Have the American Gunowners unfairly condemned Jim Zumbo?

Question

Or is the American gunowners' backlash justified? Earlier we asked (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArKxgJBe5L8n5gdTlH.jizfsy6IX?qid=20070219154839AAteCSu ) what Jim Zumbo said that ticked off Remington Arms and Outdoor Life. Today on MSNBC.com, an article from the Washington Post (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17307316/ ) seems to make Zumbo out as the victim, claiming he was sacrificed to prevent a rift between American hunters and Americans that own firearms that the "ANTI'S" call assault weapons. Personally, I shoot an AR in competition, and am building an AR-based spacegun as a Match Rifle. I know his comments on these "terrorist rifles" did not leave a favorable impression with me.

Has the gunowning community been too harsh with this writer? Has the NRA used this instance to paint a wrong impression of the intentions of the gunowning community? Or has Mr. Zumbo merely illuminated a rift that has been hidden between hunters, competitors, and collectors?

There are many excellent answers here. We do not have a preconceived answer that we are looking for. Because of the quality of answers, we have decided to allow the answers to go to voting.

Thank you for your answers.

Good luck and good shooting!

Answer 1

No.

Your typical AR or AK owner supports Zumbo's right to keep and bear whatever gun he chooses. In the past, there was talk of "sniper rifle" legislation which would have banned many common hunting rifles, and AR/AK owners spoke out against it. AR/AK owners fight for EVERYONE'S right to bear arms.

Zumbo, on the other hand, flipped his fellow gun owners the bird, with both hands, when he called ARs and AKs "terrorist rifles." He licked his finger and stuck it in the political wind, and seeing that anti-gunners were now likely to be pushing for anti-gun legislation, decided to throw AR/AK owners to the congressional wolves in a feeble attempt to save what HE loves--hunting rifles.

In short, Zumbo tried to fukc us. So fukc him.

Answer 2

I don't think it was unfair. Of all people he should've known that gunowners are sensitive to comments like he made especially that the Republicans lost power in the Senate. 10 years of the Clinton Ban was long enough and they're still trying to bring it back (Law Enforcement Act of 2007) with even more guns added like the M1 carbine, Mini 14 etc. so gunowners felt that comments from a well respected writer/hunter were threatening to their right to own the firearms he called "terrorist" weapons.

Although he's made his apology, he still needs to prove he's sincere. We'll see how that hunting trip with Nugent goes. I think gunowners will eventually let him back in the "loop" but I'm not sure how long it will take. Prominent "gun people" need to realize that hunters and gunowners that don't necessarily hunt are on the same side. Remington and the NRA cater to these people so I can understand why they didn't want to get on the Zumbo wagon

Answer 3

JIm Zumbo is guilty of helping divide hunters, target shooters, and collectors. But I really do not think that he had malevolence in his heart when he made those reckless comments. He is not the "great satan"-Rebecca Peters of IANSA gets that award. Personally, I think that a bolt-action gun with a good trigger would be a multitude of times better than any semi-auto on prairie dogs. Maybe we need to-IN OUR OWN GUN WORLD-get back to matching guns to the specific task. We have been over-marketed to by the industry. Sure, you can use a S&W model 36 to target shoot. I am not going to stop you. But I think that you are kind of stupid and ignorant. Sorry, but get a larger revolver with a real barrel for the task. What I am trying to say is that we are such gun-nuts that we want to apply every gun to every situation out of fear that some will be stigmatized (Zumbo is also guilty of stigmatizing-by the way). Look, I think AKs and SKSs are potmetal junk-not terrorist weapons-just low class. Sorry again. I own handguns and rifles of quality and I think ol' Zumbo blogged after a few hits of Maker's Mark and is really sorry for it. We cannot afford to exile our own so easily if we are to fend off attacks from the outside. Zumbo should have not been treated so harshly by his employers. Jim got the message. By the way, I think ARs are great guns (I used to own an Armalite)-even if I think that they are more suitable in the target shooting category than in some hunting expedition. If Zumbo truly means what he wrote, then I strongly disagree with him and would warn him not to play "good gun-bad gun". I would not give him the fring squad treatment. Zumbo is just as guilty as some redneck (flannel shirt/"CAT" ballcap/bad teeth/intoxicated) using an chi-com type 56 AK ( no safety glasses/plugs/common sense) shooting up his old car that is on cinder blocks. They might just deserve each other.

Answer 4

Jim Zumbo is entitled to his opinion, and the NRA, hunters and other gun owners are entitled to their opinion of Jim Zumbo. I do believe that there is a rift between SOME hunters and various gun owners. I've come across several avid hunters who hate handguns for instance and would be happy if they were all banned. I find this disingenuous at best and absolutely hypocritical at anything else.

