|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Jan 3, 2011, 10:24 PM
Post #176 of 285
(16353 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
jmeizis wrote: Jay worded it a little better than you. I get what you're driving at.
No, you don't. I am talking far more about the route and the style in which it was done than I am the person. Preserving the route as it was first climbed is a reverential nod to them and their contribution but it is not about them, it is not for their sake.
In reply to: Now if that follows then you either agree or disagree with what I said before about people who claim rights to a route needing to take responsibility for it and things that happen with it.
No
In reply to: Ken, I said willingly accept. While I have certainly climbed above crappy bolts, pitons, gear, screws, etc. I didn't do it because I wanted to climb above crappy equipment, I wanted to climb the route and the risk I felt of falling was less than the risk I felt of the gear failing. If I had a rusty 1/4" bolt next to a bomber glue in I don't have to accept the crappy bolt. If there is only the crappy bolt my choices are to back off (which is not always easy or safer), just solo the route, or clip the bolt. I don't believe that a lack of desireable choices means we willingly accept the best option currently available. If someone robs you at gunpoint and they tell you to hand over your wallet or get shot in the face would you say either choice was willing?
If you haven't WILLINGLY accepted that any fixed gear or anchor may be damaged or missing, and along with that all the associated risks, before you leave the ground, well...I'm pretty much at a loss for words. I honestly don't know what you think is happening out there on the rock.
In reply to: Maybe I am way off base. Maybe no route developers feel any interest in what happens to their routes. People don't bitch if someone adds or removes bolts from a route that isn't there's, and no FA tell people they have permission to add or remove bolts from a route.
*Face palm*
|
|
|
|
|
kaizen
Jan 3, 2011, 10:47 PM
Post #177 of 285
(16338 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2009
Posts: 154
|
jmeizis wrote: Jay worded it a little better than you. I get what you're driving at. So it sounds like in honoring or respecting the FA's style you're allowing certain rights, correct? The right to name it, the right to add or remove bolts, the right to fix draws on it, cut rings if people won't stop TRing through them, and so on? It's not total control over the route but FA's maintain some minor control over that patch of rock that they climbed first. They can't sell it or anything but they have the right to make certain changes to it that others are excluded from making. These conventions of allowing certain rights, abilities, or honors, that aren't available to others is the basis of property rights. While climbing routes eventually fall under the umbrella of real property ownership be it public or private land those rights given to the FA's by the climbing community are a sort of possessory interest. So if you regard any FA as having rights to make changes (minor as they may be) then you're de facto allowing a possessory interest. Whether you like it or not I think that's giving them a claim of some sort of ownership. Now if that follows then you either agree or disagree with what I said before about people who claim rights to a route needing to take responsibility for it and things that happen with it. Ken, I said willingly accept. While I have certainly climbed above crappy bolts, pitons, gear, screws, etc. I didn't do it because I wanted to climb above crappy equipment, I wanted to climb the route and the risk I felt of falling was less than the risk I felt of the gear failing. If I had a rusty 1/4" bolt next to a bomber glue in I don't have to accept the crappy bolt. If there is only the crappy bolt my choices are to back off (which is not always easy or safer), just solo the route, or clip the bolt. I don't believe that a lack of desireable choices means we willingly accept the best option currently available. If someone robs you at gunpoint and they tell you to hand over your wallet or get shot in the face would you say either choice was willing? As for the routes you've put up. While you desire that they stay the same you aren't checking up on them or bitching if someone changes them. I don't think all FA's do keep such interest in the routes they put up but I do know some FA's who do keep such interest, if not in all the routes they put up, at least some of them. I don't think a FA who puts up a route and leaves it to the masses is making any sort of possessory claim and therefore bears no responsibility for what happens after them. If on the other hand they do claim some sort of rights to the route then they can't shirk everything that I think goes along with that. Maybe I am way off base. Maybe no route developers feel any interest in what happens to their routes. People don't bitch if someone adds or removes bolts from a route that isn't there's, and no FA tell people they have permission to add or remove bolts from a route.
