Gun Rights

Second Amendment Foundation Calls for Independent Investigation of Philando Castile's Death

"Exercising our right to bear arms should not translate to a death sentence over something so trivial as a traffic stop for a broken tail light, and we are going to watch this case with a magnifying glass."



The Second Amendment Foundation, a prominent gun rights group, has called for an independent investigation into the death of Philando Castile, the man shot by police yesterday in Falcon Heights, Minnesota. "Wednesday night's shooting of Philando Castile is very troubling, especially to the firearms community, because he was a legally-armed private citizen who may have done nothing more than reach for his identification and carry permit," said Alan Gottlieb, the group's founder, in a press release. "We have received calls of alarm today from many of our members across the country. They are justifiably concerned that a law-abiding citizen may have been wrongfully killed."

Here are the rest of Gottlieb's comments:

"America's 13 million citizens who are licensed to carry deserve to know exactly what happened and why," Gottlieb stated. "There are conflicting explanations, and only an independent investigation can hopefully reveal the truth.

"We understand that Gov. Mark Dayton has asked the White House for a federal investigation," he added, "and we believe that either the Minnesota State Patrol, or an agency of equal stature from another state could also be invited to investigate.

"We are cognizant of the racial overtones arising from Mr. Castile's death," Gottlieb noted. "The concerns of our members, and honest gun owners everywhere, go even deeper. Exercising our right to bear arms should not translate to a death sentence over something so trivial as a traffic stop for a broken tail light, and we are going to watch this case with a magnifying glass."

The National Rifle Association has yet to make an official statement about the shooting. Cam Edwards—host of the NRA podcast Cam & Co.—did comment today while "we don't yet know all of the circumstances…what we know does not look good."

NEXT: New Citizen Video Released of Fresno Police Shooting An Unarmed Teen Who Was Lying on the Ground

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Well I’d like to see the NRA put those dues I just paid to good use.

    1. “The National Rifle Association has yet to make an official statement about the shooting.”

      If Mr. Castile was not a member of the National Rifle Association, I doubt that the organization’s decision makers will be motivated to speak/write on his behalf.

      1. Except in the negative. NRA has a long history of racism with respect to gun rights.

        1. And non-racial collectivism too. As a libertarian at a gun “rights” discussion in the 80s I has horrified to witness cowardly “rights” activists begging the ATF to shoot prohibition violators, but let the “good” citizens, the ones “more equal than others” keep 2A privileges.
          It resembled that scene at the close of Orwell’s 1984, where Winston Smith begged O’Brien: ‘Do it to Julia! Do it to Julia! Not me!

          With friends like these…

          1. Shall not be infringed.

            Any little variation of that will lead to eventual confiscation. I refuse to budge from that position. Now they’re talking about this ‘no fly no buy’ shit. And that’s nothing compared to what they’re going to try. Anyone who thinks they’re safe are foolish. Look at this excerpt from the foundation talked about this this story:

            The Second Amendment Foundation are suing the Oklahoma Department of Human Services (OKDHS) on behalf of foster and adoptive parents. Plaintiffs are a challenging an OKDHS policy that restricts the Second Amendment rights of foster and adoptive parents in the state, and threatens to immediately revoke their foster/adoptive home status and removed placed children.

            Yeah. they’d never go that far. You’re rights are safe, everyone, until they’re not.

          1. You’ll never get one.

            Because, this isn’t about the problem of cops in Democrat dominated cities shooting people willy-nilly. This is a problem of the NRA. Because the problem is always the NRA.

            1. troll on…..

        2. Oh yes; they were started, after all, to teach freed slaves the use of arms. Sounds REAL raaaaacist…. if you’re a moron.

          1. No, the NRA was founded shortly after the Civil War to deal with the abysmal state of civilian marksmanship as seen by some CW veterans. Ambrose Burnside was its first president.

            Further down the road, the NRA did invest resources in providing safety and firearms training for southern blacks (among others), so they can point to that.

      2. They no doubt get a lot of money from cops.

        1. I have the same impression. Additionally, it seems to me that many of the NRA members whom I know would likely be described as “blindly pro-cop” as well.

