In a fit of pique I turned today to the Daily Mail for some news. Is it just me, or has the world gone crazy? We have children being told not to put their hands up, police consulting psychics to find Madeleine and Belgian psychologists exonerating mothers from guilt by stating it is too much to expect a woman to have a full-time job AND remember not to leave her baby suffocating in the back of her car.
Then again, they also have a great expose about the 90,000 coppers let off their speeding offences. This is outrageous. In only a quarter of the cases were the blue lights flashing, and as we all know well, if the blue lights and sirens aren't on, then they aren't really police officers and shouldn't be going to emergencies at all. I am also shocked to hear that some officers were given written warnings instead of being prosecuted - almost as if they have some kind of special training and do some sort of special job that involves getting to a lot of places quickly.As I sped through several red traffic lights today for no good reason on my mission to kill a small child, I realised that it isn't the world that's gone mad, it's just the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright of PC Bloggs.
posted by PC Bloggs at 08:01
36 Comments:
As you do, please be sure to be using your phone or radio as well, and that your seat belt is not fastened.
NOT because you need to update control your position, OR when you stop, you can exit the car quickly of course.
*thinks for a moment, imagining the radio shout while sitting at the nick preparing a file*
"Mike Golf 10, RE: the RTC, ETA 1 second"....BANG...."TA!"
Remember-those that don't do the job are always the best people to tell us how to.
Sorry, back to reality....
01 June, 2007 09:22
in the met we've been told that we should not use our airwave units whilst driving because a) it looks like a phone and the public are twats and whinge about it and b)because of the closeness of the unit to an actual phone in that you can make calls from it, its not exempt under the emergency service communications exemptions like radios were. So now they give us crap ear pieces that you can't hear shite, even crapper vehicle units that are so bad a pursuit is cancelled in 15 seconds, not because its dangerous, but because you can't transmit when you want so end up swearing down the radio and the controllers think you're losing it and cancel you.
And as for BRAKE, I honestly think they are a group who have theirs hearts in the right place but should really just shut the fuck up sometimes. There is a need for response in all the services and those fuckers will be the first to kick and scream if there was a significant increase in fatacs because the emergency crews had to drive at 30 or 70 and stop at every red light. rantover
metcountymounty
01 June, 2007 09:54
I wish we had lights on our vans, this sounds like fun.
'Control to SOCO there is something vaguely resembling a footprint at the rear of burgled house...... immediate response please!'
01 June, 2007 11:01
I posted on this subject also!!
I also left a comment on the daily mail post but they only publish the comments that suit them and their opinion.
01 June, 2007 11:58
metcountymounty: are you really told that us mere public are twats and whinge? - damn I need to get out more
01 June, 2007 14:24
Several more reasons NOT to read the pile of pish that is The Daily Mail...
01 June, 2007 15:56
Pique, not peak.
Dear Girl, let us maintain some standards!
;->
Hoddy
01 June, 2007 22:54
Not fully back up to speed and blogging yet, BUT, does anyone know where we can buy strobe bars wholesale? If we all club together and promote this in the correct fashion we can make a killing on ebay before the gen pub realise they are duped and some things in the UK really are illegal. Come on, get cracking with it.
01 June, 2007 23:09
Fit of peak? Are you going mountaineering or did you mean 'pique'?
X
02 June, 2007 04:11
to sue - yes that is exactly what one of our inspectors said in a briefing after she dealt with a complaint after someone saw one of our drivers using his radio on a shout for urgent assistance!!!!!
02 June, 2007 08:45
I saw the same comment and was more struck by the baby dying having been left in the car for 8 hours.
http://whichendbites.blogspot.com/2007/05/dog-dies-left-in-car-for-8-hours.html
I think PCSW has the right idea.
02 June, 2007 13:34
To those of you commenting on my spelling, I can only plead that I was working nights...
02 June, 2007 13:50
anonymous - hope your booked the upstanding curtain twitcher woman, threw her in the slammer and gave her cold tea and a far too short blanket - thats what we do in NZ!!!!