Zumbo made his bed, now let him sleep in it.

Answer 5

Zumbo made a Jumbo Dumbo remark and is paying dearly for it. I hope he learned an important lesson from it. Too harsh? Possibly. But he deserved at least harsh reprimands. I don't actually agree with using ARs or AKs for hunting, but I have no right to tell anyone else not to. They are guns and guns are used for hunting. I just read an article about very long range hunting with (single shot) .50 BMG rounds, so a pipsqueak AR should be OK, at least for varmints.

Answer 6

We live in a country that believes in our constitutional rights.
The right to bear arms is in fact one of them, and a very important one at that.
But let us not over look the right of others to their freedom of speech, for that to is very important all so.
I do not like some of what Jim Zumbo said.

= Here is where I get stoned by the AK 47 worshipers.=
I do believe the people have a right to their AK47 and others weapons in that classification.
But I firmly appose the improper use and abuse of these style weapons.
Many, not all but too many take them to the woods for deer and depend on the high capacity magazines to make up for lack of skill and accuracy.
This is wrong!
I my self have a Mini 14 that does not go out for game animals big or small.
The 223 is a viable varmint and self defense round. But like the 7.62 x 39 limited.
= Now the 223 worshipers may stone me =
I my self hunt with the 223 and know it’s ability in my hands.
I shoot varmints at long range with the 223 in bolt action and single shot the Mini 14 is for close range 150 yards or less for varmints.
I’m talking in the hands of the people that have neither the range time or understanding of these bullets abilities and inabilities.
We cant stop the inexperienced from hunting, that would be wrong, but we need to limit the weapons allowed in the big game woods, to those that will do the job even in the hands of inexperienced hunters.
I am a hunter that has heard the sound of the semi auto AK47 and its kind rattle off 10 to 15 rounds in the deer woods.
with my time in the military as a front line combatant you never forget distinctive sound of the AK47 and its 7.62 x 39.
We need to stop the spray and pray operation going on in the woods.
The deer are not our enemy and even the enemy deserves better treatment then that.

The true hunter does not need this style of weapon in the big game field of hunting.

That my use of the freedom of speech,

D58

Answer 7

I would have thought Jim would be smarter than to take a divisive stance on the anti side. The assault ban is no different than the saturday night special ban, supposedly a way to keep high use weapons out of hands of criminals but it did not. It created more criminals. Allows for more restrictive gun laws. A chink in the armor so to speak. YOu cannot give an inch on gun laws and you MUST stand up for the rights of the target shooters and the 3 gun challenge shooters and collectors!

Answer 8

I don't believe in any restrictions contrary to the intent of the 2nd. amendment.

I particularly dislike the trumped up idiotic arguments as were used in the Calif. ban on weapons of .50, really stupid.

Mr. Zumbo certainly did stick his foot in his mouth, but that is his right under the 1 st. amendment. I think his apology should be accepted if for no other reason than that the anti-gun people are having a field-day with the over-reaction to his statement and making people who support the 2nd. amendment look lie a bunch of mindless yahoos.

I happen to agree that "assault weapons" are silly, but I support the right of people who like them to won them. When the Army took my M-16 away and gave me something made by Matel, I guess I developed a prejudice. Particularly when I compared the accuracy of it compared to the 7.62 NATO that the U.S. had insisted everybody go to.

Whether for sport, for just the pleasure of ownership or for the ability to resist a police-state, no restrictions should be placed on firearms ownership.

Answer 9

Zumbo did exactly what the gun banners have been doing for decades: trying to define good guns and bad guns. Since the gun banner's tactic is to get one kind banned, then decide that another kind is also bad and try to get that one banned, and don't want to stop until only criminals and the government have firearms, it is reasonable for gun owners who have been watching politics for more than 6 months to see Zumbo as aligning himself with the anti-gun forces.

Worse yet, he played right into their circular reasoning:
Ugly black guns are evil because they have no sporting purpose and it's wrong to use them for a sporting purpose like hunting because they're evil.

Answer 10

I completely agree with Guncrazy.

If anything, I think it was bad timing. With the AWOT, the AWB, and the recent elections, Gun control is a hot issue.
Like Beanie Sigel said, "Either roll with the clique, or get found in the ditch". Basically if you are going to be in it, be in it 100%. If not, you can consider yourself the enemy.

I was pissed because although I am not an avid hunter, I don't knock anyone who does. I own AR's and he suggested that I am a mentally challenged terrorist.