I couldn't be more proud of those backing out of this event. It's ashame politics and idiocy has to be the downfall to all good things. Hopefully next year this event can be held and put on by a more Pro-American Pro-Freedom venue/group! Until then the Brits can have their Tea & Biskets. OH YEAH! and Pierce Morgan!

Ontario Honker, I’ll try to explain where I am coming from with that stuff. It’s not about the guns having rights, it’s about the people. The point is that ANYTIME a person is allowed to decide what someone else “needs”, whether it is the location of their seat or the style of their firearm, freedom to choose has been removed. Please tell me who it is you think you are that you possess the power/intelligence/ability/whatever-you-want-to-call-it to decide for me what I “need”.

Need is never, and can never be, acceptable to a free people as a reason for denying anyone their choice. What would you say if someone else took the position that they don’t understand the need for you to use a semi-auto shotgun for hunting and therefore it should be restricted? What if they don’t see the need for anything but a single shot break action? Can you see where the ‘need’ argument can go?
And before you go to argue about fully automatic weapons or rocket launchers and the “need”, let’s be rational and honest shall we? We both are talking about legitimate legal sporting firearms, nothing more.

I’ll never forget the first whitetail deer I shot, hunting with my father in the Hill Country of Texas. I made a great shot on A Whitetail doe with a semi-automatic, magazine feed rifle. A Remington Woodsmaster in 30-06 to be exact. Not exactly what someone would describe as an assault or tactical rifle. But tell me please, how it that rifle any different from an AR-15? Both are semi auto. Both are magazine fed. AR’s can be had in 6.8, 6.5, even 30 caliber? And both are or were made by Remington. So why is it you get to decide one is ok, but the other is clearly not needed? Justify the difference to me if you can, but only if you have something to offer other than I don’t like the way that one looks.

Hermit Crab, A .223 is in no way worthless for hunting. And yes, I am talking about gathering food. I understand that those big northern Whitetails are too big for a .223. But, have you ever seen a Texas Whitetail on the hoof? I have, none of the deer I have ever shot in Texas were over 150 pounds live weight. Good .223 ammo in the 69grain and up weights will drop a deer in it’s tracks, I’ve seen it done. It’s also great for feral hogs which taste pretty good too. Is it right for everything? Of course not. But neither is that Winchester pre-64 model 70 in .243

You say you have never seen those MSR?ARs in deer camp? I have! Just take a look Remington’s web site. Remington sells firearms to hunters.. Those AR’s are available in not just .223, but as I said, 6.5, 6.8, and even 30 caliber. If you want to get big and a bit traditional, you can get an AR in that old standby .308, or even really big bores in .450 and even .50 caliber. Not 50BMG, but a short round 50 caliber semi auto.

AR’s work the same as those traditional rifles. They shoot the ammo that is the equivalent of rounds from varmint guns or even equal in power to a 30-30 lever action, and as powerful as a 45-70. So how can you honestly say they are not needed?

The fact of the matter is that those MSR?ARs are bringing in new hunters! Folks who own only one rifle, are taking that AR hunting. And that is good for all of us, whether WE want to hunt with one or not.

Ontario Honk, and Awaterfoweler, You say there is no need for the genres to co-exist. You also say you can not understand the need to hunt with a tactical style weapon.
Obviously you don't understand and support the Second Amendment, because the reasons people "need" those things stated above, is the same reason Rosa Parks "needed" to sit in the front of the bus.

OH & Waterfowler: I agree that wood and blued steel are prettier, but I have 2 "black guns" - a Rem 700 and a Benelli Super 90, 2 camo guns - an inline smokepole and an 11-87 Turkey Special. All have high functional utility and all have their place in the hunting world. So your objection cannot really be because of color.

OK, let's talk "tactical". As you both well know, modern bolt actions are largely based on military weapons developed primarily in the first half of the 20th century. With each major war/conflict, improvements were made to increase power, reliability, and functionality of the soldier's standard issue long weapon. And after the hostilities were over, the Army would sell off a large surplus of these guns and many were adapted for hunting purposes. It seems only natural that the same thing would happen after Vietnam and the wars that followed. The M16 has been in service in the US armed forces in some form for longer than any other rifle because it is reliable and highly functional. Just the very characteristics that make other versions of the platform excellent for hunting purposes.

I think the aversion to MSR's is mostly emotional, similar to the one Jim Zumbo had before he lost his job at Outdoor Life and Ted Nugent showed him the error of his ways (one time when the Nuge's mouth was put to excellent, spirit wild use). Thus, it was with some interest that I noted Jim Zumbo was on the list of invited outdoor celebrities who decided against attending this year's Harrisburg show.