PC Bloggs - nightshift??? isnt that the 'quiet time' *said in jest*
02 June, 2007 19:31
Ahhh the Daily Mail, want convincing that the world will end tomorrow? Read the Mail...
'And as for BRAKE, I honestly think they are a group who have theirs hearts in the right place but should really just shut the fuck up sometimes. There is a need for response in all the services and those fuckers will be the first to kick and scream if there was a significant increase in fatacs because the emergency crews had to drive at 30 or 70 and stop at every red light.'
The fact is police should only break the speed limit when on the way to an emergency with the blue lights on. It not a matter of being told how to do your job its a matter of the rules and safety. The fact that you have been train has no bearing on the matter. If Lewis Hamilton was caught speedin he would still be fined, the fact that he is one of the best drivers in the world is irrelevant. Police should be fined when they speed, if not on the way to an emergency.
'and the public are twats and whinge about it'
I really hope you are not a police officer in my area - you unprofessional idiot.
'rantover'
Career over if you ever reveal your identity.
03 June, 2007 14:36
I think the whole point is to get to an urgent job SAFELY. ( for us and the public) Some jobs will need us to make a bit of ground but as silently and covertly as we can be. Ideal world lights and sirens, but if the world was ideal, what need for us would there be?
03 June, 2007 15:03
To anonymous @ 14:36
Section 87 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 states: “No statutory provision imposing a speed limit on motor vehicles shall apply to any vehicle on an occasion when it is being used for fire brigade, ambulance or police purposes, if the observance of that provision would be likely to hinder the use of the vehicle for the purpose for which it is being used on that occasion”.
These would include issues such as attending an emergency call, gaining on a vehicle ahead which they intended to stop and a multitude of operational issues. It does not state within these regulations that Police Vehicles have to use their blue lights when exceeding the speed limit. Blue lights are used to try and warn other motorists of the police vehicles presence when traffic conditions require it, but these can hinder operations such as attending burglaries in progress at night where the lights can be seen from a long distance.
Metcountymounty’s comment about the public being “..twats and whinge about it” applies aptly to you I suspect. You know nothing but are an expert on everyting.
Reveal your identity and it will ensure you local old bill adopt an ethically correct response to any of your calls and adhere to the speed limit (obviously unless YOU declare it an emergency). Should be with you by Tuesday.
03 June, 2007 16:53
'Reveal your identity and it will ensure you local old bill adopt an ethically correct response'
I have already been exposed to the ethical standards of my local constabulary, and they were lower than that of my dogs. I qualified my proposition that police should be fined for speeding by saying,
'if not on the way to an emergency.'
My statement that they should use blue lights is a valid one. Though I can see that in certain circumstances it may be better for the police not to use lights, such as when attending a burglary and thay may alert the criminals, this does not mean they should jeperdise public safetey in the process. You have blue lights for a reason and thats to alert the public that you are moving faster than usual to attend an emergency. What if you are not seen by a child who steps out on the road because she does not see you heading towards her at unsafe speeds, just because you wanted to catch a thief?
I was recently pulled over by a policeman with no headlights on, never mind blue lights, for speeding. He said that I was the dangerous one, when he was following bahind at a distance of half a mile at the same speed, with no lights! In my opinion it was not worth his putting other road users at risk like that, just to catch me doing 10mph over the speed limit.
'Metcountymounty’s comment about the public being “..twats and whinge about it” applies aptly to you I suspect. You know nothing but are an expert on everyting.'
That comment just shows the culture that has evolved amoungst the police of 'them and us'. It is dangerous, you are just a human being like the rest of us and are not special because you are a policeman. I am appauled that a police officer would talk like that about the general public and the officer concerned should be punished. And as for me knowing it all, Iam sure I know more than you, I have a university degree and have worked my but off to get to where I am. Where as you probably have a few GCSE's and decided the easiest route to a job was through the police force. Lack of education is the problem with the current police force, you should need a degree to even be considered.
