"Zumbo" revisited - why can't we seem to repeat that epic act of activism?


PDA






Green Lantern
July 12, 2008, 08:22 PM
Just something I was thinking about today. Looking back at the massive impact we had when we concentrated on Mr. Zumbo for his..."unjudicicous" comments about black rifles...

Well...why can't we do the same thing with other antis*?

*Nothing against Mr. Z currently, as he seems to have "repented..."

But one thinks that if we collectively could get him sacked almost overnight...we could do other things.

But, maybe not? Here are the facts as I see them in the Zumbo affair:

It happened VERY quickly. In fact, I can't claim any credit for Zumbo's fall from grace. I didn't jump right on things, and it was all over with before I could collect my thoughts and put MY $0.02 in....

Not EVERY gun-owner was "on board" with it...Then and now, not everyone in the firearms community agrees with how Zumbo was treated. Though it would seem that the majority feel as I do: You're entitled to your opinion, but when that opinion wrongly condemns and damns a group of people...expect to face consequences.

Ultimately what I feel may have had the most to do with it: It was "gun-related" businesses that employed Zumbo and thus sacked him. Could that have been why it was done, and done fast? Do gun-related businesses have more respect for people from the "gun culture" as a whole?

After all - there are plenty of hunting magazines and plenty of gun/ammo makers out there...

But so to, are there plenty of insert providers of product/service provided by "antis" as well... Hmm, hmm, and hmm.

*******************
I guess there are plenty of examples out there of people/companies out there that NEED "Zumboing" but for whatever reason, we haven't been able to get results. The bit where Pepsi honored a noted anti-gun activist on the back of their Doritos bags comes to mind. For that matter, I guess I could just search for "Zumbo" for more if needed...

Whether or not you agree with it, you can't argue that the ouster of one Jim Zumbo was one of the finest examples of what us "gun people" can DO when we work together on one goal.

And regardless of Heller, Castle Doctrine, CCW, et cetera...for us to protect our right to keep and bear arms, I feel strongly that this is something we need to be able to do AGAIN when needed. So, I feel it would behoove us to know exactly how!

If you enjoyed reading about ""Zumbo" revisited - why can't we seem to repeat that epic act of activism?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
22-rimfire
July 12, 2008, 09:03 PM
Mr. Zumbo worked for Outdoor Life Magazine and had Remington Arms Company as one of their dominant sponsors. When the uproar occurred, both Outdoor Life and Remington were faced with a difficult choice. They made the hard business choice for the benefit of their customer base. I understand that and I know Mr. Zumbo understood that as well.

I feel sure he felt betrayed. How could he not feel that way? He misjudged the impact of EBR owners have in the marketplace as well in relation to his employment or sponsors. Firearms manufacture, marketing and sale is a businees.

Mr. Zumbo was quite successful in the outdoor writing industry and is one of the few that actually could earn a good living doing it. His career was lynched for his comments and there was a great deal of piling on.

I doubt gun owners or 2A supporters will have the kind of impact they did with Mr. Zumbo with most politicans or people who truly are trying to bring about legislation that restricts firearm ownership. I'm glad the NRA takes the lead in that front as they bring to bear collective influence of gun owners.

bogie
July 12, 2008, 09:12 PM
Because it is a lot easier to tear out the guts of our own, than to put the same effort into a corporate or legislative body.

Green Lantern
July 12, 2008, 09:21 PM
Because it is a lot easier to tear out the guts of our own, than to put the same effort into a corporate or legislative body.

Care to elaborate?

The only two ways I can understand that would be that:

1) One man is easier to focus on than MANY legislators...especially given that each gun owner really only has SIGNIFICANT "pull" with the ones s/he elects.

2) Since Zumbo was arguably "one of us," there was more anger coming from gun owners who felt betrayed by Zumbo's comments...

...?

yesit'sloaded
July 12, 2008, 09:23 PM
If I remember correctly, he referred to the AR15 as a "terrorist rifle". Calling gun owners terrorists is a no-no if you are a gun owner. We don't eat our own Bogie, rather we kick out the cannibals among us that would feed off of us for their own glory and profit. Ask Bill Ruger how that worked.

22-rimfire
July 12, 2008, 09:26 PM
The only good thing to come out of that whole affair for me personally was that it made me look closely at my attitudes regarding EBR's.

Soybomb
July 12, 2008, 09:26 PM
It was "gun-related" businesses that employed Zumbo and thus sacked him. Could that have been why it was done, and done fast? Do gun-related businesses have more respect for people from the "gun culture" as a whole?
I think thats a no-brainer but of course, gun related companies make their money off gun owners. Gun owners are only a percent of the customers at other businesses. The local greenpeace chapter might write nasty letters to the nascar people about their polluting races but if they're not buying the tickets to start with who really cares?

oldfart
July 12, 2008, 09:34 PM
There is one other thing: Outraged gun owners weren't required to do much to sink Zumbo's ship except perhaps type an e-mail or two. In most other cases they're expected to show up, demonstrate and type e-mails. We're basically a pretty lazy lot and more than a bit willing to let "the other guy" do the heavy lifting.

Green Lantern
July 12, 2008, 09:37 PM
I think thats a no-brainer but of course, gun related companies make their money off gun owners. Gun owners are only a percent of the customers at other businesses.

Heh, does seem pretty "duh-worthy" in retrospect...

Still, maybe the key would be to reaching out to NON gun-owners to help on some things?

Like I said, I was GOING to protest Zumbo. But I don't hunt, read Outdoor Life, nor have any particular preference for Remington arms or ammo.

I would have told them that I MIGHT buy their products if they deal with Zumbo. In fact, I got a subscription to OL, and an 870 later on...:D

22-rimfire
July 12, 2008, 09:44 PM
Ask Bill Ruger how that worked.

Yeah, it really worked. A sizable proportion of the recommendations for a "new revolver" here on the forum is buy a Ruger. It really worked. Oh yeah... Smith & Wesson... locks, their sales don't show much effect either.

RonE
July 12, 2008, 09:49 PM
Ultimately what I feel may have had the most to do with it: It was "gun-related" businesses that employed Zumbo and thus sacked him. Could that have been why it was done, and done fast? Do gun-related businesses have more respect for people from the "gun culture" as a whole?

It wasn't just "gun related", it was much deeper than that. Zumbo expressed an opinion that certain rifles had no place in the sporting/shooting/hunting environment. That went against the grain of hunting, shooting and sporting arms owners, including even people that might share the same opinion but recognized the right to hunt with anything you desired so long as you were sporting. Now, the companys that fired him or dropped him as their spokesman did so not only because of his published opinion but also because of the public outcry.

Here is why Zumbo got fired and more or less run out of town on a rail... The public outcry against him was not the public per se, but rather the gun owning, shooting, collecting, hunting public which were the entire customer base for the industry that let him go. The entire customer base. Yes, there were gun owners that though it was no big deal and perhaps in hind sight, it might not have been but the right to keep and bare arms is dear and when one opens by his opinion a doubt about the need to own, keep or bare any particular arm, the people who want nothing more than to protect thier livelyhood by satisfying their customer base had to do something and do something fast.

jaholder1971
July 12, 2008, 10:00 PM
Zumbo was a Fudd, plain ans simple.

It really doesn't help your career when you bash advertisor's products: Bushmaster, Armalite, Rock River and REmington all make AR's and spend lots of $$$ on advertising.

Yeah, take a look at Remington's new semi auto varmint gun and ask why they cut him loose?

AndyC
July 12, 2008, 10:04 PM
For me, it was because it was a shooter, not an anti, that was trying to throw EBR-owners like me under the bus and I'd had enough of that selfish, ignorant BS. Yeah, I felt massively betrayed and outraged.

Robert Hairless
July 12, 2008, 10:04 PM
We're basically a pretty lazy lot and more than a bit willing to let "the other guy" do the heavy lifting.

Hey, let's be fair! Although the overwhelming number of gun owners are indeed lazy freeloaders, they are that way because they have principles.

As I and others have pointed out frequently, there are about 80 million gun owners but only about 4 million members of the NRA. So 95% of gun owners are being carried by the 5% who give even minimal support to the major gun rights organization in this country.

That is where the principles enter the picture. I enjoy the protests that follow posts like this one because each of those "principles" is a hoot. It's hard to pick a winner because just when I feel I've heard them all, there's at least one new one that's funnier than the rest.

But in the end, after the flurry of principles, the fact remains that only 5% of gun owners in this country do more than talk. The other 95% are not people I would want on my side in a fight anyway.

yesit'sloaded
July 12, 2008, 10:17 PM
The Ruger family no longer owns Ruger.

Technosavant
July 12, 2008, 10:33 PM
It isn't hard at all to convince Remington or other firearm related companies that gun owners are angry and they need to change things. If gun owners quit buying their stuff, they're hosed, plain and simple.

However, Pepsi and other similar companies have FAR larger customer bases than those of active gun owners. We're not the vast majority of their sales. We're a blip in the market.

And that's why it is harder to influence their policies.