          1. A couple years ago the NRA supported the controversial bill in Indiana which extended Castle Doctrine rights to homeowners who are victims of an illegal entry into their home by cops. The police union in Indiana did get up in arms about the law, but the NRA stood tall.

            But since then I haven’t heard much from them about protecting citizens (minorities especially) against the state.

            1. Thanks. That is good news.

        2. Well, they do provide a large fraction of police firearm and safety training. But they’re willing and eager to provide it to everyone else who wants it, too.

      3. Still waiting for the ACLU to chime in on this one.

        1. Don’t hold your breath! Castile was a legal gun owner so the ACLU probably thinks he got what he deserved

          1. I despise a lot of ACLU stances, but they surprise me from time to time. Several State level chapters have taken Libertarian or Conservative stances over civil rights violations by government stooges over the last couple of decades. The National umbrella organization is reliably apologist for the Progressive narrative, but some of the State chapters actually have some principles.

            Not saying you are wrong, but trying to keep this from being what Stephen Fry once called “We all love our fifteen minutes of snorting outrage every morning”. The difference between the National organization and some State chapters might matter someday soon…..

    2. Well, guess which organization is getting my money. Fuck the NRA and fuck the GOA.

    3. I’m making over $15k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.
      This is what I do_________

    4. I’m making over $15k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.
      This is what I do_________

  2. The NRA seems to exist nowadays to troll leftists and to sell out to them.

    1. Did they back the Brady Bill or the 90s assault weapon ban? I can’t remember now. I’ve never been a member so I don’t keep up on their news.

      1. I don’t know, I’m thinking of their secret-list bill.

        1. Fuck that shit.

          1. Wait, I remember – the “a court can take your gun rights away based on a probable-cause finding, without trial by jury, and with the evidence against you redacted” bill.

            I think I’m remembering that correctly.

            1. To be fair, I think they would show the defendant a summary of his secret file, with the national security stuff redacted, because the feds are all about protecting classified information…from getting into the hands of people whose rights are being taken away.

            2. But we already have the FYTW Act. This is redundant legislation.

    2. The modern NRA solely exists to provide political cover to GOP congresscritters on gun issues.

      They can kiss my patootie.

  3. “Conservative Second Amendment Foundation admit it’s not primarily concerned with the ‘racial overtones’ of the case” – suggested derp for leftists to use

  4. WAIT WAIT WAIT we didn’t mean *real* civil rights!!


    1. IOW, I’m a victim, stop trying to steal my victimhood, whitey!

      1. Yeah, I’ve come to the conclusion that the movement’s schizophrenic behavior is because it is split between winners and whiners.

        Winners are actually personally threatened by bad cops or are just decent people, and have reasonable proposals to reign in abuses; they aren’t threatened by good faith efforts to expand the issue from racism to police misconduct, because it means more allies, more people thinking that the police are a personal threat rather than Black People Problems, which increases the odds of winning.

        The whiners are less likely to be personally affected (meaning, affluent and connected) and see the movement as a way to escalate their victim status among their fellow upper-middle-class technocratic prog circle (or as a way to jumpstart a political career and get rich off the deaths of people who share their skin color but not their social class). Stopping police from killing the innocent would derail their careers, so they undermine the winners every chance they get, by focusing attention on the least sympathetic victims or most questionably unjust cases and by acting like or encouraging asshats. Because they are competing for a limited resource (attention, sympathy, and social justice dollars), they see people of other races who feel threatened by police abuse not as allies, but as rivals. This sense of rivalry even extends to other progressive causes, which is why they try to upstage commie or gay rights events and make it all about them.

  5. Good, I might just have to send these guys some money.

    1. This seems to be the statement Jesse quoted from in his article, TG.

      Their Mission Statement is “The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) is dedicated to promoting a better understanding about our Constitutional heritage to privately own and possess firearms. To that end, we carry on many educational and legal action programs designed to better inform the public about the gun control debate.”

