The Tail Spin For Jim Zumbo
Posted by Tom Remington on February 20, 2007
*Update* Read Other Posts on this subject
Name Calling Does Nothing To Protect Hunting Heritage Or The Second Amendment
NRA Taking Heat Because Of Jim Zumbo
Jim Zumbo Apologizes
Jim Zumbo Apologizes - Again!
Jim Zumbo continues to experience the repercussions from comments he made on his Outdoor Life blog last Friday. His blog has been pulled by Outdoor Life.
Statement from Outdoor Life
Due to the controversy surrounding Jim Zumbo’s recent postings, Outdoor Life has decided to discontinue the “Hunting With Zumbo” blog for the time being. Outdoor Life has always been, and will always be, a steadfast supporter of our Second Amendment rights, which do not make distinctions based on the looks of the firearms we choose to own, shoot and take hunting. Please direct any comments you have to OLletters@time4.com.
If you missed the comments Zumbo made about AR and AK weapons and his apology, Hunting Sense has both of his complete posts.
This was only the beginning. Remington Arms Co. has severed all ties with Zumbo as explained in a press release posted at their website.
Remington to Sever Sponsorship Ties with Jim Zumbo
Madison, North Carolina – As a result of comments made by Mr. Jim Zumbo in recent postings on his blog site, Remington Arms Company, Inc., has severed all sponsorship ties with Mr. Zumbo effective immediately. While Mr. Zumbo is entitled to his opinions and has the constitutional right to freely express those opinions, these comments are solely his, and do not reflect the views of Remington.
“Remington has spent tens of millions of dollars defending our Second Amendment rights to privately own and possess firearms and we will continue to vigorously fight to protect these rights,” commented Tommy Millner, Remington’s CEO and President. “As hunters and shooters of all interest levels, we should strive to utilize this unfortunate occurrence to unite as a whole in support of our Second Amendment rights.”
We regret having to terminate our long-standing relationship with Mr. Zumbo, who is a well-respected writer and life-long hunter.
Mr. Zumbo’s decision, whether off the cuff or a revelation of his true feelings, to speak the words he did has created quite a controversy. He may very well have destroyed his career and he’s getting all kinds of help from others toward that end.
Outdoor Life and Remington have done the sensible thing. Outdoor Life seems to be taking more of a wait and see approach announcing that suspending his blog was temporary. Remington moved quickly to separate themselves from Zumbo as quickly as possible. What will others do?
Much of the gun rights individuals have been quick to criticize, condemn and call for his execution and that is understandable but we cannot take an opportunity like this to set precedent that as soon as someone within our ranks says things we don’t agree with, to rip them to shreds. Should we simply cast aside all that Zumbo has done during his tenure?
Personally, I don’t feel that there is much that I can say that is going to change how people feel about what Mr. Zumbo had to say. I probably can fan the flames and incite a division among hunters, shooters and Second Amendment supporters but where will that lead?
It is safe to say that Jim Zumbo has made his own bed and now has to lie in it with the realization that he has by his own words, distanced himself from many people and the profession he loves. Isn’t that punishment enough?
The best thing we can all do is forgive Zumbo because he is a fellow hunter and outdoor writer but most of all because he is human. We must learn from mistakes like this and get back on track to work together to mend the fences and wage the war in support of our right to keep and bear arms.
Tom Remington
If you enjoyed this article check these out:
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
If nothing else, this has been a great object lesson in how divisive an issue can be. I’ve seen discussions about the AR issue and Zumbo getting heated on several forums.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:18 am
He’ll pay for his comments for a long time directly and indirectly.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:39 am
I believe we all have our own opinion, That’s why our troups are fighting for our freedom everyday (including members of my own family).
Jim Zumbro is one of the best outdoor writters out there. I happen to agree with him about assault rifles and I’m sure he wishes he had chosen his words differently. I feel for him.
I do understand the NRA’s idea about all standing together to fight the “anti’s” but it doesn’t allow any room for each others different view points. We shouldn’t be so scared of the anti’s.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
I won’t condone nor support the use of “assault” rifles. I say, to each his own. If folks want to use AR’s to hunt, I say the 2nd Amendment and current laws make provision for it.
I lost a lot of respect for Mr. Zumbo when he aligned himself with USO’s (owner), George Taulman, in a law-suit filed in U.S. District Court against the AZG&FD for alleged discrimination against non-resident hunters and violation of commerce laws.
