E46 BMW Social Directory E46 FAQ 3-Series Discussion Forums BMW Photo Gallery BMW 3-Series Technical Information E46 Fanatics - The Ultimate BMW Resource BMW Vendors General E46 Forum The Tire Rack's Tire Wheel Forum Forced Induction Forum The Off-Topic The E46 BMW Showroom For Sale, For Trade or Wanting to Buy

Welcome to the E46Fanatics forums. E46Fanatics is the premiere website for BMW 3 series owners around the world with interactive forums, a geographical enthusiast directory, photo galleries, and technical information for BMW enthusiasts.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Everything Else > The Off-Topic > General Off-Topic

General Off-Topic
Everything not about BMWs. Posts must be "primetime" safe and in good taste. You must be logged in to see sub-forums.
Click here to browse all new posts.

View Poll Results: que?
<10% could do it 21 23.33%
10 - 50 % 24 26.67%
would def need to be greater than 50 % 36 40.00%
JONJON > 9 10.00%
Voters: 90. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Old 01-10-2013, 10:25 AM   #81
'busa
Registered User
 
'busa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 1,465
My Ride: E90 335i (sold)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bimmerfan08 View Post


It's pointless to contribute here as this is but an internet forum and opinions will be opinions at the end of the day. Rather it's more enjoyable to recognize the inaccuracies and flaws in arguments here.
Your opinion carries little weight then. But it's OK. I don't even need you to reply to my posts. There's plenty of material here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonJon View Post
The large majority of this country does not want any sort of ban.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bimmerfan08 View Post
So just because you think a majority is right everyone else should fall in line? It's a matter of opinion here and you have yours and others have theirs.
You know what, you're right!
__________________
'busa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:25 AM   #82
kaput
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Carlisle, PA
Posts: 748
My Ride: 2002 M3 SMG
Send a message via AIM to kaput
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
We should take up weapons against Wendy's and Chick-Fil-A?
When did I say that? All I said was your version of fighting for rights and what you feel is wrong in the world, does not work. Both of those businesses are still kicking strong, same with papa john's. You boycott, they don't care.

Granted, the issue was not really that big of a deal, well, to you it was. But issues that are as large as say, repealing or over riding the second amendment, will not be met with a boycott, nor would it be effective.
__________________

2002 M3
kaput is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:26 AM   #83
JonJon
Tinfoilhatatarian
 
JonJon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: One of the most evil states ever to exist
Posts: 3,475
My Ride: .
Send a message via AIM to JonJon
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
You know what, you're right!
We don't live in a democracy Busa.
__________________
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
I agree with JonJon.
JonJon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:27 AM   #84
'busa
Registered User
 
'busa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 1,465
My Ride: E90 335i (sold)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaput View Post
When did I say that? All I said was your version of fighting for rights and what you feel is wrong in the world, does not work. Both of those businesses are still kicking strong, same with papa john's. You boycott, they don't care.
Right, because the intent of the boycott was to ruin two fast food giants beyond repair. Come on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaput View Post
Granted, the issue was not really that big of a deal, well, to you it was. But issues that are as large as say, repealing or over riding the second amendment, will not be met with a boycott, nor would it be effective.
And yet, no such thing appears to be anywhere near likely.
__________________
'busa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:27 AM   #85
'busa
Registered User
 
'busa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 1,465
My Ride: E90 335i (sold)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonJon View Post
We don't live in a democracy Busa.
Tell it to bimmerfan!
__________________
'busa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:30 AM   #86
Xcelratr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: So Cal - 310
Posts: 958
My Ride: 04 330Ci ZHP
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
If 3% of the country is so opposed to the direction that 51% of the country want the country to go in that they're willing to take up arms, they need to reevaluate their values and priorities.
They could get on a boat and go to some far off land, oppress the savages that live there, and found a new country based on their own ideals. Unfortunately, every place is taken these days, lol. All the Plymouth Rocks have been claimed. And a superpower-backed nation creation (a la Israel) is unlikely to happen again.

However, your point is well taken that there's an established legal process for enacting and/or resisting change in this country. There are even tolerable forms of trying to influence that process, obedient and otherwise. One would hope that the unhappy folks would avail themselves of those avenues before choosing armed conflict as a course of action.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bimmerfan08 View Post
So just because you think a majority is right everyone else should fall in line? It's a matter of opinion here and you have yours and others have theirs.

As I always say, who the fvck am I to tell someone what they can't and can do. It's not my place so long as my personal life is not being harmed. Grow a pair and stop being sucked into pussified America.
You're completely missing the point.

