Home Forums Articles How To's FAQ Register
Go Back   Xoutpost.com > Off-topic > The Lounge
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
  #11  
Old 12-25-2012, 01:40 AM
blktoptrvl's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Various
Posts: 1,223
blktoptrvl is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlickGT1 View Post
Blame the retard ass mother and the rest of the family for not securing those guns.
Unfortunately, this does not seem to me to be the exception, but the rule. People who should not have guns are almost always supplied in one way or another by someone who should have known better or somehow been more responsible. We can fix the fault on them, but the dead don't care who is to blame.
__________________
2006 X5 Sport 4.4i
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links

  #12  
Old 12-25-2012, 02:36 AM
PersonaNonGrata's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 7,749
PersonaNonGrata is on a distinguished road
Obviously this is an extremely complex problem and I am of the firm belief that it has very little to do with guns. They are just the instrumentality. The root of the problem is the inability of some people to cope with life, their depression, their sorry lot in life, or whatever. It astounds me that someone who is mad at Mommy, or got fired from a job, or just feels like the world shits on them that the response deemed most appropriate is to kill innocents or anyone at all for that matter. Before we even get to the issue of gun control I think the bigger issue is this and more broadly, society in general, and some people's view that responding with unspeakable violence is appropriate.

Mental illness is a tricky thing as far as gun control goes. There have been calls for the mentally ill to be prohibited from owning or possessing guns. Fair enough but first, what exactly the definition of "mentally ill"? Secondly, how is it to be determined that once someone is mentally ill that they not get a gun? There is not currently and possibly no way to integrate mental illness or psychiatric/psychological treatment with a background check. I think there are practical impediments to that as well as federal and state privacy laws concerning medical records. Also, how would it ever be recorded, if it could at all, if someone seeks psychological counseling for dark thoughts? They could go under a false name and unless there was the need for a Tarasoff warning, the psychologist would never report such contact. The bottom line is that creating some kind of database of the "mentally ill" is near impossible. Even being able to keep them from buying guns is difficult and when a mentally ill person can murder the owner and take her guns, access cannot be prevented.

As far as so-called "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines, they are menacing and scary looking but are not the problem. Since the Clinton ban sunsetted and such weapons and magazines were again legal federally (but still banned by many states), there was no increase in crime. In fact, I can tell you as a criminal justice professional that very, very few violent crimes if any are committed with such weapons. I'm talking about the crime that happens every day, not the tragic events like Newtown or Colorado. Furthermore, bans on "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines already exist in many states. As a matter of fact, Connecticut has a ban on "assault weapons".

There are millions of guns and millions of "assault weapons" and even more millions of high capacity magazines in the hands of law abiding owners. It may seem trite but it is true that it must be considered that the vast, vast majority of these guns never kill anything more than paper targets. I know that at moments like now when the world mourns 27 lives lost that even one "assault weapon" seems like too many but the fact that millions are owned without lethal results cannot be ignored. The suggestion to take them way from lawful owners is downright unconstitutional. The United States Constitution forbids uncompensated takings from private citizens, whether it be a gun or your land. Taking in that manner is un-American. Couple that with the Second Amendment and that idea goes nowhere.

"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." I totally agree with this. I do not envision vigilantes slinging guns all over town looking for a gunfight. The notion of armed police in schools is not new at all. Many schools have "School Resource Officers". It was mentioned that Columbine had such SROs in the schools and that didn't help. Perhaps it did help to prevent even more death. Perhaps if Adam Lanza was confronted by a police officer or other armed person he would have not killed as many people or at all. Perhaps if James Holmes had encountered armed resistance he would have retreated. I have heard from law enforcement sources that the shooter in the mall in Oregon was confronted by an armed citizen whereupon the shooter took his own life, resulting in two tragic deaths but it could have been far, far worse.