Jeff White
July 12, 2008, 11:15 PM
I can give you some insight on what happened. I was in the Pat Rogers Carbine Course that Denny Hansen, Rich Lucibella and Pat set up for Jim Zumbo. I heard Jim Zumbo's side of the story directly from him at dinner at the end of training day one.

I'll start with the posts I made in the staff forum at the time of the class:

The Zumbo Carbine Course Day 1
I'm able to access a computer here at the motel.

Today was training day one of the special SWAT magazine Pat Rogers Carbine Operators Course for Jim Zumbo.

Got to the Boone County Sheriffs Department Range here in Lebanon IN about 7am. I was warmly greeted by Sheriff Ken Campbell. I've known Ken for about 5 years and he exemplifies how relations should be between the firearms owning public and the police. Ken sponsors nationally known trainers like Pat, Louis Awerbuck, Steve Tarani, Shep Kelly, Dean Caputo at his factility and all of the classes are open to the public. Ken is an adjunct instructor at Gunsite and teaches a couple of off site Gunsite courses at his facility every year. When Ken gives his welcome briefing, he states that he hosts these course for the public because the more knowlede the public has in these matters the better it is for everyone. Someday one of the graduates of a course at Boone county may sit on a jury or grand jury looking into a use of force incident and the knowledge they gained in the course may bring about a better outcome.

I was a wondering who would be in this class. When Pat invited me he made it clear that the plan was to present a cross setion of the types of people who train with him. There are three police officers in the class, Brent Wheat (SWAT columnist and Lebanon IN PD officer), Brad Sanderson of the Boone County Sheriffs Department and myself. There are two physicians, two nurses who are high power competitors (both female), a real estate agent (also female), a retired LTC from the Marines who is now military sales director for Aimpoint, a couple of business people, Ken Campbell's father in law who builds his own black powder cannons, the corporate chef for the Lone Star restaurant chain, Pat's significant other who is a scientist who works for a DOD agency on night vision projects and Rich Lucibella and, of course, Jim Zumbo.

The course started the exact same way everyone of Pat's carbine classes I have attended starts with a safety lecture, classroom time on the mechanics of running an AR type carbine and Pat's usual colorful stories.

At about 10:00 am we hit the range shooting one shot groups from 3 yards working trigger reset drills. Once everyone was shooting acceptable groups we moved back to the 25 yard line to zero. Zeroing was a relatively painless exercise and we moved back to 50 to confirm the 50 yard zero. After that we moved into controlled pairs, hammers and failure drills.

Broke for lunch, and upon return we worked transitions, and handguns. We then worked kneeling positions and the non standard response.

The course is moving a little slower then some of them I've attended but it's entirely due to the skill level of the students. Last year the course was mostly SWAT guys and military and we moved much faster. All total I fired a little over 200 rounds through my carbine and 50 or so with my pistol. Last year we hit almost 400 rounds on TD1.

Jim Zumbo still seems to be a little in shock over what happened to his life. He's never done this type of shooting. Pat's course can be pretty physical. It takes a lot to stand on the line hour after hour and it took it's toll on everyone. Zumbo hung in there. By late afternoon when I was sore and hurting, he was still there with no complaints and he's 11 years older then I am. Tonight at dinner I asked him how he enjoyed himself today and he said he was having fun. He can shoot. His manipulation skills are not good, but that's to be expected since this is his first experience with this type of shooting. He has videotaped some of the class for a TV show.

My personal gut feeling is that he really didn't intend his blog to come out the way it it did. At dinner we discussed the demise of fox hunting in the UK. He spoke very strongly and I judged it to be sincere (and I like to think I can judge that because people lie to me all the time at work) about how the same forces that ended fox hunting in the UK are at work here in the US. Right now my gut feeling is that Zumbo is guilty of the same thing we all are guilty of at times, instead of keeping quiet lest someone think you a fool, he turning on his computer and confirmed it.

Tomorrow I intend to ask him directly about it.

I'll try to post TD2's report tomorrow night. In the meantime, lets keep this in the staff forum.


Day 2


Today went a little faster. We started with a grouping exercise at 50 yards to make sure no one's sights had moved. A couple shooters had to readjust and then we were back on track. We worked multiple targets shooting roadhouse rules and box drills. Then Pat introduced his non-standard response which is firing seven to nine rounds COM into what you can see of the target. Once non-standard response had been introduced to the class we fired Pat's wave of death exercise. In that exercise everyone faces either the right or left side of the range at the indoor ready. When the shooter in front of you turns his/her head to acquire the target you begin your turn and fire. Done properly the sound starts with one rifle and builds to a peak in the middle then slows as the wave moves down the line. The purpose of the drill is to get you shooting on a visual cue. To give you an idea of the skill level in the class, I am shooting on target number 4 of an 8 target firing line. On the first few iterations I was the first person in my firing order to get rounds down range. Of course this is the 5th time I've trained with Pat and I borrowed the drill from him to use in the training I conduct. So I'm a little ahead of the learning curve compared to the less experienced shooters.

We broke for lunch about 11:30. After lunch we shot at 100 yards. Out of the five times I've taken this class, this is only the second time we ever fired at 100 yards.

The next exercise was shooting on the move. We did several iterations dry, and then live. We worked multiple targets and shooting on the move the rest of the day. I fired 420 rounds of 5.56 and 7 rounds of .45 today.

I would have made it through the day without going to the pistol at all, except Pat asked Rich and the shooter to his right to continue firing a non standard response during a shoot on the move exercise until they reached the 5 yard line where we were to stop. Pat was filming them. When you fire that exercise you dress on the shooter to your right out of the corner of your eye as an instructor is walking down the right side of the line and makes certain the line stops at the proper time. Somehow the instructions were misunderstood and those two continued firing and moving almost all the way to the target. I was dressing on Rich out of the corner of my eye so I kept moving too. Ended up running the carbine dry and transitioning to my pistol to keep the fire up. Shot it to slide lock. The up side was I didn't throw any rounds that drill .

Dinner was prepared by the chef in the class right on the range. Steak, zucchinni, asparagas, all on the grill. Baby potatoes, potato salad and baked beans were also on the menu. All courtesy of Rich Lucibella and SWAT Magazine.

Rich is a fun guy to be around. I shoot next to him. He's running an 18" AR that Greg Sullivan built him with a SureFire suppressor and a Springfield XD in .45.. And I have to give him credit, he's training as he intends to fight. He's struggled for two days with pulling magazines from his pocket. I asked him if he wanted to borrow some tactical gear and he told me that he is not likely to get in a gunfight with tactical gear on, so he wants to train with what he'll likely have available. Sounds almost like me.....Matt, Rich says hi.

I talked to Jim Zumbo today about the blog entry. He says it was a combination of fatigue, three glasses of red wine and his publisher's guidance to post controversial things in the blog. We discussed how evil black rifles with normal capacity magazines were the tip of the spear in the war to keep our guns. He also stated that there are a lot of hunters who believe what he wrote. From my interactions with them, I know he's right.

I don't know if someone has given him his television show back, but he's been taping a lot of things that he wants to put on his show. I think Denny Hansen's plan to use this as a way to build a bridge between the different factions of the shooting community might just work out.

Jeff

Day 3

Today we started at 8 am, back on the 50 yard line verifying zero. I guess it takes some people awhile to figure out little things like witness marks on the screws to your optics so you can tell nothing moved. A few people had to make sight adjustments.

The class stayed at the 50 yard line and did a drill where we shot 2 standing, 2 kneeling and two prone. Four iterations of that drill and we moved to the 25 yard line and worked on speed reloads. Fire two rounds standing, speed reload on the way down to kneeling and two rounds from kneeling. Then we moved to 5 rounds slow fire into the head.

After that it was back on the 15 yard line with handguns working failure drills. Back to the carbines and worked shooting while moving.

Then it was play time. I doubted that Jim was having as much fun as he told me he was having on day 2 because it's hard work and was a whole new ball game for him. Quite frankly he struggled. After we fired the last drill of the day, we broke out the full autos. After a brief introduction on how to stand and brace, we put a MK18 (which is a 10" barreled M4 variant built at the Naval Weapons Center in Crane Indiana). Two short bursts to get the feel of it them an entire 30 round magazine on full auto. Jim was grinning ear to ear, and shouted (Art's gramma needs to plug her ears) F**k me twice, that was fun!!! We had several full auto weapons for him to play with, the MK18, an M4A1 my PD's M16A1, an MP5, a Glock 18 and an M249 SAW. Then we ended stopped shooting. Jim was presented with a large stuffed Elmer Fudd holding an M4 instead of a shotgun. He insisted that everyone in the class sign it and he said it would go in his office. There were some interviews done for Jim's TV show and quite a bit of video was shot. I wasn't interviewed. I got the impression that he wanted to focus on what Pat calls earth people, not soldiers or cops. And that's probably better for the message we're trying to put out. I was in a lot of the video that was shot, but who knows what will make the show.

