fbi ahmad alissa boulder
An FBI investigator collects evidence around the parking lot where a mass shooting took place in a King Soopers grocery store Tuesday, March 23, 2021, in Boulder, Colo. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)
Previous Post
Next Post

Covid-19 is not gone, of course (and neither, technically, is Trump), but both are no longer the only storylines Americans care about. And with the return of mass shootings returns the question that plagued America before the pandemic. How do we prevent these utterly horrific scenes from repeating?

On the policy front, we must once again take up the most promising gun reform initiatives, such as universal background checks, red flag orders and the prohibition of assault weapons and large capacity magazines.

But on the societal and cultural front, we need to re-evaluate — perhaps permanently — how we talk about sensational violence. This must start with journalists, who need to stick to the facts and not glorify or sensationalize. Agreeing on editorial standards, like refraining from using the perpetrator’s name and not speculating about how events in the shooter’s life may have contributed to the event, will help as well. Humanize the victims, not the perpetrator. Let’s not give these murderers the one thing so many of them want — to be famous.

— Lori Ann Post in Covid slowed mass shootings. But from Colorado to California, they’re back. Here’s why.



Previous Post
Next Post


  1. I have a novel idea; how about making the punishment for violent crime really unappetizing! Like CAPITAL PUNISHMENT instead of bail reform!!!

    • “Like CAPITAL PUNISHMENT instead of bail reform!!!”

      I was pro death penalty for most of my life.

      JWT persuaded me to change my position on that.

      I agree with him a government must never be in the business of killing its citizens. Put them in a cage for the rest of their lives…

      • Yes, JWT got me to change my position too. It was so obviosly inconsistent. If I firmly believe that the gov’t is so inept and incompetent that it shouldn’t be in charge of my money, health or life choices, why would i want them to have the power to kill citizens. In other words, if the gov’t can’t do anything right, they definitely shouldn’t be in charge of things that can’t be undone, such as death sentences.

        • In order for the death penalty to proceed first there a trial followed by a citizen jury decision and then there are appeals, etc. If some pos offs me I want a jury to do for me what I would have done to save my life and that is extend my legal use of deadly force. No ifs, ands or butts about it.
          Now if you do not want a Government that can “kill its citizens” then you need to abolish Gun Control because Gun Control is a path paved with racism, genocide, etc.
          IMO…If you have reservations about the death penalty you have obstacles and I cannot rely on you to watch my back.

      • That’s an excellent argument. Of course I don’t see why the families of the victims should be so restrained as the government should.

        • Gov, is correct. Some don’t understand the meaning of the words perpetrator and victim. A perpetrator should not get off or become the victim just because they were treated wrongly in times past. Being a victim years ago does not justify their bad deeds today.

      • And make sure they never get out. Compassionate relief for the doers of capital crimes is wrong. We should allow them what Medicare allows as far as medical care, but in a lockdown facility.

        We need to have hospitals for criminals and the criminally insane and we need to keep them until their sentence is complete or until they can be released safely – that means the doctor is putting his reputation on the line so we can review how mistakes happened.

      • The idea that we should not use the death penalty because it might be used incorrectly is perfectly in line with the statist argument that all guns should be confiscated because some gun-owners will abuse them. After all, if it saves JUST ONE LIFE, right?

        There are people who no longer need to draw breath. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev of the Boston Marathon bombings. Dennis Rader (AKA the BTK serial killer). The list is long and extensive. The entire court system is tilted strongly in favor of the defense, which is why prosecutors much prefer to plea bargain serious felonies to misdemeanors. It took almost 15 YEARS to execute Andrew H. Brannan, the man who murdered Kyle Dinkheller on video over a traffic ticket. Anyone who thinks the death penalty should not be used should go watch that dashcam video, and then come back and tell me that they still think Brannan shouldn’t have been executed.

        The idea that the death penalty should never be used is naivety. We have the government, our elected officials, and our court system administrate this system because it must be done, and as IMPERFECT AS IT IS, it is a preferred alternative to murderers walking amongst us, or vigilante justice. The fact that no system is perfect is not an argument against the use of that system. None of the essential businesses of government (diplomacy, trade, infrastructure, etc) are done well. That does not mean they do not need to be done. That idea is lunacy.

        • If I understand….

          Better that X number of innocent people be executed, than any actually guilty criminal escape the death penalty?

