Are there any PRO -gun billionaires??

[Trent]

On a lighter note; as I mentioned earlier in this thread, this is a numbers game.

You *can* influence some people by spending money. But generally, this is only short term, and requires additional stimulus to be effective. (E.g. look at the load the anti-gun group spent on advertising after SH).

However, we have something the anti-gunners don't have. We're in this for life. It's far easier to convert an anti-gunner to pro-gun or neutral, than it is convert a pro-gun person from being pro-gun to anti.

So as long as we keep bringing new people to the range and introducing new shooters to the sport, we gain more ground; and we hold it.

They hold the attention of their supporters as long as it's in the mainstream media's interest. But that interest fades away as time goes on. We keep shooting. And hunting. And taking people to the range.

We (gun owners) are at what - 40% now? Of the entire population? That means they have to convince *80%* of the non-gun owners to be devoutly anti-gun, just to hold pace with our numbers.

We push that over 50% and their cause is lost. And maybe.. someday.. we get the dang NFA registry opened back up.

 

[mbt2001]

Bloomberg and the elites are pro-gun, just not pro you having one.

 

[piece of meat]

Bloomberg said in an interview yesterday that he can 'outspend the NRA'.

This guy has unlimited wealth and is intent on using those resources against us until the day he dies.

 

[Ignition Override]

Where does "The Donald" stand, or does he comment on the topic?

 

[tuj]

"The Donald" is barely a billionaire ($2.6B). He pales in comparison to say, the Koch Bros. ($40B+$40B). It would be like me making $50k a year, and you making $3,200.00 a year. Even amongst the super-rich, the disparities are great, probably far greater than amongst economically-common men.

Therefore the Koch's have much money at their disposal, which they have been active about using against liberals in many state-level races. Koch also has a significant sway over its usually well-compensated employees, who also contribute to the causes Charles and to a lesser extend David, want them to make. After all, their jobs depend on it.

Gates and Buffet top the list as the richest in America, the Koch's come next at 6th and 7th in the world if I recall. So don't say there aren't any pro-gun billionaires. Yes the Koch's are not explicitly pro-gun, but they are libertarians, and that should be enough.

 

[Rembrandt]

If inflation and the Federal Reserve keeps printing money, I may soon be a billionaire. Only problem is where to park my wheelbarrow full of money when going to the gun shows...I imagine there will be quite a line of wheel barrows waiting to get in.

 

[JRH6856]

This guy has unlimited wealth and is intent on using those resources against us until the day he dies.

Actually, his limit is currently estimated at $33billion. (which is a really high limit)

 

[tuj]

"If inflation and the Federal Reserve keeps printing money"

1. Money printing is not inflationary if an appropriate amount of debt is sold against the printed sum.

2. Inflation has been low. http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CPIAUCSL

You can see inflation has been about the same since 1975.

 

[ExTank]

Owning one or guns doesn't make someone "pro-gun." I've known many gun owners who were fervently in favor of gun control, even though some of the reasons they specified would have made them ineligible to own a firearm themselves.

Any attempt to point out the problem with their logic is met with disinterest or blank incomprehension. I think it's a form of schizophrenia, though I think that word is technically obsolete nowadays. They hold two opposing viewpoints, and refuse to acknowledge any connection whatsoever between them.

George Orwell coined a term for this in his book, 1984. It's called double-think: the ability to hold two or more completely contradictory ideas/concepts/facts as true at the same time. The people of 1984 did this for purely political-power reasons. For everyday folks, it just called "living in denial."

 

[JRH6856]

George Orwell coined a term for this in his book, 1984. It's called double-think: the ability to hold two or more completely contradictory ideas/concepts/facts as true at the same time. The people of 1984 did this for purely political-power reasons. For everyday folks, it just called "living in denial."

Cognitive dissonance

In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the excessive mental stress and discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time. This stress and discomfort may also arise within an individual who holds a belief and performs a contradictory action or reaction. For example, an individual is likely to experience dissonance if he or she is addicted to smoking cigarettes and continues to smoke despite believing it is unhealthy.

 

[itsa pain]

Gun control is very much racist. In fact, the origins of a lot of gun control laws and carry restrictions (shall issue, open-to-interpretation things like when GA didn't allow carry at "public gatherings", etc) were straight up racist. It allowed the Sheriff or whoever else to selectively enforce based on their whim...which apparently was quite often racially motivated


And yes, all the extra gun control or "this isn't gun control, this is common sense and merely nominal expenses" type stuff is also very arguably racist for just what you said.

Oh yeah lets align ourselves with the anti americans who tore this country apart with cries of racism. 99% of the people that pushed affirmative action ,quotas etc hate everything this country was founded on hate the founding fathers and want to see all European people gone after they have taken everything they own. What a totally suicidal theory. It is plain to see that the second biggest enemy to gun owners are gun owners

 

[Jason_W]

Why would billionaires care about being pro or anti-gun? They're effectively above the law. They're the modern day gentry, we're all the serfs.

Every anti-gun law conceived could pass and billionaires would still be able to own whatever and whoever they want. Laws only apply to us peasants.

 

[Kosh75287]

I have another term for those who own guns yet favor gun control...

It's a semi-clinical term called "Cranio-Rectal Insertion Disorder", or perhaps "Recto-Cranial Insertion Disorder" (meaning, in plain English, that they have their heads inserted in their posteriors. I PREFER the first one, since it lends itself to becoming a mono-syllabic acronym, but it may not be technically correct.

Perhaps one of the health-care professionals on here could chime in?

 

[JRH6856]

It's a semi-clinical term called "Cranio-Rectal Insertion Disorder", or perhaps "Recto-Cranial Insertion Disorder" (meaning, in plain English, that they have their heads inserted in their posteriors. I PREFER the first one, since it lends itself to becoming a mono-syllabic acronym, but it may not be technically correct.

Whichever, it still means they need a glass belt buckle to be able to see their way around.

 

[Justin]

For one single person looking to encroach on the rights of millions, it would appear that there is an underlying agenda.

When Reichsführer Bloomberg donates or goes on an advertisement spree to disarm people, whom does that benefit? You? Me?

First and foremostly it benefits him, if it didn't why would he donate? Sure somebody can be that convicted in their beliefs to donate to any cause, but wanting to disarm everyone while maintaining an armed security force for your self says something.

Here's what you have to realize, it has nothing to do with benefitting you, me, or society.

It's not rational in the least. What everyone needs to realize is that the vast majority of anti-gun people are pathologically narcissistic.

Everything a narcissist does in his/her life is geared towards the aggrandizement of their own personal power and adequacy. To that end, they will seek social situations in which they can assert their dominance over others.

To someone who's truly narcissistic, they believe the world does, or should, revolve around them, and the fact that you choose to own a gun is seen as a deeply personal affront to everything they stand for because it represents the possibility of a power disparity that doesn't work in their favor.

As an added bonus, narcissism perfectly explains why these people will vociferously support gun control, but are completely incapable of seeing the hypocrisy inherent to having heavily-armed personal security details. To them it simply doesn't matter.