Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Membrain

Zimmerman cleared of all charges

Recommended Posts

Csonicgo said:

Now that I know that you're trolling, I can safely ignore you now.

Your opinion is so stupid that a serious response to your post would have been a travesty of internet.

Share this post


Link to post
neubejiita said:

/pol/ posted this. It is quite funny. NSFW.

http://vocaroo.com/i/s1khJlTiBwn5

The whole Zimmerman case was a blast on /pol/.

Naked Snake said:

Trayvon is dead, but that is typically what happens when lethal force is used in self-defense.

Emergency / non-emergency operators cannot legally give you any order, either way, the operator said specifically "we don't need you to do that". This is not an order, it is a liability statement. It is entirely irrelevant to the situation. You could call up and say "I see a house fire and I hear a baby crying, get here quick, I'm gonna go rescue the baby" they will say "we don't need you to do that." If you actually do or not is up to you, but it's not an order, it's simply a way for them to absolve themselves personally and as whole (IE : their employers) of responsibility for the aftermath.

At one point in the timeline, Trayvon and George were in close enough proximity to speak to eachother. At this point in time, neither party was doing anything illegal.

What followed afterwards was laid out in a court of law, and a jury felt there was enough reasonable doubt.

Also, invoking the law as your defense is not the same thing as the law being read in jury instructions. Regardless, I'd say that when you are pinned to the ground, which is corroborated by physical evidence and a prosecution eye-witness, you don't have the ability to retreat, thus the case would more or less play the same in a Duty to Retreat state.

Very good run-down of the situation. But most people are simply hung up on the profiling element.

Share this post


Link to post
DeathevokatioN said:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/07/trayvon-protesters-beat-on-car-wont-let-family-take-child-to-hospital/
And combine ^ with the gunning down of two brothers (who had their whole lives ahead of them) by a black man for the crime of having a "free Zimmerman" bumper sticker is a great way to win hearts and minds over to your "plight".


Happen to have a source that isn't disgustingly racist by any chance?

Share this post


Link to post
Technician said:

Very good run-down of the situation. But most people are simply hung up on the profiling element.


Yes, another irrelevancy. It is in fact not illegal to be a racist son of a bitch, it is illegal to systematically be one while performing public duties, sure, but the typical civilian is allowed leeway on the asshole scale.

Let us say that theoretically George Zimmerman did in fact "racially profile" Trayvon Martin, you would still have to prove that the profiling lead to an intent to unlawfully harm or kill Martin. This is not as simple as proving he had racist views (the FBI investigated his backround and found that there was no evidence to support the idea he was a racist), you have to prove that the racist views were part of his INTENT TO KILL MARTIN UNLAWFULLY. Intent. At the moment of the incident. Almost impossible to prove unless the person gives video / written confessions stating such.

Share this post


Link to post
Membrain said:

Happen to have a source that isn't disgustingly racist by any chance?

Of what? The brothers getting shot or the case in point of TM supporters demonstrating why the law they are protesting against is necessary? The footage and photo in the latter speaks for itself: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/protester-grandma.jpg

I mean this in the least offensive possible way, have you ever thought about doing your own research? Type in google: "brothers shot free zimmerman" and you'll find there are multiple sources so you can pick whichever one you want. Just incase you can't find it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=REpZUFv8MRY. Good luck finding anything on the arrogant "un"biased "fuck middle class whitey" news channels that only clever "free thinkers" watch because those sites have a blackout on the riots and a general blackout on interracial crime statistics unless it comes to cherry picking a white on black case and repeating the word "WHITE" atleast 10 (or 100000 times in the case of Zimmerman which is what sparked this uproar). If Mainstream news wasn't so biased toward distorting reality with the goal of creating a culture of hatred and violence, and was instead focusing on the good deeds with the intent to make everyone hate eachother less this riot wouldn't be happening and I wouldn't be here right now making this post that's probably playing into some of the accusations I have made/am about to make.

