Hunting Magazine writer makes career-ending error?

[Greybeard]

By expressing (ignorant) opinion about ARs on Outdoor Life blog.

------------------------

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

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

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

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



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



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

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

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

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

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

John B. Snow
Executive Editor
Outdoor Life
-------------------------------

This thread went to 13 pages in just over 24 hours.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=256193

Sounds like Remington quickly disassociated themselves from Mr. Zumbo. And tomorrow may become known as "Black Monday" for Outdoor Life subscriptions ...

Edited to add: Oooops on my part. I just noticed that reysc already started a thread on this. ' Been hung up reading over at THR!

[HighVelocity]

Uninformed, short cited, self centered and big mouth usually adds up to unemployed. Looks like he's got it all covered.

[mr fixit]

As of today, Remington has dropped all support for him, and his website. It is expected that Outdoor Life will do the same.

Remington will make an anouncment today a 12:00.

[Greybeard]

From Remington's home page this morning:

NOTICE: Remington is in the process of severing our sponsorships with Mr. Zumbo. Remington in no way shares or advocates any of the comments made by Mr. Zumbo on his blog site. A formal announcement will be released by noon today.

After Tamara provides a small piece of her mind:

Sunday, February 18, 2007
Boomsticks: Who the hell is Jim Zumbo?

Wow, strip off that down-home looking camo, and underneath it this guy is wearing a pink Million Mom March tee shirt.

"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 don't know about living in a vacuum, Jimbo, but you do seem to be carrying one around between your ears. To claim to be an active varmint or predator hunter and yet completely unaware of the popularity of the AR-15 in that market stretches credulity to the limit.

"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." "

I guess you've never been to an NRA High Power match, either. What the hell kind of shooting enthusiast are you? You've managed to make yourself sound like a wet-behind-the-ears neophyte completely unaware of the state of the shooting sports in this country, not a "traditionalist".

"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." "

Ah, here we reach the rub. Listen, you gun-banning cretin: An argument could be made (and has been, by the Supreme Court in the Miller decision) that your hunting guns are not Constitutionally protected at all, except those that meet the requirements for militia service. In other words, if you have any scoped bolt guns in a service caliber, such as 5.56mm or 7.62 NATO, those are golden, but the .17 Remington 'chuck-popper you were fawning over in your name-dropping opening paragraph is a toy that is completely irrelevent to the spirit and intent of the Second Amendment.

Your attempt to throw me out of the sleigh, hoping that the wolves would be satisfied with my AR and would leave your precious bambi-zapper alone, is the most craven act of contemptible cowardice I've seen in a while. Now that I'm aware of your anti-gun nature, I'll be sure to cancel the one subscription to Outdoor Life that I have control over, and urge everyone else I know who subscribes to cancel theirs as well. Maybe after they ash-can you, you can go write policy columns for the Brady Center or the VPC.

I'm sure they'd love your little camouflage outfit and folksy wit. They'd find a place for you; after all, you're an "Authentic Gun Guy". *spit*

(H/T to The Unforgiving Minute.)
Labels: Boomsticks, politics, scorn

[Paladin]

I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles

Whooaa!!!

Has Jimbo been reading too many Brady Campaign publications or what!!!

I guess according to him our armed forces also carry "terrorist-rifles"

Obviously Jimbo has never shot an AR-15. They are awesome rifles, in many ways, for many things.

[Greybeard]

Yep, thus far, it looks like dem words, with a few more, wuz "professional suicide".

[AV8R]

Assault rifle? Hunting rifle? Not much difference in the holes they make.

[135boomer]

I have owned a Colt AR-15 SP1 for, oh, about 35 years now. To the best of my knowledge, it has never snuck out of the house after I went to bed and terrorized anyone!

[SRVA]

I believe it was a colossal mistake for Zumbo to make the comments he made. I am also personally upset over his comments. It is also great to have a place to vent our feelings about this issue. However, in posting your responses, please don’t forget the Forum guidelines. As emotional as this topic is, it neither justifies the suspension of our posting guidelines nor our well earned reputation for civility.

Steve

[Greybeard]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

News article on the Zumbo fiasco.
http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_102081.asp


Quote:
The Blog Heard 'Round The Industry
Jim Zumbo angers firearm enthusiasts
by Jim Shepherd
posted February 20, 2007

Click to Enlarge
Jim Zumbo, Hunting Editor for Outdoor Life magazine, angered firearms enthusiasts across the country with a weekend blog posting. His blog has now been suspended and sponsors are severing ties with Zumbo in spite of his apology.
This article is provided by Jim Shepherd in association with the "Outdoor Wire," a feed service specializing in the outdoor industry.

Legendary hunting writer Jim Zumbo has incurred the wrath of thousands of shooting enthusiasts with a weekend posting on his now-suspended blog for Outdoor Life magazine.