BTW the Glock 18 is now my favorite Glock in the world. I dumped an entire magazine into the 8" COM of Pat's target from 7 yards in about half a second. you have to lean into it like a shotgun, and I weigh in at about 250, but I found it very controllable.

I can't say enough about Rich Lucibella's generosity and commitment to our fight. I hate to think of what he spent to put this course together.

There was a lot missing from Pat's normal POI and he apologized to me several times about the pace of the class. I told him that I understood that it was not so much a training opportunity as it was an opportunity to build a bridge between different aspects of the shooting community and that I was honored to be invited.

I'll post more later, I promised Mary I'd take her to dinner....

Jeff

Jeff White
July 12, 2008, 11:19 PM
I don't think that our activism would have been as successful with someone who wasn't one of our own. I do believe that the entire episode did a lot to unite various factions of the shooting community.

And I honestly believe that Jim Zumbo understands that we have to all hang together or we'll surely hang separately.

Jeff

22-rimfire
July 13, 2008, 12:03 AM
Thank you Jeff for posting that. I don't recall reading it over at TFL.

Leif Runenritzer
July 13, 2008, 02:41 AM
Yeah, it really worked. A sizable proportion of the recommendations for a "new revolver" here on the forum is buy a Ruger. It really worked. Oh yeah... Smith & Wesson... locks, their sales don't show much effect either.

Smith and Wesson's betrayal had nothing to do with locks:

"From 1987 to 2001 Tomkins PLC, a British company, owned Smith & Wesson. ... In March 2000, Smith & Wesson signed an agreement with the Clinton Administration in order to avoid lawsuits. The company agreed to numerous safety and design standards, as well as limits on the sale and distribution of their products. Gun clubs and gun rights groups responded to this agreement almost instantly by initiating large-scale boycotts of Smith & Wesson by refusing to buy their new products and flooding the firearms market with used S&W guns, cutting into their market share. ... On May 11, 2001, Saf-T-Hammer Corporation acquired Smith & Wesson Corp. from Tomkins PLC for US$15 million, a fraction of the US$112 million originally paid by Tomkins. Saf-T-Hammer also assumed US$30 million in debt, bringing the total purchase price to US$45 million." -Wikipedia

Sounds like a win to me. Now i would happily buy a Smith and Wesson product.

22-rimfire
July 13, 2008, 08:48 AM
I know all that, but they still put on the locks today. The lock wouldn't stop me from choosing one of their firearms new. And Ruger still does not sell 20 round magazines for the Mini-14/30 except on a reduced basis primarily geared toward law enforcement needs. The only things that has changed with S&W is they have magazines larger than 10-round capacity I believe. I have never been interested in S&W pistols.

The betrayal was by the Clinton Administration. To this day, I don't know how Bill Clinton ducked responsibility on the Waco affair. If George Bush did this, people would have been all over him.

wheelgunslinger
July 13, 2008, 09:17 AM
Thanks for posting that, Jeff. It's always nice to have a primary source as opposed to reading something by some guy you don't know in a magazine.

I think the whys about Zumbo have been covered pretty well here.
I have a great respect for Mr. Zumbo since it was he and a couple of others that inspired me to stop driving nails for a living and pursue a degree so I could become a writer.

It's an interesting situation though. Instead of instantly saying "wait, what?" to him about his blog, giving him a chance to retract and accepting his apology, we collectively burned him at the stake.

If anything, I think that next time we need to exercise more restraint as a whole. Someone with Zumbo's skill and command of prose is an asset in a world increasingly looking for something worth reading on the web.

As for antis, I think the same applies. Instantly dogpiling the loose tongues for an affront makes us look like what they think we are: a bunch of uneducated kneejerk reacting rednecks with guns.

A measured and well crafted response will always be better, no matter the enemy.

Green Lantern
July 13, 2008, 11:30 AM
Yeah, it really worked. A sizable proportion of the recommendations for a "new revolver" here on the forum is buy a Ruger. It really worked.

-A fair point there. I for one remain a stalwart Ruger boycotter (though I'm optimistic about things currently), but I've seen whenever I mention it, I am VERY much in the minority...

Which begs another question...Why did we almost unanimously condemn Zumbo for his ujustified statement, and yet at the same time almost unanimously* "overlook" Bill Ruger's?

*Well, that's MY view, though I could be wrong. And maybe more people have let their animosity towards the company die along with Bill Ruger. Myself, I'd prefer some kind of official "disavowment" of those statements before letting bygones be bygones, but anyway..

You know, I take GREAT offense to any elitist that fancies me a criminal just because I desire to own STANDARD capacity magazines.

Could it be because people liked their Ruger guns more than they liked Jim Zumbo's commentating?

Do more people own Black Rifles today than "standard capacity" firearms (of ALL makes) then?

jerkface11
July 13, 2008, 11:41 AM
I never could figure out the people who claim Zumbo is one of us. Zumbo is a hunter not a shooter. He isn't one of us he's just another FUD. His CYA halfhearted apology wasn't enough to make up for his statements either.

jaholder1971
July 13, 2008, 11:46 AM
I talked to Jim Zumbo today about the blog entry. He says it was a combination of fatigue, three glasses of red wine and his publisher's guidance to post controversial things in the blog. We discussed how evil black rifles with normal capacity magazines were the tip of the spear in the war to keep our guns. He also stated that there are a lot of hunters who believe what he wrote. From my interactions with them, I know he's right.

In Vino, Veritas

May he retire writing obituaries for the local PennyPower.

22-rimfire
July 13, 2008, 12:06 PM
The majority of the people throwing stones at Mr. Zumbo didn't even know who he was until he made his blunder. I read Outdoor Life and have for a long time, and yes, I hunt.

Most people didn't even know about Bill Ruger's contributions. Access to the internet and these forums have changed a great deal since 1990, even 1998. A lot changed in the 1990's. I was reading an article in a magazine about gun forums around 2005. I had internet access and I checked them out. Prior to that, I didn't even know they existed.

I bought my first Ruger handgun, a Mark II, in 1989. Then I bought a 10/22. Prior to that, I considered Ruger to make substandard or what I called 2nd Tier handguns. Back it up 10 years and I would not have even considered any Ruger firearm; I bought Colt and Smith & Wesson handguns because they were better and I could afford them.

Bill Ruger is dead. Let him rest.

Jerkface11 said: I never could figure out the people who claim Zumbo is one of us. Zumbo is a hunter not a shooter. He isn't one of us he's just another FUD. His CYA halfhearted apology wasn't enough to make up for his statements either.

I disagree with you. If a name fits....

Z71
July 13, 2008, 12:24 PM
I always thought old Jim Zumbo was a "hunting rights" man, and not a "gun rights" man.

I had read his work in outdoor life for years, and seen his outdoor channel show, and liked his style.

That said, I had met him in real life a couple times at hunting shows and he came off arrogant in person(which could be a bad day thing?). He just didn't come off as a person who cared much about anything except what was important to him personaly.

He stuck his foot in his mouth and paid the price. Did it to himself, and started making excuses. Right or wrong, he got what he got. He should be man enough to deal with it.

Now Imus is a whole different story............

22-rimfire
July 13, 2008, 12:37 PM
I think Mr. Zumbo was certainly more interested in hunting. He wrote primarily about hunting. But firearms are used to hunt with.

I have heard others say he was arrogant. That does not surprise me. That doesn't mean I would try to hurt him, but I doubt we would have gotten along very well.

The whole affair helped to unify hunters and shooters in their 2A beliefs. It also made outdoor writers cringe and take a hard look at what they had written in the past as none wanted to have their livelihood stripped from them over something like this. The ones that didn't particularly like EBR's in a hunting environment just stopped mentioning them and would not discuss them openly.

Green Lantern
July 13, 2008, 12:48 PM
I think that MOST of us would agree that there is nothing whatsoever wrong in NOT liking EBRs!

However, making the ridiculous claim that EBRs have no place in hunting...THAT is wrong.

Z71
July 13, 2008, 12:50 PM
I really didn't address the whole topic I guess.

As far as why shooters can't "Zumbo" the anti-gun crowd.

Well, I suppose we are doing it to an extent. I try my level best to not put a dollar in any business or corporation that presents itself as anti-gun or anti-second amendment.

I do email my displeasure about those topics whenever the opportunity presents. However the shooting public just don't have the "hitting power" against politicians and goverment idiots, or anti-gun policy corporations/storefronts as they did with Remington!

Jim Zumbo's sponsers had a lot to lose. But I do think the hunting and shooting public pack considerable whallop. Just doesn't have nearly as spectacular effect as it did with poor Zumbo.

22-rimfire
July 13, 2008, 01:18 PM
I think that MOST of us would agree that there is nothing whatsoever wrong in NOT liking EBRs!

However, making the ridiculous claim that EBRs have no place in hunting...THAT is wrong.

I can agree with that. I think EBR's (actually AR's) are a great platform for varmint hunting. People need to choose a caliber that does the job in a sportsmanlike manner rather than making something fit because they like 'em.