03 June, 2007 17:39
I have moved this post to the top because I'm hoping for some more heartfelt and/or abusive comments. Speeding seems to be a thorny issue.
03 June, 2007 17:56
Anonymous the Most Recent, "I have a university degree and have worked my but [sic] off to get to where I am" does not mean that you are specially licensed to impose your subjective viewpoint on everybody else, nor does it excuse rudeness or condescension.
I don't know if you are aware of this, but the two-year probationary period for most forces (or "services", if you are that way inclined) now requires completion of University-operated foundation degrees.
You may also have heard of a little thing called the "High Potential Development Scheme", which in non-plod circles you may hear being anachronistically referred to as the fast-track. This is not some sort of experiment to establish how many GCSEs can be inserted into a police constable.
Additionally, education is simply a non-issue at recruitment, rather than being something that is preferred in its absence, so it is somewhat disingenuous to make statements such as "Where as [sic] you probably have a few GCSE's [sic] and decided the easiest route to a job was through the police force", which has implications that are clearly ridiculous.
I would respectfully suggest, also, that before you make the claim "Iam [sic] sure I know more than you" in future, you consider whether or not you can actually back this up. As a graduate myself, and someone with an extensive educational, work, and training history, I can assure you that a first degree is not an indicator of intelligence, nor of dedication, nor of worth; so the assumption that another person does not have an equivalent academic qualification cannot rationally imply the lack of those qualities.
Frankly, as a fellow graduate, that last paragraph of your post embarrasses me.
03 June, 2007 20:48
I apologise if I embarrassed you Sayonara. Thank you for pointing out that a degree does not make me intelligent. An IQ of 135, does put me in the top 5% of the population though.
You can spout all the training courses in the world that the police may be required to take before they are allowed to join the force, but the fact is mt [sic] dog could probably pass them...
'now requires completion of University-operated foundation degrees.'
Foundation being the operative word.
'does not mean that you are specially licensed to impose your subjective viewpoint on everybody else, nor does it excuse rudeness or condescension.'
I suppose being a police officer gives licence to call the general public twats though...
'The public are whingeing twats who love to see a copper doing something 'wrong' but expect us to be at their call within minutes.'
03 June, 2007 21:34
anonymous most recent:
'An IQ of 135, does put me in the top 5% of the population though.' Well please use your gift for just one moment and re-read your argument. It saddens me that intelligent people like youself, (as you pigdeon hole yourself to be one of those), are far to hasty to pick imaginary holes in the Police Force and yet are the more likely group to call 999 to insist some youngster should be put on the ASBO waiting list for picking your front yard flowers!!!! The 'them and us' culture (in my humble opinion), has been bred from nitpicking people such as you appear to be. No, not every copper is decent, but there are more out there who do a damn fine job to protect people like you and I, than there are those who do the job to power trip. May I be so bold as to suggest you give abit of credit where credit is due, instead of wasting energy trying to find the 'bad apple from last years harvest' Oh and Ive no idea about my IQ number, but respect is more important to me anyway. Good day to you
*tips hat*
03 June, 2007 22:23
Anonymous, you may see fit to turn up your nose at that "foundation" in there, but academic snobbery doesn't affect the range of topics that will be covered on such courses, nor can it exclude extra-curricular study, nor can it rob any police officers of degrees or doctorates that they earned before joining the job.
Also, some forces are training out full degrees, which - unless you have gone around and checked that every officer in those forces is less gifted than yourself - rather sinks your battleship.
If you carefully re-read my post you will see that it was not my intention to claim one is not intelligent just because one has a degree. What I am saying is that the lack of a first degree (which you assumed anyway) is in no way an indicator of how knowledgeable a person is. One can't quantify from an absence.
Similarly, an IQ test score is no indicator of how knowledgeable one is. A test regime such as Cattell CFIII or WISC-IV specifically disallows advantage through knowledge, so the test results do not provide any commentary on whether or not the candidates "know more" than other people. I have never understood the rationale behind backing up one's argument with an IQ score, which is why I never use my own in that fashion despite it being somewhat intimidating.