  6. If you wanna race-bait, do it right: Quote Chief Justice Taney’s Dred Scott opinion which refused to recognize black people as citizens because doing so “would would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right…to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”

    1. Speaking of baiting, I let some for you in the last thread which I will re-post here.

      Although Iowa Code ? 216.7(2)(a) provides a religious exemption, as drafted, the exemption is unconstitutional. Further, the Commission’s express intent to target churches singularly for enforcement, as stated in the Brochure, is an egregious constitutional violation. The only text in the entire Brochure that is underlined and italicized is the limitation that a bona fide religious institution must act according to a “bona fide religious purpose.” Such emphasis highlights the Commission’s intention to not only heavily scrutinize the validity and sincerity religious doctrines of our client and other religious institutions, but also the very legitimacy of the church as a religious body. (emphasis original)

      Any thoughts?

      1. Well, I presume the Commission can simply issue a policy statements that no way will they force churches to let men use their ladies’ rooms or vice-versa, and no way will they ever censor what churches say.

        Adopt a strict policy statement, unambiguously disavowing any such implication of their policies, and then the case would be moot, wouldn’t it? And the plaintiff would be exposed as a panic-mongering right-wing paranoid weenie.

        So…I expect that’s what they’ll do any day now.

        I mean, ha ha, unless they actually *want* to censor church teachings and tell them how to use their own bathrooms, but only a conspiracy theorist would believe *that*!

        1. Hmmm…this Raw Story article suggests churches *do* have to let men who think they’re women use the ladies’ room and vice versa. They even found a law professor to back them up:

          “Drake University law professor Maura Strassberg, an expert on sexuality law, said a past ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on public facilities found that decisions on who should be allowed to use restroom were not considered free speech.

          “That means churches can’t ban some types of people from using a restroom that’s open to the public, and Strassberg pointed out that Fort Des Moines church has specifically said it welcomes worshipers who don’t identify with their biological sex.

          “Although the government cannot regulate religious exercise, churches are not exempt from general laws that apply to everyone.”

          1. “Although the government cannot regulate religious exercise, churches are not exempt from general laws that apply to everyone.”

            So they can’t, but they can.

        2. I’m confused. If a church is so against trans* folk that they wont’ let them use the restroom, why are they letting them be church members? Or are you under the impression that people just wander into churches they don’t belong to in order to use the restroom? Who does that?

      2. We could stand touchin’ noses
        For a week at a time
        And never see eye-to-eye.

        Iowa Stubborn

      3. Thank Allah my religious group meets in private homes and can thus freely include or exclude whomever we want.

        Not that we have ever done that, or likely ever will with all that “Unity in Diversity” stuff we believe in, but it’s best to enjoy the freedom to exclude-if-we-ever-wanted-too while we still theoretically can.

  7. The solution is common-sense gun control practiced in Ireland, New Zealand and Norway. Disarm all police minions, just as in England before the entry there of Prohibition-hardened U.S. criminals in the wake of repeal. London Bobbies did not carry guns before Prohibitionist Republicans plunged the nation into the Great Depression through asset-forfeiture looting. Senator Millard Tidings published “Before and After Prohibition” to expose the official murders committed by prohibition agents and dirty cop abettors. Where laws see to it that individuals have rights, there is no cause for violent confrontation. Where looter governments order the violation of rights, every citizen is an expendable slave and mock trials will protect the perpetrators.

  8. If the media really cared about the issue of police violence, they’d start covering stories of white guys getting shot by cops along side the stories of black guys getting shot by cops. But they don’t fucking care, all they care about is stirring up racial tensions.

    We understand that Gov. Mark Dayton has asked the White House for a federal investigation

    Yeah, that’s really going to work. Now Obama will read about it in the paper and grab a chance to make it all about gun violence and common sense gun control. I mean if this guy didn’t have a gun, then the cop would have never feared for his life, right? Banning all guns is the only way. Then the cops can relax. I mean, unless you have a dog or something.

    1. I think it’s going to take at least another generation of stupid before they believe that they can actually get away with banning guns and not end up being hung from the DC cherry trees. You need a few generations of sjw majors to get that stupid.

      1. I knew those cherry trees were good for something. Thank you, Japan.

    2. “Banning all guns…” might work provided only that those held by the DEA, IRS, BATF, ICE, Treasury, Airport Gestapo and Customs head the list. Homicide squads and bank robbery investigators actually have sound reasons for being armed, even in a non-coercive society. But prohibition thugs? Asset-forfeiture highwaymen?
      “What we saw” is par for the course in a looter kleptocracy.

