Are there any PRO -gun billionaires??

[SunnySlopes]

I guarantee they are all pro gun. It's just that they only want guns for themselves and their enterouge. Heck, I remember reading about some millionaires in New England who had fully operational tanks they'd take out riding for fun.

But none of the above for you and me.

Yes, they are all pro gun. It's just that they're anti working class.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

Don't know about Donald Trump himself, but do know both his sons are big time hunters, including African safaris

I believe generally pro-gun. I've seen him bury anti-gun people in interviews, and he's rather eloquent at it.

 

[MagnumDweeb]

When you can't get the votes you try and buy the election or the politician. That's what billionaires do because we the American people so often abandon our duties to vote and take part in the process. We do nothing to create organizations that have to answer to us. We simply shuck our money to our hopeful saviour or we don't spend any money at all and demand the heavens answer our prayers.

If we organized, and stayed united, then the billionaires and the special interests would have a far harder time pushing their agenda. If we then organized to boycott those billionaires and their brethren, it'd have an effect as well. What do you imagine would happen if an advertiser for Bloomberg news got a petition to boycott their product signed by ten million people, so long as that advertiser advertised on their channel.

But hey, let's whine and moan, scoff at new ideas, act like a bunch of fatalists and defeatists and go woe is me. Right?

 

[gym]

No we aren't all like that.

 

[yzguy87]

Bruce Willis is about $850 mil short of a billion but that's still bigger than my chunk of change! Regardless of how much, or little money he has, he's on our side! Post Sandy Hook he spoke out in favor of the 2a!

I must add that idk if he endorses any pro 2a organizations financially.

 

[Trent]

Well, if all NRA members contributed $100 a year they'd have a half-billion a year bankroll to work with.

There is such a thing as "strength in numbers", to offset the titans of the anti-gun world.

 

[torqem]

same deal

if the 65 million gunowners who AINT in the NRA would kick in $7 a year each and quite freeloading on those who do kick in money to save our rights., 2c a day, and they won't do it.

 

[Shimitup]

Here's one for you. Dan Duncan, one of the most humble and gracious host to families he invited to his ranch. He hosted in partnership with the Houston Safari Club a hunt for special needs children and their families at this incredible ranch for several years. Myself and my son along with about 5 or 6 other families were lucky enough to have been able to attend on two occasions. When I addressed him as Mr. Duncan, he smiled and quietly said "please just call me Dan". Sadly the world lost a very fine gentleman when he died in 2010. Seems he was worth somewhere around 9 billion. He had an incredible Winchester collection in the guest house.

He's in the green shirt in the photo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Duncan

 

[UpperAtmosphere]

Tell ya what, guys, y'all get together and send me a billion dollars and I guarantee you there will be a pro-gun billionaire.

You get to feel good, and I get to have a billion dollars. Win-win for everybody!

 

[Sol]

As "crazy" as post #19 may seem, I believe it to be accurate.

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.

Secondly it benefits the state/ government. Yes, it's great to be that elevated in society that you can either afford private security or you get police protection due to position or wealth. The rest of us proletariats, SELF defense is just that. We either can't afford to have private security or we are not important enough that it is provided to us via tax payer.

When the right to have guns is taken away, so is the idea of self defense. Using a gun, where outlawed, in self defense is a crime. Say John Q. Public (living in the bloomberg fantasy) shoots someone in self defense and gets arrested. Sure, any REASONABLE court won't find him guilty of murder when the facts show John Q. shot only after being stabbed, but he probably will be charged with a bogus felony for carrying/shooting/owning a prohibited object. Thus leaving John Q. With enormous fines, fees, penalties and the such all paid to the state, and your not even talking legal fees.

 

[TennJed]

I would suspect that honestly, there are more " I really don't care one way or the other" billionaires than either pro or anti.

I would bet this is correct

 

[torqem]

If you kill while committing a felony, that's Murder One. So if you kill somebody while carrying an un-permitted pistol, you are looking at the death penalty, after 10 years of "living" on death row.

 

[stevek]

To accumulate the kind of wealth needed to become a billionaire requires an extraordinary amount of crimes against society, and to commit that many offenses requires government complicity. To hold that wealth and protect it against the unwashed masses (that would be us) is a lot easier when you have near total control over the people. To that end the richer you are and the larger your share of the pie is the more you will seek to dominate and control those who might take some of it back. That is why the wealthy are generally for gun control (and peasant control for that matter). It's probably a big reason the government wastes so much money subsidizing sports; pro sports is the modern version of bread and circuses.

