BMW i
Forum for the BMW i3, i4 and i8
BMW i3 BMW i8
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

  BMW i Forums > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      09-20-2019, 08:49 AM   #111
1MOREMOD
2018 track days - 0 ridge 1:52:24 pacific 1:33:30
1MOREMOD's Avatar
United_States
9017
Rep
22,060
Posts

Drives: Race car->
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: check your mirrors

iTrader: (5)

Kind of like the whole left doesnt want to take away guns. They only keep saying it but dont mean it right.
Appreciate 0
      09-20-2019, 09:56 AM   #112
F32Fleet
Major General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
1466
Rep
7,824
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan_COLD View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
This thread only remind me how hypocritical most are supporting California's stricter pollution standards while in other sections posting about their tunes (piggyback often so they can be disabled easy?) or talk about their other aftermarket additions that will not pass the current California laws.
Well, I don't live in California. So my tune would irrelevant to the discussion. Hell, we don't even do visual inspections in my state. I could go cat-less and almost certainly never get caught. I won't, but I easily could.

Further, does using a JB4 or a Dinan tune demonstrably create more emissions? Many times aftermarket tunes actually increase mileage.
...at a cost to the environment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by adc100 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Run Silent View Post

I don't live in California. As such, I could not care less what CA does with respect to emissions on vehicles.
You should it affects your wallet. They it's going bye bye
You do know that for decades BMW's sold in California had some differences with regards to emissions equipment vs same models sold elsewhere in the US?

Exhibit A: BMW N51 vs N52.


In any case the waiver is codified in the Clean Air Act and there's no mechanism to withdraw a waiver.
You are assuming. Just because there is nothing in the law about rescinding a waiver, there is nothing to state it cannot be rescinded either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTinline-six View Post
I feel bad for people in CA, but many of the emissions regulations we have today are a result of CAFE standards pushing manufacturers to innovate. I'm reminded of this every time an older car (even from the 1990s) drives by and I can smell it for the next few miles.

The diesel emissions regulations are a nightmare though. Manufacturers are literally throwing shit at the wall hoping it works to pass the requirements and we end up with trucks that cost $90,000 and require $15,000 exhaust system replacements every few years. Many of these systems end up destroying the engine soon after warranty just because of their faulty design. Instead of California having super strict standards and other states having less, there should be more uniform standards across the country. It makes no sense that in one state you need to be able to breathe from the tailpipe and in a neighboring one you can blow black smoke for 50 miles making all the cars behind you disappear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Run Silent View Post
I agree. Plus, I still stand by my original statements in that California has every right to do whatever they want to do. Folks who disagree can either vote with their pencils during elections or they can vote with their wallets and move.

I don't live in California. As such, I could not care less what CA does with respect to emissions on vehicles.
I'm generally for states rights over federal laws, but sometimes it does makes sense for a blanket federal statute.

But, here California is not the same as Wyoming, MN or Tennessee etc for that matter and have different needs due to their population and geography. I still go back to Cali every other year to visit family and I'm amazed at how the smog is creeping into areas and staying longer than I ever remember. Even with these stringent rules the pollution is still bad and increasing.

But, even those in Tennessee should care about the air quality standards if you care about the Smokies etc. All of that crap travels across the country and affects everyone/everywhere. I've actually read a decent amount about the affects on the Smokies and areas such as that from surrounding industry/auto pollution etc and it is sad.

Yes, I'm a hypocrite as I love performance vehicles but I'm certainly not fighting the inevitable because of the way a V8 sounds etc.
That's funny because the smog and Sig Alerts Which were literally daily decades ago where literally everyday visibility was far less than a mile, has been so much better (actually almost non-existent) compared to then.
Just read section 209.

BTW it would take an act of Congress to revoke the waiver.

DOJ is going to lose this. I suspect the Administration knows this but they hope a federal court will issue an temporary injunction against the agreement between the State of California and automakers until it has been adjudicated which could be years.
You can read section 209 all you want. Again, just because it does not state that a waiver cannot be revoked, that doesn't mean that a waiver cannot be revoked.

There is nothing to state it can or cannot be revoked.
Uh. Yes, that's exactly what it means. As I said before, it would take Congress to change it.
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 2
minn195871.00

      09-20-2019, 10:06 AM   #113
F32Fleet
Major General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
1466
Rep
7,824
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by adc100 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
For who? Buyers outside of California? Not necessarily. Supply/Demand of the local market have a larger impact on price disparities.
I mean seriously common sense. Making two different vehicles for x number of states. Not rocket science.