The thing that we should all agree on is that these mass killers are cowards. Why else would they do what they do? Why else do they choose the most helpless of victims? Because they are cowards who do not expect resistance, if there was someone there, a good guy with a gun, if nothing else, the killer's focus changes from offensive to defensive. He could be distracted enough to allow for people to escape. He could be forced to retreat in the face of live fire in his direction. He could be neutralized. The notion that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun is stating a simple fact. You do not repel a gun attack with a stern finger wag or good intentions. The simple fact is that to stop a lethal attack requires use of lethal force. If you don't like that, too bad. That's how it's done. It's not nice. It's not pleasant. It is the truth. I have participated in "active shooter" training at schools to prepare for such events. It's an unfortunate reality we have to do this but I can tell you, it is necessary and when you're in the heat of the moment you realize what it takes to end such an attack and it requires enormous violence of action to end.

Don't get me wrong. I am a parent of a little one and every time I hear the news or read of the murders it makes me sick to my stomach and brings tears to my eyes. I am also a gun owner and work in law enforcement. I believe in peoples' rights to keep and bear arms. I see the results of what criminals do to law abiding people. Criminals are not stopped by any rules, waiting periods, or background checks. Criminals do whatever they want and hope that their victims do not have the will or the means to defend themselves.

So what do I think would help? I believe that we do have to have a frank discussion of the issues and chief among them is what our society values and how our society has changed. Is it video games? Movies? Television? I don't have the answer to that but as I stated earlier, we have to address the fact that some people choose to solve their problems with violence. I believe in background checks. It is an overused generalization that there are gunshow loopholes and that you can buy a gun on the Internet without any checks. There are some states that are more lax on background checks but by and large, most states have background checks in place, even at gunshows. Buying guns on the Internet does not mean it arrives on your doorstep. Purchases like this must be completed at a local federally licensed dealer. The Internet seller must ship to the dealer where the buyer will complete paperwork and any background checks. I have made two such purchases. So, I would agree that background checks are a good idea across the board.

The biggest issue is the mental health issue. It seems inevitable that after such a shooting that the shooter is remembered as being "odd" or having some sort of mental instability. Why is it always after the fact? Well, is it realistic to preemptively detain someone because a classmate thinks he is strange and possible dangerous? I don't think we can do that. Mental healthcare is woefully underfunded and too few resources exist in general much less for those who might be prone to a mass shooting. The question would be how we would improve those resources and how we would identify those who need it to prevent shootings. Is it possible? I sure hope so.

For those who do not understand why we own guns, that is not for you to understand just like it is not for me to understand why you like a certain kind of music, food, vacation destination, or the way you choose to vote. Your not understanding why gun ownership is enjoyed does not mean it should be abolished. Saying that there is no purpose to owning an AR-15 style rifle and high capacity magazines is your opinion and I would beg to differ. I find I have many purposes to owning such rifles, the relevance of which you would disagree but none the less, it is my right to own them. Your disagreement is of no consequence to me just as you might dismiss some of my views that do not concur with yours.

One final point: My daughter goes to school. It is terrifying to think that someone would harm her or the other children. That is a reality whether it be a gunman or a kidnapper. The world is a pretty crappy place sometimes. Do I want to go to the school and stand guard? Absolutely! Would I be armed while doing so? Absolutely! If a bad guy with a gun were to visit, a good guy with a gun would try to stop him.
__________________

Last edited by PersonaNonGrata; 12-25-2012 at 02:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-25-2012, 03:14 AM
Dannyell's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hinckley OH: America de Nord
Posts: 1,347
Dannyell is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by blondboinsd View Post
I absolutely support the following:
-Tougher Back round Checks with MANDATORY training (Including most importantly those selling online AND at Gun Shows) because currently by most estimates only 60% of those purchasing a weapon are subject to a back round check making it easy to circumvent the system and purchase a weapon
-Expanded State Reporting to create improved communication between states
-The creation (and strict enforcement) of a "prohibited individuals list" which bans people for various reasons (prior Felon with weapons charges, mentally ill etc.) from owning any gun in any state for any reason
-The Complete banning of Assault Weapons and High Capacity Magazines because they really have absolutely no relevance in today's modernized society
Completely agree...unfortunately the NRA wants to arm everyone to defend against everyone else > thus the continuous carnage.

