The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 18, 2019, 12:23 PM   #1
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,836
Anti-Gun Democrat Buys Controlling Interest in Meateater Hunting Show

He’s also anti-hunting as well, so interesting purchase.

http://thefederalist.com/2019/01/17/...cused-company/

More details at the link; but the Meateater editorial director is now Ben O’Brien, the former marketing manager for Yeti, and a board member of several astroturf “hunting” groups that donate exclusively to Dems.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old January 18, 2019, 02:02 PM   #2
kmw1954
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 11, 2016
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 1,206
Simple enough, quit supporting the Show, sponsors, events and products. Let it fail. After all it's his money to lose isn't it. He can blow it up if he so desires. The hunters and sports men and women will find other resources and venues to take their business.

So again, let them all dry up and plow away!
kmw1954 is offline  
Old January 18, 2019, 03:49 PM   #3
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 19,212
Quote:
Simple enough, quit supporting the Show, sponsors, events and products. Let it fail.
It may not be a matter of "letting" it fail. I see only two possibilities.
1) they are willing to look past their personal biases in order to make money (which might be considered hypocritical..)

2) They bought it with the intent to shut it down, or run it into the ground so it does fail. (if that is the case, should we really "help" them do it??)

This kind of touches on something I've been wondering about, the uber-wealthy who claim to be concerned about "gun violence" and the proliferation of firearms.

Seems to me that if they were really concerned about what they claim to be concerned about, they would buy gun makers and either shut them down or convert their factories to other products.

And yet, they don't do that. They do give large amounts of money to gun control causes and politicians, though. Makes one wonder how honest they are about their claimed concerns.....
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old January 18, 2019, 04:28 PM   #4
Skans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 10,807
There are ways to try and combat this type of takeover. One way would be to have a group like the NRA purchase non-compete and confidentiality rights from pro-hunting pro-gun media companies.

The NRA can act as an incubator for new pro-gun / pro-hunting media formats, and retain the rights to approve sales, making sure the incubated companies are only sold to gun-friendly owners.

The fact that AR's and AK's are easily manufactured by hundreds of companies has blocked groups like this from taking over a say "Colt" and shutting down the sale of AR's to civilians. You can thank the '89 import ban for that unintended consequence.

We really should brainstorm to see what other methods can be used to stop ultra-wealthy bloomberg-types from simply buying gun companies and pro-gun publications for the purpose of shutting them down.
Skans is offline  
Old January 18, 2019, 08:26 PM   #5
berettaprofessor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2008
Posts: 912
Quote:
2) They bought it with the intent to shut it down, or run it into the ground so it does fail. (if that is the case, should we really "help" them do it??
Yes. Because this one will take bad money with it and someone will fill the niche with a more successful show.
berettaprofessor is offline  
Old January 20, 2019, 10:15 AM   #6
USNRet93
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skans View Post
There are ways to try and combat this type of takeover. One way would be to have a group like the NRA purchase non-compete and confidentiality rights from pro-hunting pro-gun media companies.

The NRA can act as an incubator for new pro-gun / pro-hunting media formats, and retain the rights to approve sales, making sure the incubated companies are only sold to gun-friendly owners.

The fact that AR's and AK's are easily manufactured by hundreds of companies has blocked groups like this from taking over a say "Colt" and shutting down the sale of AR's to civilians. You can thank the '89 import ban for that unintended consequence.

We really should brainstorm to see what other methods can be used to stop ultra-wealthy bloomberg-types from simply buying gun companies and pro-gun publications for the purpose of shutting them down.
Well, the seller has some responsibility in this, no? A little goggle-foo and it would be pretty easy to learn who any potential buyer of anything, is.
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer

"Tools not Trophies”
USNRet93 is offline  
Old January 20, 2019, 11:03 AM   #7
FITASC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 2014
Posts: 4,854
Quote:
Seems to me that if they were really concerned about what they claim to be concerned about, they would buy gun makers and either shut them down or convert their factories to other products.

And yet, they don't do that. They do give large amounts of money to gun control causes and politicians, though. Makes one wonder how honest they are about their claimed concerns.....
But if they did that, what would their armed security details do?
__________________
"I believe that people have a right to decide their own destinies; people own themselves. I also believe that, in a democracy, government exists because (and only so long as) individual citizens give it a 'temporary license to exist'—in exchange for a promise that it will behave itself. In a democracy, you own the government—it doesn't own you."- Frank Zappa
FITASC is offline  
Old January 20, 2019, 12:14 PM   #8
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 3,886
Seems to me, it could be a simple case of either the buyer or seller disregarding their personal ethics for greed. Happens all the time. Could be they both did. Is the buyer looking for a hunter based platform to push his anti-gun ideals? Unless he is targeting "Fudds", I wonder how that will work out. Could the seller just be looking for the most profitable way out, without any concern to what will happen to his "baby" down the road? I'm thinkin' this is probably the case.

