The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 11, 2011, 11:15 AM   #51
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
Quote:
.bullet in the gut or in the heart?....I choose the heart.
As would I. But you know as well as anyone (or you should, being a mod and all) that the dynamics of a fight don't necessarily allow us to put them where we want to every time.

Heck, we might even miss altogether a couple of times

Reality sucks sometimes.
Quote:
I am talking about instantly leveling the muzzle just as it clears leather, followed by rounds into the torso, while simultaneously bringing the pistol up to eye level, all while shooting and moving back and laterally. I didn't think of it as working my way up but it would seem the term implies working up.
That is actually a very good description of the 'zipper'.
Quote:
The whole idea is to get hits on the guy across from you before you take a hit.
I agree.

If a gun fight is getting hits while avoiding getting hit yourself, which is more important?
smince is offline  
Old January 11, 2011, 11:16 PM   #52
Shane Tuttle
Staff
 
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: Montana
Posts: 8,929
Quote:
As would I. But you know as well as anyone (or you should, being a mod and all) that the dynamics of a fight don't necessarily allow us to put them where we want to every time.
Knowing moreso isn't a requirement of a Staff member...

Quote:
Heck, we might even miss altogether a couple of times
I hope we never have to be in the situation to find out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bds32
The term "zippering" may be the wrong term to describe what I mean. I am talking about instantly leveling the muzzle just as it clears leather, followed by rounds into the torso, while simultaneously bringing the pistol up to eye level, all while shooting and moving back and laterally. I didn't think of it as working my way up but it would seem the term implies working up. The whole idea is to get hits on the guy across from you before you take a hit. With consistent practice, I still think it is a viable solution when you're up close and personal.
A viable solution? Absolutely. For me, though, as I explained my draw stroke earlier, it isn't going to be beneficial to expend the effort to level the firearm as soon as it clears the holster to fire. Even if I do, (giving the assailant is of average height as well as me) the bullet path will be entering the stomach area. I believe if I'm having to point shoot in this manner at contact/close distance in the heat of the moment bullet placement there isn't going to do a dang bit of good but have me with one less available shot. The time difference between this and firing one from retention is so miniscule that it just doesn't seem to make sense to do it.
__________________
If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language.

Posting and YOU: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting
Shane Tuttle is offline  
Old January 12, 2011, 09:22 AM   #53
Ruark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2010
Posts: 215
Some time back I read an article in a gun magazine about this, where a firearms instructor at the FBI training academy said, "if you get into a face to face gunfight, you can be sure of two things: one, you'll shoot one handed, and two, you won't use the sights."

That's probably true. If you're pulling and snap-shooting, it's probably a situation where your attacker ALREADY has his gun out, and the extra second it takes to see your sights could easily get you killed.

You should certainly practice enough with your gun to be able to whip it out and hit an 8 inch paper plate at 15 feet. A challenge here is that a lot of popular self defense handguns, especially those carried concealed, have TINY little barrels, many under 2 inches. Even WITH sights, it's hard to hit the freakin' side of a barn with those things without extensive, regular practice, not to mention under the pressure of a split-second self defense situation.

I can hit that paper plate all day with my Ruger Blackhawk, firing instantly from the waist, but then it has a 6 1/2" barrel and I've shot a gazillion rounds through it (I reload). If I got a little concealed carry gun like a S&W Bodyguard, I'd have to go back to Square One.

Just my $.02 worth.
Ruark is offline  
Old January 17, 2011, 08:47 AM   #54
Brit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 1,600
A big debate, a lot of posts when seemingly contradicting one point of view, or the other, are more or less agreeing!

Dry fire, punch draw, click! The front sight should be at the point you want the round to impact! At that exact instance the pistol stops.

Same to be repeated, on the range, time and time again! Single, multiples!