I've had loved ones stabbed to death and had a dear friend raped and I haven't been in contact with her since and I can't describe how much I hate myself for not being able to comfort and support her properly at the time but have been praying that she isn't HIV positive since, my grandmother was also beaten for her purse, a new thing they do and they did it to my friends' moms friend, is taking a syringe with aids infected blood and randomly walking up to a white lady and injecting them and running away, and just recently my father was stabbed and beaten and left for dead in a hate crime, he was stabbed 8 times, the only reason they stopped stabbing him is because the knife broke... so please forgive me if I'm bitter ATM but I really don't see how it's "racist" to address a real issue that is being force fed by bullshit fake corporate owned "News" channels that is causing innocent people to lose their lives, their loved ones, and to live in fear of one of the latter or former happening. I just want to pursue my happiness without being paranoid that someone I know or lives in my family doesn't come to harm but it's becoming less and less possible with our media and even education screaming about race and constantly beating the "whitey bad" drum. All this to distract us from government tyranny until it's too late.

And no, Myk I'm not interested in "discussing" this with you and won't humor your cherry picking certain catch phrases and taking them out of context to deliberately misinterpret where I'm coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Naked Snake said:

you would still have to prove that the profiling lead to an intent to unlawfully harm or kill Martin. You have to prove that the racist views were part of his INTENT TO KILL MARTIN UNLAWFULLY.

No, this would only be true if zimmerman were charged with 1st degree murder, which he wasn't.

DeathevokatioN said:

And no, Myk I'm not interested in "discussing" this with you and won't humor your cherry picking certain catch phrases and taking them out of context to deliberately misinterpret where I'm coming from.

Believe me, no one needs to take anything you say out of context to get exactly your point.

Share this post


Link to post

Great. Of course this is going to turn into a thread along the lines of "I'm not racist, I swear guys!" or "I'm racist, but you would be, too, if this happened to you!" Frankly, I'm not really interested in researching every bullshit story you've posted here about how all black people are evil, violent, and inferior to white men. The only reason this ever became about race is because it was sensationalized. The Martin-Zimmerman case was never confirmed to be a hate crime and Zimmerman was never charged with such, but thanks for assuming that everyone is pulling the race card because a loud minority are doing so.

But, just to let you know, I did happen to do research. Want to know what I found? This and this, both of which confirm that your hate crime was a robbery and that there's no evidence that this had anything to do with the bumper sticker. The man involved has been arrested and is being tried for murder, so that case is sealed. Maybe he'll even get the death penalty so you can feel even better about it.

Of course, I'm fully expecting you to pull the No True Scotsman fallacy and claim anything found to the contrary of your pundit sites is wrong because they're not legitimate news sites.

Share this post


Link to post
DeathevokatioN said:

a new thing they do and they did it to my friends' moms friend, is taking a syringe with aids infected blood and randomly walking up to a white lady and injecting them and running away

And my friend's uncle who works at Nintendo gave me a prototype of the new PlayStation 5.

This urban legend has been going around since the 80s or 90s.

According to the Center for Disease Control:
"Have people been infected with HIV from being stuck by needles in non-health care settings?
No. While it is possible to get infected with HIV if you are stuck with a needle that is contaminated with HIV, there are no documented cases of transmission outside of a health-care setting.

CDC has received inquiries about used needles left by HIV-infected injection drug users in coin return slots of pay phones, the underside of gas pump handles, and on movie theater seats. Some reports have falsely indicated that CDC "confirmed" the presence of HIV in the needles. CDC has not tested such needles nor has CDC confirmed the presence or absence of HIV in any sample related to these rumors. The majority of these reports and warnings appear to be rumors/myths."

From a Discovery article:
"Furthermore, putting a pathogen such as HIV on one or more of the needles (especially solid needles, as these are reported to be) is very unlikely to succeed. This is because HIV cannot exist intact for long outside the body; in fact it is rendered inert shortly after contact with air."

http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/crime/a/world_of_aids.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pin_prick_attack
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/pinprick.asp
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/mayhem/gaspump.asp
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/hiv-needle-hoax.html
http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/crime/a/abraham-sands.htm

Share this post


Link to post

Even if the court cleared him, does Zimmerman truly think that he can just walk around with no worries, while there will probably be some hundred thousands of bad muthefuckah niggaz all around the US of A who'd ice him if they got the chance?