In the posting, Zumbo said "assault rifles" (or "terrorist" rifles as he went on to refer to them) had "no place" among "our hunting community." Adding that in his "humble opinion…these things have no place in hunting" because "We don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern."



Zumbo went on to say "game departments should ban them from the praries (sic) and woods."

That kicked off a firestorm among owners of so-called "black rifles". Within hours, internet sites had reproduced the offending blog, kicking off thousands of angry emails and internet postings.

Subsequently, in what may one day be classified as the worst apology ever written (aptly titled "I was wrong, BIG TIME") Zumbo attempted to soothe readers, attributing his remarks to being tired following a long day of hunting coyotes in extreme weather conditions.

He went on recount his 40 years of NRA membership and the United States Sportsmen's Alliance, an organization, which, he wrote, "actively fights anti-hunters and animal rights groups for hunter's rights." He also told readers he had plans to go hunting with an AR-style rifle to give them a try.

At that point, however, there was little, if anything, that would assuage an angry horde of electronically mobilized AR fans. They considered Zumbo's remarks as being tantamount to a sellout, with Zumbo offering up "black rifles" as a sacrificial lamb for anti-gun forces.

In an appearance on Tom Gresham's national radio show "Gun Talk" Sunday afternoon, Zumbo attempted to apologize, but listeners didn't seem to be buying his verbal apology. If anything, any attempt to assuage them only fanned the flames of outrage.

Over the course of the afternoon and evening, various executives associated with Zumbo posted their own comments on his blog site, attempting to deflect the anger at directed at Zumbo away from their companies.

It didn't work.

Instead, they found themselves under attack with angry feedback calling for everything from a boycott of all Remington products (a pair of Remington execs were mentioned as having been with Zumbo on his now ill-fated hunting trip) to cancellation of Outdoor Life magazine subscriptions and campaigns against all companies with connections to Zumbo.

Yesterday morning, responding to an onslaught of negative publicity, Remington CEO and President Tommy Millner released a statement severing "all sponsorship ties with Mr. Zumbo, effective immediately."

Zumbo was entitled to his opinion, Millner wrote, but the inflammatory comments were solely his and did not reflect the views of Remington.

"Remington has spent tens of millions of dollars defending our Second Amendment rights to privately own and possess firearms, " wrote Millner, "and we will continue to vigorously fight to protect these rights. As hunters and shooters of all interest levels, we should strive to utilize this unfortunate occurrence to unite as a whole in support of our Second Amendment rights."

In conclusion, Millner expressed regret at the termination of a long-standing relationship with a "well-respected writer and life-long hunter."

Outdoor Life announced they were discontinuing the "Hunting With Zumbo" blog "for the time being" due to the "controversy surrounding Jim Zumbo's latest postings."

Their notice went on to remind readers "Outdoor Life has always been, and will always be, a steadfast supporter of our Second Amendment rights which do not make distinctions based on the looks of the firearms we choose to own, shoot and take hunting."

Yesterday, anyone who didn't comment risked being lumped in with anti-gun forces. Any voices calling for reason and tolerance found themselves shouted down. And those writers professing support for Mr. Zumbo privately certainly weren't willing to go on the record with that support.

Additionally, Cabela's has not yet dropped their sponsorship of the Jim Zumbo Outdoors television show, Cabela's Frank Ross is being quoted as having said their legal department is "currently reviewing contractual obligations and commitments regarding our sponsorship of the Jim Zumbo Outdoors television show. "

"Jim's comments are as unfortunate as they are inappropriate," said National Shooting Sports Foundation president Doug Painter. "No one should divide firearms into good-gun, bad-gun categories."

Zumbo's ill-considered blog may not have been intended to create good-gun, bad-gun categories, but it has certainly raised firebrand rhetoric to an art form. Rather than hunters being supported by recreational and competitive shooting enthusiasts, they have now become "Fudds" to shooters who feel they have been labeled "terrorists" by a "hard-core hunter."

It's truly not a pretty picture, but may observers say it accurately reflects a widening gap between "traditional" and "non-traditional" shooting enthusiasts.

With Congress reconsidering the Assault Weapon Ban and Connecticut and New Jersey considering legislation that would limit handgun purchases to one per month, this latest schism is already being used as further evidence of the "need" to regulate firearms -all firearms - more stringently.
==========================

[jimlongley]

"Any voices calling for reason and tolerance found themselves shouted down."

They just had to sneak that in there, didn't they?

Now anyone who disagrees with Zumbo and says so is neither reasonable or tolerant, at least according to that particular arbiter.

Sorry, like a bullet, those words, once fired, could not be called back.