Before you get off into this semantic nonsense about the validity of the .223 or the .30 Russian short for hunting purposes, remember that the name of the event is/was "The Eastern Sports and Outdoor Show", not the Eastern Hunting and Fishing Show". There are plenty of vendors and exhibitors who sell/exhibit gear for climbing, waterskiing, ATV riding, photography, etc. none of these have anything to do with hunting or fishing with the exception that they too are outdoor sports. That's where the distinction needs to be made, and should remain. Shooting, whether it's for hunting/food, sport, preparedness, invasive/non-native species conrol, or simply the joy of being as fast and accurate a shot as you can possibly be, what's the difference? They are ALL outdoor sports!
A few years ago, the exact opposite occurred at Knob Creek, KY. That is the mecca of all things tactical in the shooting world 2 times a year when they host the spring and fall machine gun shoots. Note these are true NFA-regulated type firearms here, not the seni-auto civilian market lookalikes at the center of the controversy at ESOS, though you can buy/shoot hose too there. A vendor who specialized in cowboy action-style shooting was 1st advised against setting up at the show, as his products and sport wasn't in keeping with the "focus of the venue and event". Sound familiar? He did nevertheless, and the man did more business selling single-action revolvers, spur-hammered double-barrels, lever-action rifles and Old West-style clothing than any single vendor at the show, and his is one of the biggest drawing vendors at the creek these days. Why? Because a few tactical types got off their high horse and actually tried the Wild West-type shooting with timed events, quickdraw holsters, western clothing and they had a blast doing it!
We need to set aside all of this hunting vs. shooting crap, lay off the disrespectful rhetoric and understand that we as a sporting community have the same interests at heart. The 1st of those should be preserving our rights, regardless of whatever it is you own or shoot.

I admit for years I misunderstood the "Tactical Gear" evolution. I'm not a fan of it, but then I like pizza toppings that make other folks gag. Tactical shooting sports have a place just valid as Cowboy Action Shooting in the scheme. It's a way for folks to fuss with gear and have some fun. "Tactical" really caught on when male and female vets began separating in numbers, especially now after almost a decade of continuous war. The MSR's are what these newest additions to the shooting sports know. They and their interests should be welcomed and protected. Somehow their corner in the game morphed into a bitter social battle with the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban passing. Pity.

"WE ALL LOST HERE". Not really, most of us stood for something we believe in and won. Reed Exhibitions will probably lose the Shot Show contract too, so I would say the outdoor industry won and finally showed that we will not give another inch. Again, thank you to all the vendors and speakers that fought back. The White House is already saying that the only thing that they might get is the universal background checks. Big win for the outdoor community.

Damn. There are many vendors whose lively hood depends on this show. It would be good for Reed to step down and let others take the reins. Cancelling the show is a punch in the gut to many.

Personally, I've never owned a "modern sporting / assault rifle" simply because they don't appeal to me I prefer wood and blued steel. but that's just me I would never tell someone who is a responsible citizen what kind of firearm they should choose. Who I feel bad for are the small outfitters who rent a space in order to make their nut for the year. If there is anyone good with computers maybe we could set up a virtual show for the outfitters to sell their bookings to the public.

Ontario Honker. Your arrogance and apathy toward the 2nd Amendment offends me. Let’s face it. You need Field and Stream a lot more than Field and Stream need you. Might I remind you of the outcome of a contributor to a sister magazine of Field and Stream who took your same stand on dividing the "gun" issue? Yet the issue wasn’t the type of guns used. The issue was that of the RIGHT to bear arms, and defend one’s self from oppression.
You are also naive to think that because you shun the “tactical” side of shooting that you are immune from the hand of subjugation. Your misunderstanding of the importance of the 2nd Amendment is clear. The Iron fist of tyranny doesn’t come all at once. It is slowly forged link by link, yard by yard, chain by chain until the heavy yoke of oppression is firmly around our necks. All a tyrants needs is to take a little here, then a little more later. Why sir are you so willing to give in to the appeasement of a tyrant for a little peace and safety? “Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?” You sir are not standing for principle but merely negotiating for our surrender.

SL, we do not think the 2nd Amendment is telling us its ok to own tanks, fighter jets, and nuclear bombs. But an AR-15 is not an assault rifle. An assault rifle is a select fire weapon like the M16 and M4. An AR-15 is nothing but a semi-auto with "scary" looking "evil" features. Those are real world facts. Yes I know the difference, I carried a M4 in Iraq for many months.

All I can say is all vets fought for the right for you to believe however you want. I believe in the freedom of speech the same as the right to own firearms. Not going to argue with you about it, it's your right to believe whatever you want. But if you want people to see your point of view, you have to see their point of view. Crime has actually dropped off since the first AWB ended, so them wanting to ban them again to stop crime is as dumb as they are.

The gun control nuts are loving every bit of this conversation... divide and conquer.

