Hypocritical Celebs With Private Armed Security Fund, Back Gun Prohibition March

P. Gardner Goldsmith | March 25, 2018
Font Size

There’s nothing like bald-faced, super-nova-level hypocrisy to convince others you believe in a cause.

And that level of hypocrisy was on rare display March 24 as numerous celebrities and big-wigs helped fund, and/or marched in, the anti-gun “March for Life” across the U.S.

What’s wrong with celebs backing laws to punish civilians for privately exercising their right to keep and bear arms? Well, apart from the fact that they back threats of government violence against innocent people who have an inherent right to protect themselves and their property, many of these celebrities live their lives or make public appearances while surrounded by armed guards. In some cases, the celebs even get massive, government-funded security teams to protect them.

But they want “guns are eliminated” in America.

Topping the list of hypocrites is Oprah Winfrey, who on February 20, was reported to have donated $500,000 to the March for Our Lives stunt. This is the same emotion-driven celeb who not only appears in public with armed security protection, but was granted a huge government-funded security presence and road closures by the Australian government and whose security team got into legal trouble after being accused of roughing up some reporters in India.

Then there’s Steven Spielberg, who donated $500,000 to the cause – after making millions off films like “Jaws”, “Saving Private Ryan”, the Indiana Jones series, and “Duel”. Those would be films where, in the three former cases, guns were integral to the protagonists’ survival, and, in the case of the latter, a giant truck was used as a deadly weapon. But, please, Mr. Spielberg, preach.

Then there was Jimmy Fallon, who was all in for the march, but who, while hosting the “Tonight Show”, is surrounded by armed guards hired by NBC. Has he protested the NBC policy that brings guns onto the lot?


How about Kim Kardashian and Kanye West? Yeah, armed guards protecting them and their offspring.

Demi Lovato? Lady Gaga? Ms. Lovato broke free of her armed guards long enough to participate under the careful eyes of armed NYC police, and, like Fallon, Gaga sponsored one of seventeen buses to ship people from Harlem to the DC march.

Do you think Gaga or Fallon provided any of Gaga’s spare personal armed guards or their armed venue protection forces to tag along for the ride?

When a lot of these celebs appear at events such as the Oscars, they are afforded police protection paid for by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Would they ask that the protection be removed or disarmed because: “Guns”?

And what of powerful organizations? You know, the kind that take your tax money regardless of whether you wanted it to go to them?

As MRCTV’s Brittany Hughes reported, Planned Parenthood -- the organization responsible for taking an estimated 800 lives a day across America -- helped sponsor the march as well…to protect “children.”

The federal government is not only taking your neighbor’s tax cash to fund abortion corporations, but to fund the propaganda the abortion corporation is pushing to attenuate your right to self-defense. Charming.

And what of Michael Moore, that titan of pomposity and vainglory clothed in fleece and baseball caps? His production company wanted to work with Parkland, FLA, students who were making their own documentary about the shooting. This would be the towering hypocrite who preached against gun violence while he employed an armed guard who was later arrested for allegedly breaching gun laws.

This is not to say that many of the participants don’t feel as if they’re doing something to help others. But they are attacking personal liberty even as they act in ways that reflect double standards.

Heck, who can fault George Clooney for feeling worried after he and his family experienced threats? The problem arises when Mr. Clooney plunks down cash to promote statutes that would punish others for being armed, while he employs armed guards himself.

There are many reasons folks protested. Wearing a shirt that read, “We Can End Gun Violence”, Sir Paul McCartney attended the New York march because, he said, one of his best friends was gunned down nearby. But when asked by a reporter if he believed legislative work could “end gun violence”, he answered:  “I’m like everyone. I don’t know…”

So at least Mr. McCartney understands that the issue is not as cut and dry as some gun-prohibition advocates blithely proclaim. A good thing, too, since, as a friend mentioned to me, “I love when knighted British royalty lobby for gun control in the Americas. Historically, it works out so well.”

And that’s a powerfully salient point to remember. Prohibition doesn’t stop demand. The British encountered precisely this phenomenon when they tried to confiscate guns stored by rebels in Concord, Massachusetts, in the 18th Century. Chicago residents experience the phenomenon every week, as the “gun control city” sees skyrocketing gun violence among gangs, even though the government prohibits the gang members from legally getting guns.

It’s almost as if people intent on beaching prohibitions are willing to breach prohibitions in order to get guns. How utterly unfathomable.

But what of the children? After all, the march is all about kids.

Statistics that show more children up to the age of four are killed by accidental bathtub drowning than by accidental shooting, and more people are killed by drowning in pools per year, despite gun ownership far outstripping pools.

Will these celebs sponsor marches to curb tub use and pool ownership?

Will they acknowledge their double standards while being protected by armed guards?


Heck, this is a touchy subject, and wearing one’s heart on his sleeve isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

It just becomes unacceptable when the person doing it demands that you give him your own jacket.

(Cover Photo: Nicolas Genin)

mrc merch