[Janq]

This is new news not even 24 hrs. old but it's already been picked up on various gun sites including regrettably a Brady Campaign blog at MySpace...

Assault Rifles For Hunters?

As I write this, I'm hunting coyotes in southeastern Wyoming with Eddie Stevenson, PR Manager for Remington Arms, Greg Dennison, who is senior research engineer for Remington, and several writers. We're testing Remington's brand new .17 cal Spitfire bullet on coyotes.

I must be living in a vacuum. The guides on our hunt tell me that the use of AR and AK rifles have a rapidly growing following among hunters, especially prairie dog hunters. I had no clue. Only once in my life have I ever seen anyone using one of these firearms.

I call them "assault" rifles, which may upset some people. Excuse me, maybe I'm a traditionalist, but I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity. I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles. They tell me that some companies are producing assault rifles that are "tackdrivers."

Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern. I've always been comfortable with the statement that hunters don't use assault rifles. We've always been proud of our "sporting firearms."

This really has me concerned. As hunters, we don't need the image of walking around the woods carrying one of these weapons. To most of the public, an assault rifle is a terrifying thing. Let's divorce ourselves from them. I say game departments should ban them from the praries and woods.


UPDATE: As a point of clarification about this blog, it is important for everyone to realize that the opinions expressed here are Jim’s and not necessarily those of Outdoor Life.

I’ve been friends with Jim for many years and have shared countless great times with him talking about both hunting and guns. While I totally support Jim’s right to express his point of view—this is his blog after all—I don’t happen to agree with him on this matter.

His position that AR- and AK-style rifles don’t have a place among our “sporting arms” is not one that I personally, or Outdoor Life as a magazine, happens to share.

In the six years that I’ve worked at Outdoor Life we have never wavered in our support of our Second Amendment rights, which don’t, and shouldn’t, make a distinction about the cosmetic look of the guns that we choose take to our local gun clubs or into hunting camp.

That said, I don’t expect every other hunter and sportsman out there to have a set of opinions that moves in lockstep with mine. So while I don’t share Jim’s view on this, I also know that he is still the same wonderfully talented and good-natured person he was before this post went up. For those of you who have followed him for all or part of his more than thirty years at Outdoor Life, I would ask you to bear that in mind before damning him with personal attacks.

John B. Snow
Executive Editor
Outdoor Life

Source - http://outdoorlife.blogs.com/zumbo/2007/02/assault_rifles_.html

- Janq

 

[Vostok 7]

First of all, the guy needs a huge WLTW sign since people have been using "terrorist rifles" for ages now in hunting, varminting and plinking/targeting. This is nothing new. Second of all, like I said in the AWB thread on Nabisco, there is absolutely NO functional difference between your SKS, AK or AR and any "hunting" semi-auto available on the markent.

To discriminate between rifles for purely visual reasons is idiotic and moronic at best. But this guy wasn't just happy with that, he had to throw in standard American ignorance, bigotry and sensationalism into the mix. For someone who writes for magazine catering to the firearms community this is egregious and horrifying. I'm appalled.

Vostok 7

 

[DJ 9iron]

Ignorant pussy.











[Yeah I know, not the most intelligent response, but sometimes its warranted]

 

[Janq]

The latest update...

tatement 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 [email protected].

http://outdoorlife.blogs.com/zumbo

- Janq

 

[MrMcCrackin]

i notice this morning at 6am that Remington already had a blurb on their home page about how they are "no longer affilated" with zumbo and that an offical statement will be available soon!

 

[MrMcCrackin]

here it is:

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.

http://www.remington.com/library/press/2007/2007-1.asp

 

[Vostok 7]

here it is:





http://www.remington.com/library/press/2007/2007-1.asp

That is pure awesomeness. Mega kudos to Remington for doing that, even when they don't make or sell "terrorist rifles".

Whats the odds on whether or not this loser will have a job later this week?

Vostok 7

 

[Pre-diddy]

He'll have a job. Read his first post and he says that he was on his hunting trip with the guys from Remmington. That is no accident, all those guys are good friends and if anything like the automobile press, they all know eachother well within the industry.

The companies may be publicly severing ties to save face and help PR, but dont think Zumbo is going to be starving anytime soon, his friends woudn't allow it. No, he'll be back but farther out of the public eye maybe as an un-credited/annonymous contributor to firearms publications occasionally or at least untill this incident settles in the back of the public's mind.