Regardless, the main thrust of my previous post was to highlight to you that your final paragraph attempts to use academic intimidation to mask the fact that you are making grossly over-simplified subjective statements that seem to stem from a prejudiced and narrow viewpoint, which incidentally (a) is pretty much evidenced by your comments about your experiences with the police, and (b) is what justifies the accusation "you know nothing but are an expert on everything".
You would have to go and make me spell it out for you. Now it just seems... well, rude.
It is not my intention to attack you, but to encourage clarification or reconsideration of what I perceive to be the weaknesses in your argument/s.
Far be it for me to lecture you on how to conduct yourself in public, but it seems to me that you are over-reacting because your bone of contention is not being taken seriously on here. So I will take it seriously, and if that works for you then we can all get on with our lives.
You said "I suppose being a police officer gives licence to call the general public twats though...".
Well no, it doesn't. At least, no more than anyone else.
I agree in principle that it was morally wrong of metcountymounty's inspector to call certain members of the public "twats" while in a professional setting, but on the other hand you have to remember that police officers are humans too and it is perfectly natural to gripe about those people who complicate one's already exasperating and largely thankless efforts to help and protect them, especially when one is briefing the troops who are all thinking the same thing anyway and are about to go out and face a good ten hours of the same thing and worse.
Perhaps you do believe that the inspector should be punished, but that is simply not your call, and making peevish remarks to metcountymounty is not going to change that. Be assured that if a senior officer overheard this inspector, or if s/he were reported, there would be repercussions. We are hardly likely to hear about it ex post facto, on this blog.
Metcountymounty is, as you said yourself, "just a human being like the rest of us". Police officers are citizens with particular powers. They do not magically turn into automata when they are sworn in, and he (or she) is perfectly entitled to his or her opinion, although in this case the "twats" comment is a second-hand report so the issue is essentially moot.
Basically, what I am saying is, claiming that the sky is falling in on the standards of professionalism in the police, and propping that up purely on a second-hand and entirely human comment about one specific incident, is not helping anyone. Nor does it make any kind of compelling statement about the police as a whole.
I think perhaps it is your delivery which has attracted any friction, rather than your actual position.
Pc Bloggs, I apologise for posting essays on your comments pages ;)
03 June, 2007 22:43
So much bitterness and angst in this sanctuary of irony and sarcasm.
Unless..... Anon is just pretending to be a ****. In which case bravo you had me going. 'I'm in the top 5th percentile' LOL, true comedy genius.
04 June, 2007 00:40
The real problem is the 'them and us' attitude in the legal system. The public are told that speeding is always dangerous and we should never break the speed limit, and vast amounts of money are spent to catch and fine millions of drivers who are mostly driving quite safely and reasonably... just above some arbitrary number chosen by the local council.
Then the police ignore the speed limit on a regular basis even when not driving with their lights and sirens on.
It may be legal, but it makes a mockery of any claim that 'speeding is always dangerous' and we should submit to having vast thousands of cameras around the country to enforce speed limits.
I would imagine that most of those who whinge about the police using phones while driving or being let off a speeding ticket have received one or more tickets themselves for doing so in circumstances where they weren't causing a hazard. Since the law says that they should be punished regardless of whether they're the best driver in the world, they're hardly going to accept the police turning around and saying 'but it's OK for us because we have training'. If you can avoid speeding tickets with training, where can Joe Public go to get the training that lets them avoid speeding tickets like the police?
Now, it's a rather stupid response by the public and unfair to the police, but it's also quite predictable after a decade of stupid and unfair enforcement of traffic laws; in fact, I seem to remember a senior police officer pointing out the inevitable consequences of such enforcement in the 90s.
The simple fact is that the more the legal system differentiates between police and citizens, the more the police will find themselves in conflict with the very people they're supposed to be protecting.
BTW, for the record, I don't have a mobile phone and haven't had a speeding ticket in nearly 20 years. On the other hand, I am emigrating shortly, and the infestation of speed cameras and the rising 'them and us' attitude of the legal system in this country are some of the reasons for doing so. IMHO the police have almost lost the support of the public in this country, and nothing good will come of that.
04 June, 2007 01:53
Look no one worries about blue light runs exceeding the speed limit but people DO get annoyed if there is one rule for you another one for the rest of us. I know it happens when I was in the job and some CID officers had to go to HQ for a meeting and got caught in a trap the offences got binned. They viewed it as a perk of the job. They should have been prosecuted. Blue lights and sirens are to warn other road users and to assist in reaching the incident only on rare occasions will a silent approach be justified.
04 June, 2007 15:09
"The fact is police should only break the speed limit when on the way to an emergency with the blue lights on. It not a matter of being told how to do your job its a matter of the rules and safety. The fact that you have been train has no bearing on the matter. If Lewis Hamilton was caught speedin he would still be fined, the fact that he is one of the best drivers in the world is irrelevant. Police should be fined when they speed, if not on the way to an emergency."
This was posted on 3 june by someone who obviously knows how to do our jobs better than us. I would LOVE to see how long a covert surveillance team would last if they had to use blues and twos to conduct mobile surveillance - one nano second or two? A very high number of the speeding infringements are likely to have been committed by officers on such teams. But that won't get reported in the press, because it doesn't suit their anti speed camera agenda. Perhaps the surveillance teams should all just stop and let the terrorists and drug dealers get on with it and what would the Dail Mail say then?
Anyway, I've just left the UK Police Service to emigrate as I think it is all going to ratshit and are grateful government and public get what the policing that deserve.
Tom from Wales (for the next week)
05 June, 2007 08:18
'I would LOVE to see how long a covert surveillance team would last if they had to use blues and twos to conduct mobile surveillance'
This was not my point, my point was the lives of the public should not be put at risk for the sake of catching criminals. If an officer can prove that they were on the way to an emergency, and it was absoloutly imperitive that they not use their lights then that is fine. But it should be encouraged to be used only in certain circumstances. If we give police free rein to speed without having to explain why, it will get abused by certain officers, and will put public safetey at risk.
As for me bring;
'far to hasty to pick imaginary holes in the Police'
I have had some very bad experiences at the hands of the police. I wont go into details, but it is my experiences of police practice that have caused me to come to my conclusions, not an inherrant hate of all police. Trust me I would much rather be singing your praises, and I do try not to paint you all with the same brush.
As for my arguements with regards to my intellegence, I do appologise and see that I was a bit childish. My assertation that;
'Lack of education is the problem with the current police force, you should need a degree to even be considered. '
Was a generalization, and was only based on my experiences with my local police force. And as Sayonara pointed out;
'I think perhaps it is your delivery which has attracted any friction, rather than your actual position.'
So let me deliver my opinion in a more suitable, metcountymounty, fashion;
All police officers are whinging under-educated twats.
05 June, 2007 11:49
I have to admit, that final bit actually made me lol.
05 June, 2007 12:10
There has been a lot of pointless froth here but point of the artice has a serious message. The general public hold the keepers of the law to the same standards that they are being held to and those who are allowed exemptions to the law had better have a good reason when they use them. Every one of those 90000 traffic offences was justified and should have been let off? I call Bull.
The last time I got done for speeding (40mph in a 30 zone), my thoughts were 'Fair Cop'.
The following week at the exact same location, I was overtaken by a police car, and I was going over the speed limit (still hadn't learnt my lesson). By yy guess, the cop car was doing 50. Less than a mile further on the car parked outside a newsagents (and no they did not slow down to 30 indicating a cancelled call). Just to be curious I went in to see if they were 'responding'. Nope. Ice cream, choccy and newspapers.
Now my thoughts changed to B*****ds. One rule for them and another for the rest of us. My respect for the local bobbys had now changed to contempt.
See how easy it is to loose our respect? That is why you are held up to scrutiny and that is why we react when we see the rules being applied in an unjustified manner.
Final point
'I sped through several red traffic lights today for no good reason on my mission to kill a small child'.
I think it is known as a straw man where you refute your opponent’s argument by deliberately exaggerating to the opposite extreme. You may have noticed politicians use it all the time whey they have a weak argument on their side. What is your excuse?
05 June, 2007 14:13
That she's a thick as pigshit copper with a chip on its shouder?
05 June, 2007 23:51
"There has been a lot of pointless froth here but point of the artice has a serious message. The general public hold the keepers of the law to the same standards that they are being held to and those who are allowed exemptions to the law had better have a good reason when they use them. Every one of those 90000 traffic offences was justified and should have been let off?"
This is absolutely correct. but the Daily Mail suggested that any officer not going to a 999 emergency did not have a good reason. the point of my post about the surveillance issue is that:
1 There are alot of good reasons which are not 999 emergencies
2 this was not reported on
3 Ill informed people then make the assumption that anything that is not a 999 call is therefore a misuse of the exemption.
4. No-one has mentioned the surveillance aspect before, which indicates that they were unaware of it (i.e. ill informed)
5. this is an area which might properly be investigated before deciding that all police officers are speeding hypocites.
6. If anyone is aware of incidences of apparent misuse of the exemption then they should file an official complaint (stating time, date, reg. of police vehicle etc)
7. Surveillance driving involves very high speed driving. it is dangerous, and so only done for serious offences. it is tightly controlled. very few accidents happen. when they do officers are usually prosecuted. Most speeding tickets are quashed. It NEVER involves blues and twos.
Perhaps the Daily Mail ought to make a Freedom of Information inquiry about how many alleged offences were committed by such officers and then publish how many speeding offences were committed by police officers who appear not to have an exemption - or they might even discover what those exemptions were. This would then show the level of abuse and hypocrisy. But they probably won't as it won't make good press.
And finally,...
Be sceptical about what you read in the press. The stuff that got reported about some of my cases bore only the vaguest resemblance to what was said in court or elsewhere and certianly wasn't the truth. but in 96 hours I leave the UK so its up to you guys... Tom from Wales
07 June, 2007 20:27
I have three degrees (in numerate subjects too!) and an IQ of 138 at last measurement and I think Anon is a twat. Incidently, neither fact has been particularly useful to me in my policing career, except in giving me a unique insight into spotting inadequate bullshitters who try to advance their argument by counting their degrees and quoting their IQs. [LOL, yes that includes me now] :o)
In fact, now s/he's also a patronising twat (whose subject was apparently not English, if their spelling of "jeopardise", "butt" and "appalled" is anything to go by!).
These civvies just don't have any sense of humour, never mind the darker type that police have... you see it really boils down to them versus us... [tongue firmly in cheek - some of my best friends are civvies!]
However, I do agree that many police officers do drive like twats, when they're not on I-calls especially. I share a nick with several such twats, but that's a topic for a future blog post when I have time.
Ho hum...
11 June, 2007 13:35
I have an IQ of 148 and I'm a copper.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it Anon!
12 June, 2007 20:27
成人電影,情色,本土自拍, 一夜情, 辣妹視訊, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊, 視訊美女, 美女視訊, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, 情人視訊網影音視訊聊天室, 視訊交友90739, 成人影片, 成人交友, 本土自拍, 免費A片下載, 性愛,
成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人電影, 成人, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 色情聊天室, 美女交友,
嘟嘟成人網, 成人貼圖, 成人電影, A片, 豆豆聊天室, 聊天室, UT聊天室, 尋夢園聊天室, 男同志聊天室, UT男同志聊天室, 聊天室尋夢園, 080聊天室, 080苗栗人聊天室, 6K聊天室, 女同志聊天室, 小高聊天室, 情色論壇, 色情網站, 成人網站, 成人論壇, 免費A片, 上班族聊天室, 成人聊天室, 成人小說, 微風成人區, 色美媚部落格, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人論壇, 情色聊天室, 寄情築園小遊戲, AV女優,成人電影,情色,本土自拍, A片下載, 日本A片, 麗的色遊戲, 色色網, ,嘟嘟情人色網, 色情網站, 成人網站, 正妹牆, 正妹百人斬, aio,伊莉, 伊莉討論區, 成人遊戲, 成人影城,
ut聊天室, 免費A片, AV女優, 美女視訊, 情色交友, 免費AV, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 色情影片 成人影片, 成人網站, A片,H漫, 18成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片,
愛情公寓, 情色, 舊情人, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 情色交友, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 色情a片, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊美女, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, a片下載, aV, av片, A漫, av dvd, av成人網, 聊天室, 成人論壇, 本土自拍, 自拍, A片,成人電影,情色,本土自拍,
03 April, 2009 20:07
免費A片, 本土自拍, AV女優, 美女視訊, 情色交友, 免費AV, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 色情影片, 成人影片, 成人網站, A片,H漫, 18成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片, 免費A片下載, 性愛, 成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人電影, 成人, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊,
情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊美女, 視訊交友, ut聊天室, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, a片下載, av片, A漫, av dvd, av成人網, 聊天室, 成人論壇, 本土自拍, 自拍, A片, 愛情公寓, 情色, 舊情人, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 情色交友, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 色情a片, 一夜情, 辣妹視訊, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊, 視訊美女, 美女視訊, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, 情人視訊網, 影音視訊聊天室, 視訊交友90739, 成人影片, 成人交友,
15 April, 2009 04:35
爆爆爽a片免費看, 天堂私服論壇, 情色電影下載, 成人短片, 麗的線上情色小遊戲, 情色動畫免費下載, 日本女優, 小說論壇, 777成人區, showlive影音聊天網, 聊天室尋夢園, 義大利女星寫真集, 韓國a片, 熟女人妻援交, 0204成人, 性感內衣模特兒, 影片, 情色卡通, 85cc免費影城85cc, 本土自拍照片, 成人漫畫區, 18禁, 情人節阿性, 做愛的漫畫圖片, 情色電影分享區, 做愛ㄉ影片, 丁字褲美女寫真, 色美眉, 自拍俱樂部首頁, 日本偷自拍圖片, 色情做愛影片, 情色貼圖區, 八國聯軍情色網, 免費線上a片, 淫蕩女孩自拍, 美國a片, 都都成人站, 色情自拍, 本土自拍照片, 熊貓貼圖區, 色情影片, 5278影片網, 脫星寫真圖片, 粉喵聊天室, 金瓶梅18, sex888影片分享區, 1007視訊, 雙贏論壇,
免費成人影音, 彩虹自拍, 小魔女貼影片, 自拍裸體寫真, 禿頭俱樂部, 環球av影音城, 學生色情聊天室, 視訊美女, 辣妹情色圖, 性感卡通美女圖片, 影音, 情色照片 做愛, hilive tv , 忘年之交聊天室, 制服美女, 性感辣妹, ut 女同聊天室, 淫蕩自拍, 處女貼圖貼片區, 聊天ukiss tw, 亞亞成人館, 777成人, 秋瓷炫裸體寫真, 淫蕩天使貼圖, 十八禁成人影音, 禁地論壇, 洪爺淫蕩自拍, 秘書自拍圖片,
aaaa片, 免費聊天, 咆哮小老鼠影片分享區, 金瓶梅影片, av女優王國, 78論壇, 女同聊天室, 熟女貼圖, 1069壞朋友論壇gay, 淫蕩少女總部, 日本情色派, 平水相逢, 黑澀會美眉無名, 網路小說免費看, 999東洋成人, 免費視訊聊天, 情色電影分享區, 9k躺伯虎聊天室, 傑克論壇, 日本女星杉本彩寫真, 自拍電影免費下載, a片論壇, 情色短片試看, 素人自拍寫真,
15 April, 2009 12:42
Post a Comment
<< Home