Anyone who thinks "too bad Reed didn't make this choice in November" should realize it is because Reed was courting tactical exhibitors in Nov!! (Handy to have a buddy in the industry fill me in) Reed saw the popularity of that market--and if not mistaken were calling it the outdoor "and tactical" show to those it tried to get on board. Then December 14th hit, gun control started up as a hot topic and they retreated and pretended like they are "protecting" the heritage of the show. To coin a British term: Bollocks!

Also, my pal told me (anyone else hear this??), there was a vendor who made it clear recently that he would show up with a military vehicle and 1000 ARs to sell with various capacity magazines-- Reed did not want him to attend for fear it would take all focus (media) away from the "outdoor" aspect in this volatile climate...so they naively thought they would get rid of this exhibitor by simply banning the MSR. Mistake! What did they think the "few" firearms exhibitors affected would ignore that while they fight Capitol Hill on the same issue??!

That statement Reed made was ridiculous-For them to keep acting like its is not their fault, and its a "hunting" show and act like they had no part in trying to recruit tactical exhibitors pre 12/14 --and ignore that for many hunters a light-weight, semi auto like an "modern" (modern?? Really?) Sporting Rifle is indeed handy FOR HUNTING and therefore they have every bit a proper place at that show is ridiculous! My style? Nope, but I acknowledge many DO use it for HUNTING for good reason.

I've read posts and blogs here and this is the first I have felt moved to start speaking up--it's early a.m so perhaps insomnia has geared me up, but just upsetting that this has turned into a cluster and now a great family event that many plan for each year--where that dealers can make some sales-- has been totally ruined. And the organizers take no responsibility. Shameful.

SL, you're outnumbered in the rest of society and you call us ignorant.

If you have any objection to the 2nd Amendment, you might as well be a liberal. You seem to miss the fact that you're either for the 2nd Amendment or against it, no gray area. But you're probably right about not being a liberal, they stand up for what they believe in and you do not.

I have never made any claim that the Founding Fathers were "perfect". By all means there were just men, and men have faults. But through the collective wisdom and genius they created and drafted as perfect a document and fram work for gevernment as could be established by the hand of mortal man. And SL I do think differently than you and the rest of the world. The rights of peace and safety are far outweighed by the joys and responsibilities of liberty.

@SL: Many of the laws on the books do, in fact infringe upon the 2nd ammendment IMO, especially the NFA. Banning outright or restricting the sales of any kind of firearm does nothing to prevent or curtail crime, much less deny criminals access to them.

How did this become an argument on constitutional law? This story was about a clueless, UK-based show promoter disrespecting a key segment of the shooting market, to the detriment of all involved, themselves included. No one is going to make any money at the ESOS this year, and yet the promoters seem intent on blaming the vendors. I think for one that the show should become the domain/property of the state of PA like the state fair, not unlike the venue where the show is held. Let ALL those items legal under PA state and federal law be displayed, and if need be keep them separate from the so-called "legitimate" hunting firearms to keep the blockheads and fuddyduddies who cannot or refuse to recognize the common ground we share as shooting sportsmen happy. The watersports, scuba diving and rock climbing gear vendors have their separate space away from the hunting, fishing and ATV vendors so separate us further still so everyone who attends knows who the "real" hunters are and who are the G.I. Joe wannabes, etc.

Sound okay, or does it sound as stupid to you as it does to me? I sincerely hope it's the latter, because unless we realize that we share more common ground and concerns than otherwise, those who believe we're too stupid or irresponsible to exercise our rights without the government telling us how we're allowed to do so will surely prevail.

The Second amendment clearly states the "right to keep and bear arms." The word "Arms" was purposefully used by the framers to be a relative term. Relative to the advancements of any free society to ensure that freedom from oppression was possible at any time ad infinitum. I think the founders were profoundly clear minded in their thinking about this. They didn't say the right to keep and bear muskets or swords, or cannons or horse drawn ammunition carriages, they said "Arms." Rather than try to jump on the band wagon of changing for the sake of change or emotion... I think we all need to feel a little uncomfortable with the perception of the Second Amendment. I think this issue needs to be clearly vetted because until all of us truly understand what losing freedom means, we will not really give this issue the importance it deserves. Can we for once trust ourselves enough as members of a free society to practice those freedoms, learn and understand those freedoms and respect them always? Some things are just the way they are. Isn't that enough to accept? We need to stop wasting our time on trying to recreate something already provided for us. Now its time to better understand the need for it and ensure that at some point, all societies are free and able to pusue happiness. We should all be working at that. Not working at taking our rights away again. Courage and freedom is never free. Until we all truly understand sacrifice, we will not appreciate those freedoms given to us. Fear must never drive our thinking or actions. Freedom needs to drive our thinking and actions.

big deal about the fact that Reed is a British company, it was NOT the UK office that was calling the shots here.
It was Reed USA that made the decision to not only postpone the show (not cancel), BUT it was also Reed USA that made the choice to not allow the inclusion of certain weapons at the show.

Now, the following is merely my own personal and singular opinion:

Reed USA is headquartered in Norwalk, CT… a mere 30 miles from Newton, CT… where emotions are still running high and are clearly not in favor of 'assault' weapons... which is understandable, considering the nature and victims of the recent tragedy.
However, it is again, my singular belief that if either Reed USA had been headquartered in another state, or if the shooting happened elsewhere in the country… that is to say that the tragedy and promoter were separated by a much wider geographical area within our country... I seriously doubt that Reed USA would have implemented any sort of 'ban' on what types of weapons that could be displayed at the ESOS.

Clearly, they don't get it.

Ontario Honk you sound like a north of the boarder weekend hunter to me.
The brits dont like guns, they ruin empires. We US of A Americans do. I think we just proved that here in my home area of Harrisburg PA.
We tend to stand together down here and most of us hunter like all aspectes of hunting all types of game. We even like to harvest paper targets now and then and will grab any weapon out of the safe when it comes to home protection but it is usually the biggest caliber and highest capacity choice. When it comes to our families welfare we tend to hold that in a fairly high reguard.
So if you don't stand up with your brothers in arms wether they carry a pistol bow shotgun or AR. Don't expect them to stand with you in your defence of "free public hunting lands" although I don't suspect you would fight too hard for that anyway.
And before you toss your firearms on the trash heap give me a call I will gladly rescue them. We tend to pass ours on from generation to generation down here. I dont have to worry about the closing of public lands. I have spent the money to ensure my kids and future grand kids have a place to hunt on my property

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

I guess Reed never heard about Jim Zumbo.

Ontario Honker and Waterfowler, I may prefer igniting charcoal powder with a piece of flint, but This is about our Second Amendment rights. A gun is a gun is a gun. I do not care for the emotional drivel of Soccer Moms. If I was a Brit I would tell you to "Sod Off Swampy!"

In every gun debate, sooner or later, someone has to use the term "Soccer Mom" in a negative way. It needs to stop. My wife is a soccer mom who field-dresses her own deer, loves her Ruger Mini-30, and swears like a muleskinner if someone makes the coffee too weak. (Before you smartasses get started, let me also add that she's 5'4", 128 lbs. with auburn hair and a face a lot like Nicole Kidman's). So quit using soccer moms as the perennial example of anti-gun bleeding hearts. I mean it.

There might be some point to debating the relevancy of the 2nd Amendment had human nature changed since its adaptation. As nearly as I can tell from perusing any day's headlines, the world is still well-populated by people who lust after power at the expense of other people's liberty and lives. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment -- as can be unmistakably gleaned from a reading of contemporary documents -- was to make the acquisition of unbridled power by people like that more difficult. How can anyone claim to be a free man who willingly surrenders any real ability to protect his freedom? That may be a theoretical case so far, but just because we have maintained the vestiges of a republic to this point does not mean it is impervious to those same forces that have destroyed other republics.
As for the Founders being unable to envision ARs; they were also unable to envision television and the internet, but that does not mean the 1st Amendment does not apply. Certainly, the Founders understood the value of technologically advanced arms, give the superiority of their own Pennsylvania rifles over the smoothbore muskets used by the Brits. Are we suppose to believe that the founders would only approve of free people wielding weapons inferior to those possessed by their would-be oppressors?

Wow! Some strong comments. I don't get the purist take on the outdoors show - if I see something that I don't like I just keep on walking until I find an outfitter or vendor that interests me. I am glad to see solidarity on the part of some of the show's vendors, but disappointed for those that depend on shows like this for part of their annual income.
They're at it again... I seem to remember how the Brits almost ruined Smith & Wesson with their lousy leadership decisons and management - then the company was sold and put under american leadership and S&W has since experienced unprecedented success. Maybe the Eastern Sports and Outdoors Show should take that real life example under consideration...

It's a shame that decent, hardworking people who book much of their business for the following year at the ESOS; gunsmiths, wholesalers, outfitter/guides and the such were forced into such an untenable position. With the expected quantuum drop in attendance/sales over the whole MSR issue it probably would have meant a net loss for those who didn't elect to boycott the show.

What still gets me is that Reed Exhibitions has repeatedly sidestepped any responsibility for this debacle, nor have they made any offers/attempts at recompense for the business/revenue lost. Instead they continue to blame the vendors who stood on principle, as if in the long run they had any chance. If it costs more to book space than what you could expect to make the entire show, is that really a choice? The ESOS needs an American promoter, one who won't secretly court the types of vendors they eventually shunned in the wake of bad political perception.

WMD1969, the universal background checks I'm talking about is for private transactions. What they call the "Gun Show Loophole".

I still think people can't see this was a win for us. Gun grabbers didn't close the show, the sportsman did. The firearm and hunting communities are tired of always having to give a little. It's kind of odd we keep giving a little every year but the gun grabbers never give anything up. All those vendors were willing to lose a little money for the greater good and I'm glad they did.

Use hunting as an example. What if someone loves to hunt high fence operations, but the show said any vendor that has anything to do with high fence operations was not allowed. Or hunting with dogs. I guarantee you that those people would want the hunting and shooting community to stand with them too. I will never hunt a high fence operation in my life, but I could care less if other people love it. I would still stand with them to protect their right to hunt the way they want to. As for using dogs, I love hunting with hounds. But as of January 1st this year, California hunters are not allowed to hunt bobcat or bear with hounds. And it's because some hunters didn't like it so they voted to ban it, how stupid is that. We have gun owners and hunters that think their way is the only way, well thanks for messing it up for the rest of us. And remember that when they come to take your favorite gun or way of hunting, you will be begging the rest of the sportsman to stand with you.

Great article. I live just outside of Harrisburg and my husband attends the ESS every year. I am not a hunter but have grown up and lived in PA all my life. Hunting, fishing and outdoor sports are a huge part of the lifestyle and our economy. Hunting especially is a very important time with many businesses closing to accomodate their employees time off to hunt. Reed exhibitions crossed the line by placing a ban on any type of weapon. If the weapon is still deemed legal to own and is available for purchase by the public, it should be the vendors choice if they want to carry and subsequently sell such merchandise.

For those people offended, stay home. Or, go to Walmart and shop for their imported Chinese crap and support the Chinese economy. Again, your choice. That is the bottome line. You have a choice.

Is there no American trade show organizer who is capable of putting on these types of shows? The Brits are currently wining and dining our politicians to take over and privatizing our lottery in Pa. In a time where the US economy should be welcoming any opportunity for keeping the dollar in the US, we continue to find ways to ship those dollars overseas.

A year from now it will be time again for the ESS. Perhaps somebody other than Reed can step in and begin negotiations to sponsor next years show without the contraversy and offer a venue for sports and outdoor enthusiasts to come together and share their passion--whether it be hunting, fishing, or other outdoor activities.

@Awaterfowler: The point wasn't whether you could buy one or not, the point was that Reed's decision lends credibility to this false distinction that there are "good" or "bad" firearms, or that there are "legitimate" reasons for owning something. The great thing about the show and the huge venue was if you saw something you didn't like there was an entire FSC to wander and find something that did strike your fancy. If it's just about hunting/fishing, what's with the racing ATVs,rock climbing,scuba, waterskiing and snow sports gear? Reed was trying to secure its position from a political perspective, and you're right they are the only ones who are making any money.
The fact that they (Reed) have repeatedly sidestepped any responsibility for this clusterf*** and opted instead to blame the vendors regardless of whether they pulled out or not is just plain wrong. A business agreement is NOT a suicide pact and if a vendor or sponsor recognized that they were likely to lose $ for participating is that really a choice?
There are also all of the local businesses in Harrisburg; restaurants, hotels and the like who are taking a huge hit in their bottom line. Any recompense there? No, there isn't and for Reed to blame the people who stood to lose the most for their decision is like executing a man by firing squad and charging his next of kin for the ammunition used.

Interesting how this discusion broke down into two camps. The non tactical bunch who do not like ar style weapons and tactical stuff and the ones that do or don't care.

I understand the traditionalist who does not like any firearm that looks like a military weapon. It really gets under your skin to see all the "tactical" stuff at any hunting outdoor show. I get it. I'm not into zombie anything. lol

I also understand the guys that use a military style weapons for hunting, self defence or for target shooting. They are accurate, fun to shoot and cool looking.

The powers at be will try to devide us into many sub-groups in an effort to make us all weaker and some of us more receptive to a "common sense" approach to gun control for the "good of the public".

Don't buy into this BS!

As for the timing - it wasn't stupid, it was planned. Someone got to Reed's and told them to do it and it made big news. It also pissed off a bunch of vendors who will not make any money. Not to mention upsetting the shooting public that would have spent ten's of thousands of dollars buying firearms and gear.

The powers at be got exactly what they wanted - a cancelled "Gun show" and more of the general public arguing about the validity of military style weapons.

Do you really think this just happened? LOL!

Personally I like some firearms better than others but who am I to tell someone else what he or she has the right to buy or see at a Sports and Outdoor show?

Right now tactical is selling like hotcakes. Lot's of money to be made. Can you blame them?

When did the rights of others have to do with my/your feelings?

OK - cool, you don't like cammo, or ar's or_________ (insert what gun or stuff you hate here).
But those are YOUR FEELINGS. So I'm sorry mate. I respectfully disagree.

When I see the "Tactical" displays, I usually walk through, look around... and wonder why?, and keep going. I don't buy the stuff. To much $$$ and hype. Agreed, some of it is cool looking.

Discaimer: I own both styles of weapons, hunt on my property and only harvest what I'm willing to eat. So mostly I blast away at paper targets.
I don't at shoot anyone including zombies! But if the walking dead do come after me, I'll double tap em! :)

As always, these are just my humble opinions. JMHO

@Scott Clearman: Bravo dude, well said! There are too many armchair hunters/gun store commandoes out there shooting off their mouths about things they know nothing about, and are too stubborn or stupid to learn more about guns than what they think they know. Yeah I know I said we need to lay off the namecalling but this exactly the sort of crap the Feinsteins and Schumers of the world want us to partake in; viewing the sales, ownership and use of certain guns, calibers, etc. as "bad" or "of no legitimate use". We are ALL shooters, regardless of what we shoot at or why.

@BC Underwood: You're wasting your time arguing w/someone like that. Whenever they get faced with the facts they try and get personal and inject emotion into the rhetoric. The FACT of the matter is the 2nd Ammendment isn't not outdated, obselete or not needed because of the National Guard, police etc. It is the law of the land, and the law clearly states the PEOPLES' right, not the govt's, state's, county's, town's, neighborhood's, etc. shall not be infringed. That is a clear and powerful distinction, wholly unique to our constitution. So what if more people believe that it shouldn't be that way or not; the law is still the law. It has withstood review by the highest court in the land as an individual right and unless we allow it to be changed that's the way it will remain. As of right now the anti-gunners do NOT have the votes needed to advance such a thing in either house of Congress, and they know it. Most of the current democratic leadership remember 1994 and the Feinstein ammendment cost them both houses. Obama cannot Run again, Harry Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, Kerry, etc. can, and I seriously doubt they will do anything hand the GOP a super-majority (60+seats) in the Senate for the last 2 years of Obama's 2nd term.

SL, tell us then what is the view of the second amendment? You say I am outnumbered, and no one sees it my way. Then I simply ask, without calling names or making fun of your view, how do you see the second amendment? What did the Founding Fathers not envision?

We Irish would whole heartedly agree, Z-man!

@BC Underwood: Universal checks AND registration already exists, just ask any FFL dealer who uses NIX for their transaction approvals. Those same dealers are also required by law to keep and maintain the ATFE Form 4473's for every transaction that requires one for as long as they hold their license, to be made available for ATFE inspection/review at any time.

All NIX use the NIX/NCIC database so that info is already available. They repeatedly maintain that the records are destroyed but the true likelyhood of that in this digital age is rather slim.

Hit submit too soon. Why is the Remington illegal?

The biggest sports show in the country cancelled and gunowners fighting among themselves.

Who won?

As far as I know it has always been that way. I have been hunting for 30+ years as well as two years shadowing my father before I reached the legal age of 12.

I remember when Mario Coumo and the Democrats in the NY Assembly tried to ban all shotguns with a capacity of more than 6 rounds in NY. I couldn't believe that Winchester's Model 12 would be put in the same banned class as a "black gun." It was though. Firearms as American as apple pie can be, and will be banned on the whim of these politicos. This is about political opportunism, not public safety. The Honkster knows it, he's just refusing to admit it to himself.

Asian dating --- If you can not tolerate me, not you too narrow minded, is my personality is too great. www.lilydating.com

@Awaterfowler: "Lord forbid someone be sensitive to a hot topic issue." We in the shooting community have every right to be sensitive to this matter, because there are those out there who seek to severely curtail our constitutional rights, if not altogether eliminate the ones with which they don't agree. For the promoter of a major event to try and lend some credence or legitimacy to such an idea is not only fundamentally wrong, it is reprehensible, for they enacted a policy that has and will have an extremely negative impact on the bottom line of a lot of people, regardless of if they elected to boycott the show or not.

As for the whole camo/tactical argument, look at the history of marketing trends, advertising and the products offered since WW2 and esp. Vietnam. If you want a better understanding of the interrelation of the 2 read NOT A GOOD DAY TO DIE by Sean Naylor. In it you will read how some of the most elite and capable soldiers in the world (Delta operators)in the Shahikot Valley in Afghanistan used high country archery camo developed by Mossy Oak and sold by Cabela's. They were also key in it's development for the use of us who aren't in harm's way on the other side of the world.

ha ha ontario and hermitcrab don't say anything bad about msr's or the tatical nuts and rednecks come out in droves

I think all you guys are putting way too much thought into this. The Anti's don't know and don't care about the difference's in firearms! To use the colloquialism "it's a slippery slope" Or more accurately a slow progression towards no guns. If you think I'm being alarmist, look at New York!
Honker might have legitimate reasons for not wanting MSR's at that show but Reed is being hypocritical because the show's name is SPORT not hunting and fishing expo! The PR's press junket says it all, "we're sorry we have to close, but a few vendors spoiled it for everyone, we blame you the fans." I'm all for free enterprise, but plenty of people hunt with "black" rifles. Plus black rifle's have other legitimate sporting uses. Reed should decide what's more important, their "principles" or their bottom line.