          It sounds good to ignore the dead innocents until that innocent person is you.

        • @SamIam you deliberately misunderstand. But you are aware of that. By arguing the death penalty should NEVER be used you are attempting to argue that in situations where there is no doubt or question whatsoever about guilt that the death penalty should not be used. Take Andrew Brannan, the man who murdered Kyle Dinkheller over a traffic stop. There was no doubt as to his identity or his actions. And yet you argue that he shouldn’t have been executed because.. somehow that undeniable proof and his own admission of guilt wasn’t enough to overcome your fear that the state was going to execute an innocent man.

          You want to restrict the death penalty to being used only when guilt is proven beyond the shadow of a doubt with undeniable evidence? Sure, that’s reasonable. Arguing it should NEVER be used is not reasonable. It smacks of similar ideological and emotional reasoning as the left. After all, if it saves JUST ONE LIFE.

          Your false equivocation that innocents have to die in order for the guilty to be executed is intellectual dishonesty.

      • If I was going to be in the penitentiary for the rest of my life I’d just as soon be dead.

      • I was on the fence about the death penalty for much of my life. Then I realized that long term confinement is more cruel than death. Putting people in cages is not better than execution its worse. Long term confinement is a relatively new thing in human history and as such is more “unusual”. Death and killing is as old as humans .

        If the state has the balls to kill a person slowly it should do have the balls to do so quickly. If the state has the temerity to kill the citizens of other nations a.k.a. “war” it should have the same guts with its own people.

        It might sound like BS but I am ardently pro-death penalty on humanitarian grounds. Unfortunately (at least in many cases), the threat of death or a cage will not stop the loons among us.

      • I am wiling to negotiate on the death penalty. However, those on your side are going to have to concede that “a life sentence without the possibility of parole” has to mean exactly what the words intend. You will have to speak against those who would pity the geriatric man in a wheelchair who doctors only give days-weeks-months to live. No cancer treatment. He dies in prison. No furloughs to attend Mama’s funeral. The offender is sent into prison and never comes out.

        Write, champion, and pass that legislation…. then we willingly abolish the death penalty.

    • I like the idea of executing the worst criminals, publicly and broadcast. Problem is getting it right. There have been too many cases of people being exonerated long after conviction and years in prison. Because of this I do not trust our justice system to get it right.

      • I have a “novel suggestion”:
        How about prosecutors who misuse the system to convict an innocent person must serve the sentence when found out no matter how long it has been. This includes all levels of sentences including the death sentence.

        That might alter the actions of those with ambitions.

    • Capital punishment is “after the fact” and does not bring the dead back to life. In the last 10,000 years of civilization capital punishment has proven totally ineffective in preventing people from killing each other. Treatment for mental illness and psychological problems are far more effective as well as tough vetting laws that keep guns out of the hands of psychopaths and criminals. Socialist Nations have done it and it has proven far more effective than the uncivilized country of Capitalvania America where life is considered cheap by the gangster criminal Republican party that refuses to fund such socialist programs that help people such as drug treatment programs and affordable mental health care. The effectiveness of such programs have proven superior to our almost complete lack of such programs.

      In addition you cannot resurrect a victim of capital punishment when it is found that he was innocent and was executed because of prejudice or the police deliberately withholding evidence to get a conviction. In the U.S. well over 200 people have been found to have been murdered by the state and later found to have been innocent. As one can see the vicious and sadistic proposed remedies for society problems always come out of the ignorance, prejudice and racism of the Far Right.

      • “In the last 10,000 years of civilization capital punishment has proven totally ineffective in preventing people from killing each other.”

        While ugly in application, capital punishment has been 100% effective in preventing the one executed from killing anyone, ever again. Criminal justice should be about punishment, not rehabilitation. Only problem is….capital punishment is administered by humans.

        • In the modern era of dashcams showing police officers being murdered for routine traffic stops, cellphone footage of murders, etc, the “what if we execute the wrong person” argument ceases to be convincing. For some strange reason TTAG wouldn’t allow me to post a handful of links to murders caught on bodycam/dashcam (despite TTAG themselves having linked/posted these same videos in their articles) but the point stands. If you have undeniable proof someone committed murder there is no reason NOT to execute them. Caging someone for life is not more humane. It’s simply a burden for the taxpayer and a denial of justice.

