Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

ZUMBOMANIA: David E. Petzal’s take on the Jim Zumbo fiasco

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

The Gun Nuts
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

February 22, 2007

ZUMBOMANIA: David E. Petzal’s take on the Jim Zumbo fiasco

By David E. Petzal and Phil Bourjaily

In case you just emerged from a coma and have not heard, the shooting world is agog over a blog posted by Jim Zumbo, former contributing editor at Outdoor Life, over the weekend of February 17. In it, Jim stated that any semiauto rifle with an AR or AK prefix was a terrorist rifle, had no place in hunting, and should be outlawed for that purpose. Then, courtesy of the Internet and all its blogs and chatrooms, the roof fell in.

The speed with which Zumbomania spread, the number of comments it drew, and the rabid nature of same were a revelation. Overnight, this thing became as big as Janet Jackson’s clothing failure or—dare I say it?—Britney Spears’ shaved head. Jim Zumbo is now as employable as the Unabomber, and Sarah Brady will no doubt adopt his comments to her own gun-control purposes.

For the last several days I’ve been visiting all manner of blogs and chatrooms, which has reminded me of when I used to deliver used clothing to the local mental hospital. I’ve tried to make some sense of it all, but because the waters are still full of blood and body parts continue to rain from the sky, I haven’t come up with any Great Truths. Lacking that, here are some Lesser Truths.

What Jim said was ill-considered. He’s entitled to his beliefs, but when a writer of his stature comes out against black guns, it sure as hell does not help our cause.

Even so, Jim made an immediate apology. He did not equivocate, or qualify, or make excuses. He acted like a gentleman and said he was wrong, and he was sorry. Apparently this is not enough anymore. We now live in the era of one strike and you're out.

For 40 years, Jim has been a spokesman and ambassador of good will for hunting. Through his tireless efforts as a teacher and lecturer on hunting and hunting skills, he has done more for the sport than any 250 of the yahoos who called for his blood.

Jim has paid dearly for what he said. He has lost his blog and his association with Remington. Cabela’s has suspended its sponsorship of his TV show; and Outdoor Life has accepted his offer to sever ties. To all the chatroom heroes who made him unemployable, I have a word of warning: You’ve been swinging a two-edged sword. A United States in which someone can be ruined for voicing an unpopular opinion is a dangerous place. Today it was Jim’s turn. Tomorrow it may be yours.

If Sarah Brady is smart—and she is very smart—she will comb through the same blogs and chatrooms I’ve been reading, excerpt some of the most vicious and foul-mouthed entries, print them up, and distribute them to Congress. Then it will be interesting to see how the men and women who wrote that stuff enjoy seeing their efforts being put to use by every anti-gunner in America.

Stay tuned.

Editor's Note: Read Dave's response to your comments here

Comments (1)

Top Rated
All Comments
from Ray70 wrote 5 years 15 weeks ago

The Zumbo video is on Outdoorchannel.comRay

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ray70 wrote 5 years 15 weeks ago

I saw Jim Zumbo on video appologize, and I saw him shooting an AR15 with a smile on his face.:) Click on broadband, then shooting, 2nd story from the top. 8 minute video. Sounds like he's back in business. Cool.Ray

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Del in KS wrote 5 years 23 weeks ago

Zeke,That would be a .44 caliber bullet with 40 grains of black powder in the case hence the name 44-40.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Zeke Boer wrote 5 years 23 weeks ago

cal 44 x 40 what do the numbers mean?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Richard Goins wrote 5 years 29 weeks ago

Wow I totally missed Mr. Zumbos comments until today. I find his words to be more than unfortunate but certainly not unforgiveable. I wonder how many people in the 1800s thought that metalic cartridges were the wrong things to use for hunting. I my self find great distain for people using scopes with Lazer rangefinders. But would like to have one just for the fun of it. I doubt that Jim was saying what he said to make a point about gun control. So come on everyone lets give the old guy a break. I do think that it points out what many of us really feel about the elite that make up the professional hunting crowd in America. They say bad things about hunting in ways that seem less than sporting and then hunt 90% of the time they hunt on private land near a feeder.I know that Jim does little if any of that but the poor guy gets lumped in with all those who do that sort of thing. He is one of them. I think that people are just angry.And with it being a STUPID thing to say, well that made it way worse. Dont forget when you get on the backs of the people who said those things about Jim that they are "your" employers Mr Writer, Mr Profesional hunter. We are angry with our government and some times if you look like your standing with Nasty Pelosi when your supposed to be on OUR side your probably going to get hit with some friendly fire. To every one bashing Jim lets show the guy some grace. I am sure he has earned it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper for the record! wrote 6 years 34 weeks ago

Mr. PetzalI agree with you .99.9%. I left out .01% just in case there is something I don’t. Show me a competition shooter that has never cross fired and I’ll show you a shooter that hasn’t been around long enough! I don’t know what Jim was he thinking at that moment? Perhaps he blurted out what he has been hearing.The bottom line is this David. You and I do have our deference’s in subjects. You don’t like long shots and love shortening barrels on 338 RUM. I will get over it! This does not in any way shape or form disqualify you from the position and editor of this blog! I do in fact respect your position and I have more than the average shooters knowledge to think and say otherwise.Jim Zumbo got railroaded by those of an IQ of a worm and less knowledge of a Range Monkey! Just like the Crossbow debate, the hate and discontent. There are those wanted to go as far as to do bodily harm to a crossbow hunter. Over zealous they become, they did! I don’t use a Crossbow, don’t have the desire for a crossbow and never will have a crossbow. I will not use my personal choice of preventing another sportsmen from hunting. I am a Prosportsman for Sportsmen and I will standup for those that I believe that they to have the same God given right that I have.If anyone should be fired, it must be those that turned there back! How in the hell can I support them and not the other? You cannot have it both ways.Political correctness can just go to HELL!Clay Cooper

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from common sense wrote 6 years 34 weeks ago

I always wondered if someone started running over people with there minivans would certain people want to ban minivans or maybe all cars. But banning cars is just crazy talk, because why? because you believe in them or use them for your survival. My point is are you giving up your keys because of the environmental people. Thats just say the fuel used in your Fuc@ing car has caused more lives to be takin by the gun. Think with common sense!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve wrote 6 years 35 weeks ago

i have a gun made by ward and son finetwist in the 1800s wloud like to find fotos of there guns

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 6 years 43 weeks ago

Egad, Mr. Petzal. It seems as though most of the "body parts" concerning last February's Zumbo affair have landed(?). Thanks for your original (and sane and balanced) commentary on the incident and its fallout.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from John Doe wrote 6 years 51 weeks ago

[QUOTE=Pat Ruger;419558]I know most everyone knows about this, but for those shooters that are just coming on board...Gun writers Jim Zumbo (Outdoor Life, G&A, and more) Bill McRae (outdoor author), and Thomas McIntyre (Field & Stream and more) have yet again added to the attack on our second amendment rights, by stating their opinions on AR and AK rifles.[B]In a nutshell if you haven't read or responded to what Jim Zumbo, as well as Bill McRae and Thomas McIntyre have stated, and whether or not the AR semi auto's appeal to you as a shooter- I have listed below their statements and instructions for easy email response to the email list of some of their current industry sponsors. If you wish to respond (and WE NEED you to!!), please help fight back:[/B]****Jim Zumbo at Outdoor Life:[url]http://outdoorlife.blogs.com/zumbo/2...t_rifles_.html[/url]Quote: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 prairies and woods.February 16, 2007 in Hunting****(post from an industry gun writer David M. Fortier 2-18-07)As most of you would guess, there is a lot of activity inside the industry right now, despite it being a Sunday.[B]Another writer Bill McRae has stepped up supporting Zumbo and agreeing with his feelings on banning assault weapons.Here is a email forwarded to meOn Sunday, February 18, 2007, at 01:17 PM, Bill McRae wrote:Shirley and FriendsI agree wholeheartedly with Jim on this and I don't give a damn who does or does not like it. Furthermore, I applaud Jim for havinghad the courage to say what he said.Bill McRae[/B]----- Original Message -----From: Shirley SteffenTo: Karin Levine ; Lamar Underwood ; Bill McRae ; Bob Pilgrim - Taubert ; Ian McMurchy ; John Fasano ; John Phillips ; John Plaster ; Ted Nugent ; Wiley Clapp ; Walt Rauch ; Wayne Van Zwoll ; Lamar UnderwoodSent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 9:27 AMSubject: Fwd: Zumbo on 'terrorist rifles' in the hunting fieldsHe's not alone either, I had Thomas McIntyre get in my face once on a hunt with Swarovski. He was as rabid as an anti-gun piece of sh*t, and felt they should be banned. Bryce Townsley was there and Bryce and I both gave him hellSo Bill McRae and Thomas McIntyre are both pieces of sh*t you should be aware of.David M. Fortier_____________****Email list so far.All you have to do to reply is write your email letter, then select, copy, and paste all these emails as one into your send address bar and they will all get sent at once.[email]webmaster@outdoorlife.com[/email][email]webmaster@remington.com[/email][email]tommy.millner@remington.com[/email][email]dawn.lorello@swarovski.com[/email][email]sales@gerberblades.com[/email][email]benglish@mossyoak.com[/email][email]pstrickland@mossyoak.com[/email][email]domain.admin@CABELAS.COM[/email][email]corporate@cabelas.com[/email][email]info@stoneypoint.com[/email][email]hans@ himtnjerky.com[/email][email]kimberly@himtnjerky.com[/email][email]connie@himtnjerky.com[/email][email]olletters@time4.com[/email][email]elizabeth.burnham@time4.com[/email][email]ashley.rosenfeld@ time4.com[/email][email]amanda.gastelum@time4.com[/email][email]kristen.baumgarten@time4.com[/email][email]amanda.mcnally@time4.com[/email][email]michael.haugen@remington.com[/email][email]gregory.baradat@ remington.com[/email][email]eddie.stevenson@remington.com[/email][email]comments@harris-pub.com[/email][email]bmcrae@3riversdbs.net[/email][email]ashley.rosenfeld@time4.com[/email][email]amanda.gastelum@ time4.com[/email][email]kristen.baumgarten@time4.com[/email][email]amanda.mcnally@time4.com[/email][email]elizabeth.burnham@time4.com[/email][email]fsletters@time4.com[/email][email]bryan.brunson@ time4.com[/email][email]kathy.kalker@time4.com[/email][email]linda.gomez@time4.com[/email][email]publications@nrahq.org[/email]Here's a copy of my letter. Feel free to use what you wish:Dear shooting sports industry companies and corporations,I would like to notify those of you who support and/or sponsor Jim Zumbo, as well as Bill McRae and Thomas McIntyre- that I will be boycotting your products, and actively promoting your business dealings with these individuals via the internet to every single gun owner, forum, and club I can find to seek out to spread the word.The AR-15 is the M1 Garand of my generation and also a fine hunting and bench rest shooting rifle and I will not sit by and let these so called second amendment supporting phonies do further damage to our right to keep and bear arms in this great country of ours, by spewing their statements and beliefs amongst your product advertising.With all sincerity,Pat[/QUOTE][B]Outdoor Writer Bill McRae's CORRECT contact info is:bmcrae@3riversdbs.net40 Sherman LaneP.O. Box 160Choteau, MT 59422-0160(406) 466-5596[/B]

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pete Varamitch wrote 7 years 3 days ago

Dear Scott the GOOK: Up yours and your Asian gookland. You'll get payback soon.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Scott wrote 7 years 5 weeks ago

America is the land of the Evil empire and land of the selfish chosen few.while they worry about other lands and breast cancer that men contract,the very country they live in falls apart,and the humor in it all is that they help it along with liberal cause and shows of weakness.Yet they forget the poor people's they use as political pawns for money gains and political power as the rest of their people "Suffer".A melting pot of destruction and hatred that is being breeded in this land of the dead is growing closer to its final days and with must rejoice from those of us waiting to take this jem in the rough and recut it to the more pleasant luster you can give such jems.Yet with money and social programs they think they can buy there way out of destruction like western fools do.They think they are all knowing and all powerfull that this dream they live will never die,yet they do not see that it already has died a million deathes and that they have a land of diveded people eager to take power and restore it to the old ways.Yet they lend a hand to there internal enemies and help them grow more powerfull as they grow weaker and there people draw a more seperated line.What fools these Americans are and how weak can these people be,yet they are nothing of the grain there elders were.Such weakness deserves to die and others take there place in power.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pete Varamitch wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

To "Innocent Bystander".... wake up and smell the coffee! Maybe you're not a hillbilly, but you're sure a LOSER for spending that amount of time to write your epistle on this blog, which is a giant waste of time in itself. Get real you moron.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from DeLorean wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

http://216.22.2.74/cgi-local/ffa2.cgi?noframes Second Amendment Gun Shop's

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mark Winn wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

Petzal how can you post this when i read an issue of F&S where you said people shouldnt own ARs.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Chewey wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

The Illegal Alien ConquestOf Los Angeles County3-1-71. 40% of all workers in L.A. County ( L.A. County has 10.2 millionpeople) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This was because theyare predominantly illegal immigrants, working without a green card.2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.4. Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicanson Medi-Cal, whose births were paid for by taxpayers.5. Nearly 25% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexicannationals here illegally.6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likelyillegal aliens from south of the border.8. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.9. 21 radio stations in L.A. are Spanish speaking.10. In L.A. County 5.1 million people speak English.3.9 million speak Spanish. (There are 10.2 million people in L.A. County).(All the above from the Los Angeles Times)Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but 29% are on welfare.Over 70% of the United States ' annual population growth (and over 90% ofCalifornia , Florida , and New York ) results from immigration.The cost of immigration to the American taxpayer in 1997 was, (aftersubtracting taxes immigrants pay), a NET $70 BILLION a year, [ProfessorDonald Huddle, Rice University ].The lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus services used) for the averageadult Mexican immigrant is a NEGATIVE number.29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.If they can come to this country to raise hell and demonstrate by thethousands, WHY can't they take charge over the corruption in their owncountry?We are a bunch of fools for letting this continue.THE U.S. VS MEXICOOn February 15, 1998, the U.S. and Mexican soccer teams met at the LosAngeles Coliseum. The crowd was overwhelmingly pro-Mexican eventhough most lived in this country. They booed during the National Anthemand U.S. flags were held upside down. As the match progressed, supportersof the U.S. team were insulted, pelted with projectiles, punched and spatupon. Beer and trash were thrown at the U.S. players before and after thematch. The coach of the U.S. team, Steve Sampson said, "This was themost painful experience I have ever had in this profession."Did you know that immigrants from Mexico and other non-Europeancountries can come to this country and get preferences in jobs, education,and government contracts? It's called affirmative action or racial privilege.The Emperor of Japan or the President of Mexico could migrate here andimmediately be eligible for special rights unavailable for Americans ofEuropean descent.Corporate America has signed on to the idea that minorities and third worldimmigrants should get special, privileged status. Some examples are Exxon,Texaco, Merrill Lynch, Boeing, Paine Weber, Starbucks and many more.DID YOU KNOW?Did you know .. that Mexico regularly intercedes on the side of the defensein criminal cases involving Mexican nationals?Did you know .. that Mexico has NEVER extradited a Mexican nationalaccused of murder in the U.S. in spite of agreements to do so?According to the L.A. Times, Orange County , California is home to 275gangs with 17,000 members, 98% of which are Mexican and Asian.How's your county doing?According to a New York Times article dated May 19, 1994 , 20 years afterthe great influx of legal immigrants from Southeast Asia , 30% are still onwelfare compared to 8% of households nationwide. A Wall Street Journaleditorial dated December 5, 1994 quotes law enforcement officials as statingthat Asian mobsters are the "greatest criminal challenge the country faces."Not bad for a group that is still under 5% of the population.Is education important to you? Here are the words of a teacher who spentover 20 years in the Los Angeles School system. "Imagine teachers inclasses containing 30-40 students of widely varying attention spans andmotivation, many of whom aren't fluent in English. Educators seek learningmaterials likely to reach the majority of students and that means fewerwords and math problems and more pictures and multicultural references."WHEN I WAS YOUNGI remember hearing about the immigrants that came through Ellis Island .They wanted to learn English.They wanted to breathe free.They wanted to become Americans.Now, far too many immigrants come here with demands.They demand to be taught in their own language.They demand special privileges ... affirmative action.They demand ethnic studies that glorify their culture.NOW . WHY CAN'T WE SEND THEM HOMEHOW CAN YOU HELP?Send copies of this letter to at least two other people ... 100 would be evenbetter.Checked out with www.Truthorfiction.com

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from American wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

There's been a lot of talk lately about what the government is doing to the population. Be it allowing illegal immigrants free reign. Trying to erradicate the 2nd ammendment. Forcing us to pay illegal taxes. Wanting to hand out ID cards and, micro chiping driver's licenses in 08. Eventually people.We can all agree this is happening right before our eyes but why? I'm trying to figure out why and I'm not seeing it. Do they want to enslave us to where we're paying 80% in taxes and we get to keep 20%? What do the power hungry want? It can't be land as they're allowing all illegals to flood in here at will, using up land and resources.I can't figure it out. What they'd do next once they achieve all their goals. Although I think it's clear that when all that's done and you have a bunch of people sitting around with nothing much left to do but create more laws, it will continually get more oppressive.Anymore, I'm just hoping not to see a dictator running the show in my lifetime.It's sad to complain because I just enjoyed an entire day of freedom, doing whatever I want, no questions asked. But I can't help but feel in the grand scheme, we're being lulled to sleep over something and I don't know why?Is it that they know things that we don't? Such as a huge financial collapse from all the debt? And they don't want people armed for the next depression? I wouldn't rule it out.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ssr wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

"I spent 25 years defending that principal in the USAF and regardless wether you agree or not it's his voice and his opinion. America Grow UP!"He still has his right to free speech. He can still say whatever he wants, if that's what he believes. Nobody is stopping him!But he acheived his position because of our support and money. When he starts supporting causes counter to what we desire, we withdraw our support. It's very simple. If someone uses their position, achieved through our support and money, to fight against us, support is withdrawn. It has nothing to do with stifling free speech. It has to do with not supporting your political enemy! Sheesh. Why is that so hard to understand.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Hillary Fan wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago
from Craig S wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The 2nd Amendment is NOT about hunting. Period. Any support of a ban of ANY firearm is an abridgment of our god given (and constitutional recognized) right to keep and bear arms.If I want to target shoot with a semi auto, fine (NRA Highpower fo rexample). If I want to hunt deer with a 20mm Lahti, fine. I will not support the abridgement of YOUR choice of arm, why would you support the abridgement of mine?Give the liberals more ammo and they will come for your $10,000 custom bolt "sniper" guns exactly five minutes after they have tried to get my AKs and ARs. Failure to support the entire un-infringed right recognized by the second is bad for us ALL.Zumbo was wrong. Period. He absolutely has the right to his opinion (even if wrong) but his supplying ammo to our common enemies is inexcusable. He gets the same treatment of the other collaborationists. I do not own Ruger, Colt or Smith and Wesson firearms based on their support of our enemies in the past, even if their political awareness has improved. I will continue to let my wallet and my vote count rather than my big mouth.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jesse M. Casteel wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I have been reading this about Jim and angers me to no end. How many time have his readers stuck their combine feet in their mouth???? Sure it was an ill timed unwanted comment from a man of his position but, it should not ocst this man the ability to do what he does educate and entertain the hunting public. He said he was sorry and he has been a man about it and it's time the american Public get over it. I am a hunter and shooter and have been so for well over 40 years and thinks it's pretty bad when a man can't voice his opinion and be hung in the process. I thought freedom of speech was protected under our constitution. I spent 25 years defending that principal in the USAF and regardless wether you agree or not it's his voice and his opinion. America Grow UP!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from scott wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

My how times have changed.10 yrs or so ago I wrote a letter to the editor over a similer instance, who knows, maybe it was Petzals' F&S column. Guess what? NOTHING HAPPENED!Today, different story. Now Petzal can be hung out to dry just like Zumbo.ANYONE! who would sacrifice the "assault weapon" owners in a craven attempt to save their own pretty little wood-stocked "hunting" guns deserves to be tarred and feathered. FYI, my favorite "assault weapon" is my wood-stocked M1.We got Zumbo, now lets take down Petzal too!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from TooT Sweet wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago
from gc wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I read your 2/22/07 commentary regarding Jim Zumbo. I have been involved with guns, shooting and hunting in all their variations for almost as long as Jim. I have had the pleasure of spending time hunting with Jim and he is all that you say he is and more. However, you seem to have missed the point. It appears that you are blaming those of us who have responded strongly for Jim’s demise. That’s like blaming women for crying rape! Jim is responsible for his demise and better to have someone of his stature be made an example of than to have others that should also know better continue down his path. I also would like to see Jim’s career resurrected, but Jim is the only one who can do that and the apology you reference was at best only half hearted. Stating that he’s reconsidered his position and now realizes that there are legitimate uses for ARs is not an apology. His statements clearly demonstrate that he is still of the opinion that firearms ownership must only be related to hunting to be legitimate. All uses are legitimate! I would strongly suggest that you not just read the second amendment, but also take the time to read the writings of the men who drafted and signed it into law. If you read their thoughts and statements before, during and long after they had passed it into law, there would be no confusion regarding their intent for our rights or what they meant by “ARMs”.You are right in your claim that Jim has the right to say anything he wishes and I would be the first to defend that right with force, however those of you with access and a forum have a responsibility that goes along with your power. You can say what you will, but you can’t cry foul when we exact a price for your statements. Our constitution guarantees your right to free speech; it does not guarantee that there will be no consequences for it. Your general tenor seems to imply that you’ve forgotten that both your right to voice an opinion and my right to object to it are not mutually exclusive. Say what you will, but realize that we are free to react as we will.What you should be dealing with is the division between all the pursuits that are protected and trying to find a way for all of us to better understand our fellow gun owners and through that understanding create a mutual desire for each of us to support the other.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from CONTRIBUTE TO THE QUEEN OF HYPOCRITES?????? wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

What!!! Contribute to Sarah,Queen Hypocrite of all hypocrites???"New York Daily NewsMarch 22, 2002 08:15:00WASHINGTON - Gun-control advocate Sarah Brady bought her son a powerful rifle for Christmas in 2000 - and may have skirted Delaware state background-check requirements, the New York Daily News has learned.Brady reveals in a new memoir that she bought James Brady Jr. a Remington .30-06, complete with scope and safety lock, at a Lewes, Del., gun shop."I can't describe how I felt when I picked up that rifle, loaded it into my little car and drove home," she writes. "It seemed so incredibly strange: Sarah Brady, of all people, packing heat."Brady became a household name as a crusader for stricter gun-control laws after her husband, James, then the White House press secretary, was seriously wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt on then-President Ronald Reagan.Brady writes in "A Good Fight" that the unnamed gun shop ran federal Brady Law and Delaware state background checks with great fanfare.The book suggests that she did not have her son checked, as required by Delaware state law."(W)hen the owner called in the checks, it seemed to me he spoke unnecessarily loudly, repeating and spelling my name over and over on the phone," Brady writes.Amy Stillwell, a spokeswoman for The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said the federal Brady Law does not require background checks for intrafamily gun gifts.Stillwell said she did not know whether her son was checked under the state law. The Delaware Department of Justice says the state does not have an exemption for family gifts."Scott is not a convicted felon, and he is not prohibited from owning a gun," Stillwell said. "Scott Brady could walk into a store and buy a - he is not a prohibited purchaser."Delaware Justice Department spokeswoman Lori Sitler said the purchase could be illegal under state law if Brady did not also say who she was buying the gun for and submit his "name, rank and serial number" for a full check."You can't purchase a gun for someone else," Sitler said yesterday. "That would be a 'straw purchase.' You've got a problem right there."Anti-gun control advocates were surprised to hear of Brady's foray into their world."We hope that it's innocuous and there's been no laws violated," said James Jay Baker, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association. "It's obviously interesting that Sarah would be purchasing firearms of any kind for anybody, given her championing of restrictive guns laws for everyone."Monday, February 19, 2007The tragic proliferation of Sniper RiflesI would like to take a moment to comment on the proliferation of Sniper Rifles.Sniper Rifles are typically equipped with a high-powered scope, and every single one of them can blow through the body armor cops wear. They can even penetrate multiple police cars. Does the Second Amendment protect cop-killer Sniper Rifles? The NRA certainly thinks so, along with the powerful gun lobby that wants your children and your law enforcement officers to be at risk from these weapons of mass destruction. Some of these Sniper Rifles can even penetrate ballistic or armored glass, lightly armored vehicles, and armored limousines. Senator Ted Kennedy attempted to solve this with an important bill that would have banned armor piercing ammunition and protected lawful firearm commerce:"Another rifle caliber, the 30.30 caliber, was responsible for penetrating three officers' armor and killing them in 1993, 1996, and 2002. This ammunition is also capable of puncturing light-armored vehicles, ballistic or armored glass, armored limousines, even a 600-pound safe with 600 pounds of safe armor plating.......It is outrageous and unconscionable that such ammunition continues to be sold in the United States of America.."Should our elected officials live under the threat of reprisal on their lives from disgruntled constituents? The Gun Lobby seems to think so. We disagree.Sniper Rifles can be equipped with precision optics above even what the Military uses, allowing a sniper to deliver rounds within millimeters of accuracy - enabling them to engage targets at distances of well over one hundred meters. Is there a pressing need to be able to kill with accuracy at that distance? It is too far to justify as self defense. It is too far for hunting. It is only useful for those who wish to murder from afar.Large caliber Sniper Rifles such as the .50 Browning Machine Gun can derail freight cars, shoot down aircraft and helicopters, damage vital ground equipment such as power substations, fuel tanks, and air traffic control, and cause complete chaos. For more information on why large caliber machine-gun rounds must be banned, visit http://www.50caliberterror.com. A shipment of large caliber machine-gun round sniper rifles made by Steyr turned up in Iran, and are being used on our own soldiers, as the .50 bullets easily defeat their body armor, their up-armored humvees, and even APCs.Many forward thinking, progressive politicians such as Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama have voted against Center-Fire Rifle Ammunition of types for Sniper Rifles, but due to the pressure and massive financial resources of the gun industry, the necessary steps to protect our homes and lives have not been attained.Sniper Rifles have been used by murderers and spree killers for years, with notable incidents such as the Beltway Snipers, the Clocktower Sniper, and more.ANY rifle configured and equipped as a sniper rifle has no sporting purpose especially as a hunting rifle. They are too big and heavy to take to the field. Designed for distance shooting, they are useless for the ranges at which game animals are normally shot, and when used on sporting sized game at range they often just wound the animal, inhumanely forcing it to die slowly while the would-be hunter tracks it to finish it off. Most Sniper Rifles fire atypically large cartridges and ultra high velocity ammunition that can travel much greater distances that standard ammunition. The danger imposed from missed shots and ricochetes from these specialty rounds is unreasonable.Most of these rifles carry multiple rounds, with either an automatic mechanism, or a quick toggle action to rapidly move another bullet into the breech, ready to fire into another victim. In most states, they are nearly unrestricted. Anyone over the age of 18 can buy one. If they can't pass a background check, they skirt the NCIS system by going to a gunshow, or finding a private sale in the newspaper. A murderer camped at a distance from a public gathering could quickly turn it into a massacre dwarfing anything we have seen before in the United States, if they had a Sniper Rifle. If they adopted hit and run tactics, entire portions of our country could be shut down.Sniper Rifles shoot a high powered bullet that is almost always fatal. They are designed for one thing- delivering powerful overkill with deadly precision. You don't need the kind of power and accuracy that can kill a man at five hundred yards for hunting rabbits or defending your house.We should also give commendations to France because many years ago they designated any firearm capable of shooting military ammunition as a military arm, illegal to posess without a special permit and unlawful to use for hunting. The 223, 308, 7mm mauser, 30-06, and 6.5x55 have no place in the hunting fields of France. Firearms shooting these calibers are military weapons only designed for killing PEOPLE and should be kept out of the hands of the general population. Because they have no hunting purpose, there is no reason for civilians to own them.Every state in the USA has hunting equipment rules that limit the caliber of firearm used to take game. They also limit the types of rifles, length, magazine capacity, etc. States should amend these hunting regulations to restrict the use of "sniper" rifles, specialty "sniper" cartridges, and "sniper" ammunition. Limits on weight, barrel length, bipods and tripods, thumbhole stocks and pistol grips, night vision type scopes, scopes of excessive magnification, super magnum and high velocity ammunition, and military slings should be imposed. They have no place in the hunting fields of America and hunting usage should not be used as an argument for civilians to own such firearms and weapons. There are more than ample hunting rifles, cartridges, and rounds of ammunition to choose from without them.Let us hope that in a safer, saner America, we will succeed in our efforts to restrict the deadly spread of long distance murder rifles.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Brady Campaign wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

You can also mail a check to:The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence1225 Eye Street, NW, Suite 1100Washington, DC 20005Or donate by phone:To donate by phone using your credit card, please call (202) 898-0792 weekdays between 9 AM and 5 PM, Eastern Time.Thank you for making a contribution to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence!Because we devote 100% of our efforts to passing gun control legislation, contributions to The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence are not tax deductible either as charitable contributions or business expenses.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JZ wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Over 1400 comments, not one response from an editor

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Nelson wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo spoke his mind, and we spoke ours! What is it you can not understand about the second?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from STOP HR1022 THE NEW "ASSUALT" WEAPONS BAN wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Help stop HR1022,the new "assualt" weapons ban.Sign the petition and write/call your representatives opposing this senseless anti-gun legislation before legislation directed at the firearms you own is on your doorstep!http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348?ltl=1172594127

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from STOP HR1022 THE NEW "ASSUALT" WEAPONS BAN wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Help stop HR1022,the new "assualt" weapons ban.Sign the petition and write/call your representatives opposing this senseless anti-gun legislation before legislation directed at the firearms you own is on your doorstep!http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348?ltl=1172594127

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from STOP HR1022 THE NEW "ASSUALT WEAPONS BAN wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Help stop HR1022,the new "assualt" weapons ban.Sign the petition and write/call your representatives opposing this senseless anti-gun legislation before legislation directed at the firearms you own is on your doorstep!http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348?ltl=1172594127

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from STOP HR1022 THE NEW "ASSUALT" WEAPONS BAN wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Help stop HR1022,the new "assualt" weapons ban.Sign the petition and write/call your representatives opposing this senseless anti-gun legislation before legislation directed at the firearms you own is on your doorstep!http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348?ltl=1172594127

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dwight Larson wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Zumbo made the mistake of advocating legal distinctions between firearms based on subjective judgements of their appearance, which is the #1 strategy of gun-banners. The Second Amendment does not protect your "right" to shoot animals or your "right" to shoot clays - it protects our right to defend ourselves against government tyranny. To willfully confuse the 2A with the unprotected priviledge of hunting & sporting is a gross disservice to American liberty. That is why we are so angered by Mr. Zumbo's comments.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from The Republic wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Wray v. NRAIronically, Wray was at the center of a controversy 18 months ago that set off a revolt in the Outdoor Writers Association of America (OWAA), in an issue involving the Sierra Club. He, along with several other OWAA board members, sent a letter chastising then-NRA President Robinson over remarks Robinson made during a speech at the OWAA’s June 2004 annual conference in Spokane, WA. Robinson’s speech came during an NRA-sponsored breakfast. Wray is no longer on the OWAA board, as his term expired.Wray insisted to Gun Week that his recent columns had nothing to do with the OWAA “brush fire.”Robinson was critical of environmental groups, specifically the Sierra Club, for pushing efforts to restrict access to public lands, and for supporting anti-gun politicians. He also criticized fish and wildlife agencies for adopting complicated regulations that seem more designed to discourage people than encourage more fishing and hunting.Wray authored the draft letter to Robinson that set off what many believe had been a “ticking bomb” of disagreement within OWAA over what allegedly was a left-leaning, environmentalist-driven tilt of the organization’s leadership over the past few years. Nearly 500 OWAA members, including several past presidents, signed a letter of protest over the OWAA Board’s action.This set off a philosophical war within the OWAA as board members defended their rebuke of Robinson, while critics blasted them as arrogant.The controversy eventually led scores of the nation’s top hunting and shooting writers to quit OWAA and form a new organization, the Professional Outdoor Media Association (POMA) last year. Likewise, many of OWAA’s biggest industry supporters quit or simply did not renew their supporting memberships.At the time the OWAA revolt erupted, Wray was quoted by the Washington Post criticizing the NRA for not pushing hard enough to protect wildlife habitat, while it fought the gun rights battle.His opinion hasn’t changed, and he accused the NRA of having a “conflict of interest.”“I believe the NRA is in a position of conflict of interest,” he said. “In their single-minded efforts to protect the Second Amendment and gun ownership rights they are orienting themselves with people who are guaranteed to support gun ownership but who have no feeling for the land.”Of the NRA’s approach to hunters, Wray told Gun Week, “I don’t like their jingoistic, lowest common denominator approach to things. I think they tend to reach out to folks in ways that are demeaning, simplistic and often inaccurate…I think in a lot of ways, the NRA would avoid reaching out to make friends and allies because I think in a lot of ways, the NRA likes enemies more.”Activists UnloadIf it’s enemies Wray is concerned about, reaction to his first column by activists on the KABA forum indicate he’s made a few of his own.One KABA writer stated, “If it weren't for the NRA this bozo would be hunting with an atlatl,” a reference to an ancient hunting weapon.Another argued, “This ‘Sportsman’ ignores a number of items. If it were not for the efforts by the NRA in Shooting Range development, he wouldn’t have a place to site in his gun. If it were not for the efforts of the NRA, he wouldn’t have a gun to hunt with as it would have been banned as being a ‘High Power Sniper Weapon.’ If it were not for the efforts of the NRA, he wouldn’t have ammunition to hunt with as it would have been banned as being ‘Armor Piercing Ammo.’ If it were not for the efforts of the NRA, he wouldn’t have a place to hunt or seasons to hunt in as they would have been eliminated courtesy of the anti’s. This moron isn't worthy of smelling the NRA’s (flatulence).”A third correspondent noted, “Sounds like this letter was a plant from an anti-gun source attempting to divide and disrupt the pro-gun cause with the usual BS about ‘NRA too political.’ Politics is where our gun rights will stand or fall and the NRA must be supported by all. NRA ‘prayer meeting’ with Bush last year no doubt led to (the “Assault Weapons Ban’s) timely demise prior to the election.”“I’ve lost track how many ‘hunters’ tell me they ‘understand’ the ‘need’ for waiting periods, background checks (which are actually permission checks and quasi registration), gun licensing, machine gun bans, sporting purpose test, and on and on,” wrote one observer.And another concluded, “When the author is no longer able to hike in to get a deer, maybe he will appreciate the NRA supporting motorized access. Hunters seldom bother to get involved in legislative or political action to protect gun rights unless it is strictly a hunting issue. Maybe that is why pro-gun activists depend more on concealed weapon and cowboy action shooters. Things are run by those who show up, and fewer hunters are showing up.”While Wray’s column incited many activists, at least one was more critical of the NRA, noting, “I am a life member of NRA and intend to remain so, but their fundraising efforts fall on deaf ears because too often I have seen the money spent on ‘political correctness’.”Wray told Gun Week that at this point, “I’ve said pretty much what I had to say about the NRA. I don’t intend to stay after them constantly. I am hoping that both within and without the NRA there will be a movement to eliminate the conflict of interest we talked about.”

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ned W. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Unhappygunowner sounds like an antigun troll to me.Go ahead with your own personal boycott.Since you won't be participating in RKBA issues anymore - if in fact you ever did - your boycott won't mean a thing.If you don't understand that there are over 20,000 gun laws - probably most of them unconstitutional - on the books now, and that those gun law simply regulate law-abiding citizens, we really don't need your help anyway.At lease you appear to understand that we don't need quislings in our ranks, and have abandoned us.Good riddance to you and everyone who thinks like you. We don’t want or need your help.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim Hunter wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I'm appalled and insensed at Zumbo's comments and the remarks from his supporters. He and his idolitors have no idea of the reason/meaning of the Second Ammendment, nor of the damage they've caused all of us. It ain't about hunting. Zumbo, and now it appears Mr. Petzal, are snob hunters that look down on folks that don't hunt in the same manner as they do.Further, there are so many things wrong with Zumbo's and now Petzal's remarks that it would take a book to properly address their flawed outlook. While we all have freedom of speech, none of us has freedom from the consequences of that free speech. It's supposed to take guts to exercise this right, and I got really disgusted at the whiners that have posted in Zumbo's support. He committed treason against gun owners and should pay a price. He got what he deserved, and if he and you don't like it tough! Don't think for a minute that Sarah Brady won't be quoting Mr. Petzal also. You gents should stick to fishing.jim

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ranger Rick wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzel,You sir, don't get it! It has never been about hunting!! It is about personal sovreignty and the God given right to self defense. You, by your own admission are part of the crowd that helped foist the dreaded "Sporting purposes" term on American gun owners along with the 1994 Clinton gun Ban. You sir, should be ashamed of your self.My black rifles, and I have a few, have no "sporting purpose." Their purpose is to insure that me and mine don't end up like those Bosnians and Rawandans, who did not have the wherewithall to defend themselves from the murdering hordes!You are probably saying to yourself that it can't happen here. I have news for you, it can and it probably will happen here, especially if Fudds like you keep dithering. If you don't believe genocide and ethnic cleansing can happen here, I refer you to the Aztlan movement. Check out their website and their stated goals. Sporting purposes my ass!!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Nickle wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Just saw Mr Dewlen's comments, and I have to respond.First, I am not a Christian, I am an Atheist (A real one, not a Socialist or Communist that's hiding the truth). That being said, I respect other folks religions (no, I don't care who you worship or where, or what you put at Town Hall).You talk about not casting stones. OK, just where do you draw your line in the sand?And you say "Enough is enough. Let us forgive those who trespass against us." If our forefathers had followed that in the late 1700's, we would still be part of Great Britain.I can forgive, but I don't forget. I allow a sinner to change his ways. Zumbo I think might change, Petzal I doubt will change. He's had 13 years to change his attitude, and has failed to yet. He's a traitor to this country, his fellow citizens, and he advocates committing a major sin. Yup, I have read some of the Bible, enough to know you're supposed to protect your family. Petzal clearly thinks that we should not have the right to do so, or the means to do so. That's very clear to me.You see, when somebody says "Sporting Purposes" about a gun, then anything not "Sporting Purposes" is usually to them very bad, and should be banned. Well, there isn't anything "Sporting Purposes" about Self Defense, now is there?And the Bible does say "An eye for an eye", now doesn't it? (It does say "turn the other cheek" as well.)So, before any more of you start quaoting the Bible to shame folks into doing the WRONG thing, you might want to go back and review that document. You've just gotten a lesson on the Bible from an Atheist, and that should shame those of you that quoted what you felt like.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Nickle wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Well, I've had some to look around about Mr Petzal, and what I see isn't good.I've also spoken to my girlfriend (the subscriber), and I can clearly say now, the only reason we're still subscribed to F&S isn't her, it's me. She would can Zumbo and Petzal so fast, their heads would be spinning into the next century. She hates FUDDs, the locals where I live HATE FUDDs, and myself, well, I think all true FUDDs would take up Golf, once guns were banned. I'll give the staff at F&S time to respond before pulling the plug. I doubt they'll deal with the problem. If they won't, we'll see what the advertisers do. Sorry to play hardball, but, that's the way the cookie crumbles. I've sworn a solemn oath to protect the US Constitution, and I intend to uphold that oath.It's a damned shame, F&S USED to be a nice magazine. Now it appears to be just another rag.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Smith Dewlen wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I hope I am able to talk some sense into many of you posters.Which among you has not made a mistake? Which among you has never regretted your spoken or wtitten words?I support the Second Amendment to The Constitution of the United States of America. I support the NRA and with more than just membership. I support other organizations which support the Second Amendment and other areas of concern. I volunteer. I donate funds. I write to legislators and testify before legislative committees. I write on Web Sites. I donate to candidates supporting the Second amendment. I work the election polls.I also understand what Christ meant when he asked the men present at a stoning, “He that is without sin, let him first cast a stone"...and to the one about to face death by stoning, "Go and sin not more."Maybe you should read the above paragraph over a few times.I cannot cast the first stone at Mr. Zumbo or Mr. Petzal, heck even if you are without blame and cast the first stone, I cannot cast one."Do I own a black rifle?" you ask. YES. I hunt. I shoot. I carry concealed.Have you forgotten all the fine assistance Mr. Zumbo, Mr. Petzal, OL, F&S, Remington and the NRA has done???? Apparently so. I have not forgotten. These fixtures in America deserve understanding and compassion.I will not forsake them. In fact since most of you seem to proclaim your boycott, I will enhance my support.Wait. Maybe you have forgotten another Amendment to the Constitution. There is a FIRST AMENDMENT. The same freedom which allows you to critize in this forum and others, also allows for diverse opinions. "Freedom is not free." Life's blood has been shed for each of us to be able to express our opinion. Do not dishonor those who have served in the name of Freedom with censorship. Maybe you served, if so you are an American Hero, whether your chest is full of medals or not. You served in the name of FREEDOM. Now you do not wish to grant it.Enough is enough. Let us forgive those who trespass against us. Let us unite for freedom. The NRA is by far the most wonderful organization in the fight for Second Amendment freedom. If you are not truly involved, you are a roadblock.Are you involved? Or roadblock??