These shootings should not even come as a surprise, because we love our guns and we seem unwilling to implement laws based on today's society.

I know one thing tho...if and when teachers are armed, that is when I keep my kids home.
__________________
01 4.4


P5 card hacked
'our curr€ncy, your problem'
Bavarian Motor Wrong
:
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-25-2012, 12:16 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,735
SlickGT1 is on a distinguished road
Persona, well said.

Those that think banning guns will solve problems, you really should do some research. When you ban all guns, only the criminals would have them.

Do some stats on Texas, gun violence there is less than where you live, factoring on population.

My quote below stands for this topic as well.

Let's put some perspective on this. We should ban spoons. They give people diabetes.
__________________
2006 4.8is, Black on White.

"The older we grow the greater becomes our wonder at how much ignorance one can contain without bursting one's clothes." - Mark Twain

Unlock OBC post 5
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-25-2012, 12:47 PM
blondboinsd's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,823
blondboinsd is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlickGT1 View Post
The only way to stop a bad person with a gun, is a good person with a gun. Simple as that.

It is too easy for a criminal to get a gun. For me, NYC at least, I had to go through some crazy shit to get a rifle permit. I am still waiting for results on a pistol permit, over a year. So my home defence is just a shotty. I would rather have a handgun. But the laws in NYC make it extreme for me to get anything relating to a gun. Now if the rest of the states would follow that, it would be nice. Because a criminal, goes to some lax ass state, gets a gun at Walmart, and does whatever the hell they need to do with it.

It isn't about assault rifles either. You think that shit bag couldn't do this damage with a glock?

Blame the retard ass mother and the rest of the family for not securing those guns.

I keep wondering if this type of carnage would go down the same in Texas. You know the place where every fifth person carries a piece. Where there is a big chance those same teachers have a few revolvers in their desks.
it has happened in Texas. Remember Ft Hood?
__________________
The Present:
2014 Audi Q5 TDI Prestige
The Past:
2013 Lexus GS350
2013 VW Golf TDI
2007 BMW X5 4.8i LOADED & Loved
2009 VW Jetta
2008 VW Touareg VR6
2005 BMW X5 3.0i
2005 BMW Z4 3.0i
2004 BMW X5 3.0i
2003 BMW 325i
2000 Ford Explorer Eddie Bauer 4x4
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-25-2012, 12:53 PM
blondboinsd's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,823
blondboinsd is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by PersonaNonGrata View Post
Obviously this is an extremely complex problem and I am of the firm belief that it has very little to do with guns. They are just the instrumentality. The root of the problem is the inability of some people to cope with life, their depression, their sorry lot in life, or whatever. It astounds me that someone who is mad at Mommy, or got fired from a job, or just feels like the world shits on them that the response deemed most appropriate is to kill innocents or anyone at all for that matter. Before we even get to the issue of gun control I think the bigger issue is this and more broadly, society in general, and some people's view that responding with unspeakable violence is appropriate.

Mental illness is a tricky thing as far as gun control goes. There have been calls for the mentally ill to be prohibited from owning or possessing guns. Fair enough but first, what exactly the definition of "mentally ill"? Secondly, how is it to be determined that once someone is mentally ill that they not get a gun? There is not currently and possibly no way to integrate mental illness or psychiatric/psychological treatment with a background check. I think there are practical impediments to that as well as federal and state privacy laws concerning medical records. Also, how would it ever be recorded, if it could at all, if someone seeks psychological counseling for dark thoughts? They could go under a false name and unless there was the need for a Tarasoff warning, the psychologist would never report such contact. The bottom line is that creating some kind of database of the "mentally ill" is near impossible. Even being able to keep them from buying guns is difficult and when a mentally ill person can murder the owner and take her guns, access cannot be prevented.