I want to pickup one of the new Remingtons or a Smith personally, just because. I doubt I'll hunt with them as I have other firearms to choose from. But they are fun to shoot, no question about that! For me that is what it is all about. It is not a statement of my 2A support.

jerkface11
July 13, 2008, 01:43 PM
Zumbo meant what he said. He only ever apologized for saying it he didn't recant it. So he basically offered a Bill Clinton apology he was only sorry he got caught. That isn't good enough.

22-rimfire
July 13, 2008, 01:53 PM
I think there is little doubt that Mr. Zumbo prefers traditional firearms for hunting. That does not make him anti-2A. His phrasing could have been better however in his blog back when it happened. For that, he paid a HUGE price.

Z71
July 13, 2008, 01:58 PM
I do think old Jim could have saved himself if he had been less hard-headed, and more apologetic!

Jerkface11 is right. He meant what he said. Thought his hunting public would rally to his support, and that his prominance would sheild him I guess?

The hunting public just went to their gun safe and made sure their battle rifle was safe and rust free. Then emailed Outdoor Life, and Remington, Gerber, etc!

He adopted a sort of minimal apology/wait for the storm to blow over attitude. I think he never had a clue what was going to hit him!

By the time it dawned on him that his self-importance wasn't going to save him, it was far too late!

"A stitch in time saves nine"! Zumbo didn't even have a needle!

Hk91-762mm
July 13, 2008, 02:07 PM
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (AP) - Smith & Wesson is cutting about 15 percent of its work force, blaming slumping sales and a boycott by buyers angry over its gun-safety deal with the government.

The company said Thursday about 125 workers, including some managers, would be laid off within the next week at the company's Springfield, Mass., plant.

``One of the frustrating things for us is that some of the damage has been done by the pro-gun side. Some of the employees leaving here are members of these pro-gun organizations,'' said Ken Jorgensen, a Smith & Wesson spokesman =[I GUESS YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE SCREWWED YOUR WORKERS -huh! ]
===Smith & Wesson's was the nation's biggest handgun maker for years, but Sturm, Ruger & Co. surpassed Smith & Wesson last summer in number of handguns sold.
On Oct. 6, the gunmaker announced it was replacing==>>>> Ed Shultz,<<<== its president since 1992. It named George Colclough, an executive with the company for 25 years, as his replacement.

The next week, Smith & Wesson's British owner, Tomkins PLC, announced that its longtime chief executive, Greg Hutchings, was leaving. David Newlands, who was acting as the non-executive chairman since June, was named to take his place.
ED SHULTZ Went to work for one of the major Lawn machine co.s I think MTD---I tried to find out who as Id LOVE to continue the Damage to him by writing his employer and telling them I dont sell or buy there equip because of ol EDDYS tricks of past !

22-rimfire
July 13, 2008, 02:13 PM
As I recall, Mr. Zumbo wrote a letter afterwards to Congress in relation to a bill that was pending. I believe his name was used in support of an AWB type thing and he responded. He didn't have to.

How many here have the power to write a letter and have it entered in the Congressional record?

jerkface11
July 13, 2008, 02:23 PM
And if he hadn't made his boneheaded comments the gun banners would have had less ammo to use and he wouldn't have had to write them a letter.

22-rimfire
July 13, 2008, 02:38 PM
His comments were certainly boneheaded.

HK: Thanks for digging up that article. I know that the "boycott" had an effect back when the Clinton Admin did their thing and forced Smith & Wesson to comply with their desires. There were lots of product liability law suits going on at that time.

My earlier comment was about sales NOW or actually for last year. Sales were listed on another thread. Smith never took off the locks or changed anything significant after the company was sold. But they do have what I believe to be is an excellent AR rifle now. It seems that once changes are made at the manufacturing level, that there is no going back (again because of liability issues). The lawyers have their way.

It is one of the reasons we need to be vocal about our support of the 2nd Amendment and do our best to not have any more "reasonable gun laws" passed by Congress or at a state level. The states seem to be headed in the other direction now with the NICs check being in place and working. I'm also very skeptical about the newer clauses on mental health or the ramifications to gun owners of making more offenses a felony or crime punishable by a year or more in prison.

torpid
July 13, 2008, 02:40 PM
As I recall, Mr. Zumbo wrote a letter afterwards to Congress in relation to a bill that was pending. I believe his name was used in support of an AWB type thing and he responded. He didn't have to.
How many here have the power to write a letter and have it entered in the Congressional record?

To be fair it was his own damning words that were quoted by the anti-gun forces attempting to push their legislation (as was predicted by the shooting community), and if he was to salvage the remainder of his career, he had no choice but to publicly recant them, or face being a permanent pariah.

Jeff White
July 13, 2008, 06:52 PM
I am convinced that exposure to the other side of the shooting community educated him. I watched the grin on his face get bigger when he dumped the full magazine from the MK18. I personally spoke to him and shot with him.

I am not a hunter. Jim Zumbo is not a combat/self defense/black rifle shooter. But for three days a year ago, we shared a range and we both learned something. Mr. Zumbo learned that black rifles were not just used by the military, the police and neo-revolutionaries. And I learned that if you take someone who isn't interested in fast, accurate, combat type shooting and expose him to it, he'll most likely enjoy himself.

I know that for some of the purists here, nothing will suffice. But there was a bridge built between two branches of the shooting community. It's not a strong bridge yet, but hopefully it will be.

Jim Zumbo didn't have to reach out to us and take Denny Hansen up on his offer. He would have been back at work once the furor over his comments died down. But he did. At 61 years old he jocked up and came to the Boone County Sheriffs department range and did the kind of shooting that he never in his wildest dreams ever thought he would do. And there was no way to fake the ear to ear smile once he started shooting full auto weapons.

The entire shooting community owes Denny Hansen, Pat Rogers and Rich Lucibella their thanks. Footage from the class did make his TV show along with the hunting footage. A whole new audience was exposed to black rifles and they learned that everyday people enjoyed them.

A disaster was turned around and something positive came from it.

Jeff

aquapong
July 13, 2008, 07:23 PM
Remington = big sponsor of the magazine. Remington at the time soon releasing an AR. Remington probably squeezed the magazine to boot Zumbo.

Hk91-762mm
July 13, 2008, 09:08 PM
http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/centerfire_rifles/Model_R-15_VTR.asp

ya KNOW ----Im gona hafta get me one of these things And put the ol colt in storage for awile !!!

anarchris
July 13, 2008, 09:43 PM
a bunch of things coincided, afaik it happened on a weekend that (it seems) everyone was at home.
Also, now the forums I'm on discourage that stuff with rules against using our clout to argue with (for instance DU) other forums.
I notice the activism forum doesn't get looked at as much as general, so I guess a lot of stuff gets ignored that would have received wider scrutiny.

& everybody seemed to just have had enough that weekend, I didn't hear about it till it was over and was miffed about missing it.

So I just called Mayor bloomburg and stated I had a ton of unregistered guns:evil:

another okie
July 13, 2008, 09:55 PM
Both Smith and Wesson and Ruger have different ownership than when they caused the boycotts. As far as I'm concerned, the boycotts are over. Zumbo has gone as far as you can expect anyone to go in this matter. He showed he was open to a new idea, and spoke up when his words were used against ARs.

Green Lantern
July 13, 2008, 10:56 PM
The entire shooting community owes Denny Hansen, Pat Rogers and Rich Lucibella their thanks. Footage from the class did make his TV show along with the hunting footage. A whole new audience was exposed to black rifles and they learned that everyday people enjoyed them.

A disaster was turned around and something positive came from it.

See??? That's what I call a HAPPY ENDING.

Which won't be enough for everyone, I suppose. Those that don't seem to be interested in giving Zumbo a chance to redeem himself, and at the other extreme those that thought we were wrong in the first place...

C'est la vie...

Also, now the forums I'm on discourage that stuff with rules against using our clout to argue with (for instance DU) other forums.

Uh, I thought "flame wars" with other boards were always a no-no...

When hitting a poll or something, it's strongly encouraged to open a new browser window instead of going right from THR to the poll...so they won't know they're being hammered by a pro-gun group...

Soybomb
July 13, 2008, 11:21 PM
He says it was a combination of fatigue, three glasses of red wine and his publisher's guidance to post controversial things in the blog.
Ouch. Say what we want, I imagine most of us have posted something we regret here that seemed like a good idea at the time. Luckily for most of us, no one cares.

Why did we almost unanimously condemn Zumbo for his ujustified statement, and yet at the same time almost unanimously* "overlook" Bill Ruger's?
I was not a part of the firearms community at the time so I may be wrong but I get the feeling that the internet has changed things. If bill ruger were making those statements today instead of 1994, I think things might have been different.