Share this post


Link to post

Oh geez, let's please not turn this into a racial argument. Okay yes, I admit, Zimmerman probably trailed Trayvon because he was black. There's no denying that. If Trayvon had been a white kid, Zimmerman most likely would have thought nothing about it. Zimmerman then made the unwise, but legal, move of confronting Trayvon. Trayvon made the unwise, yet understandable, move of attacking Zimmerman. Zimmerman, getting his ass handed to him, made the unfortunate, yet legal move, of shooting the kid in self defense. Was race involved? Probably. However, I don't think race motivated Zimmerman to kill Martin. Did both parties do stupid things? Yes. Was a crime committed? I don't think so.

My big issue primarily has been the attempt to assign blame here. People have this mentality that one side MUST be right and one side MUST be wrong. I think both people here made some bad calls, and it's tragic, yes, but you can't simply say that one or the other was in the right. It's like people can't face moral ambiguity. It's like we have to live a world of black and white, right and wrong. Sometimes, life doesn't work like that.

Share this post


Link to post

Black groups under control of liberal gun ban enthusiasts are now lobbying to have "Stand your Ground" laws taken off the books because supposedly the ability to defend yourself is unfair to blacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Quasar said:

Black groups under control of liberal gun ban enthusiasts are now lobbying to have "Stand your Ground" laws taken off the books because supposedly the ability to defend yourself is unfair to blacks.

They're not arguing that the law itself is racist, but rather that the application of the law is racist. Theoretically, whites and blacks who defend themselves under the "Stand Your Ground" law should have an equal chance of being acquitted. The data paints a different picture, however. I won't make the argument that race IS the factor, there could be a lot of other things at play here, but it makes sense. If you flip a coin 100 times and it comes up heads 90% of the time, you being to suspect that the coin is rigged somehow.

Again, I'm not myself arguing that racism is the reason for this, I can think of a lot of other variables that would skew the outcome, but I can understand why someone might think that racism is a factor.

Share this post


Link to post

I can see where geekmarine is coming from. If a tiny housewife can't discharge a firearm in the interest of protecting herself from a much larger, violent husband without getting 20 years in prison, (For a crime where no one was even hurt) then there's something very definitely wrong. This is even after the husband specifically said that she was in the right and that he was putting her in danger.

Here is a decent enough article detailing the difference in the way the laws are used in court. (It's certainly biased, but the evidence is sound and the bias justified.) Regardless of the letter of the law, if the spirit is not within the confines of reasonable justice, then these laws should be struck down or amended until they are effective and fair for all people involved.

Share this post


Link to post

Naked Snake said:
Yes, another irrelevancy. It is in fact not illegal to be a racist son of a bitch, it is illegal to systematically be one while performing public duties, sure, but the typical civilian is allowed leeway on the asshole scale.

A neighborhood watch person either does his job as well as a professional or doesn't do it at all. Doing it well should include proper identification and skills furthering dialogue and dissuasion. Zimmerman's talk with the cops shows angst at culprits not being caught, with prejudice aiming to have Martin get caught rather than really confirming whether he could be a threat. This intent led to the confrontation.

I read Zimmerman was placed in charge of the neighborhood watch with supervision from the Stanford cops... a force which had been under criticism for its handling of cases with black people.

Share this post


Link to post
Membrain said:

Regardless of the letter of the law, if the spirit is not within the confines of reasonable justice, then these laws should be struck down or amended until they are effective and fair for all people involved.

Making self defense less legal won't cause fewer black people to fall victim to bias in the judicial system. It will just send more people - of all races - to prison faster. It also is a goal on the slippery slope of gun control that the far left wants to push for, as they know every inch of territory is a mile in their battle to fully realize the state monopoly on violence by disarming the populace.

Once they do that, the kid gloves can really come off with all these insane laws and plans like putting TSA agents on every highway in the country pulling people over at random like cops, to give them their daily ass exam.

Share this post


Link to post

Quasar said:
It also is a goal on the slippery slope of gun control that the far left wants to push for, as they know every inch of territory is a mile in their battle to fully realize the state monopoly on violence by disarming the populace.