Zumbo made a serious mistake by being vocal on the use of “assalt” rifles for hunting use without much thought to the consequences. I feel he should receive sanctions, but certainly not lose his employment or livelihood. We all make mistakes, and some may even anger folks. Why so different for Mr. Zumbo?
I think OL and Remington could simply make statements that… “the 2nd Amendment views of Mr. Zumbo with regard to assault rifles, are not the views that we share on the subject. We do, however, allow Mr. Zumbo his constitutional right to personal expression.”
None of us will experience the public scrutiny for our opinions that Mr. Zumbo will endure. I say throw your stones at him in blogs, but don’t call for his be-heading. Where’s the humanitarian sense in that?
February 20th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Well said. I am not familiar with the AZ lawsuit.
February 20th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
The foolishness is not being aware of what is going on in his industry. AR’s can be great varmint rifles, perfect for coyotes. They are accurate and handle well. What makes them different from a Savage 110 in .223? Nothing but the plastic and the semi-auto action. I liked Zumbo and I hope that he will redeem himself. But true redemtion will most likely take the rest of his life.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:50 am
Wow, Mr. Zumbo sure stepped in it this time!
If nothing else, this should serve as a real-time wake-up call to the big paper publications about the power and influence of the Internet.
One of the big things that’s not really being mentioned here is that had Zumbo tried to run these comments through his traditional medium, none of this would ever have happened. No editor would have let that slide, even if it seemed harmless at first.
I have a pretty good idea how Zumbo feels about the “assault” weapons being used as hunting tools, and in several respects I agree with him. However, I don’t think his blog is an accurate representation of his true feelings about our individual rights under the second amendment. At least, I hope they’re not.
I don’t like “Assault” weapons all that much, although the State of California is doing its best to designate several of my current hunting rifles as such… but because I don’t care for them doesn’t mean I think no one else should have them. I am fairly sure that’s the same position that Zumbo would take, given the proper opportunity.
Unfortunately, those ill-considered words posted for the world to read will be defined differently, and as a writer and a spokesman for our sport, he will be pariah for a very long time.
Words, like bullets, can’t ever be called back.
February 21st, 2007 at 5:16 pm
You know Phillip and others, I’ve been chewing on this for a couple days and you bring up a point that has made me scratch my head more than once.
I am not going to mention names because they are not here to defend themselves and you’ll have to trust what I say is what I know to be true. I know a couple of guys who “blog” for other big time fish and game websites. I know that they get scrutinized pretty closely as to what goes up on their blogs, etc.
I know of one writer who sends me information that has been rejected by his editors as not befitting to their website - I guess like I am the dog who cleans up all the crumbs that fall on the floor.
With this occurrence I can really only conclude one of two things. One, Zumbo had free rein with this blog or two, Outdoor Life saw what he put up, went with it and retreated only after the fallout began.
I have no way of knowing if either of those assumptions are viable.
But, as you say, we all are entitled to our opinions. Under Zumbo’s circumstances, he wasn’t the ultimate say in what he writes. Either shame on Outdoor Life for not proofing his blog first or shame on them for letting it go.
I’m not passing the buck on this. This was NOT the forum for Zumbo to vent his ideas about assault weapons.
With that said, now we can all wonder about all the other writers out there that may be presenting one thing while believing another.
This all brings me to a point - believe it or not. This is why more and more writers are turning to their own blogs where they are free to write as they please and not have their ideas, thoughts and works ripped apart and watered down by editors.
This is one of the most appealing parts of the Internet, blogging and instant information.
As well known as Zumbo is, he could be writing completely on his own but I’m not sure how long it would take him to make the same money he was prior to D-Day.
February 21st, 2007 at 5:31 pm
[...] *Update* For more on Jim Zumbo, go here! [...]
February 22nd, 2007 at 5:26 pm
Jim Zumbo has made an error. Jim Zumbo has apologized. I for one accept the apology and say as Jesus said; “Go and sin no more.”
I will not forsake Mr. Zumbo, nor any of his sponsors. Consider all the fine and great things which Mr. Zumbo and his sponsors and publishers have brought to the hunting fraternity (and quickly becoming a sorority, also.) I will still read his articles, wherever published and purchase his books.
Again, from the Good Book, “He that is without sin, let him first cast a stone…” I cannot cast a stone. Can you?
Let us show the world hunters are an understanding lot and have forgiveness in our hearts.