          We already execute VERY few people every year. 1500 or so executions since 1973 averages roughly 32 executions a year… and there were 2,345 convicted murderers in 2019 ALONE.

      • https://youtu.be/W3VubTgDlVM

        Go ahead. I’m waiting to hear about how these murderers were “innocent”. Or that they wouldn’t deserve the death penalty.

        I’ll wait.

        I’m not even a fan of cops. But these are all good examples of straightforward murder, captured on camera with incontrovertible proof. Your argument that we can’t be certain we’re executing the right people is invalid. Your argument that executing criminals won’t prevent more killing is also invalid; the criminals in question who are executed will never kill anyone ever again. Your whataboutism regarding mental health and “getting guns out of the hands of criminals” is just that – pointless whataboutism. I get it, you feel deep sympathy and kinship with murderers. You’ll have to forgive the rest of us who do not and wish to see justice done.

      • Statistic show that the deterrence effect of the death penalty is roughly 50%. Yup, lots of crimes of passion won’t be deterred. But lot’s of mostly calculated killings will. Choose your side with the correct knowledge.

      • Capital punishment is 100% effective in eliminating repeat offenses. Save it for when the evidence is airtight, fine. But he’ll never escape prison and kill again.

    • That won’t deter mass shootings. Most of these people plan on going out blazing or killing themselves.

      • How about giving them the name of mass shooter #1, #2, and so on. Do NOT publicize their name unless they get found not guilty. There is no glory in these actions, life is not a video game with do overs and resets.

        • It will never work and I think you know that. You may have had a sliver of hope with that idea before the proliferation of all things internet but now. . . its the individual’s veto. The name will get out. If you believe in the 1A then you know someone is going to exercise that right by naming the killer.

    • Agreed. In the modern era of video footage of many murders, I see no reason why, in the face of incontrovertible proof, the death penalty should not be applied. Don’t argue that “the state is incompetent, we can’t trust them!”. If there’s video footage of a criminal murdering someone (the go pro-footage from the shooter in NZ springs to mind, or the various dash and body cam footage available showing an officer’s last moments) and the evidence is both obvious and clearly damning, there is no reason to cage a murderer for the rest of his life. There’s no need for 15 years worth of appeals. Execute and move on.

  2. How many of recent these shooters were previously known to the FBI? What did that agency do in response? Given the answer to those two questions how would more laws prevent further incidents? None of the proposed solutions will stop the violence as none of them address the real problem, the unrelenting liberalism that has occurred over the last few decades.

    • “How many of recent these shooters were previously known to the FBI? What did that agency do in response? Given the answer to those two questions how would more laws prevent further incidents?”

      Are you going to seriously suggest we should be locking away people who may or may not pose an actual threat? What about the presumption of innocence?

      Isn’t it better that 10 guilty people should go free than 1 one innocent person be convicted and sentenced to prison?

      • “Isn’t it better that 10 guilty people should go free than 1 one innocent person be convicted and sentenced to prison?”

        Maybe we should just run the system properly so that no guilty persons are free to continue with their criminal ways and no innocent persons are railroaded into prison.

        Yes, it can be done.

      • Geoff’s comments make slightly more sense when you recognize that he hasn’t been inside a woman since the day he was born…

    • Monitor their social media and set up an automated system for key threat word alerts? Some of these people posted shortly before committing the deed.

      • Dude do you really want that? What if a key words was “second amendment” or any variation there of?

        • That would be abuse which we know they already dabble in. I’m not talking about monitoring everyone (which they already do and lie about) I’m talking about these people that the FBI have good reason to believe are future killers. They have enough data from past incidents to profile these people. Maybe they could even stage some sort of intervention with the family. It’s been said that Amazon and Google know when something is happening or going to happen in your life before anyone else (sometimes yourself) based on your searches and buying habits. Yes, the FBI would need a warrant for that information.

      • Monitor their social media and set up an automated system for key threat word alerts?

        You sound like you don’t believe that is already being done… Spoiler alert, there are vast arrays of computers doing just that right now, and not just on suspected potentially dangerous individuals… “just collecting meta-data…” Right, believe THAT and I’ve got some lovely ocean front property in Arizona I’ll sell you dirt cheap…

    • I’ll also add: In a time where anything from travel to telecommunications is suspicionlessly and warrantlessly surveilled, who among the citizenry is not “known to the authorities”?