This case just shows how the killers getting away with self-defense more easily are the ones most "in bed" with the monopoly of the State you pretend they limit somehow, when you notice that George Zimmerman was endorsed by cops in his role and his dad is a retired magistrate with ties with the security forces. In some sense, George and his dad have that monopoly in their very heads because if you have a deeper understanding of the rules you can wing them more easily. The fact they're an interested party (they live in the gated community) and the "executioner" (taking a role usually reserved to cops) only makes this more problematic.

It will just send more people - of all races - to prison faster.

Hell yeah, let's just let people do stupid shit to reduce the prison population! Your prisons are so full mainly because they are a dumpster for poorer people and a business, more than a place to "correct" people. You're defending a type of behavior associated to private property defense that would likely imprison more middle or higher-classed (and probably paler skinned) people.

Share this post


Link to post
Quasar said:

Making self defense less legal won't cause fewer black people to fall victim to bias in the judicial system. It will just send more people - of all races - to prison faster.

Right, exactly. Because if you kill someone it should be more justifiable than if you defend yourself without loss of human life. How about the other side of the coin, where you're sending obviously innocent people to jail instead of those who are actually dangerous? If these people are "going to jail anyway", then why go with the option that protects fewer lives?

Quasar said:

It also is a goal on the slippery slope of gun control that the far left wants to push for, as they know every inch of territory is a mile in their battle to fully realize the state monopoly on violence by disarming the populace.

Oh, come off it. If the fucking government wanted to take your stuff with violence, they'd damn well do it and handheld weaponry wouldn't do jack shit. This isn't the 1700's any more. Beyond that, I really don't see where the Stand Your Ground laws have anything to do with gun control. They specifically only affect those people who shoot to kill. If you have even the slightest gun training, you should know that your first option is -always- to incapacitate when faced with a human target. Stand Your Ground obfuscates that by encouraging immediate use of lethal force.

Quasar said:

Once they do that, the kid gloves can really come off with all these insane laws and plans like putting TSA agents on every highway in the country pulling people over at random like cops, to give them their daily ass exam.

Are you serious? Like... really, do you honestly believe this is going to happen? Damn. I seriously don't even know what to say. Can you even imagine the logistics of that sort of scenario? And, again, what the hell does this have to do with anything in this topic?

This is just the kind of tin-foil hat craziness that amazes me. I really try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but there's a point where the ridiculousness just becomes unbearable.

Share this post


Link to post
Membrain said:

Right, exactly. Because if you kill someone it should be more justifiable than if you defend yourself without loss of human life. How about the other side of the coin, where you're sending obviously innocent people to jail instead of those who are actually dangerous? If these people are "going to jail anyway", then why go with the option that protects fewer lives?

I don't recall saying that. "Stand your ground" simply means you have no duty to retreat from an intruder. Whatever else you want to blow it up into, it does not equal a license to kill.

Membrain said:

Are you serious? Like... really, do you honestly believe this is going to happen? Damn. I seriously don't even know what to say. Can you even imagine the logistics of that sort of scenario? And, again, what the hell does this have to do with anything in this topic?

This is just the kind of tin-foil hat craziness that amazes me. I really try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but there's a point where the ridiculousness just becomes unbearable.

A two-minute search of Google will find you plenty of photographic evidence of the VIPR program. To be crazy, I'd have to be making shit up, not talking about something that has already happened in some places.

Share this post


Link to post
Membrain said:

Why is it that this so important as to have the case hinge on it? We have four options in regard to this:

- Zimmerman initiated aggressions, was winning the fight, but was injured, and shot Martin
- Zimmerman initiated aggressions, was losing the fight and was injured, and shot Martin
- Martin initiated aggressions, was winning the fight and injured Zimmerman, but was then shot
- Martin initiated aggressions, was losing the fight, managed to injure Zimmerman, and was then shot

Have you noticed the similarity here? Every single case ends with Martin being shot by Zimmerman after having injured him. While I agree that the prosecution was terrible and far too ready to gain notoriety because of the way the case was made famous, I disagree that Zimmerman is innocent of wrongdoing. No matter what happened, he shot another man and killed him. Everything else is just as valid as the alternatives and thus is no more than speculation.


This.