Jim, I hope this email reaches you. I also hope someday to sample your cooking. I use your recipes frequently. Good Luck and God Bless.
Smith W. Dewlen, Jr.
8625 Argyle Ave.
Life Member: National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, Safari Club International and the Central Missouri Chapter and Gateway Chapter of SCI, NAHC, Missouri Sport Shooting Association, Second Amendment Coalition of Missouri.
Member Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.
Missouri Hunter Education Instructor.
February 22nd, 2007 at 7:30 pm
My problem with Mr.Zumbo’s blog is he says that he is a defender of hunter and shooters rights. Well he should bring himself to Camp Perry. All of his dreaded rifles are there and being used by God fearing Americans. My opinion is that the man is an elitist hunter and Knows nothing about shooting sports. Great hunter ? I won’t argue that but a friend of the second amendment, I think not. ” IT AIN’T ABOUT HUNTING” and those that defend him should re-think their positions.
My.02
Bill Out
February 22nd, 2007 at 9:14 pm
I think that blogs like yours are sometimes dangerous to the fight to protect the 2nd Amendment. I am not a hunter but I am a shooter. And what you call assault rifles are what I shoot. Because I have always believed that supporting hunting is a good way to support gun rights, I have been a long time member of the Rocky Mountain ELk Foundation, have contributed to various wild sheep federations, contibuted to Duck’s Unlimited and have never spoken a negative thing about hunting. I thought to do so would show the gun grabbers that we gun owners have a chink or two in our armor. You fooling yourselves if you think they don’t see comments about not liking assault rifles and realize at least tow things; 1- even the idiot hunters out there don’t know what a true assault rifle is so we can keep calling any firearm we want an assault rifle, and 2- there is a big chink in our armor. Every time I read some hunting blog that puts down the weapons I choose for my shooting sport and see them maligned even a little, it makes me want to become an anti-hunter. I especially have never cared for someone calling themselves a hunter who kills animals like prairie dogs and marmots for fun.
February 23rd, 2007 at 4:20 am
Jack,
I’m not sure I understand the point of your comments. My blog, if that’s the one you are referring to, has done nothing more than clearly and precisely supported and defended the Second Amendment, so kindly don’t refer to the Black Bear Blog as being dangerous to that cause. Are there blogs that are? Yes, but not this one.
The truth is that as is the over used statement, “2nd Amendment isn’t about duck hunting”, is absolutely true and the truth also is that there are many, many hunters who believe and think as does Jim Zumbo but that doesn’t mean there should be a war between hunters and shooters or gun owners.
Thanks for your comments but you are unnecessarily inflaming this story by lumping all blogs as dangerous to the Second Amendment.
Please call a spade a spade, it will help us all out.
February 23rd, 2007 at 8:24 am
[...] Posts* The Tail Spin For Jim Zumbo Jim Zumbo [...]
February 23rd, 2007 at 9:15 am
Good response, Tom, thanks. I’m still getting my feet wet as a blogger, but this Internet thing is pretty old hat for me. I’ve seen this “dogpile” effect so many times now it’s not even funny, but I don’t know that I’ve ever seen one with the repercussions that this one has had.
Anyway, you wrote:
I agree fully with your point here, but also want to point out that there’s a dangerous and dark side to this. Anyone can be an “expert” on the Internet, and misinformation is as readily available as the good stuff.
However, it’s not just the availability of instant information that makes the Internet so powerful. It’s the opportunity for instant and unfiltered feedback and unlimited free discussion. Here’s an instant communication vehicle that doesn’t know subscriber communities, geographic boundaries, or publication schedules and lead-time. It’s a double-edged dagger, as no communications vehicle in our history has ever had the capability to drive grass-roots movements or cater to the mob mentality on the scale of the Internet.
And this is what I think the old-school publications like Outdoor Life and Field and Stream did not anticipate. I’m sure there are some smart and web-savvy people over there, but they are still operating in the paper-based paradigm if they think they can turn someone like Zumbo, Dave Petzal, or Jim Carmichael loose on a Blog without the risk of this kind of fiasco.
Those guys have been known to determine the very fate of a new rifle or cartridge with a single column…their opinions carry a lot of weight. And as we see now, a single mis-step is all it takes to bring down the very fires of hades.
