Gun Control III - the Gunnening

[Big Jim P]

I read that already, but thanks.

I wasn't trying to be an ass, I was just saying, it applies to your comment; that our points are related. Forgive me if I came across in a hostile or b*tchy manner.

You're fine, and yes, our points are related.

[Big Jim P]

See, and here is the part that almost scares me.

IF these people are this bad today, can you imagine what the next generation is going to be like with parental figures such as them?

You're assuming though that times will be as good or easy as they've been for the last few decades, but the Pax Britannica is over, and the Sun is setting on the Pax Americana; tough times are coming in the future, and tough times will breed tough people.

Who will create good times, thus the cycle will continue.

[The Two Jerseys]

Can you imagine if these wastes of sperm and egg existed back then? The constant handwringing over American rugged individualism, shit never would have gotten done as too many people would be still suckling from their momma's tit.

Oh I'm sure these types did indeed exist back then. However, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the reason why we never hear of them is because unlike today, people back then just didn't give them the time of day and let them kill themselves off from their own stupidity.

Or they were mauled to death by wild animals because they weren't carrying a gun.

[Aclion]

The 100-year-old statue, featuring a man carrying a whip in one hand with a rifle slung over his shoulder supposedly makes some students and faculty feel “very inferior.”

perhaps because they are

Can you imagine if these wastes of sperm and egg existed back then? The constant handwringing over American rugged individualism, shit never would have gotten done as too many people would be still suckling from their momma's tit.

Oh I'm sure these types did indeed exist back then. However, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the reason why we never hear of them is because unlike today, people back then just didn't give them the time of day and let them kill themselves off from their own stupidity.

Or they died in infancy.

[Fartsniffage]

You people do realise that the complaints aren't about the gun? Right?

[Kernen]

You people do realise that the complaints aren't about the gun? Right?

Yeah, it was getting weird...

[Telconi]

You people do realise that the complaints aren't about the gun? Right?

Which complaints would those be?

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Can we pretty please tell these people to shut the fuck up already and collectively move on from this "I'm offended by everything" fucking trend already?

Welcome to real life cupcakes, a place where safe spaces don't exist, nobody gives a flying fuck about you or your perceived viewpoints, and you might have to come to terms with things that might offend you and actually be an adult about it.

Offended by a fucking pioneer statue because it has a rifle and a whip portrayed on it... give me a fucking break.

Can you imagine if these wastes of sperm and egg existed back then? The constant handwringing over American rugged individualism, shit never would have gotten done as too many people would be still suckling from their momma's tit.

They probably existed, but if the movie Braveheart is even the slightest bit accurate, they likely got thrown from the castle window for insubordination.

Civilizations ascend to greatness in hobnailed boots, and descend to oblivion in silk slippers.

Sorry America, you ain't the exception. It happens to all the great Empires, at one time or another; the only that prevent such things is a constant exposure to danger and risk, the moment a Nation or Empire becomes too secure and too prosperous, it begins eating itself; this is why America is decaying from within - its had its Peace and Prosperity for too long, and is slowly self-destructing from within, though one could argue the Empire is rotting at an increasingly quick rate. The end of the Empire doesn't necessarily mean the end of America as a whole; it just means America may not be the World Hegemon, as it has been since the Fall of the Soviet Union.

It almost seems as though the looming possibility of mass-violence must be tolerated as a necessary evil.

France had its reign of terror, Soviet Russia had their Gulags (and later, squatting gopniks)... America has a slightly more anarchist take.

[Grinning Dragon]

Dumbasses. This is what going by "feelings" gets you.
California Pension Fund Gun Stock Ban Cost Beneficiaries $11 Million in Returns

Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal captured the political battles being fought behind the scenes of one of the largest public employee pension fund in the country: the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, or CalPERS.

In the article, aptly titled, “Calpers’ Dilemma: Save the World or Make Money?” the author reviews the fund’s choices throughout recent years to sell off and ban purchasing of stocks for controversial companies.

Entire industries have been on the CalPERS blacklist including tobacco and fossil fuels. Of course, gun control activists who have been having little luck in passing irrational legislation, are also targeting pension funds nationwide to urge divestment.
Fiduciary Responsibility

The problem with divestment is that it ties the hands of the pension fund managers, the ones in charge of investing and generating enough of a return to support the retirement of every covered worker. Taking potentially strong investment options off the table at a time when public pensions are underfunded and struggling is a losing proposition for state workers.

The article illustrates this with a chart showing that the existing ban on investing in the manufacturers of firearms that are illegal for sale in California (hint: that’s a lot), has cost the fund $11 million. That’s an expensive political statement to make with other people’s money, especially considering the duty that fund managers have to serve the interests of the workers....

[Crockerland]

If they did exist back in the day, I would suspect those types would a very small minority. Which bring me to my next point.
– In 1944 18 year-olds stormed the beach at Normandy into almost certain death.

– In 2019 18-year-olds feel unsafe because words/statues/American rugged individualism hurt their feelings.

- In 1992 sensitive LIBERALS get TRIGGERED by statues of some Russian guy with a mustache who HURT THEIR FEELINGS so they DESTROY HISTORY instead of just going back 2 their SAFE SPACE. Sad.

You people do realise that the complaints aren't about the gun? Right?

Why else would native american students not like seeing a statue of a pioneer with a gun? It's not like pioneers ever done anything major to native americans, it must be something to do with what guns have done to students.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

You people do realise that the complaints aren't about the gun? Right?

Why else would native american students not like seeing a statue of a pioneer with a gun? It's not like pioneers ever done anything major to native americans, it must be something to do with what guns have done to students.