Like I said..I am a tree hugger but allowing different states set their own limits.. Yea thank OBama for Doing an essentially Executive action 5 days in office..Trump is just undoing stupidity.and to say he can't is..........
So are you saying that US customers subsidize EU customers because their vehicles now have the GPF and US vehicles do not?

By that logic Trump should demand that the EU rollback their emissions standards.

Look as I said before. The cost differences will largely be eclipsed by market differences. Like it always has been (Ex. N51 and N52).

BMW still has to sell cars. It's not like you're forced to own one.
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 1
minn195871.00

      09-20-2019, 11:13 AM   #114
minn19
Major General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
5871
Rep
6,489
Posts

Drives: 19 F150, 19 M550 19 ZL1 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
Kind of like the whole left doesnt want to take away guns. They only keep saying it but dont mean it right.
Sure some of them do and have actually said so. Unlike the cloak and dagger lobbyist partnership with Trump and "his" (it is no longer the US citizens) EPA.
Appreciate 0
      09-20-2019, 02:29 PM   #115
IK6SPEED
Major General
IK6SPEED's Avatar
United_States
3688
Rep
9,352
Posts

Drives: BMW M3 / AH3
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cali

iTrader: (20)

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
The topic?

1) I've always stated that Car Makers can chose to go with tighter regulation, be it from EU or wherever. Trump cannot make auto makers adhere to less stringent regulations.

2) Federal laws and waivers. In this case, Federal law prevails....but as stated it's a mute point as automakers will go with EU Standards which are tighter.

3) You keep confusing yourself. NO CARS ARE BEING SOLD TODAY THAT MEET THE 2022-2025 STANDARDS.

Every one of you links do NOT even begin to claim that Trump is rolling back the EPA car Emission standards less than what is already in place on vehicles being sold now....so quit implying it. You are ignoring facts again. And trying to blur with non CARB items now.
Enjoy just talking to yourself? The last line is utter bullshit as it is 100% clear he is attempting to roll back nearly every EPA pollution/emission standard there is past, present to future. I’m not the one confused here. I don’t even know why you started the thread or what you are arguing anymore. You said it three times now that Trump or California doesn’t control what is going to happen the EU will so end thread.
Because it was and is car news.....and this is a car forum.

And again you and others are speculating with facts not in evidence.
__________________
Stable: F80 / AH3
Past: F80 ZCP / F22 M235i / E89 35is
Appreciate 0
      09-20-2019, 02:34 PM   #116
IK6SPEED
Major General
IK6SPEED's Avatar
United_States
3688
Rep
9,352
Posts

Drives: BMW M3 / AH3
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cali

iTrader: (20)

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan_COLD View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
This thread only remind me how hypocritical most are supporting California's stricter pollution standards while in other sections posting about their tunes (piggyback often so they can be disabled easy?) or talk about their other aftermarket additions that will not pass the current California laws.
Well, I don't live in California. So my tune would irrelevant to the discussion. Hell, we don't even do visual inspections in my state. I could go cat-less and almost certainly never get caught. I won't, but I easily could.

Further, does using a JB4 or a Dinan tune demonstrably create more emissions? Many times aftermarket tunes actually increase mileage.
...at a cost to the environment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by adc100 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Run Silent View Post

I don't live in California. As such, I could not care less what CA does with respect to emissions on vehicles.
You should it affects your wallet. They it's going bye bye
You do know that for decades BMW's sold in California had some differences with regards to emissions equipment vs same models sold elsewhere in the US?

Exhibit A: BMW N51 vs N52.


In any case the waiver is codified in the Clean Air Act and there's no mechanism to withdraw a waiver.
You are assuming. Just because there is nothing in the law about rescinding a waiver, there is nothing to state it cannot be rescinded either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTinline-six View Post
I feel bad for people in CA, but many of the emissions regulations we have today are a result of CAFE standards pushing manufacturers to innovate. I'm reminded of this every time an older car (even from the 1990s) drives by and I can smell it for the next few miles.

The diesel emissions regulations are a nightmare though. Manufacturers are literally throwing shit at the wall hoping it works to pass the requirements and we end up with trucks that cost $90,000 and require $15,000 exhaust system replacements every few years. Many of these systems end up destroying the engine soon after warranty just because of their faulty design. Instead of California having super strict standards and other states having less, there should be more uniform standards across the country. It makes no sense that in one state you need to be able to breathe from the tailpipe and in a neighboring one you can blow black smoke for 50 miles making all the cars behind you disappear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Run Silent View Post
I agree. Plus, I still stand by my original statements in that California has every right to do whatever they want to do. Folks who disagree can either vote with their pencils during elections or they can vote with their wallets and move.