In the magazine world, the editors could have managed something like this. A month or two after the offending column, the “Letters to the Editor” section will have three pro letters and three con letters, carefully screened to avoid anything too inflammatory, and the hoopla will eventually die down. If it’s a really hot topic, it may take a couple of editions…but the effect is the same. There’s a buffer of time there, and we all know that time heals all wounds (or you die).
We don’t operate in that world anymore, though.
Best thing Zumbo could do right now, in my opinion, is duck into a hole until the bombardment stops, give it some time, then peek out slowly when the mob has turned to other pursuits. By staying in front of it, through his apologetics and self-flagellation with Nugent, he’s only gonna keep the fire hot.
February 23rd, 2007 at 12:05 pm
Phillip,
Not everyone would agree with my assessment of this: I believe and this goes against all the control freaks who feel the need to “regulate” everything, that with for example blogging, everything is left completely up to the READER.
We are learning from this new form of information supply and the Zumbo fiasco is an example, that what we have been reading for years and years, may not really reflect the writer’s views and opinions.
Call it what you will but it is a form of censorship, albeit somewhat necessary.
Now that it is the responsibility of the READER to decide, this should make a better informed hunter or whatever their interest is.
The other guiding force in this new media is that readers are intelligent. They can read and they will determine what is good and what isn’t. This will sort out the wheat from the chaff.
Granted, those who follow bloggers tend to be those who mostly agree with the philosophies, thoughts and opinions of the writer.
The bottom line is this, as a blogger to be successful you have to provide quality. This is nothing new. The reader now has the responsibility to make choices based on what they read that is NOT watered down by editors.
And as you said, many of these outfits are still living in the paper world and if I were them, there is no way that I would allow any writer to have uncontrolled liberty to blog whatever they wanted. No way!
February 23rd, 2007 at 12:45 pm
[...] on The Black Bear Blog, Tom Remington tossed some ideas out to his readers, and got a little back as well. Othmar [...]
February 24th, 2007 at 1:39 am
The biggest problem with people these days is that they are not truly capable of fighting for what they believe in. Zumbo has revealed himself as an enemy anti-gunner and needs to be banished from our side of the fence. We already have enough enemies that we can plainly see, why do we need to keep some skulking in the shadows back attacker on our side? Zumbo has cut every hunter and gun owner deep with his comments and his comments are going to be used by the anti-gunners and that is a fact. For those of you who advocate forgiveness I say you have no real right to own a gun or talk as if you favor gun owner rights. 2nd amendment supporters do not need friends like Jim Zumbo or his supporters. We already have enough enemies who are honest enough to attack us face to face as the anti-gunners they truly are. We don’t need back attacking forgivers with their deer rifles in their closets who support Zumbo. We don’t need supporters of groups who use a false support of the 2nd amendment as a tool to take away the rights that we have fought for. If you want to keep your guns and if you want to keep our Bill of Rights intact you better make up your mind to start fighting for those rights. Vote against the anti-gunners when you get the chance at the polls. Speak out against anti-gunners in forums like this when that opportunity shows its self. Contact elected officials and tell them you want them to vote pro-gun or you will do your part to vote them out of office. If you find yourself dealing with someone you thought to be pro-gun and they support someone like Zumbo, find a new friend. No 2nd amendment supporter needs a friend, associate or political representative that will talk for the anti-gunners.
February 25th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
I have read with much interest at all this back biting, insolent remarks, brainless thinking from people, feeling a need for retaliation.
I am a Viet Nam era Army Veteran proud of my service to my country at that time. The United States Army trained me as an 11 Bravo infantryman and I am experienced and was trained and qualified on all types of military firearms and munitions of that period.
First, I am not an active hunter at the present, nor am I an NRA member. I have hunted, enjoyed it, and finally just didn’t have time to devote to it anymore. I am just a Joe Blow off the side of a NE Tennessee mountain that has nothing wrong with his logic and thinking abilities.
It could be that because I am not an active member of the “hunting, gun owners, activist community” that I can evaluate this situation from conception to the present in an unbiased and unprejudiced.
I have no axe to grind, no need or desire to try to destroy a great man (human being), with evidently recognized authority, position, and expertise.
While I now recognize and see the prominence and effect that Jim Zumbo’s words have when in print, my logic is I, nor most likely Mr. Zumbo realized that this simple opinionated expression (constitutionally guaranteed, i.e like the 2nd Ammendment if I can parallel here sensibly) could or would cause or set off or give the impetus for latent, closet, do gooders to come out of the woodwork and get their fifteen seconds of fame and publication, by making this into a Jim Zumbo Vs. the 2nd ammendment rights of America.