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Cooked up in Texas wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The failure of the media elites of the world to show these Anti-gun disciples in true light is important. Only by understanding their deeper motivations can future generations comprehend the ultimate failure of gun control policy and there architects.They tell us that we have the right to self-defense never really meaning it.They're willing to be attacked and called, in some form or fashion, "TRAITOR" in order to advocate policies that are good for the country.In the end, that's what liberalism versus conservatism all comes down to sappy, feel good emotionalism that sounds appealing, but doesn't work versus doing things the right way, even when it's not easy.Anti-gun liberals seldom do consider the long-term consequences of their feel good policies.It takes a lot more integrity, character, and courage to be a conservative than it does to be a liberal. That's because at its most basic level, liberalism is nothing more than childlike emotionalism applied to adult issues. Going to war is mean, so we shouldn't do it. That person is poor and it would be nice to give him money, so the government should do it. Somebody wants to have an abortion, have a gay marriage, or wants to come into the U.S. illegally and it would be mean to say, "no," so we should let them. I am nice because I care about global warming! Those people want to kill us? But, don't they know we're nice? If they did, they would like us! WE HAVE TO PUT THE IRON BOOT TO THESE TRAITORS MY FELLOW GUNNERS!!! WE DON"T NEED OR WANT ANYMORE - "Michael Moore compares Iraqi insurgents who kill Americans to the Minutemen of Revolutionary New England." WAKE UP PEOPLE AND LETS GO TO WAR! WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE SOMETIME,WHY NOT DIE HERE AT HOME AND FREE OURSELVE'S FROM THESE TRAITORS!!!! ANY OF YOU MEN LEFT IN THIS COUNTRY? WASHINGTON TRAITORS MUST GO!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ant -Jemyma wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Hunters!...Go figure!Those dummies just don't get it..and never will! Its all aboutthem and their sport. Damn the2nd!...Ooops...except my rightto hunt! Belligerent Snobs, thewhole lot of em'. These are thesame type of "backstabbers" whowould shake your hand, wink atya, and call you friend. Thenwhen your back is turned, they'rethe ones on the phone with theFBI, turning you in because youhave an "evil balack gun." Nobetter than your average democrattwo-faced liar!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from bydand wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I am dumbfounded by the post by Eric. A long burst from an assault rifle? WAKE UP! A full auto weapon IS NOT USED FOR HUNTING!!!! They are TIGHTLY CONTROLLED BY THE GOVERNMENT and have been so since 1933.What you have been calling an "assault rifle" IS NOT. It is a semi-auto rifle that requires the trigger be pulled for EACH SHOT. I would remind you that there are several semi-auto commercial rifles used for hunting. You are confusing something that only LOOKS like something else with the real thing! As for that AK 47 quote, the cartridge is the equivalent of a 30-30 ballisticaly, and It would be patently impossible to enumerate the number of deer taking with that cartridge. There are even your "beloved" bolt action rifles chambered for it. No, I wouldn't go hunting with a semi-auto AK, and I doubt others would either. Your farcial statement makes the WRONG assumption.As for semi-auto's not being "sporting" Just what in the hell is sporting about using a scoped bolt action "sniper rifle" to shoot an unsuspecting animal at 200 yards or better?You want to be sporting about it? DON'T wear cammies, stand up when you shoot instead of using a rest, and use a single shot rifle!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from "ANTI-FUDD!" wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

These elite snobs who callthemselves Hnters," no longerare friends of mine. I putthem in the same catagory asSchumer, Fein-swine, Hitlary,and the rest of those Democrattraitors. They've never put thehard work in defending the 2nd.,except when hunting is concerned.From now on I vote NO on every-thing concerning hunting! Yeah,thats right!...If I got to loosemy Rights, then you loose yours!Ass-Clowns!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from AB wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The hunter's worried about land and a place to hunt doesn't feel they can lose their guns. after the semi-autos go then they will come for the bolt actions and then the single shot, look at England Wake up people the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, and not about the state controlling militia's IT'S ABOUT EVERY CITIZEN'S RIGHT TO POCESS ARMS. AND IT DOESN'T SAY FOR "SPORTING PURPOSES"! When the Politicians want to make our land "safer" you must ask for who? For you? Are you that naive? When they divide us into groups they feel they have us. WE ARE ALL GUN OWNERS and the only security we have is the fact that we own guns everyone on the same page yet? His comments were ill thought, he was a hunter not a gun advocate, and he was too comfortable with his own opinion to know the real world. when I defend my rights for semi-autos I defend your right to hunt.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Brad wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

this is rediclous, we are all inteled to our opinion, but when you have a nice well paying job common sence tells you to watch your mouth... i do not hate jim jumbo, i hate what he said. he basicly called owners of ars and aks terrorist. i dont like to be called a terrorist. and im sure you dont ether. if jim would have simply said i dont like hunting with ar15s. ect.. im sure he would still have his job.he got what he deserved we need to work together and stop the gun grabbers. instead of fighting like children. weather you like to shoot paper or shoot dear ect. well all have 1 thing in common. we all enjoy firearms. and for the people who say well i dossent effect me, well it WILL. becasue if its ok to ban one type of gun it will be ok to ban others. then we will be left with nothing. and this country will no longer be the land of the free...-Brad

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Grant Gable wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I need a price check.It is a basic tenet of maturation to discover that all that glitters is not gold. Every nickel spent for "security" must be taken from one person and chipped away at by each bureaucracy along the way. Not only are bureaucratic means unjustifiable, the end (security) is a pipe dream. Calling something secure (e.g., "Social Security") does not make it so. In fact, it practically ensures the equal and opposite outcome as we now witness with the crumbling and evaporation of social safety nets. When we become completely responsible for ourselves, everything changes. We can no longer identify with other "victims" of life who want to be taken care of with the guns of government pointed at our neighbors. We begin to identify with mature people who take complete responsibility for their experience of life and realize that those guns are being pointed at us too. We begin to see that freedom is essential to the pursuit one's own happiness and the irrational desire for security, even though it once glimmered brightly, becomes too costly when measured up against liberty - the Hope Diamond of human existence - invaluable and only obtainable at the greatest cost, the loss of your illusions.ITS TIME TO MARCH ON WASHINGTON D.C. -MARCHED ARMED! THE PC PIGS WILL NOT RISK A INTERNATIONAL SLUAGHTER. subguns.com

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Frank wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Posted by E. Humberg"I still respect Mr. Zumbo, I own black guns, I am an NRA member since 1970,I am a law enforcement officer. I will continue to read and watch Mr. Zumbo whenever and wherever I can."As a law enforcement officer of 20 years, I am embarassed by your cavalier attitude toward the constitution.Posted by Kevin B"As for the earlier comments that the Second Amendment is not about hunting, I'll respond that the opposite is also true: Every statement or opinion about hunting does not implicate the 2nd Amendment. While we have the right to own guns, we do not have an absolute right to use anything we want to take an animal. I happen to think regulations on magazine capacity for hunting waterfowl and big game are spot on. Does that make me an anti-gunner?"You kind of answered your own question. Hunting regulations are perfectly fine and have nothing to do with the 2nd. As to whether or not you're a Fudd, depends on if all you care about is your hunting rifle or the RKBA.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from MSJ wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo got what he deserves - he has been doing this long enough to understand what the "fight" is for.The 2A is underfire and if anyone is out from under the rock, they will know that we are being stripped from our/their AMERICAN RIGHT! What happens when all we can do is ask the criminals to come "pull the cork" out of our pop gun in order to protect ourselfs?OH, by the way.... If I knew that something that I said had pissed off the people that I had been writing for, for so many years, and my livelyhood was in jepordy what would I do? I think I would say I'm sorry pretty damn quick.and to add..... living in the era of "one strike your out" quoted by David Petzal, maybe thats true, I am a fan of the 3 strike thery, but when you awaken the beast, the beast gets hungry.You made the bed, lets hope you can sleep in it...MSJ

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tim wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

To KrustyThanks for responding to my post, but I think there are a few things that need clarification.If BR owners could create a "firestorm" of activity on blogs in a matter of days, why would it take weeks to email OL or anyone else? It takes as long to post on a blog as it does to post an email. Beyond that, and I'm only referring to Zumbo in this post, the man wrote poorly and insulted you and should be taken to task for it, but some of the postings I've seen would have benefited from a good editing, which brings me to my next point.My statement about "Rambos" referred to the individuals responsible for the foul mouthed postings calling for violence. I hope that label doesn't apply to you. ( by the way, if you find Rambo so insulting, why do you use Fudd in an insulting manner?) Telling Jim Zumbo he was an ignoramus for insulting you and chastising him was an entirely appropriate response, threatening him isn't. THOSE people are your perception problem, not me. When the Brady bunch want to convince the American public that black rifles should be restricted, whose comments do you think they're going to put out for consideration? Guess what, they won't be mine.As far as defending Petzal, I refuse to do that, but the statement about paramilitary weapons being a liability I think was right. Face it, when the anti's want to push a gun ban, what do they go after, black rifles, and why, because they have an image problem with the non-shooting public. Until we can convince the American public at large that you're not a threat to them, they'll think maybe there should be some restrictions. Which is why you should be concerned about what some of your "brothers" are saying, non-shooters are going to read some of these postings and think, you know, if thats whats going through their heads they shouldn't own firearms. And don't tell me thats BS because I've talked to a lot of non-shooters and thats the sort of thing they've said to me.As far as being self-policing, I haven't seen a lot of that. Of course, I hardly know anyone that owns paramilitary rifles. I know lots and lots of people that own guns but only knew 3 that owned black rifles. One is a very good friend who sold his AR15 when he found out how much they were worth, one was a genuine "nut" in the neighborhood who scared his own friends, and the other was a neighbor who I later learned was a drug dealer. My only other experience with black rifles was at a public shooting range, and they effectively got themselves regulated out of it with their loutish behavior. If the range was busy, they didn't bother waiting for a bench like everyone else, they just set up between benches and shot away, even though posted rules stated you had to shoot from a bench. Hell, they didn't even bother with targets, they were just there to see how fast they could burn through their surplus commie ammo, and they sure weren't concerned about whose head their empty brass bounced off of. But I still supported their rights, and you think I'm the problem. You think you're stuck with us? Divorce yourself from the hunters, collectors, CCW holders, clay bird shooters and casual gun owners and see how long you stay out of the toilet. The anti's would flush you so quick your head would spin. I don't want to see that happen to you, but if you think that attacking everyone rather than building bridges, well, good luck. But I will still support your rights.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Patriot wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"I've voted in every election since 1980.I've been an NRA member for years and years.I've been with the program.I've spent thousands of dollars for guns, ammo, hunting gear, range fees, etc....I've done my part. I think you should own and shoot what you want.. My biggest problem is the voice of reason is gone.. I'm just tired of the arguments." unhappygunownerIn our Constitutional Republic,the supreme law of the land, is the US Constitution.The BOR = the first ten amendments to our supreme lawand enumerates some of our Individual Rights.Do you comprehend the meaning of the Second Amendment?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joe wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

It is all or nothing.Just ask Hillary,Diane,Nanci,Ted,Chuck or the likes.Maybe not at once,but make no mistake,its all or nothing.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from unhappygunowner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

So how about gettin' with the program..?Don't you love your country..?Who's side are you on anyway..?Do you understand 2A?I've voted in every election since 1980. I've been an NRA member for years and years.I've been with the program. I've spent thousands of dollars for guns, ammo, hunting gear, range fees, etc....I've done my part.Deep down this a class envy argument for many of these people. Rich guys vs regular joes. I'm not rich, but I don't own an AR either. I think you should own and shoot what you want. My biggest problem is the voice of reason is gone. It's an all or nothing metality that Wayne LaPierre of the NRA has created that starts this garbage. I'm just tired of the arguments.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from unhappygunowner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The people elected don't give a crap about anything other than money. Gun owners represent a small portion of their VOTING constituents.Supposedly there are 80 million gun owners in this country. If they are so concerned why aren't there more than 4 million members of the NRA?Apparently 76 million gun owners don't think the NRA represents them very well.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Patriot wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"By the time this crap is finished,we may all wish we could still own a pellet gun."Posted by: unhappygunownerSo how about gettin' with the program..?Don't you love your country..?Who's side are you on anyway..?Do you understand 2A?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joe wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I do believe thier sworn to uphold the Constitution,are they not? Any elected or appointed official that interpets "WE" or the Founding Fathers intent of the 2nd Amendment to anything but the citizens of the United States is as phony as these two writers.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joe wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Yeah well,if the people elected to represent us are wise,they'll take note and stop representing thier own interests.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from unhappygunowner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Dont worry,they probably wont take your pellet gun.By the time this crap is finished, we may all wish we could still own a pellet gun.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joe wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Oh,and Ive never seen gun owners of this great country so united...Its damn well about time!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Larry M. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Listen you FUDDS.Put down those hunting rifles and pick up a BOW, SPEAR or KNIFE!!You do want to be purists..right!You either believe in the R2KBA or you don't, there is no wishy washy BS middle ground!The 2nd Amendment applies to everyone or no one. Something Mr. Petzal has lost sight of years ago.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joe wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

[Quote]I have been shooting and hunting for 30 years and I can't believe how we all turned on one another.[Quote]"WE" havent turned on anyone.A couple phony writers have shown thier colors and let everyone know just what they think of the people that supported them.Your attitude goes a long way in showing your willingness to preserve your rights and the rights of others.Dont worry,they probably wont take your pellet gun.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from unhappygunowner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Are you people still at it? Brush your teeth, put on your NRA pajamas and go to sleep. Tomorrow when dawn breaks we can all rejoice in the irreparable damage we've done to gun owners. I've never seen this group so fractured. Petzal and Zumbo may have said some stupid things, but I've never seen the amount of hateful, ridiculous, divisive garbage vomited up on this blog and others in my life. I'm done.I'm done with the NRA and the way the immediately turned their back on a 40 year member. I'm done with f&S and OL and remington and the rest of the sponsors who ran like cowards. I'm done with the black gun crowd and the walnut and steel crowd. I'm not donating any more time and/or money to any gun groups period. I'll take my chances and if the bans pass, so be it. I have been shooting and hunting for 30 years and I can't believe how we all turned on one another. I'm done.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from fredjones wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David PetzalYou sir. Are the problem, and an enemy to the American hunter shooter any American that believes in the rights of the people. You and your comments divide the shooting public rather than using your voice to unify all those that hold the second amendment dear. You show your ignorance, and distance to the common shooter and hunter. The fact that you ever helped ban and disarm your fellow Americans makes me sick. I will not buy or support any magazine that publishes you, or buy from any of your sponsors. Your pen may be loud but my and my brother’s dollars speak volumes.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from fredjones wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David PetzalYou sir. Are the problem, and an enemy to the American hunter shooter any American that believes in the rights of the people. You and your comments divide the shooting public rather than using your voice to unify all those that hold the second amendment dear. You show your ignorance, and distance to the common shooter and hunter. The fact that you ever helped ban and disarm your fellow Americans makes me sick. I will not buy or support any magazine that publishes you, or buy from any of your sponsors. Your pen may be loud but my and my brother’s dollars speak volumes.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from fredjones wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David PetzalYou sir. Are the problem, and an enemy to the American hunter shooter any American that believes in the rights of the people. You and your comments divide the shooting public rather than using your voice to unify all those that hold the second amendment dear. You show your ignorance, and distance to the common shooter and hunter. The fact that you ever helped ban and disarm your fellow Americans makes me sick. I will not buy or support any magazine that publishes you, or buy from any of your sponsors. Your pen may be loud but my and my brother’s dollars speak volumes.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from cphilip wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Gee... I am now ashamed I am a Hunter.Heck... even I knew the 2nd amendment was about the right to bear arms and does not protect my right to hunt (Hint: a small subset of the purpose to be able to own a firearm is to use it for this).I also knew painting a Semi Auto Black or Green didn't make it evil or go off and do things horrific while I slept. In fact I thought synthetic black stocks were "IN". Funny thing is my Browning A Bolt has one. Works well. Seems to be capable of not assaulting anyone either.Even I knew a 30 caliber was close to the same as a 7.63 X 39 round an AK used. Even I knew it was a real fine Deer rifle too. Even I knew a .223 was close to the same AR round as 5.56. Even I knew that makes a great Varmit gun. Even I knew they both were SEMI AUTO same as the other SEMI AUTO rifles and shotguns I always used. Even I new they were the same action and usefullness as any other SEMI AUTO. Even I knew they took one pull of the trigger to deliver onen shot. Even I knew they didn't magicaly go to "Spraying bullets" on their own. I didn't even have to look it up. And I ain't no magazine writer either!No more Field and Stream for me. I would prefer to read things that the writers actually knew what they were talking about or at least did a little research. And ones that have a clue what damage they are doing with their misguided snobbery. You don't get it do you? And I am suprised there are others of you. And most of us old guys should! I know I am over 50 now but I surely haven't lost my mind like some of you Magazine writers seem to have. Whats causing this dementia? Sheesh. I would have a talk with you if you worked for me. Then if you persisted to be an ignoramous I would fire you too. No place in this fight for someone that just can't get it!As a Hunter I appoligise to all the AR and AK Hunters/Shooters for these two old guys. They don't represent all us old guys. Nor do they represent real hunters. They represent "Snob Writers".I hate this happened to Jim though. I hope he can somehow come back and help us all fight for our rights. I believe he could be a great asset. Not so sure about David though. He had time to think before he posted...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from RW wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

If Sarah Brady was smart then she would leave US "free" American's alone.Because we don't really care what those Socialist / Communist gun banners think.Save the Whales!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Woodard R. Springstube, Ph.D. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzal,I posted a reply to your comments, but it seems to have been deleted. Perhaps, it was because I was on my computer at work, and either my employer stopped it, or your system deleted it because the source did nto match my email.In any event, Jim Zumbo delivered a reprehensible, dastardly stab in the back of every firearms owner in the country. This fight is not about getting rid of "terrorist guns". It is about preserving the right of every law-abiding American to own guns for hunting, target shooting, and, yes, for self-defense. The Brady Center has, on their website, already targeted "cop-killer" .30-30's. Can you say good-bye to the Winchester 94 and the Marlin 336? They have also called for a ban on the .22 Long Rifle. Don't take my word for it. Go to their website and see for yourself--if it hasn't been removed within the last three days.Of course, you and Zumbo have every right to voice your opinion, but, when that opinion marks you as eletist, Elmer Fudd clones, don't be surprised if you raise a firestorm of protest. If you ignore all of the target shooters and those who keep weapons for protection in the case of widespread civil disturbance or natural disaster that ties up the police so that law enforcement is overwhelmed (can you say Katrina or Los Angles riots?), then don't be astonished if there is a price to pay. If you kick a skunk, expect to be sprayed. An experience hunter like yourself should know that.Weapons laws, historically, have seldom been about reducing crime. More often they are about an elite gaining or solidifying power over a peasantry. This was true in the post-Reconstruction South, in Japan during the Shogunate era, and in a depressingly large number of other cases.I grew up reading F&S and OL and SA, reading every word written by the likes of Warren Page and Jack O'Conner. Now, it seems that F&S has come a long way since the days of the 1960's when Richard Starnes first raised the alarm about gun confiscation laws in its pages. Sadly, the changes have not been for the better. Educate yourself and go to VPC and the Brady websites and read their position papers for yourself. See that their ultimate goal is eliminating all civilian guns, except for, maybe, the wealthy and politically well-connected. We cannot afford the luxury of stabs in the back like you and Zumbo have given us. Grow some backbone and stand up for all of our rights for "We must all hang together, or we shall, most assuredly, hang seperately."Finally, the Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. It was written to give citizens the ability to defend themselves and the state against criminals and enemies, both foreign and domestic. Read the writings of Madison, Jefferson, and the state constitutions adopted at the time that the Bill of Rights was adopted. Again, I suggest that you educate yourself, unless you think that gun ownership and self-defense should be the privilege of an elite. The two are inextricably linked today.Woodard R. Springstube, Ph.D.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bob Rusnock wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Dave look at it this way we all voted and Zumbo lost the election why don’t you sign him up for field and stream and see if he will carry the election there this is what the left hates when we stick together they lose the election

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gary wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzel,You name calling to honest,legal gun owners is out of line. Your opinion does not reflect the opinion of the majority of gun owners. I will engage my right as a consumer to boycott the advertisers that support you. This is about the Second Amendment and it is important to more people than you think. Without this right there will be no hunting.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dan wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzel sits in an ivory tower we paid for and pronounces the legal EBR owners:1.mental patients2.yahoos3.rabid4.foul mouthed5.viciousAll this judgement from a fellow that seems to say he is above us rather than one of us, as we express our God given right to the 1st-which provides us free speech in any langusge we choose!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Larry T. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal,Your a traitor to gun rights in America. Its people like you who prostitute themselves to the enemy to save their own skins when times are hard. Field and stream needs to get rid of you.Also, get your head out of your ass. Their are millions of semi-automatic weapons in America. There is alot more than 250 people that are enraged over Zumbo and know your comments.Your a traitor to all gun related sports, and your a traitor to the right of self defense. If I want to protect myself with an assault weapon, I do not need you to tell me otherwise. If I want any more shit from you, Ill squeeze your head and watch shit dribble out.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Rio Rancho wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal Get A Clue ! The prominent and indispensable among our rights is the "right of the people to keep and bear arms." Second Amendment rights, never to be infringed, were posited by our nation's founders as among the most essential tenets of the free and just republic they sought to establish. It seems Petzal's arrogance will not be cured by facts and seems oblivious to the facts. It reflects the anti-gun Left's Disney-World approach to everything. They would be happy if everyone but a few them died out and left behind their artifacts to be gathered in a giant museum for the few who remained.Yet, as with so many of our celebrity gun 2A intellectuals, to my jaundiced eyes, he doesn't measure up to his reputation.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Scott Gilmore wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Jim got the most backlash from the simple fact that he called the rifles "terrorist" rifles. That is the root cause. Saying he was against them for hunting wouldn't have got him nailed like he was. We can have a difference of opinion on a subject. When you come right out and call them "terrorist rifles" in a blog like Jim did, you will pay the price. Mr. Petzal has also sold us out in the past. I for one get sick and tired of hunters/sportsman willingly selling my rights out to further their own good. I am a hunter, and a black rifle owner. Don't throw out the black rifles to prolong the safety of your beloved hunting rifles.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Freedomlover wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I think Petzal and Zumbo aren't paying attention. Hunters do not speak for the entire shooting public. Personally, I find it more entertaining to shoot targets with a decent semiautomatic than spend hundreds of dollars for licenses, exotic ammunition, guides, transportation, deer lease fees, and assorted related equipment in order to have a chance to kill an animal, that I possibly have little interest in eating. But that's me. I can shoot cheaply and frequently and actually enjoy the benefits of freedom in this country. I can also use the same rifle as an effective means of providing self defense for me and my family. I thank God I live in Texas and those freedoms haven't yet been infringed to the point that they have in too many parts of the country. I do not appreciate being associated with terrorists or having mental problems for taking advantage of those freedoms. On the other hand, if I chose to go hunting instead or additionally, I can do that as well. It then seems Mr. Petzal implies that I am somehow to blame for Zumbo's downfall when I have done nothing.As for Petzal's support for the 94 AWB, it is a losing strategy for him and his cause. The choice of criminals and gangs of "semiauto-assault weapons"(an oxymoron if I ever heard one) as a their weapon of choice wouldn't be a justifiable reason for the government to ban them, even if it was true. It is not, and never has. The proliferation and availability of handguns and "assault weapons" and laws providing for the legal use for self defense in the home and concealed carry of handguns in public has reduced crime. Furthermore, liberal politicians don't need another AWB to ban hunting. They can easily ban or restrict hunting (and already have in certain places) to the point of making it too expensive for most of the people other than the elite.So I think, Mr Petzal, it is up to you to change your attitude towards those of us who simply prefer a day at the range with an AR, an AK, an M1-A, or a surplus military rifle over a budget busting hunting trip. Why would you insist upon double-crossing a fellow shooter and invite government to ban my particular choice of firearms?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from OSOK wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzal, apparently you don't "get it" any more than Mr. Dumbo did.It's not about hunting and its not about being able to voice an opinion.Its about standing as one against the socialist zionists that want total control over the sheeple.You Sir, are the one treading on thin ice here.Apprently, you don't get the fact that your readership is your real "report to" and can terminate your smug butt any time that we act in unison on a mutually agreed upon action. Your sponsors understand this full and well as they actually sell a product.Walk lightly or the ice will give and you will be suffering from "exposure".As to Sara Brady, she's going to come up with some BS non-sensical crap regardless. Apparently, you are further unaware of how many comments are made on gun boards and that they have been available for a long long time.Another old "hunting writer" with his head up his sponsor's butts spouting off on his blog or as he calls it, his glog. lol

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Not impressed wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

You really don't get it do you? We didn't "turn on one of our own". He clearly was not "one of us". Your friend maybe, but not "one of us". Hunting rifles are only safe until the black rifles are gone. Then "sniper rifles with high powered scopes" will be next. Don't be so naive.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Rick wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Your toast you TRAITOR!!!!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from SC-Texas wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

== Ode to David Petzal===When they came for the machine guns, I said nothing because I didn't have a machine gun, and I didn't think they should be used for hunting.When they came for the "assault" rifles, I called them "terrorist" rifles because I didn't have a "terrorist" rifle, and I didn't think they should used for hunting.When they came for my bolt action scoped deer rifle, they called it a "sniper" rifle... and there was nobody left to stand up for me because I had already sacrificed too many of my fellow citizens Rights by trying to keep my own little 'hunting' world safe from the gun grabbers.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Derek Huffman, AZEX wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Determined to go down the same road eh Dave?Now your '94 comments are coming back to haunt you.When YOU'RE unemployable, perhaps Hitlery will hire you. "Minister of FUDD relations".It's about ALL guns Dave. Unless you FUDDS have an epiphany real soon, you'll find that us lowly, dirty, EBR, HSR, MGers will make life a living hell for your sponsors.And that's a ONE way sword, my friend. The CUSTOMER has a right to know who's actively buggering his rights and promoting "gun racism". Judging the applicability of one's Freedoms to YOUR perception of what's acceptable is foolhardy, treasonous, and ignores the lessons of History.Derek Huffman, AZEX

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mumbo-Zumbo wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

All I hear from the Zumbo apologists is "he has done more for the sport than any of you".I for one don't hunt so he hasn't done squat for me. I have asked several of my other gun owning friends what Zumbo has done for them, they respond "Who's Zumbo?".What exactly has Zumbo done for the EBR community? Did he speak out against the AWB in 1994? Is he speaking out against the current AWB that was recently introduced in Congress?You elitists live in a fantasy world where sponsors provide your equipment, license fees, guides, and trips to exotic places that the average hunter can only dream about. You and your ilk, Mr. Petzal, are out of touch with the shooting community and don't have a clue what is going on within it, otherwise you wouldn't be writing your garbage rants about terrorist rifles and mental patients.Zumbo got exactly what he deserved, and hopefully you will get yours, and I for one will be proud that I was among the legions that helped get his accomplished.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from M. Kapp wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Just in case all of you "true" hunters out there don't realize it, this blog has turned into a liberal blog with anti-hunters pretending to be hunters so they cn use these posts to their advantage. Please do not give them the time of day let alone a response!From One hunter to many - please pay attention.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Anglican wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

DAVID PETZAL! YOU ARE GUILTY OF CRIMES AGAINST THE PEOPLE! HOW DO YOU PLEAD?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from General Lee wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo is a traitor to the cause, and the cause is not hunting. It is my right to keep and bear arms, and that is far more important than hunting. Don't get me wrong, I hunt as well, and I have nothing against hunting, but you sir are a pompous idiot."he has done more for the sport than any 250 of the yahoos who called for his blood."He called me a terrorist for the type of rifle I own. Please accept my humblest apologies for being offended. The second amendment is not about hunting, and you have demonstrated that you do not care a bit more about it than Zumbo does."Then it will be interesting to see how the men and women who wrote that stuff enjoy seeing their efforts being put to use by every anti-gunner in America."Come again? Why would Brady use the comments of anonymous internet authors when she can use the word of Jim Zumbo, respected writer?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gary Cooper wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

There are probably a lot more target shooters than hunters. In fact, there are a lot of shooters who have little or no interest in killing a deer or elk.I have NO SYMPATHY for the Zumbos of the world.In fact, the worst thing that will come from this for Zumbo, et al, is that he will have to learn what it's like to be Joe average, and have to buy his guns, ammo and license fees out of his own pocket.He is obviously an elitist, and an ignorant one at that, just like you Dave.IMO, there's not enough that can be said or done to remove the traitors in our own ranks.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gil Martin wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Zumbo should have exercised better judgment than to ramble on with the same old, tired anti-gun propaganda. The anti-gunners want to ban the black guns, then they will be back for the deer rifles (some anti-gun folks refer to them as sniper rifles)and then shotguns and handguns.Mr.Zumbo lost touch with his audience and has alienated them. He should have known better and he paid the price. All the best...Gil

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gil Martin wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Zumbo should have exercised better judgment than to ramble on with the same old, tired anti-gun propaganda. The anti-gunners want to ban the black guns, then they will be back for the deer rifles (some anti-gun folks refer to them as sniper rifles)and then shotguns and handguns.Mr.Zumbo lost touch with his audience and has alienated them. He should have known better and he paid the price. All the best...Gil

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from boogeyman wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo and Petzal "Appease the unappeasable". America is a free country, but it is not the fat socialist Michael Moores or the Misguided Petzal's or the senatorial commie loudmouths or freedom hater Sarah Brady who keep it free. They merely enjoy the freedom that others are prepared to defend with their lives. But, when you try to deal with complex, real world issues, using little more than simplistic emotionalism that's primarily designed to make the people advocating it feel good rather than to deal with problems, it can, and often has had disastrous consequences.Anti-Gun liberals like Petzal never seem to learn from this. Why don't they learn anything from failed liberal policies? Because there is nothing underpinning them other than feelings and so even when they don't work, their good intentions are treated, by other liberals at least, as more important than the results of their actions.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Michael M. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Better to have anti 2nd amendment traitors exposed than permit them to hide behind their corporate sponsors and blogs.1st. Jim Zumbo2ns. David PetzalHow can you be so ignorant as to believe you can selectively decide what firearms should be banned. YOURS ARE NEXT!!! It will be easier for someone to decide your high powered, scoped rifles are "assault" or "sniper" weapons.WAKE UP!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from John W. Loosemore wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

You sir are an idiot, if you think Sarah Brady wants to bring this firestorm to attention of anyone in Congress. This type of thing is exactly what every career politician spends his life studiously avoiding.This whole thing has been very good for the gun community, and even the most vulgar comments have served their purpose. It's been a wake-up call to our fringe allies, and warning to our enemies.As for Zumbo, once he is cleansed of his career, perhaps he can dedicate the rest of his life to educating the public about the actual intent of the Second Amendment. He is the one man who could say with credibility, "I used to think like that too..."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Allan wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

From what I've seen of Zumbo's videos, he's an old fat guy being led around by professional hunters in front of the camera and "handlers" behind the camera. They just allowed him off his leash on the blog, and that was their mistake. His career is done as he has finally shown his elitist or liberal bias. Good riddance!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from AndyC wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." (Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322)"The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals.... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." (Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789)"The right of the people to keep and bear arms has been recognized by the General Government; but the best security of that right after all is, the military spirit, that taste for martial exercises, which has always distinguished the free citizens of these States....Such men form the best barrier to the liberties of America" - (Gazette of the United States, October 14, 1789.)"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J.Boyd, Ed., 1950])"The right of the people to keep and bear...arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country..." (James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434 [June 8, 1789])"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms." (Richard Henry Lee, Additional Letters from the Federal Farmer (1788) at 169)"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." (Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment [ I Annals of Congress at 750 {August 17, 1789}])"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380)"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)"the ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone," (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper #46.)"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States" (Noah Webster in 'An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution', 1787, a pamphlet aimed at swaying Pennsylvania toward ratification, in Paul Ford, ed., Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, at 56(New York, 1888))"...if raised, whether they could subdue a Nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty, and who have arms in their hands?" (Delegate Sedgwick, during the Massachusetts Convention, rhetorically asking if an oppressive standing army could prevail, Johnathan Elliot, ed., Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Vol.2 at 97 (2d ed., 1888))"...but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights..." (Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29.)"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation. . . Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper No. 46.)"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." (Tench Coxe in 'Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution' under the Pseudonym 'A Pennsylvanian' in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1)"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people" (Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788)"The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both." [William Rawle, A View of the Constitution 125-6 (2nd ed. 1829)"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426)"The Constitution shall never be construed....to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms" (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87)"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them." (Richard Henry Lee, 1788, Initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights, Walter Bennett, ed., Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, at 21,22,124 (Univ. of Alabama Press,1975)..)"The great object is that every man be armed" and "everyone who is able may have a gun." (Patrick Henry, in the Virginia Convention on the ratification of the Constitution. Debates and other Proceedings of the Convention of Virginia,...taken in shorthand by David Robertson of Petersburg, at 271, 275 2d ed. Richmond, 1805. Also 3 Elliot, Debates at 386)"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." (Zachariah Johnson, 3 Elliot, Debates at 646)"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8)"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of The United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..." (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Peirce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850))"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants" (Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy 20, S. Padover ed., 1939)"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined" (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good" (George Washington)"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks. (Thomas Jefferson, Encyclopedia of T. Jefferson, 318 [Foley, Ed., reissued 1967])"The supposed quietude of a good mans allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside...Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them..." (Thomas Paine, I Writings of Thomas Paine at 56 [1894])"...the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms" (from article in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette June 18, 1789 at 2, col.2,)"Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people." (Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697])"No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion." (James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775])"Men that are above all Fear, soon grow above all Shame." (John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon, Cato's Letters: Or, Essays on Liberty, Civil and Religious, and Other Important Subjects [London, 1755])"The difficulty here has been to persuade the citizens to keep arms, not to prevent them from being employed for violent purposes." (Dwight, Travels in New England)"What country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms." (Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, Dec. 20, 1787, in Papers of Jefferson, ed. Boyd et al.)(The American Colonies were) "all democratic governments, where the power is in the hands of the people and where there is not the least difficulty or jealousy about putting arms into the hands of every man in the country. (European countries should not) be ignorant of the strength and the force of such a form of government and how strenuously and almost wonderfully people living under one have sometimes exerted themselves in defence of their rights and liberties and how fatally it has ended with many a man and many a state who have entered into quarrels, wars and contests with them." [George Mason, "Remarks on Annual Elections for the Fairfax Independent Company" in The Papers of George Mason, 1725-1792, ed Robert A. Rutland (Chapel Hill, 1970)]"To trust arms in the hands of the people at large has, in Europe, been believed...to be an experiment fraught only with danger. Here by a long trial it has been proved to be perfectly harmless...If the government be equitable; if it be reasonable in its exactions; if proper attention be paid to the education of children in knowledge and religion, few men will be disposed to use arms, unless for their amusement, and for the defence of themselves and their country." (Timothy Dwight, Travels in New England and NewYork [London 1823]"It is not certain that with this aid alone [possession of arms], they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to posses the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will, and direct the national force; and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned, in spite of the legions which surround it." (James Madison, "Federalist No. 46")"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them. And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights." (Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States; With a Preliminary Review of the Constitutional History of the Colonies and States before the Adoption of the Constitution [Boston, 1833])"The tank, the B-52, the fighter-bomber, the state-controlled police and military are the weapons of dictatorship. The rifle is the weapon of democracy. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military. The hired servants of our rulers. Only the government - and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws." (Edward Abbey, "The Right to Arms," Abbey's Road [New York, 1979])"You are bound to meet misfortune if you are unarmed because, among other reasons, people despise you....There is simply no comparison between a man who is armed and one who is not. It is unreasonable to expect that an armed man should obey one who is unarmed, or that an unarmed man should remain safe and secure when his servants are armed. In the latter case, there will be suspicion on the one hand and contempt on the other, making cooperation impossible." (Niccolo Machiavelli in "The Prince")"You must understand, therefore, that there are two ways of fighting: by law or by force. The first way is natural to men, and the second to beasts. But as the first way often proves inadequate one must needs have recourse to the second." (Niccolo Machiavelli in "The Prince")"As much as I oppose the average person's having a gun, I recognize that some people have a legitimate need to own one. A wealthy corporate executive who fears his family might get kidnapped is one such person. A Hollywood celebrity who has to protect himself from kooks is another. If Sharon Tate had had access to a gun during the Manson killings, some innocent lives might have been saved." [Joseph D. McNamara (San Jose, CA Police Chief), in his book, Safe and Sane, (c) 1984, p. 71-72.]"To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege." [Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54 (1878)]For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution." [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822)]" 'The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the milita, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right." [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)]"The provision in the Constitution granting the right to all persons to bear arms is a limitation upon the power of the Legislature to enact any law to the contrary. The exercise of a right guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be made subject to the will of the sheriff." [People vs. Zerillo, 219 Mich. 635, 189 N.W. 927, at 928 (1922)]"The maintenance of the right to bear arms is a most essential one to every free people and should not be whittled down by technical constructions." [State vs. Kerner, 181 N.C. 574, 107 S.E. 222, at 224 (1921)]"The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the "high powers" delegated directly to the citizen, and 'is excepted out of the general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power." [Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)]"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." --Samuel Adams