All very good posts. A lot of comon sense responces.Someday the anti-gun activists will thank us for defending their rights. Meanwhile we have to agree to disagree on some ofe the finer points and hang together!

black pink wood long or short next thing you know they will be telling you what kind of car you can drive

The British commoner hasn't had hunting rights since 1066. Americans have hunting rights, under the reasonable regulations we set for ourselves. But the majority of Americans don't hunt and don't care squat about wild animals or the wilderness they need to survive. Hunters do. We are a minority. There are way more people promoting gun rights than hunting rights, and the those that don't see the difference must think hunting is just about shooting animals. They're wrong. Hunting isn't limited to shooting, and real hunters have more to watch out for than just the one issue of gun ownership. To the hang together crowd who gang up on the occasional hunter that doesn't fall in line with the protect all weapons agenda, I ask you: what are you doing to protect those non-gun-related rights? You inviting hunters onto your land? You making habitat improvements? You lobbying to protect varied environments from development? You advocating linking corridors for wildlife to pass from one area to another to prevent inbreeding? Nah? Not interested in all that? Just your guns?

SL, tell us then what is the view of the second amendment?
I surely don't view the 2nd amendment as a law that allows anyone to own whatever they want, without any questions asked. Supreme court has upheld many of the limitations that have been put on it over the years, and rightfully so. I am not calling for a ban on AR rifles, for silly cosmetic reasons, but to ban high capacity magazines would not be too much for us to give up in my honest opinion. No, maybe AR rifles are not used in many crimes, but at the same time you can't expect the non-gun owning part of society to be comfortable with what someone with such firepower is capable of doing. This is just part of what the founding fathers did not envision. They never thought we'd be a nation of 300+ million, either. There are limits to freedom. What YOU consider freedom, is perceived as a danger to others. Neither side is completely right OR completely wrong. That is my main reason for posting. We should NOT only look at our own points of view without stoping for at least a moment to try to understand to the other side. The liberal side is surely guilty of this, but we shouldn't make the mistake that the pro 2nd amendment side isn't either. As I've said before, ignorance is alive and well on all sides.

The only good thing to come from England I'm aware of is English Muffins.........

Scott Clearman,
PA does not allow autoloading centerfire rifles for use during any of its seasons for any game animal. They do allow autoloading shotguns plugged to 3 shells for upland, small game & waterfowl. I do not think you can use a autloading shotgun w/slugs or buckshot either.

So again to loose our largest vendor pool for finding opportunities locally or nationwide for that matter hurts. I planned on shopping for guides for hunts this fall/winter but that will no longer be possible. We have plenty of gun shows that would have and still will allow the so called "black gun crowd" to get thier fill.

I do not want to take or dissallow someone to pursue thier passion for anytype of firearm or its use but I have now been denied mine for the sake of a few not the majority. I am not alone, nor do I claim to be but again people here are celebrating a victory that did not occur.
We as sportsmen lost and for no reason, NO LAWS WERE BEING PASSED or voted on at this event.....

Do they schedule a mid-morning and mid-afternoon intermission for tea?

"I personally do not think it's a healthy thing for outdoors sports to be associated with the whole assault gun/home defense/militia/zombie/tactical atmosphere."
I couldn't agree with this more. Why should we go to shows that we think cater to hunters and fisherman and then all we get to see is AR rifles, bullet proof vests, helmets, Zombie ammo, and all that kind of nonsense? Has absolutely NOTHING to do with hunting. And as many of you keep saying HUNTING has NOTHING to do with the 2nd amendment, so lets keep that issue from being the primary conversation when we want to talk about hunting and fishing. For all those people who support the boycott of the Harrisburg show, there are plenty more who are glad that they won't be going to a show where all they got to see are AR rifles and paraphernalia. Might as well not a have a show at all.

I have long believed that the ever growing popularity of these military styled weapons would be our downfall, and it sure looks like the entire world is against us right now, doesn't it?? Even DP himself predicted this in his infamous 1994 F&S article, so I have to take my hat off to him for having such foresight. Foresight that much of the rest of the shooting community surely DOESN'T have!

"And let's not forget that, like everyone in every period of history, they were subject to the mores of their own era."