Oh of course, the businesses (OL, Cabella’s,Gerber,etc) are concerned more with with the bottom line $$$ more than anything or anyone else in their organization and operational philosophy- many decisions made is made without regard to the “human factor” in this, just the money. I personally think and from personal experiences over my career, know this mentality and have been in exactly the same position as Mr. Zumbo is in as a “Man without a Country”.
It is one thing to be on top of it all one day—AND the next day be relegated to dirt under someone’s feet being trodden over. The blow and affect to the individual that has made a mistake is often overlooked and all his credentials and accomplishments being a NON decision making factor is incomprehensible to me. Granted guns, gun owners, hunters, whomever the “Brady bunch zealots” all come into the corporate decision making– that has left Mr. Zumbo spinning in the wind, with very few covering “his back”.
I realize the sentiment is treating this as some type of platform, or issue to make Mr. Zumbo the “whipping boy” for whatever purpose or reason, totally ignoring and leaving out, his contributions and sacrifices he has made over this career to work for, promote, and bring pleasure into the lives of those whom a month ago worshipped him and others of relative same status and position, who have basically given their lives, sacrificed their families, missed alot of domestic family things that life is all about, and lived the glamorous life, we see in his celebrity status. Let me say, yes glamorous and intriguing, but only at the expense of what us regular folks take for granted, our everyday normalcy hum drum lives. You know watching the kids play ball, going into work everyday, a trip to the walmart whenever we need something. Mr. Zumbo has missed our normal peaceful lives and trials, by trying to promote, and do good for hunters and people that recreationally enjoy it. The end result is Mr. Zumbo has enriched and made better the way for the “hunting community” and gun owners by giving his life for our good.
Now the bottom line is this—Is this really a Jim Zumbo Vs the World, is this a failure to recognize and give credit to someone who has done so much for the “community”, OR is it merely yet another great, famous, credentialed person, with feelings and family and emotions, being done wrong by the very segment of the population that recognized and worshipped him and his works only a couple of weeks ago. Is it a situation for opportunistic people/companies/CEO’s to take advantage of and use for their selfish best interests.
I personally feel, conscientiousness and ’scruples’ needs to and must come into this. The moral judgments and inflammatory remarks are more divisive than anything contained in Mr. Zumbo’s words he published. The damaging actions of his supposed backers and supporters are understood but in my judgment are only demonstrative of how cheap and expendible the human factor, hard work, sacrifice, and accomplishment factors really are.
This is the time to rally, to come together and use Mr. Zumbo’s right to express his ideas (again contitutionally guaranteed like the right to bear arms). If he was mistaken, misunderstood, whatever on what he said due to not fully understanding the “black rifle” implications, then let us go forward with him, let us support this great educator of hunting, and give him a chance to continue to discover the applications of these rifles for legitimate hunting applications. Mr. Zumbo I am sure has in other things and areas over his career, has changed 360 on less controversial things, and used it as a means to educate the rest of us. I honestly, truthfully, believe he will do the same thing concerning application of “black rifles”.
I beg the detractors, the zealots, the very people who created this to re-evaluate their position, their thinking, the benefits of having Mr. Zumbo go forward, pick it ALL back up and use his abilites and notoriety to promote and expand on the use the the “black rifles” he mentioned in his first opinion. I think this will be the beginning for a stronger platform, a stronger united we stand expression, than what has brought about all the ‘changes’ that leaves us where and Mr. Zumbo is now. He now knows and I believe he will make it a obsession to discover, explore, and use his writing abilities and persona to bring us together, reunited even stronger than before. We need to utilize Mr. Zumbo not exile him to obscurity.
This is the opportune time to show, that an opinion and thinking can be reflected on and changed to support the Constitution guarantees. Taking sides, with unknown people trying to grab 15 lines of fame and pseudo power, with yet another anti Zumbo opinion which may be contrarily used by others to build their case based on the craziness of their non-thinking criticisms used. I feel if people wise up instead of jumping on the condemn Jim Zumbo band wagon, we will see this for what it is and wonder who is orchestrating it—OL, NRA, Brady or are we our own worst enemy by our reactions. Sometimes the most popular thing to do, is not the wisest.