I never could figure out the people who claim Zumbo is one of us. Zumbo is a hunter not a shooter. He isn't one of us he's just another FUD. His CYA halfhearted apology wasn't enough to make up for his statements either.
I can understand the anger at people like Zumbo for throwing us under the bus, but what does this get us? Like it or not Zumbo is one of us. The anti's want all the guns even if the ebr's are first on the chopping block. We need to realize that the hunters are the same boat that we are and we need to make the hunters realize it too. We get nothing from dividing on it. Every time someone takes a zumbo out like Jeff White talks about and makes a positive impression, thats one more for our side. If we're lucky they're someone that has an audience and we get many more votes.

clarence222
July 14, 2008, 12:15 AM
Bill Ruger is dead, and yes Ruger is under new ownership. However there policy on 20 round mini 14 magazines still stands doesn't it

22-rimfire
July 14, 2008, 12:22 AM
I know this is off topic, but tell me about the "new ownership" at Ruger. I know Bill Ruger Jr. is no longer in charge, but some of the others are still there. So enlighten me. Management change or new ownership?

tntwatt
July 14, 2008, 01:01 AM
If anything, I think that next time we need to exercise more restraint as a whole.
Like it or not Zumbo is one of us.

I tend to disagree with both of these statements. We need to maintain a rapid and as severe as possible response to all attacks on gun rights. Especially for those so widely recognized as experts in their respective fields.

Zumbo proved he was not "one of us" when he intentionally made a statement intended to separate himself as a hunter and therefore using firearms for a more "respectable" reason. His statements made it plain that he considered himself separate and in a better class than the average non-hunting gun owner. He tried and failed to do what antis have been trying to do for decades: divide gun owners. What burned him was when all these hunters he expected to agree with him also reconized that if you take away black rifles, hunting rifles will be next.

And yes I've been reading his stuff and hunting for years. He knows his stuff. But he got what he deserved. Compromising basic principles is what loses your rights.

Sit back and do nothing when things like this happen and you will watch your rights disappear right along with your guns.

feedthehogs
July 14, 2008, 08:31 AM
We've all said dumb things, but those in a position of authority in the media are looked to by their readers, listeners as something beyond the u tube stupid people clips.

I think many more would excuse Jim for his blog statement if he had not made excuses, " He says it was a combination of fatigue, three glasses of red wine and his publisher's guidance to post controversial things in the blog" and said something to the effect of " I was wrong in my statements and hurt the gun community and the second amendment."

Certainly a man of his experience and age at the time should have known better and the coresponding consequences a statement like that could have resulted in. After all with age we garner wisdom, not foolishness.

Foolishness is for the young.

When you have losing presidential candidates and advisers claiming they lost because of the gun vote, you can't get much more active than that.

You want gun companies to give up internal locks, go after the politicians pressuring them or passing stupid legislation.

Green Lantern
July 14, 2008, 10:20 AM
Bill Ruger is dead, and yes Ruger is under new ownership. However there policy on 20 round mini 14 magazines still stands doesn't it

As far as I know, you are quite correct!

BTW, I'm only 26 and don't think I was even interested in guns when Ruger made his disparaging remark about "civvies" that want "hi-caps." So what, it still sticks in my craw..

jaholder1971
July 28, 2008, 02:43 AM
Sorry, but Zumbo still comes off as someone who would throw all gunowners under the bus as long as he could continue killing forest creatures. For him, RKBA involves his hunting rights and no one elses.

I've seen too many of his type.

Guntalk
July 28, 2008, 08:26 AM
>>Sorry, but Zumbo still comes off as someone who would throw all gunowners under the bus as long as he could continue killing forest creatures. <<

Really? When was the last time you talked with him?

buzz_knox
July 28, 2008, 08:46 AM
>>Sorry, but Zumbo still comes off as someone who would throw all gunowners under the bus as long as he could continue killing forest creatures. <<

Really? When was the last time you talked with him?


When you spoke with him, did you lay out his three different apologies and ask him to explain the rather significant differences between the three? Is the explanation that we didn't understand him, that he didn't understand what the 2nd Amendment was all about, or that he was drunk and tired? He's offered all three and never retracted one of them.

Did you ask if he'd been advised not to blog about the subject, as has been reported elsewhere?

22-rimfire
July 28, 2008, 10:16 AM
Let it go. I don't know why this keeps coming up. I guess people just like to gripe about something.

If the Zumbo thing still bugs you to the point of loosing sleep, I would just not write him in for president come November. :)

Jeff White
July 28, 2008, 01:15 PM
Buzz,
Unless Tom Gresham has, I would have to say that I'm probably the only person in this thread who has personally spoken to Jim Zumbo about this issue. What was more important to me then his words was his actions. I spent 3 days on the range with him while he learned a totally new type of shooting.

Words mean nothing. I am basing my opinion of him on his actions in that course. Maybe an academy award winning actor could fake the enjoyment he got from dumping a mag from the MK18 on full auto, but the big grin and the exclamation I can't quote here because of the forum rules told me everything I needed to know.

The way I see it, we can either reinforce the bridge that was built between the two shooting communities in April 07 or we can let hard feelings continue to divide us. We have some more battles to fight after Heller. One of the big ones is going to be defining what weapons are in "common use". We are going to need the hunters on our side in this upcoming battle. We can either cross the bridge we built and reach out to them or we can act like spoiled children and cross our arms and hold our breath till we turn blue because they don't see things like we do. The choice is ours. They aren't going to reach across the gap to us, they don't feel threatened, the banners always make a point of pandering to them.

When the battle for defining arms in common use is joined, do we want Jim Zumbo remembering the nurses and physicians and real estate agents and chefs he shot black rifles with in Indiana, and countering the propaganda of the antis, or do we want him indifferent to the issue?

Jeff

buzz_knox
July 28, 2008, 01:26 PM
Maybe an academy award winning actor could fake the enjoyment he got from dumping a mag from the MK18 on full auto, but the big grin and the exclamation I can't quote here because of the forum rules told me everything I needed to know.

Was his grin as big as Charles Schumer's when firing a Tec-9?

I'm not questioning the desire to get him involved, nor am I trying to reopen that battle. I was simply asking whether his statements were ever explained. Mr. Gresham said he talked to him about this matter, and I presumed that was in the context of an interview. I just thought such an interview might have involved presenting the statements.

Thernlund
July 28, 2008, 01:48 PM
Having just breezed over this thread (and having read Jeff's entire post about his interaction with Jim Zumbo)...

Firstly, I think gun owners will rise to the occasion. However, we need an occasion to rise to I think. The kind of effort that went to crucifying Jim Zumbo was out of a perceived immediate need. Activism was required right now. But activism for its own sake just isn't our shtick I think, eh?

As far as Jim Zumbo seeing the light, well, he probably has. I'm not one to hold someone to a screw up they made forever ago so long as they have shown some type of regret and/remorse over it, and done something to make it right.

That said, I think if it came down absolutely having to make a choice, I'm pretty sure he'd sell out "shooters" to save "hunters". I mean come on, the guy is a hunter. I'm sure there are probably some of us who, if put in the corner, would sell out hunting to preserve shooting, eh?

Fortunately, it's mostly only academic. Hunting and shooting are so closely related that it's unlikely that one could be damaged without damaging the other as well, and I think all involved are smart enough to see that. The Zumbo storm was, by Jim Zumbo's own admission, a product of media sensationalism. He may actually feel that way and that's fine. But without pressure from his publisher, I doubt he (or any hunter) would be so stupid as to voice such an opinion.

We're all on the same team kicking for the same goal posts and we all know it, even if we don't completely like it.


-T.

buzz_knox
July 28, 2008, 01:55 PM
Hunting and shooting are so closely related that it's unlikely that one could be damaged without damaging the other as well, and I think all involved are smart enough to see that.

Don't count on it. I've known hunters who were pro-gun control. They supported bills that banned weapons they own.

Too many hunters don't have a clue what the real goal of gun control is.

Thernlund
July 28, 2008, 01:57 PM
Don't count on it. I've known hunters who were pro-gun control. They supported bills that banned weapons they own.

Too many hunters don't have a clue what the real goal of gun control is.

Allow me to rephrase...

"Hunting and shooting are so closely related that it's unlikely that one could be damaged without damaging the other as well, and I think most involved are smart enough to see that."


-T.

Guntalk
July 28, 2008, 02:01 PM
Jeff: I appreciate your insight and your report on shooting with Jim. He has been a friend of mine for about 30 years, so I know him fairly well. Yes, I've talked with him about this -- at length.

There's simply no need to re-open this issue, since there is a small but vocal part of the gun owner population who delights in tearing apart elements of our own, making themselves appear "more pure" or something.

Short version: Jim is not a gun guy. Never pretended to be. Probably owned about four guns. Didn't write about guns. Just a hunter. Spoke from ignorance. ("Ignorance" is not knowing something.") Learned a lesson. Learned about ARs. Began shooting them. Discovered how much fun they are. Got on board. Built a bridge between hunters and shooters. Now serves as a good reminder.

I use his name when I give my talk to outdoor writers (not gun writers) about what the AR-15 is and why they need to know. The message to them is simple. To not know is to be ignorant, and to be ignorant is to look stupid to your readers. Also, it's in their financial interest to know about this stuff. Then we have them shoot. MANY of them come in with the "I don't like *those* kind of rifles" only to leave wanting to know where to buy one. BTW, Jim was at one of those seminars, where he joked that he'd be happy to help me explain about the AR-15. He has a good sense of humor about the whole thing, which is amazing, and it speaks well for the man.