What!?!?! Sounds pretty socialist/communist to me...

 

[gonoles_1980]

They can be anti-gun, because they just hire people with guns.

 

[itsa pain]

To accumulate the kind of wealth needed to become a billionaire requires an extraordinary amount of crimes against society, and to commit that many offenses requires government complicity. To hold that wealth and protect it against the unwashed masses (that would be us) is a lot easier when you have near total control over the people. To that end the richer you are and the larger your share of the pie is the more you will seek to dominate and control those who might take some of it back. That is why the wealthy are generally for gun control (and peasant control for that matter). It's probably a big reason the government wastes so much money subsidizing sports; pro sports is the modern version of bread and circuses.

Hey, you asked!

Real good post it is the truth and most people do not like hearing it

 

[spm]

I'm a pro-gun thousandaire. Will that work?

Hahahahaha!

Me, too.
s.

 

[piece of meat]

Sol,
One of the things I do not understand about all this is the motives of some of these anti's.

Why are they so relentless and personally invested in this?

These are (mostly) not stupid people, im sure they know there will be no real effect on crime, so why do they hate gun ownership so much?

Bloomberg is probably a smart man...he has nothing to gain financially or politically...and im sure he knows these stupid arbitrary laws will not really affect crime...so why is he so fixated on ending private gun ownership??

It is hard to not wonder if there is not something truly sinister behind the motives of these people. While not trying to get into tinfoil hat territory, i am at a complete loss as to what their true motivations are. I cannot explain why they hate gun ownership so much and work so hard to eliminate it.

 

[zdc1775]

Sol,
One of the things I do not understand about all this is the motives of some of these anti's.

Why are they so relentless and personally invested in this?

These are (mostly) not stupid people, im sure they know there will be no real effect on crime, so why do they hate gun ownership so much?

Bloomberg is probably a smart man...he has nothing to gain financially or politically...and im sure he knows these stupid arbitrary laws will not really affect crime...so why is he so fixated on ending private gun ownership??

It is hard to not wonder if there is not something truly sinister behind the motives of these people. While not trying to get into tinfoil hat territory, i am at a complete loss as to what their true motivations are. I cannot explain why they hate gun ownership so much and work so hard to eliminate it.

It's actually really simple. Gun ownership gives people power and they want all the power in their hands.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Why are they so relentless and personally invested in this?

These are (mostly) not stupid people, im sure they know there will be no real effect on crime, so why do they hate gun ownership so much?

Bloomberg is probably a smart man...he has nothing to gain financially or politically...and im sure he knows these stupid arbitrary laws will not really affect crime...so why is he so fixated on ending private gun ownership??

It is hard to not wonder if there is not something truly sinister behind the motives of these people. While not trying to get into tinfoil hat territory, i am at a complete loss as to what their true motivations are. I cannot explain why they hate gun ownership so much and work so hard to eliminate it.

Virtually all of these questions could be turned around and asked as to why folks are so relentlessly and personally involved with gun ownership.

It isn't just rich liberals who are so against gun ownership. There are plenty of poor folks against it as well.

 

[JustinJ]

Rather than politically motivated groups seeking their own billionaires i'd rather we as a country limit their grossly disproportionate influence by removing campaign contribution loopholes and tightening up lobbying restrictions.

 

[Pizzapinochle]

im sure they know there will be no real effect on crime, so why do they hate gun ownership so much?

??? Oh gosh.... :banghead:

Maybe because they DON'T know that? Or, even more likely, the think there WILL be a real effect on crime?

Maybe... just MAYBE.... not everyone sees the world exactly like you do?

 

[HOOfan_1]

Supposedly Heston said in one of his books that Spielberg has one of the biggest gun collections in the nation.

Using google I can't find any concrete evidence that Spielberg has done anything specifically anti-gun.

I did find one blog where someone misattributed a Stephen King quote to Speilberg

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Or, even more likely, the think there WILL be a real effect on crime?

Like Lott and several others believe guns reduce crime rates?

 

[Dinosaur1]

I just read where one of the walmart kids is joining with soros for hillary. Disgusting. I have a whole other view of walmart now.

 

[Trent]

I'm a pro-gun billionaire. Nay, TRILLIONAIRE!

(Ever look at the exchange rate for Zimbabwe dollars???)