I also feel that when Zimmerman stalked and confronted Martin without a valid reason to do so (Martin hadn't actually done anything wrong) Zimmerman should have no longer been able to claim self-defense. Instead, self-defense should actually go to the one being stalked. With this understanding, even IF Martin threw the first punch, it was in self-defense.

This form of logic manifests itself from a culture where women are often stalked and raped. The stalker is never the victim, even, or perhaps especially when the one being followed 'initiates aggression' by using self-defense to escape the true aggressor.

Share this post


Link to post
Quasar said:

Black groups under control of liberal gun ban enthusiasts are now lobbying to have "Stand your Ground" laws taken off the books because supposedly the ability to defend yourself is unfair to blacks.

I thought I'd be safe from the "Liberals are the real racists" sentiment in Doomworld, but I guess I was wrong.

Quasar said:

the state monopoly on violence

WEE OOO
WEE OOO
LIBERTARIAN ALERT

Tell us again how you never signed any social contract.

Share this post


Link to post

This whole Zimmerman trial is a big distraction while Detroit goes bankrupt, Russia engages in it's largest war games since the Soviet era, and while the Brzezinski plan goes forward trying to play China against Russia. The problem is, Chamberlain tried to play Stalin against Hitler, didn't turn out that great huh Zbig?

As for Zimmerman, this whole concept of a "white" Hispanic is ridiculous. He got acquitted, fine, let him be. The boy is still dead.

Share this post


Link to post
MRB_Doom said:

As for Zimmerman, this whole concept of a "white" Hispanic is ridiculous.


Never seen "Blood in, blood out", esse?

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

Never seen "Blood in, blood out", esse?


Naah maaan. But I'm not going to San Quentin either, scary looking place.

Share this post


Link to post
MRB_Doom said:

This whole Zimmerman trial is a big distraction while Detroit goes bankrupt, Russia engages in it's largest war games since the Soviet era, and while the Brzezinski plan goes forward trying to play China against Russia. The problem is, Chamberlain tried to play Stalin against Hitler, didn't turn out that great huh Zbig?

As for Zimmerman, this whole concept of a "white" Hispanic is ridiculous. He got acquitted, fine, let him be. The boy is still dead.

You wanna throw in a "WAKE UP SHEEPLE" for good measure?

Alright, so the boy is dead and Zimmerman was acquitted. Doesn't mean the case no longer matters. Nothing's going to change those two facts, but I think there's a lesson to take away here, and simply sweeping the case under the rug won't teach us anything. To me, the question here should be whether or not what Zimmerman did was right. I'm not talking about pulling the gun out and shooting the boy, the courts said he had every right to do so. I mean, whether or not it was right for him to stalk this boy in the middle of the night and confront him for no good reason. To me, it seems like a lot of people support this kind of vigilante justice. I think that's one of the reasons this case has been so controversial. Like, "Fuck yeah, armed citizens taking the law into their own hands, it's about time!" I just think it's a very dangerous road to go down.

Share this post


Link to post
geekmarine said:

You wanna throw in a "WAKE UP SHEEPLE" for good measure?

Alright, so the boy is dead and Zimmerman was acquitted. Doesn't mean the case no longer matters. Nothing's going to change those two facts, but I think there's a lesson to take away here, and simply sweeping the case under the rug won't teach us anything. To me, the question here should be whether or not what Zimmerman did was right. I'm not talking about pulling the gun out and shooting the boy, the courts said he had every right to do so. I mean, whether or not it was right for him to stalk this boy in the middle of the night and confront him for no good reason. To me, it seems like a lot of people support this kind of vigilante justice. I think that's one of the reasons this case has been so controversial. Like, "Fuck yeah, armed citizens taking the law into their own hands, it's about time!" I just think it's a very dangerous road to go down.


To me people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton do not make the situation better by demanding that the UN(!) investigate the Trayvon Martin shooting. That is so overkill by at least Jackson, don't know what Sharpton's position is. This whole case is a perfect distraction and opportunity to create riots and put massive amount of riot police with Darth Vader outfits and roam the streets against black folks who are pissed off about their none existing civil rights and liberties. MLK Jr's legacy has completely disappeared thanks to know it all's like Jackson.