Those of us who have spent decades worrying about hunters and skeet shooters and other people who participate in one shooting sport to the exclusion of all others, throwing the rest of us to the wolves, have now found ourselves faced with just exacltly the scenario we most feared - someone who has said to the world "I've got mine and I don't care about the rest."

Whether he meant it or not, whether he was just tired and not thinking straight (he should try that explanation with the cops when he runs someone off the road while asleep at the wheel) or whatever other excuse he can come up with, the simple fact is that he posted his words out there where our enemies can use them against us, and they will surely ignore his retraction, or even disparage it as an effort to keep his job or curry favor, or whatever. Heck they will even use the firestorm of commentary against us.

Like Neville Chambelain, he has acted the appeaser, intentionally or not, and he has let the camel's nose into the tent. He has thrown the rest of us to the crocodiles in hopes that he will be eaten last. However you choose to look at it, I personally am left with the feeling that any words from him from this point are just out there in the wind, unlikely to be heard or heeded. I think he should just beat a retreat, retire, and not be heard from again - I can't imagine him being able to pull a Smith and Wesson on this one.

The only thing I can picture him doing to redeem himself is to hire on with the Brady Bunch and get access to the "Bully Pulpit" and then declare how wrong the Brady's are.

What's the old thing? When they came for the Jews I did nothing because I was not a Jew . . .

[Tom]

"Any voices calling for reason and tolerance found themselves shouted down."

They just had to sneak that in there, didn't they?

Now anyone who disagrees with Zumbo and says so is neither reasonable or tolerant, at least according to that particular arbiter.

<big snip>

The only thing I can picture him doing to redeem himself is to hire on with the Brady Bunch and get access to the "Bully Pulpit" and then declare how wrong the Brady's are.

What's the old thing? When they came for the Jews I did nothing because I was not a Jew . . .

Jim,

Sadly, Zumbo has his apologist and he is a big name in the shooting/hunting game: Ted Nugent!

==============================================
Two quotes from just this morning on the Nugent forum from
Ted himself:
Check it out yourself:
http://nugeboard.tednugent.com/ubb/Foru ... 86666.html

posted 02-21-2007 09:42 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zumbo is on board with all guns now. he stated so & apologized. case closed xcept for the closed minded. what Ive learned is that our sport is loaded with small minded, unsophisticated cannibals, much worse than Jim's momentary lapse. those of intellect & sophisstication as to the real gun wars out here will embrace Jim & help his epiphany upgrade all who suffer from the inbreeding antigun bufoonery within. to not do so is further downgrade. how foolish


posted 02-21-2007 10:34 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would think that my absolute stand with Jim at this time would be enuf for my BloodBrothers to grasp that I as THE absolutist of alltimes on allthings 2nd Amendment would be enuf for the faithful. I am saddened to know that I must rethink who the faithful are.
==============================================

I am having a hard time thinking of something appropriate to say about this that would stand a chance
at passing by the censors.

Sad Regards,

Tom

[Liberty]

Jim,

Sadly, Zumbo has his apologist and he is a big name in the shooting/hunting game: Ted Nugent!

Actually I sorta agree with Ted on this one. Not that I think that Zumbo didn't deserve the criticism wrath and penalties that he received, but there is a time to to move on, a time when going after more blood is pointless. Taking into consideration his life's work. I think its time to move on further trashing his name, and boycotting his sponsors maybe pointless. Ted is supporting a friend, I can't fault him for that.

That being said, We don't need to forget either. He lost his job, and his respectabilty. Thats good enough for me.

[Greybeard]

"I must be living in a vacuum."

IF the man had just quit after that paragraph, we'd not be doing this now.

[Greybeard]

Tipping Point -- Suicide on the Web

http://www.guntalk.com/site.php?pageID=15&newsID=12

Something fascinating just happened. I suspect it will be studied by those who do such things, but at this point, it is clear that last weekend we saw a sea change in the way gun owners react to threats.

If you heard Gun Talk last Sunday, Feb. 18, you heard Jim Zumbo, longtime hunting writer for Outdoor Life, addressing a blog (online comment piece) he wrote. If you didn't hear it, you can download the archive file here: http://guntalk.libsyn.com. It's the February 18 show, "part C."

Jim basically committed career suicide. In short, he wrote in his blog on the Outdoor Life web site that he had just learned (while on a hunt) that some people use AR-15 rifles for hunting. He offered his thought that this was a bad image for hunters. Okay, that's his opinion. But, he went even further, calling for game departments to ban the use of these rifles for hunting. After crossing the line and calling for a banning of those guns for hunting, he firmly planted his foot on a land mine and called AR-15s "terrorist rifles." The explosion from that misstep was heard throughout the firearms industry.