I don't post much, but I have seen you get shit on in a lot of other threads. I thought that it was pretty unfair to you in a lot of cases.
This is my lightbulb moment.
|
|
|
|
|
schu
Jan 3, 2011, 11:28 PM
Post #178 of 285
(16313 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2006
Posts: 5
|
notapplicable wrote: jt512 wrote: jmeizis wrote: I can't tell if you're saying your honoring of a FA is simply honorific or if there having done the FA entitles them to certain rights in regards to a route they put up. I think that what he said is clear. He's saying the same I am, above. Jay This is exactly right. I'm beginning to hope that jmeizis is actually this sites most talented troll. In reply to: Otherwise this is profoundly embarrassing .
As a longtime C. Springs local, this is really embarrassing - first off you you have the pubic hair bearded draw thief that should of gotten his ass beat into the ground. As if that weren't enough to soil our local climbing community's image then you have Jmoron's rant about every FA needing to ensure the safety of every subsequent climber on any of their routes... forever.
Jerimiah, are you suggesting I travel around upgrading hardware, prying off loose holds, scraping lichen on every route I've put up in the last 25 years? I've got a job and a family dude- that ain't happnin'.
Jmeizis and draw thief are not representative of Colorado Springs climbers, but I'm sure you all already knew that... /end rant
|
|
|
|
|
jmeizis
Jan 4, 2011, 12:03 AM
Post #179 of 285
(16297 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2006
Posts: 635
|
I suppose I used too broad of a brush. In some circumstances we willingly accept certain risks. If I can see the bolts are bad from the ground and I choose to climb it anyways then I'm willingly accepting that risk but once I'm up there and find the circumstances I think it's less willing. We take precautions and make risk averse decisions precisely because we don't willingly accept all risks.
As for gear failure inherent in climbing I guess I agree that it's something I realize is a possibility but I don't think that means it's inherent. I think if more people felt that gear failure was an intrinsic part of climbing they wouldn't do it. I wouldn't do it. It's because gear rarely fails that I feel comfortable climbing. Accepting that climbing is risky I don't think means that you accept gear failure when used properly as an inseperable part of climbing. Failure of inadequate gear or damaged gear sure. I think less than 20 reported gear failures in almost 60 years says a lot about that.
I too have climbed up to two bolts where one was an old 1/4"er and the other a nice SS 1/2"er. I clipped the 1/2"er. 
Now maybe it's different where you live but some people here get pissy about their FA's. I won't name anyone but someone put anchors on a classic route that wasn't their's. The FA went and chopped them. He's been chopping the rings on his routes because people are toproping through them. I'm not going to get into whether I agree with what they're doing but that particular FA's seems to feel more ownership of their routes than some others do. Perhaps that's skewing my perception a bit. Obviously there's no concensus on this otherwise people wouldn't have discussions about adding or removing bolts to routes and talking to FA's about it.
I think it's a little complicated. If you don't give some pseudo ownership of a route to the FA then I think you're de facto leaving decisions about it to the whims of the masses. Personally I don't like the idea of that. I don't like the idea of the FA being responsible for the gear on the route long after they've climbed it either if they're not claiming any sort of special rights in regards to the route.
Dynosore, there's a reason I kept saying "sort of", "pseudo", and "interest". Because you're right it's not real ownership like I own my house. But allowing someone to do something to something and excluding others from doing it is the basis of ownership. That ownership is only as valid as the people who recognize it. So if nobody recognizes any rights of a FA to do anything to a route then there are none. It sounds like people do recognize, during a certain time period perhaps, that the FA can add/remove bolts, change their locations, etc. and thus some level of interest that is stronger than that of people other than the FA's.
You certainly have not persuaded me that you know anymore about what you're talking about than I do.
