Home Forums Articles How To's FAQ Register
Go Back   Xoutpost.com > BMW SAV Forums > X5 (E53) Forum
Fluid Motor Union
User Name
Password
Member List Premier Membership Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring....
Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #191  
Old 10-24-2017, 06:38 PM
andrewwynn's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 10,817
andrewwynn will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcredliner View Post
Guns in America: Attitudes and Experiences of Americans | Pew Research Center

The above study is quite long but it is very worthwhile to read a couple of times. Whether you are for or against gun control the discussion must start with a common base of understanding.
Those types of study should be read by both sides, absolutely agree.
Those against stricter gun control largely base their position on second amendment rights rather than the facts that measure what the majority of Americans believe should be done, where there is already bipartisan support for changes and factual, current and supportive studies.
I agree, but I also insist (as i've mentioned) that the anti-gun crowd base their position on non-facts. I think that EACH side should be shown unbiased factual data, they can draw their own conclusions.
IMO pro gun believers retreat to 2nd amendment rights when their opinions are dispelled by the facts. Those that want more gun control are very willing to have a non partisan discussion about issues. It is clearly the pro gun folks that adamantly refuse to consider working together.
I could see this being the case, but I seldom see any anti-gun 'facts' that would be against their beliefs. Not an accurate statement from my perspective "very willing no partisan discussion" from the left. I would love to see a fact-based less-gun argument. During the period in the usa where gun crime has dropped in half, gun ownership has gone up quite a lot, and millions more have CCW. Where restrictive laws disallow self-defense tend to be the places where gun crime remained higher when 'the rest of' the usa gun crime has dropped more.

Do you have examples of somebody bringing forth a gun restriction that has evidence to reduce gun crime?

My contention is the 'the majority who want more gun control' is simply based on emotional reaction to mass media hype. That majority is simply misled, that is clearly evidenced by studies such as done by pew research:



While I agree that the pro-gun folk are equally at-odds with actually knowing the truth (example: claim that crime rates drop precipitously when ccw is introduced etc), the facts that i've researched definitely land closer (by chance) to the side of the pro-gun crowd. The anti-gun crowd will say more guns = higher gun crime rate and that is not born out with facts.
I certainly respect those that believe the constitution should never be changed but the foundation of a democracy is the will of the people.
There are forces behind the option of changing the constitution and it's designed to be difficult to change so it won't ebb and flow with the emotional response of something bad. If the anti-gun forces can use a purely factual argument they can back with examples (such as other countries that passed certain laws that had a concrete result without negative side effects), the population as a whole will get behind them.
One statistic that I haven't mention should be mentioned: 89% of gun owners are willing to admit that owning a gun is very or somewhat important to their overall identity. When combined with protection as the primary reason to own a gun and that a very high percentage of gun owned are revolvers, IMO it doesn't paint a pretty picture for our children.
That 'identity' = pure unadulterated freedom, of course it's important to their identity. I have no idea why revolvers are a problem in this case.

I think that people should have more training required before owning a gun, i think it would be fair to have different levels of training required for different types of gun based on their intrinsic danger. If pro control people were to introduce this type of sound, logical arguments without the insistence of making it more restrictive than needed, i think there could be common ground to support gun laws that are designed specifically to just make gun use safer.

I see no problem for the next generation, as with the previous 10 or 12 generations. Gun violence was rising at horrific rates 20 or 30 years ago, whatever was done to change that trend worked and gun crimes are less than half what they were. The anti-gun forces refuse to acknowledge this and want to believe that it's just as bad today and there is some explosion in gun violence happening today which it is not.

If they used more honest reporting of the facts "even though gun violence is half what it was 20 years ago, we contend that 5 per 100,000 gun homicides is too high for a 1st world country and we need to make it stay on that downward trend rather than just wait for it to get worse". Honest pro-gun people can 'get behind' that argument.