As far as so-called "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines, they are menacing and scary looking but are not the problem. Since the Clinton ban sunsetted and such weapons and magazines were again legal federally (but still banned by many states), there was no increase in crime. In fact, I can tell you as a criminal justice professional that very, very few violent crimes if any are committed with such weapons. I'm talking about the crime that happens every day, not the tragic events like Newtown or Colorado. Furthermore, bans on "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines already exist in many states. As a matter of fact, Connecticut has a ban on "assault weapons".

There are millions of guns and millions of "assault weapons" and even more millions of high capacity magazines in the hands of law abiding owners. It may seem trite but it is true that it must be considered that the vast, vast majority of these guns never kill anything more than paper targets. I know that at moments like now when the world mourns 27 lives lost that even one "assault weapon" seems like too many but the fact that millions are owned without lethal results cannot be ignored. The suggestion to take them way from lawful owners is downright unconstitutional. The United States Constitution forbids uncompensated takings from private citizens, whether it be a gun or your land. Taking in that manner is un-American. Couple that with the Second Amendment and that idea goes nowhere.

"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." I totally agree with this. I do not envision vigilantes slinging guns all over town looking for a gunfight. The notion of armed police in schools is not new at all. Many schools have "School Resource Officers". It was mentioned that Columbine had such SROs in the schools and that didn't help. Perhaps it did help to prevent even more death. Perhaps if Adam Lanza was confronted by a police officer or other armed person he would have not killed as many people or at all. Perhaps if James Holmes had encountered armed resistance he would have retreated. I have heard from law enforcement sources that the shooter in the mall in Oregon was confronted by an armed citizen whereupon the shooter took his own life, resulting in two tragic deaths but it could have been far, far worse.

The thing that we should all agree on is that these mass killers are cowards. Why else would they do what they do? Why else do they choose the most helpless of victims? Because they are cowards who do not expect resistance, if there was someone there, a good guy with a gun, if nothing else, the killer's focus changes from offensive to defensive. He could be distracted enough to allow for people to escape. He could be forced to retreat in the face of live fire in his direction. He could be neutralized. The notion that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun is stating a simple fact. You do not repel a gun attack with a stern finger wag or good intentions. The simple fact is that to stop a lethal attack requires use of lethal force. If you don't like that, too bad. That's how it's done. It's not nice. It's not pleasant. It is the truth. I have participated in "active shooter" training at schools to prepare for such events. It's an unfortunate reality we have to do this but I can tell you, it is necessary and when you're in the heat of the moment you realize what it takes to end such an attack and it requires enormous violence of action to end.

Don't get me wrong. I am a parent of a little one and every time I hear the news or read of the murders it makes me sick to my stomach and brings tears to my eyes. I am also a gun owner and work in law enforcement. I believe in peoples' rights to keep and bear arms. I see the results of what criminals do to law abiding people. Criminals are not stopped by any rules, waiting periods, or background checks. Criminals do whatever they want and hope that their victims do not have the will or the means to defend themselves.

So what do I think would help? I believe that we do have to have a frank discussion of the issues and chief among them is what our society values and how our society has changed. Is it video games? Movies? Television? I don't have the answer to that but as I stated earlier, we have to address the fact that some people choose to solve their problems with violence. I believe in background checks. It is an overused generalization that there are gunshow loopholes and that you can buy a gun on the Internet without any checks. There are some states that are more lax on background checks but by and large, most states have background checks in place, even at gunshows. Buying guns on the Internet does not mean it arrives on your doorstep. Purchases like this must be completed at a local federally licensed dealer. The Internet seller must ship to the dealer where the buyer will complete paperwork and any background checks. I have made two such purchases. So, I would agree that background checks are a good idea across the board.

The biggest issue is the mental health issue. It seems inevitable that after such a shooting that the shooter is remembered as being "odd" or having some sort of mental instability. Why is it always after the fact? Well, is it realistic to preemptively detain someone because a classmate thinks he is strange and possible dangerous? I don't think we can do that. Mental healthcare is woefully underfunded and too few resources exist in general much less for those who might be prone to a mass shooting. The question would be how we would improve those resources and how we would identify those who need it to prevent shootings. Is it possible? I sure hope so.