Schu, you aren't doing the local community any better buddy. Obviously you didn't thouroughly read what I wrote because I'm not ranting, simply providing a different viewpoint. What you wrote is not my viewpoint. If you or someone else can provide a cohesive thought that opposes my actual viewpoint without explicitly or implicitly suggesting that I'm an idiot then go for it. Nowhere have I said that my viewpoint is the correct one. There isn't a correct one. If you and all the other people want to pretend that your view is the correct one then by all means let your circle jerk continue but I'm going to the gym.
|
|
|
|
|
MS1
Jan 4, 2011, 12:23 AM
Post #180 of 285
(16279 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 24, 2009
Posts: 560
|
cracklover wrote: MS1 wrote: cracklover wrote: Two things: 1 - The thief was lying from beginning to end. I've little doubt that he will be more careful next time, but that there will be a next time. 2 - Outside of the narrow pissing match with Jay and Moose, I think the question of liability *is* an interesting one, and worth discussing. Let's take the case that happened recently in Australia, in which a party equipped a route poorly, resulting in a bad accident. It was claimed that the party had been warned beforehand (by one of the most well-respected local developers) *not* to use the type of bolt they had in mind, and/or *not* to bolt the line they had in mind (because the rock was known to be poor). The party was on a mission to do an FA each place they went, and they disregarded the advice that was given. Let's say this happened in the US, and that both parties were US citizens. Wouldn't there be a good claim for negligence, even under Jay's more strict interpretation? As a climber, I would strongly hope that we would police/look after our own. This means vilify the bolters so they could never develop another route, and raise the $$ to help out the fallen climber. It means keep it out of the court. But in reality, I see no reason to think it *would* stay out of court. Further, I see no reason to think that the injured party wouldn't stand a good chance of winning. And if this happened, it could create a legal precedent that would be very damaging to further development. GO The law varies from state to state, but in most states this sounds like a viable claim as a matter of formal law. Under the most common version of the comparative negligence rule, the question would be whether clipping those bolts as they appeared from a climber's perspective was more negligent than placing them in their bad condition, having been advised that the bolts and the rock were unsound. People generally view climbing as crazy, so that is an obstacle for your plaintiffs, but I don't think the claim would be worthless; the plaintiff could probably obtain a reasonable settlement. As I said above, the real reason you don't see these claims has nothing to do with the legal rules, but instead it is because most route developers don't have enough money to be worth suing. And I also agree that courts are not the best place to handle problems like this. Well in the situation I'm referring to, I don't believe the climbers in question had any sure reason to know that the bolts were poor. They were good quality bolts and hangers, just not appropriate for the rock, and possibly poorly placed (may have been too wide a hole for the bolt). However, two things that *would* make the jury put some blame back on them are the facts that they were 1 - off route, and 2 - their ability was not up the the route they were on. GO
Well, as far as that goes, it's pretty much up for grabs in terms of what a judge or jury would think. I think to the average non-climber, just climbing on lead on bolts that an unknown person placed looks pretty reckless. A good plaintiff's lawyer would try to educate them regarding the relative safety of sport climbing, but you'd be fighting some pretty strongly ingrained ideas to the contrary.
In my own mind, I think the nature of the crag should factor into things significantly. Is this a popular, closely bolted sport crag where most other routes are bolted by knowledgable people? Then I think a reasonable climber should feel pretty comfortable trusting the bolts on a random route. (I certainly would.) Is this a pretty wild area with a few bolted-on-lead trad lines and a healthy amount of choss? Then I think the onus is much more on the climbers to investigate the quality of rock and bolts (including, potentially, asking around for some history about the FA) before getting on a route. This last point is especially applicable in your example, given that this climb was hard for the climbers and involved apparently challenging route-finding issues.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 4, 2011, 12:41 AM
Post #181 of 285
(16267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
jmeizis wrote: But allowing someone to do something to something and excluding others from doing it is the basis of ownership. That ownership is only as valid as the people who recognize it. So if nobody recognizes any rights of a FA to do anything to a route then there are none. It sounds like people do recognize, during a certain time period perhaps, that the FA can add/remove bolts, change their locations, etc. and thus some level of interest that is stronger than that of people other than the FA's.
Jeremy, anybody has a right to add bolts to any route, and anybody has the right to chop the added bolts.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Jan 4, 2011, 12:41 AM
Post #182 of 285
(16265 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
bearbreeder wrote: majid_sabet wrote: [ QDs are rated to 15 KN with soft material hanging all day and all night exposed to cold and hot conditions with people taking falls on them on regular bases. bolt and hanger are rated to 25+ KN in one set condition and last five time longer than any QDs. Does 2+2 adds up 4.5 ? Why can't sport climber clean up after their climb ? tell me, what is the logic behind leaving your sh*t hanging on the wall when you could easily clip and move on ? Does two second time to clip in slows them down or uses a lot of their energy ? bunch of pus*ies with skinny harness and skinny 6.9mm rope who can't even carry six QDs on their harnesses. says the flamer who can't lead 5.8 yet  im sure youve got no problems clipping al yr draws on-sighting 5.4s mista majid ... unfortunately its not that easy on climbs that are a tad harder ... 
exactly, my guess is that anyone in here saying project draws are booty are just like the dick in the OP that can't climb hard enough to realize the real advantage to having fixed draws and probably never will.
Hey majid.. down clean these will ya?
|
|
|
|
|
schu
Jan 4, 2011, 12:53 AM
Post #183 of 285
(16252 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2006
Posts: 5
|
Your actual viewpoint that FA's should be held responsible for going around and maintaining all of their routes indefinitely is complete bullshit in my opinion. If the route is popular, it will get maintained by the local community or the FA - no big deal.
My cohesive thought is that some climbers put up a shit ton of routes over the years - some good, some not so good. To suggest they go around maintaining and keeping track of every one of them is completely retarded, not to mention impossible.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jan 4, 2011, 1:09 AM
Post #184 of 285
(16243 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
Bats wrote: Sunny, I am confused about this sport climbing issues. That is why I am asking you. What constitute legitimate booty from theft? I thought you cleaned after you climbed on sport or trad, and not leave any gear for days. The way I look at it the owners and qd thief are equally guilty.
Booty is when someone leaves something behind by messing up, getting in over their heads, or just being stupid. If you lower off and you forgot to thread the chains and grab your draws and you can't be assed to climb another lap and get them back, then there is a plesent surprise for the next person (or maybe for convinience's sake they'll hang around). Or if you simply can't do the moves and lower off and leave something behind - classic booty.
Or if you can't get a piece of pro out and I can - it's mine. You left it for dead anyways so cool beans.
Hope that helps, mr bats.
|
|
|
|
|
ubu
Jan 4, 2011, 1:59 AM
Post #185 of 285
(16218 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2008
Posts: 1485
|
I dunno, I can see where that guy is coming from. Once I got really pissed seeing a mess of draws that had been left on a couple routes for what seemed like months, so I cleaned the entire wall.
I'm banned from that gym now.
|
|
|
|
|
jmeizis
Jan 4, 2011, 3:48 AM
Post #186 of 285
(16179 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2006
Posts: 635
|
If it's a free for all then my previous assertions were indeed way off base. Oops. My worry in it being a free for all is that in certain circumstances we all lose. But what can we do about it? Hell if I know.
schu wrote: Your actual viewpoint that FA's should be held responsible for going around and maintaining all of their routes indefinitely is complete bullshit in my opinion. If the route is popular, it will get maintained by the local community or the FA - no big deal. My cohesive thought is that some climbers put up a shit ton of routes over the years - some good, some not so good. To suggest they go around maintaining and keeping track of every one of them is completely retarded, not to mention impossible.
You're right, if I had said that it would be incredibly stupid for FA's to maintain all the routes they put up. I didn't say that though. I added a caveat in which that only applied if they made some sort of claim that the route belonged to them or only they could alter the nature of it. Apparently few first ascencionists make such claims so I don't think they have any responsibility for what happens after their first ascent of the route.