  3. The problem is the “gun free safe zone” which are nothing but a magnet for these lunatic suicidal mass murders. They greatly fear the threat of law abiding citizens being able to shoot back. Yet the progressives insist on protecting schools and other places by taping the signs to the doors and somehow think murdering criminals will see them and leave.

    • GFZ Gun Free Zones should be correctly identified and defined as (HVZ) Helpless Victim Zones whenever spoken about including in print media on this site and anywhere posters are allowed to comment. Redefinition of terminology has been a tactic of the Left for decades as a way to Transform history and silence speech they don’t agree with. It’s time to use this same strategy in the War on Our Freedoms and Liberties. As We all know chief among the definition fight in the War on the 2nd A has been the term (AR) Armalite Rifle being defined as Assault Rifle. While this may seem a trivial response the same thing was thought many years ago when the Left began their redefinition Movement. Now many years later We are seeing the Fruits of their Redefinition strategy.

    • That King Soopers was not a gun free zone. Anyone with a concealed carry permit can legally carry in any business in Colorado, regardless of signs on doors. There were about 150 people in the building at the time and either none of them carried or, if they did have a pistol, they got the hell out instead of taking on a guy with an AR15.

  4. The problem is that over the years by creeping infringement on the Second Amendment which went unanswered or was ineffectively opposed, letting the feds infringe “just a little bit, when it was REALLY important”, we have allowed HUGE SWATHS of America to become de facto “Gun Free Zones” where the people are either afraid to exercise their rights due to overzealous anti-gun prosecutors or social pressures equating gun ownership with criminality.

    This is what has emboldened criminals, gangs and the mentally unstable, not the little signs that only promise a specific area is even more gun free than the others.

  5. “But on the societal and cultural front, we need to re-evaluate — perhaps permanently — how we talk about sensational violence. This must start with journalists, who need to stick to the facts and not glorify or sensationalize.”

    That horse is long gone from the barn.

    They are far too addicted to the ratings that sensationalized coverage brings them. At this point it’s pretty much obvious to anyone with more than two neurons firing how biased the ‘News’ coverage is.

    But that now may be working in our favor – There’s very little shock value left for them to emotionally exploit for political gain. The poll numbers are showing little support for gun control, and they’ve been beating that dead horse for 20 + years.

    The facts are clearly on our side. ‘Gun violence’ has been on a downward trend for over 20 years. Since 1990, nearly every state has gone from no legal carry to shall-issue carry, and the murder rate is roughly one-half as much as it was back then.

    Here’s a thought – Should we not stop our enemies from making a fatal mistake? 😉

    • I actually agree with the original author’s call to report these kinds of incidents in a calmer, more rational, and less fact-free way than has become the norm (not so much with his call for gun control).

      You are probably right, however, that the media is too addicted to this way of reporting to make meaningful changes. They’re propagandists, and they care much more about the narrative and supporting their team than about reporting events and letting the rest of us draw our own conclusions.

      To be fair, the media has never really been all that objective, even in the heyday of it’s supposed objectivity during the latter half of the 20th century.

      • Either you were to young to have witnessed their behavior in the later half of the 20th century or hadn’t seen the light of agenda driven tactics. Even the highly respected Walter Cronkite among others used an agenda driven narrative over fact based reporting when it advanced “The Cause”.

        • “the media has never really been all that objective”

          “even in the heyday of its supposed objectivity”

          I feel like you are agreeing with me!

  6. They could start by not deceptively editing audio and video to try to portray justifiable acts of self defense as racist attacks. I mean, you’re asking the same group of people who concocted a fantasy about Trump being a Russian spy and ran with it for 4 years to start being responsible journalists. Good luck with that.

    • “They could start by not deceptively editing audio and video to try to portray justifiable acts of self defense as racist attacks.”

      They have an agenda to push…

      • Journalist play a vital role in a perfect society. Unfortunately we do not live in a perfect society and the journalists we have are slightly more useless than the people in India who keep calling me to give me a better rate on my non-existing credit card or my non-existing student loan debt.

        • Almost all the “Journalists” we have in America today are the defacto propaganda department for the left wing of the Democrat Party. It has become so bad over the last three decades that most Americans assume the news is slanted at best or complete disinformation at worst.