Jeff, you got it right. He's a good guy who screwed up, admitted it, learned from it, and understands that part of his legacy is to serve as a (reluctant) reminder of many things.

buzz_knox
July 28, 2008, 02:07 PM
There's simply no need to re-open this issue, since there is a small but vocal part of the gun owner population who delights in tearing apart elements of our own, making themselves appear "more pure" or something.

Mr. Gresham, I hope you won't count me among that group. As a recovering litigator, words do mean something to me and when a person says a couple of inconsistent things, I want to know if there was an explanation. That was the substance of my question, to find out if he had ever explained the inconsistencies between his explanations of why things happened as they did.

Jeff White
July 28, 2008, 02:08 PM
Was his grin as big as Charles Schumer's when firing a Tec-9?

Buzz,
It was bigger. It was after 2 1/2 days of hard training. Zumbo was 61 years old at the time. You and I were in one of Pat's classes together so I know you know how tired one can be by that stage of the training. The full auto play put new life into him.

As for his explanation, I can only go with what he told me, that was the publisher encouraged him to write controversial things on his blog, he had been hunting all day and was feeling the effects of dinner and three glasses of red wine.

Personally I doubt his comments would have made it past an editor and into Outdoor Life. But given the immediate nature of a blog, there it was, for everyone to see.

Jeff

Dave Workman
July 28, 2008, 05:23 PM
jerkface11 wrote:Zumbo meant what he said. He only ever apologized for saying it he didn't recant it. So he basically offered a Bill Clinton apology he was only sorry he got caught. That isn't good enough.

That's not true. He apologized and also said he was wrong. He said it to me, he said it in a letter and I quoted him.

Dave Workman
July 28, 2008, 05:27 PM
Jeff White wrote:Unless Tom Gresham has, I would have to say that I'm probably the only person in this thread who has personally spoken to Jim Zumbo about this issue. What was more important to me then his words was his actions. I spent 3 days on the range with him while he learned a totally new type of shooting.

No, you're not. I spoke with him a lot, did at least three interviews with him.

Jeff White
July 28, 2008, 05:43 PM
Sorry Dave, I wasn't aware of your interviews. That makes three of us who've personally spoken with the man who have essentially the same impression.

Jeff

Guillermo
August 3, 2008, 11:17 AM
While I have no personal knowledge of Mr. Zumbo, I do of human nature.

His "I was tired" explanation was lame at best and no excuse for calling black rifles "terrorist weapons."

Was that a matter of him playing to an audience or a closely held belief?
I do not know.

Is his regret genuine or is because of loss of business and standing?
I cannot say.

Did he really change his mind or was it a business decision?
Again, I don't know.

Now maybe some of you know him well enough to make these distinctions. Maybe you think that you can see into his soul. I know some believe that they have these powers.

(One fellow claims that he knew Bill Jordon well enough to know that he would like Smith and Wesson's internal lock.)

I am not a mind reader. Just a gun guy looking at the situation from the outside and evaluating the evidence.

As one of the gun community I look at Zumbo as an operative that gave valuable information to the enemy. One who betrayed his people and is now repentant.

I might forgive but I will never forget. And I will never completely trust him.

Especially when I take out my "terrorist weapon."

Guntalk
August 3, 2008, 07:59 PM
>>Was that a matter of him playing to an audience or a closely held belief?<<

It was his belief, as he has said many times. It was what he knew at the time. Now, you can say he SHOULD have known, but we can only know what we know.

Now he owns, shoots and enjoys AR-15s. His beliefs changed as he learned more. This is the way it works for all of us at some time in our lives.

>>Is his regret genuine or is because of loss of business and standing?<<

Since I know Jim pretty well, I know it's genuine, and that he hates getting things wrong. In this case, he was really wrong. In this unusual situation, it hurt him badly to be so poorly informed. He did, however, "cowboy up" and went out and got educated, owned up to his mistakes, and moved on. He now has become quite a promoter of ARs.

>>Now maybe some of you know him well enough to make these distinctions. Maybe you think that you can see into his soul. I know some believe that they have these powers.<<

Usually I ignore such comments, but in this case, I'll address it. When you know someone well, as I do Jim, you have some pretty good insights. I've dined at his home. I've hunted with him several times. I've shared good whiskey with him on many occasions. He's not trying to fool anyone.

>>(One fellow claims that he knew Bill Jordon well enough to know that he would like Smith and Wesson's internal lock.)<

Cute. That was me, but since you have decided to not only misquote me but to misrepresent what I said in a PM, let me just say that you need to read very carefully. I did not say that at all. I knew Bill pretty well. He was a good friend of my father. What I said is that Bill would understand. He understood business decisions. I never said he would like the lock, and to represent it as such is just wrong.

>>Just a gun guy looking at the situation from the outside and evaluating the evidence.<<

Not really. You are ignoring evidence from people in a position to know, and choosing, instead, to maintain the "I'm more pure than others" attitude which only harms the gun rights movement by perpetuating a distrust of our own.

>>As one of the gun community I look at Zumbo as an operative that gave valuable information to the enemy.<<

?? He let them in on the secret that some hunters didn't know much (or anything) about AR-15? Some secret.

>>I might forgive but I will never forget. And I will never completely trust him.<<

That's your choice.

>>Especially when I take out my "terrorist weapon."<<

Then you can join Jim when he's shooting his AR-15. I think you'll find that he doesn't own any terrorist weapons.

The "Zumbo Incident" actually accomplished a lot of good. Many in the gun industry were as clueless as Zumbo about the popularity of black rifles. This thing really shook them up, and they have put their full support behind ARs. They also have expanded their lines, offering us more choices.

Many more shooters -- many of them hunters who had never considered the AR-15 platform -- took up shooting this fun rifle. Now, every maker of ARs is back-ordered for months. These new AR shooters are a potent political force. This is a very good "unintended consequence" of this incident.

All told, I rate the Zumbo Affair as a positive. Jim suffered, and I'm sorry this happened to my friend, but he would be the first to recognize the good which has come from this.

He's a good man who spoke up, screwed up, owned up, manned up, and stood up.

buzz_knox
August 3, 2008, 08:14 PM
It was his belief, as he has said many times. It was what he knew at the time. Now, you can say he SHOULD have known, but we can only know what we know.

If he believed what he wrote and specifically chose the words he did in accordance with that belief (as he asserted to begin with), then why say later that it was the result of being tired and too much wine?

Guillermo
August 3, 2008, 08:30 PM
Tom,

You seem a stand up guy. Very knowledgeable and open with said information. No doubt you are an asset to the gun community. You also strike me as an optimist. I have no doubt that you are a nice guy that I would enjoy meeting, hunting or shooting with or trading stories over a beer.

As you know Mr. Zumbo well, certainly you have more insight than I. It was my objective to stress my “outsiders” view. You are incorrect that I am ignoring you folks that know him well. I do consider your positions and opinions. Were not so many of you coming to his defense I would want him drummed out of the gun community.

One point that I would like to make. You (and others) describe Mr. Zumbo’s “lack of education” as an excuse for his opinion of black rifles. I find that VERY difficult to believe. As one who has been around the shooting community, gun shows, hunting for as long as he has it is inconceivable that he was “uneducated” about the uses of assault styled rifles. He never went to Camp Perry? Never saw one use one to hunt? Never had a chum wax eloquent about his black rifle as they sat around the camp fire? That is HIGHLY unlikely.

In addition, it is a huge leap to go from the misconception that “you can’t hunt with it” to “terrorist rifle.” That is a repugnant statement and in addition to being totally false, what does that say about our law enforcement and military?

BTW, as a point of order I would like to point out that I did not “quote” you. In no way did I identify you, nor would I as that was a private conversation. Honor would not allow me to reveal anything that we said without good reason. You also did not elaborate when you responded to my declarative statement.

Guntalk
August 3, 2008, 08:34 PM
>>If he believed what he wrote and specifically chose the words he did in accordance with that belief (as he asserted to begin with), then why say later that it was the result of being tired and too much wine?<<

Well, if you go to the ORIGINAL statement he made -- it was on my radio show -- I think you'll find that he said he should not have hit the SEND button, and that he did that after several long days afield, dinner, and wine. I could be wrong, but I don't think he ever said the CONTENT was due to tiredness or wine -- only that he should have let the blog sit overnight before sending it.

That's my memory of it. Might not be perfect, but I think it's pretty close.

Millwright
August 3, 2008, 08:37 PM
I've read Zumbo's stuff for years. Like any writer, some's good, some's bad. I've always taken his expressed opinions with a grain ( or several ) of salt because he is, (or claims to be) a humorist.

