More likely, he did not "have guns" he was in his office and may not have even had a CCW, IF there was anything there firearms wise, it was likely in a safe awaiting use in a production.
It's incredibly unlikely that he didn't have a gun on him, as he was a gun enthusiast. More likely he was caught by surprise, in which case a gun isn't going to help you.
Id put money on this being some anti- gun liberal that did it.
So your theory is that somebody who opposes guns bought—or illegally acquired—a firearm and used it to kill someone simply because of their enthusiasm for firearms? That's pretty contradictory. It would be like a vegetarian protesting a meat advocate by disembowelling a cow in front of their home. Surely an "anti-gun liberal" would use a knife or poison? You know, anything other
than a gun.
Hmm something smells fishy.
Obviously. He was murdered. Unless you're suggesting it's part of a massive government conspiracy to restrict American's right to bear arms, which wouldn't surprise me given the other ridiculous stuff you post.
As for the victim, if
he was murdered for his enthusiasm for firearms then that's very sad and concerning. Many people might consider his enthusiasm to be unhealthy and abhorrent but that's certainly no reason to kill somebody. I would suspect he was murdered for another reason - possibly money. If the YouTube channel was generating a lot of money - which you'd have to assume it was given its popularity - then that's a very strong motive for killing somebody, especially if there was a dispute over how it was to be shared. It would be very scary to think that gun owners and advocates of gun restrictions were turning against each other to the point that they're willing to kill each other, though given the toxic political climate in the US that's certainly a possibility.