For those who do not understand why we own guns, that is not for you to understand just like it is not for me to understand why you like a certain kind of music, food, vacation destination, or the way you choose to vote. Your not understanding why gun ownership is enjoyed does not mean it should be abolished. Saying that there is no purpose to owning an AR-15 style rifle and high capacity magazines is your opinion and I would beg to differ. I find I have many purposes to owning such rifles, the relevance of which you would disagree but none the less, it is my right to own them. Your disagreement is of no consequence to me just as you might dismiss some of my views that do not concur with yours.

One final point: My daughter goes to school. It is terrifying to think that someone would harm her or the other children. That is a reality whether it be a gunman or a kidnapper. The world is a pretty crappy place sometimes. Do I want to go to the school and stand guard? Absolutely! Would I be armed while doing so? Absolutely! If a bad guy with a gun were to visit, a good guy with a gun would try to stop him.
Interesting points but I fail to grasp WHY someone needs an assault weapon. Answer? They don't.... Just because their not the majority of shootings doesn't for one second remove their culpability or ability to cause major carnage. This whole "oh a good guy with a gun will stop it" seems so ridiculous to me because what about Columbine? What about Ft Hood in TEXAS? Obviously mass shootings still happen and limiting access to these weapons seems like the absolutely rational decision
__________________
The Present:
2014 Audi Q5 TDI Prestige
The Past:
2013 Lexus GS350
2013 VW Golf TDI
2007 BMW X5 4.8i LOADED & Loved
2009 VW Jetta
2008 VW Touareg VR6
2005 BMW X5 3.0i
2005 BMW Z4 3.0i
2004 BMW X5 3.0i
2003 BMW 325i
2000 Ford Explorer Eddie Bauer 4x4
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-25-2012, 12:57 PM
blondboinsd's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,823
blondboinsd is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlickGT1 View Post
Persona, well said.

Those that think banning guns will solve problems, you really should do some research. When you ban all guns, only the criminals would have them.

Do some stats on Texas, gun violence there is less than where you live, factoring on population.

My quote below stands for this topic as well.

Let's put some perspective on this. We should ban spoons. They give people diabetes.
That is literally the I worst argument I have ever read. So stupid I'm fact I'm shocked I'm actually responding to it. Oh spoons huh? When is the last time there was a drive by spooning? Oh that's right I forgot about that assault spoon shooting? Wait oh yeah none of those happened

I've looked at your stats Texas and I still believe you have NO need for assault weapons
__________________
The Present:
2014 Audi Q5 TDI Prestige
The Past:
2013 Lexus GS350
2013 VW Golf TDI
2007 BMW X5 4.8i LOADED & Loved
2009 VW Jetta
2008 VW Touareg VR6
2005 BMW X5 3.0i
2005 BMW Z4 3.0i
2004 BMW X5 3.0i
2003 BMW 325i
2000 Ford Explorer Eddie Bauer 4x4
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-25-2012, 02:22 PM
TerminatorX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stafford, VA & Harrisburg, PA - USA
Posts: 5,735
TerminatorX5 is on a distinguished road
well... i've heard the 2nd amendment being mentioned everytime the weapon question comes into the light... so, i read it (there are several versions, one that was adopted by Congress, the other versions that were ratified by states)... it was adopted in 1791 (!), when the private citizens were expected to bring their own weapons into the State sponsored militia... There is nothing more to the 2nd amendment, nothing less... the times were rough, the indians were not friendly (rightfully so), the weapons were necessary - while you are plowing your fields and are being attack by indians, you wanted to have a weapon handy...

over the years the 2nd amendment went viral - people did not want disarm themselves, and wanted to keep expensive guns... The law interpretations went to the extent, that nobody remembers about the militia anymore but right to bear (to bring your own weapon once deputized into militia) has become the right to just HAVE the arms...