Most of those that wish to limit guns agree with you as far as not telling others what they can and can't do. The difference is they see guns as "harming their personal lives", therefore they consider it their place to try to limit access to them, just as you would if you saw them that way.

Wherever anyone falls on the spectrum of this debate, treating everyone that disagrees with your POV as someone with broken values is counterproductive. Some people that want increased limits on guns are genuinely frightened for their own safety and that of their families. They are very pro-freedom and pro-rights and patriotic, but because of their fear, they consider limiting guns to be a net good for society. If you attack those people based on their patriotism or accuse them of failing to support freedom, you're never going to get anywhere with them. They believe they're increasing freedom because they're protecting their right to walk down the street without getting shot.

There are other people who have different motivations, values and intentions. Career politicians are pandering for media exposure, campaign contributions and votes. LEOs are trying to figure out how to get in fewer shootouts. Media people are trying to get ratings and sell advertising. Gun industry peeps are trying to not lose their income stream. Some criminals want guns limited so they'll have fewer armed victims to deal with, some criminals don't want guns limited because they're afraid fewer guns in circulation will make it harder to obtain one to use in crimes. Each of these groups have to be dealt with differently in order to influence them.

Throwing the "freedoms and rights" argument at someone that is afarid for their own (or their family's) safety isn't going to accomplish anything.

Even JJ, who is a Class 1, 5-star, brand-name nutjob, has stated clearly that if his daughter (Mini JJ?) was threatened, all other considerations can GTFO. If JJ is protecting his kid, don't expect him to expend a lot of thought worrying about your "freedoms and rights".

When you want to influence someone's judgement, attacking their motivations or values is inefficient. The opposite is true, as well.
__________________
----------------------------------------------
Quote:
As a juror, do you think the trial was a publicity stunt?

Yes
----------------------------------------------

Last edited by Xcelratr; 01-10-2013 at 10:47 AM. Reason: Typo
Xcelratr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:32 AM   #87
kaput
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Carlisle, PA
Posts: 748
My Ride: 2002 M3 SMG
Send a message via AIM to kaput
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
And yet, no such thing appears to be anywhere near likely.
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/publ...ssault-weapons

Yea, it's not intended to ban weapons and override the second amendment...

Not at all...
__________________

2002 M3
kaput is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:34 AM   #88
JonJon
Tinfoilhatatarian
 
JonJon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: One of the most evil states ever to exist
Posts: 3,475
My Ride: .
Send a message via AIM to JonJon
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
Tell it to bimmerfan!
I'm sure he means the same as me. The voices are not being heard by our elected officials.
Those that work for us are following their own agendas.

They need to understand that they work for US, not their children, not their wives and not their own opinions:

Like this piece of sh!t
http://articles.philly.com/2012-12-2...ontrol-casey/3

Quote:
Over the weekend, his wife of nearly 30 years, Terese, challenged him on the issue and urged him to support new gun laws, Casey said.
"She confronted me several times," he said. "She was very direct and persistent."
__________________
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
I agree with JonJon.

Last edited by JonJon; 01-10-2013 at 10:39 AM.
JonJon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:35 AM   #89
kaput
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Carlisle, PA
Posts: 748
My Ride: 2002 M3 SMG
Send a message via AIM to kaput
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xcelratr View Post
They could get on a boat and go to some far off land, oppress the savages that live there, and found a new country based on their own ideals. Unfortunately, every place is taken these days, lol. All the Plymouth Rocks have been claimed. And a superpower-backed nation creation (a la Israel) is unlikely to happen again.

However, your point is well taken that there's an established legal process for enacting and/or resisting change in this country. There are even tolerable forms of trying to influence that process, obedient and otherwise. One would hope that the unhappy folks would avail themselves of those avenues before choosing armed conflict as a course of action.



You're completely missing the point.

Most of those that wish to limit guns agree with you as far as not telling others what they can and can't do. The difference is they see guns as "harming their personal lives", therefore they consider it their place to try to limit access to them, just as you would if you saw them that way.

Wherever anyone falls on the spectrum of this debate, treating everyone that disagrees with your POV as someone with broken values is counterproductive. Some people that want increased limits on guns are genuinely frightened for their own safety and that of their families. They are very pro-freedom and pro-rights and patriotic, but because of their fear, they consider limiting guns to be a net good for society. If you attack those peope based on their patriotism or accuse them of failing to support freedom, you're never going to get anywhere with them. They believe they're increasing freedom because they're protecting their right to walk down the street without getting shot.

There are other people who have different motivations, values and intentions. Career politicians are pandering for media exposure, campaign contributions and votes. LEOs are trying to figure out how to get in fewer shootouts. Media people are trying to get ratings and sell advertising. Gun industry peeps are trying to not lose their income stream. Some criminals want guns limited so they'll have fewer armed victims to deal with, some criminals don't want guns limited because they're afraid fewer guns in circulation will make it harder to obtain one to use in crimes. Each of these groups have to be dealt with differently in order to influence them.

Throwing the "freedoms and rights" argument at someone that is afarid for their own (or their family's) safety isn't going to accomplish anything.

Even JJ, who is a Class 1, 5-star, brand-name nutjob, has stated clearly that if his daughter (Mini JJ?) was threatened, all other considerations can GTFO. If JJ is protecting his kid, don't expect him to expend a lot of thought worrying about your "freedoms and rights".

When you want to influence someone's judgement, attacking their motivations or values is inefficient. The opposite is true, as well.
And the ignorance of those opposing firearms, making them the bad guy is the real issue. I personally wish that we did not jump to this debate so quickly, but I knew it would happen.

Taking "freedoms and rights" away from those that are not scared isn't going to accomplish anything.
__________________

2002 M3
kaput is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:38 AM   #90
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 508
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaput View Post
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/publ...ssault-weapons

Yea, it's not intended to ban weapons and override the second amendment...

Not at all...
Feinstein has been against projectile weapons since the creation of the slingshot. Because one Senator, who has always been against guns, proposes something doesn't mean it will come to fruition. Have you read the proposals? Banning flash suppressors, thumbhole stocks, and requiring photographing and fingerprinting. This thing is DOA.
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:41 AM   #91
'busa
Registered User
 
'busa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 1,465
My Ride: E90 335i (sold)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaput View Post
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/publ...ssault-weapons

Yea, it's not intended to ban weapons and override the second amendment...

Not at all...
Two things.

  1. How likely is it to pass?
  2. Do you think ANY restrictions should be made on what civilians are allowed to possess? Anti-aircraft missiles ok? Are we not allowed to have a discussion about what should be allowed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xcelratr View Post
However, your point is well taken that there's an established legal process for enacting and/or resisting change in this country. There are even tolerable forms of trying to influence that process, obedient and otherwise. One would hope that the unhappy folks would avail themselves of those avenues before choosing armed conflict as a course of action.
Of course they will, but this bravado about taking up arms is kind of funny.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xcelratr View Post
Wherever anyone falls on the spectrum of this debate, treating everyone that disagrees with your POV as someone with broken values is counterproductive. Some people that want increased limits on guns are genuinely frightened for their own safety and that of their families. They are very pro-freedom and pro-rights and patriotic, but because of their fear, they consider limiting guns to be a net good for society. If you attack those peope based on their patriotism or accuse them of failing to support freedom, you're never going to get anywhere with them. They believe they're increasing freedom because they're protecting their right to walk down the street without getting shot.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Xcelratr View Post
There are other people who have different motivations, values and intentions. Career politicians are pandering for media exposure, campaign contributions and votes. LEOs are trying to figure out how to get in fewer shootouts. Media people are trying to get ratings and sell advertising. Gun industry peeps are trying to not lose their income stream. Some criminals want guns limited so they'll have fewer armed victims to deal with, some criminals don't want guns limited because they're afraid fewer guns in circulation will make it harder to obtain one to use in crimes. Each of these groups have to be dealt with differently in order to influence them.

Throwing the "freedoms and rights" argument at someone that is afarid for their own (or their family's) safety isn't going to accomplish anything.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Xcelratr View Post
Even JJ, who is a Class 1, 5-star, brand-name nutjob, has stated clearly that if his daughter (Mini JJ?) was threatened, all other considerations can GTFO. If JJ is protecting his kid, don't expect him to expend a lot of thought worrying about your "freedoms and rights".
and true.
__________________
'busa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:42 AM   #92
JonJon
Tinfoilhatatarian
 
JonJon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: One of the most evil states ever to exist
Posts: 3,475
My Ride: .
Send a message via AIM to JonJon
Quote:
Originally Posted by badfast View Post
Have you read the proposals? Banning flash suppressors, thumbhole stocks, and requiring photographing and fingerprinting. This thing is DOA.
Where you born after 1994?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal...lt_Weapons_Ban

Didn't you know? Barrel Shrouds and Flash Suppressors will enable guns to kill you twice while consuming your soul
__________________
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
I agree with JonJon.

