Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!







Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 14th, 2009, 04:59 PM   #1
Kodiak450r
Keep on truckin
 
Kodiak450r's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-14-07
Location: Waterford, MI
Posts: 5,909
iTrader: (19)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default township meeting read it

ok so i was reading the paper when i came across this article.

Waterford Township is updating its nearly 50-year-old zoning ordinance, incorporating new rules for such matters as number of household pets allowed, election signs and how many cars can be kept on a property.

Public hearings are being held Tuesday and possibly Dec. 22 to receive input about the proposed regulations. Officials plan to present the ordinance to the township board by the end of January 2010, for its adoption.

Township planners have been working on updating the ordinance since 2004.

To develop the 233-page ordinance, staff used the township master plan, decisions from the Zoning Board of Appeals, other communities’ zoning ordinances and staff experience, said Robert Vallina, the township’s community planning and development director.

Having the new specific rules will give township officials the ability to cite residents and businesses for violations and clean up the township.

Vehicles

Vehicle parking and storage would be regulated, something Vallina said was never defined in the past.

In residential areas, vehicles will have to be parked on an established driveway.

Vehicles not in a garage cannot be parked in front, rear or side yards, or on residential zoning lots without a principal residential building.

The rules would not apply to a temporary party or gathering, officials noted.

Commercial equipment and trailers would not be allowed to be stored on residential property.

Recreational vehicles would be permitted as long as they are in good condition and operational, and not more than 13 feet in height, and residents would not be allowed to have more than two on their property.

“The current ordinance says there can be no RV on a driveway at all,” said Vallina.

“We have 34 lakes in the township and there is recreation here.”

Animals

The old ordinance only addressed kennels, said Vallina.

The new regulations will state people can have no more than five household pets (container pets such as fish are not regulated).

People with five acres of property would not be allowed to have more than three nonhousehold domestic animals.

“We have no regulations on cats now, and (having too many) is a health hazard,” said Vallina.

Noise

Noise was a recent issue in Waterford when a resident filed a lawsuit complaining music performed during worship services was too loud and violated township ordinances. (The resident settled with the church’s insurance company.)

In the old ordinance, all noise could not exceed 70 decibels. The new ordinance would delineate a timeframe (hour of day), whether the noise is in a residential or industrial neighborhood and specific decibel levels. The “unamplified human voice” is exempt.

Signs

Over the years, “the issue of signs has come up a lot,” said Vallina.

The new ordinance would note business vehicles covered with business signage parked close to a roadway would be regulated.

Holiday decorations that do not cause a safety hazard would be permitted.

Freestanding signs were regulated under a “one-sizefits-all” rule in the past, and the new ordinance would allow for larger signs on larger buildings.

Election signs would be permitted to be up for 100 days and would have to come down within five days of the election. They would need to sit back 20 feet from the edge of a roadway.

Garage sale signs would not be allowed to be up for more than 30 days in a year.

“We’re trying to regulate commercial enterprise,” said Vallina.

Specifics in

ordinance

The new proposed zoning rules feature 50 pages of definitions. For example, in the past, the township listed only “restaurants,” but now that section has categories such as bar/lounge, brewpub, night club, carryout, drive-in, dining, fast food/deli/sandwich.

A new single-family residential district, called R-1C, incorporates property where the lot width was less than 65 feet.

By setting up this category, said Vallina, lots created prior to 1963 that have always been nonconforming with the ordinance will now be considered conforming.

More than 14,500 of the township’s 30,000 parcels will fall into this category.

People can review a copy of the draft ordinance at the planning department at Township Hall during business hours, or by going online at twp. waterford.mi.us.

“We believe we’ve done a good job creating a modern, balanced ordinance to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the residents,” said Vallina, “and reasonable rules that will not be onerous to citizens or businesses.”

Contact Oakland Press staff writer Carol Hopkins at (248) 745-4645 or carol. hopkins@oakpress.com.



FYI


Waterford Township is holding a public hearing to discuss its new proposed zoning ordinances at 6:30 p.m. Tuesday in the Township Hall Auditorium, at 5200 Civic Center Drive. Applications and procedures, administration and enforcement, variances, appeals, penalties and graphics will be addressed. If needed, a meeting will be held Dec. 22 for final review and recommendation to the Township Board. To see a full summary, visit twp.waterford.mi.us or call (248) 674-6255.

so if you live in waterford and believe that they should not be able to tell you you can only have 5 domestic pets, you can only have 2 recreational vehicles, and you may NOT park your vehicles in your yard at all, and that you are limited to owning only a certain amount of vehicles period. please join me and a few others in attending the public hearing and protest government intrusion onto private property. people complain about not having any rights anymore but yet fail to protest the people that take them away.

Last edited by Kodiak450r; January 3rd, 2010 at 09:21 PM.
Kodiak450r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 05:05 PM   #2
Stan
I got a gold chain
 
Stan's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Shelby Twp.
Posts: 15,650
iTrader: (7)
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Default

I agree with the rules.

Damn hillbillies.
Stan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 05:10 PM   #3
RyeBread
Catch the wave
 
RyeBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-08-05
Location: Fenton
Posts: 7,944
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan View Post
I agree with the rules.

Damn hillbillies.
x2.

given that the specific ordinances have been essentially in effect for 50 years, it is in theory easy to surmise that the vast majority of those rules complained about may have been desirable to those who had the forethought to check them out before moving into the township.
RyeBread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 05:34 PM   #4
crassell
Senior Member
 
crassell's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-03-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 1,346
iTrader: (43)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

sounds like your fuked James
crassell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 08:44 PM   #5
Kodiak450r
Keep on truckin
 
Kodiak450r's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-14-07
Location: Waterford, MI
Posts: 5,909
iTrader: (19)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

fine when we all live in NAZI country because bitches like you people don't stand up against the government taking away freedoms left and right don't come crying to me cuz i told you so.
Kodiak450r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 09:01 PM   #6
RyeBread
Catch the wave
 
RyeBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-08-05
Location: Fenton
Posts: 7,944
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodiak450r View Post
fine when we all live in NAZI country because bitches like you people don't stand up against the government taking away freedoms left and right don't come crying to me cuz i told you so.
did you even read what you pasted? Did you even read any of the proposed ordinances?

you live in a charter township. yes, charter township. not a general law township.

there are distinct differences in each form of local Government, and this being a home rule state, local Governing is and should be at the local level.

I'd love to see a break down of the before / after ordinances. If anything, what I read in the above paste is actually standardizing, defining what was loosely defined, and/or re-granting privileges - e.g. grand fathering in lots that formerly were considered non-conforming will now be considered a conforming zoning rather than a grand-fathered non-conforming situation. (there are distinctions there as well - grand-fathered, non-conforming lots can continue a use, but any change in use requires a visit to the Zoning Board of Appeals - e.g. if your house burns down you can't fucking rebuild it unless a variance is granted under a grandfathered, non-conforming situation)

If you really believe that local zoning is akin to Nazi right's taking then you are doing a HUGE disservice and disrespect to the atrocities that were done under the Nazi's. You are also displaying even more ignorance than ever before with that analogy.

The bitch in this thread sounds like the original poster as far as I'm concerned...
RyeBread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 09:20 PM   #7
RyeBread
Catch the wave
 
RyeBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-08-05
Location: Fenton
Posts: 7,944
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

here's a quick guide/break down grid of before/after.

http://twp.waterford.mi.us/cpd/pdf/S...0Ordinance.pdf

and the full text of the proposed final draft:
http://twp.waterford.mi.us/cpd/pdf/D...ber%202009.pdf


I'm sure you'll find the methods and opportunity to appeal how many domestic pets you can own/breed with, or that you should be allowed to park your vehicles on the lawn
RyeBread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 09:42 PM   #8
Kodiak450r
Keep on truckin
 
Kodiak450r's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-14-07
Location: Waterford, MI
Posts: 5,909
iTrader: (19)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

this is a direct quote from the new ordinance draft. took me awhile to find it but here it is. i've highlighted my problems with the new ordinance.

"The regulations in the subsections below are applicable to properties in the R-1 through R-1E zoning districts:
1. Vehicle Regulations. The purpose of this subsection is to preserve and promote the health, safety and general welfare of citizens, motorists and pedestrians alike within the residential districts of the Township through the regulation of parking and storage of personal, commercial, and recreational vehicles and equipment, such that vehicles do not detract from the appearance and character of the surrounding area, do not negatively affect the value and marketability of surrounding properties, do not cause the overcrowding of land and reduction of open space, do not constitute traffic hazards, do not obstruct access to rights-of-way or nonmotorized pathways, do not present an attractive nuisance for children, do not impede crime prevention and/or hamper the effectiveness and access of emergency personnel, vehicles and equipment, or do not become involved in illegal vehicle sales or result in the storage or collection of junk vehicles in residential districts.
A. Vehicle Parking.
(1) Parking of personal vehicles, recreational vehicles, utility trailers, and other vehicles not restricted or prohibited under this Section is permitted:
(A) on the established driveway, provided that vehicles shall be no closer than five (5) feet from any public nonmotorized path or no closer than fifteen (15) feet from the street roadway, whichever is a greater distance from the street roadway, and
(B) within accessory buildings, such as a garage, or accessory structures constructed in accordance with the Waterford Township Building Code for such vehicle parking.
Vehicles shall not be parked in any other portion of the front, rear, or side yards, or on residential zoning lots without a principal residential building.
(2) The following vehicles, equipment, and/or their attached apparatus are expressly prohibited from being parked on rights-of-way and nonmotorized pathways:
(A) Commercial equipment, commercial trailers, intensive commercial vehicles, and construction vehicles, except for the necessary and appropriate period of time when such equipment is lawfully parked on or adjacent to a residential property while being used in the performance of a service for that particular residential property.
(B) Junked vehicles.
Article III FINAL DRAFT-NOVEMBER 2009 ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Page III-9 FINAL DRAFT-NOVEMBER 2009
(ARTICLE III, DIVISION 3-3, SECTION 3-302.1.A cont.)
(3) No more than two (2) personal commercial vehicles, when utilized on a regular (i.e., daily) basis as a condition of employment in a business that is located off-site or a lawful home occupation at their residential property, may be parked on residential property. Parking of such vehicles shall only be permitted when the vehicles are in good repair, properly licensed and registered, and operated by an occupant of the principal building on the property. Any parking of personal commercial vehicles that are used in conjunction with the operation of a business on a residential property that is prohibited by this Zoning Ordinance is also prohibited.
(4) No person shall elevate, block, or stabilize any vehicle outside of a garage, accessory building, or carport, except a registered vehicle with jack stands on the established driveway for a period not to exceed forty-eight (48) hours in order to complete minor repairs to the vehicle.
(5) Each single-family residential property having a dwelling unit shall be required to contain sufficient area within a private garage and/or established driveway for a minimum of two parking spaces.
B. Vehicle Storage.
(1) Notwithstanding anything else in this Section to the contrary, the following vehicles, equipment, and any associated attached apparatus are expressly prohibited from being stored anywhere on residential property:
(A) Commercial equipment.
(B) Commercial trailers.
(C) Intensive commercial vehicles.
(D) Personal commercial vehicles, with the exception for when such vehicles are in a stored status concurrent with the residential property owners absent from the property due to vacation or personal matters.
(E) Construction vehicles.
(2) Storage of recreational vehicles is permitted, subject to all of the following restrictions:
(A) The vehicle is operational and in good repair.
(B) Restricted to zoning lots upon which a principal residential dwelling is located.
(C) The recreational vehicle must be owned by the full-time occupants of the zoning lot upon which the recreational vehicle will be stored.
(D) No recreational vehicle shall be used for living or housekeeping purposes for more than thirty (30) days in any one calendar year.
(E) The recreational vehicle shall not be connected to electricity, gas, water, or sanitary sewer facilities, except that a temporary electrical connection may be made for the purposes of recharging batteries.
(F) No more than two (2) recreational vehicles are allowed to be stored upon a zoning lot outside of an accessory building at any given time. Solely for purposes of this limitation, recreational vehicles used in conjunction with one another such as a boat mounted upon a boat trailer shall be considered as one recreational vehicle provided that all vehicles are in good repair.
(G) An unmounted camper enclosure, boat not mounted on a boat trailer, or similar such unmounted vehicle or apparatus, shall not be permitted to be stored outside of an accessory building under this subsection.
(H) Storage of recreational vehicles is restricted to the following locations:
(i) in an accessory building,
(ii) in the rear yard or the side yard, provided that the recreational vehicle shall be stored no closer than five (5) feet from any window or door of any residential building, or
(iii) upon an established driveway in the front yard provided that the recreational vehicle does not exceed thirteen (13) feet in height, shall be located between five (5) and ten (10) feet from the principal building or an accessory building, and located no closer than twenty (20) feet from the front lot line."

so what that means is anything you have must be on a driveway, must be running, and you can only have 2 recreational vehicles. apparently boats count this time. so they will probably define recreational as any vehicle not normally used for traveling purposes, and put a restriction on it. and the part about being in running condition i know alot of you people don't all have perfectly good condition toys that are always in working condition...who the hell does?
Kodiak450r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 09:47 PM   #9
mpwal099
Stick it up your ass
 
mpwal099's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-05-06
Location: Plymouth
Posts: 3,070
iTrader: (11)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodiak450r View Post
this is a direct quote from the new ordinance draft. took me awhile to find it but here it is. i've highlighted my problems with the new ordinance.

blah blah blah

So your city/ township that you live in doesn't want your or their property to look like a hillbilly junkyard with shit just strewn about. What's the big deal?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan View Post
I feel, for the most part, we have a whole generation of worthless, lazy, pieces of shit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatty Matty View Post
A good chunk of the younger generation is really fucked up. Not all of them, but a good amount.
mpwal099 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 09:48 PM   #10
itselliott
Senior Member
 
itselliott's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-20-06
Location: Walhalla
Posts: 1,805
iTrader: (80)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Kind of has me thinking that property values in Waterford may soon be on the up swing
itselliott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 09:51 PM   #11
RyeBread
Catch the wave
 
RyeBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-08-05
Location: Fenton
Posts: 7,944
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Vehicles shall not be parked in any other portion of the front, rear, or side yards, or on residential zoning lots without a principal residential building.

Sounds quite reasonable. Most local communities have ordinances that specify that vehicles are to be parked on driveway surfaces, many further dictate where said driveways can exist. Else every vacant lot fronting on a 'traffic road' becomes a used car lot, and every wannabe but can't get certified/employed mechanic turns into a sanford & son

The vehicle is operational and in good repair.
Again, typical and reasonable in my opinion. Most people are concerned with property values, and most people equate an inoperable, junked, or flat out heap of trash vehicle as synonymous with blight and a detriment to property values.

No more than two (2) recreational vehicles are allowed to be stored upon a zoning lot outside of an accessory building at any given time. Solely for purposes of this limitation, recreational vehicles used in conjunction with one another such as a boat mounted upon a boat trailer shall be considered as one recreational vehicle provided that all vehicles are in good repair.
Again, I don't really see the problem. If one can afford all the toys, then afford the storage/garage to house them. Keep in mind that much of Waterford (As described above) consists of 65' or smaller lots. Do you really think it's reasonable to store your boat+trailer, your snow mobiles + trailer, your dirt bikes + trailer, and your dune buggy + trailer, and 3 semi-parted out vehicles on your 1/10th acre lot?

as I stated multiple times above, they aren't necessarily taking away rights, if you checked the pre-existing ordinances chances are you'd find that in some form or fashion there were already limits placed on the above.



RyeBread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 09:52 PM   #12
RyeBread
Catch the wave
 
RyeBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-08-05
Location: Fenton
Posts: 7,944
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by itselliott View Post
Kind of has me thinking that property values in Waterford may soon be on the up swing
doubtful, it is still after all adjacent to Pontiac.
RyeBread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 10:11 PM   #13
NSmist
Senior Member
 
NSmist's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-11-08
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 1,538
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to NSmist
Default

Yep. Course how enforcing is Watertucky when it comes to ordinances? Pontiac (city and school district) is a joke when it comes to enforcement, even on their own properties (dumping, overgrown grass, etc.) And when it comes to 'attempting' to enforce, they can't even write the notice correct or abiding to the ordinance.
NSmist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2009, 10:35 PM   #14
Suta99
Senior Member
 
Suta99's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-20-09
Location: Leamington/Ontario
Posts: 838
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

These ordinances are set in place in most areas and are mostly there to keep yards looking like scrap yards. If you have lets say a boat 2 snomobiles a quad and a trail rig but your yard is kept presentable and clean nobody is gonna hassle you. these are only put in place to avoid havig someone with 4 boats, 4 of which dont work, a couple old cars with grass growing wild around them, from getting away with running a junkyard in there tiny yard.
Suta99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2009, 07:49 AM   #15
Quagmire
I can has layinframe
 
Join Date: 11-08-05
Location: 48346
Posts: 5,037
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Send a message via Yahoo to Quagmire
Default

If you don't like it move out into the sticks.
__________________
Google first.....ask questions later
Quote:
Originally Posted by clarkstoncracker View Post
Actually, the new rule of thumb is you should make your tires bulge slightly more then skooterbuilt when he's wearing his tight ladies pants
Quagmire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2009, 07:56 AM   #16
L4CX
Out for the Summer!
 
L4CX's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-07
Location: Hillsdale, MI
Posts: 4,910
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

As Americans we have the right to protest. So Go right ahead. But we also should be able to expect our neighbors (if we live in a City or town) to keep their property nice so it doesn't bring down our property value (and Visa Versa).

Sounds to me like you don't like the idea that you might have to get rid of some of the Stuff you have around the house. If you want to be able to stock pile Cars/Trucks/Rv's then go move to the country. These kind of Very Reasonable Ordinaces go with living in a Neighborhood.
L4CX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2009, 08:20 AM   #17
clarkstoncracker
lol
 
clarkstoncracker's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-03-05
Location: OC - MI
Posts: 42,259
iTrader: (39)
Mentioned: 65 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to clarkstoncracker
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodiak450r View Post
people complain about not having any rights anymore but yet fail to protest the people that take them away.
just so you know, like many discussion forums in waterford, I will be in attendance, however I'm not going to be fighting for your side. I doubt I will get podium time because this one will be packed, but I will try.

I live on a pretty much private street, with only 12 houses, and we don't have any dirtasses. but on the other hand, I have to drive through the south side of waterford on my way to my grandmas, and I think the whole city looks like shit because of the lax laws on junk.

Waterford really needs to clean up the city, especially towards pontiac, or else it will turn into one big pontiac. And I think it should start with fining people for having shit all over their yard.

If you can't put it in the driveway, or the garage, then get rid of it.


BTW, if I get podium time I'm also suggesting the slaughter of all pitbulls. and I'll word it just like that.
__________________

Last edited by clarkstoncracker; December 15th, 2009 at 08:24 AM.
clarkstoncracker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2009, 04:27 PM   #18
Kodiak450r
Keep on truckin
 
Kodiak450r's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-14-07
Location: Waterford, MI
Posts: 5,909
iTrader: (19)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clarkstoncracker View Post
just so you know, like many discussion forums in waterford, I will be in attendance, however I'm not going to be fighting for your side. I doubt I will get podium time because this one will be packed, but I will try.

I live on a pretty much private street, with only 12 houses, and we don't have any dirtasses. but on the other hand, I have to drive through the south side of waterford on my way to my grandmas, and I think the whole city looks like shit because of the lax laws on junk.

Waterford really needs to clean up the city, especially towards pontiac, or else it will turn into one big pontiac. And I think it should start with fining people for having shit all over their yard.

If you can't put it in the driveway, or the garage, then get rid of it.


BTW, if I get podium time I'm also suggesting the slaughter of all pitbulls. and I'll word it just like that.

yea so lets fine the people who already don't have money to begin with great idea . for the record i don't make enough money to buy food for myself, pay for all of my bills, and i can't even afford car insurance anymore. and you expect ME to pay a fine because YOU don't like the way MY yard looks? get lost. have a problem with the way my house looks then come talk to me about it face to face. there is no need to get government involved in domestic issues. i have no problem reasoning with someone about something, but when people just call the township to bitch about MY stuff on MY property, that I'M making the payments on then i get angry.
Kodiak450r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2009, 04:32 PM   #19
Kodiak450r
Keep on truckin
 
Kodiak450r's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-14-07
Location: Waterford, MI
Posts: 5,909
iTrader: (19)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by L4CX View Post
As Americans we have the right to protest. So Go right ahead. But we also should be able to expect our neighbors (if we live in a City or town) to keep their property nice so it doesn't bring down our property value (and Visa Versa).

Sounds to me like you don't like the idea that you might have to get rid of some of the Stuff you have around the house. If you want to be able to stock pile Cars/Trucks/Rv's then go move to the country. These kind of Very Reasonable Ordinaces go with living in a Neighborhood.
yea that would be nice if i had a decent paying job, and could actually afford it. the stuff i do have that i wanna sell no one wants. i'm not going to give it away for free because that would be dumb. i'm stuck in a low paying job because i wasn't mommy and daddys spoiled brat that gets to go to a 4 yr college so they can earn a shit ton of cash. whats funny is the people that complain about others actions and choices are the same people who have it made in life. they HAVE a good paying job, they HAVE a nice house on a lot of land, and the same assholes who wanna make everyone else conform to THEIR idea of how things should be.
Kodiak450r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2009, 04:39 PM   #20
Pokerob
hug life
 
Pokerob's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-25-06
Location: G-Rap, MI
Posts: 10,147
iTrader: (25)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodiak450r View Post
yea that would be nice if i had a decent paying job, and could actually afford it. the stuff i do have that i wanna sell no one wants. i'm not going to give it away for free because that would be dumb. i'm stuck in a low paying job because i wasn't mommy and daddys spoiled brat that gets to go to a 4 yr college so they can earn a shit ton of cash. whats funny is the people that complain about others actions and choices are the same people who have it made in life. they HAVE a good paying job, they HAVE a nice house on a lot of land, and the same assholes who wanna make everyone else conform to THEIR idea of how things should be.
is this any good?

http://www.cyclonerake.com/index.htm...FRXxDAodUyo6yQ
Pokerob is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
Tags
hillbilly junk n da hood

Thread Tools

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 11:44 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Copyright ©2005 - 2012 Cracker Enterprises - Powered by Linux
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=
Page generated in 0.33405 seconds with 52 queries