February 27th, 2007 at 12:41 am
I am sorry guys, but Zumo is right. High magazine capacity, semi-auto rifles are not appropriate tools for big game. They belong at the range or in the “plinking” fields. I have been a gun owner, hunter and shooter for over 50 years and have never been in a hunting situation where a high capacity magazine was helpful. If you can’t hit it by the third shot it’s gone. Maybe some would find assault rifles appropriate for predator control or varmint shooting, but in the deer woods they are dangerous. Before modern assault rifles were around I had my deer stand and hat ventilated by an idiot who emptied the 30 round clip of an M1 carbine at a doe he spooked from a brush pile. You “black gun” guys can shoot up all the junk cars you want in safe locations, but don’t bring them hunting. The difference between the attitude of some of the “black rifle” crowd and the traditional hunter is the difference between boys with toys and men with tools. The NRA has always traded on the public acceptance of the legitimacy of the “traditional” hunter and in blurring the lines between sporting weapons and assault rifles. The “ from my cold dead hand” group needs to acknowledge that there is a legitimate public interest in restricting access to certain weapons. The “guns are evil” crowd should recognize that what is appropriate for Chicago or Baltimore may not be appropriate for rural Texas or Idaho. I left the NRA when it became so absolutist. There are a lot of people like me and our numbers are growing. Frankly, I think the greatest threat to my gun ownership rights is being swept up in the public reaction when the next nut job empties four AK mags into a football stadium. This will happen.
February 27th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
I make absolutely zero apologies for the NRA’s position on any firearms issue. I joined that Organization while still a police officer, and applaud the fact that the NRA recognizes that the gun-banners view any capitulation to their schemes as weakness. Make no mistake about it, the Gun-ban lobby will eventually come after your particular firearm, in the name of preventing the actions of some criminal or “nut job.” As a matter of fact, the Gun-ban lobby views any person who chooses to own any firearm as a “nut job.” John Lee Malvo and John Allen Muhammad, the Beltway Snipers, took out their victims a single shot at a time. Does the fact that they didn’t “empty four AK mags” into their victims make them any less dead? Any freedom can be abused, and the solution is to remove from Society those who demonstrate that they are incapable of peacefully living in a free society, not to eliminate the freedom itself. You will never thwart the ultimate agenda of the gun banners by bashing the NRA in the hope of currying favor with the Anti-gun Lobby.
February 28th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
Bad point. The nut job or terrorist who empties 4 AK mags into a crowed public location will kill or wound dozens or more within a few seconds. A series of such events will happen and will bring a public reaction that will threaten all gun our ownership rights. Because you and the NRA are absolutist you lump all of us who believe that there is a legitimate public interest in restricting access to certain weapons with those very few absolutist “gun banners” on the other side who want to eliminate gun ownership entirely. The fact is that modern military small arms have advanced to the point of being the equivalent of hand held WMD’s. Even the relatively primitive AK’s qualify. Is there any type of small arm that you would restrict access to? When the US military adopts a hyper velocity rail gun or “metal storm” rifle as standard issue, will you insist that there should be a civilian version and that it is appropriate for hunting?
February 28th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
Jim,
What I am stating is that the gun-banners have all of us in their sights, and their proposals to further infringe on firearms ownership in the name of “safety” always has a hidden agenda. I personally do not choose to hunt, but I will defend to the bitter end your right to do so. I would hope that you would do the same regarding gun rights for all law-abiding citizens. The weapons that are commonly referred to as “assault rifles” are in fact not true assault rifles. The name has been applied by the media and the gun-banners, and they have been successful in getting semi-automatic firearms lumped into the same category as fully-automatic weapons in the minds of those who don’t know any better. I am not telling you anything that you don’t already know. As to your question about demanding the right to own hyper velocity rail guns or “metal storm” rifles, let me state that an AK knock-off or an AR-15 is not by any stretch of the imagination in the same class as such weapons. The semiautomatic rifles that many of you refer to as “assault weapons” fire one round with every pull of the trigger, and are often less powerful than many standard bolt-action hunting rifles. I don’t deny that most of them accept high-capacity magazines. Common sense must apply. The problem is determining who defines “common sense.” By the way, since you have chosen to escalate the rhetoric, I don’t support private ownership of nuclear weapons, either. Again, as you already know, true assault rifles cannot be legally possessed without going through an extensive Government screening process, including a thorough background check, fingerprinting and purchase of a rather expensive license. If you don’t like semiautomatic weapons, don’t own one; just don’t buy into the fantasy that when the gun-banners have successfully divided the firearms owners of America, and are successful in reinstating the “assault weapons” ban, that their unhealty appetite for eliminating private ownership of firearms is going to be satisfied. There are presently an estimated 10,000 - 20,000 gun control laws on the books. Have any of these satisfied those who constantly seek to further infringe on the Second Amendment? Think what you want, but I don’t believe for a moment that there are very few absolutist “gun banners” on the other side who want to eliminate gun ownership entirely, and I don’t want to live in a Country where I have to ask some predator who violates the sanctity of my home if he minds waiting until I drive down to the local armory to retrieve my single-shot twelve-gauge so that I can defend myself and my family.