    3. I mean if this guy didn’t have a gun, then the cop would have never feared for his life, right?

      Not that the cognitive dissonance would slow him down, but that would sound an awful lot like victim blaming.

  9. Bitter clingers

  10. Cops don’t like competition.

    1. The brave murderer just hit the national news in Brazil, next to the Speaker of the House–an antiabortion fanatic impeaching the lady president for allowing rape victims a morning-after pill–resigning in disgrace and under indictment for several felonies. The spin is that American cops shoot blacks for no reason. (The cops in prohibitionist Rio shoot everyone of all colors for no reason).

      1. “The spin is that American cops shoot blacks for no reason. (The cops in prohibitionist Rio shoot everyone of all colors for no reason).”

        I think is was last week when some Brazilian gov’t member pointed out (re: Orlando) that US nutters kill gays. The story ended up (by design?) right next to a story about a gay Brazilian who had been beaten by a mob, and when the cops showed up, they beat him, too.

  11. I stopped paying my NRA dues a few years ago for a variety of reasons, and I’ve been looking for a new gun rights group since then. I’ve narrowed it down to Gun Owners of America and the Second Amendment Foundation. Does anyone have opinions on either of these and explanations for why they might be a good or bad choice for gun rights? I also considered Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership as a second group to join.

    1. I have never been an NRA member. Thought about it a couple of times, but it seems they’re weak. I’m a purist on constitutional rights. I looked at the Second Amendment Foundation a little. The other I will check out. But I’m not paying a membership fee to any organization that wants to talk about taking away someone’s rights because the government decided to put them on some secret list. If that’s all it takes to take away a right, we’re all going to be on some secret list in short order. Sounds like a statists fucking wet dream to me.

      1. You can thank the NRA for the large portion of your natural right to self defense that the state is bound to respect.

        They’re a hell of a lot better on gun rights than Cato.

        1. Cato’s Robert Levy funded the “Heller” case which the NRA tried to undermine. Read Damon Root’s book “Overruled” about just how cowardly the NRA acted in that case.

    2. All of them seem to exist to fundraise as a primary mission.

      I’ve soured on SAF and its sister organization, and they panhandle worst of all. Alan Gotlieb has been more than willing to accede to gun restrictions in the past, particularly in Washington state. Google him and GOA together should bring up the details.

      I still think Alan Gotlieb is fifth columnist and Heller was an attempt to finally nail down 2A as a collective right that went sideways.

    3. Akira,

      It seems to me that the NRA is only dedicated to protecting its own members’ rights (the NRA successfully lobbied to have “The Disclose Act” amended in order to allow larger organizations such as themselves exempted from disclosing membership personal information).

      Open Secrets provides a comparison of money obtained and spent from [the National Rifle Association and the Gun Owners of America].
      For instance, in 2012 GOA provided contributions of $119,850 compared to the NRA’s $1,458,651.

      GOA contributed only to Republicans candidates and the top recipients were Steve Stockman R-TX) and Ted Cruz (R-TX), along with Denny Rehberg (R-MT), Steven Daines (R-MT) and Douglas Lamborn (R-CO).

      The NRA contributed to a variety of Republicans and Democrats, some of whom don’t wish to repeal current gun laws in order to remove restrictions on the Second Amendment, but rather enforce them.
      Additionally, in their lobbying, GOA spent $1.3 million in both 2011 and 2012, compared to just under $3 million by the NRA in 2011-12. Keep in mind that the NRA is nearly seventeen times larger in members than GOA and has been around far longer. GOA has approximately 300,000 members compared to the NRA’s five million.”


      1. Sheesh.

        I suppose I had one of Julie’s lessons somewhere in my brain.

        (The link leads to a lesson in calligraphy)

  12. In case you didn’t get enough of the Vagina-Sandwich Blogger mentioned by Crusty earlier…

    …in between praising Wilson Philips and any female country acts of the 1990s, and suggesting her daughter’s vagina resembles a near-meatless ham sandwich …

    …she* likes to celebrate the deaths of BLACK THUG CRIMINALS

    *note= i think from the very first it should be obvious that the author is likely a college-age dude. parodying a christian mom-blog is a cute idea, but he can’t really carry the “voice” very far.


      1. Is it so hard to click the provided link? its the second thing down, below dancing on the “thugs” graves.

        1. I agree with your assessment of the blog’s author(s), GIL.

          Additionally, in concordance with your idea that individuals, upon occasion, post comments to deceive the reader, I hazard one guess that our friendly Hyperion himself has indeed partaken of the sandwich in his question.

    2. “In case you didn’t get enough of the Vagina-Sandwich Blogger mentioned by Crusty earlier…”

      Why would I look at a link of Crusty out-Crustying himself?

    3. I agree that it’s got to be a guy. Even Hillary voters don’t think about vaginas that much.

  13. What a pathetic state of affairs where cops are concerned.

    What’s next? The pant shitting coward cop asking for a driver’s license only to shoot the person because they feared they had a gun?

    WTF is going on? Dude, is legally carrying, freely discloses the info. and loses his life? I thought if you obey and cooperate all is supposed to be fine. Yet, I see guys being wrestled to the ground, handcuffed AND shot in the fucking back. I see people being choke held to death. I see guys running away without threatening around only to be gunned down like a dog. I see a kid with a toy get murdered because cops can’t be bothered to take a deep breath. I see homeless guys getting pummeled to death. I don’t see it as just about race, since cops are creating an atmosphere of animosity for all Americans choosing to escalate confrontations.

    What a national disgrace.

    As I wrote elsewhere:

    Part of courage is to remain calm under pressure no matter the danger it poses on you.

    These are not actions of people doing ‘a hard job’. These are the acts of incompetent cowards.

    Heroes my ass.

    1. I don’t see it as just about race, since cops are creating an atmosphere of animosity against all Americans choosing to escalate confrontations rather than diffuse them.

      I don’t want the Reason grammar-stapo on my case.

    2. The last time I got pulled over, and anytime for years now, I made sure I told the cop I had to unbuckle my seatbelt and reach over to get my registration out of the glovebox. I waited for him to say ok go ahead first and I did so slowly and deliberately. I’ve informed my wife specifically how to act in these situations. Any little traffic stop these days can end up with you being dead, for no reason. Most people, sadly, are not aware of the mortal danger they are in anytime they come into contact with cops.

      1. Hyp, I understand. If you’re ever pulled over by a cop, pull your license and registration out of your pocket or wherever you carry it and put it on the dashboard. Don’t give them an excuse.

    3. What’s next? The pant shitting coward cop asking for a driver’s license only to shoot the person because they feared they had a gun?

      That’s not next, it’s already happened. Shooting people complying with an order to provide documents is so 2013.

      1. Well, I can’t see then what possibly the cops can say to defend themselves.

        They flat out are killing people.

        1. Rufus,

          This type of unaccountable/state approved after-the-fact violence might well reach your own country. Learn from what is being accepted as “the new normal” to your south, Sir.

          Perhaps you could obtain the skills necessary to become a politician in order to curtail state sanctioned brutality?

          1. Bah. It’s already here – just on a smaller scale. Plus you Yanks keep hogging all the attention.

            1. Drat.

              *Omits Canada from list of “most desired” locations in which to dwell*

              1. Well, it IS peaceful!

    4. These cops kinda remind me of a wife beater who acts all outraged and indignant because the Mrs, after having endured years of abuse, takes after hubby with a meat cleaver!

    5. ^this

      The default culture for any and all law enforcement types, particularly if they are armed, should be the maxim of self-sacrifice. Their well-being should always come a distant second to the life, liberty, property of the general public. How the fuck is officer safety the primary concern of police departments? If you want to look out for #1 don’t join the force …. I would recommend running for congress as an alternative.

  14. Officer Friendly is rolling a joint in his in grave.

  15. Unless dashcam footage proves that the cop did anything other than what he said he did, the cop was justified.

    Anyone who has any sense knows that during a traffic stop you are supposed to keep your hands where an officer can see them at all times, unless given permission to move them. This is for the LEO’s safety AND YOURS. It is even more critical to do so when you are in possession of a weapon, and as a CWP-holder, Castile should have known this. In Minnesota it is required to have firearms training in order to obtain a CWP, & this type of scenario is covered. You do not tell a LEO that you have a gun and then reach for your permit. You tell the LEO you have a permit and that you are carrying, and then you wait for him to direct you. The second he reached, Castile signed his own death warrant.