You see, the AR-15 is one of the most popular firearm platforms going. I own three of them and love to shoot them. I don't consider myself a terrorist, and neither do the millions of others who own them and shoot them for recreation, or who own them for personal defense. On "Personal Defense TV" we have been showing that the thinking among security trainers has moved away from the shotgun as the ideal home defense gun, and in many quarters, it now favors the AR-15 or some other carbine (short rifle).

Zumbo had made a mistake from which there was no recovery. He wrote his blog while on a hunting trip. Just before going on the air, I checked the internet forums (fora?) and found a firestorm. People were livid, and with good reason. Some of the comments were clearly over the top, but most of them conveyed the rage that comes from a feeling of being betrayed by someone you thought of as one of your own.

We were only 30 minutes away from going on the air for a live, three-hour broadcast, so I called Zumbo's home. He was still enroute home from his hunting trip and knew nothing about the controversy he had created. I left word that if he wanted to come on the show to make a statement, he could call in.

During the last hour of the show, he decided to go onto Gun Talk, live. He had just posted an apology on the Outdoor Life web site. His explanation was that he just didn't know anything about these rifles, and had no idea that people actually hunted with them. I felt for Jim, but I also knew that in calling for the banning (even if only for hunting) of any gun was incredible, but calling them rifles used by terrorists was, quite simply, unconscionable.

Having just read some of the comments on a few of the online groups where people were posting Zumbo's home address and personal information, calling for . . . well, it was hard to know what they were calling for . . . I made a comment about our willingness to eat our own. Some of that was based on hearing gunnies say that they won't buy Ruger firearms because of something Bill Ruger said two decades ago. Hey, the man is dead and buried.

Still, in this case, I was wrong. That's not what was going on here, as I discovered when I got off the air. To listeners who took offense, I do apologize. The outrage by gun owners is completely understandable. To put it in context, Zumbo's comments came only days after we saw the introduction of a bill in Congress to bring back the Clinton Gun Ban (the so-called "assault weapons" ban). The final nail in the coffin was when-- Sunday afternoon -- the Brady Campaign (the leading group working to restrict gun rights) posted Zumbo's comments to several places on the net, saying, in effect, "See, even the top hunting writer says these rifles have no legitimate use."

At that point, it was all over for Jim Zumbo.

Thousands upon thousands of emails were directed to Remington and all the sponsors of Zumbo's television show on The Outdoor Channel. The emails were all pretty much the same -- dump Zumbo or I'll never buy any of your products. Remington first posted a message saying it was severing all ties with Zumbo. On Monday, the company said it was ending its sponsorship of him. Other companies followed, and it continues. Outdoor Life removed Zumbo's blog, and his apology. Each had generated thousands of comments -- almost all of them hugely negative.

We can take away from this experience several observations.

The first is that this attitude of "just let them take those ugly, black guns" is common among hunters and competitive shooters. Anyone with that attitude is a fool. Sit down with a hunter from England or Australia, hear him tell the story of what happened there, and watch the tears well up in his eyes when he says they never thought the government would take away their hunting guns. To gun banners, there is no such thing as a good gun. They want them all. When Tom Diaz, of the Violence Policy Center, was on Gun Talk, I forced him to admit that he would like to ban all guns. What about the police, I asked. Once we get all the other guns, he said, the police won't need their guns, either.

A ban on black guns, or "Saturday Night Specials," or 50-caliber rifles, is a ban on all our guns. There is no such thing as a bad gun or a good gun. We can't throw babies off the back of the sled, thinking it will keep the wolves away from us.

The next thing we learn from this is that the world has just changed. This entire episode took place inside of 36 hours, on a weekend -- a three-day weekend for President's Day. It happened...and this is important...entirely on the internet. The original posting was on the net, the reaction was on the net, the emails demanding that companies break off with Zumbo were on the net, and the reactions from the companies were all on their web sites. This was completely an internet event. It was a nuclear explosion, with tens of thousands of messages posted, spanning all the firearms-related web sites.

How often over the last 30 years, as I fought for gun rights, traveled to Washington, DC, wrote about gun rights, spoke at the Gun Rights Policy Conference, and for the last 14 years, broadcasted about gun rights on the radio, have I lamented the inability to get gun owners motivated to protect their own rights? This powerful example shows that it can be done.

Now, the real question is whether we can generate that kind of response when we need to defeat a gun ban. Can we melt down mail servers of elected representatives the way gun owners hammered the servers at various companies? I don't know.

What I do know is that we are facing more calls for gun bans and restrictions on our gun rights over the next few years than we have seen in the last 40 years. Someone on the side of gun rights needs to develop a way to replicate this . . . this "Zumbo Effect" . . . to beat back the assault which has already started.

We must find a way to "Zumbo" our attackers in Congress, in the state houses, and wherever they assault our rights.

Tom Gresham
-------------------------------