Ohio Smoking Ban

October 30, 200618 yr

I wouldn't have a problem for everyone having a right to do whatever they want or bars to decide whether they want to allow it or not. But my feeling is more than smelling like cigarettes when I go out, I feel that the build up of chemicals from the cigarettes is that if its toxic enough to burn eyes then its toxic enough to burn lungs. Its not just one person smoking one cigarette, its a buildup of multiple people smoking many. The combined buildup of arsenic, lead, and 20 other known toxic chemicals, into a confined space does not make me feel that the smokers have the rights to screw up the air in a public space. Would we allow a burning tire and all the toxins that puts out in a bar to be ok? I think people don't want to believe that the smoke is poisonous. So should maybe we should rephrase the question: Should people be allowed to put toxic and poisonous smoke into a public space?

October 30, 200618 yr

The combined buildup of arsenic, lead, and 20 other known toxic chemicals, into a confined space does not make me feel that the smokers have the rights to screw up the air in a public space.

is it a public space? And I'm not being sarcastic.

I remember some lame supreme court case where the conclusion was its a private space intended for public use. that had to do with first amendment rights...

anyone?

October 30, 200618 yr

The combined buildup of arsenic, lead, and 20 other known toxic chemicals, into a confined space does not make me feel that the smokers have the rights to screw up the air in a public space.

is it a public space? And I'm not being sarcastic.

I remember some lame supreme court case where the conclusion was its a private space intended for public use. that had to do with first amendment rights...

anyone?

From a purely practical standpoint, no business that serves the public is truly private; the owner of a business is beholden to the public interest and answers to many public entities, such as the Dept. of Health, OSHA, the local Building and Engineering Dept., etc.

As for the argument that smoking is free speech, again I say, honkey please...

October 30, 200618 yr

^read a little closer next time honkey

I was merely trying to explore the argument that a bar is/isn't a public space through an example I vaguely remember from 9th grade civics class.

October 30, 200618 yr

That's Mr. Honkey, to you.

I saw your mention of First Amendment and figured that was your right-to-smoke angle.

Sorry. I get all crazy when I hear "First Amendment." Kind of a "Niagara Falls! Slowly I turned, step by step...inch by inch..." reaction.

October 30, 200618 yr

i don't even know what the first amendment is........

is that the right to drive an automobile?

October 30, 200618 yr

i don't even know what the first amendment is........

is that the right to drive an automobile?

I did graduate from law school, so trust me on this one: It is the right to drive a large automobile.

October 30, 200618 yr

i don't even know what the first amendment is........

is that the right to drive an automobile?

On the sidewalk.

October 30, 200618 yr

Those smoking rooms in airports are hilarious. You have all these people standing around in this toxic ass room. You can literally see the smoke. Its disgusting. I think it should be left up to the individual establishment what they cater to. That would be cool. It just sucks for Cincinnati because it gives people another reason to go to KY.

October 30, 200618 yr

^There's a reason to go to KY?

October 30, 200618 yr

^^But w/ airports, there are not smocking and nonsmocking options in every city.

October 31, 200618 yr

the smokers should look on the bright side. If issue 5 passes, it will give them more of an incentive to quit. After all, it seems like most smokers would like to quit but it is too hard. However, if it keeps getting harder on them to smoke, it will make quitting that much easier on them.

October 31, 200618 yr

From the 10/20/06 BG News:

PHOTO: Cigar anyone?: James Stickles and Miranda Bond stand outside in the cold, handing out free cigars in attempt to defeat issue 5 which would create a smoking-ban law that will prohibit smoking in public places. Media Credit: Jason Rentner

'Great Falcon' smokers protest issue 5

By: Megan Schmidt

Issue date: 10/20/06 Section: Campus

Despite steady rain and cold temperatures, more than 30 students stood huddled together puffing cigars in front of the Union yesterday afternoon.

October 31, 200618 yr

From the 10/21/06 Toledo Blade:

OHIO SMOKING BAN

Issue 5 to remain on Nov. 7 ballot

Issue 4 backers fail to sway high court

By JIM PROVANCE

BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU

COLUMBUS - The tobacco and hospitality industries yesterday failed in their last-ditch effort to block a Nov. 7 vote by Ohioans on a near-total statewide ban on indoor public smoking.

