Gun prohibitionists $pend million$ to erode Second Amendment

Wealthy anti-gunners are spending big bucks to see such signs dotting the landscape.

A report by KATU in Portland, Oregon, and reprinted by KVAL in Eugene, shows how the gun prohibition lobby and wealthy elitists including billionaire anti-gunner Michael Bloomberg have turned their plump bankrolls into political bludgeons in gun control efforts that should alarm Second Amendment activists across the map.

Looking back at the 2016 election cycle, KATU reported that “discovered pro-gun control candidates received more than six times more money than pro-gun rights candidates on the issue.”

That may actually be a conservative estimate, since the published totals in their story reflect closer to a 10-to-1 spending level, with anti-gunners spending a total of $538,288.36 while pro-rights expenditures – including money from the National Rifle Association, came to $52,312.73.

take our poll - story continues below

How have you been greeting people this holiday season?

  • How have you been greeting people this holiday season?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Conservative Firing Line updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: ‘We The People Will Fund The Wall’: Triple amputee vet starts petition, GoFundMe page to build Trump’s wall

‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.’—Edmund Burke

According to a 2016 Reuters report, Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety lobbying group spent millions of dollars pushing so-called “universal background check” initiatives, and the former New York mayor has dug into his own wallet for millions more. In Nevada last year, anti-gunners collected $14.3 million for their initiative campaign, dwarfing the $4.8 million raised by the pro-rights Nevadans for Freedom.

Likewise, in Maine last year, anti-gunners spent more than five times as much as pro-rights activists in an unsuccessful attempt to pass an initiative there.

Washington state gun owners recall the 2014 campaign to pass Initiative 594. Proponents of that measure raised more than $10.4 million to pass a measure that they claimed was supported by 80 percent of the voters. Opponents, including those who ran an alternative measure, spent about $2 million. When the ballots were cast, the measure passed by slightly under 60 percent in a year when only about half of the state’s registered voters returned ballots. Many activists still believe that if gun owners had actually all voted, they might have defeated the measure.

As 2018 looms large on the horizon, anti-gun lobbying groups continue to raise money with almost weekly email blasts declaring one problem or another, invariably with the NRA as the bogeyman. The gun rights movement does not appear to be nearly as active.

The problem, as expressed by many gun rights activists, is that they don’t have a wealthy “sugar daddy” like Bloomberg on their side of the fight. It underscores the adage that “the thing a conservative is most conservative about is a dollar.”

But others suggest that belief may be self-defeating, because the fact remains that while elitists have millions of dollars, grassroots rights activists have millions of votes. The challenge is to get their troops activated enough to fill out a ballot.

The situation is a reminder that Edmund Burke was right: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Related:

If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so.  And be sure to check out our new MeWe page here.

If you appreciate independent conservative reports like this, please go here and support us on Patreon.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.