I do not see mass shootings involving laser blasters when people and buildings are cut in half... why?... maybe because there are NONE of those blasters in the hands of anyone!!! I do not see nuclear missiles offered for sale at the gun shows... strange - gun is a gun is a gun...

How comes that US is so much worried about prolifiration of weapons worldwide (not just nukes, conventional weapons as well) in the hands of professional, trained military personnel as a THREAT to our security and is NOT worried about proliferation of weapons in the domestic market in hands of untrained, unstabled private citizens? Threat is a threat is a threat.

Slick, you know what Anton Pavlovich said about a rifle hanging on the wall in the first act of a show... I totally understand the desire to protect yourself, and your family from the crooks that have the guns - but the venue chosen is not the best path... even my mother has a handgun... which worries me - if my kids don't find it, what if she flies off the handle when they drive her crazy with ice cream smeared all over the walls.. even the most normal person can go crazy...

I would take a mass knifer with bare hands but will think twice about using my handgun on a mass shooter (пуля - дура, штык - молодец)

I think, all those mass shootings in the US should be considered as acts of TERROR - I worry every time I go to a mall, or Wal-Mart, or take the kids to a movie theater - this is THE very definition of a terror instilled in the general populace by those acts, when daily routine is disrupted enough to cause personal and societal discomfort...
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-25-2012, 02:24 PM
LeMansX5's Avatar
Admin
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: X5world
Posts: 20,257
LeMansX5 has a spectacular aura aboutLeMansX5 has a spectacular aura aboutLeMansX5 has a spectacular aura about
Guns may not be the problem, but they are part of the big problem.

Mental illness + ease of access to "assault weapons" = death of several innocent people

People will remain "people" and they will have assault weapons lying around in the house for some mentally ill kid to grab. That will never change as long as weapons are easily available.

Why do we need "actual assault weapons" to satiate our desire for shooting, etc.? In this computer age, aren't the computer games enough? There are more gun shooting places in Newtown, CT than restaurants.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-25-2012, 02:27 PM
JonK's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Calio
Posts: 884
JonK is on a distinguished road
Many other industrialized countries in the world do just fine without civilians owning guns: Absolutely lower gun related deaths. We are deemed very violent country statistically with guns. There's no denying number of civilian gun ownership factors into the statistics.

My eyes got teary when I face the incident, and I got angry when the CEO of NRA made a speech blaming violent video games on everything gone bad.

PNG is right that we don't have resources to manage the mentally ill to prevent them to cause carnage.

I live in a upscale gated estate all the home's value is above few mils, people here are well to do and very private. Few years back there was a crazy old lady terrorizing neighbors such as taking others mails, popping out like "jack in the box" in their neighbors backyards multiple times. Neither she owned a gun, nor neighbors who got their backyards broke into did own a gun. No blood was splashed... It was going on several month about one incident a week. Nobody wanted to confront including her son so I had to step up and call Sheriff's dept. know that would be only way for her to get mental help. Including a young female deputy taking a report from me blamed me for taking on old innocent grandma who could be my mom. The deputy shut herself off after finding out she has taken other neighbors car key from the RV parked and attempted to drive off his car even though she didn't have a drivers Lic. She was taken in to custody and sent off to mental facility... I found her on my street 2 weeks later, was released because they were too crowed. she eventually foreclosed her home.

Lesson learned? If I didn't have her arrested for B&E, her illness would have never been documented. If any of the parties involved owned a gun, somebody definitely would have been shot.

Americans' appetite for guns are like for giant SUV's. It feels good to own them even though you don't really need them just in case something horrible happens out of blue.

They have to be pried out American's arms to enforce gun regulation...
We like them too much to be taken away.

I am familiar with gun, and properly trained but I don't want them in my house, and I stay as far as possible from people who are fond of them, cause I know what they can do, and I know most of people who own them are not qualified to exercise the respect the firearm commands.
Just my opinion.
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 06:06 AM.
vBulletin, Copyright 2019, 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.