Share this post


Link to post
MRB_Doom said:

To me people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton do not make the situation better by demanding that the UN(!) investigate the Trayvon Martin shooting. That is so overkill by at least Jackson, don't know what Sharpton's position is. This whole case is a perfect distraction and opportunity to create riots and put massive amount of riot police with Darth Vader outfits and roam the streets against black folks who are pissed off about their none existing civil rights and liberties. MLK Jr's legacy has completely disappeared thanks to know it all's like Jackson.

Did I say anything about Jesse Jackson, the UN, or calling for more investigations? Whoops, sorry about that, guess I misspoke.

Seriously, I didn't mean to talk about Jesse Jackson or the UN. What I meant to say is that we need to consider the consequences of this case in our own lives. Oh wait, what was that? I never brought up Jesse Jackson or the UN? Really? I could have sworn I did because you went on a rant that had nothing to do with ANYTHING I said.

Look, if you want to make a point about Jesse Jackson, be my guest, post whatever the heck you want. To me it's completely irrelevant to the real point here, but whatever. However, it seems weird that you would quote me and THEN rant about Jesse Jackson as if you were addressing some point I made. I fail to see the connection at all. I've made it very clear that the outcome of the situation and the case is settled, and there's nothing we can do about that. All I was saying is that I still see value in discussing the case, because situations like this will always happen in the future. I believe there are important things to work out here. What do you do if a stranger in a truck stalks you in the night and then confronts you? What's the appropriate course of action if you believe you see someone suspicious walking around? Basically - how can we prevent these kinds of things from happening in the future?

Share this post


Link to post
Bucket said:

I thought I'd be safe from the "Liberals are the real racists" sentiment in Doomworld, but I guess I was wrong.

I don't know what you're talking about precisely, but the plain fact of the matter is I'm getting emails in my hotmail account from left-leaning groups catering to African American membership that are pushing trying to remove "Stand your Ground" laws from state lawbooks. Skew it any way you want, I guess. Any political party will try to use race as an advantage toward its goals if it sees the opportunity, just the same way they use class and religion.

Bucket said:

WEE OOO
WEE OOO
LIBERTARIAN ALERT

I am much closer to an anarchist, thank you.

Bucket said:

Tell us again how you never signed any social contract.

Actually if you want to talk about the concept of the social contract, I've generally been a believer in that notion. The problem we have in our current society is that the government isn't keeping up its end of it. Instead it is trampling the rights of the people, and exceeding its designated authority in almost every way imaginable. It is corrupt and is only working toward the goals of those with the money and power to tell it what they want.

Share this post


Link to post
geekmarine said:

Did I say anything about Jesse Jackson, the UN, or calling for more investigations? Whoops, sorry about that, guess I misspoke.

Seriously, I didn't mean to talk about Jesse Jackson or the UN. What I meant to say is that we need to consider the consequences of this case in our own lives. Oh wait, what was that? I never brought up Jesse Jackson or the UN? Really? I could have sworn I did because you went on a rant that had nothing to do with ANYTHING I said.

Look, if you want to make a point about Jesse Jackson, be my guest, post whatever the heck you want. To me it's completely irrelevant to the real point here, but whatever. However, it seems weird that you would quote me and THEN rant about Jesse Jackson as if you were addressing some point I made. I fail to see the connection at all. I've made it very clear that the outcome of the situation and the case is settled, and there's nothing we can do about that. All I was saying is that I still see value in discussing the case, because situations like this will always happen in the future. I believe there are important things to work out here. What do you do if a stranger in a truck stalks you in the night and then confronts you? What's the appropriate course of action if you believe you see someone suspicious walking around? Basically - how can we prevent these kinds of things from happening in the future?


Yes I see your point about future events, but my issue with Jackson is that he has a following of people that look up to him and he can change the course of actions that certain folks tend to make. That's all. It's a pretty difficult case because it was dark, Trayvon attacked Zimmerman(?), Zimmerman felt he needed to take action quickly, got his gun, and fired. Maybe he should have been convicted of involuntary manslaughter and gotten a prison sentence, would he have survived behind bars then? Does it matter if he lives at all? It looks like the New Black Panthers Party wants to incite riots and kill whitey after this whole ordeal and how can that makes things better?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×