Jim, I have no desire to get into a “flame-war” with you or anyone else about this issue. I respect your opinion, and vigorously defend your right to disagree with me or anyone else whose ideas run counter to your own. I do not fear debate conducted in good faith, as is the case of that in which we are engaging, but I will not stand idly by while the liberty that we Americans enjoy from the blood of a multitude of patriots who have gone before us is rationed, redefined as “privilege” or eliminated. “Live Free or Die,” is not just a slogan to me. It is a part of my DNA. Our Constitution is not the plaything of would-be tyrants. The Founding Fathers recognized that for a Representative Republic like ours to thrive, the people themselves must be possessed of self-discipline. I think that we can agree that sadly, much of that is gone in our present Society, which opens the door for tyranny, not just in the arena of firearms ownership, but all liberty. I sincerely hope that hunting will always be there for you and your family with whatever weapon you reasonably choose with which to hunt. For as long as I draw breath, you have my vow that I will do all that I can to defend your right to do so.
Best regards,
Mike Glaser
Cincinnati, OH
February 28th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
I think the reaction to Zumbo’s comments did more damage than the comments . It just gave the anti gun folks more ammo. (look everyone those gun nuts will even eat thier own.)
March 1st, 2007 at 1:22 pm
Anyone can figure out that China and India together growing at 10% plus will put a real squeeze on the “American Way” pretty soon now regardless of other issues. The world can’t support 3 billion American lifestyles.
March 8th, 2007 at 2:14 am
I belive this whole thing with Jim Zumbo is a whole lot to do about nothing, I can not belive that Zumbo does not support the second amendment, in his remarks all he said was he didn’t think assult rifles should be used in the hunting arena. And I agree. With all the great hunting guns out there why go out there with an AK47, unless you are really a lousy shot. Its beyond me how these big companys are cutting him off at the pockets. He only voiced his opion. I belive thats in the second amendment too. I really hope he gets another show, he is one of the best. Go gettem Jim, I’m with you bud, Hal Clark,Oregon
April 12th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
Wow, it is amazing how many people have missed the point of the second amendment. Under the second amendment ALL ARMS are included that means semi-automatic and automatic weapons, tanks, rockets, howitzers and even nuclear weapons (don’t really know why you would want one). The purpose of the second amendment is to put the people on equal fighting ground with the government should they need to overthrow the government. The government serves at the pleasure of the people, the people do not serve the government. As soon as you say that any restriction is acceptable you will soon find yourself in the situation we are in today where the second amendment has been eroded beyond the point of recognition. If you truly understand the meaning and intent of the second amendment you would see that there can be NO restriction, that means zero laws tell you what you can and can’t possess.
The problem with so many of you is that you see the weapon as the cause of crime. Yes, that means all of you say “oh but “assault weapons” aren’t full auto we have restrictions on those.” You are saying that full auto should be restricted because it somehow represents more of threat to the safety of the people than a semi-auto which you freely admit utilize the same cartridges. The problem is no the weapon, but the person. Allowing for any restriction is what has gotten the second amendment eroded and will get it destroyed. Oh, and hunting is not right owning weapons of all types is.
April 13th, 2007 at 6:58 am
Oops that should be hunting is not A right….damn typos
April 13th, 2007 at 6:59 am
I rarely hear the fact that when the second amendment was drafted it gave the people of that time the right to keep and bear firearms which were EXACTLY THE SAME as the army of their time used.
Darn right black rifles are okay for us to have, even the automatics shouldn’t need special paperwork as far as I’m concerned.
Too many of us base our knowledge on what we read in OL, Field and Stream, and other sporting magazines. Go to the source. read the Federalist Papers and historical debates and words of Franklin, Hamilton, Jefferson and the other patriots of the American Revolution.
