@bavgruppedesigns: 🚀 Happy Monday, Mod Squad 🔥 Sneak peek at what’s hitting the streets next 👀 We’re wrapping up a BMW 1 Series E82 Pre-LCI headlight build, and this one is anything but stock. This setup got the full Bavgruppe treatment 👇 ⚡ Proprietary color-chasing RGB halos – because static lights are boring 🖤 Our signature LED carbon eyebrows – bringing that factory+ LCI look 😈 Quad Demon Eyes w/ clear lenses – menacing at night 🌑 Full blackout housings – stealth mode engaged ✨ Brand-new headlight lenses – crystal clear, showroom fresh If you’re tired of blending in and ready to turn heads at every meet, this is your sign. Hit the link in our bio and let’s build something custom, aggressive, and unmistakably YOU. Built for night drives. Designed for attention. ⸻ 📲 Hashtags #Bavgruppe #HeadlightsRedefined #BMWMods #BMWLife #E82 BMW1Series EuroBuilt EuroCarScene CarModification CustomHeadlights RGBHeadlights DemonEyes HaloHeadlights AngelEyes CarbonEyebrows DTMRings BuiltNotBought CarCulture CarScene NightDriveVibes CarMeetReady StreetBuilt LEDHeadlightUpgrade bmw

Bavgruppe Designs
Bavgruppe Designs
Open In TikTok:
Region: US
Monday 22 December 2025 16:12:52 GMT
302
2
0
1

Music

Download

Comments

There are no more comments for this video.
To see more videos from user @bavgruppedesigns, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

You're talking with your friend Lizzy, and she says that ‘all men are bad at dealing with their emotions.' And so you push back with a few counterexamples and within the space of a single sentence, her claim morphs into something like, 'Well, just the ones I've dated.' She hasn't lost the argument, per se, but she's done something far sneakier, and the philosopher Nicholas Shackel called it a ‘motte and bailey fallacy.’  The motte and bailey fallacy is when somebody makes a bold and outrageous claim, which is the bailey, and they live there happily until somebody attacks it, at which point they retreat to a much smaller and much more defensible claim — the motte — and pretend that that is what they were saying all along.  We've all seen this happen a hundred times. It's when somebody makes a bold claim, like 'all politicians are corrupt,' or that 'science has disproven God.' And the moment somebody pushes back, their claim changes into something far narrower. 'Well, I mean, some politicians are corrupt,' or 'I was only talking in a strict empirical sense.' They abandon the front lines, and they retreat to a position that is far more defensible.  This is why so many of our political discussions can feel impossible to win. Whole political movements live in the bailey when there is no opposition, and then sprint back to the motte the moment anybody challenges them. A provocative claim whips up a crowd and pulls in support. But a mature claim requires evidence, argument, and can withstand scrutiny. So, the next time somebody says something outlandish, call them out on it. It often only takes the slightest bit of resistance for somebody to change their claim into something far more reasonable, defensible, and nuanced.
You're talking with your friend Lizzy, and she says that ‘all men are bad at dealing with their emotions.' And so you push back with a few counterexamples and within the space of a single sentence, her claim morphs into something like, 'Well, just the ones I've dated.' She hasn't lost the argument, per se, but she's done something far sneakier, and the philosopher Nicholas Shackel called it a ‘motte and bailey fallacy.’ The motte and bailey fallacy is when somebody makes a bold and outrageous claim, which is the bailey, and they live there happily until somebody attacks it, at which point they retreat to a much smaller and much more defensible claim — the motte — and pretend that that is what they were saying all along. We've all seen this happen a hundred times. It's when somebody makes a bold claim, like 'all politicians are corrupt,' or that 'science has disproven God.' And the moment somebody pushes back, their claim changes into something far narrower. 'Well, I mean, some politicians are corrupt,' or 'I was only talking in a strict empirical sense.' They abandon the front lines, and they retreat to a position that is far more defensible. This is why so many of our political discussions can feel impossible to win. Whole political movements live in the bailey when there is no opposition, and then sprint back to the motte the moment anybody challenges them. A provocative claim whips up a crowd and pulls in support. But a mature claim requires evidence, argument, and can withstand scrutiny. So, the next time somebody says something outlandish, call them out on it. It often only takes the slightest bit of resistance for somebody to change their claim into something far more reasonable, defensible, and nuanced.

About