So what if he put his #12 brogan in the "black gun" cow patty ? Lots of others have done so - particularly early on its evolution - myself included. Its only been in the last decade or less all the nifty engineering and chemistry has come to the fore in creating a lot of nifty - and damn good accurate arms - has emerged using that platform. Its also curious so many ranted about the AR style while similar mods and odds were being done to its peers without much comment..... >MW

Guntalk
August 3, 2008, 08:42 PM
Once again . . . I guess it's just impossible for some folks to admit that not everyone knows everything.

Good grief.

Many, many hunters don't know squat about guns.

Jim has always been in that category.

Gun shows? Why would he go if he doesn't care about guns?

Camp Perry? He's not a competitive shooter, doesn't write about competitive shooting, doesn't write about guns, and doesn't care about competition guns.

You can jump up and down all you want and rail that he should have known this, or he should have know that, but your assumption, and I believe it to be completely in error, is that someone who is a hunter should know a bunch about guns. Many hunters don't. Many hunters don't care about guns. Many hunters could not tell you the difference between a .270 and a .30-06.

To file the point on this a bit finer, once again, Jim is not a gun writer. Many of the assumptions on what he should have known are based on the misunderstanding of what a gun writer is, and what a hunting writer is.

He said he had never seen an AR-15 used by a hunter, and I believe him.

I bet 90 percent of hunters in the U.S. have never seen an AR-15 used for hunting.

You are right -- it wasn't a quote. It was a mischaracterization. I couldn't let the mischaracterization of what I said about Bill Jordan sit there unchallenged. Even if no one else knew who said it, I did, and I also knew that your statement left an inaccurate impression of Bill. This was not acceptable.

Guillermo
August 3, 2008, 09:03 PM
Tom,

You truly seem like a good guy and ready to find the best in people. I am a skeptic. While I have never been to Missouri, I love their motto.

I don't buy that one can spend decades and not understand guns beyond those that he was enthusiastic about. You do. We disagree.

As the learned fellow that you are I do wish that you would speak to thisit is a huge leap to go from the misconception that “you can’t hunt with it” to “terrorist rifle.” That is a repugnant statement and in addition to being totally false, what does that say about our law enforcement and military?

pbearperry
August 3, 2008, 09:08 PM
Does anyone have a good recipe for beaten dead horse?

Guntalk
August 3, 2008, 09:15 PM
Once more, and then we bury this poor critter. <grin>

Of course it was repugnant. That's why he apologized, and has done it again and again.

I don't think that Jeff White has a dog in this fight, and I think he's a straight shooter.

I know Dave Workman well, and I can guarantee you that he has a finely-tuned BS filter (as any good reporter does). Heck, Dave would call me on it if he ever spotted me trying to pull some shenanigan, so you know he would do it to Zumbo.

The three of us all agree on this one.

That's all I can offer.

Guillermo
August 3, 2008, 09:21 PM
LOL

pbearperry I can't argue with that!

at least it is tenderized!

;)

Guillermo
August 3, 2008, 09:25 PM
Tom,

All three of you have good reputations as straight shooters.

While I wonder if you are too close to this and there are some things that have not been explained we can agree to disagree.

I respect your opinion and loyalty to a friend.

Zip7
August 3, 2008, 09:36 PM
I bet 90 percent of hunters in the U.S. have never seen an AR-15 used for hunting.

I've been hunting all my life and have never seen anyone hunting with an AR-15. (I'm in my 40s). If I did, I would probably ease off in another direction.

I don't buy that one can spend decades and not understand guns beyond those that he was enthusiastic about.

I've pretty much been interested in guns my whole life. I own a good many guns. I've spent a good many hours looking at ballistics tables, gun catalogs, going to gun shows, going to the range, etc... and I don't know diddly about AR-15s.

I've shot one once - someone handed it to me ready to fire and I fired it. I remember it being quite loud because it had a brake of some sort on it.. But if I were to pick one up I'd probably have a time figuring out how to load it and fire it, much less what kind of stuff I ought to buy to add to it. I see people with them at the range and with other guns of the type I guess - military / tactical type weapons. I can't really tell one from the other.

The idea of owning one or shooting one just hasn't ever appealed to me. I'm sure I'm not the only one. I do know the difference between a .270 and a 30-06 and have used and owned both. I own enough handguns to make me think about moving to Montana sometimes, but I've just never wanted an EBR. If somebody gave me one I would probably put it in the safe or try to sell it if it was worth a lot and buy something I would rather have. I wouldn't go hunting with it, although I'm sure it's OK for some types of hunting... it's just not me.

If EBR type guns are what float your boat, I don't have a problem with it. I care about guns, and my gun rights as much as anyone, but I don't see how that obligates me to be interested in tacti-cool firearms.

Rob62
August 3, 2008, 10:17 PM
I think its important to post exactly what Mr Zumbo wrote that started the firestorm. I make no accusations against Mr. Zumbo in any way. Simply reporting what I believe to be an exact copy of the article (blog post) by Mr. Z and then his appology.

FWIW - I admire Mr. Zumbo for what he has done in the past reference his writting skill and hunting adventures. From everything I have read and heard, since this incidence he is 100% on board the Black Rifle Express :)

Regards,
Rob

Zumbos 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 praries and woods.

------ His Appology-----------

I was wrong, BIG TIME

Someone once said that to err is human. I just erred, and made without question, the biggest blunder in my 42 years of writing hunting articles.

My blog inflamed legions of people I love most..... hunters and shooters. Obviously, when I wrote that blog, I activated my mouth before engaging my brain.

Let me explain the circumstances surrounding that blog. I was hunting coyotes, and after the hunt was over and being beat up by 60 mph winds all day, I was discussing hunting with one of the young guides. I was tired and exhausted, and I should have gone to bed early. When the guide told me that there was a "huge" following of hunters who use AR 15's and similar weapons to hunt prairies dogs, I was amazed. At that point I wrote the blog, and never thought it through.

Now then, you might not believe what I have to say, but I hope you do. How is it that Zumbo, who has been hunting for more than 50 years, is totally ignorant about these types of guns. I don't know. I shot one once at a target last year, and thought it was cool, but I never considered using one for hunting. I had absolutely no idea how vast the numbers of folks are who use them.

I never intended to be devisive, and I certainly believe in United we Stand, Divided we Fall. I've been an NRA member for 40 years, have attended 8 national NRA conventions in the last 10 years, and I'm an advisory board member for the United States Sportsmen's Alliance which actively fights anti-hunters and animal rights groups for hunter's rights.

What really bothers me are some of the unpatriotic comments leveled at me. I fly the flag 365 days a year in my front yard. Last year, through an essay contest, I hosted a soldier wounded in Iraq to a free hunt in Botswana. This year, through another essay contest, I'm taking two more soldiers on a free moose and elk hunt.

When I started blogging, I was told to write my thoughts, expressing my own opinion. The offensive blog I wrote was MY opinion, and no one else's. None of the companies that I deal with share that opinion, nor were they aware of what I had written until this firestorm started.

Believe it or not, I'm your best friend if you're a hunter or shooter, though it might not seem that way. I simply screwed up. And, to show that I'm sincere about this, I just talked to Ted Nugent, who everyone knows, and is a Board member of the NRA. Ted is extremely active with charities concerning our wounded military, and though he's known as a bowhunter, Ted has no problem with AR 15's and similar firearms. My sincerity stems from the fact that Ted and I are planning a hunt using AR 15's. I intend to learn all I can about them, and again, I'm sorry for inserting my foot in my mouth.

Jim Zumbo

Guillermo
August 3, 2008, 10:52 PM
Zip7,


NOBODY said that you are obligated to be interested in anything. Your assertion is nothing but subterfuge. It has nothing to do with the subject at hand.


There are a few things that I believe which are appropriate to the subject

-A decent human being does not spread lies.

-A reasonable person does not insult tens of thousands of people, calling them repugnant names merely because he is not interested in the same things

-Only the most imbecilic would publicly voice strong opinions based on ignorance.

-It is better to be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt

There is not doubt that Jim Zumbo made a total fool of himself, spreading lies and castigation. The only question is whether you believe in his sincerity with regards to his change of heart. Several quality people believe him.

I am not so sure.

22-rimfire
August 3, 2008, 10:55 PM
Rob62; thank you for posting the original stuff. I copied and saved it on my other computer and that computer died along with a lot of good information. Tisk Tisk.

Tom (GunTalk) you make a lot of sense and I believe you.

Guillermo; You can choose to believe anything you want to. But I simply don't agree with a number of things you said. Not everyone is in love with AR's.

Guillermo
August 3, 2008, 11:09 PM
Not everyone is in love with AR's.

Who said that everyone is in love with AR's?

With what do you disagree?

Guntalk
August 3, 2008, 11:18 PM
Calling someone a liar is not High Road.

A lie is saying something you know to be untrue.

Contrast that with saying something that is untrue, but which you are not aware is untrue. That is called a mistake, or a misstatement.

Calling it a lie is, in my view, beyond the pale.

As for voicing a strong opinion based on ignorance . . . well, I'm sure glad that never happens on internet boards such as this. <big grin>

Guillermo
August 3, 2008, 11:24 PM
A lie is saying something you know to be untrue.

