If the net goes down, do you still have a job? Any liquid money left? Survivalists better treat their staff damn well when the sh*t hits the fan or they'll turn into fertilizer.
Also, no matter what you hoard or stash, you have nothing that compares to military-grade hardware. Which suggests your survival will require compromising with those who have control over military remnants.
The gun part is pretty hypocritical though, isn't it? The guy at least pretends to be a Democrat, and donates to Democratic PACs, which support gun control, meanwhile he's stocking up on guns and ammo himself: https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2020/05/22/silic...
Maybe he just doesn't want the masses/little people/useless eaters owning firearms?
Sounds also logical. Better for fewer people to have guns when the "shit hits the fan". "Rules for thee not for me" is a real thing. Not condoning, and I don't know if that's the explanation, but there's nothing that doesn't make sense about his actions.
Edit: Rereading and seeing a sibling comment, it's also possible and more likely he's just a Democrat that doesn't belive in a gun ban or whatever his actions seem to contradict. I'm a Republican and disagree with lots of Republican policy. Lesser evil, remember?
It isn't. The Second Amendment doesn't just apply to Republicans, and one can support gun control while also believing in legal (albeit regulated) gun ownership, including for self defense. There are "leftist" gun owners, and there are pro gun-control gun owners. Don't fall prey to the NRA/Republican Party propaganda.
You can be a Democrat while disagreeing with what some or even most of the prominent party members peddle. Politics is about compromise in exchange for solidarity.
You can have guns and desire gun control, anyway. Some Democrats want to abolish guns, but if you only have two parties to caucus with there'll be stuff you disagree with anyway.
If he's leaving AR-10s on his coffee table, that's a problem. If he's got small-magazine weapons, not such a problem. He's got the resources others are coming for. If I were in his shoes, a concealed carry permit might make sense, but bodyguards are probably a better choice.
Gun control can mean a lot of things, and doesn’t necessarily always mean the end of all private firearm ownership.
Even in countries with strict gun laws, it’s often still relatively easy to buy a shotgun for hunting.
If you reach a doomsday scenario, of course you’re going to want guns, and if you’re prepping for that, even strong gun laws aren’t going to stop you from throwing shotguns in a bunker.
12 comments
[ 5.3 ms ] story [ 38.0 ms ] threadAlso, no matter what you hoard or stash, you have nothing that compares to military-grade hardware. Which suggests your survival will require compromising with those who have control over military remnants.
Maybe he just doesn't want the masses/little people/useless eaters owning firearms?
Edit: Rereading and seeing a sibling comment, it's also possible and more likely he's just a Democrat that doesn't belive in a gun ban or whatever his actions seem to contradict. I'm a Republican and disagree with lots of Republican policy. Lesser evil, remember?
[1] - https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-a... (2021)
You can have guns and desire gun control, anyway. Some Democrats want to abolish guns, but if you only have two parties to caucus with there'll be stuff you disagree with anyway.
If he's leaving AR-10s on his coffee table, that's a problem. If he's got small-magazine weapons, not such a problem. He's got the resources others are coming for. If I were in his shoes, a concealed carry permit might make sense, but bodyguards are probably a better choice.
Even in countries with strict gun laws, it’s often still relatively easy to buy a shotgun for hunting.
If you reach a doomsday scenario, of course you’re going to want guns, and if you’re prepping for that, even strong gun laws aren’t going to stop you from throwing shotguns in a bunker.