To strike vital areas of the human body, consistently, holding your pistol, in two hands tightly, works best, level in front of face (IMHO) you strive for this, but if not possible, you do the best you can.
Brit is offline  
Old January 17, 2011, 01:27 PM   #55
Brit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 1,600
G.willikers said

Quote:
How do you teach the proper use of the sights?
The method that works the quickest for me is to concentrate on and practice good form.
Grip, trigger, stance, 'etc all must be near perfect for fast, accurate shooting.
When all else is good, the sights will be on the target, even small ones at the distances you mentioned.
No need to actually think about them.
They will be there.
Is that the method you use?
Sorry I missed your question, as all action starts from the draw, I taught the draw as the trigger point to hitting the target! So practice, draw, punch, fire.
Brit is offline  
Old January 17, 2011, 03:02 PM   #56
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
I think you'll get the bickering and debating in every thread, like it or not, and this is one of those topics that brings out the highly opinionated, or so it seems. However, it is hard to get much across in the way of technique and whatnot when there is so much controversy over the basic idea. Besides, it's hard to get much across when there is mutual agreement, it being a dynamic thing. That is, given the limitation of the forum. There have been books on the subject.

An excellent read on the subject is Fairbairn's old book, "Shooting to Live." The illustrations are fairly good, for what they are, the advice is good and he even goes out on a limb and suggests that a thinking man could come up with good ideas all on his own. Anyhow, as you all probably know, he advocated chamber empty carry of a Colt .45 auto. That's another topic of controversy. He claimed a fast draw could be achieved nevertheless. But nowhere in the book can you find a thorough and complete discussion of exactly how you can actually do a quick draw and get off a shot. He tells you how to do it but not how to do it fast, which is a big difference and perhaps the point on which so much controversy turns--or spins.

I have my own issues with training matters which I've mentioned from time to time, which chiefly amounts to not ever being able to either train or practice sufficiently to satisfy anyone's standards.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old January 17, 2011, 04:01 PM   #57
sliponby
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2010
Location: Alabama
Posts: 187
Why all the arguing?

I would hope (God forbid I'll never have to) that if I was forced into a situation where I must draw and fire that I would have eyes on front sight targeted to COM. I do practice this and strive for smoothness, speed and accuracy. Incorporate movement, yada, yada, ya.

BUT, I am fully aware that the circumstances may be that I don't have the luxury to get sights on target, eyes on front sight, COM. Therefore, I do practice point shooting as part of my training. WHY NOT?

You'd be surprised what your technique (form, stance, etc.) will be under extreme stress with milliseconds to react. Most will thrust gun straight out in isosceles, eyes wide open, on threat, bang, bang, bang... Sounds like point shooting to me...
__________________
No one prays harder for peace than the soldier.
"We Dare Defend Our Rights", Alabama State Motto...

Last edited by sliponby; January 17, 2011 at 06:41 PM.
sliponby is offline  
Old January 17, 2011, 05:15 PM   #58
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
I agree, timetohunt, that it may add microseconds, more likely a lot more, but it is more a case of doing one thing instead of another and it is a question of doing the same thing all the time. By that I mean you obviously should practice doing only one method with one gun, although I honestly don't think the difference is that great between different methods. I'm sure plenty of people use both revolvers and automatics with no problems operating two different systems successfully. Besides, the controversy is usually just about single action automatics in the first place. But in my case, I find the safeties on some double action automatics to be even harder, going on impossible, to operate quickly under stress (or not), like the Walther and S&W type of safeties that work "the wrong way," and the same type is found on some Ruger automatics. My point here is that not everyone will find flicking off the safety of a .45 auto all that easy or racking the slide on most (but not necessarily all) automatics to be that difficult, even under stress. But there's more.

All of the business of safeties and different carry methods may be beside the point if you can't get your gun out and shooting in time because your reaction time isn't fast enough.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old January 17, 2011, 05:31 PM   #59
Nnobby45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,150
Quote:
I know of that chamber empty method or commonly known as the "Israeli Method". My issue with that method is it adds an extra step in the process that could be forgotten. It also adds some microseconds of time to the equation and those microseconds can mean the difference between life and death IMHO
Interesting that your issue with the method doesn't including being totally dependent on having two hands free.
Nnobby45 is offline  
Old January 17, 2011, 09:05 PM   #60
Shane Tuttle
Staff
 
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: Montana
Posts: 8,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by timetohunt
I opened this thread thinking that we would be discussing point shooting methods and techniques. However, this seems to be a lot of bickering and debating about whether we should be using this method or not. Can we discuss some techniques and methods or is this thread a debate about whether or not we should use it?
Bickering? Well, all due respect to the OP and you, it wasn't really specific on the subject at hand. There's a bit of bickering, yes. That's the nature of the beast to a certain degree in subjects such as point shooting. Staff believes it has been at a dull roar and the signal/noise ratio is acceptable.