I reread his original words. Foolish, ignorant, insulting, repugnant but the ugliness was all opinion. Opinion worthy of Rosie O’Donnell and critical thought worthy of Sarah Brady, but opinion nonetheless.

It should read "There is not doubt that Jim Zumbo made a total fool of himself, spreading stupidity and castigation."

I stand corrected and herby apologize.

Zip7
August 3, 2008, 11:52 PM
NOBODY said that you are obligated to be interested in anything. Your assertion is nothing but subterfuge. It has nothing to do with the subject at hand.


Well, you are the one that said:

I don't buy that one can spend decades and not understand guns beyond those that he was enthusiastic about.

I was pointing out that I happen to be such a one, and why. I really don't understand the allure of tricked out battle rifles. I do understand that they are probably state of the art for killing folks.

While I think that Zumbo certainly went overboard in summarily denouncing a certain type of gun because of what it is, I can understand what alarmed him. This deer season, if I run across a yoyo with a tricked out AR in the deer woods, you can bet I'll be a little alarmed. I've never seen it yet.

Hunting also has it's own enemies, and what you don't want is people to have an image of a bunch of Bubbas stalking through the local forest armed with the kind of small arm firepower we go to war with. That sends the wrong message - it really does. To most neutral observers, an AR-15 appears to be something that will send a lot of hot lead downrange in a hurry, and that is not what you want neutral observers to think that hunting is all about.

Do I think people have a right to own them and shoot them? Absolutely. If we ever need to invoke the 2nd amendment for the original purpose, we're really going to need SAM batteries and RPGs if possible.

bsf
August 4, 2008, 01:00 AM
Mr White,
Thanks for posting the staff forum posts. Those were very interesting.

Ian Sean
August 4, 2008, 01:44 AM
why can't we seem to repeat that epic act of activism?


On a national level, it is possible and I think we do and have had some good positive effect. It is the local level where things are hard to pull together.

Whenever a new event or legislation comes up...how many posts do you see with "contact your congressman here" I am a member on many forums and see it a lot and this stuff makes the rounds real fast.

For some local action...every state should have a forum like we have at the PAFOA, http://www.pafoa.org/forum/ 2 years old and almost 10,000 members, more and more meet and greets and activism by the day, real proud of the founders of that website and what my fellow Pennsylvanians have done so far.

On the whole though, we could be better organized.

I firmly believe, Bill Ruger would have caught a lot of flack and business would have suffered if his actions were done today and not 15 years ago.

As far as Zumbo...as a hunter and an EBR owner, I felt very betrayed and I was fired up. From anti's you expect it, not from one of "us" or at least one who is somewhat in the community.

Actually a little disapointed at the NRA in some of this also, I always found the NRA website a bit lacking/hard to navigate and they could really use the web better as an organizational tool.

My .02

ArfinGreebly
August 4, 2008, 02:19 AM
Redemption can be tough.

Even when you achieve it, there's no guarantee that everyone will accept it.

I nearly sank a ship once, with perhaps fifty or more of my crew mates on it.

Go ahead. Try to live that down!

Now do whatever it takes to redeem yourself in the eyes of this crew whom your actions nearly killed.

Spend a year at it. Sweep and mop and paint and chip and do bilge rat duty for weeks at a time. Do the really crap jobs so that some other crewman doesn't have to.

Now, go ask for their forgiveness in person.

And when you run up against one of them who isn't yet willing to accept that you're worthy of crew status among them, swallow that, and keep doing what needs to be done.

Finally, when all the people that matter have congratulated you on your redemption, know that there are still members of the crew who won't trust you. Who won't ever eat at your table. Who won't have you on their watch.

Yeah. Now you have redemption but, to some, you'll never be whole.

That can be tough.

For me? I'll take a man who's done months of bilges and crap deck work on my watch.

I've stood in his shoes and he's stood in mine, and neither of us will let that happen again.

Jim Zumbo has dined on some seriously tough crow. He put himself in the hands of the people he'd mocked and submitted his ego to those he'd wronged.

That's tougher than many will ever know.

He's a better man for it, and our community is better for having walked that mile.

He's welcome at my table, should we ever meet.

Jeff White
August 4, 2008, 02:50 AM
I haven't read an Outdoor Life since 1985 when my wife's grandfather who was an avid hunter passed away. I didn't know who Jim Zumbo was until the explosion over his blog rocked the online firearms community.

I did spend three long hard days on the range with him. I don't know what his motives for taking Denny Hansen up on his offer to review the class and write it up in SWAT were. And I don't care, because his motives didn't matter.

What mattered was, he came out and did a kind of shooting he had never done before. Was he a little uncomfortable at first, yes, but who of us isn't the first time we ever do something?

You can't fake the enjoyment he was showing once he started picking things up and learning new things. It would have been an academy award level performance to fake the comradeship that was developing on the range.

Do you guys have any idea what it must have been like for him to come to the Boone County Sheriffs dept and shoot with us? Talk about walking into the lions cage. Pat's class about how to fight with a carbine. It's heavy on manipulation and mindset. This may surprise some of you, but not everyone fancies himself a gunfighter. I don't think Jim did or does. And while he probably wouldn't be my first choice to follow into the room on a dynamic entry, I wouldn't worry about him being able to hold his own and watch my back in bad situation. He has good shooting skills but more importantly I think he's got the guts it takes to be there and do what needs to be done if everything went bad.

To me it doesn't matter what he thought about evil black rifles before. I know how he feels about them now that he's been exposed to them. Isn't that what's really important here?

I think you guys are forgetting that converts are very zealous and anxious to convert others. We now have an important person in the hunting community who has a massive audience on our side.

We can't keep building walls between the different disciplines of the shooting community. This constant bickering about who is more pure in their love for the second amendment is getting old.

Buzz, have you never firmly inserted your foot into your mouth like Zumbo did and then made an excuse, even to yourself as to why you did that? I think what he meant when he said he was tired and had three glasses of wine, was that he'd have chosen his words more carefully, not that the gist of it wouldn't have been the same (that black rifles didn't belong in the field on hunts).

Something good came from a very bad thing and we should be happy about that. If you don't like Jim Zumbo for what he said, then that's your right. No one says you have to read his column in Outdoor Life or watch his TV show. But let's accept the victory that we won. And most importantly lets thank the people who made the conversion possible, everyone who bombarded all of his sponsors with email, that was the club that got his attention. Denny Hansen, who without consulting with his boss first, offered the newest pariah in the shooting community an article in SWAT, Pat Rogers for agreeing to make room in his busy schedule to fit in another three day class (not easy when you are already pushing upwards of 250 days a year on the road), Sheriff Ken Campbell, who made range space available on short notice, and lastly Rich Lucibella who sponsored everything.

Now let's let this one lay for awhile. Sometimes it's good to let the rage die down and just bask in the afterglow of an RKBA victory.

Jeff

JKimball
August 4, 2008, 03:23 AM
Thanks, Jeff. I think you're right on.

I remember when I was a teenager, I felt pretty much the same way Zumbo did (pre conversion.) I had a shotgun and some traditional sporting rifles and was pleased as punch that the 2nd amendment protected my right to own them. I didn't see any need for EBR's, and wondered why in the world anybody would want them. For that matter, I didn't see much need for handguns. However, I have since converted. As I have learned about man's inhumanity to man throughout history, and the purpose of the second amendment, I have come to see assault weapons as the most important class of firearms to own. It is the most vulnerable to restrictions and I believe it should be the primary focus of our RKBA efforts.

If I were to guess, I would say that there are more gun owners that agree with Zumbo's original statement or at least the sentiment, than those that disagree. We must not alienate them, but educate and embrace them.

I guess what I'm saying is (start ROCKY IV music) If I can change.... and Zumbo can change... everybody can change! :D

RDak
August 4, 2008, 06:36 AM
Oh, I forgive Zumbo. He made a stupid mistake and I've certainly made many myself.

I was surprised he disliked AR-15's so much because, even though I'm an old guy like Zumbo, I absolutely love those guns. They are nice to shoot, accurate and reliable IMHO.

You can buy one lower and swap multiple uppers onto that lower. I've never seen a firearm that is as "adaptable" as the AR-15.

Why he held such a disdain for the AR-15 is beyond me. You can get them in a .308 and go deer hunting, same for the 6.8. Heck, I think they even have a .450(?) available now!! It's just a "newer" type of design that Zumbo didn't accept into the hunting "fraternity" of firearms. That really surprised me considering Zumbo has been around firearms all his life.

Why he went off the deep end was baffling to me. (I mean, it would be like me saying in 1880 [I was alive then:p] "I don't like those darn bolt action rifles, only a musket for me!":p)

In any event, I've been VERY surprised the anti-gunners haven't used Zumbo as their "poster boy" for advancing the anti-gun agenda.

Whew!! I was very worried the anti-gunners would do that. Over the long-run Zumbo wasn't used as much by the anti-gunners as I thought he would be used.

If you enjoyed reading about ""Zumbo" revisited - why can't we seem to repeat that epic act of activism?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!