Its just like in real life, if you've ever been out in public with a group of friends. The "dumb one" says something innapropriate, and everyone else reacts by making fun of him or distancing themselves for a little while. But after you leave the watchfull eye of the public, you aren't going to really abandon a friendship over a brief lapse of judgement. You may however decide not to go back to that same bar/restaurant/etc. with the same friend in tow. And if anyone asks whatever happend to that moron that used to hang out with you - just shug your shoulders, "Oh, we don't really hang out with him anymore." (*wink wink)


All in all, I'm not going to hate on the guy. I was mortified when I read it at first, instantly realizing the implications of what he was saying (long before he did, for sure). He opened his mouth before thinking, something we all have done at one point or another. While its a shame in the grand scheme of things, the damage has been done and energy now would be much better spent containing it as opposed to continuing to give this "story" any more attention than it already got.

At this point he's just another guy out there who doesn't share my view on firearms in the slightest, and his thoughts on them mean no more or less to me than any other person I don't know.

 

[Jeremy]

Like it or not this is a pretty common opinion among the older 50+ traditionalist crowd and there are a lot of them out there, I would bet if you'd pivk up the next issue of outdoor life mag it'll be a pretty even split.

 

[ShartMaster]

bullshit move by the magazine and remington

his view on things IMHO is bullshit as well

 

[Gun-Nut]

What really crawled under my skin, was when he started calling them "terrorist rifles".
One of the most devastating weapons on the battlefield is a sniper rifle,which is based on the modern hunting rifle. I'm sure he's used a Remington 700 many times, but doesn't consider this a "terrorist rifle".

 

[Vostok 7]

What really crawled under my skin, was when he started calling them "terrorist rifles".
One of the most devastating weapons on the battlefield is a sniper rifle,which is based on the modern hunting rifle. I'm sure he's used a Remington 700 many times, but doesn't consider this a "terrorist rifle".

Well, really, calling them "terrorist rifles" is just a completely unprofessional and inflammatory way to refer to them. There was no call to use that sort of terminology.

Vostok 7

 

[Gun-Nut]

That's what I was saying. I've met Jim a few years ago at a Sportsmans show. I can't believe someone like him would spew this kind of BS.

 

[Vostok 7]

BTW, just an update, apparently he was fired last week over this whole thing, and he lost ALL his sponsors.

<--- called it

Vostok 7

 

[Gun-Nut]

Good, someone of his stature should understand the power of his own words.

 

[einzelherz]

pretty sad when someone's opinion costs him his job to major applause.

 

[jamz]

pretty sad when someone's opinion costs him his job to major applause.

Yeah, but when you hint that a whole bunch of law abiding people are terrorists, you get an energetic response.

I mean really. The word is heavily, heavily loaded, In today's day and age, being labeled a terrorist can get you taken away, off ot the gulag, with no right to judge, jury, prosection or anything. It is possibly the worst legal thing you can call someone.

I am quite happy to see someone with those beliefs uncerimoniously ejected from the gun and freedom loving community. I will be much, much happier, however, if he returns, having fully internalized the real reason that the 2nd amendment exists, black rifles place in that amendment, and becomes a powerful, vocal and widespread activist for that idea.

 

[Janq]

Agreed Jamz, correct.
But the irony in this is kind of funny as per Einzelherz's observation.

I'll bet every dime I have and will ever have that Zumbo considered himself to be one who is not 'politically correct'. Further I'll bet that most any one who had a problem with his statements will or has said same.
meanwhile ehre is Zumbo who does just that saying something that is not at all politically correct, to those of the conservative right, and boom guess what happens. Even as normally it's the conservative right handed folks who othersie constantly complain about political correctness and it's being fubar in todays world...like it's something new that hasn't been around since the dawn of human civilization in practice.

Bottom line is dude was wrong _and_ wholly ignorant, that much is plainly obvious.
Even still he was speaking his mind which is fine and as well was obviously doing so contrary or unthinkingly toward the politcal correctness of his audience, associates, and financial supporters.
They turned on him largely for being exactly what they do not generally care for, he being not politically correct.

The liberal left has got to be eating this stuff up...

- Janq

 

[DJ 9iron]

I think it goes beyond just being politically in-correct. I think he was viewed as being an enemy of the "team" or jumping ship. I'd like to think that this situation can go beyond the politically correct terminology that he did or did not use. It was more of a betrayal than being conservative or liberal. Conservativism FTW.

 

[jamz]

It depends on how narrowly you define "politically correct". If you mean it by how say, the nation currently defines politically correct, it is possibly spot-on. If you mean it in terms of politically correct in your limited circle of leadership, it means almost the polar opposite.

Also I think there is a real difference between being politically correct and blatantly insulting. To me, not being politically correct is not trying had to alienate someone, versus definitely trying to alienate someone.

Bottom line is, well, the bottom line. No sponsor, magazine or other hiring entity wants to shoulder someone who makes 50% of their customers or readership mad.