Debating? Isn't that the whole point of the board? To debate, discuss, and exchange ideas? I've yet to see in public view where anyone has resorted to personal attacks. Attacking statements is a different story from attacking a person's character.

Now, back to the discussion...
__________________
If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language.

Posting and YOU: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting
Shane Tuttle is offline  
Old January 17, 2011, 10:07 PM   #61
JimPage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2010
Location: Rome, NY
Posts: 941
I shoot both ways.

I hope I use the appropriate method in the appropriate situation.
Since I don't know what the situation will be or how I may react to the situation, I must practice both methods.

Hopefully, I won't find out. But I do have signigicant experience is military combat.
JimPage is offline  
Old January 17, 2011, 10:43 PM   #62
Nnobby45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,150
Quote:
I shoot both ways.

I hope I use the appropriate method in the appropriate situation.
Since I don't know what the situation will be or how I may react to the situation, I must practice both methods.
LOL, that's the whole point. Point shooting isn't appropriate in all situations, and two hands using sights isn't always possible. Arguing about which one to use exclusively is pretty silly when one better be schooled in both.

Same could be said for Weaver vs. Iscoseles but that's another can of goo for another thread. And one reason I hate the Iscoseles is because I can never spell it.
Nnobby45 is offline  
Old January 17, 2011, 10:49 PM   #63
armsmaster270
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2008
Location: California
Posts: 1,951
I shoot both ways depending on the distance & circumstances 20 years Military & 18 years city police experience.
__________________
http://www.armsmaster.net-a.googlepages.com
http://s239.photobucket.com/albums/f...aster270/Guns/
Retired LE, M.P., Sr. M.P. Investigator F.B.I. Trained Rangemaster/Firearms Instructor & Armorer, Presently Forensic Document Examiner for D.H.S.
armsmaster270 is offline  
Old January 18, 2011, 12:11 AM   #64
Blue Duck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 15, 2006
Posts: 300
Of course sighted fire has been proven to be superior, by Col. Cooper, and every IPSC, and later IDPA shooter, that probably ever played the game. I know I shot IPSC back in the 80's and later IDPA in the 90's, and also NRA Bullseye, NRA Hunter Silhouette. Except for a very few IDPA matches did I ever points shoot anything, but none of those targets were shooting back at me, from 5ft away, either.

Most all shooting qualifications are measured by some sort of target ring, with higher scores for better hits, except of course for steel and bowling pins, etc. So, of course sighted fire rules the day, but I think point shooting definately has a place in the real world of self defense, espacally for a CCW carrier, that quite often may need to start off, behind the curve, from a consealed carry holster.

I practice point shooting a lot, but that doesn't mean I can't make a better than average showing using sighted fire, however point shooting is a skill I want, in addtion to sighted fire, and the more I practice it at real world spitting distances, the more I believe in it, and the less value I put on nite sights, lasers, etc, for CCW.

Sure If I have time, I am going to use my sights, but point shooting just might be a life saving skill, doing all sighted fire practice does not nessairly hone one's point shooting, in fact to the contrary, I believe my point shooting practice has speeded up my sighted fire shooting.

Another thing I found out after many years of shooting flat mainspring housings on 1911's is that when I tried arched mainspring housings, my point shooting was a lot better. My favorite carry gun is a 4 inch lightweight 1911 with the tiny GI sights, even though I have several guns of the same size with high profile night sights. Sometimes it baffles me, that almost all of the custom 1911's are only offered with flat mainspring housings, then it dawned on me that is because few people point shoot, they just do sighted fire, and I think they are missing something because of it.

Last edited by Blue Duck; January 18, 2011 at 12:22 AM.
Blue Duck is offline  
Old January 18, 2011, 05:39 AM   #65
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
Thoughts on Point Shooting:

http://www.warriortalknews.com/2011/...-shooting.html

Scroll down to the article.
smince is offline  
Old January 18, 2011, 05:47 PM   #66
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by smince
Thoughts on Point Shooting:

http://www.warriortalknews.com/2011/...-shooting.html

Scroll down to the article.
Good article smince, gotta say I agree 100%.

“You do want to see your sights every chance you get.”

Above is a quote from the aforementioned article. I would like to add, for those unaware of it, that seeing your sights, does not necessarily mean looking through them. The farther up you can bring your pistol toward eye level, the more accurate you will be. In other words, although you are focused on the target, the higher you bring the pistol in your peripheral vision the better your results.