Just like the 2nd amendment is viewed differently in this era. LOL

Well its Troll season again.

OH; You can’t tell people who don’t want to listen and only want to hear their own braying, And frankly I am sick to death of this topic, which is why I don’t comment much anyone. It supposed to be about outdoors. If you want to beat this to death, go to the message board section or try GUNS AND AMMO. In 20 years in uniform I have all the freakin black rifles I ever want to see, hold, clean or shoot. I hated carrying them then and I am not to fond of them now. But; If someone with proper training, license and registration wants one and relive that time in their life, fine by me.

Last year, some of us predicted this would happen. There would be another nut job and the fuse would be lit again. When the average guy no longer feels safe, the law of the land would be changed. And now it will. When we could have offered an intelligent compromise, some of our appointed "Spokesmen" stonewalled and we got this mess. Again.

It’s not about freedom. You don’t have freedom to drive your car as fast as you like. You don’t have freedom to make illegal pharmaceuticals in your back yard, you don’t have freedom to fish with dynamite. Government’s regulate freedom so we ALL have basic rights. Thats their job to strike that balance. They failed and a lot of hearts are now broken. And the tree of liberty is not nourished by the blood of toddlers. The founding fathers would be ashamed of how that phrase and others have been misused. Is this what our fore bearers fought and died for, the right to endanger children so we can keep a flame thrower in our basement? I am sickened by this whole un-Godless mess.

And If you think that AR in your basement is going to stop an Apache gun ship, you watch too much television. Your CAR and your mobility is a much greater danger to an oppressive government then your AR rifle. If they wanted to suppress you all they have to do is stop the sale of bullets and buy all the lead in the market so you can’t make more. Insurrection is over.

Meanwhile, WalStreet steals your savings and pension, they pollute your water with tracking and call it necessary AND we have a special low tax rate for speculators. All while they have you focused on a non-issue, that could have been solved years ago.

The only one who is going to win in this is sleazy scum sucking bottom feeder lobbyists and the people who feed them by making pointless noise to gin up contributions on both sides. Basically people, YOU ARE BEING PLAYED. Zealots and Ideologues are people who never learned to think for themselves and are what Lenin called useful idiots. But I expect you are going to negative me, please do. Enjoy your self, meanwhile your deer role man not REALLY BE IN DANGER, because when we could have been part of the solution, we allowed the lobbyist to make the problem worse.

I quit the NRA years ago when the current management made it a lobbyist organization. I won’t give them another dime until it changes management. Thats my opinion of the current NRA VP. Here is a clue: I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT VENDORS AND OTHERS HAVE RINGERS ON THIS SITE TO GIN UP SALES. Which one of you guys is writing for himself and who is paid to comment. Be careful what your read one here and from whom.

I supported the boycott, because it is up to our political process to make out decisions for us. Not some vendor from England.

Honker has a right to his option and frankly he is usually right when it comes to outdoor issues. He has more time in the saddle than most of us do in the outdoors are whole life. Although him and I have had our knock down drag out flame wars, I respect the man and his right to say it. And this time I agree with him.

Lets see how many Dings I can get.

PLEASE HIT THE “NO” WORD BELOW TO REGISTER YOUR DISAGREEMENT NOW.

“Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?”

If you somehow can't remember, those people who wrote the 2nd amendment, and who you hold so beloved, also had NO problem keeping people in "chains and slavery". You guys hold the founding fathers as being so perfect when it comes to your beloved 2nd amendment, but give little thought to other things they also believed in which were FAR from commendable. If they were so RIGHT about the 2nd amendment, why were they so WRONG about slavery, a practice that had already been abolished by most civilized nations? The answer is simple. They were FAR from perfect men, which means they couldn't foresee what the world would look like 240 years into the future. Thus, you guys may cling to the 2nd amendment as they may have viewed it, but I can assure you the rest of society doesn't share your view. Societies views changed on slavery, race relations, women's rights, prohibition, etc. over the years, and so it has on the 2nd amendment. You guys of course will call these people unpatriotic, and against our constitution, but I guess you would call all others who were against such things as slavery unpatriotic also then? You guys surely don't want to hear it, but most of society does not think like you. You are actually vastly outnumbered, and the more extreme and fanatical you make yourselves look, the worse it will be.

I agree with their logic. We should not forget that some of the blog editors were less than subtle in their criticism of the zombieists takeover of SHOT last year. I would much rather see a tactical show separate from the sportsman's one. However, Reed's timing on this is of course dumb. Really dumb. I do hope in the future they will set a trend that moves towards segregating the two aspects of gun culture entirely. I would rather not have to explain to my grandkids why we need to pass by certain black plastic sections of these "outdoors" shows. I would rather that they grow up knowing the two are entirely unrelated ... in spite of some silly advertising agency's new description of ARs being MSRs.