I don't live in California. As such, I could not care less what CA does with respect to emissions on vehicles.
I'm generally for states rights over federal laws, but sometimes it does makes sense for a blanket federal statute.

But, here California is not the same as Wyoming, MN or Tennessee etc for that matter and have different needs due to their population and geography. I still go back to Cali every other year to visit family and I'm amazed at how the smog is creeping into areas and staying longer than I ever remember. Even with these stringent rules the pollution is still bad and increasing.

But, even those in Tennessee should care about the air quality standards if you care about the Smokies etc. All of that crap travels across the country and affects everyone/everywhere. I've actually read a decent amount about the affects on the Smokies and areas such as that from surrounding industry/auto pollution etc and it is sad.

Yes, I'm a hypocrite as I love performance vehicles but I'm certainly not fighting the inevitable because of the way a V8 sounds etc.
That's funny because the smog and Sig Alerts Which were literally daily decades ago where literally everyday visibility was far less than a mile, has been so much better (actually almost non-existent) compared to then.
Just read section 209.

BTW it would take an act of Congress to revoke the waiver.

DOJ is going to lose this. I suspect the Administration knows this but they hope a federal court will issue an temporary injunction against the agreement between the State of California and automakers until it has been adjudicated which could be years.
You can read section 209 all you want. Again, just because it does not state that a waiver cannot be revoked, that doesn't mean that a waiver cannot be revoked.

There is nothing to state it can or cannot be revoked.
Uh. Yes, that's exactly what it means. As I said before, it would take Congress to change it.
Again, you are speculating.

Logic goes that if EPA can grant waivers, they are in control of waivers.

Nothing states that waivers CANNOT be rescinded....nor what that process would be.

Simply logic goes that if the authority to grant waivers,one would have authority to rescind.

Congress granted EPA the right to grant and there by administer the waivers. Not Congress themselves. As such, Congress passed on their authority to administer waivers. Now if Congress wants to rewrite the bill so waivers cannot be rescinded, they should do just that.

The law is very telling in what it does and doesn't state.

Obama did so much by Executive Action instead of passing it through Congress, with the stroke of a pen the next President can wipe it out. That's the real bottom line of why we are in this see-saw back and forth these days overall. And yes I know the EPA did granted this waiver under authority granted by Congress, but I am talking generalities of this decade.
__________________
Stable: F80 / AH3
Past: F80 ZCP / F22 M235i / E89 35is
Appreciate 0
      09-20-2019, 02:43 PM   #117
minn19
Major General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
5871
Rep
6,489
Posts

Drives: 19 F150, 19 M550 19 ZL1 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Because it was and is car news.....and this is a car forum.

And again you and others are speculating with facts not in evidence.
Keep grasping. I've shown plenty of evidence that Trump via the EPA etc/at the best of corporations that have lobbied hard for these rollbacks. There is no question that he/they are rolling back environmental protections across the board.

You don't even know what you are arguing anymore.
Appreciate 1
      09-20-2019, 02:46 PM   #118
minn19
Major General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
5871
Rep
6,489
Posts

Drives: 19 F150, 19 M550 19 ZL1 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Nothing states that waivers CANNOT be rescinded....nor what that process would be.

Simply logic goes that if the authority to grant waivers,one would have authority to rescind.

The law is very telling in what it does and doesn't state.
In law there is nothing that simple and it certainly isn't as clear cut as you wish it to be.

Hmm, it appears you are speculating as to the outcome without all the facts as you are so love to say to others. These sentences you wrote contradict each other.
Appreciate 0
      09-20-2019, 02:47 PM   #119
IK6SPEED
Major General
IK6SPEED's Avatar
United_States
3688
Rep
9,352
Posts

Drives: BMW M3 / AH3
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cali

iTrader: (20)

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Because it was and is car news.....and this is a car forum.

And again you and others are speculating with facts not in evidence.
Keep grasping. I've shown plenty of evidence that Trump via the EPA etc/at the best of corporations that have lobbied hard for these rollbacks. There is no question that he/they are rolling back environmental protections across the board.

You don't even know what you are arguing anymore.
No...you keep trying to confuse coal issues with this specific car issue.

You are all over the road.

I am talking the subject of the thread.

You are out in space.
__________________
Stable: F80 / AH3
Past: F80 ZCP / F22 M235i / E89 35is
Appreciate 0
      09-20-2019, 02:48 PM   #120
IK6SPEED
Major General
IK6SPEED's Avatar
United_States
3688
Rep
9,352
Posts

Drives: BMW M3 / AH3
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cali

iTrader: (20)

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Nothing states that waivers CANNOT be rescinded....nor what that process would be.