        • I like the one’s that call to VERIFY a large purchase on my non-existent Amazon account…

        • Yeah Maxx, I didn’t even mention the one claiming to be the IRS and if I didn’t send them $3000 immediately they were going to send the local PD to arrest me. Or the ones who keep calling about my social security account being suspended. I should post this above because I don’t care what side of the issue you’re on, I think we all can agree that these people deserve the death penalty.

  7. “… how we talk about sensational violence. This must start with journalists, who need to stick to the facts and not glorify or sensationalize. Agreeing on editorial standards, like refraining from using the perpetrator’s name…”

    That quote is the only good idea she has.

    The only way to stop these attacks is to repair and rebuild a mental health system in this country. Nothing else has any hope of success.

    Certainly not the idiotic notion of collecting hundreds of millions of guns, even more magazines and billions of rounds of ammunition. That ain’t going to happen. They’d have greater luck genetically engineering Senators to grow wings and feathers and fly in formation over the US Capitol Dome.

    • “The only way to stop these attacks is to repair and rebuild a mental health system in this country. Nothing else has any hope of success.”

      Bring back institutionalizing people in mental ‘hospitals’?

      Passivate them with drugs, electro-shock ‘therapy’ and surgically-lobotomize their brains?

      The ‘Good ‘ole Days’, eh, moron?

      There were good reasons those places were permanently closed…

      • Wrong you moronic fuck. Rebuild and correct the causes that got them closed. A topic I know of because I saw some of it happening.

        It is a typical error in judgement that to fix problems we should throw it away and pretend that is the solution. But all it did was to rip away care and places for the dangerously insane while at the same time dumping those people on the streets, family homes and regular prisons. Al the places least capable of dealing with mentally ill people.

        Ask Mrs. Lanza how that idea kept her son from becoming a mass murderer.

        Oops, no can do, because she was refused help and in the end, he killed her first.

        • “Rebuild and correct the causes that got them closed.”

          Mental health daycare is your solution, you moronic fuck?

          They worked because they kept them LOCKED AWAY from society…

    • “They’d have greater luck genetically engineering Senators to grow wings and feathers and fly in formation over the US Capitol Dome.”

      Enuf, we don’t agree on a lot, but I fully support your proposal for giving senators something useful to do.

  8. “But on the societal and cultural front, we need to re-evaluate — perhaps permanently — how we talk about sensational violence. This must start with journalists, who need to stick to the facts and not glorify or sensationalize.”

    Cool! Now do police interactions with black people.

    • Criminals regardless of color are the architects of their own demise. They choose the behaviors that ultimately get themselves killed. Starting with being Criminals followed by non compliance when ordered to do so followed by aggressive actions. Keeping in mind that more Caucasians are shot and killed by the police than Blacks, Browns or Asians. Yes their are Bad Cops as there are Bad Civilians. Which when happen to be competing for the same space result in injury or death. Life and Death is often about choices. It’s always better to make the choice that has the best chance of keeping you alive.

  9. “start with journalists, who need to stick to the facts and not glorify or sensationalize”

    If they don’t glorify or sensationalize, they’re not “journalists.” They’re “unemployed persons.”

    The whole sick profession of journalism is built on stirring up as much sh!t as humanly possible. And when there’s nothing to stir up, there’s plenty to make up.

  10. “How do we prevent these utterly horrific scenes from repeating?”