Thing is, what one does to make money, or how one spends money should be of little concern as long as it's done legally. Ethics is a moot point as is how it will affect us personally. We as gun owners and hunters should follow our own ethics, and not be that brand loyal that we will follow blindly. Pretty simple.
buck460XVR is offline  
Old January 20, 2019, 02:34 PM   #9
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 3,564
Edited: that was a pretty strong “we’re not changing” just because we have a liberal investor.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابياً

Last edited by TXAZ; January 20, 2019 at 06:36 PM.
TXAZ is offline  
Old January 20, 2019, 05:03 PM   #10
HeathH
Junior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Posts: 5
You guys might want to hear Rinella's response straight from his mouth.

https://www.themeateater.com/hunt/fi...-meateater-inc


I will take the guy's word. He hasn't shown me any reason not to yet.
HeathH is offline  
Old January 20, 2019, 06:07 PM   #11
Salmoneye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 31, 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,075
Quote:
You guys might want to hear Rinella's response straight from his mouth.

https://www.themeateater.com/hunt/fi...-meateater-inc


I will take the guy's word. He hasn't shown me any reason not to yet.
About what I expected when I read the hoopla...

Thanks for posting that...
Salmoneye is offline  
Old January 21, 2019, 06:48 AM   #12
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,836
Meateater’s Editorial Director is Ben O’Brien - you may know him as the former marketing manager at Yeti who broke off the relationship with the NRA. Or you may know him as the head of a DemocraticPAC that spent $1.2 million to get Jon Tester re-elected. Or you might know him as a board member of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers - a group that also supported Tester (and a group quoted in Meateater’s most recent article on the effects of the government shutdown on hunting).

If some asks you if you support a ban on semi-autos, there’s a simple answer if you don’t - “No, I don’t support a ban on semi-autos.” Question asked and answered.

In his reply, Rinella starts with “I support the Second Amendment.” That’s literally the exact same phrase every politician who has proposed gutting the Second Amendment uses so it doesn’t tell us much. For all we know, the Second Amendment he supports is the collective rights view advocated by Justice Stevens.

He then changes the question to what he hunts with and states he prefers to use bolt-actions but he has friends who use semis and he gives them good-natured ribbing. In other words, he sidesteps the question of whether he supports semi-auto bans entirely. Why would he do that?

Semi-autos have existed since the late 19th century. Saying this technology shouldn’t be banned is hardly controversial except among people who don’t hunt or shoot at all.

Last edited by Bartholomew Roberts; January 21, 2019 at 06:57 AM.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old January 21, 2019, 10:31 AM   #13
BBarn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2015
Posts: 672
FWIW, for any who might of missed it, Mr. Rinella does state in the audio clip at 3:31 "I have never supported or endorsed any bans on classifications of guns or limits on ammunition possession or any other attempts to infringe on our constitutional liberties."
BBarn is offline  
Old January 21, 2019, 10:56 AM   #14
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,836
Thank you for the correction. I heard ot as he was just saying there was no evidence he had ever supported any bans. But he does clearly say he has never supported or endorsed them. I guess his use of the present perfect tense threw me.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old January 21, 2019, 12:31 PM   #15
Don Fischer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2017
Posts: 1,334
I don't see what the problem is. You can support or not support anyone or anything you want!
Don Fischer is offline  
Old February 8, 2019, 11:38 AM   #16
SmellyShooter
Member
 
Join Date: February 6, 2019
Location: DFW, Texas
Posts: 33
As an avid listener of the Meateater podcast, I can say that from what I have heard, Stephen Rinella is one stubborn son of a gun. He is also strongly apolitical as the article says, aside from his stances on hunting and public land protection. I'd say I feel pretty confident that the show and podcast won't be changing. It won't become more or less pro-gun. It'll just stay pro-hunting and pro-public land. Hee may be a little bit of a fudd but he seems to be a single issue activist.
__________________
"If you can make yourself laugh, you'll never be lonely"

-me
SmellyShooter is offline  
Old February 8, 2019, 06:28 PM   #17
Armed_Chicagoan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2013
Location: Albany Park, Chicago
Posts: 710
The issue, of course, is that if you listen to the podcast you are funding anti-gun efforts, because Chernin will use the money earned from Meateater to fund anti-gun politicians and groups. Rinella isn't really in the equation.
Armed_Chicagoan is offline  
Old February 11, 2019, 11:37 AM   #18
SmellyShooter
Member
 
Join Date: February 6, 2019
Location: DFW, Texas
Posts: 33
New update, on the podcast, Rinella hosted Larry Keane and Mark Oliva of the NSSF and very openly discussed his opposition to universal background checks and his support of the Hearing Protection Act. The Armed Chicagoan makes a really good point though.
__________________
"If you can make yourself laugh, you'll never be lonely"

-me
SmellyShooter is offline  
Old March 4, 2019, 04:53 PM   #19
Husqvarna
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 7, 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 992
Armed Chicagian do you do a background check on everything you purchase?


Do you drive a gasoline/diesel car? If so you are supporting the Saudis, sharia supporting slaveowners...

You have some sort of Electronic device otherwise you wouldnt be online, so you support commies?

Any form of ak or milsurp? You mind as well donate straight to Putin...


Rinella is great

To view guncontrol as a rep vs dem or right vs left is doing it a disservice
Husqvarna is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.07667 seconds with 8 queries