Simply logic goes that if the authority to grant waivers,one would have authority to rescind.

The law is very telling in what it does and doesn't state.
In law there is nothing that simple and it certainly isn't as clear cut as you wish it to be.

Hmm, it appears you are speculating as to the outcome without all the facts as you are so love to say to others. These sentences you wrote contradict each other.
Sorry you cannot grasp the concepts of laws.
__________________
Stable: F80 / AH3
Past: F80 ZCP / F22 M235i / E89 35is
Appreciate 0
      09-20-2019, 02:56 PM   #121
minn19
Major General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
5871
Rep
6,489
Posts

Drives: 19 F150, 19 M550 19 ZL1 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
No...you keep trying to confuse coal issues with this specific car issue.

You are all over the road.

I am talking the subject of the thread.

You are out in space.
Coal? The links I posted and the fact the EPA is doing way more environmental rollbacks than just coal. Regulation on fracking in terms of clean water and how much emissions power plants can emit just to name two of about 80. There is an extremely clear pattern and motive here to all of this. It certainly isn't rocket science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Sorry you cannot grasp the concepts of laws.
I grasp that law is a very difficult subject and it is rarely black and white. I wonder why so many lawyers can bill for so many billable hours every year and court cases drag out for years when is it so clear cut as you say it is.

Read what you wrote. On one hand you say that there is nothing talking about rescinding a waiver. But in the next sentence you say the law is very clear in what it does and doesn't state. It looks obvious that that isn't the facts of this dispute. It doesn't state if it can be rescinded and if it can who can do it. Lawyers will have a field day billing hours on this one.

I'm sorry you can't grasp your own words and ideas.
Appreciate 1
      09-20-2019, 03:34 PM   #122
F32Fleet
Major General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
1466
Rep
7,824
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan_COLD View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
This thread only remind me how hypocritical most are supporting California's stricter pollution standards while in other sections posting about their tunes (piggyback often so they can be disabled easy?) or talk about their other aftermarket additions that will not pass the current California laws.
Well, I don't live in California. So my tune would irrelevant to the discussion. Hell, we don't even do visual inspections in my state. I could go cat-less and almost certainly never get caught. I won't, but I easily could.

Further, does using a JB4 or a Dinan tune demonstrably create more emissions? Many times aftermarket tunes actually increase mileage.
...at a cost to the environment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by adc100 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Run Silent View Post

I don't live in California. As such, I could not care less what CA does with respect to emissions on vehicles.
You should it affects your wallet. They it's going bye bye
You do know that for decades BMW's sold in California had some differences with regards to emissions equipment vs same models sold elsewhere in the US?

Exhibit A: BMW N51 vs N52.


In any case the waiver is codified in the Clean Air Act and there's no mechanism to withdraw a waiver.
You are assuming. Just because there is nothing in the law about rescinding a waiver, there is nothing to state it cannot be rescinded either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTinline-six View Post
I feel bad for people in CA, but many of the emissions regulations we have today are a result of CAFE standards pushing manufacturers to innovate. I'm reminded of this every time an older car (even from the 1990s) drives by and I can smell it for the next few miles.

The diesel emissions regulations are a nightmare though. Manufacturers are literally throwing shit at the wall hoping it works to pass the requirements and we end up with trucks that cost $90,000 and require $15,000 exhaust system replacements every few years. Many of these systems end up destroying the engine soon after warranty just because of their faulty design. Instead of California having super strict standards and other states having less, there should be more uniform standards across the country. It makes no sense that in one state you need to be able to breathe from the tailpipe and in a neighboring one you can blow black smoke for 50 miles making all the cars behind you disappear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Run Silent View Post
I agree. Plus, I still stand by my original statements in that California has every right to do whatever they want to do. Folks who disagree can either vote with their pencils during elections or they can vote with their wallets and move.

I don't live in California. As such, I could not care less what CA does with respect to emissions on vehicles.
I'm generally for states rights over federal laws, but sometimes it does makes sense for a blanket federal statute.

But, here California is not the same as Wyoming, MN or Tennessee etc for that matter and have different needs due to their population and geography. I still go back to Cali every other year to visit family and I'm amazed at how the smog is creeping into areas and staying longer than I ever remember. Even with these stringent rules the pollution is still bad and increasing.

But, even those in Tennessee should care about the air quality standards if you care about the Smokies etc. All of that crap travels across the country and affects everyone/everywhere. I've actually read a decent amount about the affects on the Smokies and areas such as that from surrounding industry/auto pollution etc and it is sad.