Last edited by JonJon; 01-10-2013 at 10:44 AM.
JonJon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:43 AM   #93
'busa
Registered User
 
'busa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 1,465
My Ride: E90 335i (sold)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonJon View Post
What makes this person a piece of sh!t?
__________________
'busa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:44 AM   #94
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 508
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonJon View Post
Did you not pay attention to the political lessons learned?
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:46 AM   #95
JonJon
Tinfoilhatatarian
 
JonJon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: One of the most evil states ever to exist
Posts: 3,475
My Ride: .
Send a message via AIM to JonJon
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
What makes this person a piece of sh!t?
Take your pick... flip flopping on the promises he made to us voters to get into office.
Ignoring his constituents stern stances while listening to his wife, thinking about his own children (which are surrounded by armed guards), not being educated on the matter before forming an opinion...
__________________
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
I agree with JonJon.

Last edited by JonJon; 01-10-2013 at 10:47 AM.
JonJon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:54 AM   #96
'busa
Registered User
 
'busa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 1,465
My Ride: E90 335i (sold)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonJon View Post
Take your pick... flip flopping on the promises he made to us voters to get into office.
Ignoring his constituents stern stances while listening to his wife, thinking about his own children (which are surrounded by armed guards), not being educated on the matter before forming an opinion...
Is a person a piece of sh!t when he changes his mind to agree with you, too?
Has there been a proper poll of his constituents?
He's a piece of sh!t for letting his life partner have an influence on him?
Thinking about his own children makes him a piece of sh!t?
People who are inadequately educated (according to subjective criteria) are pieces of sh!t?

Or is he just a piece of sh!t because he did something you don't like in a field about which you feel emotional about and tend to make general statements and have kneejerk reactions?
__________________
'busa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:59 AM   #97
casino is no lie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: CDT
Posts: 76
My Ride: M54B30
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
Is a person a piece of sh!t when he changes his mind to agree with you, too?
You mean like Gitmo? No... then we have to hear them bitch about how he broke his promises even though it's in alignment with their beliefs.
__________________
casino is no lie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 11:01 AM   #98
evolved
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Posts: 816
My Ride: 2011 BMW 135i
Quote:
Originally Posted by casino is no lie View Post
You mean like Gitmo? No... then we have to hear them bitch about how he broke his promises even though it's in alignment with their beliefs.



"He's going to close Gitmo.....what an outrage!!!"

"He didn't close Gitmo......I am, again, outraged!!"
__________________

Present
2011 BMW 135i - BSM
Past
2006 Mazdaspeed 6 GT, 2000 BMW 323ci, 2003 Evolution VIII, 1995 Nissan 240sx w/ SR20DET

E46Sig

Last edited by evolved; 01-10-2013 at 11:02 AM.
evolved is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 11:01 AM   #99
JonJon
Tinfoilhatatarian
 
JonJon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: One of the most evil states ever to exist
Posts: 3,475
My Ride: .
Send a message via AIM to JonJon
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
Is a person a piece of sh!t when he changes his mind to agree with you, too? Not me specifically
Has there been a proper poll of his constituents? Yes
He's a piece of sh!t for letting his life partner have an influence on him? When it overrides his constituents, yes
Thinking about his own children makes him a piece of sh!t? When a hypocrite, yes
People who are inadequately educated (according to subjective criteria) are pieces of sh!t? Yes. He thinks the 2nd A protects hunting
.... I like pink
__________________
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
I agree with JonJon.

Last edited by JonJon; 01-10-2013 at 11:02 AM.
JonJon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 12:01 PM   #100
Raymond42262
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The South
Posts: 453
My Ride: Is German
Quote:
Originally Posted by badfast View Post
Feinstein has been against projectile weapons since the creation of the slingshot. Because one Senator, who has always been against guns, proposes something doesn't mean it will come to fruition. Have you read the proposals? Banning flash suppressors, thumbhole stocks, and requiring photographing and fingerprinting. This thing is DOA.
But she has a concealed weapons permit........she carries a revolver in her purse according to the radio this morning.

And she has police protection and bullet resistant chauffeured limousines in Washington and probably has a police detail watching her home in California.
__________________
"The grand essentials to happiness in this life are something to do, someone to love, and something to hope for."....Joseph Addison
--------------------
Raymond42262 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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 On
Censor is ON





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
(c) 1999 - 2011 performanceIX Inc - privacy policy - terms of use