Today I went to the range, I shot my old Beretta Model 71. I did because I had mentioned it on the form and remembered I hadn't shot her in a while.

From the low ready position I fired several strings of 9 shots, at an ISPC target placed 5 yards away. My best string was 2.13 seconds with a .56 first shot time.

To accomplish this I bring the pistol to eye level and shoot looking through the sights. My vision is focused on the target, but the pistol is as high in my line of vision as is possible, without being over it.

I also managed a, from low ready position, .98 Mozambique drill with my PM9. And a .90 flat double tap from the draw. I included the PM9 times just to brag.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Old January 18, 2011, 08:01 PM   #67
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
I have found that Coopers MT, 'Modern Technique' actually had some point shooting in it.

Don't believe me?

Well in his field manual he said that if you cannot see your sights due to such as darkness, to bring your gun up JUST AS IF YOU CAN SEE THE SIGHTS and fire.

And really, point shooting such as Applegate showed, was to bring the gun up to eye level and look over the top of the gun.

As you can see, there is not much difference in the idea, is there?

So practice sighted fire as much as you can, one handed or two, but memorize the hold needed so if you can't see the sights, bring it up to the same position AS IF YOU COULD SEE THE SIGHTS.

Deaf
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old January 19, 2011, 06:36 AM   #68
Brit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 1,600
A real help in the eye level shooting, is having sights that imprint themselves on your eye balls, without actually focusing on them, like TruGlow.
Brit is offline  
Old January 19, 2011, 08:37 AM   #69
sliponby
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2010
Location: Alabama
Posts: 187
+1 TruGlo TFO's

A big +1 Brit to the TruGlo TFO's. Put them on my G26 and the improvement in sight aquisition, in bright or low light, is remarkable.
__________________
No one prays harder for peace than the soldier.
"We Dare Defend Our Rights", Alabama State Motto...
sliponby is offline  
Old January 24, 2011, 02:17 PM   #70
Patriot Prepper
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 9, 2011
Location: South Florida, USA
Posts: 3
I think a lot of people, maybe instructors included, are confused by point shooting. I think they believe it is a careless, aimless, spray and pray tactic. It is not. Point shooting involves a degree of body alignment as well as sometimes employing the front sight. In extreme CQC, body alignment is more than enough to stay on target.

I practice both point shooting and shooting for accuracy. Both are tools used for different purposes. There are instances where point shooting is the best defense and vice vera.

I started point shooting when I was 7 years old and that was a long time ago. To me point shooting is vital to self defense. But it is a little more difficult for some people to master. It requires a different mind set and a new set of skills.

People need to have open minds, including instructors.

(In LE there are some people often more concerned with legal ramifications than self defense. They may think of point shooting as not aiming and taking wild shots, and be concerned with lawsuits. That is an unfounded concept and dangerous.)
Patriot Prepper is offline  
Old January 24, 2011, 04:40 PM   #71
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
You are probably correct in that many may see point shooting as shooting wildly, although it is entirely possible to be using the sights and firing wildly, too. I realize that sounds contradictory but that little gun can sure jump around in recoil.

It is hard to get across in writing, much less in one thread (although the opportunity comes up often enough), the dynamics of point shooting, to put it one way. Clearly some practice is necessary, just as it is when you are using the sights. I think people's opinions diverge on only a few points.

One is how much practice is necessary. Some seem to think that so much practice (as well as training) that ordinary people couldn't possibly get in enough practice to become sufficiently proficient.

That leads to the question of proficiency and what is good enough. You can be proficient and deadly efficient and still not be either a good NRA target shot, much less a trick shot. But is there any NRA target shooting at five yards?

It is also worth saying that different people will have different requirements for their handgun proficiency level. If you carried an Elmer Keith Special in the event you thought you might need it when you met a bear, your entire approach to the activity would be a little different and probably point shooting just might not be what you should be considering in your plans. But you might work on your draw nevertheless.

Practice is going to be problematic for most people. It was for me, to an extent, though the problem was more a matter of what you could do at an indoor range. While it was sometimes possible to darken the range if I happened to be the only one there, at least on one side (the range being divided in half, more or less, by a partition), and that increased the challenge but only some. But there was no way it approximated any physical similarity to places I thought a shooting might take place. But not all was lost.
Something of value was learned and retained. You nearly always get something out of a shooting experience at the range, although you may reach a level when it becomes boring and unproductive.