Yes, I'm a hypocrite as I love performance vehicles but I'm certainly not fighting the inevitable because of the way a V8 sounds etc.
That's funny because the smog and Sig Alerts Which were literally daily decades ago where literally everyday visibility was far less than a mile, has been so much better (actually almost non-existent) compared to then.
Just read section 209.

BTW it would take an act of Congress to revoke the waiver.

DOJ is going to lose this. I suspect the Administration knows this but they hope a federal court will issue an temporary injunction against the agreement between the State of California and automakers until it has been adjudicated which could be years.
You can read section 209 all you want. Again, just because it does not state that a waiver cannot be revoked, that doesn't mean that a waiver cannot be revoked.

There is nothing to state it can or cannot be revoked.
Uh. Yes, that's exactly what it means. As I said before, it would take Congress to change it.
Again, you are speculating.

Logic goes that if EPA can grant waivers, they are in control of waivers.

Nothing states that waivers CANNOT be rescinded....nor what that process would be.

Simply logic goes that if the authority to grant waivers,one would have authority to rescind.

Congress granted EPA the right to grant and there by administer the waivers. Not Congress themselves. As such, Congress passed on their authority to administer waivers. Now if Congress wants to rewrite the bill so waivers cannot be rescinded, they should do just that.

The law is very telling in what it does and doesn't state.

Obama did so much by Executive Action instead of passing it through Congress, with the stroke of a pen the next President can wipe it out. That's the real bottom line of why we are in this see-saw back and forth these days overall. And yes I know the EPA did granted this waiver under authority granted by Congress, but I am talking generalities of this decade.
Govt doesn't operate off logic.
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 3
      09-21-2019, 01:13 PM   #123
IK6SPEED
Major General
IK6SPEED's Avatar
United_States
3688
Rep
9,352
Posts

Drives: BMW M3 / AH3
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cali

iTrader: (20)

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
No...you keep trying to confuse coal issues with this specific car issue.

You are all over the road.

I am talking the subject of the thread.

You are out in space.
Coal? The links I posted and the fact the EPA is doing way more environmental rollbacks than just coal. Regulation on fracking in terms of clean water and how much emissions power plants can emit just to name two of about 80. There is an extremely clear pattern and motive here to all of this. It certainly isn't rocket science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Sorry you cannot grasp the concepts of laws.
I grasp that law is a very difficult subject and it is rarely black and white. I wonder why so many lawyers can bill for so many billable hours every year and court cases drag out for years when is it so clear cut as you say it is.

Read what you wrote. On one hand you say that there is nothing talking about rescinding a waiver. But in the next sentence you say the law is very clear in what it does and doesn't state. It looks obvious that that isn't the facts of this dispute. It doesn't state if it can be rescinded and if it can who can do it. Lawyers will have a field day billing hours on this one.

I'm sorry you can't grasp your own words and ideas.
Clearly you do not understand the law. Both points I made are very consistent with how the law is interpreted.

Let me give you another concept. It's called a discredited witness.

That's when someone testifies to one thing and then facts prove they were incorrect. Their testimony is either thrown out or the jury disregards.

As you are one of those posting of how much worse the LA air quality situation has gotten over the past decades when in fact measurable facts show just the opposite, you are the discredited witness here.

Case dismissed.
__________________
Stable: F80 / AH3
Past: F80 ZCP / F22 M235i / E89 35is
Appreciate 0
      09-21-2019, 01:44 PM   #124
minn19
Major General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
5871
Rep
6,489
Posts

Drives: 19 F150, 19 M550 19 ZL1 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED View Post
Clearly you do not understand the law. Both points I made are very consistent with how the law is interpreted.

Let me give you another concept. It's called a discredited witness.

That's when someone testifies to one thing and then facts prove they were incorrect. Their testimony is either thrown out or the jury disregards.

As you are one of those posting of how much worse the LA air quality situation has gotten over the past decades when in fact measurable facts show just the opposite, you are the discredited witness here.

Case dismissed.
That has nothing to do with this or how the law we are discussing is written.

This was fun, keep grasping at straws/contradicting yourself and adding new misdirections.

I really have nothing else to say here as it has all been said and will watch how it plays out.
Appreciate 0
      09-21-2019, 02:10 PM   #125
Poiseuille
Colonel
Poiseuille's Avatar
United_States
3159
Rep
2,665
Posts

Drives: 2016 M4 DCT Tanzanite/Amaro
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Princeton

iTrader: (0)

.
Attached Images
 
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:25 AM.




bmw
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST