are put on medication to control those emotions and hormones how can that child ever be a child and ever grow into an adult without the need for continuously changing behavioral drugs in order to make sure the drugs properly control those emotions as the bodies biological system changes and as the paradigm of what makes up the emotional person is created?

This is not to even mention or get into the discussion of education, the rigidness as the whole far outweighs the one when it comes to learning modes/styles. It used to be said there were 7 styles of learning I understand they have now increased that to 12. This means there are that many different ways in which a person learns optimally. Yet schools still require that students conform to whatever system has been put in place designed around the norm. Individualism is gone with the first day of kindergarten when now children are thrown into a first grade environment possibly even second grade in comparison to the school set up when I was that age.
So are children allowed to be children? Between the break down of the family unit compared to the 35 year old typical nuclear family unit, the break down of parent and teacher communication and willingness to work together combined with the need to medicate every behavior that is seen as disruptive, unacceptable, or outside the expected norm of each parent or teacher.

With all of these factors, even only a few of these factors when children grow up with Dissociative Disorders, Schizophrenic Style Behavioral patterns, Or simply act impulsively and uncontrollably why should we actually be surprised? After all, the dissociative and Schizophrenic behavior descriptions were scoped out and named by people that also base their perspectives on similar times, the account of what an untrained human is actually like is not even taken into account and what I would suggest we end up with, or worse a partially trained human as that is what society is at the core, a model that people and children are held to in the world of behaviorism is it not?
 
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 09-17-2013, 10:40 PM
DocSheldon's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 01-01-10
Location: Baja California
Posts: 3,740
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Maybe because I grew up in a different time (by the 70s when ya'll were running around shooting each other with phasers, I was running around shooting guys in black PJs with an M16), my point of view is a little different.

I understand they say that learning styles vary... some folks supposedly learn better by reading, some by pictures, some by verbal explanation... I think there's one universal learning style, that works with everyone but a seriously challenged person. It's called consequences.

When you do something wrong, if there are consequences, you're less likely to repeat the mistake. If you fail to fulfill your responsibilities, the consequences of that will teach you to be more responsible next time.

I think everyone is responsible for their own actions and inactions. Even a two year old knows when they're doing something wrong. And if you don't believe that a lack of consequences will lead that child to greater transgressions down the road, then you've never been a parent.

When we don't hold our kids responsible for their actions and inactions, we're doing them a disservice. We're depriving them of a valuable lesson that they'll eventually have to learn.

Sending my dad to jail because I got a DUI would've taught me one thing for sure... not to be in the county the day he got out. Beyond that, it would have simply sent me the message that my dad would be held responsible for my actions, not me.

Every problem we have can't be blamed on irresponsible parenting (or meddlesome laws that make it difficult to discipline kids without being threatened with their removal from the home). But I do believe that the majority of societies problems have been exacerbated by a breakdown of family.

Love, nurturing, support, limits and discipline are all part of the family experience. Lose any one of them, and there are consequences for that too.... for the child, the parents, the siblings, society in general and the future grandkids.

So I think each one of them should be directed where it'll do the most good. Discipline should be directed at the guilty party... if they're two years old or more, they either made a conscious decision to misbehave or they should be receiving constant care and supervision.
__________________
Intrinsic Value SEO
SEO and Content Strategy Agencies

 
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 09-18-2013, 04:24 AM
TechWizard's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-26-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Way to go Doc

I wrote that essay, but didn't even address the thread topic...just new I had written to much even though I wasn't done, then after I hit submit and looked I was like Holy Cow.....

To address the direct question...No the parents should not be held responsible. One thing my kids hate hearing out of me and have heard ever since they can remember is that they are responsible for their own actions. There are no excuses...

That is the same as saying my doctor is responsible because I fail to take my medication and have a seizure...something my doctor says he would be liable for...that is ridiculous! I walk into a store, a school etc and catch the Flu Bug....I think they should have to pay my doctor bill because they allowed someone that had it walk into their store...I think Zoos should be sued because they have monkey houses and kids will a lot of times after seeing them fall out of the trees at home and get hurt because they are trying to act like the monkeys they saw...
 
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 09-22-2013, 03:50 PM
txshellie's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-04-08
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 2,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
So, everyone here agrees that we should all provide loving guidance, support and discipline for our kids.

I started this thread because 3 young men shot a man out for a jog because they were bored.

They had access to weapons, had money and apparently lots of free time.

One mother of the assailants claimed she knew where her son was and she was confident that he didn't commit the crime. <she was wrong>

Are parents ever to be held accountable in any way for how they choose to raise their kids?

As a right-leaning, finding myself more often than not in some libertarian meadow, I just have to ask all of you who have thoughtfully raised and in some cases home-schooled your kids to do the right thing.... what penalty is appropriate for the parents of the child whose parents have done none of that and the child commits a terrible crime.

I guess the consensus is that the parents should receive no penalties.

From Snake's post, it looks like if you allow your house to be used for a drunken party, you are liable.

Is there any way or is it feasible at all to consider at least a schedule of community service and required education for a parent who turns a blind eye to a child's behavior and other people are hurt as a result.

I'm amazed that I feel so strongly about this considering I live my life and most all of my beliefs are based on self determination and self responsibility.

But I think/feel that too many times parents are disengaged, expecting the teacher, the TV and the radio to raise their kids.

Shouldn't we expect more from parents?

<sigh>

And I am SO NOT one of those "It's take a village" people.

How about this.... you know your kid is "crazy" and doesn't exhibit self control. You know that he's immature and isn't performing well in class or at his chores at home.

You still want him out of your hair because you are tired of toting him around.

So you equip him with a car and plenty of gas money.

He has a terrible fatality accident.

Do you bear no legal liability?

Or do... I just need to let this rest. <big smile>
__________________
Shellie
Owner, Christmas Light Source
 
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 09-22-2013, 04:45 PM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,751
iTrader: 5 / 100%
I think most of us would agree, Shellie, that parents are responsible for raising well adjusted, well integrated members of society.
The problem arises when parents are to be punished for the actions of their child.
Kids don't always do what you tell them to and often stray from the path you've taught them to follow and that is natural behaviour.
It's difficult to justify punishment for a parent for the natural, expected behaviour of their child.
 
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 09-22-2013, 09:28 PM
TechWizard's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-26-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
I think holding parents liable for all actions of their children is a very slippery slope. Already the U.N. is attempting to mandate what parents in the U.S. and other countries can and can not do as parents, the U.S. Government is doing its best to mandate what parents can and can not do and so on...

In some cases the act may very well be because parents were abusive or neglectful to their children. At the very same time it is also possible that they had an extremely loving home and were caught up by outside influences outside the the ability of their parents to observe after particular ages...

I am also fearful that demanding such a thing would also mean that the quality of parenting then would be judged not by the family, not by local culture or society but by mental specialists and governmental agencies.

As was the case in the example Cricket provided, the problem was not due to lack of supervision or attempt of discipline or communication. Sometimes there are many other variables at work that are well beyond the control of the parent(s). Who really is to be the judge of acceptable and not acceptable parenting?

Another example is in the case of my son from a previous marriage, he was abused physically and mentally by his mother, finally made it here at the age of 18 and moved out at the age of 25. There were a GREAT many problems that were attempted to be worked through, no real violence problems luckily but others such as lying etc...it takes a very long time to fix things that have been messed up somehow. My wifes daughter from another marriage came to us finally at the age of 16 after severe mental abuse and neglect...she is still a work in progress but has made great strides of improvement...under your proposal if those children had gotten to us at the age of 14 with all of their problems and God forbid had done something bad a couple years after the came to us would we then be responsible for their actions?

I would think you could agree that it is not so cut and dry and there are a lot more risks with such a suggestion than possible benefits. I don't think such a thing would have the effect that you are looking for, it also likely that it could increase the level of abuse or the number of homeless children too..
__________________
Get A PC Helper
Virus Malware Removal | Remote Computer Repair
And More...
www.pchelper123.com


 
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 09-23-2013, 06:51 PM
txshellie's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-04-08
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 2,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechWizard View Post
I am also fearful that demanding such a thing would also mean that the quality of parenting then would be judged not by the family, not by local culture or society but by mental specialists and governmental agencies.
I guess this is the quote that has swayed my thinking.

In this thread, I was thinking more of children who become violent offenders.

But, I guess I see the slippery slope of it all. I'm enjoying the freedom to educate my children the way I see fit - raise them the way I want to. I know not all countries give parents that luxury.

I wish and pray for the day when all children are loved and nurtured. A time when women are treated with respect and men are allowed to be men.

We can see that none of this can be effectively legislated.

It's good to have come to my senses. Thanks for the time y'all have put into this thread.
__________________
Shellie
Owner, Christmas Light Source
 
Reply With Quote
Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
We have the right to keep and bear arms. m42 Controversial Social Issues 105 08-23-2008 12:17 PM


V7N Network
Get exposure! V7N I Love Photography V7N SEO Blog V7N Directory


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:31 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright © 2003 - 2014 Escalate Media




Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.