Wayne Nix
Life Member NRA
Life Member North American Hunting Club
April 15th, 2007 at 11:48 am
You’re right Wayne. Too many people forget what this country that this country is supposed to based on freedom and the constitution.
April 15th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
With this occurrence I can really only conclude one of two things. One, Zumbo had free rein with this blog or two, Outdoor Life saw what he put up, went with it and retreated only after the fallout began
August 17th, 2007 at 1:35 am
It seems like the mainstream gun culture is greatly concerned with its ability to get it up, as evinced by the number of ads for erectile dysfunction curatives in its publications.
August 31st, 2007 at 3:27 am
It is interesting to me to see the reactions against Zumbo still. It isn’t about hunting, or the outdoors, or “our freedoms”. The last argument fascinates me, for the people who usually bring that up are often spew out the most thoughtless propaganda, whether blind,flag waving patriotism, or the delusion of home defense. With hunting, anything beyond a pump or bolt action is pointless, and those who rattle off multiple shots drive me from the woods in fear. If you cannot kill with one shot, don’t shoot.As far as fear of the government, I don’t know how anyone expects a bunch of hoot owls from the local bar are going to take on organized troops with training, equipment and modern communications. It would be like shooting domesticated turkeys ( I am a veteran.) IN short, the reaction against Zumbo is that of blind idealogues, the equivalent of the Taliban, the right wing Christian nutballs of this land, or the Nazi’s. These true believers cannot stand anyone questioning their beliefs, no matter how lunatic, and somehow equate them with gospel. Here is the deal. IN a very short time, the vast majority of people will not have hunted or own a gun. They will not understand, nor will they care about your or my history of deer hunting. And anyone can spend any amount they want, but they will outnumber hunters by 50:1. They, and others with common sense, are going to ask the legitimate question, and it is legitimate, of why anyone, other then a nutball, needs an assault rifle. And, drawing a line and blindly ranting and raving about rights and interpretations will not suffice. They will have the numbers. They will be able to pass anything they wish, including a constitutional amendment. Now you all can foam at the mouth, bu this can and might happen. Until you acknowledge the difference between an MP-5 and a 76 sport pump, you are living in the delusion that this about the outdoors and sportsmanship.If you cannot see the difference, then what you like is the gun, and as someone trained to use them, that frightens me. Why? Because you see the gun as important, and not what you are doing with it. I also hunt bow and blackpowder, and frankly I do not care what tool I have as long as I still get to be outdoors and hunt. Sitting around and massaging and oiling my guns is not why I do this. A gun is a tool, and that is all. It will not stop me from dieing, nor will it stop an oppressive government or corporations, something people always seem to ignore. THose things require thought and organizing. This is why I do not associate with my old sportsmen’s group, because people didn’t that nature was this is about, but instead saw guns and atv’s as some sort of means to life. I am done venting…for now. Think clearly..and think.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:52 am
ya rite but some times its not work yaar. Give me some more info
June 11th, 2008 at 1:38 am
This guy from the “pensi”, is persistant as a tick, and sounds like he’s from India or Pakistan…too bad he stepped in on an old post, so here’s something for him to consider…..(if he comes back)
FINALLY, SOMEONE HAS CLEARED THIS UP.
For centuries, Hindu women have worn a dot on their foreheads. Most of us have naively thought this was connected with tradition or religion, but the Indian Embassy in Washington , D.C. has recently revealed the true story.
When a Hindu woman gets married, she brings a dowry into the union. On her wedding night, the husband scratches off the dot to see whether he has won a convenience store, a gas station, a donut shop or a motel in the United States.
If nothing is there, he must take a job in India answering telephones giving us technical advice in unintelligible english.
August 14th, 2008 at 6:39 am
I now have the answer to a question I have been asking for a long time and all this time I just thought they were all terrorist training camps.
And, at my age, I don’t think penis enlargement is anything that would interest me
August 14th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Flattery will get you anywhere, but, did he really see it?
August 25th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
[...] Abraham Harrison LLC Marketing Conversation - New Marketing and Social Media by Abraham Harrison LLC The Tail Spin For Jim Zumbo - Black Bear Blog - Black Bear Blog - The Politics of Hunting, Fishing … Tags dog trainer dog obedience aggressive dog train dog dog behavior This product is also [...]
September 7th, 2008 at 10:45 am