The absolute fable told by 'the media' that there is an epidemic of gun violence in the usa is what keeps the pro-gun side from coming to the discussion table. If you were to poll the population at large they will confidently tell you that gun violence is out of control and rising at exponential rates because that's what the media tells them and they don't know where to find the truth.
I applaud countries that have rationally made changes based on current gun violence as intelligently adapting and focusing on a better future than protecting an 'ancient' past.
Credit where credit is due. Do you have an example of an intelligent law in a different country that had a demonstrable change in the positive?

Are you saying you applaud Australia for spending $500 million to reduce the gun ownership by something close to 25% (after buying 700,000 guns or so, that only reduced the # of guns by 20-33%). After 20 years, the gun-related homicides are statistically not different than before the ban, there was a period of about 8 years where non-fatal gun related crime was up to 50% higher than pre-ban.

The statistics that i've seen only showed 'no practical difference' in gun crime after major restrictions on guns were implemented. I'm not suggesting giving up or throwing in the towel. There was 'something' that caused a major deflection in the gun crime rates in the usa about 20-25 years ago, and that should be studied in depth to determine if we can 'turn up the volume' on the factors that influenced the change.

Some candidates of the prime forces that corrected the rising gun crime rates in the usa:
  1. Crack cocaine having a peak use and dropping
  2. Baby boomer's babies aging out of the violent age group
  3. Abortion legalization; reducing the population (at a higher rate in the high-crime areas than others, logically = less criminals, less crime)
  4. Lead paint being removed

Note that none of those things had anything to do with gun-control but the factors that affect violence regardless of the tool used to be violent.
answers inline.

Summary: when reasonable action is suggested from the 'gun control side' and when backed with facts, and especially when it has nothing to do with guns (since it's the metal state of the gun operator that is the actual problem), There is positive action. I think a state-by-state assessment of which laws have actually shown a positive effect would be a great starting point. (example of harmless to 2nd amendment, make gun owners responsible for managing their guns; their gun causes harm, they are proportionally responsible for the injury/loss). There can be a lot done to help reduce gun injury without restricting legal use of guns. Improve people's lives; better school, better jobs, and get communities to pay attention to their own (to have a pulse on who might be acting nutso before they take out a McD as the first symptom).

I would love to see any 'gun law' that could suppress gun violence, but the examples that the anti-gun crowd come up with are usually laughable at best as they are trying to solve the symptom not the disease. It will be social conditioning that actually makes any real change, not any 'gun control' law.
__________________
2011 E70 • N55 (me)
2012 E70 • N63 (wife)
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links

  #192  
Old 04-18-2018, 12:51 PM
andrewwynn's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 10,817
andrewwynn will become famous soon enough
So I finally solved my version.

Not saying it will be perfect for you but it's good.







It fits two pistols, it's possible to access from both seated in the driver's seat and from outside the driver's door.

It gives me just enough room for my left foot to fit to the left so I can stretch that leg a bit.

It works for loaded CCW or unloaded no permit.
__________________
2011 E70 • N55 (me)
2012 E70 • N63 (wife)
Reply With Quote
  #193  
Old 04-18-2018, 02:13 PM
Overboost's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Huntersville, NC
Posts: 3,266
Overboost is on a distinguished road
I love the spring assist on the box strut. I still have to try that on the X rear struts.
Reply With Quote
  #194  
Old 04-19-2018, 06:00 PM
andrewwynn's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 10,817
andrewwynn will become famous soon enough
A+ on being observant. I have to do the spring for my hatch also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
2011 E70 • N55 (me)
2012 E70 • N63 (wife)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:19 PM.
vBulletin, Copyright 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
© 2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved. Xoutpost.com is a private enthusiast site not associated with BMW AG.
The BMW name, marks, M stripe logo, and Roundel logo as well as X3, X5 and X6 designations used in the pages of this Web Site are the property of BMW AG.
This web site is not sponsored or affiliated in any way with BMW AG or any of its subsidiaries.