We cannot focus on what democrats would consider the positive things done.

Oh, you meant racism... even though most early pioneers were single white men and they somehow had families out there within a few years.

[Loben The 2nd]

You people do realise that the complaints aren't about the gun? Right?

Which complaints would those be?

Psssssst it’s white people.

[Pax Nerdvana]

I can't even imagine being so thin skinned that a mere statue, especially one that's 100+ years old, offends me.

I'm of the same mind. Pretty much nothing offends me, I can count on one hand the things that may offend me, a statue isn't one of them.

I've learned to not get offended at stupid little things, and to ignore stuff. People just need to learn that they will haveto deal with people they find disagreeable.

[Grinning Dragon]

US Supreme Court rules in favor of illegal immigrant in possession of firearm Interesting take in which I agree with the ruling.

The US Supreme Court held in a 7-2 decision on Friday that undocumented immigrants must know both that they are in the country illegally and that they belong to a class that is proscribed from possessing firearms to be prosecuted under federal law.

The petitioner, Hamid Mohamed Ahmed Ali Rehaif, whose F-1 student visa had expired after he was dismissed from Florida Institute of Technology for being academically ineligible, stayed in the country, rented a gun and purchased ammunition at a gun range. He was arrested after the FBI, responding to a tip, came to his hotel room and discovered the ammunition and was told by the petitioner that he indeed had fired a gun. A federal grand jury subsequently charged him under 18 USC §922(g), which prohibits a person who “is illegally or unlawfully in the United States” from possessing “any firearm or ammunition.” He was convicted by a jury in the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed....

I can see how this ruling can be applied to and challenge in those who have had their 2nd Amendments stripped due to a technicality in local and state laws

[Fartsniffage]

Dumbasses. This is what going by "feelings" gets you.
California Pension Fund Gun Stock Ban Cost Beneficiaries $11 Million in Returns

Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal captured the political battles being fought behind the scenes of one of the largest public employee pension fund in the country: the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, or CalPERS.

In the article, aptly titled, “Calpers’ Dilemma: Save the World or Make Money?” the author reviews the fund’s choices throughout recent years to sell off and ban purchasing of stocks for controversial companies.

Entire industries have been on the CalPERS blacklist including tobacco and fossil fuels. Of course, gun control activists who have been having little luck in passing irrational legislation, are also targeting pension funds nationwide to urge divestment.
Fiduciary Responsibility

The problem with divestment is that it ties the hands of the pension fund managers, the ones in charge of investing and generating enough of a return to support the retirement of every covered worker. Taking potentially strong investment options off the table at a time when public pensions are underfunded and struggling is a losing proposition for state workers.

The article illustrates this with a chart showing that the existing ban on investing in the manufacturers of firearms that are illegal for sale in California (hint: that’s a lot), has cost the fund $11 million. That’s an expensive political statement to make with other people’s money, especially considering the duty that fund managers have to serve the interests of the workers....

The fund has $360 billion in assets. What's $11 million as a percentage of that?

[Grinning Dragon]

Dumbasses. This is what going by "feelings" gets you.
California Pension Fund Gun Stock Ban Cost Beneficiaries $11 Million in Returns

The fund has $360 billion in assets. What's $11 million as a percentage of that?

Doesn't matter, having the ability to pull more money into the pension is what should be driving it, not feelings.

[Fartsniffage]

The fund has $360 billion in assets. What's $11 million as a percentage of that?

Doesn't matter, having the ability to pull more money into the pension is what should be driving it, not feelings.

You sure you want to make that argument in a gun control thread?

[Grinning Dragon]

Doesn't matter, having the ability to pull more money into the pension is what should be driving it, not feelings.

You sure you want to make that argument in a gun control thread?

I fail to see why anyone would reject a revenue stream all because a part of that revenue is generated from the firearm industry.

[Fartsniffage]

You sure you want to make that argument in a gun control thread?

I fail to see why anyone would reject a revenue stream all because a part of that revenue is generated from the firearm industry.

Morals.

[Grinning Dragon]

I fail to see why anyone would reject a revenue stream all because a part of that revenue is generated from the firearm industry.

Morals.

Why would that matter, there is nothing immoral about said revenue.

[Fartsniffage]

Morals.

Why would that matter, there is nothing immoral about said revenue.

In your opinion. It other peoples opinion there is.

[Mushet]

I can't even imagine being so thin skinned that a mere statue, especially one that's 100+ years old, offends me.

I'm of the same mind. Pretty much nothing offends me, I can count on one hand the things that may offend me, a statue isn't one of them.

I don't really get offended by shit like statues, but I still might casually throw my hat in with people trying to take them down if I don't like the statue. I'm not sure how many of these people are legitimately offended and how many casually agree with the offended people, but I'm pretty sure the former is small and the latter is large as per usual.

[The Two Jerseys]

Why would that matter, there is nothing immoral about said revenue.

In your opinion. It other peoples opinion there is.

But if it's legal to make those investments, then fiduciary responsibility should overrule morals.

[Grinning Dragon]

Why would that matter, there is nothing immoral about said revenue.

In your opinion. It other peoples opinion there is.

Its an illogical moral position to hold to reject those firearm industries that can feed the pension fund.

[Fartsniffage]

In your opinion. It other peoples opinion there is.

But if it's legal to make those investments, then fiduciary responsibility should overrule morals.

Why? Not everything is about profit. And if you're failing to gain $11 million on a fund of $360 billion then it's hardly an expensive decision.