The Ohio Supreme Court unanimously dismissed an attempt by backers of an exemption-laden Smoke Less Ohio alternative to have its stricter competitor, backed by a coalition of health organizations, stricken from the ballot.

"R.J. Reynolds has deep pockets, but dozens of legal challenges could not stop SmokeFreeOhio," said Susan Jagers, SmokeFreeOhio co-chairman. "Ohio voters have a clear choice - Issue 4's pro-smoking constitutional amendment or Issue 5's state law defending your right to breathe smoke-free air."

October 31, 200618 yr

From the 10/22/06 PD:

ISSUES 4 AND 5

Public smoking issues offer two choices: less or none

Sunday, October 22, 2006

Harlan Spector

Plain Dealer Reporter

Even the heaviest of smokers have adjusted to shrinking public tolerance for smoke-filled rooms.

But an attempt in Ohio to outlaw lighting up in the remaining tobacco-friendly bastions -- bars, restaurants and bowling alleys -- has ignited a holy war.

On one side are health advocates campaigning to convince voters that hospitality workers and the public need protection from harmful effects of secondhand smoke.

From the 10/22/06 Enquirer:

Is Issue 5 a smokescreen?

Ad Watch

BY GREGORY KORTE | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITER

AD: "If Issue 4 Wins, You Lose," a 30-second ad from Smoke Free Ohio, promoting state Issue 5 and against Issue 4. It's running with a companion ad, "Don't Be Fooled by the Smokescreen."

SCRIPT: Tracy Sabetta, co-chairwoman of Smoke Free Ohio: "On Election Day, you will choose between two very different smoking issues, Issue 4 and Issue 5. Issue 4 is backed by big tobacco. It would keep smoke in restaurants and other places we go with our families. It would overturn 21 local smoke-free laws, and leave half a million workers exposed to smoke. Remember, Issue 4 is a constitutional amendment. If both issues pass, only Issue 4 becomes law. If Issue 4 wins, you lose. Vote no on Issue 4. Vote yes for Issue 5."

October 31, 200618 yr

From the 10/25/06 Lancaster Eagle-Gazette:

Issue 4 vs. Issue 5 Statewide smoking bans raise debate

By CARL BURNETT JR.

The Eagle-Gazette Staff

[email protected]

LANCASTER - Business owners and voters in Fairfield County are divided over whether a total or partial smoking ban would be the right thing for Ohio.

There are two issues on Ohio's Nov. 7 ballot involving statewide smoking bans.

Issue 4 proposes to amend the Ohio Constitution to ban all smoking in enclosed areas except in tobacco stores, private residences, nonpublic facilities and certain areas of some businesses. Supporters of Issue 4, Smoke Less Ohio, say their issue would ban smoking in 90 percent of public businesses but allow smoking in some public places, according to the Ohio Issues Report from the Ohio Secretary of State's Office.

October 31, 200618 yr

From the 10/26/06 Toledo Blade:

ELECTION 2006

Reynolds relative blasts firm for smoking lobbying

By JIM PROVANCE

BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU

COLUMBUS — The grandson of the founder of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. yesterday blasted his namesake company for bankrolling an effort to etch smoking protections into Ohio’s constitution.

“I am shocked by the new low that the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. has hit,” said Patrick Reynolds. “I feel that my grandfather, as much as he did to market and popularize smoking of cigarettes, is spinning in his grave with what they are doing now.”

From the 10/26/06 Marion Star:

The smoking vote: If both pass, Issue 4 wins

Issue 5 makes no exceptions for lighting up in public

By JOHN JARVIS

The Marion Star

MARION - Mind if I smoke?

A person's answer to that question might indicate how he or she will vote on state issues 4 and 5, ballot questions that will determine whether and where smoking in public is legal in Ohio.

However, for voters who will decide if those issues pass or fail on Nov. 7, it may not seem as simple a matter as responding to the polite tobacco user's inquiry.

October 31, 200618 yr

From the 10/27/06 Toledo Blade:

ELECTION 2006

Tobacco giant pours $5.4M into relaxed smoking ban

By JIM PROVANCE

BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU

COLUMBUS - R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. alone has funneled more than $5.4 million into Ohio's smoking-ban war, 86 percent more than the total raised by the opposition.

The tobacco giant is backing Issue 4 on the Nov. 7 ballot pushed by Smoke Less Ohio - the coalition of tobacco companies, bars, and restaurants seeking to write an exemption-laden smoking ban into the Ohio constitution.

The R.J. Reynolds money was funneled through a nonprofit organization not legally mandated to reveal its donors. But Smoke Less voluntarily revealed the support from the maker of such cigarette brands as Winston, Camel, and Salem.

From the 10/27/06 Newark Advocate:

Gov. Taft visits Newark, backs smoking ban

By KENT MALLETT

Advocate Reporter

NEWARK -- Gov. Bob Taft called State Issue 4 "nothing less than voter fraud" in a visit to Newark city hall Thursday, when he spoke about the two smoking issues on the Nov. 7 general election ballot.

October 31, 200618 yr

From the 10/28/06 Toledo Blade:

Issue 4's spillover effects detailed in state report

By JIM PROVANCE

BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU

COLUMBUS - Issue 4 on the Nov. 7 ballot, which would write an exemption-laden statewide smoking ban into Ohio's Constitution, could have the unintended consequence of overturning smoking bans in mines, fireworks companies, and businesses handling flammable materials, state officials warned yesterday.

Also from the 10/28/06 Toledo Blade:

SMOKING

Tobacco heir speaks out against Issue 4

By JENNI LAIDMAN

BLADE STAFF WRITER

The R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. is trying to fool Ohio voters, says the grandson of the tobacco company's founder, and he was in Toledo yesterday, he said, to set the record straight.

If Ohioans want to curb tobacco-related deaths, they need to vote against tobacco-company bankrolled Issue 4 and vote Yes on Issue 5, Patrick Reynolds told a gathering at the Toledo-Lucas County Health Department.

October 31, 200618 yr

From the 10/29/06 Toledo Blade:

Toledo smoking ban likely to change Nov. 7

Issue 4 would weaken, Issue 5 strengthen city law

By JIM PROVANCE

BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU

COLUMBUS — Regardless of which of two dueling bans reigns supreme when the smoke clears on election night, the rules about where people can and cannot light up in Toledo are likely to change.

Toledo’s Clean Indoor Air Ordinance, as amended by voters in 2004, is much weaker than Issue 5, a strict statewide ban on indoor public smoking pushed by a group of health organizations, but slightly stronger than Issue 4, the exemption-laden alternative pushed by the tobacco and hospitality industries.

From the 10/29/06 Youngstown Vindicator:

Will voters abstain?

By DAVID SKOLNICK

VINDICATOR POLITICS WRITER

With three customers smoking cigarettes only feet away, Kim Raymond, co-owner of the Ice Cream Parlor in Salem, said she favors an issue on the Nov. 7 ballot to ban smoking in most public places, including restaurants.

"I'm a small-business owner and I don't want to tell them not to smoke," she said. "I don't want to be the bad guy. I want someone else to be the meanie. I could then tell them that it's out of my hands."

October 31, 200618 yr

From the 10/30/06 PD:

TWO VIEWS ON ISSUES 4 AND 5

Many Cleveland bar workers afraid to lose their customers

Monday, October 30, 2006

Harlan Spector

Plain Dealer Reporter

Protecting bar workers from secondhand smoke is an important theme of the SmokeFree Ohio campaign heading into the Nov. 7 election.

But finding Cleveland-area bar workers who think they need government protection is not easy. They work in a business culture known for militant resistance to smoking bans. Bartenders say they depend on smoking drinkers for a living.

Candice Walden, 26, acknowledged that bar servers routinely exposed to smoke have a higher risk of cancer. She pours drinks at Academy Tavern, a neighborhood fixture near Shaker Square.

Walden is conflicted. "I'd like to be here for my children," said the mother of children 8 and 6. But, she said, "I have a lot of customers who smoke, and that's how I make my money."

From the 10/30/06 Times-Reporter:

Sorting out Issues 4 and 5

Voters still figuring out state smoking proposals

By KYLE KONDIK, T-R Staff Writer

Opponents have charged supporters of Issue 4, a constitutional amendment that restricts smoking but would allow it in bars, restaurants and other venues, of trying to confuse voters.

Intentional or not, some voters are having difficulty separating Issue 4 from Issue 5, a more stringent smoking ban.

October 31, 200618 yr

the smokers should look on the bright side. If issue 5 passes, it will give them more of an incentive to quit. After all, it seems like most smokers would like to quit but it is too hard. However, if it keeps getting harder on them to smoke, it will make quitting that much easier on them.

^very true. there is a more direct connection between banning smoking and people quiting than raising prices and people quiting. (no body call me out on it, i'm far too lazy to start quoting studies).

October 31, 200618 yr

I don't see how either are effective in getting people to quit. They can still step outside the establishment and smoke.I'm pretty sure all its going to do is piss a lot of smokers off, and when smokers get pissed off, they smoke more.

October 31, 200618 yr

Has there been any polling on these two issues? I'm so nervous that Issue 4 will pass... Ugh.

October 31, 200618 yr

the smokers should look on the bright side. If issue 5 passes, it will give them more of an incentive to quit. After all, it seems like most smokers would like to quit but it is too hard. However, if it keeps getting harder on them to smoke, it will make quitting that much easier on them.

^very true. there is a more direct connection between banning smoking and people quiting than raising prices and people quiting. (no body call me out on it, i'm far too lazy to start quoting studies).

I don't know how effective the hassle-factor is. When I was smoking, I switched to handrolling in an attempt to slow myself down. I got very good at rolling cigarettes.

Smoking bans benefit non-smokers more than smokers, who outnumber smokers in ever-increasing numbers. If the vote goes by this logic, 4 will fail in a landslide. If this "common sense approach" boo-yah floated out there gets traction, it'll be close.

Where there's a will there's a way. Quitting smoking is all about the will part.

October 31, 200618 yr

Where there's a will there's a way. Quitting smoking is all about the will part.

^Or about the will of those around you...Nicorette + a concerned and tenacious wife = I'm finally a non-smoker again...

October 31, 200618 yr

the smokers should look on the bright side. If issue 5 passes, it will give them more of an incentive to quit. After all, it seems like most smokers would like to quit but it is too hard. However, if it keeps getting harder on them to smoke, it will make quitting that much easier on them.

^very true. there is a more direct connection between banning smoking and people quiting than raising prices and people quiting. (no body call me out on it, i'm far too lazy to start quoting studies).

So let kingfish dive into the medical journals for you.

Some hi-lites...

TC Online, Accepted 10 June 1999

The effects of household and workplace smoking restrictions on quitting behaviours

…CONCLUSIONS Both workplace and household smoking restrictions were associated with higher rates of cessation attempts, lower rates of relapse in smokers who attempt to quit, and higher rates of light smoking among current daily smokers. (Tobacco Control 1999;8:261-265)...

http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/8/3/261

From Medical News Today, October 25, 2006

Exercise Helps You Quit Smoking More Successfully

You are more likely to succeed in your attempt to give up smoking if you also do regular exercise, say researchers from Austria. They found that smokers who use nicotine gum or skin patches were much more likely to stay off tobacco if they also did regular exercise, compared to people who just had the nicotine replacement therapy and no exercise...

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/healthnews.php?newsid=55107

From Science Daily, October 11, 2006

Smoking Ban Associated With Rapid Improvement In Health Of Bar Workers

Bar workers in Scotland showed significant improvements in respiratory symptoms and lung function within 2 months following a ban on smoking in confined public places, according to a study in the October 11 issue of JAMA.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/10/061012190032.htm

October 31, 200618 yr

...and about the most ridiculously disturbing thing I've come across on the internet.

Ever.

This story was originally published June 15th, 1999 in the St. Petersburg Times. It's

about a man who died very young of lung cancer from smoking, and the family he left behind.

We can leave it at that and still ruin your day. Or you can click the link below and totally ruin your day as I have.

Seriously.

Final warning.

Okay, you asked for it: http://www.whyquit.com/whyquit/BryanLeeCurtis.html

If you need me, I'll be under my desk, sobbing/and or vomiting.

October 31, 200618 yr

^God, what a horrid picture. Sure sends a message (especially if you have a young child).

October 31, 200618 yr

I've been bedside at two deaths. It changes everything about you. That poor kid...

October 31, 200618 yr

From the 10/31/06 PD:

Smoking issues' leaders air their differences

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Regina McEnery

Plain Dealer Reporter

To paraphrase the singer k.d. lang, they are down to their last cigarettes.

Leaders of two statewide smoking initiatives debated their proposals Monday at The City Club for ballot issues whose titles sound compatible but whose measures, in truth, are quite different.

From the 10/31/06 Zanesville Times Recorder:

Vote on smoking could go either way

By LEEANN MOORE

Staff Writer

ZANESVILLE -Bernard Mayles doesn't smoke, but he's voting for issue 4 and against issue 5.

Tammara Tucker said she is definitely voting no for issue 4 and yes for issue 5.

Voters have two choices when it comes to smoking bans on the Nov. 7 ballot. Issue 4 is a constitutional amendment that according to www.smokelessohio.com, creates a partial smoking ban covering 90 percent of enclosed business places with exceptions for businesses that serve adults and rely heavily on smoking customers for a large portion of their business.

October 31, 200618 yr

^"Yes. I feel issue 5 is too strict, therefore I will allow a fantastically monied consortium of businessmen and their attorneys to rewrite my State Constitution."

Please tell me you don't grow 'em any dumber than this guy.

Please?

November 1, 200618 yr

what happens if both issues pass? a smoke off to determine the winner?

November 1, 200618 yr

what happens if both issues pass? a smoke off to determine the winner?

issue four instantly trumps issue five

issue four: constitutional amendment

issue five: boring old trumpable law.

November 1, 200618 yr

I've heard two separate people on WLW say that if you vote for issue 4, voting either way on issue 5 doesn't matter.

Am I wrong in thinking that if issue 4 fails, an issue 5 yes vote from a ballot that voted yes for issue 4, would still be counted toward issue5???

The only combinations people should vote are no, yes or yes, no or no, no. yes, yes could work against you.

November 1, 200618 yr

Looks like the people on here understand how the two issues are being addressed, clearly a favoritism for an outright ban, but we'll see how the general public understands these two come election day.

November 1, 200618 yr

I've heard two separate people on WLW say that if you vote for issue 4, voting either way on issue 5 doesn't matter.

Am I wrong in thinking that if issue 4 fails, an issue 5 yes vote from a ballot that voted yes for issue 4, would still be counted toward issue5???

yes, they are two entirely separate issues (though the subject matter is similar), so the individual votes are counted separately. Or in the case of cuyahoga county, not counted at all!

November 1, 200618 yr

From the 11/1/06 Enquirer:

Smoke filters found less effective than bans

BY PEGGY O'FARRELL | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITER

High-tech ventilation systems that claim to filter cigarette smoke from the air in restaurants and bars aren't as effective as smoking bans, a new study shows.

If the systems are improperly installed or maintained, toxin levels can actually climb in the nonsmoking areas the equipment is supposed to protect, said the researcher who headed up the study released Tuesday.

November 1, 200618 yr

I received an email from SmokeFree Ohio today. It quoted from the "Cleveland Post Dispatch."

November 1, 200618 yr

^I saw that too. I figured it must be a paper I've never heard of, but I'm assuming from your comment that it was supposed to be the PD?

November 1, 200618 yr

I received an email from SmokeFree Ohio today. It quoted from the "Cleveland Post Dispatch."

maybe cleveland and st. louis have consolidated their newspapers?

November 5, 200618 yr

From the 11/4/06 Dispatch:

GRAPHIC: Is smoking allowed?

GRAPHIC: Still smokin'

Issues 4, 5 drawing unlikely supporters

Saturday, November 04, 2006

James Nash and Mark Ferenchik

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

Skully Webb opposed Columbus’ smoking ban when it was proposed two years ago, fearing it would drive away smokers who patronize Skully’s Music Diner in the Short North.

Now, though, Webb has switched sides. He fears that if Ohio voters approve a measure that would repeal the Columbus ban, nonsmokers no longer would feel welcome at establishments where people freely puff away.

From the AP, 11/4/06:

LOGAN COUNTY

10 charged with forging signatures for Issue 4

Saturday, November 04, 2006

BELLEFONTAINE, Ohio (AP) — Ten people are accused of submitting petitions with the names of dead people and forging signatures for State Issue 4 on Tuesday’s ballot, authorities said yesterday.

The 87 petitions containing 2,003 signatures were declared invalid by the Logan County Board of Elections in August and turned over to authorities, said Lucinda Holycross, the elections board’s director. She did not know how many of the signatures were found to be invalid.

The 10 people have been charged with election fraud, a felony that carries a sentence of up to a year in prison, authorities said. All live in the Springfield and Dayton areas and most collected the signatures while working for a temporary agency in this county about 50 miles northwest of Columbus.

From the 11/4/06 Youngstown Vindicator:

Health officials urge support for Issue 5 to ban indoor smoking

Among supporters of Issue 5 is a restaurant owner who says he 'enjoys' a cigarette.

By WILLIAM K. ALCORN

VINDICATOR STAFF WRITER

AUSTINTOWN — Area health officials and community leaders urged area residents to vote "no" on Issue 4 and "yes" on Issue 5 in Tuesday's general election.

Issue 5 is a proposed state law that would ban smoking in all indoor public places.

Issue 4 is a proposed Ohio constitutional amendment that would permit smoking in bars, restaurants, bowling alleys, factories, offices and other public places.

From the 11/4/06 DDN:

Taft urges passage of Smoke Free's Issue 5

Governor visits Centerville, a smoke-free city, to push rejection of issue 4.

By Anthony Gottschlich

Staff Writer

Saturday, November 04, 2006

CENTERVILLE — Visiting this "smoke-free" city Friday morning, Gov. Bob Taft blasted Issue 4, the Smoke Less Ohio issue on Tuesday's ballot, and urged passage of Issue 5, Smoke Free Ohio.

"Issue 4 amounts to voter fraud," Taft told a gathering in city council chambers. "It's a wolf in sheep's clothing."

November 6, 200618 yr

From the 11/6/06 Bucyrus Telegraph Forum:

2 smoking issues split area voters

By Kimberly Gasuras and Mike Redelson

Telegraph-Forum staff

Even though Chad Lewis is a non-smoker, he does not think Issue 5 should pass.

"I think the decision to allow smoking or to prohibit smoking in a business should be left up to the individual owner," Lewis said.

Cheryl Hollis of Galion thinks that Issue 4 should pass and not issue 5.

November 7, 200618 yr

Issue 4 is the most dastardly bit of proposed legislation I've ever come across. Pass or fail, I will demand that the attorneys who crafted it be ground into little pieces, rolled up, and smoked.

Outside, of course.

November 7, 200618 yr

Outside, of course.

LMAO!!!!

November 7, 200618 yr

You know, on one hand it is kind of nice that voters are presented with two options for a smoking ban, but on the other hand it really is confusing for everyone. After voting today, I could see how maybe even smokers (or anti-ban supporters) may vote no on both of them, just as nonsmokers (or pro-ban supporters) might vote yes on both of them. Whatever the outcome of these issues, I don't think the results are going to be very telling of what people really wanted.

I planned on voting Yes for 4 and No for 5, and I did indeed vote that way, but at the polls I almost got them confused.

November 8, 200618 yr

You know, on one hand it is kind of nice that voters are presented with two options for a smoking ban, but on the other hand it really is confusing for everyone. After voting today, I could see how maybe even smokers (or anti-ban supporters) may vote no on both of them, just as nonsmokers (or pro-ban supporters) might vote yes on both of them. Whatever the outcome of these issues, I don't think the results are going to be very telling of what people really wanted.

I planned on voting Yes for 4 and No for 5, and I did indeed vote that way, but at the polls I almost got them confused.

It looks like issue 4 will be voted down, and issue 5 will pass. I wonder if the Havana Martini Club in Cincinnati will change their name with the smoking ban.

November 8, 200618 yr

I'm going to open a smoke-easy

November 8, 200618 yr

11:04PM

5 wins. 4 Wins.

FU*K! FU*K! FU*K!

FU*K!

No further comments.

November 8, 200618 yr

^That wasn't funny, don't play with me like that!!!!

Sign In

Ohio Smoking Ban

Featured Replies

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Recently Browsing 0

Account

Navigation

Search