By the way, if routes are left to the community to maintain then the community in Colorado Springs is lagging. I only know of two people replacing bolts in the Garden. Tell you what. Buy me a drill and I'll make it my goal for the summer season to replace every piton or bad bolt in the entire park. That can be our way of giving back to the community.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 4, 2011, 4:39 AM
Post #187 of 285
(16160 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
*sigh* Please quote the portion of the post you are responding to. I know it makes it harder to win by obfuscation, but it does at least make the argument possible to follow.
What I wrote: Jeremy, anybody has a right to add bolts to any route, and anybody has the right to chop the added bolts. jmeizis wrote: If it's a free for all then my previous assertions were indeed way off base. Oops. My worry in it being a free for all is that in certain circumstances we all lose. But what can we do about it? Hell if I know.
If you want to actually come to an understand of this issue, then consider the following paradox: even though anybody has a right to add bolts to any route, and anybody has the right to chop the added bolts, "free for alls" (ie, bolt wars) are uncommon.
Once you can explain that paradox, you'll stop making stupid posts about FAists rights, route ownership (pseudo or otherwise), and liability.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jmeizis
Jan 4, 2011, 7:24 AM
Post #188 of 285
(16130 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2006
Posts: 635
|
Sorry, I figured you were smart enough to figure it out. I don't think a free for all necessarily means a bolt war although that would be such an instance. Just off the top of my head these are the places I could think of that have had bolting controversies. Some recent some old.
El Cajon
Boulder Canyon
Compressor Route
Most of New England
Southern Arizona
South Platte
I can probably dredge up more bolting controversies than you can injuries resulting from the failure of properly used climbing equipment. Guess there isn't a paradox after all.
Why would I stop making my stupid posts? Then I'd miss out on all your witty repartee. Well this was fun.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Jan 4, 2011, 7:56 AM
Post #189 of 285
(16124 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
jakedatc wrote: bearbreeder wrote: majid_sabet wrote: [ QDs are rated to 15 KN with soft material hanging all day and all night exposed to cold and hot conditions with people taking falls on them on regular bases. bolt and hanger are rated to 25+ KN in one set condition and last five time longer than any QDs. Does 2+2 adds up 4.5 ? Why can't sport climber clean up after their climb ? tell me, what is the logic behind leaving your sh*t hanging on the wall when you could easily clip and move on ? Does two second time to clip in slows them down or uses a lot of their energy ? bunch of pus*ies with skinny harness and skinny 6.9mm rope who can't even carry six QDs on their harnesses. says the flamer who can't lead 5.8 yet im sure youve got no problems clipping al yr draws on-sighting 5.4s mista majid ... unfortunately its not that easy on climbs that are a tad harder ... exactly, my guess is that anyone in here saying project draws are booty are just like the dick in the OP that can't climb hard enough to realize the real advantage to having fixed draws and probably never will. Hey majid.. down clean these will ya? [image]http://mountainproject.com/images/83/78/106588378_large_1ce71b.jpg[/image]
that is like 50 QDs @ $500 cash on ebay so what is the GPS UTM location ?
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 4, 2011, 8:23 AM
Post #190 of 285
(16118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
jmeizis wrote: Sorry, I figured you were smart enough to figure it out. I don't think a free for all necessarily means a bolt war although that would be such an instance....
Clueless twit. Sorry, I figured you were smart. I won't make that mistake again.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 4, 2011, 1:50 PM
Post #191 of 285
(16093 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
That's pretty fucking ugly.
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Jan 4, 2011, 2:10 PM
Post #192 of 285
(16080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
j_ung wrote: [image]http://mountainproject.com/images/83/78/106588378_large_1ce71b.jpg[/image] That's pretty fucking ugly.
that was my first reaction, too, but I understand why the draws are there, even if I think they shouldn't be.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 4, 2011, 2:38 PM
Post #193 of 285
(16070 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Gmburns2000 wrote: j_ung wrote: [image]http://mountainproject.com/images/83/78/106588378_large_1ce71b.jpg[/image] That's pretty fucking ugly. that was my first reaction, too, but I understand why the draws are there, even if I think they shouldn't be.