The biggest thing about the indoor range was that it was indoors. That sounds a little dumb but I found that everything seemed to be different out of doors and the biggest difference was time of day.

Another point of disagreement is exactly what constitutes point shooting. I won't get into that beyond saying that I don't mean "hip shooting," even though that actually seems to be taught in some courses, with names like speed rock and so on. I'm not saying there's no place for hip shooting, only that I'm not talking about hip shooting. Besides, they frown on you doing that at the range.

There isn't much talk of speed around here in the old fashioned quick draw sense, although it is often implied, especially when the subject of carry method comes up (referring to condition, loaded chamber, empty chamber, etc.) but speed is what it's all about. So ultimately, it becomes a question of whether or not using the sights, any sights, helps with hits without slowing you down or not, or if an alternate method is faster--and good enough-- for what you expect to happen.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old January 25, 2011, 01:29 AM   #72
sigxder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 20, 2009
Posts: 388
At the distances most confrontations take place with civilians point shooting, threat focused shooting, body indexing, whatever you want to call it is a needed skill. Bad guys don't mug, rape, or hold up a victim at 25 yards. According to the F.B.I. almost everything happens within 7 yards and most much closer than that. If you draw your gun and extend both hands in the "New Method" way you are handing the bad guy your gun. No one has to justify point shooting because up until the "New Method" came into. It was used and used is used effectively to this day.
I don't know why people get so polarized. If you do get into a gunfight and you have enough distance to safely use your sights you are going to. Point shooting is a close combat shooting system. You need to learn both sighted and point shooting to cover all the bases. According to the latest F.B.I. report the bad guys get better than 70% hit ratios. At best most LEO groups taught the two handed method get around 30% at best. If you get a chance to see some of the shootings from a store security systems or on a police car camera it's a real eye opener.
When the gunfight is close most of their two handed shooting methods go out the door. The point shoot as they try to remove themselves from the area of danger ASAP. Training civilians as opposed to Military and LEO's is a different ballgame. Military and police often know they are going into a hairy situation and already have guns drawn. The same F.B.I. report said that 65% of all shootings are with one hand. I've trained under some schools that don't even teach one handed shooting. Both work within their proper range. Sights at bad breath distance are nearly impossible. Point shooting when you have the time and distance to use sights is simply not the best choice. Learn both. You need both.
sigxder is offline  
Old January 25, 2011, 06:01 AM   #73
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by sigxder
Both work within their proper range. Sights at bad breath distance are nearly impossible. Point shooting when you have the time and distance to use sights is simply not the best choice. Learn both. You need both.
^^^^^^

We could prune this whole thread and the others we've written on this subject down to the above quote.

If we wanted to be really succinct, the portion in bold sums it up nicely.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Old January 25, 2011, 06:41 AM   #74
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
Something worth mentioning here is that in the early days, before Jeff Cooper enlightened us, pistols and revolvers came with relatively poor sights. Finding the sights and aligning them in great haste, under pressure, was difficult. Sights on handguns today are generally better, so that is mostly a practical gain when it comes to sighted fire. Some early practitioners always favored what were called target sights anyway, although probably not earlier than WWI. Bill Jordan favored a Model 19 S&W revolver, which has adjustable target sights, though he also used a plain Jane M&P revolver for some of his demonstrations.

Ed McGivern, who used mostly revolvers, did not limit himself to one kind or sight or one barrel length. He was more of a trick shooter but he claimed that he always used the sights.

Sights as they are used today on handguns would be worthy of a long discussion (which has probably already happened here) and vary widely, from a groove on the top of the slide to basic adjustable target sights. If nothing else, it allows buyers to find something they're happy with.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old January 25, 2011, 01:01 PM   #75
Willie Lowman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 5, 2009
Location: Uh-Hi-O
Posts: 2,624
+1 to poor sights. Just look at the old cap and ball Colts, the rear sight was part of the hammer. I have a 6" 1920 vintage S&W .38 (stamped .38 S&W Special) whose rear sight is a microscopic grove in the top strap. New J frame snubbies have better sights than my old .38.
__________________
"9mm has a very long history of being a pointy little bullet moving quickly" --Sevens
Willie Lowman is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10585 seconds with 8 queries