doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Zumbo's comments

I love double rifles and Foxes. But I also really enjoy automatic weapons. They are a whole ot of fun. In some of the esituations I used them, no it wasnt but training with them is a hoot. If you ask Crossed Chisles about some of hisactivities and interests with the "boys" out in Ill. when he taught a gunsmithing curriculum, he will have some tales to tell.
Just because it is black and alloy/synthetic doesnt mean its bad.
I ownt even get into the concept of all American males being able to fire and qualify with the standard service rifle.

When the going get stough, the tough go cyclic!!!!

I hope this doesnt excommunicate me form the double gun crowd

Mr. Stabler:
I do not believe that I have missed anyone's point "entirely." I do think some of you have not read what I wrote carefully. I wrote that I do not agree with using assault rifles as a sporting arm. For me, they come short of what I feel is "fair chase." I never said anything about outlawing them, in fact, I said just the opposite. I deliberately tried to steer clear of the constitutional issues with gun control. I know the Second Amendment does not provide the privilege to possess any weaponry immaginable, enough said.

I do not remember accusing anyone of being a "Rambo wannabee." I did use some similarly figurative language to describe how some of the hunters I meet in the woods today appear to me, but I do not see any accusations being made towards anyone, unless, you possibly felt that my colorful description was a match. I am pretty sure that this did not happen.

At best, I regret jumping in to this fray. As I said earlier, I am a lifelong hunter, I may not agree with some of you on everything, but I am still a hunter. I should have remembered that when this board gets away from shotguns, it becomes a less friendly place.

Best regards,
Ed Pirie
West Topsham, Vermon

In an attempt to find the perfect Grouse gun I've ended up with a safe full of doubles, but none are as much fun to shoot as my AR. I like the Zumbo is a Dumbo quote the best so far......

The big mistake that Zumbo made is he is a center of influence for the shooting community.

Freedom of speech and the First Amendment are a wonderful thing. But along with that comes responsibility.

If you wrote an Email to your co-workers disparaging your boss, you most likely would be fired. It is doubtful a judge would give you your job back based on the First Amendment.

Jim Zumbo is a gun writer and world class sportsman. By writing what he did, it causes people not to buy Outdoor Life magazine, Remington products, and people no longer watch his TV show. Therefore, many other people lose money.

A similar but different situation is the baseball player John Rocker. He voiced his opinion of the diverse group of people who ride the 7 train in New York. He was basically run out of baseball.

Who cares what a ball player thinks? He is not a rocket scientist, he throws a baseball. In fairness, I think they (the media) were too hard on him. Now if it had been a Police Chief, or a Governor, I would be worried. With Zumbo however, he just didn't think. His apology came a little too late.

The Second Amendment was written to give Americans the right to bear arms to defend themselves against their own government gone awry.

Back then, "arms" meant rifles, muskets, pistols, swords, cutlass, pike and polearms.

The founding father's could never have imagined machineguns, .50 caliber sniper rifles, WMD, etc. In fact, in the 1700's, I guess a Brown Bess would have been an "assault weapon".

I have no need for an assault rifle. I don't scan the skies looking for black helicopters, and I don't watch for chinese paratroopers falling from the sky. And I know that alot of folks have them just because they are fun to shoot.

I also believe that it is an American's right to have one if they are not otherwise prohibited from owning a firearm.

As sportsman, we need to support all of the various venues. Trappers need to support coonhunters, bowhunters should support gun hunters, etc.

Make no mistake, the anti-gun lobby sees no difference in an AR-15 or your 1890's hammer gun. They are all evil and are killing our kids. They will not stop if they ban assault rifles. It will be the first step. Many say register them like you do a car. Well, driving is a privelege. Gun ownership is a right. Big difference. And, we all already know that gun laws make no difference to criminals. They don't buy guns at the gun shop. They buy them from another crackhead or steal them from your home.

To wrap it up, by Zumbo saying or writing what he did showed division. Division in the ranks of the shooting fraternity which is alarming. If a regular Joe made those comments it's no big deal. But for a once well respected writer to make them is troubling. Sorry for the long and bounced around rant.