    Hmmm…..pndering how these events ramp up just as anti-2A Socialists/Libyurds/Elitists come into ghree branch of government control… Maybe we should investigate the possibly these incidents were influenced, nurtured and “nudged” at an appropriate time….in a cluster for maximum effect….. ……with a little help from psychotropic drugs…..by a Deep State operation to act such that the masses of Little People cry out for the Sleazy, Senile, Elitist Leader to “do something,…anything” to make them safe.
    “The ‘Do Something’ Disease”…..aka “Stampede The Flock Over the Edge”…….The Lemming Effect……Get ‘Em While They’re Hot. “Hair on fire, we’re all going to die” contingent.
    Dead bodies in a grocery store aisle, or school classroom, or church pew…..the bad guy with a gun…..or the gang member with a gun…. the mentally deficient guy with a gun……or the terribly distraught family member of a gun shooting victim…… or a gun violence survivor……or the Feelz-Gooder Social Do-Gooder….. or the the “hair-on-fire, we’re-all-gonna-die” contingent……or the skin color only voter…..or the “just need common sense” purveyors…..or the “we just need to come together” crowd…..are the politician’s easily manipulated Useful Idiot Tools to achieve his power and control agenda.
    Keep wondering how much a Deep State effort is probably at work to create these “Heat ‘Em Up Events”, A Government Deep State undercover operation to identify susceptible/vulnerable individuals to nurture, position, “nudge”, and trigger at opportune times and places to stampede the flock over the cliff of civilian disarmament.
    But, our government would never do that….NAW.
    -Our government would never weaponize the FBI to exonerate a crooked as sin ex-FLOTUS/SoS for treasonous acts, and attempt a coup against a duly elected President for the same collusion with the Russians…NAW
    -Our government would never weaponize the IRS against Conservative organizations….NAW
    -our government would never run guns to Mexico to demonize US gun laws for Mexican crime, corruption, and violence….NAW,
    -our government would never allow invasion of our borders for political purposes, and voting power….NAW,
    -our government would never create voting fraud….NAW
    -our government would never spend foolishly, squander, skim, scam tax payers’ money to bankrupt and weaken America from within so as to drop into our enemies’ hand as an over ripe fruit….PLOP…NAW
    -our government would never run a pandemic for political purposes, shutting down the economy, putting more citizens on the Government Plantation Free Shit Express to servitude and control, desensitizing the little peeps to be faceless mask wearers, order followers to ensure ousting of a Swamp Draining incumbent President….NAW
    -Our government would never…..well I can go on and on, but you should get the idea,

  11. “Maybe we should investigate the possibly these incidents were influenced, nurtured and “nudged” at an appropriate time”

    There is absolutely NO doubt in my mind that these events are specifically precipitated by the actions of our alphabet agencies, especially the FBI (Federal Bureau of Injustice), and as you might have noticed, they are unleashed based on the leftist political talking points at the time.

    The FBI is guilty of abetting a multitude of murders in America, and yet, no one there will ever be charged. This has been going on for years, from back in the bootleg years, to Ruby Ridge, Waco, up to the “insurrection” at the US Capitol.

    They have had their fingers in all these pies, and yet, many people still revere them as a top notch police agency. Their agents are also all compromised, as I have seen NO mass retirements of agents protesting the FBI’s many illegal activities.

    They are a CRIME FAMILY, just as is the federal government.
    Anyone who works for them is also a criminal.
    They are part of the American Gestapo (Geheime Staatspolizei (Secret State Police)).

  12. A swing, and a miss.

    You posed the proposition that innocents executed are essentially collateral damage in the quest to execute the heinously guilty. If it were possible to guarantee that only those proved guilty beyond a reasonable (or even shadow) of a doubt, that all the risk of executing an innocent is removed, then, and only then should the death penalty be used. So, unlike under any other circumstance, if it saves only one to suspend the death penalty, it is good to suspend the death penalty.

    When I was young, the societal understanding about American criminal justice was stated as, “Better 10,000 guilty go free than one innocent person be convicted.” Now, I am reading that some innocents being executed is an acceptable risk. A stance usually presented by people who are convinced beyond reason that they will never be one of those considered a reasonable risk.

    If you have been around, you know that my idea of suitable punishment for heinous crimes is to put people on a body parts register. Parcel out the parts for people not incarcerated; people in need of transplant of scarce organ and other parts. Should a convicted person be later proven innocent, and that person having donated body parts, conduct the necessary surgeries to restore those lost parts, prior to release from jail.

    The harsh reality is a mistake of death cannot be reversed, or the victim compensated for loss. Mistake of any other prison sentence offers an opportunity for restoration.

    Read John Grisham’s “An Innocent Man”. See the system you would trust, up close and ugly.

  13. Oh! Oh! Oh! I know! How about some of these liberal do-gooder judges, prosecutors, mayors, governors – you know, those charged with enforcing laws already on the books – how about they start be enforcing the laws that are already in place? How about they stop letting violent offenders out before their sentences are up? How about no more plea deals for violent crimes, especially when firearms are involved, and actually applying the extra years of incarceration the laws provide for when violent felonies are committed using forearms? Huh? How about that? Huh?

Comments are closed.