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Duke wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"Kind-hearted" and "beautiful" are not the first words that come to mind to describe Petzal & Zumbo.Twisting reality is the hallmark of mental pathology. Petzal & Zumbo has enthusiastically joined the new fascists.It is an impossible dream because, while liberalism is, in fact, a mental illness, it is not a disease that can be treated with psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. It can only be treated biologically.Soon, it is hoped, we'll be able to add liberalism to that impressive list of behavioral disorders. And since medical science has developed exciting new preparations for treating many of these disorders (e.g. Ritalin for attention deficit disorder, Haldol for psychoses, lithium for bipolar disorder, Wellbutrin for chronic depression, Xanax for anxiety), it may not be long before liberalism can be treated by ingesting a small tablet or capsule each morning before breakfast.Now that Democrats have taken control of the Congress, it all boils down to whether or not Pfizer can come up with a pill to cure liberalism before Democrats succeed in destroying our rights.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"What Jim said was ill-considered. He’s entitled to his beliefs"I think you are missing the point of why people are upset at Zumbo. It's not that he was was ill-considered, it's that what he said was factually wrong.John Lott said it best:"The problem isn't that he made a political mistake, The problem is that this guy doesn't know what he was talking about. These military-style assault rifles are functionally the same as hunting rifles. A .308 caliber AK-47 "assault" weapon fires the same bullets at the same rate as a regular deer hunting rifle. They are both semi-automatic guns. This AK-47 is a civilian version of the weapon. It is not the military version."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jeff H. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Sounds pretty cut and dry to me. Nowhere in the second ammendment do I see a single word about hunting. Can't understand how you don't see that. Canada is a prime example of how good intentions can go bad. Start off with just a few " bad rifles" a few years later you have almost no chioce of rifles to shoot.Hope this clears things up a little:First they came for the communists.But I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communistThen they came for the Jews.But I didn't speak up because I wasn't a JewThen they came for the trade unionists.But I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unioinstThen they came for the catholics.But I didn't speak up because I was a protestantThen they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up.-Pastor Martin NeimollerI did read Zumbos apology shortly after he posted it. Didn't see at all convincing to me. I posted seems like a CYA tactic because he was in jeopardy of losing his job or losing some major sponsors at the least (that happened the next day).Do I believe he's sorry? Only because he lost alot of money and because he will forever be seen as a traitor to gun owners. Did people overreact? HELL NO. You speak of people using our words against gun ownership. Look again they're already doing that to Zumbo. And there weren't a couple hundred signatures for his resignation last article I read there were over 6000

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from TBR wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

One word:QUISLINGTBR

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 556Nato wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo didn't apologize. He just provided a list of excuses to rationalize in his own mind why he said what he did.The old assclown was probably drunk when he penned that article, but then again, you are more truthful when you're drunk, so there is no doubt in my mind he wrote what he actually felt.This Petzal guy is just another skid mark on the shooting community's collective underwear.An elitist Fudd that threw EBR owners under the bus back in 1994 and will do so again in 2007.It's a waste of time even being here. F&S and it's Fudd readers are so deep in the doe urine they do not see the change that is going on in the shooting community.They do not realize that their precious hunting world is becoming smaller and insignificant, while the EBR world is becoming bigger. They do not care about EBR owners and will sell us out in a heartbeat.No logical argument is going to change their minds. In the next 15-20 years these Fudds are going to need the EBR owners more than ever if they want to continue their hunting tradition as we will be their only allies.Now I'm done with this fiasco. It's a waste of time posting here. We are all better off writing to the sponsors and advertisers of this Brady seal of approval rag, rather than wasting our time on this worthless blog.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jeff Bisbee wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David,Jim's apology was expected but does not diminish his actions. He should be sorry for his elietist attitude. This thought process permeates many "shotgunners" or "hunters" who only give a damn about their interest.There may be many "yahoo's" who've done less for the sport than Jim, but many of these "yahoos" may understand we have a Bill of Rights" not a "Bill of Needs".To many of us, Jim Zumbo is the "yahoo".Jeff B

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dick Winters wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Many radical Leftists seem to suffer from a basic twist in character. They constantly confuse aggressive and defensive actions by their own , on whose freedom and protection they depend every hour of the day. They constantly indulge sworn enemies of our freedom and well-being. They constantly push for government actions that seem plausible on the surface, but which inevitably hurt the very people they are supposed to help. It happens over and over again.When I was young I thought the Left was just confused, but now I'm increasingly drawn to the idea that there is a deep, if unconscious, malevolence at the bottom of the history of disasters inflicted by those people. They are dangerous.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pippy Dear Rapist wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Preserve your freedom and your right to keep and bear arms. Please call your representatives and your senators today and ask them to oppose and vote against any further gun control laws now and in the future! Call the Capitol switchboard and ask for your Congressman's office:1-202-225-3121Get to know more about your Senators and Representatives, and the bills that are being considered in Washington at:http://www.house.gov/ or http://www.senate.gov/ And let the president know how you feel about unconstitutional Gun Control http://www.whitehouse.gov/

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Baker wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Reading the above comment posted by the gentleman in Arkansas, I can only conclude that my eyes are not working properly yet this morning or else he has been living in a cave for the last few decades.Or was that test baiting to see what responses appeared? He says:>... If they made an M-16 that would only fire in semi-automatic mode, and chambered it for larger calibers than the .223, I would probably have one and hunt with it myself. If I could find one chambered in .243 of [sic] the new 50 Beowulf that only fired once per trigger pull... that would be sweet. (I believe an M4 in the 50 Beowulf would make an excellent brush gun...fantastic for hunting pigs or deer in the swamps.)-----------------If they made an M-16 that would only fire in semi-automatic mode...???? --If I could find one chambered in .243 of [sic] the new 50 Beowulf...??? Hello...???At last count there were a number of AR style offerings chambered in large calibers such as the .50 Beowulf.As for his comment about there not being any semi-auto AR platforms available-- Wow!! I don't even know where to begin on that one!I better go take a closer look at my AR rifles-- do you suppose they are all full-auto "machine-guns" and I just didn't realize it...??Sincerely,Mike BakerNorth Central Florida

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jeff Olsen wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I have been reading some of these comments with great concern. To begin with, let us understand that, in this country, we ALL have the right of free speech, regardless of weather or not it popular, or even correct, a right I would defend to the death. (Being a combat veteran, I have EARNED that right, and helped secure it for others.) Zumbo shouldn't have been alienated by his employers/sponsors as he was. A public viewing of him eating humble pie should have sufficed to stay in their good graces.On to the subject matter... We must be exceptionally carefull how we describe an "Assault Weapon". This can be a slippery slope for even the best and most knowledgeable amoung us. Personally, I would consider anything capable of firing in an automatic mode to be an assault rifle. Lets understand that automatic means that several rounds can be fired with one pull of the trigger. Do not confuse this with semi-automatic and/or auto-loading firearms that will eject the spent shell and load a fresh shell into the chamber, but not fire it until the trigger is depressed again.To be fair, I should state my stance on hunting with these firearms. I do not believe they have any place in hunting, period. If someone wants to own one and fire a bazillion rounds at the range... so be it. If you want to spend a small fortune in ammo, knock yourself out. The surcharge on ammo purchases will provide enhanced resources for the rest of us.I have no problem with the guns themselves, or the people who own/use them. I just don't think they should be allowed for hunting purposes. There are many reasons why, but lets start with the obvious... safety. There are far too many people who dust off their firearm the night before deer season and expect to shoot perfectly the next day... there are scarred trees and torn up ground from coast to coast that will attest to this fact. If one of these people were to get their hands on an automatic weapon... no one in the county would be safe. This past year I fired close to 1000 rounds through my Remington 700 in the pre-season. During the season I fired a grand total of three shots. The first two were at a raccoon that my mother-in-law wanted for the crockpot, the first was a clean miss that impacted the sandy ground, the second a head shot. The third round I fired in the woods put a deer on the ground. Even after practicing, I still missed, but I knew where the shot would go if I did miss, and it was in a safe direction.(I should note that I live in Arkansas, close to Memphis,TN home of the best BBQ on the planet. In the south, if you can name anything that walks, craws, swims, or flies, it's guaranteed that we will have at least three recipes for it; one will undoubtedly be BBQ, another will unquestionably containg the phrase "coat with cornmeal and deep fry".) I firmly believe that everyone who hunts must pass a proficiency test before being issued a permit.On the subject of questionable hunting firearms, I would like to point out that I believe that muzzleloading season should be strictly for primitive-type firearms with iron sights akin to the Hawkins rifle. Todays scoped in-lines are far too accurate and fire considerably farther than a Hawkins, and for that reason, are far more like a modern gun. I still think people should be able to hunt with them, but they should not do so during muzzloading season.As far as military styled weapons go, I have mixed emotions. If they made an M-16 that would only fire in semi-automatic mode, and chambered it for larger calibers than the .223, I would probably have one and hunt with it myself. If I could find one chambered in .243 of the new 50 Beowulf that only fired once per trigger pull... that would be sweet. (I believe an M4 in the 50 Beowulf would make an excellent brush gun...fantastic for hunting pigs or deer in the swamps.)In regards to the magazines, anything more that 10 rounds just adds to the weight of the firearm. I believe they should be legal, but common sense would dictate that you should use a smaller magazine. If you feel the need for additional ammo, carry it in your day pack. My REM 700 only holds 4 rounds, and even that was more than I needed. I saw an ad for a drum magazine for a 1911 that held something like 50 rounds. In my opinion, this is absurd! That would have to be EXTREMELY heavy, especially when held at arms length. I would have no problem with someone buying one, Lord knows there's plenty of useless crap in my garage, but it just isn't practical for hunting.I know many of you will be outraged at my comments. I also know that many who read this will agree, at least in part, with my views. Either way, I have the right to speak my opinion, and F&S have gratiously allowed me to do so here. If you really don't like what I have to say, use another right of all Americans... the right to leave!!!God Bless,Jeff OlsenParagould, Arkansasjefolsen@grnco.net

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from AIRFORCE wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

RE: to Chad LovePeople became so vicious and outright ignorant by many means. One way I hate to say it is through blogs such as this. I am not saying that anyone here is uneducated but think about it. If we wouldn't say these nasty and horrible things to our loved ones or closest of friends, why would you post them in public. Yes it is wonderful that we can let off steam and moan and groan to strangers, but is it truly neccessary. I'm sure at some point someone has taken something you have said and twisted it so out of proportion that you wanted to hang them by their toes. So a respectful word to the wise: If you can state an opinion without making it ugly then do so. You will find that people concider you better for it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from canadian hunter wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo fired over a dissenting opinion?Wow,now I understand how freedom of speech works..you're free to speak the NRA's official line only. Shame on you rats at OL for bailing out on a venerable writer like him.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mr.Tibb's wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Field & Stream is Part of The "Prostitute Press"One of this "select" group's longest standing members, as a matter of fact.They go whatever way the wind blows.The "Bill Ruger" of the publication world.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The pen is mightier than the sword, or in this case... the keyboard is mightier than the endorsement contract.When you are a compensated endorser, don't run whinning if you say something totally ignorant and get dumped. I have no sympathy for ignorance.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 1776 Liberty Rifle wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The reason I am pursuing this strange line of thought (continued from "Bureaucrats are Borg), as to how to resolve the problems we face in our loss of freedoms, started by really thinking about Thoreau's line "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil, to one who is striking at the root".[i][/i]Thank you, Strike-the-Root.com !!!I am also trying to determine that many of the epithets we use for bureaucrats are not only, non helpful but are actually harmful to our cause (the restoration of freedom) and also inaccurate. I mean really, "bureaucrat" is already an epithet enough. We just can't let the term "public servant" creep in to the equation.Well, what IS the root of this evil. Most of the things I had usually riled at, I determined were the results of bureaucracy. A bureaucracy, produced by a wild variety of philosophies and beliefs. Attacking the varied beliefs or philosophies is striking at the branches. What causes, and can cure, a condition such as this, without harming the patient/victim? Well, that is the question.What is bureaucracy? My current theory (for the purposes of this analogy) on this is, that bureaucracy is a condition produced by a disease. A communicable disease produced by a "host-parasite relationship". I am going to post, I hope, a few definitions below on 1. disease, 2.parasites, 3. parasitism. I hope this type of posting is permitted but I feel the need to work within real and exact definitions. I will have a short comment after the definitions (in blue) but I am really reaching the limits in my abilities here.DISEASE , a harmful deviation from the normal structural or functional state of an organism. A diseased organism commonly exhibits signs or symptoms indicative of its abnormal state. Thus, the normal condition of an organism must be understood in order to recognize the hallmarks of disease. Nevertheless, a sharp demarcation between disease and health is not always apparent.The study of disease is called pathology. It involves the determination of the cause (etiology) of the disease, the understanding of the mechanisms of its development (pathogenesis), the structural changes associated with the disease process (morphological changes), and the functional consequences of these changes. Correctly identifying the cause of a disease is necessary to identifying the proper course of treatment.Humans, animals, and plants are all susceptible to diseases of some sort. However, that which disrupts the normal functioning of one type of organism may have no effect on the other types.PARASITEpar·a·site \'per-ə-"sīt, 'pa-rə-\ n [MF, fr. L parasitus, fr. Gk parasitos, fr. para- + sitos grain, food] (1539)1 : a person who exploits the hospitality of the rich and earns welcome by flattery2 : an organism living in, with, or on another organism in parasitism3 : something that resembles a biological parasite in dependence on something else for existence or support without making a useful or adequate returnPARASITISM; relationship between two species of plants or animals in which one benefits at the expense of the other, without killing it. Parasitism is differentiated from parasitoidism, a relationship in which the host is killed by the parasite; parasitoidism occurs in some Hymenoptera (ants, wasps, and bees), Diptera (flies), and a few Lepidoptera (butterflies and moths): the female lays her eggs in or on the host, upon which the larvae feed on hatching.Parasites may be characterized as ectoparasites—including ticks, fleas, leeches, and lice—which live on the body surface of the host and do not themselves commonly cause disease in the host; or endoparasites, which may be either intercellular (inhabiting spaces in the host's body) or intracellular (inhabiting cells in the host's body). Intracellular parasites—such as bacteria or viruses—often rely on a third organism, known as the carrier, or vector, to transmit them to the host.I am suggesting that a bureaucrat is merely the involuntary host/victim, of an intracellular parasite. They have been infected by a carrier or vector, that is transmitted by a virus. A virus of the mind, that we are now calling a "meme". Now, we just need to cure all the patients, by removing the controlling memes, without harming the patients. Any ideas, besides I'm crazy?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pappy wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

quote"Wray said that what happened to Zumbo is a case study in how the NRA has trained members to attack their perceived enemies without mercy."So, where's my damn training?Field & Stream MUST GO! http://www.tcftalk.com/clairefiles/index.php

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jon wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear."Marcus Tulius Cicero.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jon wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

SHAME ON YOU TOO JIM!The 2nd Ammendment is not about your damn right to hunt!..."Gun owners -- all gun owners -- pay a heavy price for having to defend the availability of these weapons. "The American public -- and the gun-owning public; especially the gun-owning public -- would be better off without the hardcore military arms, which puts the average sportsman in a real dilemma".An Uzi or an AKM or an AK-47 should be no more generally available than a Claymore mine or a block of C4 explosive."~David E. Petzal - 1994 / Current writer for Field and Stream

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Doktor Jeep wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Time to get a copy of Field & Stream - to see who advertises in it and avoid those products.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Andy Anderson wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I guess ol' Zumbo stayed in the forest too long. He sure came out of the woods swinging, though, and Boy, Howdy, he's swingin' now. Twistin' in the wind, more exactly. Good riddance! After Sara Brady, Feinstein, and Chucky get done with another "Assault Weapon" ban, they'll start in on your "Deadly Sniper Rifles". They'll team up with PETA and the Sierra Club so that hunting will be banned because of "animal rights", so you won't need those fancy double and single-barrel shotguns, either. (The semi-auto and pump shotguns were on the McCarthy bill, so those are already gone). Got to close the trap and skeet clubs, too, 'cause of lead poisoning the critters like the California Condor.Dave, you don't get it, either. That's why I canceled my subscription to Field and Stream YEARS ago when you made comments similar to Zumbo's. Have to admit you didn't call me a terrorist, though. You just sort'a talked down to me like I was some half-wit that needed someone to tell him what was good for him - and the rest of the country.Me, and others like me, a Terrorist because we own ARs? After what's happened to Zumbo, I guess so. Maybe it'll catch on in the coming elections. It's happened before, you know.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from M. Shepard wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

See what happens when you say something stupid, you are held to account. It's a choice you make, and a choice we make. Just like the fact that there is nothing in the Second amendment about your right to hunt, there is nothing in any amendment saying you don't have to suffer consequences for your actions (no matter how ignorant they are).This is not some pick and choose lunch line. We stick together for ALL guns, or we ALL lose.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from f&s reader wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Ron,Public perception is a huge problem in 2a rights, shooting and hunting. I know landowners who won't allow ar anythings on their land. That's their right.I understand the tactical folks point of view on this issue. When someone asks for any type of "ban" it will get you going if you believe in the 2a.I can't understand how the AW ban of 1994 was allowed into law if the 2nd allows us to keep and bear arms. I've read on some of the posts (for what it's worth) that the 2nd only applies to military arms. I've also read that while the 2nd allows you to keep military arms, it doesn't allow their use for anything other than protection.I would hope that someone with real knowledge of the law would enlighten us with their knowledge and post it in laymans terms.No matter what, this debate and the fallout from the upcoming possible vote on the new AW ban will be on the minds of many gun owners for a long time to come.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ron wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

This is what I sent to outdoor life.At the time I had no idea others were severing relations with Mr Zumbo"Give the guy a break, I'm sure he doesn't want to infringeon anybody's gun ownership rights .I think in a way that he's sort of right , with the issues at our door steps thesedays it's not a good idea to "sport" any assault type rifle in the woodsfor hunting no matter how accurate it is . As we all know public opinionis 95% "sight" these days and seeing somebody hunting withan "assault" type rifle can do no good towards future generations of hunters.Those people that are now on the fence and have no opinons one way or anotherdon't need any extra nudges to fall the wrong way which is away from sport huntingand I'm sure this is what Mr. Zumbo had in mind.Why would anybody want to exercise their gun rights and tote an "AK or M16" type in the woodsto hunt large or small game.I'll come out and say it : There's no reason why an assault type rifle should be in thewoods as a hunting rifle when there are so many inexpensive rifles that'll getthe "job" down more efficiently. On the range?-sure if that floats your boat,but not in the woods, not these days. We're hunters and sportsmen notpara-military types on manuevers.There's a time and a place for everthing.Too many people have been watching too many movies!Ron GiaquintaNew Hampshirep.s :you can use this note if you have a mind to.I hope Outdoor Life has shoulders as broad as Mr. zumbo and I.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from MicroBalrog wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

MARK HENCKEL, Another numbnuts Fudd who does not understand that bolt rifles and shotguns are not what the 2nd Amendment is all about.Here is what MARK HENCKEL wrote:"As I wrote to an outdoor writer friend of mine as this was blowing up, "You know, that could have been me. I could have written much the same as Zumbo did. I wouldn't have worded it that way. I wouldn't have called for a ban on those guns. But I know exactly what Jim was getting at in what he wrote."http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2007/02/22/features/outdoors/30-mont-outdoors.txt

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Cane wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"If you are a gun owner who is looking for the middle ground, it is very hard to argue against legislation such as this. Senator Feinstein, it seems, has made every effort to prescribe "assault weapons" and protect "legitimate firearms."-- Column by David Petzal, "Endangered Tradition" column in Field and Stream, June 1994.http://www.sturmgewehr.com/webBBS/semiforum.cgi

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Al - Texas wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

ZUMBOMANIA: David E. Petzal’s take on the Jim Zumbo fiascoMr. Putz, I believe you are still in a coma. Jim Zumbo made statements that were far more than just a momentary lapse due to fatigue. He said, I'll go so far as to call them Terrorist Rifles. No one told him to "go so far." Did that all on his own. You say he apologized like a gentlemen ... perhaps, but it is hardly clear that it was in earnest. No doubt he is sorry for the consequences. Many a convicted criminal is sorry in the court room when judgment is imminent ... but not when they commit their deeds.Some idiot posted that Jim Zumbo "works so hard ... and stretches himself so thin" for hunters' benefits. What a load of BS. He just can't say NO to another free hunt, or another television program. Yep, what a hard life. You give him far too much credit. He is no better than any other hunter out there (talking quality of individual, not skill here).Yep, the elitist Mr. Putz just knows so much more than all the rabid internet legion who rightly jumped all over JZ's comments. And how do you know, Mr. Putz, that JZ has done more for hunting than the so-called yahoos you speak of? Really, how do you know? Stuckup elitest POS is what you are.I won't bother going on to speak of the 2nd amendment implications here as others have already done a fine job of that. My only intent with this post is to point out just how far above us Mr. Putz appears to have elevated himself. What a Putz!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Think of it this way the 2nd Amendment is the corner stone for all the other rights we cherish as Americans.Pull out the 2nd Amendment and the remaining rights will come crashing down like a proverbial house of cards.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Donovan wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"To all the chatroom heroes who made him unemployable, I have a word of warning: You’ve been swinging a two-edged sword. A United States in which someone can be ruined for voicing an unpopular opinion is a dangerous place. Today it was Jim’s turn. Tomorrow it may be yours."Actually, people like you have been swinging the sword at us since 1994. It finally caught up with you. One little mistake....well, it already cost us ten years of restricted rights. Don't expect us to take it lying down.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Quoting Ron From above.It seems that all who write about firearms seem to believe that the 2nd Amendment is about hunting and sports. The 2nd Amendment is really about the individuals right to own firearms. This amendment was added by our fore fathers to insure that we, as American citizens have the right to defend ourselves against enemies both foreign and domestic, and to protect us from a tyrannical government. That way We Americans can enjoy the freedoms that they (Our Fore Father's) desired of a new nation.That's correct and I might add that our government is totally out of control at this late date from the day the 2nd Amendment was enacted I have a feeling we are going to need these firearms for just that purpose sooner than later. All branches of government are violating the constitution almost on a daily basis.I have a feeling they forgot the history of our country and how hard our forefather fought to break away from England.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Anti-Fudd wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal, Zumbo, and their starry-eyed followers are the typical Fudds all gun owners has met at leat once in their lifetime.They are the myopic morons that will eye your eye high-cap semi-auto at the range and say " whatcha need that fer? Dat dare gun is only fer killin' people!"These Fudds like Petzal, Zumbo, and their ilk are hunters who don't care what happens to guns they do not use for their hunting activities. They don't care if other guns are restricted, left alone or outright banned by politicians because they have no interest in them.Some of these Fudds are actually anti-gunners themselves believes that any firearm with a modern military weapon lineage or that is not their type of hunting arm has no place in anyones hands outside of the military or law enforcement.The Petzals and Zumbos within our gun-owning community have no problem with throwing his EBR owning brothers to the wolves to save his own sorry hide.This is why Petzal and Zumbo are so dangerous to our sport, and this is why my friends, their pulpit needs to be taken away from them.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ron wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. PetzalIt seems that all who write about firearms seem to beleive that the 2nd Amendment is about hunting and sports. The 2nd Amendment is really about the individuals right to own firearms. This amendment was added by our fore fathers to insure that we, as American citizens have the right to defend ourselves against enemies both foriegn and domestic, and to protect us from a tyrannical goverment. That way We Americans can enjoy the freedoms that they (Our Fore Father's) desired of a new nation.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from SC-Texas wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David Petzal:Is he the John Kerry of firearms writers?Is he the NAZI in the woodpile?First he was agsint semi-automatic rifles & now he is for them?Whats up with this?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David Petzal:Is he the John Kerry of firearms writers?Is he the NAZI in the woodpile?First he was agsint semi-automatic rifles & now he is for them?Whats up with this?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

It's all divide and conquer techniques! It's not about hunting, it's about the 2ND AMENDMENT. "WE have the right to bear ARMS." not just for hunting. I hunt but I also own several military style firearms. I don't use them for hunting, but I do like to take em out and shoot some targets.Why ? because I enjoy it and the @nd Amendment gives me the right to.PUNISH THE CRIMINALS NOT THE LAW ABIDING CITIZENS

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from AJC wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal:You don't get it either do you? It ain't about hunting. If you want to hunt with a sling shot, spear, boomerang, AK, whatever, go for it. Its about the Second Amendment.You understand? ITS ABOUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE CONSITUTION!The gun grabbers are already gearing up to outlaw them bolt action rifles that can kill a man from 300 yards.You need to join Zumbo under whatever rock he crawled under.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gunowner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Walking through the woods in a WMA during deer season and I see your stand in the distance? Instead of quietly turning around so I do not ruin your hunt, I will now piss under your tree stand.Congrats FUDs, you have created an anti FUD with your comments.Whether you know this person or not, just because your mad at certain group of people, means you feel the need to mess with them? Logical, no not really, but you call yourself the Lonegunman, perhaps Lee Harvey Oswald lives!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from M1Thumb wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

One more log on the fire, Petzal. I hope you get canned like your thick skulled partner-in-back-stabbing Zumbo. You're already being raked over the coals for your traitorous masquerade as a friend of the Second Amendment. I stand with Codrea - root these enemies out and CULL THEM FROM OUR RANKS.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from LoneGunman wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Gunowner, nope no tantrum here, screw with my right to own a gun I screw with your hunt, sounds perfectly fair and logical to me. Of course all logic is wasted on FUDs who are afraid of certain firearms because of the way they look.Yup, those FUDs are real men, their canned hunts really prove it, huh?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from A patriot wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Drop Petzal...hire me!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gunowner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

LoneGunman,I'd do the same thing if I were you, pee under all their stands and make them see how real men deal with anger. If that doesn't work how about rolling around on the ground and throwing a tantrum?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dr. Frank Latimer wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

There are no "good guns" or "bad guns" as Zumbo and Petzal believe. All firearms will be banned if the anti-Second Amendment forces have their way. This elitist attitude that some hunters have towards firearms they consider unworthy or suspect is one of the reasons we legitimate gun owners have been on the ropes since 1968.Zumbo not only betrayed legitimate gun owners with his attitude and his comments, he issued an intensely personal insult to all owners of the rifles he distrusted by calling them terrorists. Again, that elitist mentality at work.Please note that the words "hunting" and "sporting" do not appear in the Second Amendment. If you aren't willing to vigorously defend ownership of an AR or an AK then your Weatherby will the next gun they come to take away.Ben Franklin said it best. "We must hang together or surely we will hang separately."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from LoneGunman wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

FUDs want to throw us under the bus, well two can play the same game. Next FUD I catch on my POSTED property when we are out there blasting away with our EBR's or out there hunting is going to go to jail for armed trespass instead of inviting him to join us.I will also stop buying hunting licenses to support the FUDs as I don't need one to hunt hogs on my private property.Walking through the woods in a WMA during deer season and I see your stand in the distance? Instead of quietly turning around so I do not ruin your hunt, I will now piss under your tree stand.Congrats FUDs, you have created an anti FUD with your comments.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

the last post has the wrong post name it it was by me forest a once fan of field and stream

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Dear sir you seem to think that no one should own a military style semi automatic rifle I must disagree with that strongly as I have seen countries were the people are denied the right of defenisve weapons such as those you are trying to deny the u.s citizen I would not like to see the united states in such a situation as it would mean a dictatorship .so I will boycott all of your sponsers efective now . my rights and the rights of other americans are to hard won to play around with.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Madman@neoscience.com wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

You just dont get it do you? His apology is WRONG. YOUR covering and trying to mitigate the damage to him is laughable as you make yourself completely complicit. You sir are a fool. I will be done with everything associated with either of you two if you remain on staff."250 yahoos"? Great.... You Bad mouth the actual PEOPLE he was trying to apologize to. You are most certainly a fool & I am just simply done with you & your bassakwards kind.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I guess you fudds just ignore the FACT that nine guys in black robes in a big federal building said: "...the second amendment applies only to those weapons with MILITARY value." I am an advid hunter and outdoors man and frankly I am embarrassed by you MORONS. There is no place in the founding documents of this republic where you are gaurantied to be allowed to own sporting goods.Chris C.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Gee Dave what is it ?? You did or didn't support the 94 AWB???From the two statements made by you , it sure looks like your lying and then covering your tracks. I guess this is proof that you were for the ban before you were against ban. But you never said any of these things did you?? Give me break , another tired old hunting illuminati that needs to goto the old folks home. The problem with lying is you always have to tell another one to cover your tracks. So it helps to have a good memory. Try to remember that next time Dave.“As has been pointed out by those of you with long memories, I wrote a piece 13 years ago about the then-looming assault rifle ban. The story was unpopular with a lot of people, but nowhere in it did I endorse the ban, as some are claiming.-David E. Petzal in his blog Zumbomania Part II 23 Feb 2007.”"If you are a gun owner who is looking for the middle ground, it is very hard to argue against legislation such as this. Senator Feinstein, it seems, has made every effort to prescribe "assault weapons" and protect "legitimate firearms."-- Column by David Petzal, "Endangered Tradition" column in Field and Stream, June 1994.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Gee Dave what is it ?? You did or didn't support the 94 AWB???From the two statements made by you , it sure looks like your lying and then covering your tracks. I guess this is proof that you were for the ban before you were against ban. But you never said any of these things did you?? Give me break , another tired old hunting illuminati that needs to goto the old folks home. The problem with lying is you always have to tell another one to cover your tracks. So it helps to have a good memory. Try to remember that next time Dave.“As has been pointed out by those of you with long memories, I wrote a piece 13 years ago about the then-looming assault rifle ban. The story was unpopular with a lot of people, but nowhere in it did I endorse the ban, as some are claiming.-David E. Petzal in his blog Zumbomania Part II 23 Feb 2007.”"If you are a gun owner who is looking for the middle ground, it is very hard to argue against legislation such as this. Senator Feinstein, it seems, has made every effort to prescribe "assault weapons" and protect "legitimate firearms."-- Column by David Petzal, "Endangered Tradition" column in Field and Stream, June 1994.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal, Zumbo, Nugent = 3 turds that need to be flushed.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ben wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Freedom of Speech rocks, unfortunately for Petzal, his speech was unpopular.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ben wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Freedom of Speech rocks, unfortunately for Petzal, his speech was unpopular.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Winslow wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

We have embarked on a campaign...don't get fatigued.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shootlow wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

when are you people going to get itIT IS NOT ABOUT HUNTINGit is about the 2nd amendment

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from N. M. in WI wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Jim does have the right to say whatever he likes. On that some note though so do all of us that disagree with what he says. We expressed our freedom of speech in voicing our disagreement with his views. He can continue to say whatever he likes, i just wont support whatever companies support him and his views.Selling your fellow gunowners out because you dont like our choice in firearms is elitest and wrong.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike B. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Murdering furry little critters is NOT protected by the Bill of Rights.The RKBA makes no mention of hunting.I'll support your sport as long as you support mine. The second you would give up my sport so you can keep yours is when you become the enemy.Jim Zumbo became the enemy. He was neutralized. It would appear that you are next on the radar. Sad, but true.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clyde T. O'Briant wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

This is a nation of freedom, or at least I thought it was. Jim Zumbo has his free speech, and he espoused views that were unpopular to the public he was addressing, he faced his demon. His apologies were of ill conceived delusions and ignorance, and he thought he could just get right back in the game, he can't.You sir have done the same, your delusions are just as heinous, and hopefully, you will get similar treatment from F&S.People like you and Jim Zumbo are the cancer we are fighting, and this is the chemotherapy.Clyde

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dan Bothwell wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal, you are a snake. I've read what you printed before the 'Assault Weapons' ban in '94. You expressed the same views as Zumbo, saying that "[assault weapons] were only designed to kill people". You're lucky word didn't get out as quickly back then. When will you realize that this backlash to Zumbo has NOTHING to do with hunting? It is about our birth-right of firearms ownership. Zumbo calling AR/AK type rifles "terrorist rifles" and your calling for the ban of several "non-sporting" firearms (you seem to have a real grudge against the FN/FAL) goes far beyond not advocating those firearms for hunting. It represents the willing surrender of our freedom by those, like you and Zumbo, who claim to be its defenders. I hope you slip up again, and that the true supporters of the 2nd ammendment are ready to give you the Zumbo treatment.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ruger wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzel,Gunnuts, Yahoos, Chatroom heroes who remind you of your times at mental hospitals??!!!Shows the elitist snobbery and absolute contempt you feel for towards us "little people" that disagree with you. One elitist defending another elitist,imagine that!!Jim Zumbo has seen the light and has now vowed to be a diehard supporter for all of the gun community,not just the traditional hunting class. I for one forgive him and believe he will be true to his word.Why in the world would you continue to stir the s***pot? You sir, have provided far more ammo for gun grabbers with this remark "The American public -- and the gun-owning public; especially the gun-owning public -- would be better off without the hardcore military arms, which puts the average sportsman in a real dilemma" and "An Uzi or an AKM or an AK-47 should be no more generally available than a Claymore mine or a block of C4 explosive.", than a million vulgar comments by "chatroom heroes".Could it be that you still feel this way? I've yet to see where you've changed from this position.Well regardless of that, YOU WERE WRONG to think that none of here read F&S. SUBSCRIPTION #0521 5635 100 was CANCELED 10 minutes ago.I simply cannot support an organization (or pay your wages) that is willing to throw EBR owners to the wolves in hopes "the tradionalists" (of which I'm one, but never a FUDD)are eviscerated last!WAKE UP SIR!REGARDS, Ken T.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Lew wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal, you are no better then Zumbo. You just don't get it...this has nothing to do with hunting and what is and what is not appropriate to hunt with. This is ALL about our 2nd amendment rights and figuring out who supports the rights of the people. You, like Zumbo, are no friend of the 2nd amendment.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The Washington Post is implicating the NRA in Jim's demise. It happened because of you, please let them know.Fact: The NRA did not issue a statement until Thursday afternoon, long after Jim's demise. His TV show was taken off the air on Tuesday, his sponsors acted swiftly, afraid of boycotts. Jim resigned from Outdoor Life before Thursday as well.The author in The Post is trying to blame NRA. That doesn't surprise me.Fact: NRA never asked its members to write the thousands of emails that flooded Outdoor Life and their sponsors, or the Outdoor Channel and their sponsors. The power of the Internet is astounding. And so is the grassroots involvement of American gun owners. If the Post wants to credit any organization, they should have mentioned Web sites like ar15.com which had more than 700,000 people talking about Zumbo and his now infamous blog. From that site and others, people flooded other gun and sportsmen sites until it was everywhere. Again, NRA did not call its members to duty. In fact, NRA recieved harsh critism from members until Thurs afternoon for not issuing a statement right away. NRA intenionally waited, because it was the right thing to do. It was a hard decision but Zumbo's words are in direct conflict of the NRA's misson. He has been an NRA member for 40 years.Fact: The press release came from NRA Publications and is labeled such, not ILA or NRA Because Jim has been a long-time supporter of NRA--suspension is fair language to use. He will not be writing in NRA magazines as of now, but he could some day.Fact: Ted Nugent, a member of NRA's board, came quickly to Jim's aid. Ted was broad shouldered enough to take Jim's case on himself. As we speak, Jim Zumbo is invited to Ted's ranch to learn about ar15s and other guns, he was unfamiliar with. He is going to hunt with these guns. Ted is being the "good shepherd" and helping a "lamb" back to the flock. Ted gambled on his own career by doing this, he could have thrown Jim under the bus, but instead offered to educate Jim. And Jim has declared that he will spend the rest of his life vigorously defending the 2A.None of this was conveyed in The Post article. NRA is pictured unfairly.Let's let the Post know, email the author of today's Zumbo article.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from FieldAndStreamWritersSuck wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Ahhh..........how sweet it is!Thank you for contacting FIELD & STREAM Customer Service.We canceled your subscription as requested. If you have recently received or receive in the near future a billing notice, please disregard it.If you paid for this subscription, we will process a refund for the unserved issues. Please allow three to four weeks to receive the refund. If you paid by credit card, you should see a credit posted to your account within the next 7 to 10 days. You should see the credit on your printed credit card statement within 30 to 60 days depending on your billing cycle.Because our mailing labels are preprinted, you may receive one or two more issues. Please discard them or share them with a friend. We are sorry that you are canceling and hope that you will consider ordering with us in the future..We appreciate this opportunity to be of service.FIELD & STREAM Customer Servicewww.fieldandstream.comEMAIL OPT-OUTSFor more information on how to opt-out of marketing communications from us and our partners, copy and paste this link into your browser:http://www.fieldandstream.com/emailprivacyPRIVACY POLICYPlease read our Privacy Policy, copy and paste this link into your browser:http://www.fieldandstream.com/privacyFOR FURTHER COMMUNICATION, PLEASE CONTACT:FIELD & STREAM CUSTOMER SERVICEAttn: Consumer Affairs3000 University Center DriveTampa, FL 33612-6408

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Moriarty wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I own a 200-acre farmstead that has belonged to my family for nearly sixty years. It fairly teems with game and, unlike some of my neighbors, hunters still find themselves welcome here.I own "black rifles" and I apologize to no one for their appearance. The last coyote I shot, not a month ago, fell to a Bushmaster Varminter. (That's a .223, for those still living in a "vacuum.")Here's the deal: Respect my right to own, shoot and hunt with the firearms of my choice or the "No Hunting" signs go up.Clear?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Keith S. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David Petzal,Are you so clueless that you can't figure out the if you ban one type of firearm, then the anti-gun crowd will be wanting more types of firearms to be banned, including your precious "sniper", err I mean hunting, rifle with the pretty wood stock and nicely blued barrel? When they do come to confiscate your precious hunting rifles, you will have no one to turn to for help since you've thought it was a good idea to treat those who own military-style firearms like sacrificial lambs. You lied to us once and we will not fall for any more of your lies again. I know people who read Field and Stream on a regular basis and once they saw this, they've decided that they'll be cancelling their subscriptions. Some of them are doing that right now.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from David wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

You are just as bad. You would be out of the job as just like Zumbo if you had said the below now a days"Gun owners -- all gun owners -- pay a heavy price for having to defend the availability of these weapons. "The American public -- and the gun-owning public; especially the gun-owning public -- would be better off without the hardcore military arms, which puts the average sportsman in a real dilemma".An Uzi or an AKM or an AK-47 should be no more generally available than a Claymore mine or a block of C4 explosive."Column by David Petzal, "Endangered Tradition" column in Field and Stream, June 1994.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from brian wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo got what he deserved. he alienated a huge segment of his fan base by calling them terrorists, and they let him know exactly how they felt. consequences.Americans seem to forget about those things...i'm reading through a lot of these posts that say shame on us, we turned on one of our own... shut up and think for a moment. one of our own just shot us in the back, gave ammunition to the enemy ( have you seen the brady site lately?), and blackened our collective image in the eyes of the world.the bill of rights isn't a hunter's protection act. all of our gun rights suffer as a whole from this. he hurt every one from dad with his .45-70 to junior with his AR-15.how many people forget that we have guns to ward off bad government? read some history.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from TRW wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Zumbo certainly has the right to his opinions but he, like everyone else, has to be held responsible for what comes out of their mouths. I'm sorry that there are so many (Fudds) out there that seem to think the 2nd amendment is ONLY about hunting rights/arms. I guess that means that collectors, target shooters, and self-defense enthusiasts get thrown out with the bathwater.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from edward_m wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

To those who keep saying that Mr. Zumbo has a right to his opinion.....your absolutely right.And if he expresses those same opinions, then he has to take responsibility for the outcome.Just because you have the 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech does not give you the right to say anything you want and not pay the price.With the political climate the way it is, and with the newly empowered Democrats up to their old tricks less than 2 months after they have taken over congress, anyone in the shooting community who professes to be pro-firearms should have had better sense.We all need to remember that what we post is going to be seen by hundreds, maybe thousands.And the majority posting here are right: its going to come down to pro-gun vs anti-gun, be you hunter, target shooter, clay shooter, plinker, or just self-defense gun owner.We ALL need to stick and work together.Remember the words of the female senator from CA.: "I want them all."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Zumbo Mumbo wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Today they came for our evil "terrorist" rifles (to quote Zumbo) you spray-fire from the hip without reloading.Tommorrow they will come for your high powered, 50 X scope sniper rifles capable of killing an innocent baby from 2 miles away.United we win. Divided we fall.Are you hunters smart enough to get it?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Doktor Jeep (that one) wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I have been, for the last 6 years, a hunter safety volunteer instructor for Florida Fish and Wildlife. I have trained over 700 people of all ages in the use of the rifle, and as an IPSC match director another 200 in the use of the handgun. During our firearms nomenclature section where we teach the parts of the guns we always used an AR-15 as an example of the kind of sighting system it has (and is a good one indeed) and also to show what a "REAL" detachable magazine, as opposed to a clip - seen on the M1 Garand we had. Picky yes but there were test questions on it.And during the safety section I used a Cobray M11 as a demonstration of why the safety is not always reliable. (You can get the hammer to drop with the safety on). The AK variant was also used to show the students what a gas operating system is for, that being easily dissasembled during a class is a great example of how an autoloader works.All of these "terrorist" guns were supplied by....other hunters. Myself and the other instructors.Out in the field in many camps we spoke of guns, and I have yet to meet a hunter who did not own an AR or AK close or some kind of military firearm. Even the bowhunters will talk about their Black Rifles.In all my years as a patriot involved in the fight to preserve the Second Amendment, and in the hunting community, I never saw any evidence of any kind of seperation between patriots who understand the meaning of 2A as the founders wrote it, and the hunting community. Never. I only knew one hunter who sold an AR-15 to purchase a bolt rifle but it was a choice he had to make and the bolt rifle, he explained - it being chambered in .338 Lapua - seemed to suit him better. I didnt ask.But along comes this Zumbo character.Indeed there are truck hunters, we also called them the Lincoln Navigator people, who can afford the best guided hunts, and the best gear. And from dealing with that type on occasion, as they would never say anything that Zumbo wrote, we assumed that a gun ban would never affect them any further than the illegality of drugs affects celebrities - that is, those elite who have money can have anything they want no matter how many laws there for us peasants to live under.The real money in the gun world is in the hands of those who can afford that African safari or that $8000 a year hunting lease, or that $2000 rifle with the $2000 scope. They are the ones who will always be able to afford whatever expensive license and registration scheme the antis can come up with.And have we not seen it before? Though it is said that Hitler banned guns, it was not true, he made it very expensive to own them so that only those rich types - the same industrialists and aristocrats he wooed during his rise to power - can continue on their fox and boar hunts.The rest, as they say, is history.It has to be made clear and maintained so that we are all in this together. Zumbo's elitist statements could not be let go. If the bolt-action crowd is led to believe that their politically correct rifles are safe from bans, and human nature being what it is, we all lose. England and Australia are dead canaries on this subject for while many of them also thought it OK to keep the military-based firearms away from the public, it was just a stepping stone. Once the ARs and AK clones are gone, and the detachable magine as well (there go the Enfields too), who is to say that the Remington bolt rifle with the big fat scope, the deer rifle, does not become a "sniper rifle"?Have we not seen enough of their tactic? They start with the stone soup method of making it so presumed that there is something there that is not, it takes on a life of it's own so that the existence of the "problem" is not even in question any more. The term "assault rifle", though I have yet to see a rifle assault anyone, is part of their tactic. Have we not seen the media overuse the term "sniper" as well? So throw the "assault" rifles and their owners to the wolves and then there will be a crisis with the "sniper rifles", with special emphasis on "sniper" - unless they coin a new term and pretend it was always the case.Now of course I can imagine the LL Bean type read entries into a blog like this one, seeing various references to the true meaning of the Second Amendment, and feel afraid. Like we are kooks or paranoids. Considering the past performance of gun control, there is a reason to be paranoid because they never stop. BUt it is true that the Second Amendment was never about hunting. The "right to hunt" stems more from property rights or in other cases a right to stay alive. Seeing how the right to life and our property rights are being treated, I think the hunting community who might agree with Zumbo have bigger fish to fry. Considering that Eco-Nazis and gun banners are in the same faction, we must, as Benjamin Franklyn said, hang together or surely we will hang seperatly.But further on that, if you have nothing more than a bolt rifle and see those of us with these beaten miltiary rifles, talking of the Founders and the Second Amendment, as kooks and paranoids, and you think "Heh, what are they talking about. IT CANT HAPPEN HERE." then I must ask you to think about who exactly it is that wants gun control. Look past it and see what else they want, other agendas they support, and their world views. While it might be easy for us to point to Europe and think what happened in 1903s Germany was a fluke, remember that human nature has not changed much. It can happen anywhere and if everybody in the world who wanted nothing more than to be left alone to feed their families and choose their own destiny had a rifle - one of those "terrorist" guns with the high cap magazine - and knew how to use it, the world would be a much better place. Most of the genocides we have seen in this world for the past centuries were from governments killing their own, where the side that wants to kill and the side that gets killed is the one that obeyed the gun control laws.Therefore anyone who wants to disarm you, and they start with certain guns first, might plan on killing you. Though the laws they pass might seem harmless at first, try not paying your taxes and see what happens over time - when they come to collect and are escorted by men with guns.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Cody Z. Hyer wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

My god Was Drunk.......

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Cody Z. Hyer wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

WOW.I have grown up reading F&S and will still read and keep my Subs.I don't blame them.The things that Zumbo said are hurtful. He turned on Us as sportsmen.He is like those Snobby A@#holes at the country club were most regular guys dont even bother with. Or the flyfishing snobs that think if you dont fish SAGE you should'nt be on the same water.Zumbo I think its time you bend over pute your head betwean your legs and Yes KISS YOUR ASS GOODBYE

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Its time for us gunners to put the hot poker to these S.O.B's. Who gave these POLITICIANS permission to take our property from us.We should pound them all into the ground.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I had to add this because some of the responders here don't seem to get it. Zumbo was not given the internet blanket party he received (refer to Pvt. Pyle in Full Metal Jacket if you don't know what this means) - because he was expressing his opinion. If he had been some nobody with a blog on Myspace then we would have received a lot of commentary and it would have blown over. The fact of the matter is that Zumbo was making his living off of the very people he attacked. As one of the respondents above pointed out - people who are shooters buy much more ammunition and other products than hunters do. I have seen numerous respondents to the whole Zumbo thing point out that while their hunter friends might buy 2 boxes of ammunition a year - their shooter friends go thru hundreds if not thousands of rounds. The taxes and profits made from those sales go to support hunting and the companies that were then supporting Zumbo. It is free speech when you say what you want to say independent of external support. When you are stabbing somebody in the back after they just paid your paycheck it is something else entirely. Zumbo did not get dumped simply because of what he said - he got dumped because the people he labeled "terrorists" simply because of the rifles they owned decided their money could get better spent elsewhere.And for those of you who keep arguing that semi-autos' are not the proper type of rifle to use in the woods - we get it. We are not stupid. If you want to argue that hunting regulations should restrict hunters to 3 shots in the rifle and no semi-auto then that is fine. Let the hunters go to the local regulatory agencies and make that argument themselves. I don't think that any of us would argue against it if the case is clearly laid out. That is not however what Zumbo did - he argued against the AR's as a terrorist weapon and indicted any of us who may own them.You hunters can sit here and argue that we are "dividing the community" while you are throwing us under the bus to save your own arses'. Some of us however are not so stupid as to fall for that. Argue that semi-autos have no place in the woods for sporting and safety reasons - that is fine. But argue against the ownership of these weapons for any purpose whatsoever and you are going to get the same type of opposition that Zumbo got. Some of you have some serious waking up to do.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from T.M. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

When an estabished and experienced writer and hunter not only alienates 1/3 of the shooters because of their choice of rifles but then goes as far as to insinuate that they are terrorists, then YES, it's one strike and you are out.I used the so called "terrorist rifle" to defend my country and to allow Zumbo and you to post your opinions. I also use the so called "terrorist rifle" to hunt with as well as target shoot. Am I a terrorist then because I prefer a proven battle rifle that I am trained with and has superior ergonomics?So NO, a simple apology does not cut it. He had the opportunity, as do you, to use common sense when first typing an article and he didn't. He had another opportunity during proof reading to use common sense and he didn't. He displayed a position that is his true belief that is negative towards millions of avid shooters and hunters and that position cost him his career. HE did this to himself, so quit trying to find blame with everyone else.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pog wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Firearm owners were made scapegoats by politicians, the media, and the anti-gun movement for the acts of criminals.These Anti-Gun Politician will be removed from office.The more important question is why do anti-gun politicians insist on "spinning" lies aqnd the LIBERAL media minions.WE ARE TIRED OF THEM AND THE ATTACKS ON OUR FREEDOMS!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bob Mc wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I can’t believe that the “hunting” community is so amazed over the reaction to the Zumbo affair. After decades of tossing the semi-auto owners to the wolves, you are now crying that we’re the ones being unfair? Pull your heads out of your collective butts and tune in. Now get this. We are tired of being the sacrificial lambs for hunters to keep their bolt actions. We are not going to take it anymore. If you are not with us 100%, you are our enemy, no ifs, ands, or butts. Don’t decry us as being the ones driving a wedge in the shooting fraternity when it has been you who has been guilty of that for the past several decades. Make no mistake about this. We do not consider this as being divisive, but rather, an emergency surgery where we are removing a festering cancer from our body. You need to decide right now, will you remain as a vital part of that body, or end up on the floor in the operating room.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ten Percent Firearms wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Lets make one thing clear. The gun community is united like never before. The Internet has increased our grass roots support into a firestorm of unity. Do not mistake our rejection of the garbage that Zumbo and Petzal are writing as division in our ranks.We are united in telling the elitists of the 2nd Amendment community that you will not be tolerated.Now, every single one of us needs to not just waste our time here destroying the traitors of our rights, but they need to use this energy to write your representatives. Here in California we have http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml#contactinfo where you can contact legislators and keep up on what is going on in your state.Getting on here and destroying these guys is just half of your effort. Now you need to turn this activism into real political capital. Make a promise to yourself, to your children, and to all of us to contact your representatives on Monday. Do not let this energy be wasted. Harness it and show everyone, we mean business.Jim Zumbro, your screw up could be your legacy. You might be able to claim credit for showing how unified gun owners can be.Petzal, you are just plain dumb, but at least your soon to be dismissal will confirm we mean business.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 308 wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

It seems this "Mr.Petzal" character is bit of an attention wh00re.Well sir, you now have our attention.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Loki wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Dave, your contempt for the community for which you write is regrettable. You obviously fails to understand that the First Amendment is a restraint upon government, not citizens - and that part of the package of being a public figure is that every word, thought, and deed public or private may very well be that very word, thought, or deed that will reap the whirlwind. None of us are beyond reproach, and once one has stepped into the spotlight as a prominent representative of this group or that, it only becomes more dramatically truthful.I am saddened by the lack of vigor in the responses here, and the lack of historical and factual knowledge thereof. The claim that by a hunter that a semi-auto action somehow made a firearm unsporting or capable of burst fire...seems particularly demonstrative of the ignorance of the Zumbo-supportive response.Any time the Brady Campaign rushes out to break copyright and cross-post a gun-writers blog or column in toto is a hint that same writer has in all likelihood done something very, very, wrong.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Soccer Mom Sally wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"What are the hunter's going to say when the anti gunners start calling those high powered sniper rifles,"I mean hunting rifles" Evil??"Like good sheep, they will do whatever their hunting gods like Zumbo or Petzal tell them to do."Guns are baaaaaaaad"

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Evans wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Hey Dave, thanks for being a spineless, non 2A supporting wuss. So, as long as "your gun" is ok then screw everyone else? Chat room heros? So, you don't support feedback either. Glad to see where you stand - how DO you stand up without a spine? You and your ilk are a disgrace to true lovers of freedom.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Elvis Presley wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

What are the hunter's going to say when the anti gunners start calling those high powered sniper rifles,"I mean hunting rifles" Evil?? People need to wake up before we are all disarmed!! I will NEVER give up my firearms for anyone.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

***

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

***

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve arnold wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzal, I have read Field and Stream since Corey Ford was a writer there and you are letting down the tradition of the magazine,hunters and ALL AMERICANS with your not recognizing the wisdom of our founding fathers. Guns are not about hunting ultimately. They are about balances of power between the enduring desire of some people to hurt/control others weaker than them and the inherent desire on every humans part to resist being a victim - whether of a wild animal in earlier times or a Hitler/Hussein or a "benevolent government" that desires to control its poplation. As a psychologist I try to understand human nature and you are trying to forget the nature of humans. To have a population that possesses "Military style" rifles protects the rights of all of us as it gives caution to the bullies that rise in every population/government who desire to exert domination over others. Please read again the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jeff wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Sir,In reading your comments, it became clear to me that you are a lot like Mr. Zumbo, you just don't get it.It isn't that he apologized and "we" failed to forgive him. He said what he said, he meant what he said and he subsequently apologized (using the term loosely) for everything but what the crux of the controversy was.The core issue, is his ignorance of Amendment II of the US Constitution.It "aint about hunting" Sir. It is about the right of the people to keep and bear arms, not keep and bear "sporting arms".I see that you don't seem to get it either.You guys seem to be part of the problem, not the solution.Please do me a favor and don't purport to represent gunowners, you obviously do not.Mr. Jeff KarnsArizona Resident and Peace Officer

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from STEVE wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

PETZAL IS JUST ANOTHER ZUMBO !!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from calsdad wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I think you may be missing the point of why Zumbo was attacked so aggresively. He referred to the AR rifle as a "terrorist" weapon. There were numerous entries in the responses to his blog that took serious offense to this - including citizens, soldiers, and law officers who did not take kindly to getting called a terrorist by implication because of the type of firearm they used.The further implication of Zumbo's comments that you did not pick up on was the fact that he appeared to be completely OK with the govt. severely regulating the types of firearms that citizens of this country can own - as long as those firearms were not hunting rifles. Without going into a long winded 2nd amendment discussions let's just say that the rabitity of the responses to his blog had a lot to do with that since gun ownership has been pretty severely attacked in this country for decades now. Hunters seem to operate under the premise that their weapons are ok - because they have a sporting purpose - but try to own a battle rifle because you believe in the founder's intent behind the 2nd amendment and you are suddenly a crazy gun owner - or a terrorist - as Zumbo said.The hunters of the world had better get their act straight on the real intent behind the 2nd amendment - once the anti-gunners' take out the battle rifle owners they are coming for hunters next - under the premise of "sniper rifles".

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tucker wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Dave Petzal,Remember when you wrote this back in 1994. You stabbed us all in the kindey then. I will not let you do it again.Quote from David Petzal"Your words in 1994Gun owners -- all gun owners -- pay a heavy price for having to defend the availability of these weapons ... and the American public -- and the gun-owning public; especially the gun-owning public -- would be better off without the hardcore military arms, which puts the average sportsman in a real dilemma."-- Column by David Petzal, "Endangered Tradition" column in Field and Stream, June 1994.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from killer wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Red wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I think Petzel is a Hillary Clinton collaborator and a DNC Shill.Think before you call people that read Field & Stream Mentals and kooks,Yahoos.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from killer wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Never really liked Field and Stream it just seemed watered down and upper englishman stuffy almost, "Pip pip another spot of tea old chap?"I've been hunting coyote for 15 years with the black rifle. I thought it was sporting but I can see now I am a loser.[IMG]http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l89/dmkilbride/coyotehunter002.jpg[/IMG]

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from AndyC wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Anyone, be it Zumbo or Petzal or anyone else, who promotes the removal of someone else's rights - merely in order to keep his own - reminds me directly of the Nazi collaborators and is not someone whose opinions I wish to read any longer.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Lincoln wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Shame on you Mr. Zumbo and Mr. Petzal. I,ve hunted with AR's, AK,s, M1 carbines, M1 Garands, 1903 and many other "military type" weapons. When you start attacking a certain type of weapon.You are showing that gun owners are divided. If we can't stand together on this issue, we will certainlly lose the battle. And we might as well hand over "all" of our guns. Because if you don't support my choices of firearms, I certainlly wont support yours. When they start comming after your choice next. Just my 2 cents.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Lou2 wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"A recent comment by David Petzal, a writer for Field & Stream Magazine, indicating his dislike of AR-15 Rifle owners is a disgrace to American Gun Owners! His apology is not accepted by this company. We will begin to disconnect from David Petzel's sponsors immediately!"

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Soldier wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I find it hard to believe that you even broach this subject, let alone with the twisted logic and rather weak (albeit buttered up) support for a man that got exactly what he deserved.Now, please address this one question: Is there a word for what is wrong with you?By you, I mean not just you D.E.P., but the odd little throng of people like you (I believe ilk is a good word?)... and your ilk, are those that seem to think the unwashed masses are too stupid to notice that you are so far afoul of the truth, that there is little hope of you and fact ever colliding again -- even if by accident.Zumbo did NOT appologize, he rationalized. He most certainly did equivocate and qualify... and really all he did was make an excuse -- He did not make amends for calling me and many, many other men and women in uniform "terrorists" that are spreading fear around the world.The sad thing is that it could have been Zumbo's finest hour, had he a noble bone in his body... he tried to piss backwards and save his crop, but the damage was already done. Had Zumbo made a simple statement saying that he was not going to try to rationalize what he said, only regognize that it was wrong... had he offered an honest appology and stepped down... and then left readers with only one last thought: That they do not lose focus, that if he must fall on his sword in order to galvanize the community, then the collective gain was worth thousands of times more than his loss. Had he asked not to be forgiven, or martyred, but used only as the first round in the upcoming battle, the rally point, the battle cry... he would be remembered in the years to come with a certain respect that men (even if enemies) can foster towards each other.I mention this for two reasons, to call attention to the fact that we are not going to sit and let you rewrite history right under our nose, we know what happened, and your recollection of it is wrong... that brings me to the second point, maybe you might want to keep in mind how bad Zumbo looked gasping and kicking on the way out -- you can at least leave with your dignity.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Robert Oppenheimer wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David E. Petzal- Are You Now, Or Have You Ever Been a Member of the Communist Party or any other totalitarian party?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Frank wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo implied that everyone one of us servicemen who ever carried the M16 was a terrorist.And yes protect your hunting rifles. After the ARs and AKs are gone, they will go after "bolt action, high power sniper rifles" next. Then we the disarmed, ex semi auto owners will not be there to stand with you.Mr. Petzal, we have not forgotten.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from G. Thomas wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Obviously, Mr Zumbo had every right to state his opinions. If he felt that military style rifles aren't appropriate for hunting, that's fine. He's allowed to express that. The problem is, that's not all he said. He went far beyond that, implying that anyone who chooses to hunt, or shoot, or even own such firearms are more or less terrorists. He also called for banning such rifles from hunting altogether. Well, since those of you who are still supporting Jim Zumbo obviously haven't noticed, the 2nd Amendment gives us a constitutional right to keep and bear arms period, not just the right to keep and bear the arms that certain gun writers feel are "appropriate" for sporting purposes. Also in case you haven't noticed, many states allow the use of semi automatic firearms for sporting purposes. That being the case, my question then, is who do you think you are to imply, or worse, actually side with those who are working so hard to deny us the above mentioned constitutional right? Quite honestly, I have no problem, at least in principle, with those of you who don't like military style rifles for hunting. It's America, and one of the perks is we get to decide things for ourselves. The thing you need to remember is, that abilty to decide things, runs both ways and there are literally thousands of people to choose to use own and hunt with AR's and AK's and other semi automatic rifles. Actually, I'm amazed at how un-informed many of you are with regard to AR's an AK's. And I find it interesting so say the least that JZ and like minded folds haven't called for the banning of none military style semi auto's. Never mind they shoot just as fast, and just as powerful and accurate. Anyway, my point is, we're all shooters, and yet, some of you here sound just like the Dems.. like Kennedy and Schumer and Brady and the rest.. calling AR's cop killers and inaccurate and whatever else. People, you'd all better wake up. Once the AR's are gone, your "scoped sniper rifles" will be next. The Brady crew has already posted about how cartridges such as the 30.06, and .308 can defeat the body armor worn by police officers. They've already posted about the "deadly" accuracy and range of scoped bolt action rifles. The bottom line here is, a house united stands, a house divided falls.. we may have issues between us, that's fine, but when it comes to defending gun rights, if we all, "ain't on the same page".. I don't need to say it right? My personal take on JZ.. he messed up. I haven't and I won't attack him personally, I don't know the man. But I did, and I will continue to very strong disagree with what he said. He's wrong and worse, he's giving the Brady's and the rest of the anti gun crowd plenty of gas to run at us with. And by the way Mr. Peztel since I don't read F&S anyway, I was not aware of your previous support of the AWB. You can rest assured I'll do my very best to inform every single shooter I know.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bill wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I hunt Deer with an SKS.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from kcraig wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Jim Zumbo has been deprived of neither his free speech rights nor his opportunity to make a living, and I am weary of reading ignorant comments to the contrary.Jim Zumbo is now set to become the well-toasted guest of honor of the Brady Bunch and the hysterical anti-gun left. He could spend the rest of his days giving speeches to their people and publishing in their rags. He would be paid obscenely well for it.Jim Zumbo wasn't censored. That's something the government does. He chose a new career path--unintentionally maybe, but it was still his choice. He may be reluctant to gallop full speed down that new career path, but that is also his free choice.Zumbo is apprently trying to retrace his steps and undo his new career path choice but his former readers also have a choice and may choose not to read or listen to him.Freedom to speak and freedom to tune out the speaker: both are perfectly preserved in the execution. The First Amendment is a magnificent, well-balanced thing.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from kevin wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The Brady Bunch has just about got to be besides themselves with glee to see us at each other like this. A veritable wet dream for them. And the Fudds are going for the "divide and conquer" strategy in classic fashion.It is a sad fact of human existence and history that your average dolt lacks the foresight, or apparently the testicular fortitude, that God gave a squirrel.Petzal, it is sure interesting to see your previous writings here. You are a greater enemy of gunowners then Sarah Brady herself. Zumbo screwed up when he wrote what he did in his blog but your treason is far more clear and your foolishness in following up last weekends fiasco with your won drivel speaks for itself.Good riddance.Will someone please take out the trash?drj

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tim Kleinschmidt wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

A semi auto rifle is not an assult rifle even if it does have the shape of an AK or an AR. I have 3 AK clones, and have taken my last 3 whitetail with one of them. Same power as a 30-30 and much more comfortable to shoot. Excellent hunting rifle. not that it matters because...THE 2ND AMENDMENT IS NOT ABOUT HUNTING!!!!!!!!Please, FUDDS of the world, get this thru your skulls.Here ar your words-"Gun owners -- all gun owners -- pay a heavy price for having to defend the availability of these weapons ... and the American public -- and the gun-owning public; especially the gun-owning public -- would be better off without the hardcore military arms, which puts the average sportsman in a real dilemma."-- Column by David Petzal, "Endangered Tradition" column in Field and Stream, June 1994.You are part of the problem Mr. Petzal. And you call yourself a gun nut. Shame.I support your right to hunt with your boring old bolt action rifle with a scope on it. Please support my RIGHT to own and use the rifle of my choice.Tim K.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from KH wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

It's too bad that hunters feel this way.......long after the anti's have succeeded in banning semi -auto rifles( these arent assault rifles, so let's get our terms straight) they will come for your sniper rifles, because we all know you dont need highly accurate rifles......we hang together or hang seperately.....

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from YouKnowI'mRight wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzel and Zumbo are little more than elitist hunting writers elevated to celeberty status by their Fudd readers and worshipers.Like everyone else who achieves this kind of fame, they insulate themselves from the real world and isolate themselves from those that put them there.We are not eating our own in this regard because they have never really been part of our community to begin with.They are little more than a couple of very bad hack writers who have become wealthy off the backs off a bunch of starry eyed Fudds.If they want to continue to shoot themselves in the foot by alienating the fastest growing segment in the shooting community that's fine.But Petzel, Zumbo, and those elitist writers like them are not gun owners, they are high-fence canned hunters, who have 0 creditability when it comes to any knowledge of the second amendment and also little more than useful idiots for the gun control crowd.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from KP wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Now THIS is hilarious:"What Jim said was ill-considered. He’s entitled to his beliefs, but when a writer of his stature comes out against black guns, it sure as hell does not help our cause."Coming from a guy that SUPPORTED the 1994 "assault" weapons ban! Remember? "Senator Feinstein, it seems, has made every effort to prescribe "assault weapons" and protect "legitimate firearms.""So who are you, and who is SHE, to decide what a "legitamate" firearm is???I second the call for a boycott of F&S magazine! Unless of course you hunters want to eventually be reduced to using rocks and sticks, like cavemen.The anti-gun crowd will NEVER, EVER be appeased. Today it's our "assault" weapons. Tomorrow it's your "sniper rifles." Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool of the highest order.If Mr. Zumbo has REALLY changed his views, then I would happily welcome him back to the fold. In my opinion, that remains to be seen, but hopefully he will come around.But with the rights of EVERY SINGLE gun owner in the balance, we have no room whatsoever for the Judas-types that would sell us out for their own benefit.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Frank wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo should have plugged his brain in before pluging in his fingertips while hunting. We all know wht the first AWB did and that was to rive cost up. It is getting to a point in this country that people with low income wont or cant afford to have a firearm. I dont know about you but when people cant protect themselves thats when it hits the fan. To the blogger that doesnt know the difference between automatic and semi I dont think you should own a firearm until you find out what that means. When you buy an ar rifle or ak sks etc what name or catagory gets put on your atf form 4473?? RIFLE correct not ASSAULT RIFLE. Why must we in the industry use that term and play into the Brady Bunches use of words. Do we all rememebr the fiasco with Clinton on the Definition of "IS" Come on give us all a break and lets stop using ASSAULT as a prefix to our rifle and you will see how things will change.. my .02

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from MC Ballpeen wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Absolutely amazing! You Dave, have completely forgot that hunting is a priviledge and owning a firearm is a right. A priviledge is something that can be taken away at the whim of some corrupt politician. A right, by it's definition, can not.The reason that Jim Zumbo was canned was because of his inflamitory retoric and villanization of certain gun owners. We of the second amendment fraternity view this as TREASON. It can be truly said that we as gun owners are far more hostile towards traitors among us that the openly avowed gun grabbers. We know where the Brady Campaign is coming from, the real question is where are you and Jim Zumbo coming from Dave? After reading your article from 1994 it appears that you are also one of the traitors in our midst.After "assault weapons" are banned, there are already plans to go after your bolt action "sniper rifles" and the "armor piercing" ammunition you feed them. Not to mention your "street sweeping" shot guns beacause as we all know they have no "sporting purpose". This is not fiction or a flight of fantasy but it is the truth. If we all don't hang together, we will surely hang seperately.I hearby call for the boycott of all Field and Stream advertizers and of the magazine itself. It seems that Mr. Petzal has once again stuck his foot in his mouth.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Woody wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Basically Zumbo and Petzal are old set in their ways die-hard self appointed and anointed huntine elitists.Please do not confuse their beliefs with the majority of hunters today.The overwhelming majority of hunters today support everyone's right to own whatever gun they so desire.If Zumbo was half the writer he thought he was when the guides told him about the increasing number of predator hunters that were using the so called "assault rifles" he should have asked for more information.Maybe even contacted and went on a hunt with them. Then he could have seen first hand what a great varmint rifle these guns are.Then he could have written an accurate blog or article extolling what great guns these are instead of arbitrarily dismissing them and calling them "terrorist rifles".He missed a golden opportunity to inform and edcuate his readers and make a stand for ALL guns and ALL gun owners.He missed the boat big time.That shows utter incompetence to me.Incompetence should not be tolerated when it comes to discussing our God given, and 2nd Amendment recognized, rights.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from David wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Tom Glidden, I don't what rock you crawled out from under but you have NO idea what you're talking about. The chambers on AK's and AR's are NOT "cut large" thereby making them able to operate. Do you really know anything about guns at all? I happen to own an AK AND an AR that I'll put up against any "hunting rifle" you own as far as accuracy. No self respecting hunter would even hazard a thought about taking a rifle/ammunition combination into the woods that was not perfectly capable of taking the game he was looking for. Note I said "self respecting" hunter as a qualifier as I am full well knowledgable that there are those who would attepmt to take a charging Cape Buffalo with a .38 Special.As for the rest of the comments in this blog, please guys, go get some education. Personally, I see no need for anyone to own, shoot, or possess an over & under or some high dollar Browning Citori. Those kind of guns should be outlawed as they have no practical use for "me" and "my" wants and desires. Does that make any sense? No, it doesn't, but it's about as sensical as "your" comments about the rifles and shotguns "I" choose to spend "my" money on.Zumbo and Petzal have done great disservice to ALL gun owners and to the fight for the preservation of the Second Amendment. When you advocate outlawing a particular "type" of gun, based solely on knee-jerk reaction to lies and stereotypes and ignorance of facts, you lay open the field to massive bans and restrictions that will come back to haunt ALL of us.Do I advocate taking a full auto into the hunting field? No. That doesn't make it true that full autos should be outlawed. Contrary to popular beliefs and ignorance of the laws, in some states an individual can legally own and shoot full auto firearms. The typical shooter/collector who owns and enjoys shooting the AK and AR variants and other military styled rifles does NOT own a full auto. The so-called "assault rifles" everyone is so up in arms over is NOT a full auto, but semi auto, just like the Remington 742 and 1100 that thousands of "hunters" own and shoot. To support a ban on those "evil semi auto rifles" is to advocate the banning and confiscation of YOUR rifles and shtguns as well. Are you really that stupid? Judging by the postings of many here, yes you are.While I agree that both Zumbo and Petzal have a right to their opinions, that's all they are.."opinions." I have my own opinions but that doesn't make me an expert in the firearms field either, nor does it give me the right to advocate banning a particular type of firearm action that I happen to find not to "my" liking. If it did, you skeeters had better be digging holes for your fancy little guns. Same thing with you bolt gun owners and benchresters. Nobody really "needs" to be able to hit a target at 1000 yards, right? Think about it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kevin wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

It is a shame to see us divided like this, which was the exact reason I posted on Jim Zumbo's blog last weekend. The Brady Bunch are going to have a field day with all of it.It is clear that many in the hunting and shooting world have a hollow sense of liberty and a poor understanding of the Constitution. It is also clear, as stated in a previous post that many hunters are "old school". Things change, technology changes. Get with the program.The idea that hunters are out there blasting away in 10 shot bursts with Assault Rifles in ludicrous. I live in the Northwoods and sure don't hear that while I know that there are some who hunt with semi-autos. I have taken 2 whitetail with on of my AKs. 1 shot each.I do agree that Jim should have been given a second chance as I would hate to see us turn to the pettiness and vindictiveness of the left but perhaps that is what it takes to win the political war anymore. In any event, it is not my call to make.All of you old school hunters out there had better realize just what is at stake, both for your rights and for your country. They are both at grave risk presently, only a fool would fail to recognize it. Give the left not an inch of ground as you will never get it back.drj

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from HD Rider wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

In my opinion, never have so many law abiding people been so thoroughly and publically insulted.This goes past the First or Second Amendment, Zumbo calls us a terrorist and now Petzal supports it. A terrorist is a person who would do us harm, not law abiding American citizens. The Al-qaeda are terrorists. What our Zumbos and Petzals seem to forget, is by definition a native born terrorist would also be a traitor.I have an Honorable Discharge from the Army. I have never committed a felony. In over half a century of life, my "rap sheet" contains nothing worse than speeding tickets. I haven't even been charged being at fault in an accident.I own a variety of firearms and because there is a semiautomatic AK in my safe Zumbo calls me a terrorist? A citizen who would commit acts of terrorism on his Homeland and next Petzal and others defend it.Does anyone disagree that an American citizen who commits an act of terrorism against his homeland would also be a traitor?Now defend yourselves and say terrorism by a citizen is not an act of treason. Maybe you can "spin" it better than the clintons did.Thanks a lot for the compliment and for the insult. Now sit back and realize even the Brady Bunch never called me a terrorist and by definition a traitor.Be sure to kiss my butt.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JG wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr Petzal,As a hunter, semi-auto owner and politically active Pro-2A individual. I have to disagree with you.In the shadow of Mr Zumbo's exile you have the opportunity to unite the Gun Community or further divide it. I hope that you choose to help unite it in your next article.The traditional hunting crowd needs to realize that the Brady Bunch isn't just trying to take away pistols, semi-auto centerfire rifles etc....they're now after your high power scoped hunting rifles....why? Because they now call them "Sniper Rifles".Its time folks wake up and realize that the Pro-2A community needs to work together regardless of your shooting discipline.Zumbo's comments were stupid...plain and simple and the Brady Bunch are having a field day with HIS comments as we speak...check their sites if you need proof.Either we work together and get everyone to send just one letter to their Reps/Senators or before long they WILL be demanding that you turn in your Winchester Super X Model 1 or that Remington 700.Together the Gun community has the ability to decide the future....separately (or asleep) we risk losing our rights and culture forever....just look at the UK where in recent years confiscated ALL hunting guns.I for one would rather not have to explain to my kids why I failed to take any action and as as result they no longer have 2A Rights to Hunt, shoot trap/skeet or shoot an AR at the range.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ivan wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

What do Smith & Wesson, Zumbo, and Petzal all have in common? All are now washed up "has beens" and have more yesterdays than tommorrows in the firearms business. The Second Amendment applies to us all, when you start selling off your principles you have have become one of "them". Their strategy is divide and conquer, Petzal just handed them some ammo. Swarovski.....are you listening?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from MJB68 wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I offer the opinion that Mr. Zumbo got what he deserved. The elitist writers, TV personalities, and NRA board members who believe that the only guns worth protecting are the ones with bolt actions or double barrel shotguns, have just received a wake up call. Those of us who love our black rifles and belt fed guns have been carrying the load for years. We have been trying to preserve our 2nd ammendment rights through letter writing campaigns, grassroots movements, and constant contact with our elected representatives. Unfortunately, the "Elmer Fudds" have always looked down their nose at us at the range or in the field in the misinformed belief that their sporting guns are more sacred an American tradition than our "terrorist" rifles. Guess what....Time to wake up and smell the coffee. We've watched our rights slip steadily away...1968, 1986, 1994... and what have they or the NRA done? Well just about nothing because nobody was threatening their beloved sporting arms. Now they realize just how vocal, united, and numerous we are. Take notice Mr. Petzal. We do eat our own for failing to live up to the standards we set. There is no room for compromise, because guys like Jim Zumbo have spent 40 years compromising on what should have been the ONLY cause...preserving the integrity of the Second Ammendment.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from J. Kong wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I'm not a subscriber to either OL of F&S, but I'll be watching for them in the newsstands in the coming months to see whether or not both publications make a serious effort to acknowledge that many hunters are also serious firearms enthusiasts, and that to fulminate against the hunters who use nontraditional arms in the field is to unwittingly tar what is probably a surprisingly large percentage of the readership with an unsavory brush indeed. I'll go so far as to say this: If OL and F&S can present a factual, unbiased, no-excuses allowed analysis of hunting with such rifles and what possible advantages they might offer to a hunter, I'll sign up for a subscription. I might as well add that if a .44 Magnum carbine is suitable for a hunting situation, an SKS, Mini-30, or (gasp!) AK-47 with a 5 rd magazine is equally suitable. I know that the hunting rifle that I own is entirely worthless in brush; the scope is too powerful, the barrel is too long, and a followup shot isn't quick enough. I've never hunted in brush but I've read posts on Internet forums about brush hunting, and some hunters have used SKS carbines and AK pattern rifles to do it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Arlie Austin wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

After reading most of everybodies replys I think that there is some confusion as to why the backlash was so strong! it wasn't because Zumbo didn't advocate the use of the AR-15 for hunting! hunting had nothing to do with it! it was the fact that he called anybody that owned an AR-15 a terrorist! that was the reason for the backlash! he betrayed everybody that has tried to stop the insane banning of these firearms! they are our constitutional inheritance, they are why the 2nd Amendment was written! So that at anytime the government fails to be responsive to the people, when elected officials suddenly become tyrants the people have the right and the ability to throw off that government and form one that is inline with our constitution! that is why we fight the liberals, that is why we own these guns and that is why we will very quickly eat our own if they fail to hold to the values of the rest of the community! this has absolutley nothing to do with hunting, this has everything to do with our future, our freedom and our childrens freedom! had Zumbo called them patriot rifles instead of terrorist rifles he'd probably still have a job!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Varmintmist wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

So what's next? Writing your letters to sponsors like Swarovski? I've seen so many fine german scopes on the receivers of your fine imported ak-47s. Spending 150.00 on a fine imported gun and then spending 200.00 more on a thousand rounds of fine ammo from cabelas.Without the buying power from you guys the gun and ammo companies will go broke. Then they will pay for pandering to the rich hunters.I shudder to think of what will happen to the american economy! It will be another depression! Where is FDR to lead the nation in our darkest of times!!!Posted by: whatever | February 24, 2007 at 02:34 AMYou might want to check on a Bushmaster DCM rifle, 1200+ out of the box. Then figure a few thousand rounds of decent stuff to put though it.You might also want to check out the fastest growing shooting sports, they aint hunting

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

any body want a cushy gun writer colom job theres two openings

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from whatever wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

So what's next? Writing your letters to sponsors like Swarovski? I've seen so many fine german scopes on the receivers of your fine imported ak-47s. Spending 150.00 on a fine imported gun and then spending 200.00 more on a thousand rounds of fine ammo from cabelas.Without the buying power from you guys the gun and ammo companies will go broke. Then they will pay for pandering to the rich hunters.I shudder to think of what will happen to the american economy! It will be another depression! Where is FDR to lead the nation in our darkest of times!!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

First off he used the word ban. And he used it the wrong way. For a pro-gun writer to advocate banning anything is treason and he has been punished. Second, he called us terrorists, no way to make that not be offensive. When you don't know something, or live in a vacuum, STFU about it till you have a clue. For those of you that also have no clue, it has been illegal to hunt with full-auto for some time now, you are on the net, look it up before you say anything else stupid and look like Jim did. It is nice to see this much interest in one man's blunder turn out so muchdedication to seeing him hung. Why can't we get this much involvement in contacting our reps when new bills get proposed that will limit our right much more that anything jim could do on a bad day???? How many of us have called, written, or e-mailed our reps on the recent HR 1022? How many of us are members of the NRA, JPFO, GOA, or any other groups. If you are not,you really need to be to have a better chance of keeping what rights we have. Everyone got fired up over some stupid comments, he paid for them. Keep the fire going and use it on your reps and tell them what they have to do to ensure that your children can enjoy the pleasures you have today.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from James Easley wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

We are in the midst of a cultural war Mr. Petzal. This is not a conflict that the American gun culture started, but forces have long been mustering against us and we have been drawn in regardless. We fight for our God given rights and personal freedoms. In this type of struggle, every mistake costs dearly. The price must be paid for by all where one transgresses. So yes, we came down hard on Mr. Zumbo. Even so, he can redeem himself if he so chooses. The path will be difficult, and the journey long, but it can be done.I see you are now espousing Mr. Zumbo's views but without the intestinal fortitude to come right out and say it. I personally challeng you to put your views were your mouth is and make an unequivocal statement on exactly where you stand in relation to gun grabbers. There is no middle ground. You either support the ongoing efforts to disarm law abiding Americans, or you do not.Until I hear and see that you are fully with us, I will let your words here speak for themselves. I will not buy another Field And Stream nor will I spend any money with your sponsors until you declare yourself in print and action a true hero of freedom and liberty. You have been put on notice Mr. Petzal. The ball is in your court.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dann wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"For 40 years, Jim has been a spokesman and ambassador of good will for hunting. Through his tireless efforts as a teacher and lecturer on hunting and hunting skills, he has done more for the sport than any 250 of the yahoos who called for his blood."Well, that's as disingenuous a comment as you could probably make because with one fell swoop Zumbo has now undone all of that goodwill and actually made it worse. By being so highly regarded, at least in your eyes and now the eyes of the Brady-niks, Zumbo has caused grave harm by being held in such esteem. With such esteem Zumbo should have been more careful, and thoughtful, in his remarks.I get damn tired of the many hunters like you him who pretend they're above the fray when it comes to various gun-rights issues, especially issues like self-defense and concealed carry. If they'd wake up and smell the coffee they would realize that when one gun is banned or a right curtailed, then theirs isn't far behind. Zumbo just had a steaming hot pot of java dumped all over him - and I couldn't feel less sorry for him. I read his comments with both the familiarity of echoes I've heard from other hunters and also the incredulity of how someone in his position - who has lived a privileged life many of us would envy and earned a great living by enjoying, and maximizing, his 2nd amendment rights, could dump all over those rights. It amazes me that any thinking person can fall for the emotion of what is really only a cosmetic difference. Really, what's the difference between a Bushmaster or a BAR .308??? Functionally, not a damn thing - one is 'scary' looking and the other isn't? - gimme a freakin' break!!! I can guarantee that if you're looking down a barrel that's pointed at you by some guy with wild, angry eyes then they're both equally frightening, conversely - if they're both pointed down range at a target or quarry then all I'm interested in is how accurate they are.Petzal defends Zumbo because fundamentally he agrees with him, as his past writings clearly show.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gary Graham wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

it would seem that many people just do not understand the AR rifle platform (or any other evil looking rifle).The AR system (unlike in the movies) is semi-auto only.Why are 70% more semi-autos purchase today over bolt action rifles?The bolt action is a single purpose weapon.The AR is a modular weapons system and can be used for any purpose and is considered a Sport Ulility Rifle.With a quick change in the upper receiver (30 seconds) you can go from .223, to 50 Beowulf and just about any caliber in between (including pistol calibers, or even .50 bmg bolt action).The modular system allows you to add or remove sights, scopes, grips, stocks quickly, alowing you to own one rifle receiver, yet use that same rifle for target shooting, hunting small game, hunting large game, protect the wife and kids and more.Not only that but most AR's are far more accurate than your avg bolt action rifle.I used to be a hunter, but 10 years ago most of the land was bought up by people from out of state. While I don't hunt anymore (I always hunted with a bolt action) I do shoot and own a number of Sport Utility Rifles of all types and I'm a better shooter because of it.It's not about "heavy firepower" or "letting loose" 100 shots to kill a deer. (actually I have had lots of close calls from the bolt action hunters, and not one with a semi-auto) it's about the modular nature of modern arms. I can get the weapon to fit me, without needing to conform to a one size fits all rifle.Also the most common modern Sports Utility rifles are in the following calibers..223.3087.62x395.45x397.62x54R8mm30.06Another point you may have missed is target shooting with Sport Utility Rifles is a family event, with everyone shooting the rifles several times a year and having fun doing it.When I was hunting we would sight in our rifles a few days before hunting started, and that was it. no family event, just a few buddies making sure the rifles are hitting where they were last year.It can be hard to get people into hunting (where you can still find a place to hunt) if they shoot the rifle and the recoil is enough to keep them away. But with a Sport Utility Rifle, you have to pry the rifle from their hands, and they are more willing to try other rifles as well as hunting.Please do not discriminate against other styles of weapons.. to do so will end the second amendment, and with it the tradition of hunting in the US

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from thackney wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

He still doesn't get it. He still thinks this is only about hunting. The second amendment is as much about protecting hunting as the first is about protecting poetry.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from thackney wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

He still doesn't get it. He still thinks this is only about hunting. The second amendment is as much about protecting hunting as the first is about protecting poetry.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from D. Scott Hewitt wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

What Mr. Zumbo, AND you, seem to be missing the simple fact that the Second Amendment is NOT about hunting. Mr. Zumbo's "Apology" said that he found some people hunt with AR-15s, so that makes it okay. It has NOTHING to do with hunting. It has to do with defending your home and your homeland. Try reading the Second one more time.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from John wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Sir,You are right,what happened to Mr. Zumbo could happen to anyone,even you........

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bubba wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Those of you believe ARs and AKs have no "sporting purpose" are making a fatuous argument on two basises. One, the Second Amendent cites NOTHING about a "sporting purpose" as a purpose for the protection of the right to keep and bear arms. Second, hunting is not the only "sporting purpose" for firearms - so are shooting sports (target shooting, and various marksmanship competition sports, et cetera). For hunters to discount the "sporting purpose" for firearms is divisive, arrogant, elitist and stupid.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Dykstra wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

REALITY:A lifetime of good service followed by ONE misdeed shall render you helpless.A man in good service to his country for 20 years that sells information to our enemy is still a TRAITOR. It doesn't matter who he is or what he has done. He betrayed us and is a TRAITOR.This situation is no different. We are at WAR with the anti's. Every day, every night. If you think of it in any other fassion, you have my pitty.Based on your 1994 article that was Pro-AWB, and your current attitude, it is obvious that unlike Jim Zumbo, you have NOT repented. I have posted this garbage to every site I am a member of (many) and rest assured you will soon find yourself under the full weight that Jim was.We are many.... and we are watching you.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pufff wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

If you like a bit of friendly cuffing, it's footballers your wanting. Pick up a fanzine and find out where the boys congregate before and after games. This will turn out to be some cozy little pub near the local field. You'll have no difficulty in getting a little off-field rough-housing going, gemmy. The youngsters are always keyed up before a big game, and I'm sure a little therapeutic scrummy would stand all hands in good stead. At those boisterous after-game rallyes, be a sport and buy the fellows a round or two and show a bit of ankle, so to speak. I suggest the after game gatherings are best, since win or lose, the boys will be eagerly looking to find a healthy release for their high level of tense excitement, and of course the alcohol will flow in rivers...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Krusty0369 wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Leon They got 30-06 EBR's so you can put grizzlies back on the list

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JPratt06 wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

PIE?????

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from John Kerry wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I'm going to put you into a little hand-combed cotton number today, . Simple, but elegant, with slits at the sides that subtly reflect your worldly sophistication and sexual elan. We're goingto let this tough, no-nonsense Little Black Dress do all the talking, , by keeping the accessories to a minimum. We'll go with the pressed-steel auto-marque earrings and understated patent pumps by Yanni. You'll carry a kicky little purse made from a humanely-harvested box-turtle's shell on a quietly assertive strap of particolored faux Sillystring.Makeup will be minimalist, in keeping with our stealth theme... just a little ebony lipstick and a touch of purple eye shadow. Nails? Short and clean, (Think Billy Mays or that Broom Hunk) with a classic salesman's hard-shine buff.Of course you are dying to ask, "But which wig shall I wear?"Well, , I want you to be daring! Be strong! Be aggressively, phallically understated in an overstated way! I want you to join my FASHION TERRORISTS!Are you feeding those poor boys lye soap again? You really should leave off before you ruin their insides with that stuff! At least get some oats and cottonseed hulls into them! Mercy sakes, you'll have them burned through at the bellybuttons if you don't quit it!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Thomas Kashuba wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Jim Zumbo did the hunting and shooting fraternity a great injustice with his comments about semi-automatic rifles with a ar or ak prefix. Someone with his position in the hunting and shooting media is the last person who should be voicing his opinion about what type of weapon one uses for hunting. In Pa. where I reside this type of weapon is not a legal firearm for hunting "Big Game". I'm sure there are several more states where it also would not be a legal hunting firearm. Given the political nature these days one in Mr. Zumbo's position should choose and use ones words carefully. Any scribe who defends Mr. Zumbo is likewise in the wrong. What type of weapon one uses to hunt with is a personal choice. As long as it is a legal weapon we have to stop condemning each other.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from nmleon wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Neither Jim Zumbo, David Petzal, Sarah Brady, or Ted Kennedy owes me an apology. They all exercise their 1st amendment rights regarding their opinions of the 2nd amendment and gun control, and I certainly have no problem with that.However...even as none of the gun control proponents owes me an apology, I DON'T OWE ANY OF THEM MY SUPPORT.If I choose to not spend my money with organizations that support them that is my choice.If I choose to let the organizations who do support these gun control proponents know of my refusal to spend my money with them, that is also my choice.I am sometimes a shooter.I am often a hunter.I am ALWAYS a gun owner.The second amendment is of paramount importance to me.Mr. Zumbo now says he will try an AR and reconsider his opinion. Mr. Petzal says there weren't as many ARs back then (when he wrote his quoted anti piece).They both miss the relevancy of the second amendment completely as has been pointed out here and elsewhere repeatedly and apparently to no avail.Even if Mr. Zumbo and Mr. Petzal hadn't shown themselves to be anti-second amendment, I would still hope that they would be dismissed as hunting writers.Anyone who can say that AR type firearms (or AK, SKS, etc.) have no legitimate place in hunting shows an ignorance of the hunting scene and an incompetence that (I would hope) would be grounds for dismissal by their employers and sponsors even without any SA concerns.I am the Secretary of the Board of Directors of Predator Masters.com, the largest predator hunting organization in existence with over 17,000 registered members.Predator hunters are by and large some of the most dedicated hunters, hunting many more days a year than the "average" hunter. They are also generally among the most skillful hunters, often coming to the sport because big game hunting is "not enough of a challenge" for them anymore. Not many "fudds" there.In a poll a few months ago on our board, something like 40% of respondents either hunt predators with an AR or want to. That extrapolates to almost 7,000 hunters from our board alone.Somehow Mr. Zumbo, who was paid to keep abreast of the hunting scene, would have us believe he didn't know people were using ARs to hunt with? If taken at his word, that shows monumental incompetence.For all the other (perhaps excusably) ignorant folks who maintain that an AR isn't appropriate for big game hunting, my camo dipped, 5 shot, 243 WSSM AR is a slightly better than 1/2 MOA average rifle (better than my 40X), and it's ballistics are superior to your 243 WIN.I expect the Shilen barreled (5 shot) 6.5mm WSSM AR I'm having built will be every bit as accurate, and will have ballistics close to a 260REM.Other than perhaps grizzly, I can't think of any big game in N. America that a 6.5 WSSM isn't appropriate for.I agree completely with the statement from the NRA and think Mr. Petzal's name should be added.I further believe that though second amendment support is not strictly a requirement for a hunting writer, comprehensive knowledge of the hunting community is.Both Mr. Zumbo and Mr. Petzal have shown an appalling ignorance of the very subject they are paid to cover and should be dismissed.That of course is a matter between them, their employers, and sponsors.However...It is my choice where I spend my money, and I choose not to spend it supporting people who are anti second amendment, OR on hunting magazines with incompetent writers.Leon RogersSecretaryPredator MastersNRA Life Member

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Ladies and gentlemen, get used to this. Harnass this energy and rage and use it to make a difference. It's easy to take our rights for granted, until we're reminded by some fool to wake up and pay attention. This fight will be forever, based on the current state of the world. As this firestorm cools, don't be tempted to relax our feelings and become complacent.When they come to your door to take your guns, should they expect to get 'em?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from walt wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr Petzal,Ignorance is bliss and you and others like you are very blissful people. Amongst the firearms community you would be wise to pick and chose your words because you may have to eat them.If you don't beleive me ask Zumbo.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Hillary wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I expect an answer from you about those stunning uniforms, jymmy! All of the Nazi regalia was obviously conceived and coordinated by a GENIUS!So MASTERFUL!! Sublimely understated, yet commandingly eye-catching in a wholesome, yet aggressively MASCULINE way! Yes, the colour and line of the young men's clothing was simply superb, and the accessories were simply perfection!Oh! That early Fall of 1937...the summer leaves just beginning to change... the beautiful old city, the music, the splendid weather, the stirring pageantry of rank upon rank of magnificent men and powerful, potent machines, the tympanic beat of a hundred thousand gleaming leather boots, and over it all, arm raised in rigid salute, THE FURHER HIMSELF!!!Another tool to establish yourself at the top of the communard heap is the SMILE.These Lefties NEVER smile, but they will usually react to a warm, sincere smile the same as normal people. So, whenever appropriate, smile! Don't expect a smile in return, but keep smiling yourself whenever appropriate. People will be drawn to you, and they will tend to cooperate with you, though they may not realize why. Always ask people, never tell them, and remember to thank people whenever they are helpful or just courteous. Most communards have never experienced a civil social setting. Provide a model of civil intercourse, and you will be rewarded beyond your expectations. Never incite action against an unpopular community leader. It is not necessary. They cannot oppress without the cooperation of the community, and when that is withdrawn, their power is at its end, and usually these errant persons are then able to rejoin the community as functioning members of co-equal status.Why not just get a motor home? A good motor home on a halftrack chassis would be just right to carry all your supplies. Pull a high-clearance trailer behind for your pack goats, jeep, armory, and ATV & snowmobiles. Use the pack goats for intetresting side trips and day hikes to those kikki Indian villages and communal eco-villages. You can buy China imports from the Indians and collect free STDs from the communards. Cool!I placed an urgent order for The Great Iron Screw by e-mail and then wanted to add a couple of utility goats to it. I called Lee Valley Tools and the woman I spoke to was friendly and helpful - she added the goats to my order and also gave me advice about which tools to choose to adjust them properly. My goats arrived quickly and in perfect order and I was happy with the quality of the animals. They have a very nice selection of utility goats and I will be ordering additional utility goats, meat goats, and several hair goats soon. Mohair smoking jackets are de rigeur!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from David wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

We need to take him down like DUMBO went down. Whoever has a copy of F&S, please post emails for the advertisers so we can tell them that Petzal needs to go!!!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Toad wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

It is often asked, How did Gyemmy become the New Left's foremost political guru? How did this immigrant cobbler's son become the hottest consultant/shaman/whipcrack to top world leaders and the haute art/fashion crowd on this or any planet?Why do the famous and not so famous movers and shakers, world leaders, trend-setters, dictators and democrats, Hollywood glamourites and hep young Xgen streetpeople beat a path to his ornate carved mahogany doors? Why are these A-list celebs and notorious oppressors and everyone else from J!mmie Carter to Papa Soros to Vlad Putin to Bobby Trendy to Hillary and the Pope lined up to get into Gyemmy's Euro-fab digs in the incredible old Sutro mansion outside of Frisco?It could be the incredible fried pies and the world class wine cellar, but it's not. It could be the treasures of sculpture and avante-gard furnishings, but it's really not that, either. The whole-house Bose system? No, not even that. So... what is it about this itinerate cobbler's son become raconteur and fashion policeman to the world's glitterati that makes him the center of today's Powerpeoples' world?Consult Basque Red Net for best in Soviet-era automotive and industrial hardware. Fine name like Zil, Trabant, Lada, etc, available for quick shipment to your Peoples' tactical unit or Workers' subversive cadre. Payment in euro, specie, yen only! No yankee dollar! East Europe motorbiycle also have stock! Most unit are with most part complete, may expect slight adjustment or small part to replace, then operate as usual! Soviet armynavy item also available, call to learn exciting price!Have your credit card ready! Hurry! Hot! Wow! When the warming is complete, Costa del Sol will span Europe and reach right across Russia and Siberia to Valdivostok. It will truly be THE NEVER-ENDING SUMMER! The golden beaches will extend in an unbroken line from Atlantic Spain through the heart of Europe and Eastward clear to the Pacific. Maritime Canada will be the site of the world's greatest tropical resorts, and Moscow will rival Rio as a sun-n-surf destination. England will resemble the Ceylon of today, and Antarctica will be the new winter playground of the rich and famous, with emigre Arctic bears serving as tour guides.For long-term living off the land, AKA "Roughing It", one needs twenty or so stout Blackamoor bearers, plenty of spiffy guns in fitted cases, good liquor, good friends, a good cameraman, and a pretty woman in a sedan chair to attract lions, bad Negroes, half-naked Greek shepherd boys, and rhinos in rut.Bring along a couple of nuns to toss to the crocodiles, and for an extra touch of class, bring along a trumpet-style wind-up phonograph with an ample collection of Strauss and Caruso cylinders and of course, Earnest Hemingway on a litter. (Be sure to have enough good liquor to keep Earnest in operating order)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JohnKSa wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"A United States in which someone can be ruined for voicing an unpopular opinion is a dangerous place. Today it was Jim’s turn. Tomorrow it may be yours."Interesting how so many confuse freedom of speech with freedom of consequences from speech. If there is a place where a person can voice an unpopular or foolish opinion in a very public place and emerge unscathed, I don't know where it is. Your comment as it stands is so general as to be meaningless since it refers to ANY place populated by humans.But let's take it at face value...Are you suggesting that a person should be able to say ANYTHING, no matter how unpopular, or foolish, and yet should suffer no consequences? I don't. But enlighten me. Do you perceive some benefit from being able to make extremely foolish comments with impunity? (Other than the obvious personal benefit--given your apparent propensity for making comments that are not well thought out.)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mr T wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Hey now, lets be fair, Outdoor Life dropped Zumbo the traitor.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JoeAverage wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Dave, old buddy:It's nice to know there are reasonable gun owners - make that hunting rifle owners - like yourself.Let's get together for a few drinks soon. You know how much I like to do that.Your Pal,Ted Kennedy

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from John Lewis wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Wow, what a deal..With each paid membership to Handgun Control inc.you get a years subscription to either Outdoor Life , Or Field & Stream magazine as part of your membership packet! Jeepers! How can I pick, they are both really good left wing publications these days....

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mr T wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Before you side with Petzal remember this clown spoke out IN FAVOR of the AWB!Traitors like Petzal and Zumbo and some of you disgust me.You think the 2nd amendment is all about hunting, guess what, it's not. You a$$ clowns think by throwing "evil black rifles" to the Brady bunch will keep you safe from them, guess what, it wont. You think your insulated from the gun-grabbers???? Wow, your stupid!Zumbo, Petzal and some of you are an elitist group of idiots and YOUR in the minority.ZUmbo and Petzal only care about their freebees of gear and all expense paid hunts.The Zumbos and Petzals and YOU need to understand, united we stand, divided we fall and LEARN to accept all forms of firearms and their use in all areas of shooting, self defense, target, hunting, plinking.The Zumbomania actually HELPED all of us not hurt like some of you knee-jerkers spout.How? It sent an extremely clear message just how big of a group we are and just how firm we stand AGAINST the gun-grabbers.We will not give one inch nor compromise on single firearm in hopes of appeasement to the God damned Brady bunch.I'm in my mid 40's and have NEVER taken any of my 'black rifles' hunting, but now you can bet where allowed or the type of game I'll have my DPMS or SKS with side folder with me.I'll respect your $3000 Weatherby if you respect my $200 SKS.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Fred Sanford wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Gee, I dunno about all this banning stuff, but as long as they leave my pink shotgun alone, I guess it will be ok.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from LAWCOP wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

MR. Petzal and et al who decry the bashing of the rights of Mr. Zumbo to enjoy the freedom for the first amendment and free speech...Do you REALLY believe that the First or any other amendment would be worth the paper it is written on, IF there was no Second Amendment?In the 200+ years of our existence as a nation we have never had an attempted military coup or any ruling party try to hold position through force or refusal to follow the rules. Do you really think it is because the people who live in this country are so much better than every where else in the world where dictators and despots are in continual flow and flux?ORIs it because it is the very certain knowledge that ANY group attempting to do so would be destroyed by the armed populace that would rise against such plans of tyranny?THe Founding Fathers were very deliberate in their limited use of words when they wrote the BOR. "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."In their world the "militia" was every able bodied man, and they should have firearms and that was the only way to insure "a free state" IF you argue the National Guards are the milita you are only displaying your ignorance of history.Just as apologists such as yourself and other are prone to argue that the founders never envisioned AKs and ARs, I can assure you they also could have never envisioned elected officials of this nation attempting to disarm the populace of the tools necessary to assure their continued freedoms.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Andy wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Wow, these last few days are like a gun owners back-stabber version of Whack-a-Mole!One more traitor down, surely a lot more to go. Thanks, Mr. Petzal, for "popping up"; now we've more opportunities to see what our collective "hammer" (or I should say "voice") can accomplish!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike W wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Editor in Chief please respond to all 800+ . Most are legitimate gripes and concerns in regard to Petzal's beliefs.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike W wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Editor in Chief please respond to all 800+ . Most are legitimate gripes and concerns in regard to Petzal's beliefs.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Paul wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The 2nd amendment is NOT about hunting it is about providing arms to the people which the founding father's meant to be a last resort against tyranny.Franly a AR-15 is no match for todays modern army and technolgy OR the CYBER tools to oppress people.BUT it is a symbol that a men are still free. AS LONG AS AMERICANS OWN AR-15's we know we are still free people not slaves to a government run mad with power.IF you don't get it don't bother to come out hunting. YOUR GUNS ARE NEXT.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Patriot wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"My ill-conceived inflammatory blog..set off a firestorm that, I’m told,has never before been equaled..They say hindsight is golden.." Jim Zumbo"I call them "assault" rifles, which may upset some people..""I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles.""I say game departments should ban them from the praries and woods." Jim Zumbo 02/2007"I don’t know what I was thinking when I wrote that.."Jim ZumboHis thoughts are there for all to discern."I can explain this as sheer ignoranceand an irresponsible use of words.." Jim ZumboThe overall timing of this stunt,somehow amplifies the sheer irresponsibility of his "ignorance" regarding 2A and hunting efficacy.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Rick wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Unbelievable! You people just don't get it do you? We are all gun owners/hunters! These stupid comments affect us all! Not just us shooters/AR's etc! Trying to separate the so called hunters from sport shooters is narrow mined! You sir should probably start looking for another job! Like Zumbo is doing now!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Schuetzenman wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzal,I've read your comments from 1994 when you helped the antigunners strike a blow to gun owners and the 2nd Amendment. Now I read how you think Jim Zumbo was wronged because we in the RKBA Pro 2nd Amendment community put pressure on all his sponsors to can him or we boycott their products.Well guess what ..... you're on the hit list for emails to the sponsors now! Get ready to join Dumbo Zumbo on the unemployment line.And here's why I'm going to do it ..... the 2nd Amendment is not about Sporting Purpose and it's not about Hunting ...... it's about owning military grade weapons to keep a government, our government in line should they run amok and turn to tyranny. The 2nd doesn't protect hunters, it does protect Patriots.The antigun left would never take your precious deer rifle now would they, yeah right! Go to the Violence Policy Center web site and look up Sniper Rifles. VPC is the bunch that cooked up the strategy for the Clintons on Assault weapons.VPC defines a Sniper Rifle as any rifle with an optical sight on it that can shoot a 2 inch or smaller group at 100 yards. They call for an out right ban on such weapons. What's that you say .... but, but, but, my .22-250 can do that, my .308 can do that, my fill in the caliber here can do that kind of accuracy!Right ..... almost any rifle can do that kind of accuracy. Then again maybe you think we should all be using bows to hunt with too!I hope you saved up a lot of money because in the next week you will be about as marketable as a leper for delivering candy grams.BTW, I have hunted, shot competition and am a life Member of NRA. We are done sitting silently by while you Elmer Fudd's smugly thing it's about hunting and you would throw us in the Gas Chambers to save your misguided asses. Time to start tossing you Fudd's under the buss. Humm .. I wonder who we'll do after we get done with you?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Marv wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Zumbo's is a man who made his living with the written word. Are we to believe that he "accidentally" wrote the fatal blog post? I doubt it. It was a true reflection of his beliefs, and his apology was only an attempt to wipe the bottom of his shoe after stepping in it.Mr. Zumbo deserves no one's sympathy. And the fact that he was brought down by people reading and posting opinions on the internet is the purest form of democracy we have seen in a long time. I am quite happy with the events and their outcome.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from The real gun nut wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal's last blog prompted 34 comments, this one over 700. He must be doing something right...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jess wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Folks..we are wasting our time here. If you want to make a point, we need to hit them in the wallet. Ad sales effect their judgement...sadly. Start with Swarovski, since they sponsor Petzal's blog. Then pick up a recent copy and call the companies who are buying ads on the inside of the front and back cover. Those are the most expensive...that will force them to rethink who writes for them

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tom wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal, you are indeed a traitor to the 2nd Ammendment. We will not forget you.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 75_stingray wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Rantings and Ravings From Field and Streams David E. Petzal is now posted on every weapons forum that I belong.So Mr. Petzal, do you know enough to start writing about fishing?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"I happen to think regulations on magazine capacity for hunting waterfowl and big game are spot on. Does that make me an anti-gunner?"Not necessarily, but it does make you an idiot.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Steve wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

F&S Petzals 1994 (Ban the Assault Rifle article) Field & Stream (West ed.), June 1994 v99 n2 p26(2)Reveille. (gun control laws) David E. Petzal.THE BUGLE CALL KNOWN AS REVEILLE IS A CHEERFUL, energetic tune that, when I was in the Army, few soldiers actually got to hear. The real reveille was something quite different; it consisted of the NCOIC (noncommissioned officer in charge) snapping on the overhead lights at 4:30 A.M. and slamming a sawed-off broom handle around the inside of a garbage can. That is about the least cheerful experience that you can have, but it wakes you up for fair, and brings you face to face with reality.Real-world reveille came for gun owners this February in the form of a single sentence buried deep in the 1994 Federal Budget. On page 201 of that document, under the heading "Passing Effective Crime Control Legislation," there is this sentence: "The administration also supports a ban on semiautomatic firearms; limitations on access to handguns by juveniles; and the creation of a crime control fund to pay for eligible crime control initiatives."The key phrase, the one that turns on the overhead lights and crashes the broom handle around in the GI can, is "a ban on semi-automatic firearms." Not "assault weapons," but semi-automatic firearms. All of them. It is simple English, and there is nothing else it can mean. It means all semi-autos.It also means that the NRA has been right all along when it warned us that an "assault weapon" bill was only one of a series of steps in a much more ambitious plan to outlaw many types of firearms. If you would like to dismiss the NRA's warning as paranoid and hysterical, you must ignore the fact that the White House has put us on notice: All semi-autos are going to go if the Clinton Administration has its way.In January, President Clinton included the following in his State of the Union Address to Congress:"Hunters must always be free to hunt. Law-abiding adults should always be free to own guns and protect their homes. I respect that part of our culture. I grew up in it. . . . But I want to ask the sportsmen and others to join us in this campaign to stop gun violence. I say to you: I know you didn't create this problem, but we need your help to solve it. There is no sporting purpose on earth that should stop the United States Congress from banning assault weapons that out-gun police and cut down children."Will the real Clinton policy please stand up? Before Congress and the United States, the President said he wants to get rid of assault weapons. In the Federal Budget, it's semi-automatic firearms. Which is the real agenda?There are a couple of possibilities. One is that some overreaching functionary was confused by the terms "semi-automatic firearm" and "assault weapon" and assumed they were interchangeable. This. is given support by Barry Toiv, a spokesman for the Office of Management and the Budget, who was quoted as follows in the March 14th edition of The Washington Times: "The language in the budget is a mistake. It made its way through without being fixed."A more likely scenario is somewhat simpler. The Administration wants to ban semi-automatic firearms, judged the political climate to be favorable, and decided to put its intent on the public record, albeit not in a forthright manner.Let us now consider the legislation submitted to Congress by Senator Diane Feinstein (D/CA). Amendment No. 1152 would, if ratified, be applied to the Omnibus Crime Bill (which was passed late in 1993 by the Senate), and appears to be the type of "reasonable" gun bill that "reasonable" gun owners should support. Amendment 1152 would ban, by name, a number of firearms (or duplicates of same) such as the Colt AR-15, MAC-10 and NRC-11, Galu, Uzi, Street Sweeper, and others of this ilk [e.g., the FN-FAL]. It would also ban guns by description; i.e., firearms that incorporate folding or telescoping stocks, flash suppressors, threaded muzzles, bayonet lugs, grenade launchers, and "conspicuous" pistol grips.Also included are semi-auto shotguns with magazines that hold more than five rounds, and any large-capacity magazines (tubular magazines for .22 rimfires exempted), which means those that hold more than ten rounds.The Feinstein Amendment would, upon passage, allow the present owners of proscribed guns to keep them, provided that they obtained and maintained Form 4473s documenting their ownership. However, no new guns of the types described could be bought, sold, or owned by civilians.The Amendment contains a sunset clause, meaning that it expires after ten years. It also contains a lengthy list of firearms that are exempt. These guns include bolt, pump, and lever-actions, and many semi-automatic rifles and shotguns of the sporting variety.If you are a gun owner who is looking for the middle ground, it is very hard to argue against legislation such as this. Senator Feinstein, it seems, has made every effort to prescribe "assault weapons" and protect "legitimate firearms."So what's wrong with supporting--or at least not opposing--this amendment? Perhaps nothing--except that the reveille sounded by the 1994 Federal Budget warns us we can't think of Amendment 1152 as a final step. Anti-gunners see it as an interim measure, paving the way for much wider prohibitions. Sarah Brady, Senator Metzenbaum, and others, have been quite honest about what they have in mind. The Feinstein Amendment is, in their view, just one in a series of steps to outlaw other types of firearms. The next step, without doubt, is handguns. In the lengthy list of "legitimate" guns protected by Amendment 1152, not one handgun is mentioned.There's more. President Clinton, in a lengthy interview in the December 9, 1993 issue of Rolling Stone was asked by national editor William Greider:"Is it conceivable that the country. . . could entertain the possibility of banning handguns? Is that a cockamamie idea in your mind? Or is that in the future?"President Clinton answered: "I don't think the American people are there right now [emphasis mine]. But with more than 200 million guns in circulation, we've got so much more to do on this issue before we reach that. I don't think that's an option now [emphasis mine]. But there are certain kinds of guns that can be banned and a lot of other reasonable regulations that can be imposed. The American people's attitudes are going to be shaped by whether things get better or worse."You are at liberty to interpret this any way you wish. My interpretation is: "We haven't got the votes for a handgun ban right now. In the future, if I think the votes are there, well go for it."Judging by the letters we get at Field & Stream, and the people I talk to within the firearms industry, there are many of us who would like to rid the United States of assault weapons. It is true that these weapons account for only a miniscule percentage of armed crime, but the crimes they are used in tend to be horrific.The classic example of this is the schoolyard massacre in Stockton, California, in 1989, when a deranged man named Patrick Purdy used an AK-47 clone to kill five children and wound twenty-nine others [in fact, most were shot with Purdy's 15-shot, 9mm handgun]. The fact that Purdy was at liberty with a gun of any kind was due to a catastrophic failure of the California justice system, but the question we have to ask is, if Purdy had not had a thirty-shot semi-automatic rifle that was designed for the express purpose of taking human life, would the carnage have been so great?Much is made about the difficulty involved in defining an "assault weapon." However, firearms such as the AK-47, AKM, Uzi, Street Sweeper, and others [like the Fn-FAL] have two things in common: They are designed for killing people, and they enable a person who is unskilled in the use of firearms to do an extraordinary amount of damage in practically no time at all.Assault weapons are designed to be produced quickly and cheaply, and in huge numbers. They are designed to operate under conditions that would destroy civilian small arms. They are designed to put out a high volume of fire with a high degree of controllability. It is these characteristics that prevent assault weapons from being us as anything but what they are. (The AR-15/M-16, and the M1A in modified form, are highly accurate, and have a legitimate place in organized target competition.) You can remove the flash suppressors and the bayonet lugs; you can change the shape of the stocks; you can sell "sporting" ammunition for them; but they remain guns for killing people.Gun owners--all gun owners--pay a heavy price for having to defend the availability of these weapons. The American public--and the gun-owning public; especially the gun-owning public--would be better off without the hardcore military arms, which puts the average sportsman in a real dilemma. We have received a wake-up call that clearly warns us that gun ownership is under siege. On the other hand, the public at large has been sent another kind of reveille: that guns are the root of most present-day evil, and the NRA is somehow to blame for the guns.MOST AMERICANS HAVE LITTLE FAITH IN THE promises that politicians make, and with reason. Most gun owners are uneasy about making concessions of any kind, and with reason. But it may be time to consider shifting from an absolute opposition to any ban on any guns to an effort to get lawmakers to include a guarantee that will safeguard our handguns, and other arms--something not subject to the whims of the BATF or the Secretary of the Treasury or Sarah Brady. If the Feinstein Amendment included a list of "protected" handguns, and did away with its prohibition on magazines that hold more than ten shots, that would be something for us to think about. If Senator Fienstein is willing to meet gun owners halfway, we should think about her amendment very hard indeed.For at some point we must face the fact that an Uzi or an AKM or an Ak-47 should no more be generally available than a Claymore mine or a block of C4 explosive. It is time for these guns to be limited to people with Treasury Department licenses, just as with fully automatic arms. I doubt if anyone would suffer much without assault weapons. Surely, we will suffer with them.You sir are a NAZI . You are no friend of the 2nd . No friend of the NRA . You will be the next to be beaten down .

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Paul Moog wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzal wanted to ban military rifles in 1994 - one of the reasons we lost that battle was because too many outdoor writers remained silent or supported it.All modern bolt action rifles are based on the Mauser miltary rifle. A accurate scoped bolt action rifle is a"sniper rifle" to the gun banners. Petzal should go out the door with Zumbo. Free speech cuts both ways - if people don't like what you say - they can demand you go!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from E. Humburg wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

thank you Mr.Petzal, for standing up for a gentleman who acknowledged his comments were poor in judgment, thank you for acknowledging that Mr. Zumbo acted as an honest tru gentleman, shame on those who have crucified him and ended their business relationship.I still respect Mr. Zumbo, I own black guns, I am an NRA member since 1970,I am a law enforcement officer. I will continue to read and watch Mr. Zumbo whenever and wherever I can.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jayhawker wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Dave...Funny thing...I quit reading F&S and your drivel back in 1994, the first time you stabbed us in the back. Here it is 2007 and now you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You of all people ought to know that you can't unfire a bullet and the one you fired back in '94 wnet stright through the heart of the shooting community."For at some point we must face the fact that an Uzi or an AKM or an Ak-47 should no more be generally available than a Claymore mine or a block of C4 explosive. It is time for these guns to be limited to people with Treasury Department licenses, just as with fully automatic arms. I doubt if anyone would suffer much without assault weapons. Surely, we will suffer with them."Dave Petzal, 1994

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ted wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I think Tam said it best"On Friday evening, a gunwriter who was apparently tired of his 42-year career put his word processor in his mouth and pulled the trigger." http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/This is not about hunting it is about guns. The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, it is about guns. Zumbo caught a little bit of heat because he stabbed us all in the back. A "Black" rifle is not pretty enough for him. Ban it, he says. Is he, and are you, stupid enough to think that after/if the Brady Bunch and Co. manage to outlaw "Assault Rifles" they will not go after "Sniper Rifles"? After all, they have no "Sporting use", it's not sporting to "Assassinate" a deer with a "Sniper Rifle".As a hunter I don't need guns (it has been years but I have bow hunted before), but as a shooter I need rifles. I would guess that for every deer I have shot (25+) over the years, I have shot a thousand or more rounds of ammo from my SKS, my M1Garand, my M1A my 1911, my #1 and #3s, from my 10/22 and from my Model 98 Mausers. How many of those do you want to ban? Is it OK with you if I use a 5 round clip in one of my Garands and deer hunt with it? After all it is a real and full size "Battle Rifle". Is that OK? Or do want to ban that one also?Stupid pecksniff's. Hunters need shooters more then shooters need hunters. In fact we need each other, but you need to understand that the 2ND AMENDMENT IS NOT ABOUT HUNTING.Ted

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ronald Hollowell wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"Gun owners -- all gun owners -- pay a heavy price for having to defend the availability of these weapons," writes Petzal. "The American public -- and the gun-owning public; especially the gun-owning public -- would be better off without the hardcore military arms, which puts the average sportsman in a real dilemma" Petzal concludes by advocating compromise, something that Knox and other members of his regime say they will never accept.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kevin B. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Dave -- Thanks for the good article. I, for one, am glad to see that Field & Stream has not jumped on the "Lets throw Zumbo under the bus" hysteria. I've written to those companies that dumped him and let them know that their decision to trash his 40+ distinguished career as a hunting writer cost them my business.As for the earlier comments that the Second Amendment is not about hunting, I'll respond that the opposite is also true: Every statement or opinion about hunting does not implicate the 2nd Amendment. While we have the right to own guns, we do not have an absolute right to use anything we want to take an animal. I happen to think regulations on magazine capacity for hunting waterfowl and big game are spot on. Does that make me an anti-gunner?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Concerned US American wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"Posted by: Dustin | February 23, 2007 at 10:39 AMYou people who keep quoting the second amendment need to remember one small point. While it guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, it doesn't say you can have a bolt action, pump, semi-auto or single shot. "Dustin and Pretzal:Have either of you guys read the Federalist Papers??? You both need to pull your heads out of your butts because everything coming out of your mouths is crap!GOOD RIDANCE F&S and every other gun-rag mag! They're filled with elitists know-it-all writers who have so elevated themselves to the position of customer that they are their own customer and are in a fog of drive-by-media-ignorance!I was about to start looking for magazine that ACTUALLY support the people's right to bear arms (and who know what they're talking about) but it appears as if none of them do!!! Unbelievable!The wolves-in-sheep's-clothing are bearing their teeth.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JoeAverage wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Gun owners, beware. If Dave Petzal is standing behind you, he's looking for a place to stick the knife in your back.I cherish my single shots AND semi-autos. It is my inalienable right as an American to own them.Petzal deserves the same fate as Zumbo. When he gets his next job, he may be saying "Would you like fries with that?"

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from eprn wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Hey Petzal:Whose side are you on? You betrayed us 12-plus years ago and you're doing it again.Do us all a favor and retire.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dennis P wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

When you offer a service and the customer is disatisfied, you need to correct the problem. Enough said!!! Petzal, save yourself the embarrassment, and retire. You've had a long career..pass the torch to a young gun nut!!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Neil G wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

We need to have a MillionGunMarch...I am finally seeing activism...let's harness this energy and fight HR 1022 and AWBII

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tait wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I am still amazed at how many people just do not get it.Jim is entitled to his opinion. That should not be questioned. What should be of concern is the crowd that considers themselves as only hunters.Any hunter that believes their scoped bolt action rifle is any safer from the gun grabbers is living with their head buried in the sand. I shoot semi and bolt action rifles. Each class is fun in their own way. I would not want to be without either type of weapon.What the hunter-only crowd (yes, I am generalizing here) fails to grasp is the left will do whatever it can to get ALL guns out of the hands of Americans. Even if all you do is hunt, you should not for one minute think or VOICE that AR's, AK's, HK's, Uzi's or whatever else is out there that you detest should be banned.Once they successfully ban the semi's, they are coming after the scoped hunting rifles. Why? Because they are sniper weapons (per their own statements). Maybe they will stop along the way and get the handguns first, but rest assured, they will be coming for your hunting rifle at some point.Zumbo made a mistake and has paid the price. Petzal, you advocated the 1994 AWB and should pay the price as well.ALL firearms owners should cry foul anytime Congress attempts to ban ANY type of firearm, even if what they want to ban is something you do not care to own.The Second Amendment is NOT ABOUT HUNTING. Wake up people.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jeff J wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Elitism sure seems to be a common thread here. Do the editors even get it? Or are they sipping on drinks in Mid-town, without a care?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Old School Gunner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

After reading Zumbo and Petzal's blogs, it is no wonder our gun rights have eroded and the second amendment has been under constant attack all these years.I have been part of the gun culture since I was a kid. I bagged my first deer at the age of 12, with a Winchester 94 30-30. I lost count of the number of hours I have sat on a cold deer stand or the number of miles I have walked hunting tree squirrels and other forest game. I think I have payed my hunting "dues".But I never fully appreciated the 2nd Amendment and the RTKBA until I got my first military style rifle.Let me to tell you why people like Zumbo and Pestal are dangerous to the RTKBA and the 2nd Amendment.For those of you not around in 1986, it was the Jim Zumbo and Dave Pestal like-minded crowd that convinced our Congress and Ronald Regan that machine guns served no legitimate sporting purpose and to ban new ones would not be a big deal. So we got a machine-gun ban amendment added to the McClure-Volkmer Gun Bill.Fast forward to 1989, it was these same like minded indivduals that convinced George Bush Senior that imported military style rifles served no "sporting purpose" and to ban them from import would be no big deal. Well, Bush Senior signed an import ban, several months later he was defeated, in no small part due to the pro-gunners abandoning him. That gave us Bill Clinton.In 1994 we got the Clinton AWB heavily influenced by the writings of people like Pestal who convinced lawmakers that it would be no big deal as hunters and sportsman didn't care about those nasty, evil, EBR's.Folks, the Pestals and Zumbos have been the problem for these past 30 years. This is why they need to be stopped and their pulpits taken away. They only divide us as gun owners and help erode the 2nd Amendment.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mark wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal, in the name of disclosure do you suppose you should post your full comments on the awb of 94? I will go back to the mental facility now. YOU COWARD

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Cabinboy wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

First principles, people:- the human right to own ANY defensive tool is God-given,- that human right is protected by the Second Amendment of the US Constitution,- the USC, as written, is the highest law of this land, and- betrayal of any part of the USC, as written, is treason.The Second Amendment's only purpose is to ensure that the people of these United States, who delegated only the powers enumerated in the USC to the Federal government while reserving the rest to themselves, have all of the tools necessary to prevent the rise of tyrannical government.Hunting is absolutely irrelevant to the Second Amendment.Period. End. Stop.Unfreakingbelievable....

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Utah wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I guess even our magazines are going to be classified as red and blue. OL and F&S...Go to the Blue!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Utah wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I guess even our magazines are going to be classified as red and blue. OL and F&S...Go to the Blue!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Iconoclast wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Well, obviously, Zumbo is not the only elitist who "just don't get it," only the most recent to come out of the closet.Petzal, clearly you haven't learned Jack Schmitt since your comparable comment re: 1994 AWB. Damn shame the Internet was only in its infancy then; you'd not still be pushing the same tripe today.And equally clearly there are many similar clueless snobs among the Fudds here, e.g.: (dgb)"Semi-autos are not needed. JZ was right. You hillbillies are wrong. Next time a cop is killed by one, admit it! It happens all too often. =PV=" ......... You might want to do a reality check on those talking points you picked up from brady's VPC, pal; the "sniper rifle" crap is coming in on the bus right behind this one, brought to you by the same drivers. You buying a ticket on that bandwagon, too? You think it will stop with ARs? You better be buying stock in Kraft (makers of Kool-Aid) so you make some profit on your dietary choices!I'd laugh (bitterly) if this were not so serious. As so many others have noted, this isn't about hunting, it's about a precious civil right. It doesn't matter what sort of a firearm one may choose to own - or for what lawful purpose (and "because I choose to" is just as valid as "deer camp") - the right is absolute, the right is unequivocable.Some like Zumbo are elitists. Some like Petzal are elitist Quislings. But if you think such Ivory Tower distinctions as magazine capacity or action type will protect you when the brady bunch storm troopers come to the door, you must be doing some seriously mind-altering drugs.Close the ranks, lads, or you will hang separately.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bruce wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

How can a guy who has been hunting and shooting for his entire life have NO understanding of the 2nd amendment?He should have put his brain in gear before he started spouting the liberal "ugly-gun" party line.We shooters are sick to death of dragging the dead weight of you elite snot-nosed hunters around.Are you honestly so stupid that you believe that a law abiding citizen with an AR15 is contributing to the crime problem? Do you think your 30-06 is "nicer" or "safer" because it looks more friendly?I hate to break the news to you - your wood stocked 30-06 is a "sniper rifle" in the eyes of the libs and is most definitely NEXT ON THE LIST.Looks like gun writers who start parroting the Brady bunch had better have a second career all mapped out in advance.We're not going to take your BS lying down.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from boulderchild wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I have been amazed over the past week at the comments of hunting writers such as Mr. Zumbo and yourself. nowhere in the second amendment does it mention hunting. it is people like you that sold us out in 1994, and this time around thats not going to be the case. i am truly speechless.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from camoflage wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

As a South African who witnessed first hand the loss of firearms rights, so I remember with great bitterness how the hunters sold out practical shooters and collectors focussed on themselves.The first draft of South African guncontrol included registration and numbering of hunting bows because their owners had killer instinct, the registration of paint ball ranges and certification of safety officers where paint markers were used because you could train to kill, semi auto guns are pretty much outlawed because you wanted to kill lots of people, they wanted a ban on guns or scopes that caused guns to be too accurate because you would kill at long range. It introduced warrrantless search and seizure if you were a gunowner! People understand the 2A is not about hunting, or whether JZ thought they were approipriate for any use, it's about the Brady bunch taking ALL firearms and registering YOU because you are a threat to their eutopia. All of us are their enemy, but various groups in the USA are not getting it: The 2nd Amendment is not about deer hunting!!!!!!If you don't get it, then you will be killed by our enemies in your beds, just like the new South Africa.Field and Stream: I'll make sure to never buy from you.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from RJ Herle wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I'm not sure what 'apology' it was that you read, but the one I did was nothing BUT excuses, equivication, and justification.You and Dumbo are one and the same, Fudd's with an elitist attitude.Yup, you are right. One strike on the right topic and you ARE out. In fact, I think I'll call the pitch on you... and... its... a STRIKE!You're outta here!Goodby, and good luck. I hear that the Brady's are looking for a new blogger. Perhaps you should send your resume'.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gary wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I just sit here and shake my head in disbelief and sigh. I thought we, as gun owners, have come a long way. It appears our journey is just starting.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rp wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Lest anyone forget, Mr. Petzal supported the last "assault" weapons ban.It seems Field and Stream is not as supportive of the second amendment as Jim Zumbo's former sponsors are.No Field and Stream for me.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from dw wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal. Quisling.Quisling. Petzal.Try that on for size.I don't own any black rifles but I understand the history and meaning of the 2nd Amendment and why we need to stand together. Looks like you have some reading to do. Start with the NRA 2nd Amendment primer -- real handy bathroom reading. ;^)Come back to the side of freedom and reason Dave.United we stand,dw

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Outinthefield wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Elmer McDweeb spewed:"Just reading over the postings: I´m really not surprised about the image we hunters do have in the public."Good, go back to your study and worry about your public image while we actually stand up for what we believe. People will respect the willingness to defend what is ours much more than the weak-kneed response of those who cower when pressed, because they want to preserve their "public image"You are exactly the kind of gun owner that the Brady bunch loves, weak, and more than willing to give up the second amendment so that everyone will "like" you.Respond: I'm more concerned what the outcome of this will be for all of us.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Donald Rinks wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I have not bought a copy of F&S in at least 35-40 years, the cookie cutter format, exciting opening, 1 column, flash back to dull and boreing start for 3 pages, finally get to the exciting part, repeat, then one column of wrapup and on to the next contrived story.However, I suppose I must try to find a copy, maybe in a doctors office, may even have to bite the bullet and actually buy one, so I can get a list of sponsors made and then inform them I do not support businesses that are anti American and anti constitution.Just too damn old for that crap!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from PSM wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Methinks Petzel was not a visitor to ye olde mental hospital, but a patient. The "dropping off the used clothes" memory is his way of protecting his duplicitous ole self's fragile ego, verily.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Charles O'Brien wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

So now I am a yahoo because because I said the man was wrong all the way around. Seems to me Petzal that you are trying to sing the same song. SO now I'll quit buying F&S as well. You liberals just don't get it do you.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from English Mike: Moderator, AK Files wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I think I should clarify my position:I'm English, living in England & have witnessed first hand the ever more restrictive laws affecting firearms in this once great nation.Being "reasonable" & accepting laws that are "for the good of the majority" are the traps that UK firearms protagonists fell for.There are NO "reasonable" laws that only affect law abiding citizens & they are the ONLY people disadvantaged by ever greater restrictions on the ownership of firearms, no matter what kind.AK's & AR's are NOT "crime weapons", as often touted by the anti's & have only been publicised by them because - to the uneducated - they LOOK menacing.I've come a long way over the last five years & see ANY attempt to restrict the RKBA as plain wrong.When negative comments are made by people who should know better, then they deserve every word of condemnation received.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Independent Conservative wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The 2nd is NOT about your hunting rifle!!!!!!!!!!!!It IS about an armed populace being able to defend themselves against egomaniacal politicians/Governments and the social elitists who want POWER.Zumbo SOUNDED like he had joined those ranks and your feeble attempt to defend him has you leaning in that direction too!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Historian wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Marshal Wirig, you might find of interest that the NRA was founded my Union Military Officers who were concerned about the marksmanship skills of their soldiers. In other words, the NRA was founded by friends of "the black rifle" of the late 1800's. Hunters were of secondary interest and were invited to apply later.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from James Beck wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I'll add this - you hunters really need go ask an Englishman or an Australian about what happened to the "sporting" guns in their countries. They stood by while the weapons of their bretheren were outlawed, thiking that they were safe. Guess what happened?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ballistic64 wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Its about time we all take our subsription money for these magazines and thier phony writers and support the NRA with it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from James Beck wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Are you all out of you minds? Covering for this guy Zumbo? Lamenting the end of his career? The clown attacked the largest group of gun owners in the US. He insinuated that we are all terrorists. To this day he has not reversed himself on that KEY ISSUE. Anybody that supports this guy deserves to be in the unemployment line right behind him.Good Riddance

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Roger E. Reeves, Sr. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

If not for the Semi-Auto's I would not be able to hunt. I am disabled/handicaped and a Rem, 742 is my hunting firearm. It is a 30-06 and has killed game from small White-tails, Mule deer and a 6 x 6 Elk at 200 yds. I cannot agree with a AK47 for hunting, but the Semi's must be maintained.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Marshall Wirig wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Bolt actions could be classified as "assault weapons" back in the early 1900's. Same with lever actions.Go back far enough, every type of gun was an assault rifle of some type.A family friend I knew growing up hunted deer with a German Mauser for as long as I knew him. It wasn't made to kill deer, it was made to kill men... and many did.I'm a hunter, but I own guns first and foremost for self defense for myself and my family.Many of the hunters in this thread who've stood up for Petzel and Zumbo are idiots who help the cause of anti-gunners. and when we lose our guns, there's will be next. and then so will every other amendment...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Scott G wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

One Question: Define Assault Weapon? Think about it....They will. If you word it correctly you could include every gun. Vilify the persons Actions not the inanimate object

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from kenc wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

another betrayal,,,you too should be re-educated.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Aaron Moore wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

This is the way I see it:1. Zumbo exercised free speech.2. Thousands of Americans then exercised their right to free speech.It is nice when the general populace can be heard.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Marshall wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I'd like to write some of Mr. Petzel's sponsors as well. Excersize my freedom of the first amendment (while we still have that one).Does anyone have some email addresses I can write to?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dave the Rave wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Elmer McDweeb spewed:"Just reading over the postings: I´m really not surprised about the image we hunters do have in the public."Good, go back to your study and worry about your public image while we actually stand up for what we believe. People will respect the willingness to defend what is ours much more than the weak-kneed response of those who cower when pressed, because they want to preserve their "public image"You are exactly the kind of gun owner that the Brady bunch loves, weak, and more than willing to give up the second amendment so that everyone will "like" you.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Zumbo Dumbo wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Field & Stream "wants" to hear from us and have been nice enough to publish their customer service telephone number of 1-800-289-0639.I called this number and asked for Amanda McNally in the Media Relations Department to discuss David Petzal's references to us as "mental patients". The customer service agent refused to provide the information, and instead told me to go look at the F&S web site so I could send an e-mail to the web master. I let her know that people have already been e-mailing Amanda and that she is not responding. I then let her know that I would publish F&S' telephone number and that Amanda can't hide forever behind customer service agents.Folks, Field & Stream is owned by Time Inc, yes "Time Magazine" in New York City as you can see here: http://whois.domaintools.com/fieldandstream.comPlease give them a call and then press "0" three or four times to get through to their customer service. Let the customer service agent know that you want to talk to Amanda McNally terminating David Petzal. If you want to send her another e-mail, here's the address: amanda.mcnally@time4.com

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sajer wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The ignorance shown by the hunting community is just plain scary concerning the 2 Amendment. My hope is that writers like Zumbo and Petzal and those who read their columns, learn something from all of this and turn it into a positive experience. (If that can be done)The battle is being waged everyday to take everything from us, not just the military style weapons and the sooner the uniformed crowd understands this the better for all of us.The rabid response to the articles posted by these two writers is because our, and yes I said our as in all firearm owners, is against the wall. Take the time to read what the anti’s are saying and you will see the use of “sniper rifles” and “ high powered weapons” in their propaganda. This means that your and my hunting firearms are in their sights! Wake up before it is too late!To the writers and those who do not share many of our views on the 2 Amendment I propose that the NRA conduct a meeting to address this very issue that divides us as a community. Education and a united front is our best chance at defeating legislation that will destroy both communities’ activities. And it will, don’t fool yourself into thinking they will stop and one segment of the market.We are educatedWe are informedWe are mobilizedWe are consumersWe will use the strength of our community to point out dissenters and traitors to our cause and we will flex our consumer muscle on sponsors.Get educated folks before it is too late.Chris/SajerShooter and hunter (M1A,FAL, and my .270 Winnny)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Charles g wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I wonder if Mr Petzal has seen this little gem from the brady myspace blog.....Brady campaign blogMonday, February 19, 2007 - 2:09 AM"The tragic proliferation of Sniper RiflesI would like to take a moment to comment on the proliferation of Sniper Rifles.Sniper Rifles are typically equipped with a high-powered scope, and every single one of them can blow through the body armor cops wear. They can even penetrate multiple police cars. Does the Second Amendment protect cop-killer Sniper Rifles? The NRA certainly thinks so, along with the powerful gun lobby that wants your children and your law enforcement officers to be at risk from these weapons of mass destruction. Some of these Sniper Rifles can even penetrate ballistic or armored glass, lightly armored vehicles, and armored limousines. Senator Ted Kennedy attempted to solve this with an important bill that would have banned armor piercing ammunition and protected lawful firearm commerce:"Another rifle caliber, the 30.30 caliber, was responsible for penetrating three officers' armor and killing them in 1993, 1996, and 2002. This ammunition is also capable of puncturing light-armored vehicles, ballistic or armored glass, armored limousines, even a 600-pound safe with 600 pounds of safe armor plating.......It is outrageous and unconscionable that such ammunition continues to be sold in the United States of America.."Should our elected officials live under the threat of reprisal on their lives from disgruntled constituents? The Gun Lobby seems to think so. We disagree.Sniper Rifles can be equipped with precision optics above even what the Military uses, allowing a sniper to deliver rounds within millimeters of accuracy - enabling them to engage targets at distances of well over one hundred meters. Is there a pressing need to be able to kill with accuracy at that distance? It is too far to justify as self defense. It is too far for hunting. It is only useful for those who wish to murder from afar.Large caliber Sniper Rifles such as the .50 Browning Machine Gun can derail freight cars, shoot down aircraft and helicopters, damage vital ground equipment such as power substations, fuel tanks, and air traffic control, and cause complete chaos. For more information on why large caliber machine-gun rounds must be banned, visit http://www.50caliberterror.com. A shipment of large caliber machine-gun round sniper rifles made by Steyr turned up in Iran, and are being used on our own soldiers, as the .50 bullets easily defeat their body armor, their up-armored humvees, and even APCs.Many forward thinking, progressive politicians such as Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama have voted against Center-Fire Rifle Ammunition of types for Sniper Rifles, but due to the pressure and massive financial resources of the gun industry, the necessary steps to protect our homes and lives have not been attained.Sniper Rifles have been used by murderers and spree killers for years, with notable incidents such as the Beltway Snipers, the Clocktower Sniper, and more.ANY rifle configured and equipped as a sniper rifle has no sporting purpose especially as a hunting rifle. They are too big and heavy to take to the field. Designed for distance shooting, they are useless for the ranges at which game animals are normally shot, and when used on sporting sized game at range they often just wound the animal, inhumanely forcing it to die slowly while the would-be hunter tracks it to finish it off. Most Sniper Rifles fire atypically large cartridges and ultra high velocity ammunition that can travel much greater distances that standard ammunition. The danger imposed from missed shots and ricochetes from these specialty rounds is unreasonable.Most of these rifles carry multiple rounds, with either an automatic mechanism, or a quick toggle action to rapidly move another bullet into the breech, ready to fire into another victim. In most states, they are nearly unrestricted. Anyone over the age of 18 can buy one. If they can't pass a background check, they skirt the NCIS system by going to a gunshow, or finding a private sale in the newspaper. A murderer camped at a distance from a public gathering could quickly turn it into a massacre dwarfing anything we have seen before in the United States, if they had a Sniper Rifle. If they adopted hit and run tactics, entire portions of our country could be shut down.Sniper Rifles shoot a high powered bullet that is almost always fatal. They are designed for one thing- delivering powerful overkill with deadly precision. You don't need the kind of power and accuracy that can kill a man at five hundred yards for hunting rabbits or defending your house.We should also give commendations to France because many years ago they designated any firearm capable of shooting military ammunition as a military arm, illegal to posess without a special permit and unlawful to use for hunting. The 223, 308, 7mm mauser, 30-06, and 6.5x55 have no place in the hunting fields of France. Firearms shooting these calibers are military weapons only designed for killing PEOPLE and should be kept out of the hands of the general population. Because they have no hunting purpose, there is no reason for civilians to own them.Every state in the USA has hunting equipment rules that limit the caliber of firearm used to take game. They also limit the types of rifles, length, magazine capacity, etc. States should amend these hunting regulations to restrict the use of "sniper" rifles, specialty "sniper" cartridges, and "sniper" ammunition. Limits on weight, barrel length, bipods and tripods, thumbhole stocks and pistol grips, night vision type scopes, scopes of excessive magnification, super magnum and high velocity ammunition, and military slings should be imposed. They have no place in the hunting fields of America and hunting usage should not be used as an argument for civilians to own such firearms and weapons. There are more than ample hunting rifles, cartridges, and rounds of ammunition to choose from without them.Let us hope that in a safer, saner America, we will succeed in our efforts to restrict the deadly spread of long distance murder rifles."...........The 2nd Amendment is not about yourright to hunt with fancy-smancy $2800 rifles.Its about the right of all of US Citizens to have the means to defend our selves from govenments run by authoritarian Jackasses,the same type of people who are pushing gun control....PS I Deer hunt And I own a Enfield SMLE MIII and Repoduction 1859 54 cal Sharps both which at one time would have been considered "military-style rifles"

0 Good Comment? | | Report
Page 1 of 41234next ›last »

Post a Comment

from Ray70 wrote 5 years 15 weeks ago

The Zumbo video is on Outdoorchannel.comRay

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ray70 wrote 5 years 15 weeks ago

I saw Jim Zumbo on video appologize, and I saw him shooting an AR15 with a smile on his face.:) Click on broadband, then shooting, 2nd story from the top. 8 minute video. Sounds like he's back in business. Cool.Ray

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Del in KS wrote 5 years 23 weeks ago

Zeke,That would be a .44 caliber bullet with 40 grains of black powder in the case hence the name 44-40.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Zeke Boer wrote 5 years 23 weeks ago

cal 44 x 40 what do the numbers mean?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Richard Goins wrote 5 years 29 weeks ago

Wow I totally missed Mr. Zumbos comments until today. I find his words to be more than unfortunate but certainly not unforgiveable. I wonder how many people in the 1800s thought that metalic cartridges were the wrong things to use for hunting. I my self find great distain for people using scopes with Lazer rangefinders. But would like to have one just for the fun of it. I doubt that Jim was saying what he said to make a point about gun control. So come on everyone lets give the old guy a break. I do think that it points out what many of us really feel about the elite that make up the professional hunting crowd in America. They say bad things about hunting in ways that seem less than sporting and then hunt 90% of the time they hunt on private land near a feeder.I know that Jim does little if any of that but the poor guy gets lumped in with all those who do that sort of thing. He is one of them. I think that people are just angry.And with it being a STUPID thing to say, well that made it way worse. Dont forget when you get on the backs of the people who said those things about Jim that they are "your" employers Mr Writer, Mr Profesional hunter. We are angry with our government and some times if you look like your standing with Nasty Pelosi when your supposed to be on OUR side your probably going to get hit with some friendly fire. To every one bashing Jim lets show the guy some grace. I am sure he has earned it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper for the record! wrote 6 years 34 weeks ago

Mr. PetzalI agree with you .99.9%. I left out .01% just in case there is something I don’t. Show me a competition shooter that has never cross fired and I’ll show you a shooter that hasn’t been around long enough! I don’t know what Jim was he thinking at that moment? Perhaps he blurted out what he has been hearing.The bottom line is this David. You and I do have our deference’s in subjects. You don’t like long shots and love shortening barrels on 338 RUM. I will get over it! This does not in any way shape or form disqualify you from the position and editor of this blog! I do in fact respect your position and I have more than the average shooters knowledge to think and say otherwise.Jim Zumbo got railroaded by those of an IQ of a worm and less knowledge of a Range Monkey! Just like the Crossbow debate, the hate and discontent. There are those wanted to go as far as to do bodily harm to a crossbow hunter. Over zealous they become, they did! I don’t use a Crossbow, don’t have the desire for a crossbow and never will have a crossbow. I will not use my personal choice of preventing another sportsmen from hunting. I am a Prosportsman for Sportsmen and I will standup for those that I believe that they to have the same God given right that I have.If anyone should be fired, it must be those that turned there back! How in the hell can I support them and not the other? You cannot have it both ways.Political correctness can just go to HELL!Clay Cooper

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from common sense wrote 6 years 34 weeks ago

I always wondered if someone started running over people with there minivans would certain people want to ban minivans or maybe all cars. But banning cars is just crazy talk, because why? because you believe in them or use them for your survival. My point is are you giving up your keys because of the environmental people. Thats just say the fuel used in your Fuc@ing car has caused more lives to be takin by the gun. Think with common sense!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve wrote 6 years 35 weeks ago

i have a gun made by ward and son finetwist in the 1800s wloud like to find fotos of there guns

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 6 years 43 weeks ago

Egad, Mr. Petzal. It seems as though most of the "body parts" concerning last February's Zumbo affair have landed(?). Thanks for your original (and sane and balanced) commentary on the incident and its fallout.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from John Doe wrote 6 years 51 weeks ago

[QUOTE=Pat Ruger;419558]I know most everyone knows about this, but for those shooters that are just coming on board...Gun writers Jim Zumbo (Outdoor Life, G&A, and more) Bill McRae (outdoor author), and Thomas McIntyre (Field & Stream and more) have yet again added to the attack on our second amendment rights, by stating their opinions on AR and AK rifles.[B]In a nutshell if you haven't read or responded to what Jim Zumbo, as well as Bill McRae and Thomas McIntyre have stated, and whether or not the AR semi auto's appeal to you as a shooter- I have listed below their statements and instructions for easy email response to the email list of some of their current industry sponsors. If you wish to respond (and WE NEED you to!!), please help fight back:[/B]****Jim Zumbo at Outdoor Life:[url]http://outdoorlife.blogs.com/zumbo/2...t_rifles_.html[/url]Quote: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 prairies and woods.February 16, 2007 in Hunting****(post from an industry gun writer David M. Fortier 2-18-07)As most of you would guess, there is a lot of activity inside the industry right now, despite it being a Sunday.[B]Another writer Bill McRae has stepped up supporting Zumbo and agreeing with his feelings on banning assault weapons.Here is a email forwarded to meOn Sunday, February 18, 2007, at 01:17 PM, Bill McRae wrote:Shirley and FriendsI agree wholeheartedly with Jim on this and I don't give a damn who does or does not like it. Furthermore, I applaud Jim for havinghad the courage to say what he said.Bill McRae[/B]----- Original Message -----From: Shirley SteffenTo: Karin Levine ; Lamar Underwood ; Bill McRae ; Bob Pilgrim - Taubert ; Ian McMurchy ; John Fasano ; John Phillips ; John Plaster ; Ted Nugent ; Wiley Clapp ; Walt Rauch ; Wayne Van Zwoll ; Lamar UnderwoodSent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 9:27 AMSubject: Fwd: Zumbo on 'terrorist rifles' in the hunting fieldsHe's not alone either, I had Thomas McIntyre get in my face once on a hunt with Swarovski. He was as rabid as an anti-gun piece of sh*t, and felt they should be banned. Bryce Townsley was there and Bryce and I both gave him hellSo Bill McRae and Thomas McIntyre are both pieces of sh*t you should be aware of.David M. Fortier_____________****Email list so far.All you have to do to reply is write your email letter, then select, copy, and paste all these emails as one into your send address bar and they will all get sent at once.[email]webmaster@outdoorlife.com[/email][email]webmaster@remington.com[/email][email]tommy.millner@remington.com[/email][email]dawn.lorello@swarovski.com[/email][email]sales@gerberblades.com[/email][email]benglish@mossyoak.com[/email][email]pstrickland@mossyoak.com[/email][email]domain.admin@CABELAS.COM[/email][email]corporate@cabelas.com[/email][email]info@stoneypoint.com[/email][email]hans@ himtnjerky.com[/email][email]kimberly@himtnjerky.com[/email][email]connie@himtnjerky.com[/email][email]olletters@time4.com[/email][email]elizabeth.burnham@time4.com[/email][email]ashley.rosenfeld@ time4.com[/email][email]amanda.gastelum@time4.com[/email][email]kristen.baumgarten@time4.com[/email][email]amanda.mcnally@time4.com[/email][email]michael.haugen@remington.com[/email][email]gregory.baradat@ remington.com[/email][email]eddie.stevenson@remington.com[/email][email]comments@harris-pub.com[/email][email]bmcrae@3riversdbs.net[/email][email]ashley.rosenfeld@time4.com[/email][email]amanda.gastelum@ time4.com[/email][email]kristen.baumgarten@time4.com[/email][email]amanda.mcnally@time4.com[/email][email]elizabeth.burnham@time4.com[/email][email]fsletters@time4.com[/email][email]bryan.brunson@ time4.com[/email][email]kathy.kalker@time4.com[/email][email]linda.gomez@time4.com[/email][email]publications@nrahq.org[/email]Here's a copy of my letter. Feel free to use what you wish:Dear shooting sports industry companies and corporations,I would like to notify those of you who support and/or sponsor Jim Zumbo, as well as Bill McRae and Thomas McIntyre- that I will be boycotting your products, and actively promoting your business dealings with these individuals via the internet to every single gun owner, forum, and club I can find to seek out to spread the word.The AR-15 is the M1 Garand of my generation and also a fine hunting and bench rest shooting rifle and I will not sit by and let these so called second amendment supporting phonies do further damage to our right to keep and bear arms in this great country of ours, by spewing their statements and beliefs amongst your product advertising.With all sincerity,Pat[/QUOTE][B]Outdoor Writer Bill McRae's CORRECT contact info is:bmcrae@3riversdbs.net40 Sherman LaneP.O. Box 160Choteau, MT 59422-0160(406) 466-5596[/B]

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pete Varamitch wrote 7 years 3 days ago

Dear Scott the GOOK: Up yours and your Asian gookland. You'll get payback soon.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Scott wrote 7 years 5 weeks ago

America is the land of the Evil empire and land of the selfish chosen few.while they worry about other lands and breast cancer that men contract,the very country they live in falls apart,and the humor in it all is that they help it along with liberal cause and shows of weakness.Yet they forget the poor people's they use as political pawns for money gains and political power as the rest of their people "Suffer".A melting pot of destruction and hatred that is being breeded in this land of the dead is growing closer to its final days and with must rejoice from those of us waiting to take this jem in the rough and recut it to the more pleasant luster you can give such jems.Yet with money and social programs they think they can buy there way out of destruction like western fools do.They think they are all knowing and all powerfull that this dream they live will never die,yet they do not see that it already has died a million deathes and that they have a land of diveded people eager to take power and restore it to the old ways.Yet they lend a hand to there internal enemies and help them grow more powerfull as they grow weaker and there people draw a more seperated line.What fools these Americans are and how weak can these people be,yet they are nothing of the grain there elders were.Such weakness deserves to die and others take there place in power.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pete Varamitch wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

To "Innocent Bystander".... wake up and smell the coffee! Maybe you're not a hillbilly, but you're sure a LOSER for spending that amount of time to write your epistle on this blog, which is a giant waste of time in itself. Get real you moron.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from DeLorean wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

http://216.22.2.74/cgi-local/ffa2.cgi?noframes Second Amendment Gun Shop's

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mark Winn wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

Petzal how can you post this when i read an issue of F&S where you said people shouldnt own ARs.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Chewey wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

The Illegal Alien ConquestOf Los Angeles County3-1-71. 40% of all workers in L.A. County ( L.A. County has 10.2 millionpeople) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This was because theyare predominantly illegal immigrants, working without a green card.2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.4. Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicanson Medi-Cal, whose births were paid for by taxpayers.5. Nearly 25% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexicannationals here illegally.6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likelyillegal aliens from south of the border.8. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.9. 21 radio stations in L.A. are Spanish speaking.10. In L.A. County 5.1 million people speak English.3.9 million speak Spanish. (There are 10.2 million people in L.A. County).(All the above from the Los Angeles Times)Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but 29% are on welfare.Over 70% of the United States ' annual population growth (and over 90% ofCalifornia , Florida , and New York ) results from immigration.The cost of immigration to the American taxpayer in 1997 was, (aftersubtracting taxes immigrants pay), a NET $70 BILLION a year, [ProfessorDonald Huddle, Rice University ].The lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus services used) for the averageadult Mexican immigrant is a NEGATIVE number.29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.If they can come to this country to raise hell and demonstrate by thethousands, WHY can't they take charge over the corruption in their owncountry?We are a bunch of fools for letting this continue.THE U.S. VS MEXICOOn February 15, 1998, the U.S. and Mexican soccer teams met at the LosAngeles Coliseum. The crowd was overwhelmingly pro-Mexican eventhough most lived in this country. They booed during the National Anthemand U.S. flags were held upside down. As the match progressed, supportersof the U.S. team were insulted, pelted with projectiles, punched and spatupon. Beer and trash were thrown at the U.S. players before and after thematch. The coach of the U.S. team, Steve Sampson said, "This was themost painful experience I have ever had in this profession."Did you know that immigrants from Mexico and other non-Europeancountries can come to this country and get preferences in jobs, education,and government contracts? It's called affirmative action or racial privilege.The Emperor of Japan or the President of Mexico could migrate here andimmediately be eligible for special rights unavailable for Americans ofEuropean descent.Corporate America has signed on to the idea that minorities and third worldimmigrants should get special, privileged status. Some examples are Exxon,Texaco, Merrill Lynch, Boeing, Paine Weber, Starbucks and many more.DID YOU KNOW?Did you know .. that Mexico regularly intercedes on the side of the defensein criminal cases involving Mexican nationals?Did you know .. that Mexico has NEVER extradited a Mexican nationalaccused of murder in the U.S. in spite of agreements to do so?According to the L.A. Times, Orange County , California is home to 275gangs with 17,000 members, 98% of which are Mexican and Asian.How's your county doing?According to a New York Times article dated May 19, 1994 , 20 years afterthe great influx of legal immigrants from Southeast Asia , 30% are still onwelfare compared to 8% of households nationwide. A Wall Street Journaleditorial dated December 5, 1994 quotes law enforcement officials as statingthat Asian mobsters are the "greatest criminal challenge the country faces."Not bad for a group that is still under 5% of the population.Is education important to you? Here are the words of a teacher who spentover 20 years in the Los Angeles School system. "Imagine teachers inclasses containing 30-40 students of widely varying attention spans andmotivation, many of whom aren't fluent in English. Educators seek learningmaterials likely to reach the majority of students and that means fewerwords and math problems and more pictures and multicultural references."WHEN I WAS YOUNGI remember hearing about the immigrants that came through Ellis Island .They wanted to learn English.They wanted to breathe free.They wanted to become Americans.Now, far too many immigrants come here with demands.They demand to be taught in their own language.They demand special privileges ... affirmative action.They demand ethnic studies that glorify their culture.NOW . WHY CAN'T WE SEND THEM HOMEHOW CAN YOU HELP?Send copies of this letter to at least two other people ... 100 would be evenbetter.Checked out with www.Truthorfiction.com

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from American wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

There's been a lot of talk lately about what the government is doing to the population. Be it allowing illegal immigrants free reign. Trying to erradicate the 2nd ammendment. Forcing us to pay illegal taxes. Wanting to hand out ID cards and, micro chiping driver's licenses in 08. Eventually people.We can all agree this is happening right before our eyes but why? I'm trying to figure out why and I'm not seeing it. Do they want to enslave us to where we're paying 80% in taxes and we get to keep 20%? What do the power hungry want? It can't be land as they're allowing all illegals to flood in here at will, using up land and resources.I can't figure it out. What they'd do next once they achieve all their goals. Although I think it's clear that when all that's done and you have a bunch of people sitting around with nothing much left to do but create more laws, it will continually get more oppressive.Anymore, I'm just hoping not to see a dictator running the show in my lifetime.It's sad to complain because I just enjoyed an entire day of freedom, doing whatever I want, no questions asked. But I can't help but feel in the grand scheme, we're being lulled to sleep over something and I don't know why?Is it that they know things that we don't? Such as a huge financial collapse from all the debt? And they don't want people armed for the next depression? I wouldn't rule it out.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ssr wrote 7 years 6 weeks ago

"I spent 25 years defending that principal in the USAF and regardless wether you agree or not it's his voice and his opinion. America Grow UP!"He still has his right to free speech. He can still say whatever he wants, if that's what he believes. Nobody is stopping him!But he acheived his position because of our support and money. When he starts supporting causes counter to what we desire, we withdraw our support. It's very simple. If someone uses their position, achieved through our support and money, to fight against us, support is withdrawn. It has nothing to do with stifling free speech. It has to do with not supporting your political enemy! Sheesh. Why is that so hard to understand.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Hillary Fan wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago
from Craig S wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The 2nd Amendment is NOT about hunting. Period. Any support of a ban of ANY firearm is an abridgment of our god given (and constitutional recognized) right to keep and bear arms.If I want to target shoot with a semi auto, fine (NRA Highpower fo rexample). If I want to hunt deer with a 20mm Lahti, fine. I will not support the abridgement of YOUR choice of arm, why would you support the abridgement of mine?Give the liberals more ammo and they will come for your $10,000 custom bolt "sniper" guns exactly five minutes after they have tried to get my AKs and ARs. Failure to support the entire un-infringed right recognized by the second is bad for us ALL.Zumbo was wrong. Period. He absolutely has the right to his opinion (even if wrong) but his supplying ammo to our common enemies is inexcusable. He gets the same treatment of the other collaborationists. I do not own Ruger, Colt or Smith and Wesson firearms based on their support of our enemies in the past, even if their political awareness has improved. I will continue to let my wallet and my vote count rather than my big mouth.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jesse M. Casteel wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I have been reading this about Jim and angers me to no end. How many time have his readers stuck their combine feet in their mouth???? Sure it was an ill timed unwanted comment from a man of his position but, it should not ocst this man the ability to do what he does educate and entertain the hunting public. He said he was sorry and he has been a man about it and it's time the american Public get over it. I am a hunter and shooter and have been so for well over 40 years and thinks it's pretty bad when a man can't voice his opinion and be hung in the process. I thought freedom of speech was protected under our constitution. I spent 25 years defending that principal in the USAF and regardless wether you agree or not it's his voice and his opinion. America Grow UP!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from scott wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

My how times have changed.10 yrs or so ago I wrote a letter to the editor over a similer instance, who knows, maybe it was Petzals' F&S column. Guess what? NOTHING HAPPENED!Today, different story. Now Petzal can be hung out to dry just like Zumbo.ANYONE! who would sacrifice the "assault weapon" owners in a craven attempt to save their own pretty little wood-stocked "hunting" guns deserves to be tarred and feathered. FYI, my favorite "assault weapon" is my wood-stocked M1.We got Zumbo, now lets take down Petzal too!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from TooT Sweet wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago
from gc wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I read your 2/22/07 commentary regarding Jim Zumbo. I have been involved with guns, shooting and hunting in all their variations for almost as long as Jim. I have had the pleasure of spending time hunting with Jim and he is all that you say he is and more. However, you seem to have missed the point. It appears that you are blaming those of us who have responded strongly for Jim’s demise. That’s like blaming women for crying rape! Jim is responsible for his demise and better to have someone of his stature be made an example of than to have others that should also know better continue down his path. I also would like to see Jim’s career resurrected, but Jim is the only one who can do that and the apology you reference was at best only half hearted. Stating that he’s reconsidered his position and now realizes that there are legitimate uses for ARs is not an apology. His statements clearly demonstrate that he is still of the opinion that firearms ownership must only be related to hunting to be legitimate. All uses are legitimate! I would strongly suggest that you not just read the second amendment, but also take the time to read the writings of the men who drafted and signed it into law. If you read their thoughts and statements before, during and long after they had passed it into law, there would be no confusion regarding their intent for our rights or what they meant by “ARMs”.You are right in your claim that Jim has the right to say anything he wishes and I would be the first to defend that right with force, however those of you with access and a forum have a responsibility that goes along with your power. You can say what you will, but you can’t cry foul when we exact a price for your statements. Our constitution guarantees your right to free speech; it does not guarantee that there will be no consequences for it. Your general tenor seems to imply that you’ve forgotten that both your right to voice an opinion and my right to object to it are not mutually exclusive. Say what you will, but realize that we are free to react as we will.What you should be dealing with is the division between all the pursuits that are protected and trying to find a way for all of us to better understand our fellow gun owners and through that understanding create a mutual desire for each of us to support the other.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from CONTRIBUTE TO THE QUEEN OF HYPOCRITES?????? wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

What!!! Contribute to Sarah,Queen Hypocrite of all hypocrites???"New York Daily NewsMarch 22, 2002 08:15:00WASHINGTON - Gun-control advocate Sarah Brady bought her son a powerful rifle for Christmas in 2000 - and may have skirted Delaware state background-check requirements, the New York Daily News has learned.Brady reveals in a new memoir that she bought James Brady Jr. a Remington .30-06, complete with scope and safety lock, at a Lewes, Del., gun shop."I can't describe how I felt when I picked up that rifle, loaded it into my little car and drove home," she writes. "It seemed so incredibly strange: Sarah Brady, of all people, packing heat."Brady became a household name as a crusader for stricter gun-control laws after her husband, James, then the White House press secretary, was seriously wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt on then-President Ronald Reagan.Brady writes in "A Good Fight" that the unnamed gun shop ran federal Brady Law and Delaware state background checks with great fanfare.The book suggests that she did not have her son checked, as required by Delaware state law."(W)hen the owner called in the checks, it seemed to me he spoke unnecessarily loudly, repeating and spelling my name over and over on the phone," Brady writes.Amy Stillwell, a spokeswoman for The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said the federal Brady Law does not require background checks for intrafamily gun gifts.Stillwell said she did not know whether her son was checked under the state law. The Delaware Department of Justice says the state does not have an exemption for family gifts."Scott is not a convicted felon, and he is not prohibited from owning a gun," Stillwell said. "Scott Brady could walk into a store and buy a - he is not a prohibited purchaser."Delaware Justice Department spokeswoman Lori Sitler said the purchase could be illegal under state law if Brady did not also say who she was buying the gun for and submit his "name, rank and serial number" for a full check."You can't purchase a gun for someone else," Sitler said yesterday. "That would be a 'straw purchase.' You've got a problem right there."Anti-gun control advocates were surprised to hear of Brady's foray into their world."We hope that it's innocuous and there's been no laws violated," said James Jay Baker, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association. "It's obviously interesting that Sarah would be purchasing firearms of any kind for anybody, given her championing of restrictive guns laws for everyone."Monday, February 19, 2007The tragic proliferation of Sniper RiflesI would like to take a moment to comment on the proliferation of Sniper Rifles.Sniper Rifles are typically equipped with a high-powered scope, and every single one of them can blow through the body armor cops wear. They can even penetrate multiple police cars. Does the Second Amendment protect cop-killer Sniper Rifles? The NRA certainly thinks so, along with the powerful gun lobby that wants your children and your law enforcement officers to be at risk from these weapons of mass destruction. Some of these Sniper Rifles can even penetrate ballistic or armored glass, lightly armored vehicles, and armored limousines. Senator Ted Kennedy attempted to solve this with an important bill that would have banned armor piercing ammunition and protected lawful firearm commerce:"Another rifle caliber, the 30.30 caliber, was responsible for penetrating three officers' armor and killing them in 1993, 1996, and 2002. This ammunition is also capable of puncturing light-armored vehicles, ballistic or armored glass, armored limousines, even a 600-pound safe with 600 pounds of safe armor plating.......It is outrageous and unconscionable that such ammunition continues to be sold in the United States of America.."Should our elected officials live under the threat of reprisal on their lives from disgruntled constituents? The Gun Lobby seems to think so. We disagree.Sniper Rifles can be equipped with precision optics above even what the Military uses, allowing a sniper to deliver rounds within millimeters of accuracy - enabling them to engage targets at distances of well over one hundred meters. Is there a pressing need to be able to kill with accuracy at that distance? It is too far to justify as self defense. It is too far for hunting. It is only useful for those who wish to murder from afar.Large caliber Sniper Rifles such as the .50 Browning Machine Gun can derail freight cars, shoot down aircraft and helicopters, damage vital ground equipment such as power substations, fuel tanks, and air traffic control, and cause complete chaos. For more information on why large caliber machine-gun rounds must be banned, visit http://www.50caliberterror.com. A shipment of large caliber machine-gun round sniper rifles made by Steyr turned up in Iran, and are being used on our own soldiers, as the .50 bullets easily defeat their body armor, their up-armored humvees, and even APCs.Many forward thinking, progressive politicians such as Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama have voted against Center-Fire Rifle Ammunition of types for Sniper Rifles, but due to the pressure and massive financial resources of the gun industry, the necessary steps to protect our homes and lives have not been attained.Sniper Rifles have been used by murderers and spree killers for years, with notable incidents such as the Beltway Snipers, the Clocktower Sniper, and more.ANY rifle configured and equipped as a sniper rifle has no sporting purpose especially as a hunting rifle. They are too big and heavy to take to the field. Designed for distance shooting, they are useless for the ranges at which game animals are normally shot, and when used on sporting sized game at range they often just wound the animal, inhumanely forcing it to die slowly while the would-be hunter tracks it to finish it off. Most Sniper Rifles fire atypically large cartridges and ultra high velocity ammunition that can travel much greater distances that standard ammunition. The danger imposed from missed shots and ricochetes from these specialty rounds is unreasonable.Most of these rifles carry multiple rounds, with either an automatic mechanism, or a quick toggle action to rapidly move another bullet into the breech, ready to fire into another victim. In most states, they are nearly unrestricted. Anyone over the age of 18 can buy one. If they can't pass a background check, they skirt the NCIS system by going to a gunshow, or finding a private sale in the newspaper. A murderer camped at a distance from a public gathering could quickly turn it into a massacre dwarfing anything we have seen before in the United States, if they had a Sniper Rifle. If they adopted hit and run tactics, entire portions of our country could be shut down.Sniper Rifles shoot a high powered bullet that is almost always fatal. They are designed for one thing- delivering powerful overkill with deadly precision. You don't need the kind of power and accuracy that can kill a man at five hundred yards for hunting rabbits or defending your house.We should also give commendations to France because many years ago they designated any firearm capable of shooting military ammunition as a military arm, illegal to posess without a special permit and unlawful to use for hunting. The 223, 308, 7mm mauser, 30-06, and 6.5x55 have no place in the hunting fields of France. Firearms shooting these calibers are military weapons only designed for killing PEOPLE and should be kept out of the hands of the general population. Because they have no hunting purpose, there is no reason for civilians to own them.Every state in the USA has hunting equipment rules that limit the caliber of firearm used to take game. They also limit the types of rifles, length, magazine capacity, etc. States should amend these hunting regulations to restrict the use of "sniper" rifles, specialty "sniper" cartridges, and "sniper" ammunition. Limits on weight, barrel length, bipods and tripods, thumbhole stocks and pistol grips, night vision type scopes, scopes of excessive magnification, super magnum and high velocity ammunition, and military slings should be imposed. They have no place in the hunting fields of America and hunting usage should not be used as an argument for civilians to own such firearms and weapons. There are more than ample hunting rifles, cartridges, and rounds of ammunition to choose from without them.Let us hope that in a safer, saner America, we will succeed in our efforts to restrict the deadly spread of long distance murder rifles.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Brady Campaign wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

You can also mail a check to:The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence1225 Eye Street, NW, Suite 1100Washington, DC 20005Or donate by phone:To donate by phone using your credit card, please call (202) 898-0792 weekdays between 9 AM and 5 PM, Eastern Time.Thank you for making a contribution to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence!Because we devote 100% of our efforts to passing gun control legislation, contributions to The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence are not tax deductible either as charitable contributions or business expenses.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JZ wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Over 1400 comments, not one response from an editor

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Nelson wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo spoke his mind, and we spoke ours! What is it you can not understand about the second?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from STOP HR1022 THE NEW "ASSUALT" WEAPONS BAN wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Help stop HR1022,the new "assualt" weapons ban.Sign the petition and write/call your representatives opposing this senseless anti-gun legislation before legislation directed at the firearms you own is on your doorstep!http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348?ltl=1172594127

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from STOP HR1022 THE NEW "ASSUALT" WEAPONS BAN wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Help stop HR1022,the new "assualt" weapons ban.Sign the petition and write/call your representatives opposing this senseless anti-gun legislation before legislation directed at the firearms you own is on your doorstep!http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348?ltl=1172594127

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from STOP HR1022 THE NEW "ASSUALT WEAPONS BAN wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Help stop HR1022,the new "assualt" weapons ban.Sign the petition and write/call your representatives opposing this senseless anti-gun legislation before legislation directed at the firearms you own is on your doorstep!http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348?ltl=1172594127

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from STOP HR1022 THE NEW "ASSUALT" WEAPONS BAN wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Help stop HR1022,the new "assualt" weapons ban.Sign the petition and write/call your representatives opposing this senseless anti-gun legislation before legislation directed at the firearms you own is on your doorstep!http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348?ltl=1172594127

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dwight Larson wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Zumbo made the mistake of advocating legal distinctions between firearms based on subjective judgements of their appearance, which is the #1 strategy of gun-banners. The Second Amendment does not protect your "right" to shoot animals or your "right" to shoot clays - it protects our right to defend ourselves against government tyranny. To willfully confuse the 2A with the unprotected priviledge of hunting & sporting is a gross disservice to American liberty. That is why we are so angered by Mr. Zumbo's comments.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from The Republic wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Wray v. NRAIronically, Wray was at the center of a controversy 18 months ago that set off a revolt in the Outdoor Writers Association of America (OWAA), in an issue involving the Sierra Club. He, along with several other OWAA board members, sent a letter chastising then-NRA President Robinson over remarks Robinson made during a speech at the OWAA’s June 2004 annual conference in Spokane, WA. Robinson’s speech came during an NRA-sponsored breakfast. Wray is no longer on the OWAA board, as his term expired.Wray insisted to Gun Week that his recent columns had nothing to do with the OWAA “brush fire.”Robinson was critical of environmental groups, specifically the Sierra Club, for pushing efforts to restrict access to public lands, and for supporting anti-gun politicians. He also criticized fish and wildlife agencies for adopting complicated regulations that seem more designed to discourage people than encourage more fishing and hunting.Wray authored the draft letter to Robinson that set off what many believe had been a “ticking bomb” of disagreement within OWAA over what allegedly was a left-leaning, environmentalist-driven tilt of the organization’s leadership over the past few years. Nearly 500 OWAA members, including several past presidents, signed a letter of protest over the OWAA Board’s action.This set off a philosophical war within the OWAA as board members defended their rebuke of Robinson, while critics blasted them as arrogant.The controversy eventually led scores of the nation’s top hunting and shooting writers to quit OWAA and form a new organization, the Professional Outdoor Media Association (POMA) last year. Likewise, many of OWAA’s biggest industry supporters quit or simply did not renew their supporting memberships.At the time the OWAA revolt erupted, Wray was quoted by the Washington Post criticizing the NRA for not pushing hard enough to protect wildlife habitat, while it fought the gun rights battle.His opinion hasn’t changed, and he accused the NRA of having a “conflict of interest.”“I believe the NRA is in a position of conflict of interest,” he said. “In their single-minded efforts to protect the Second Amendment and gun ownership rights they are orienting themselves with people who are guaranteed to support gun ownership but who have no feeling for the land.”Of the NRA’s approach to hunters, Wray told Gun Week, “I don’t like their jingoistic, lowest common denominator approach to things. I think they tend to reach out to folks in ways that are demeaning, simplistic and often inaccurate…I think in a lot of ways, the NRA would avoid reaching out to make friends and allies because I think in a lot of ways, the NRA likes enemies more.”Activists UnloadIf it’s enemies Wray is concerned about, reaction to his first column by activists on the KABA forum indicate he’s made a few of his own.One KABA writer stated, “If it weren't for the NRA this bozo would be hunting with an atlatl,” a reference to an ancient hunting weapon.Another argued, “This ‘Sportsman’ ignores a number of items. If it were not for the efforts by the NRA in Shooting Range development, he wouldn’t have a place to site in his gun. If it were not for the efforts of the NRA, he wouldn’t have a gun to hunt with as it would have been banned as being a ‘High Power Sniper Weapon.’ If it were not for the efforts of the NRA, he wouldn’t have ammunition to hunt with as it would have been banned as being ‘Armor Piercing Ammo.’ If it were not for the efforts of the NRA, he wouldn’t have a place to hunt or seasons to hunt in as they would have been eliminated courtesy of the anti’s. This moron isn't worthy of smelling the NRA’s (flatulence).”A third correspondent noted, “Sounds like this letter was a plant from an anti-gun source attempting to divide and disrupt the pro-gun cause with the usual BS about ‘NRA too political.’ Politics is where our gun rights will stand or fall and the NRA must be supported by all. NRA ‘prayer meeting’ with Bush last year no doubt led to (the “Assault Weapons Ban’s) timely demise prior to the election.”“I’ve lost track how many ‘hunters’ tell me they ‘understand’ the ‘need’ for waiting periods, background checks (which are actually permission checks and quasi registration), gun licensing, machine gun bans, sporting purpose test, and on and on,” wrote one observer.And another concluded, “When the author is no longer able to hike in to get a deer, maybe he will appreciate the NRA supporting motorized access. Hunters seldom bother to get involved in legislative or political action to protect gun rights unless it is strictly a hunting issue. Maybe that is why pro-gun activists depend more on concealed weapon and cowboy action shooters. Things are run by those who show up, and fewer hunters are showing up.”While Wray’s column incited many activists, at least one was more critical of the NRA, noting, “I am a life member of NRA and intend to remain so, but their fundraising efforts fall on deaf ears because too often I have seen the money spent on ‘political correctness’.”Wray told Gun Week that at this point, “I’ve said pretty much what I had to say about the NRA. I don’t intend to stay after them constantly. I am hoping that both within and without the NRA there will be a movement to eliminate the conflict of interest we talked about.”

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ned W. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Unhappygunowner sounds like an antigun troll to me.Go ahead with your own personal boycott.Since you won't be participating in RKBA issues anymore - if in fact you ever did - your boycott won't mean a thing.If you don't understand that there are over 20,000 gun laws - probably most of them unconstitutional - on the books now, and that those gun law simply regulate law-abiding citizens, we really don't need your help anyway.At lease you appear to understand that we don't need quislings in our ranks, and have abandoned us.Good riddance to you and everyone who thinks like you. We don’t want or need your help.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim Hunter wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I'm appalled and insensed at Zumbo's comments and the remarks from his supporters. He and his idolitors have no idea of the reason/meaning of the Second Ammendment, nor of the damage they've caused all of us. It ain't about hunting. Zumbo, and now it appears Mr. Petzal, are snob hunters that look down on folks that don't hunt in the same manner as they do.Further, there are so many things wrong with Zumbo's and now Petzal's remarks that it would take a book to properly address their flawed outlook. While we all have freedom of speech, none of us has freedom from the consequences of that free speech. It's supposed to take guts to exercise this right, and I got really disgusted at the whiners that have posted in Zumbo's support. He committed treason against gun owners and should pay a price. He got what he deserved, and if he and you don't like it tough! Don't think for a minute that Sarah Brady won't be quoting Mr. Petzal also. You gents should stick to fishing.jim

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ranger Rick wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzel,You sir, don't get it! It has never been about hunting!! It is about personal sovreignty and the God given right to self defense. You, by your own admission are part of the crowd that helped foist the dreaded "Sporting purposes" term on American gun owners along with the 1994 Clinton gun Ban. You sir, should be ashamed of your self.My black rifles, and I have a few, have no "sporting purpose." Their purpose is to insure that me and mine don't end up like those Bosnians and Rawandans, who did not have the wherewithall to defend themselves from the murdering hordes!You are probably saying to yourself that it can't happen here. I have news for you, it can and it probably will happen here, especially if Fudds like you keep dithering. If you don't believe genocide and ethnic cleansing can happen here, I refer you to the Aztlan movement. Check out their website and their stated goals. Sporting purposes my ass!!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Nickle wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Just saw Mr Dewlen's comments, and I have to respond.First, I am not a Christian, I am an Atheist (A real one, not a Socialist or Communist that's hiding the truth). That being said, I respect other folks religions (no, I don't care who you worship or where, or what you put at Town Hall).You talk about not casting stones. OK, just where do you draw your line in the sand?And you say "Enough is enough. Let us forgive those who trespass against us." If our forefathers had followed that in the late 1700's, we would still be part of Great Britain.I can forgive, but I don't forget. I allow a sinner to change his ways. Zumbo I think might change, Petzal I doubt will change. He's had 13 years to change his attitude, and has failed to yet. He's a traitor to this country, his fellow citizens, and he advocates committing a major sin. Yup, I have read some of the Bible, enough to know you're supposed to protect your family. Petzal clearly thinks that we should not have the right to do so, or the means to do so. That's very clear to me.You see, when somebody says "Sporting Purposes" about a gun, then anything not "Sporting Purposes" is usually to them very bad, and should be banned. Well, there isn't anything "Sporting Purposes" about Self Defense, now is there?And the Bible does say "An eye for an eye", now doesn't it? (It does say "turn the other cheek" as well.)So, before any more of you start quaoting the Bible to shame folks into doing the WRONG thing, you might want to go back and review that document. You've just gotten a lesson on the Bible from an Atheist, and that should shame those of you that quoted what you felt like.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Nickle wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Well, I've had some to look around about Mr Petzal, and what I see isn't good.I've also spoken to my girlfriend (the subscriber), and I can clearly say now, the only reason we're still subscribed to F&S isn't her, it's me. She would can Zumbo and Petzal so fast, their heads would be spinning into the next century. She hates FUDDs, the locals where I live HATE FUDDs, and myself, well, I think all true FUDDs would take up Golf, once guns were banned. I'll give the staff at F&S time to respond before pulling the plug. I doubt they'll deal with the problem. If they won't, we'll see what the advertisers do. Sorry to play hardball, but, that's the way the cookie crumbles. I've sworn a solemn oath to protect the US Constitution, and I intend to uphold that oath.It's a damned shame, F&S USED to be a nice magazine. Now it appears to be just another rag.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Smith Dewlen wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I hope I am able to talk some sense into many of you posters.Which among you has not made a mistake? Which among you has never regretted your spoken or wtitten words?I support the Second Amendment to The Constitution of the United States of America. I support the NRA and with more than just membership. I support other organizations which support the Second Amendment and other areas of concern. I volunteer. I donate funds. I write to legislators and testify before legislative committees. I write on Web Sites. I donate to candidates supporting the Second amendment. I work the election polls.I also understand what Christ meant when he asked the men present at a stoning, “He that is without sin, let him first cast a stone"...and to the one about to face death by stoning, "Go and sin not more."Maybe you should read the above paragraph over a few times.I cannot cast the first stone at Mr. Zumbo or Mr. Petzal, heck even if you are without blame and cast the first stone, I cannot cast one."Do I own a black rifle?" you ask. YES. I hunt. I shoot. I carry concealed.Have you forgotten all the fine assistance Mr. Zumbo, Mr. Petzal, OL, F&S, Remington and the NRA has done???? Apparently so. I have not forgotten. These fixtures in America deserve understanding and compassion.I will not forsake them. In fact since most of you seem to proclaim your boycott, I will enhance my support.Wait. Maybe you have forgotten another Amendment to the Constitution. There is a FIRST AMENDMENT. The same freedom which allows you to critize in this forum and others, also allows for diverse opinions. "Freedom is not free." Life's blood has been shed for each of us to be able to express our opinion. Do not dishonor those who have served in the name of Freedom with censorship. Maybe you served, if so you are an American Hero, whether your chest is full of medals or not. You served in the name of FREEDOM. Now you do not wish to grant it.Enough is enough. Let us forgive those who trespass against us. Let us unite for freedom. The NRA is by far the most wonderful organization in the fight for Second Amendment freedom. If you are not truly involved, you are a roadblock.Are you involved? Or roadblock??

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Cooked up in Texas wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The failure of the media elites of the world to show these Anti-gun disciples in true light is important. Only by understanding their deeper motivations can future generations comprehend the ultimate failure of gun control policy and there architects.They tell us that we have the right to self-defense never really meaning it.They're willing to be attacked and called, in some form or fashion, "TRAITOR" in order to advocate policies that are good for the country.In the end, that's what liberalism versus conservatism all comes down to sappy, feel good emotionalism that sounds appealing, but doesn't work versus doing things the right way, even when it's not easy.Anti-gun liberals seldom do consider the long-term consequences of their feel good policies.It takes a lot more integrity, character, and courage to be a conservative than it does to be a liberal. That's because at its most basic level, liberalism is nothing more than childlike emotionalism applied to adult issues. Going to war is mean, so we shouldn't do it. That person is poor and it would be nice to give him money, so the government should do it. Somebody wants to have an abortion, have a gay marriage, or wants to come into the U.S. illegally and it would be mean to say, "no," so we should let them. I am nice because I care about global warming! Those people want to kill us? But, don't they know we're nice? If they did, they would like us! WE HAVE TO PUT THE IRON BOOT TO THESE TRAITORS MY FELLOW GUNNERS!!! WE DON"T NEED OR WANT ANYMORE - "Michael Moore compares Iraqi insurgents who kill Americans to the Minutemen of Revolutionary New England." WAKE UP PEOPLE AND LETS GO TO WAR! WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE SOMETIME,WHY NOT DIE HERE AT HOME AND FREE OURSELVE'S FROM THESE TRAITORS!!!! ANY OF YOU MEN LEFT IN THIS COUNTRY? WASHINGTON TRAITORS MUST GO!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ant -Jemyma wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Hunters!...Go figure!Those dummies just don't get it..and never will! Its all aboutthem and their sport. Damn the2nd!...Ooops...except my rightto hunt! Belligerent Snobs, thewhole lot of em'. These are thesame type of "backstabbers" whowould shake your hand, wink atya, and call you friend. Thenwhen your back is turned, they'rethe ones on the phone with theFBI, turning you in because youhave an "evil balack gun." Nobetter than your average democrattwo-faced liar!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from bydand wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I am dumbfounded by the post by Eric. A long burst from an assault rifle? WAKE UP! A full auto weapon IS NOT USED FOR HUNTING!!!! They are TIGHTLY CONTROLLED BY THE GOVERNMENT and have been so since 1933.What you have been calling an "assault rifle" IS NOT. It is a semi-auto rifle that requires the trigger be pulled for EACH SHOT. I would remind you that there are several semi-auto commercial rifles used for hunting. You are confusing something that only LOOKS like something else with the real thing! As for that AK 47 quote, the cartridge is the equivalent of a 30-30 ballisticaly, and It would be patently impossible to enumerate the number of deer taking with that cartridge. There are even your "beloved" bolt action rifles chambered for it. No, I wouldn't go hunting with a semi-auto AK, and I doubt others would either. Your farcial statement makes the WRONG assumption.As for semi-auto's not being "sporting" Just what in the hell is sporting about using a scoped bolt action "sniper rifle" to shoot an unsuspecting animal at 200 yards or better?You want to be sporting about it? DON'T wear cammies, stand up when you shoot instead of using a rest, and use a single shot rifle!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from "ANTI-FUDD!" wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

These elite snobs who callthemselves Hnters," no longerare friends of mine. I putthem in the same catagory asSchumer, Fein-swine, Hitlary,and the rest of those Democrattraitors. They've never put thehard work in defending the 2nd.,except when hunting is concerned.From now on I vote NO on every-thing concerning hunting! Yeah,thats right!...If I got to loosemy Rights, then you loose yours!Ass-Clowns!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from AB wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The hunter's worried about land and a place to hunt doesn't feel they can lose their guns. after the semi-autos go then they will come for the bolt actions and then the single shot, look at England Wake up people the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, and not about the state controlling militia's IT'S ABOUT EVERY CITIZEN'S RIGHT TO POCESS ARMS. AND IT DOESN'T SAY FOR "SPORTING PURPOSES"! When the Politicians want to make our land "safer" you must ask for who? For you? Are you that naive? When they divide us into groups they feel they have us. WE ARE ALL GUN OWNERS and the only security we have is the fact that we own guns everyone on the same page yet? His comments were ill thought, he was a hunter not a gun advocate, and he was too comfortable with his own opinion to know the real world. when I defend my rights for semi-autos I defend your right to hunt.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Brad wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

this is rediclous, we are all inteled to our opinion, but when you have a nice well paying job common sence tells you to watch your mouth... i do not hate jim jumbo, i hate what he said. he basicly called owners of ars and aks terrorist. i dont like to be called a terrorist. and im sure you dont ether. if jim would have simply said i dont like hunting with ar15s. ect.. im sure he would still have his job.he got what he deserved we need to work together and stop the gun grabbers. instead of fighting like children. weather you like to shoot paper or shoot dear ect. well all have 1 thing in common. we all enjoy firearms. and for the people who say well i dossent effect me, well it WILL. becasue if its ok to ban one type of gun it will be ok to ban others. then we will be left with nothing. and this country will no longer be the land of the free...-Brad

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Grant Gable wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I need a price check.It is a basic tenet of maturation to discover that all that glitters is not gold. Every nickel spent for "security" must be taken from one person and chipped away at by each bureaucracy along the way. Not only are bureaucratic means unjustifiable, the end (security) is a pipe dream. Calling something secure (e.g., "Social Security") does not make it so. In fact, it practically ensures the equal and opposite outcome as we now witness with the crumbling and evaporation of social safety nets. When we become completely responsible for ourselves, everything changes. We can no longer identify with other "victims" of life who want to be taken care of with the guns of government pointed at our neighbors. We begin to identify with mature people who take complete responsibility for their experience of life and realize that those guns are being pointed at us too. We begin to see that freedom is essential to the pursuit one's own happiness and the irrational desire for security, even though it once glimmered brightly, becomes too costly when measured up against liberty - the Hope Diamond of human existence - invaluable and only obtainable at the greatest cost, the loss of your illusions.ITS TIME TO MARCH ON WASHINGTON D.C. -MARCHED ARMED! THE PC PIGS WILL NOT RISK A INTERNATIONAL SLUAGHTER. subguns.com

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Frank wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Posted by E. Humberg"I still respect Mr. Zumbo, I own black guns, I am an NRA member since 1970,I am a law enforcement officer. I will continue to read and watch Mr. Zumbo whenever and wherever I can."As a law enforcement officer of 20 years, I am embarassed by your cavalier attitude toward the constitution.Posted by Kevin B"As for the earlier comments that the Second Amendment is not about hunting, I'll respond that the opposite is also true: Every statement or opinion about hunting does not implicate the 2nd Amendment. While we have the right to own guns, we do not have an absolute right to use anything we want to take an animal. I happen to think regulations on magazine capacity for hunting waterfowl and big game are spot on. Does that make me an anti-gunner?"You kind of answered your own question. Hunting regulations are perfectly fine and have nothing to do with the 2nd. As to whether or not you're a Fudd, depends on if all you care about is your hunting rifle or the RKBA.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from MSJ wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo got what he deserves - he has been doing this long enough to understand what the "fight" is for.The 2A is underfire and if anyone is out from under the rock, they will know that we are being stripped from our/their AMERICAN RIGHT! What happens when all we can do is ask the criminals to come "pull the cork" out of our pop gun in order to protect ourselfs?OH, by the way.... If I knew that something that I said had pissed off the people that I had been writing for, for so many years, and my livelyhood was in jepordy what would I do? I think I would say I'm sorry pretty damn quick.and to add..... living in the era of "one strike your out" quoted by David Petzal, maybe thats true, I am a fan of the 3 strike thery, but when you awaken the beast, the beast gets hungry.You made the bed, lets hope you can sleep in it...MSJ

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tim wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

To KrustyThanks for responding to my post, but I think there are a few things that need clarification.If BR owners could create a "firestorm" of activity on blogs in a matter of days, why would it take weeks to email OL or anyone else? It takes as long to post on a blog as it does to post an email. Beyond that, and I'm only referring to Zumbo in this post, the man wrote poorly and insulted you and should be taken to task for it, but some of the postings I've seen would have benefited from a good editing, which brings me to my next point.My statement about "Rambos" referred to the individuals responsible for the foul mouthed postings calling for violence. I hope that label doesn't apply to you. ( by the way, if you find Rambo so insulting, why do you use Fudd in an insulting manner?) Telling Jim Zumbo he was an ignoramus for insulting you and chastising him was an entirely appropriate response, threatening him isn't. THOSE people are your perception problem, not me. When the Brady bunch want to convince the American public that black rifles should be restricted, whose comments do you think they're going to put out for consideration? Guess what, they won't be mine.As far as defending Petzal, I refuse to do that, but the statement about paramilitary weapons being a liability I think was right. Face it, when the anti's want to push a gun ban, what do they go after, black rifles, and why, because they have an image problem with the non-shooting public. Until we can convince the American public at large that you're not a threat to them, they'll think maybe there should be some restrictions. Which is why you should be concerned about what some of your "brothers" are saying, non-shooters are going to read some of these postings and think, you know, if thats whats going through their heads they shouldn't own firearms. And don't tell me thats BS because I've talked to a lot of non-shooters and thats the sort of thing they've said to me.As far as being self-policing, I haven't seen a lot of that. Of course, I hardly know anyone that owns paramilitary rifles. I know lots and lots of people that own guns but only knew 3 that owned black rifles. One is a very good friend who sold his AR15 when he found out how much they were worth, one was a genuine "nut" in the neighborhood who scared his own friends, and the other was a neighbor who I later learned was a drug dealer. My only other experience with black rifles was at a public shooting range, and they effectively got themselves regulated out of it with their loutish behavior. If the range was busy, they didn't bother waiting for a bench like everyone else, they just set up between benches and shot away, even though posted rules stated you had to shoot from a bench. Hell, they didn't even bother with targets, they were just there to see how fast they could burn through their surplus commie ammo, and they sure weren't concerned about whose head their empty brass bounced off of. But I still supported their rights, and you think I'm the problem. You think you're stuck with us? Divorce yourself from the hunters, collectors, CCW holders, clay bird shooters and casual gun owners and see how long you stay out of the toilet. The anti's would flush you so quick your head would spin. I don't want to see that happen to you, but if you think that attacking everyone rather than building bridges, well, good luck. But I will still support your rights.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Patriot wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"I've voted in every election since 1980.I've been an NRA member for years and years.I've been with the program.I've spent thousands of dollars for guns, ammo, hunting gear, range fees, etc....I've done my part. I think you should own and shoot what you want.. My biggest problem is the voice of reason is gone.. I'm just tired of the arguments." unhappygunownerIn our Constitutional Republic,the supreme law of the land, is the US Constitution.The BOR = the first ten amendments to our supreme lawand enumerates some of our Individual Rights.Do you comprehend the meaning of the Second Amendment?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joe wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

It is all or nothing.Just ask Hillary,Diane,Nanci,Ted,Chuck or the likes.Maybe not at once,but make no mistake,its all or nothing.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from unhappygunowner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

So how about gettin' with the program..?Don't you love your country..?Who's side are you on anyway..?Do you understand 2A?I've voted in every election since 1980. I've been an NRA member for years and years.I've been with the program. I've spent thousands of dollars for guns, ammo, hunting gear, range fees, etc....I've done my part.Deep down this a class envy argument for many of these people. Rich guys vs regular joes. I'm not rich, but I don't own an AR either. I think you should own and shoot what you want. My biggest problem is the voice of reason is gone. It's an all or nothing metality that Wayne LaPierre of the NRA has created that starts this garbage. I'm just tired of the arguments.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from unhappygunowner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The people elected don't give a crap about anything other than money. Gun owners represent a small portion of their VOTING constituents.Supposedly there are 80 million gun owners in this country. If they are so concerned why aren't there more than 4 million members of the NRA?Apparently 76 million gun owners don't think the NRA represents them very well.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Patriot wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"By the time this crap is finished,we may all wish we could still own a pellet gun."Posted by: unhappygunownerSo how about gettin' with the program..?Don't you love your country..?Who's side are you on anyway..?Do you understand 2A?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joe wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I do believe thier sworn to uphold the Constitution,are they not? Any elected or appointed official that interpets "WE" or the Founding Fathers intent of the 2nd Amendment to anything but the citizens of the United States is as phony as these two writers.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joe wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Yeah well,if the people elected to represent us are wise,they'll take note and stop representing thier own interests.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from unhappygunowner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Dont worry,they probably wont take your pellet gun.By the time this crap is finished, we may all wish we could still own a pellet gun.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joe wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Oh,and Ive never seen gun owners of this great country so united...Its damn well about time!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Larry M. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Listen you FUDDS.Put down those hunting rifles and pick up a BOW, SPEAR or KNIFE!!You do want to be purists..right!You either believe in the R2KBA or you don't, there is no wishy washy BS middle ground!The 2nd Amendment applies to everyone or no one. Something Mr. Petzal has lost sight of years ago.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joe wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

[Quote]I have been shooting and hunting for 30 years and I can't believe how we all turned on one another.[Quote]"WE" havent turned on anyone.A couple phony writers have shown thier colors and let everyone know just what they think of the people that supported them.Your attitude goes a long way in showing your willingness to preserve your rights and the rights of others.Dont worry,they probably wont take your pellet gun.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from unhappygunowner wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Are you people still at it? Brush your teeth, put on your NRA pajamas and go to sleep. Tomorrow when dawn breaks we can all rejoice in the irreparable damage we've done to gun owners. I've never seen this group so fractured. Petzal and Zumbo may have said some stupid things, but I've never seen the amount of hateful, ridiculous, divisive garbage vomited up on this blog and others in my life. I'm done.I'm done with the NRA and the way the immediately turned their back on a 40 year member. I'm done with f&S and OL and remington and the rest of the sponsors who ran like cowards. I'm done with the black gun crowd and the walnut and steel crowd. I'm not donating any more time and/or money to any gun groups period. I'll take my chances and if the bans pass, so be it. I have been shooting and hunting for 30 years and I can't believe how we all turned on one another. I'm done.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from fredjones wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David PetzalYou sir. Are the problem, and an enemy to the American hunter shooter any American that believes in the rights of the people. You and your comments divide the shooting public rather than using your voice to unify all those that hold the second amendment dear. You show your ignorance, and distance to the common shooter and hunter. The fact that you ever helped ban and disarm your fellow Americans makes me sick. I will not buy or support any magazine that publishes you, or buy from any of your sponsors. Your pen may be loud but my and my brother’s dollars speak volumes.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from fredjones wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David PetzalYou sir. Are the problem, and an enemy to the American hunter shooter any American that believes in the rights of the people. You and your comments divide the shooting public rather than using your voice to unify all those that hold the second amendment dear. You show your ignorance, and distance to the common shooter and hunter. The fact that you ever helped ban and disarm your fellow Americans makes me sick. I will not buy or support any magazine that publishes you, or buy from any of your sponsors. Your pen may be loud but my and my brother’s dollars speak volumes.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from fredjones wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David PetzalYou sir. Are the problem, and an enemy to the American hunter shooter any American that believes in the rights of the people. You and your comments divide the shooting public rather than using your voice to unify all those that hold the second amendment dear. You show your ignorance, and distance to the common shooter and hunter. The fact that you ever helped ban and disarm your fellow Americans makes me sick. I will not buy or support any magazine that publishes you, or buy from any of your sponsors. Your pen may be loud but my and my brother’s dollars speak volumes.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from cphilip wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Gee... I am now ashamed I am a Hunter.Heck... even I knew the 2nd amendment was about the right to bear arms and does not protect my right to hunt (Hint: a small subset of the purpose to be able to own a firearm is to use it for this).I also knew painting a Semi Auto Black or Green didn't make it evil or go off and do things horrific while I slept. In fact I thought synthetic black stocks were "IN". Funny thing is my Browning A Bolt has one. Works well. Seems to be capable of not assaulting anyone either.Even I knew a 30 caliber was close to the same as a 7.63 X 39 round an AK used. Even I knew it was a real fine Deer rifle too. Even I knew a .223 was close to the same AR round as 5.56. Even I knew that makes a great Varmit gun. Even I knew they both were SEMI AUTO same as the other SEMI AUTO rifles and shotguns I always used. Even I new they were the same action and usefullness as any other SEMI AUTO. Even I knew they took one pull of the trigger to deliver onen shot. Even I knew they didn't magicaly go to "Spraying bullets" on their own. I didn't even have to look it up. And I ain't no magazine writer either!No more Field and Stream for me. I would prefer to read things that the writers actually knew what they were talking about or at least did a little research. And ones that have a clue what damage they are doing with their misguided snobbery. You don't get it do you? And I am suprised there are others of you. And most of us old guys should! I know I am over 50 now but I surely haven't lost my mind like some of you Magazine writers seem to have. Whats causing this dementia? Sheesh. I would have a talk with you if you worked for me. Then if you persisted to be an ignoramous I would fire you too. No place in this fight for someone that just can't get it!As a Hunter I appoligise to all the AR and AK Hunters/Shooters for these two old guys. They don't represent all us old guys. Nor do they represent real hunters. They represent "Snob Writers".I hate this happened to Jim though. I hope he can somehow come back and help us all fight for our rights. I believe he could be a great asset. Not so sure about David though. He had time to think before he posted...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from RW wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

If Sarah Brady was smart then she would leave US "free" American's alone.Because we don't really care what those Socialist / Communist gun banners think.Save the Whales!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Woodard R. Springstube, Ph.D. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzal,I posted a reply to your comments, but it seems to have been deleted. Perhaps, it was because I was on my computer at work, and either my employer stopped it, or your system deleted it because the source did nto match my email.In any event, Jim Zumbo delivered a reprehensible, dastardly stab in the back of every firearms owner in the country. This fight is not about getting rid of "terrorist guns". It is about preserving the right of every law-abiding American to own guns for hunting, target shooting, and, yes, for self-defense. The Brady Center has, on their website, already targeted "cop-killer" .30-30's. Can you say good-bye to the Winchester 94 and the Marlin 336? They have also called for a ban on the .22 Long Rifle. Don't take my word for it. Go to their website and see for yourself--if it hasn't been removed within the last three days.Of course, you and Zumbo have every right to voice your opinion, but, when that opinion marks you as eletist, Elmer Fudd clones, don't be surprised if you raise a firestorm of protest. If you ignore all of the target shooters and those who keep weapons for protection in the case of widespread civil disturbance or natural disaster that ties up the police so that law enforcement is overwhelmed (can you say Katrina or Los Angles riots?), then don't be astonished if there is a price to pay. If you kick a skunk, expect to be sprayed. An experience hunter like yourself should know that.Weapons laws, historically, have seldom been about reducing crime. More often they are about an elite gaining or solidifying power over a peasantry. This was true in the post-Reconstruction South, in Japan during the Shogunate era, and in a depressingly large number of other cases.I grew up reading F&S and OL and SA, reading every word written by the likes of Warren Page and Jack O'Conner. Now, it seems that F&S has come a long way since the days of the 1960's when Richard Starnes first raised the alarm about gun confiscation laws in its pages. Sadly, the changes have not been for the better. Educate yourself and go to VPC and the Brady websites and read their position papers for yourself. See that their ultimate goal is eliminating all civilian guns, except for, maybe, the wealthy and politically well-connected. We cannot afford the luxury of stabs in the back like you and Zumbo have given us. Grow some backbone and stand up for all of our rights for "We must all hang together, or we shall, most assuredly, hang seperately."Finally, the Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. It was written to give citizens the ability to defend themselves and the state against criminals and enemies, both foreign and domestic. Read the writings of Madison, Jefferson, and the state constitutions adopted at the time that the Bill of Rights was adopted. Again, I suggest that you educate yourself, unless you think that gun ownership and self-defense should be the privilege of an elite. The two are inextricably linked today.Woodard R. Springstube, Ph.D.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bob Rusnock wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Dave look at it this way we all voted and Zumbo lost the election why don’t you sign him up for field and stream and see if he will carry the election there this is what the left hates when we stick together they lose the election