Kind regards,

Faint hope perhaps but there's movement in federal political and police circles in Canada to get rid of the long gun registry and replace an impotent regulatory regime with simple licenses of competency which we already have i.e. acquisition and possession certificates. Register the owner, not the firearm. My personal feeling is that it will happen.

It would be a victory for persistent appealing to common sense,supported by evidence more than emotion, striking a common chord. The shameless waste of money has helped. As an active participant in the campaign, I can say that our sporting fraternity has not had any public divisions in its ranks. As enthusiasts everywhere, we had differences of opinion, but we kept our mouths shut.

Mr. Pirie - What is your definition of an "assault" rifle? An AR-15 is a semi-auto, my A-5 is a semi-auto, a Browning Twelvette is a semi-auto, albeit a 2-shot semi auto. Do these make you uncomfortable? Is my Remington 1100 "unsporting"? If the AR had a walnut stock and an internal magazine would that make you and Mr. Zumbo feel any better? If good ol' boys in camo make you uncomfortable you should take up tiddly winks. Perhaps a little Harris tweed would make things more chummy. Jim Zumbo bit the hand that fed him because he evidently is a gun snob. I suspect that all that the rarified air of gratis ammo, guns, and hunting trips went to his head and confused him. I expect his head is clear now. Apologies for this flame. I'm generally a nice guy, at least that's what my dog tells me.

Gun control and gun banning is a lot like porn regulation to me. Who gets to decide what is and what is not allowed? When the Supreme Court could not come up with a description of what porn was, nine of the better legal minds in America, what give you any hope reasoned gun restrictions will be made by the same people? On top of that this becomes a very emotional issue for many and facts and the lack of knowledge gets in the way of opinions. Too many people think that they know a lot more than they really know. The rely on others to inform them and do not find out if they are being lied to or told the true facts.

We really need to regulate the people not the guns. If you obey the law you should be allowed to own a gun of your choice. If you break the law you loose that right. Prison for your crime and the certain fact that if you do the crime that you will pay the time should be central to any law.

Any one is allowed to have an opinion just do not impose your opinion on me.

Indeed the Slovenians and Croats fought against the Serbs, as they have from time immemorial, in the impossibe ethnic brew that has been called "the powderkeg of Europe." Claiming that an ethnic war based on ancient hatreds is an 'analog' to US gun owners fighting a US government is simply nonsense.

Mr. Maloney:

First things first.

I never suggested "US Gun Owner vs US Govt". In the "Second Amendment Scenario" I posited, it would be mass warfare - literally hundreds of thousands of people in arms against a delegitimized tyrannical, non-Constitutional government. This would not be a few gun clubs fending off black helicopters. Again, as I said, the scenario and the response are both unlikely, but that is what the Founding Fathers envisioned. If you have a dispute with that, I am sorry. You will have to take it up with them.

Second, in my reference to the Slovenes and Croats, I believe I was quite clear, but perhaps I was not. I try to write succinctly, but sometimes I fail. If I was not clear, please forgive me for the obscurity -

I merely pointed out that light infantry of militia-type model had been sucessful in battle against an organized regular army. The cost was significant.

That is all I said.

Are you suggesting that the analogy is not good simply because there were cultural issues involved?

The Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto did a pretty good job as well. So did the Hungarian republican forces in 1956. Unfortunately for the Hungarians and the Jews, there was no exterior support, and no mass support ( such as would be seen in a scenario envisioned by the Founding Fathers) and the OPFOR prevailed. The Afghan Mujahadeen performed pretty creditably against Soviet heavy forces too. Many of them armed with Lee-Enfields. ( Of the type that make Congressman Schumer uncomfortable, I might add. But Im sure you knew that so I digress)

I have cited historical , operational examples. There are others. Rather than spluttering at me that I must be wrong, why not provide me some counter-citations and we will discuss this like civilized gentlemen?

Regards

GKT

Looks like another outdoor writer has a professional death wish. David Petzal posted this defense of Zumbo (see link): Field and Stream Blogs

Here is an excerpt:


I take this stuff personally!