Sure. I'm also not stating an opinion on local ethics one way or another, nor what I think the future of those draws should be. I'm just saying, "Ick."
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Jan 4, 2011, 2:41 PM
Post #194 of 285
(16066 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
j_ung wrote: [image]http://mountainproject.com/images/83/78/106588378_large_1ce71b.jpg[/image] That's pretty fucking ugly.
ict.
You'd want to downclean stuff at the motherlode or bob marley jay?
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Jan 4, 2011, 2:44 PM
Post #195 of 285
(16063 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
majid_sabet wrote: jakedatc wrote: bearbreeder wrote: majid_sabet wrote: [ QDs are rated to 15 KN with soft material hanging all day and all night exposed to cold and hot conditions with people taking falls on them on regular bases. bolt and hanger are rated to 25+ KN in one set condition and last five time longer than any QDs. Does 2+2 adds up 4.5 ? Why can't sport climber clean up after their climb ? tell me, what is the logic behind leaving your sh*t hanging on the wall when you could easily clip and move on ? Does two second time to clip in slows them down or uses a lot of their energy ? bunch of pus*ies with skinny harness and skinny 6.9mm rope who can't even carry six QDs on their harnesses. says the flamer who can't lead 5.8 yet im sure youve got no problems clipping al yr draws on-sighting 5.4s mista majid ... unfortunately its not that easy on climbs that are a tad harder ... exactly, my guess is that anyone in here saying project draws are booty are just like the dick in the OP that can't climb hard enough to realize the real advantage to having fixed draws and probably never will. Hey majid.. down clean these will ya? [image]http://mountainproject.com/images/83/78/106588378_large_1ce71b.jpg[/image] that is like 50 QDs @ $500 cash on ebay so what is the GPS UTM location ?
ha... it is in an area of the country where a severe beat down would result if you took them. you wouldn't make it to the parking lot.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 4, 2011, 4:23 PM
Post #196 of 285
(16024 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
jakedatc wrote: j_ung wrote: [image]http://mountainproject.com/images/83/78/106588378_large_1ce71b.jpg[/image] That's pretty fucking ugly. ict. You'd want to downclean stuff at the motherlode or bob marley jay?
j_ung wrote: I'm also not stating an opinion on local ethics one way or another, nor what I think the future of those draws should be. I'm just saying, "Ick." |
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Jan 4, 2011, 4:32 PM
Post #197 of 285
(16014 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
j_ung wrote: jakedatc wrote: j_ung wrote: [image]http://mountainproject.com/images/83/78/106588378_large_1ce71b.jpg[/image] That's pretty fucking ugly. ict. You'd want to downclean stuff at the motherlode or bob marley jay? j_ung wrote: I'm also not stating an opinion on local ethics one way or another, nor what I think the future of those draws should be. I'm just saying, "Ick."
saw that :) I think they have a place so i'm not offended by them very much.
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Jan 4, 2011, 5:33 PM
Post #198 of 285
(15969 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
Here's what I don't get: Why did the guy steal the draws? How is it worth the time? If he stole 8 draws, he could maybe fetch $40-$60.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Jan 4, 2011, 5:36 PM
Post #199 of 285
(15967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
spikeddem wrote: Here's what I don't get: Why did the guy steal the draws? How is it worth the time? If he stole 8 draws, he could maybe fetch $40-$60.
its not the money but pleasure of taking it down.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jan 4, 2011, 6:26 PM
Post #200 of 285
(15939 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
majid_sabet wrote: spikeddem wrote: Here's what I don't get: Why did the guy steal the draws? How is it worth the time? If he stole 8 draws, he could maybe fetch $40-$60. its not the money but pleasure of taking it down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
