It's true that a lot of people have two sets of standards. Stallone has gotten a really bad rap since he made that door-to-door statement when he was in Europe after Phil Hartman was killed. Of course, I wasn't there, but it was apparently taken out of context of a series of options that Stallone offered to solve the problem. He has disputed the statement since then, but not recieved much press on it. His brother attends a great many shoots and hunts every year.
Schwarzenegar is another one that has been labeled anti-gun at times, yet he shoots a lot. He hosted a shoot in Hawaii for a friend of ours last month.
Now, I have heard that Eastwood is another story. He is apparently very much against firearms in the hands of everyone.
Unfortunately, many of these people live under two sets of rules in the first place. The average guy on the street might say "he puts his pants on just like me.." one minute, then turn around when he does something wrong and expect him to have been above it or to have known better. These are just people, with the same faults as everyone else. I've heard an awful lot of die hard guns rights guys say, without noticing the inherent contradiction, that "certain people" shouldn't have guns. These people who make judgements based on their own arbritrary value system could be deemed to be much less justified than a celebrity who feels that the added threats they face entitle them to more rights to defend themselves than the average citizen.
IMHO, both groups of people are wrong. Either we should all have the right to defend ourselves or we should not. You've got to choose one side or the other on this one. Otherwise, you allow infringemetn upon infringement until it is too late. That is what too many people are missing