    1. If that is the SOP then the SOP is FUBAR and needs to be changed immediately.

      Even if that is SOP i suggest you try the officer anyway and let a jury of the victims peers decide of that SOP was reasonable.

      Following orders should not execuse murder. The fact that it often does just demonstrates the miscarriage of justice we commonly endure

      1. So, it’s “FUBAR” for a LEO who is walking into an unknown situation with multiple real possibilities for negative/dangerous/deadly outcomes (which have played out numerous times) to insist that you keep your hands where they can be seen until directed otherwise…ESPECIALLY if you’ve identified yourself as carrying a weapon. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. Give me a break. This is a tragic scenario, & if Castile had any common sense, or followed his training, then he’d still be alive today.

        1. It is FUBAR for anyone to open fire prior to observing an actual fucking weapon.

          A cop is at my front door looking throug the window. I can see he is armed. Is THAT a threat? How do I know he might not shoot me when he loses sight of my hands as I innocently reach for the doorknob?

          1. When you encounter this situation, there were be no one coming to help you.

        2. Yes it is fucked…if your primary concern as an “LEO” is your own safety you have chosen the wrong career. Danger and self sacrifice are part of the job title fucktard. Shooting down people/civilians during a confrontation you initiate because they didn’t follow “police dept policy” is so god damned wrong on every level it makes me sick.

          That said some people need to be shot by police aka the gay Orlando jihader- I just wish it didn’t take the entire Orlando police dept 3-hours to work up the courage to do it

          I’m sensing a trend

    2. 4schitzngrins,

      Anyone who has any sense knows that during a traffic stop you arenot to commit murder.

      Considering that being murdered is by definition the opposite of being safe, this fundamental understanding is for the LEO’s safety AND YOURS.

      1. LOL…astute analysis.

    3. Unless dashcam footage proves that the Lavish Reynolds was lying, the cop was not justified.

      *Driver reaches for wallet, states he has a gun legally*
      *LEO opens fire.*

      Yeah, no. When you’re a LEO, for both the civilians safety AND your own, you’re supposed to be competent enough to NOT give contradictory instructions!!

  16. The solution is first, get facts. Park your confirmation bias.

  17. Law enforcement is a risky profession and Obama and his sock puppet media have made it even more dangerous with their disrespect and false claims of racism for law enforcement and promoting the notion that attacking the police is justified.
    Most motorists are less than happy when stopped for traffic infractions and are quite frequently resentful because traffic fines are not cheap even for minor infractions. Coupled with the current animosity against the police it’s no wonder there are not more incidents like this.

    1. Risky? Last I checked being a cop didn’t even make the top ten list of most dangerous jobs!

      1. It just feels risky – how can it not when your entire job is to piss everyone off on a daily basis. Add to that the small percentage of bad cops who literally get away with murder while the entire LEO community bend over backward to protect them and you have a profession that feels risky- it’s not traveling salesman risky though

  18. I sent several outraged and indignant e-mails concerning the Castile murder to state legislators. One responded saying he couldn’t believe the comments I had made. I used no profanity. He said the incident was a tragedy. My response is that the Japanese earthquake and tsunami was a tragedy. The Castile murder is not a tragedy. It was a cold, calculated, deliberate act done by a member of a privileged caste who knew he most likely could get away with it. The other cops at the scene were overheard comforting him, telling him this would turn out OK for him, that they “had his back”, the implication being that they were prepared to lie for him as cops always do when closing ranks.

  19. The NRA regularly speaks out within hours of mass-shootings, but now they want to wait for more information?

  20. good when utilized throughout your house, and as a result of this, This program functions to load a tank with softened water, nice.

  21. uptil I saw the receipt which was of $4452 , I accept …that…my mom in-law woz like truley bringing home money part time from their laptop. . there neighbour haz done this for only 9 months and resantly paid the loans on there condo and purchased a gorgeous Cadillac . go to this site …..

    CLICK THIS LINK=====>>

  22. I believe there should be proper investigation for Philando Castile’s death. It dosent matter who killed him. It matter why he has been killed. Everyone has right to know about this news. Thanks for sharing this post. For MP3 Juice Download

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.