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gary wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzel,You name calling to honest,legal gun owners is out of line. Your opinion does not reflect the opinion of the majority of gun owners. I will engage my right as a consumer to boycott the advertisers that support you. This is about the Second Amendment and it is important to more people than you think. Without this right there will be no hunting.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dan wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzel sits in an ivory tower we paid for and pronounces the legal EBR owners:1.mental patients2.yahoos3.rabid4.foul mouthed5.viciousAll this judgement from a fellow that seems to say he is above us rather than one of us, as we express our God given right to the 1st-which provides us free speech in any langusge we choose!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Larry T. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal,Your a traitor to gun rights in America. Its people like you who prostitute themselves to the enemy to save their own skins when times are hard. Field and stream needs to get rid of you.Also, get your head out of your ass. Their are millions of semi-automatic weapons in America. There is alot more than 250 people that are enraged over Zumbo and know your comments.Your a traitor to all gun related sports, and your a traitor to the right of self defense. If I want to protect myself with an assault weapon, I do not need you to tell me otherwise. If I want any more shit from you, Ill squeeze your head and watch shit dribble out.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Rio Rancho wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Petzal Get A Clue ! The prominent and indispensable among our rights is the "right of the people to keep and bear arms." Second Amendment rights, never to be infringed, were posited by our nation's founders as among the most essential tenets of the free and just republic they sought to establish. It seems Petzal's arrogance will not be cured by facts and seems oblivious to the facts. It reflects the anti-gun Left's Disney-World approach to everything. They would be happy if everyone but a few them died out and left behind their artifacts to be gathered in a giant museum for the few who remained.Yet, as with so many of our celebrity gun 2A intellectuals, to my jaundiced eyes, he doesn't measure up to his reputation.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Scott Gilmore wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Jim got the most backlash from the simple fact that he called the rifles "terrorist" rifles. That is the root cause. Saying he was against them for hunting wouldn't have got him nailed like he was. We can have a difference of opinion on a subject. When you come right out and call them "terrorist rifles" in a blog like Jim did, you will pay the price. Mr. Petzal has also sold us out in the past. I for one get sick and tired of hunters/sportsman willingly selling my rights out to further their own good. I am a hunter, and a black rifle owner. Don't throw out the black rifles to prolong the safety of your beloved hunting rifles.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Freedomlover wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I think Petzal and Zumbo aren't paying attention. Hunters do not speak for the entire shooting public. Personally, I find it more entertaining to shoot targets with a decent semiautomatic than spend hundreds of dollars for licenses, exotic ammunition, guides, transportation, deer lease fees, and assorted related equipment in order to have a chance to kill an animal, that I possibly have little interest in eating. But that's me. I can shoot cheaply and frequently and actually enjoy the benefits of freedom in this country. I can also use the same rifle as an effective means of providing self defense for me and my family. I thank God I live in Texas and those freedoms haven't yet been infringed to the point that they have in too many parts of the country. I do not appreciate being associated with terrorists or having mental problems for taking advantage of those freedoms. On the other hand, if I chose to go hunting instead or additionally, I can do that as well. It then seems Mr. Petzal implies that I am somehow to blame for Zumbo's downfall when I have done nothing.As for Petzal's support for the 94 AWB, it is a losing strategy for him and his cause. The choice of criminals and gangs of "semiauto-assault weapons"(an oxymoron if I ever heard one) as a their weapon of choice wouldn't be a justifiable reason for the government to ban them, even if it was true. It is not, and never has. The proliferation and availability of handguns and "assault weapons" and laws providing for the legal use for self defense in the home and concealed carry of handguns in public has reduced crime. Furthermore, liberal politicians don't need another AWB to ban hunting. They can easily ban or restrict hunting (and already have in certain places) to the point of making it too expensive for most of the people other than the elite.So I think, Mr Petzal, it is up to you to change your attitude towards those of us who simply prefer a day at the range with an AR, an AK, an M1-A, or a surplus military rifle over a budget busting hunting trip. Why would you insist upon double-crossing a fellow shooter and invite government to ban my particular choice of firearms?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from OSOK wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Petzal, apparently you don't "get it" any more than Mr. Dumbo did.It's not about hunting and its not about being able to voice an opinion.Its about standing as one against the socialist zionists that want total control over the sheeple.You Sir, are the one treading on thin ice here.Apprently, you don't get the fact that your readership is your real "report to" and can terminate your smug butt any time that we act in unison on a mutually agreed upon action. Your sponsors understand this full and well as they actually sell a product.Walk lightly or the ice will give and you will be suffering from "exposure".As to Sara Brady, she's going to come up with some BS non-sensical crap regardless. Apparently, you are further unaware of how many comments are made on gun boards and that they have been available for a long long time.Another old "hunting writer" with his head up his sponsor's butts spouting off on his blog or as he calls it, his glog. lol

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Not impressed wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

You really don't get it do you? We didn't "turn on one of our own". He clearly was not "one of us". Your friend maybe, but not "one of us". Hunting rifles are only safe until the black rifles are gone. Then "sniper rifles with high powered scopes" will be next. Don't be so naive.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Rick wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Your toast you TRAITOR!!!!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from SC-Texas wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

== Ode to David Petzal===When they came for the machine guns, I said nothing because I didn't have a machine gun, and I didn't think they should be used for hunting.When they came for the "assault" rifles, I called them "terrorist" rifles because I didn't have a "terrorist" rifle, and I didn't think they should used for hunting.When they came for my bolt action scoped deer rifle, they called it a "sniper" rifle... and there was nobody left to stand up for me because I had already sacrificed too many of my fellow citizens Rights by trying to keep my own little 'hunting' world safe from the gun grabbers.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Derek Huffman, AZEX wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Determined to go down the same road eh Dave?Now your '94 comments are coming back to haunt you.When YOU'RE unemployable, perhaps Hitlery will hire you. "Minister of FUDD relations".It's about ALL guns Dave. Unless you FUDDS have an epiphany real soon, you'll find that us lowly, dirty, EBR, HSR, MGers will make life a living hell for your sponsors.And that's a ONE way sword, my friend. The CUSTOMER has a right to know who's actively buggering his rights and promoting "gun racism". Judging the applicability of one's Freedoms to YOUR perception of what's acceptable is foolhardy, treasonous, and ignores the lessons of History.Derek Huffman, AZEX

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mumbo-Zumbo wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

All I hear from the Zumbo apologists is "he has done more for the sport than any of you".I for one don't hunt so he hasn't done squat for me. I have asked several of my other gun owning friends what Zumbo has done for them, they respond "Who's Zumbo?".What exactly has Zumbo done for the EBR community? Did he speak out against the AWB in 1994? Is he speaking out against the current AWB that was recently introduced in Congress?You elitists live in a fantasy world where sponsors provide your equipment, license fees, guides, and trips to exotic places that the average hunter can only dream about. You and your ilk, Mr. Petzal, are out of touch with the shooting community and don't have a clue what is going on within it, otherwise you wouldn't be writing your garbage rants about terrorist rifles and mental patients.Zumbo got exactly what he deserved, and hopefully you will get yours, and I for one will be proud that I was among the legions that helped get his accomplished.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from M. Kapp wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Just in case all of you "true" hunters out there don't realize it, this blog has turned into a liberal blog with anti-hunters pretending to be hunters so they cn use these posts to their advantage. Please do not give them the time of day let alone a response!From One hunter to many - please pay attention.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Anglican wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

DAVID PETZAL! YOU ARE GUILTY OF CRIMES AGAINST THE PEOPLE! HOW DO YOU PLEAD?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from General Lee wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo is a traitor to the cause, and the cause is not hunting. It is my right to keep and bear arms, and that is far more important than hunting. Don't get me wrong, I hunt as well, and I have nothing against hunting, but you sir are a pompous idiot."he has done more for the sport than any 250 of the yahoos who called for his blood."He called me a terrorist for the type of rifle I own. Please accept my humblest apologies for being offended. The second amendment is not about hunting, and you have demonstrated that you do not care a bit more about it than Zumbo does."Then it will be interesting to see how the men and women who wrote that stuff enjoy seeing their efforts being put to use by every anti-gunner in America."Come again? Why would Brady use the comments of anonymous internet authors when she can use the word of Jim Zumbo, respected writer?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gary Cooper wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

There are probably a lot more target shooters than hunters. In fact, there are a lot of shooters who have little or no interest in killing a deer or elk.I have NO SYMPATHY for the Zumbos of the world.In fact, the worst thing that will come from this for Zumbo, et al, is that he will have to learn what it's like to be Joe average, and have to buy his guns, ammo and license fees out of his own pocket.He is obviously an elitist, and an ignorant one at that, just like you Dave.IMO, there's not enough that can be said or done to remove the traitors in our own ranks.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gil Martin wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Zumbo should have exercised better judgment than to ramble on with the same old, tired anti-gun propaganda. The anti-gunners want to ban the black guns, then they will be back for the deer rifles (some anti-gun folks refer to them as sniper rifles)and then shotguns and handguns.Mr.Zumbo lost touch with his audience and has alienated them. He should have known better and he paid the price. All the best...Gil

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gil Martin wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Mr. Zumbo should have exercised better judgment than to ramble on with the same old, tired anti-gun propaganda. The anti-gunners want to ban the black guns, then they will be back for the deer rifles (some anti-gun folks refer to them as sniper rifles)and then shotguns and handguns.Mr.Zumbo lost touch with his audience and has alienated them. He should have known better and he paid the price. All the best...Gil

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from boogeyman wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo and Petzal "Appease the unappeasable". America is a free country, but it is not the fat socialist Michael Moores or the Misguided Petzal's or the senatorial commie loudmouths or freedom hater Sarah Brady who keep it free. They merely enjoy the freedom that others are prepared to defend with their lives. But, when you try to deal with complex, real world issues, using little more than simplistic emotionalism that's primarily designed to make the people advocating it feel good rather than to deal with problems, it can, and often has had disastrous consequences.Anti-Gun liberals like Petzal never seem to learn from this. Why don't they learn anything from failed liberal policies? Because there is nothing underpinning them other than feelings and so even when they don't work, their good intentions are treated, by other liberals at least, as more important than the results of their actions.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Michael M. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Better to have anti 2nd amendment traitors exposed than permit them to hide behind their corporate sponsors and blogs.1st. Jim Zumbo2ns. David PetzalHow can you be so ignorant as to believe you can selectively decide what firearms should be banned. YOURS ARE NEXT!!! It will be easier for someone to decide your high powered, scoped rifles are "assault" or "sniper" weapons.WAKE UP!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from John W. Loosemore wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

You sir are an idiot, if you think Sarah Brady wants to bring this firestorm to attention of anyone in Congress. This type of thing is exactly what every career politician spends his life studiously avoiding.This whole thing has been very good for the gun community, and even the most vulgar comments have served their purpose. It's been a wake-up call to our fringe allies, and warning to our enemies.As for Zumbo, once he is cleansed of his career, perhaps he can dedicate the rest of his life to educating the public about the actual intent of the Second Amendment. He is the one man who could say with credibility, "I used to think like that too..."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Allan wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

From what I've seen of Zumbo's videos, he's an old fat guy being led around by professional hunters in front of the camera and "handlers" behind the camera. They just allowed him off his leash on the blog, and that was their mistake. His career is done as he has finally shown his elitist or liberal bias. Good riddance!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from AndyC wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." (Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322)"The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals.... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." (Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789)"The right of the people to keep and bear arms has been recognized by the General Government; but the best security of that right after all is, the military spirit, that taste for martial exercises, which has always distinguished the free citizens of these States....Such men form the best barrier to the liberties of America" - (Gazette of the United States, October 14, 1789.)"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J.Boyd, Ed., 1950])"The right of the people to keep and bear...arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country..." (James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434 [June 8, 1789])"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms." (Richard Henry Lee, Additional Letters from the Federal Farmer (1788) at 169)"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." (Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment [ I Annals of Congress at 750 {August 17, 1789}])"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380)"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)"the ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone," (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper #46.)"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States" (Noah Webster in 'An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution', 1787, a pamphlet aimed at swaying Pennsylvania toward ratification, in Paul Ford, ed., Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, at 56(New York, 1888))"...if raised, whether they could subdue a Nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty, and who have arms in their hands?" (Delegate Sedgwick, during the Massachusetts Convention, rhetorically asking if an oppressive standing army could prevail, Johnathan Elliot, ed., Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Vol.2 at 97 (2d ed., 1888))"...but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights..." (Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29.)"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation. . . Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper No. 46.)"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." (Tench Coxe in 'Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution' under the Pseudonym 'A Pennsylvanian' in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1)"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people" (Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788)"The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both." [William Rawle, A View of the Constitution 125-6 (2nd ed. 1829)"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426)"The Constitution shall never be construed....to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms" (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87)"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them." (Richard Henry Lee, 1788, Initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights, Walter Bennett, ed., Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, at 21,22,124 (Univ. of Alabama Press,1975)..)"The great object is that every man be armed" and "everyone who is able may have a gun." (Patrick Henry, in the Virginia Convention on the ratification of the Constitution. Debates and other Proceedings of the Convention of Virginia,...taken in shorthand by David Robertson of Petersburg, at 271, 275 2d ed. Richmond, 1805. Also 3 Elliot, Debates at 386)"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." (Zachariah Johnson, 3 Elliot, Debates at 646)"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8)"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of The United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..." (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Peirce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850))"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants" (Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy 20, S. Padover ed., 1939)"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined" (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good" (George Washington)"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks. (Thomas Jefferson, Encyclopedia of T. Jefferson, 318 [Foley, Ed., reissued 1967])"The supposed quietude of a good mans allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside...Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them..." (Thomas Paine, I Writings of Thomas Paine at 56 [1894])"...the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms" (from article in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette June 18, 1789 at 2, col.2,)"Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people." (Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697])"No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion." (James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775])"Men that are above all Fear, soon grow above all Shame." (John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon, Cato's Letters: Or, Essays on Liberty, Civil and Religious, and Other Important Subjects [London, 1755])"The difficulty here has been to persuade the citizens to keep arms, not to prevent them from being employed for violent purposes." (Dwight, Travels in New England)"What country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms." (Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, Dec. 20, 1787, in Papers of Jefferson, ed. Boyd et al.)(The American Colonies were) "all democratic governments, where the power is in the hands of the people and where there is not the least difficulty or jealousy about putting arms into the hands of every man in the country. (European countries should not) be ignorant of the strength and the force of such a form of government and how strenuously and almost wonderfully people living under one have sometimes exerted themselves in defence of their rights and liberties and how fatally it has ended with many a man and many a state who have entered into quarrels, wars and contests with them." [George Mason, "Remarks on Annual Elections for the Fairfax Independent Company" in The Papers of George Mason, 1725-1792, ed Robert A. Rutland (Chapel Hill, 1970)]"To trust arms in the hands of the people at large has, in Europe, been believed...to be an experiment fraught only with danger. Here by a long trial it has been proved to be perfectly harmless...If the government be equitable; if it be reasonable in its exactions; if proper attention be paid to the education of children in knowledge and religion, few men will be disposed to use arms, unless for their amusement, and for the defence of themselves and their country." (Timothy Dwight, Travels in New England and NewYork [London 1823]"It is not certain that with this aid alone [possession of arms], they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to posses the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will, and direct the national force; and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned, in spite of the legions which surround it." (James Madison, "Federalist No. 46")"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them. And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights." (Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States; With a Preliminary Review of the Constitutional History of the Colonies and States before the Adoption of the Constitution [Boston, 1833])"The tank, the B-52, the fighter-bomber, the state-controlled police and military are the weapons of dictatorship. The rifle is the weapon of democracy. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military. The hired servants of our rulers. Only the government - and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws." (Edward Abbey, "The Right to Arms," Abbey's Road [New York, 1979])"You are bound to meet misfortune if you are unarmed because, among other reasons, people despise you....There is simply no comparison between a man who is armed and one who is not. It is unreasonable to expect that an armed man should obey one who is unarmed, or that an unarmed man should remain safe and secure when his servants are armed. In the latter case, there will be suspicion on the one hand and contempt on the other, making cooperation impossible." (Niccolo Machiavelli in "The Prince")"You must understand, therefore, that there are two ways of fighting: by law or by force. The first way is natural to men, and the second to beasts. But as the first way often proves inadequate one must needs have recourse to the second." (Niccolo Machiavelli in "The Prince")"As much as I oppose the average person's having a gun, I recognize that some people have a legitimate need to own one. A wealthy corporate executive who fears his family might get kidnapped is one such person. A Hollywood celebrity who has to protect himself from kooks is another. If Sharon Tate had had access to a gun during the Manson killings, some innocent lives might have been saved." [Joseph D. McNamara (San Jose, CA Police Chief), in his book, Safe and Sane, (c) 1984, p. 71-72.]"To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege." [Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54 (1878)]For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution." [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822)]" 'The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the milita, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right." [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)]"The provision in the Constitution granting the right to all persons to bear arms is a limitation upon the power of the Legislature to enact any law to the contrary. The exercise of a right guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be made subject to the will of the sheriff." [People vs. Zerillo, 219 Mich. 635, 189 N.W. 927, at 928 (1922)]"The maintenance of the right to bear arms is a most essential one to every free people and should not be whittled down by technical constructions." [State vs. Kerner, 181 N.C. 574, 107 S.E. 222, at 224 (1921)]"The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the "high powers" delegated directly to the citizen, and 'is excepted out of the general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power." [Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)]"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." --Samuel Adams

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Duke wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"Kind-hearted" and "beautiful" are not the first words that come to mind to describe Petzal & Zumbo.Twisting reality is the hallmark of mental pathology. Petzal & Zumbo has enthusiastically joined the new fascists.It is an impossible dream because, while liberalism is, in fact, a mental illness, it is not a disease that can be treated with psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. It can only be treated biologically.Soon, it is hoped, we'll be able to add liberalism to that impressive list of behavioral disorders. And since medical science has developed exciting new preparations for treating many of these disorders (e.g. Ritalin for attention deficit disorder, Haldol for psychoses, lithium for bipolar disorder, Wellbutrin for chronic depression, Xanax for anxiety), it may not be long before liberalism can be treated by ingesting a small tablet or capsule each morning before breakfast.Now that Democrats have taken control of the Congress, it all boils down to whether or not Pfizer can come up with a pill to cure liberalism before Democrats succeed in destroying our rights.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"What Jim said was ill-considered. He’s entitled to his beliefs"I think you are missing the point of why people are upset at Zumbo. It's not that he was was ill-considered, it's that what he said was factually wrong.John Lott said it best:"The problem isn't that he made a political mistake, The problem is that this guy doesn't know what he was talking about. These military-style assault rifles are functionally the same as hunting rifles. A .308 caliber AK-47 "assault" weapon fires the same bullets at the same rate as a regular deer hunting rifle. They are both semi-automatic guns. This AK-47 is a civilian version of the weapon. It is not the military version."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jeff H. wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Sounds pretty cut and dry to me. Nowhere in the second ammendment do I see a single word about hunting. Can't understand how you don't see that. Canada is a prime example of how good intentions can go bad. Start off with just a few " bad rifles" a few years later you have almost no chioce of rifles to shoot.Hope this clears things up a little:First they came for the communists.But I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communistThen they came for the Jews.But I didn't speak up because I wasn't a JewThen they came for the trade unionists.But I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unioinstThen they came for the catholics.But I didn't speak up because I was a protestantThen they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up.-Pastor Martin NeimollerI did read Zumbos apology shortly after he posted it. Didn't see at all convincing to me. I posted seems like a CYA tactic because he was in jeopardy of losing his job or losing some major sponsors at the least (that happened the next day).Do I believe he's sorry? Only because he lost alot of money and because he will forever be seen as a traitor to gun owners. Did people overreact? HELL NO. You speak of people using our words against gun ownership. Look again they're already doing that to Zumbo. And there weren't a couple hundred signatures for his resignation last article I read there were over 6000

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from TBR wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

One word:QUISLINGTBR

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 556Nato wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo didn't apologize. He just provided a list of excuses to rationalize in his own mind why he said what he did.The old assclown was probably drunk when he penned that article, but then again, you are more truthful when you're drunk, so there is no doubt in my mind he wrote what he actually felt.This Petzal guy is just another skid mark on the shooting community's collective underwear.An elitist Fudd that threw EBR owners under the bus back in 1994 and will do so again in 2007.It's a waste of time even being here. F&S and it's Fudd readers are so deep in the doe urine they do not see the change that is going on in the shooting community.They do not realize that their precious hunting world is becoming smaller and insignificant, while the EBR world is becoming bigger. They do not care about EBR owners and will sell us out in a heartbeat.No logical argument is going to change their minds. In the next 15-20 years these Fudds are going to need the EBR owners more than ever if they want to continue their hunting tradition as we will be their only allies.Now I'm done with this fiasco. It's a waste of time posting here. We are all better off writing to the sponsors and advertisers of this Brady seal of approval rag, rather than wasting our time on this worthless blog.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jeff Bisbee wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

David,Jim's apology was expected but does not diminish his actions. He should be sorry for his elietist attitude. This thought process permeates many "shotgunners" or "hunters" who only give a damn about their interest.There may be many "yahoo's" who've done less for the sport than Jim, but many of these "yahoos" may understand we have a Bill of Rights" not a "Bill of Needs".To many of us, Jim Zumbo is the "yahoo".Jeff B

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dick Winters wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Many radical Leftists seem to suffer from a basic twist in character. They constantly confuse aggressive and defensive actions by their own , on whose freedom and protection they depend every hour of the day. They constantly indulge sworn enemies of our freedom and well-being. They constantly push for government actions that seem plausible on the surface, but which inevitably hurt the very people they are supposed to help. It happens over and over again.When I was young I thought the Left was just confused, but now I'm increasingly drawn to the idea that there is a deep, if unconscious, malevolence at the bottom of the history of disasters inflicted by those people. They are dangerous.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pippy Dear Rapist wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Preserve your freedom and your right to keep and bear arms. Please call your representatives and your senators today and ask them to oppose and vote against any further gun control laws now and in the future! Call the Capitol switchboard and ask for your Congressman's office:1-202-225-3121Get to know more about your Senators and Representatives, and the bills that are being considered in Washington at:http://www.house.gov/ or http://www.senate.gov/ And let the president know how you feel about unconstitutional Gun Control http://www.whitehouse.gov/

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Baker wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Reading the above comment posted by the gentleman in Arkansas, I can only conclude that my eyes are not working properly yet this morning or else he has been living in a cave for the last few decades.Or was that test baiting to see what responses appeared? He says:>... If they made an M-16 that would only fire in semi-automatic mode, and chambered it for larger calibers than the .223, I would probably have one and hunt with it myself. If I could find one chambered in .243 of [sic] the new 50 Beowulf that only fired once per trigger pull... that would be sweet. (I believe an M4 in the 50 Beowulf would make an excellent brush gun...fantastic for hunting pigs or deer in the swamps.)-----------------If they made an M-16 that would only fire in semi-automatic mode...???? --If I could find one chambered in .243 of [sic] the new 50 Beowulf...??? Hello...???At last count there were a number of AR style offerings chambered in large calibers such as the .50 Beowulf.As for his comment about there not being any semi-auto AR platforms available-- Wow!! I don't even know where to begin on that one!I better go take a closer look at my AR rifles-- do you suppose they are all full-auto "machine-guns" and I just didn't realize it...??Sincerely,Mike BakerNorth Central Florida

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jeff Olsen wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I have been reading some of these comments with great concern. To begin with, let us understand that, in this country, we ALL have the right of free speech, regardless of weather or not it popular, or even correct, a right I would defend to the death. (Being a combat veteran, I have EARNED that right, and helped secure it for others.) Zumbo shouldn't have been alienated by his employers/sponsors as he was. A public viewing of him eating humble pie should have sufficed to stay in their good graces.On to the subject matter... We must be exceptionally carefull how we describe an "Assault Weapon". This can be a slippery slope for even the best and most knowledgeable amoung us. Personally, I would consider anything capable of firing in an automatic mode to be an assault rifle. Lets understand that automatic means that several rounds can be fired with one pull of the trigger. Do not confuse this with semi-automatic and/or auto-loading firearms that will eject the spent shell and load a fresh shell into the chamber, but not fire it until the trigger is depressed again.To be fair, I should state my stance on hunting with these firearms. I do not believe they have any place in hunting, period. If someone wants to own one and fire a bazillion rounds at the range... so be it. If you want to spend a small fortune in ammo, knock yourself out. The surcharge on ammo purchases will provide enhanced resources for the rest of us.I have no problem with the guns themselves, or the people who own/use them. I just don't think they should be allowed for hunting purposes. There are many reasons why, but lets start with the obvious... safety. There are far too many people who dust off their firearm the night before deer season and expect to shoot perfectly the next day... there are scarred trees and torn up ground from coast to coast that will attest to this fact. If one of these people were to get their hands on an automatic weapon... no one in the county would be safe. This past year I fired close to 1000 rounds through my Remington 700 in the pre-season. During the season I fired a grand total of three shots. The first two were at a raccoon that my mother-in-law wanted for the crockpot, the first was a clean miss that impacted the sandy ground, the second a head shot. The third round I fired in the woods put a deer on the ground. Even after practicing, I still missed, but I knew where the shot would go if I did miss, and it was in a safe direction.(I should note that I live in Arkansas, close to Memphis,TN home of the best BBQ on the planet. In the south, if you can name anything that walks, craws, swims, or flies, it's guaranteed that we will have at least three recipes for it; one will undoubtedly be BBQ, another will unquestionably containg the phrase "coat with cornmeal and deep fry".) I firmly believe that everyone who hunts must pass a proficiency test before being issued a permit.On the subject of questionable hunting firearms, I would like to point out that I believe that muzzleloading season should be strictly for primitive-type firearms with iron sights akin to the Hawkins rifle. Todays scoped in-lines are far too accurate and fire considerably farther than a Hawkins, and for that reason, are far more like a modern gun. I still think people should be able to hunt with them, but they should not do so during muzzloading season.As far as military styled weapons go, I have mixed emotions. If they made an M-16 that would only fire in semi-automatic mode, and chambered it for larger calibers than the .223, I would probably have one and hunt with it myself. If I could find one chambered in .243 of the new 50 Beowulf that only fired once per trigger pull... that would be sweet. (I believe an M4 in the 50 Beowulf would make an excellent brush gun...fantastic for hunting pigs or deer in the swamps.)In regards to the magazines, anything more that 10 rounds just adds to the weight of the firearm. I believe they should be legal, but common sense would dictate that you should use a smaller magazine. If you feel the need for additional ammo, carry it in your day pack. My REM 700 only holds 4 rounds, and even that was more than I needed. I saw an ad for a drum magazine for a 1911 that held something like 50 rounds. In my opinion, this is absurd! That would have to be EXTREMELY heavy, especially when held at arms length. I would have no problem with someone buying one, Lord knows there's plenty of useless crap in my garage, but it just isn't practical for hunting.I know many of you will be outraged at my comments. I also know that many who read this will agree, at least in part, with my views. Either way, I have the right to speak my opinion, and F&S have gratiously allowed me to do so here. If you really don't like what I have to say, use another right of all Americans... the right to leave!!!God Bless,Jeff OlsenParagould, Arkansasjefolsen@grnco.net

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from AIRFORCE wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

RE: to Chad LovePeople became so vicious and outright ignorant by many means. One way I hate to say it is through blogs such as this. I am not saying that anyone here is uneducated but think about it. If we wouldn't say these nasty and horrible things to our loved ones or closest of friends, why would you post them in public. Yes it is wonderful that we can let off steam and moan and groan to strangers, but is it truly neccessary. I'm sure at some point someone has taken something you have said and twisted it so out of proportion that you wanted to hang them by their toes. So a respectful word to the wise: If you can state an opinion without making it ugly then do so. You will find that people concider you better for it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from canadian hunter wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Zumbo fired over a dissenting opinion?Wow,now I understand how freedom of speech works..you're free to speak the NRA's official line only. Shame on you rats at OL for bailing out on a venerable writer like him.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mr.Tibb's wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Field & Stream is Part of The "Prostitute Press"One of this "select" group's longest standing members, as a matter of fact.They go whatever way the wind blows.The "Bill Ruger" of the publication world.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Visitor wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The pen is mightier than the sword, or in this case... the keyboard is mightier than the endorsement contract.When you are a compensated endorser, don't run whinning if you say something totally ignorant and get dumped. I have no sympathy for ignorance.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 1776 Liberty Rifle wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

The reason I am pursuing this strange line of thought (continued from "Bureaucrats are Borg), as to how to resolve the problems we face in our loss of freedoms, started by really thinking about Thoreau's line "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil, to one who is striking at the root".[i][/i]Thank you, Strike-the-Root.com !!!I am also trying to determine that many of the epithets we use for bureaucrats are not only, non helpful but are actually harmful to our cause (the restoration of freedom) and also inaccurate. I mean really, "bureaucrat" is already an epithet enough. We just can't let the term "public servant" creep in to the equation.Well, what IS the root of this evil. Most of the things I had usually riled at, I determined were the results of bureaucracy. A bureaucracy, produced by a wild variety of philosophies and beliefs. Attacking the varied beliefs or philosophies is striking at the branches. What causes, and can cure, a condition such as this, without harming the patient/victim? Well, that is the question.What is bureaucracy? My current theory (for the purposes of this analogy) on this is, that bureaucracy is a condition produced by a disease. A communicable disease produced by a "host-parasite relationship". I am going to post, I hope, a few definitions below on 1. disease, 2.parasites, 3. parasitism. I hope this type of posting is permitted but I feel the need to work within real and exact definitions. I will have a short comment after the definitions (in blue) but I am really reaching the limits in my abilities here.DISEASE , a harmful deviation from the normal structural or functional state of an organism. A diseased organism commonly exhibits signs or symptoms indicative of its abnormal state. Thus, the normal condition of an organism must be understood in order to recognize the hallmarks of disease. Nevertheless, a sharp demarcation between disease and health is not always apparent.The study of disease is called pathology. It involves the determination of the cause (etiology) of the disease, the understanding of the mechanisms of its development (pathogenesis), the structural changes associated with the disease process (morphological changes), and the functional consequences of these changes. Correctly identifying the cause of a disease is necessary to identifying the proper course of treatment.Humans, animals, and plants are all susceptible to diseases of some sort. However, that which disrupts the normal functioning of one type of organism may have no effect on the other types.PARASITEpar·a·site \'per-ə-"sīt, 'pa-rə-\ n [MF, fr. L parasitus, fr. Gk parasitos, fr. para- + sitos grain, food] (1539)1 : a person who exploits the hospitality of the rich and earns welcome by flattery2 : an organism living in, with, or on another organism in parasitism3 : something that resembles a biological parasite in dependence on something else for existence or support without making a useful or adequate returnPARASITISM; relationship between two species of plants or animals in which one benefits at the expense of the other, without killing it. Parasitism is differentiated from parasitoidism, a relationship in which the host is killed by the parasite; parasitoidism occurs in some Hymenoptera (ants, wasps, and bees), Diptera (flies), and a few Lepidoptera (butterflies and moths): the female lays her eggs in or on the host, upon which the larvae feed on hatching.Parasites may be characterized as ectoparasites—including ticks, fleas, leeches, and lice—which live on the body surface of the host and do not themselves commonly cause disease in the host; or endoparasites, which may be either intercellular (inhabiting spaces in the host's body) or intracellular (inhabiting cells in the host's body). Intracellular parasites—such as bacteria or viruses—often rely on a third organism, known as the carrier, or vector, to transmit them to the host.I am suggesting that a bureaucrat is merely the involuntary host/victim, of an intracellular parasite. They have been infected by a carrier or vector, that is transmitted by a virus. A virus of the mind, that we are now calling a "meme". Now, we just need to cure all the patients, by removing the controlling memes, without harming the patients. Any ideas, besides I'm crazy?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pappy wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

quote"Wray said that what happened to Zumbo is a case study in how the NRA has trained members to attack their perceived enemies without mercy."So, where's my damn training?Field & Stream MUST GO! http://www.tcftalk.com/clairefiles/index.php

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jon wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear."Marcus Tulius Cicero.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jon wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

SHAME ON YOU TOO JIM!The 2nd Ammendment is not about your damn right to hunt!..."Gun owners -- all gun owners -- pay a heavy price for having to defend the availability of these weapons. "The American public -- and the gun-owning public; especially the gun-owning public -- would be better off without the hardcore military arms, which puts the average sportsman in a real dilemma".An Uzi or an AKM or an AK-47 should be no more generally available than a Claymore mine or a block of C4 explosive."~David E. Petzal - 1994 / Current writer for Field and Stream

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Doktor Jeep wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Time to get a copy of Field & Stream - to see who advertises in it and avoid those products.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Andy Anderson wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

I guess ol' Zumbo stayed in the forest too long. He sure came out of the woods swinging, though, and Boy, Howdy, he's swingin' now. Twistin' in the wind, more exactly. Good riddance! After Sara Brady, Feinstein, and Chucky get done with another "Assault Weapon" ban, they'll start in on your "Deadly Sniper Rifles". They'll team up with PETA and the Sierra Club so that hunting will be banned because of "animal rights", so you won't need those fancy double and single-barrel shotguns, either. (The semi-auto and pump shotguns were on the McCarthy bill, so those are already gone). Got to close the trap and skeet clubs, too, 'cause of lead poisoning the critters like the California Condor.Dave, you don't get it, either. That's why I canceled my subscription to Field and Stream YEARS ago when you made comments similar to Zumbo's. Have to admit you didn't call me a terrorist, though. You just sort'a talked down to me like I was some half-wit that needed someone to tell him what was good for him - and the rest of the country.Me, and others like me, a Terrorist because we own ARs? After what's happened to Zumbo, I guess so. Maybe it'll catch on in the coming elections. It's happened before, you know.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from M. Shepard wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

See what happens when you say something stupid, you are held to account. It's a choice you make, and a choice we make. Just like the fact that there is nothing in the Second amendment about your right to hunt, there is nothing in any amendment saying you don't have to suffer consequences for your actions (no matter how ignorant they are).This is not some pick and choose lunch line. We stick together for ALL guns, or we ALL lose.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from f&s reader wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

Ron,Public perception is a huge problem in 2a rights, shooting and hunting. I know landowners who won't allow ar anythings on their land. That's their right.I understand the tactical folks point of view on this issue. When someone asks for any type of "ban" it will get you going if you believe in the 2a.I can't understand how the AW ban of 1994 was allowed into law if the 2nd allows us to keep and bear arms. I've read on some of the posts (for what it's worth) that the 2nd only applies to military arms. I've also read that while the 2nd allows you to keep military arms, it doesn't allow their use for anything other than protection.I would hope that someone with real knowledge of the law would enlighten us with their knowledge and post it in laymans terms.No matter what, this debate and the fallout from the upcoming possible vote on the new AW ban will be on the minds of many gun owners for a long time to come.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ron wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

This is what I sent to outdoor life.At the time I had no idea others were severing relations with Mr Zumbo"Give the guy a break, I'm sure he doesn't want to infringeon anybody's gun ownership rights .I think in a way that he's sort of right , with the issues at our door steps thesedays it's not a good idea to "sport" any assault type rifle in the woodsfor hunting no matter how accurate it is . As we all know public opinionis 95% "sight" these days and seeing somebody hunting withan "assault" type rifle can do no good towards future generations of hunters.Those people that are now on the fence and have no opinons one way or anotherdon't need any extra nudges to fall the wrong way which is away from sport huntingand I'm sure this is what Mr. Zumbo had in mind.Why would anybody want to exercise their gun rights and tote an "AK or M16" type in the woodsto hunt large or small game.I'll come out and say it : There's no reason why an assault type rifle should be in thewoods as a hunting rifle when there are so many inexpensive rifles that'll getthe "job" down more efficiently. On the range?-sure if that floats your boat,but not in the woods, not these days. We're hunters and sportsmen notpara-military types on manuevers.There's a time and a place for everthing.Too many people have been watching too many movies!Ron GiaquintaNew Hampshirep.s :you can use this note if you have a mind to.I hope Outdoor Life has shoulders as broad as Mr. zumbo and I.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from MicroBalrog wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

MARK HENCKEL, Another numbnuts Fudd who does not understand that bolt rifles and shotguns are not what the 2nd Amendment is all about.Here is what MARK HENCKEL wrote:"As I wrote to an outdoor writer friend of mine as this was blowing up, "You know, that could have been me. I could have written much the same as Zumbo did. I wouldn't have worded it that way. I wouldn't have called for a ban on those guns. But I know exactly what Jim was getting at in what he wrote."http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2007/02/22/features/outdoors/30-mont-outdoors.txt

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Cane wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

"If you are a gun owner who is looking for the middle ground, it is very hard to argue against legislation such as this. Senator Feinstein, it seems, has made every effort to prescribe "assault weapons" and protect "legitimate firearms."-- Column by David Petzal, "Endangered Tradition" column in Field and Stream, June 1994.http://www.sturmgewehr.com/webBBS/semiforum.cgi

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Al - Texas wrote 7 years 7 weeks ago

ZUMBOMANIA: David E. Petzal’s take on the Jim Zumbo fiascoMr. Putz, I believe you are still in a coma. Jim Zumbo made statements that were far more than just a momentary lapse due to fatigue. He said, I'll go so far as to call them Terrorist Rifles. No one told him to "go so far." Did that all on his own. You say he apologized like a gentlemen ... perhaps, but it is hardly clear that it was in earnest. No doubt he is sorry for the consequences. Many a convicted criminal is sorry in the court room when judgment is imminent ... but not when they commit their deeds.Some idiot posted that Jim Zumbo "works so hard ... and stretches himself so thin" for hunters' benefits. What a load of BS. He just can't say NO to another free hunt, or another television program. Yep, what a hard life. You give him far too much credit. He is no better than any other hunter out there (talking quality of individual, not skill here).Yep, the elitist Mr. Putz just knows so much more than all the rabid internet legion who rightly jumped all over JZ's comments. And how do you know, Mr. Putz, that JZ has done more for hunting than the so-called yahoos you speak of? Really, how do you know? Stuckup elitest POS is what you are.I won't bother going on to speak of the 2nd amendment implications here as others