Old Topic...Lesson Learned?


PDA






ShawnC
January 1, 2012, 11:50 PM
Okay so I was just recently educated on the Zumbo deal in 2007...this isn't about him. What it is about is a question I didn't even realize was ever an issue...

Are there still people that believe "black rifles" shouldn't be used for hunting? No flaming or judging, but if you feel this way I'm just curious what the justification is.

If you enjoyed reading about "Old Topic...Lesson Learned?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
BP44
January 1, 2012, 11:56 PM
Honestly I dont see an advantage for the use of a black rifle when hunting big game, Having said that if its all ya got then go for it. Jim Zumbo had to eat crow after that ordeal:cool: as he should have. I dont think a full auto has any use other than spraying lead and not being accurate in the process but I will support others rights to own them. I guess my point is we cant get so biased that we dont support all of our gun rights, even if you dont see the point in it. Maby the next thing they ban or regulate might be your hobby.

ShawnC
January 2, 2012, 12:06 AM
I agree, but I don't think there is one hunter or gun owner that is ok with hunting full auto.

Hardtarget
January 2, 2012, 12:31 AM
If the caliber is capable for the chosen game...no problem.
ten round magazine limit...I'm ok with that. I hunt with a Win. 30-30 with an eight round mag tube. Never load but five. My job is to shoot straight and kill cleanly. The second shot is to anchor my deer.

Wouldn't surprise me to see an effort to ban single shots because of the slower second shot. :evil: (devils advocate)

Ethics, caliber selection, bullet construction, hunter capable of correct placement. With those four points what difference does firearm type/style/ function matter?

Mark

Sam1911
January 2, 2012, 12:48 AM
Sure there are people who believe that. There are people who believe 'most anything.

There are old traditionalists who have no experience with or understanding of more modern firearm (or who do...) and feel that higher-capacity self-loading rifles derived from or similar to those used for military purposes do not meet their idea of what the sportsman's aesthetic or even, in a fuzzy sort of way, "ethics" aught to be. They feel that a deer, squirrel, duck, Sasquatch, or whatever should fall to a traditional (at least traditional to a particular era) walnut and blued steel sporting firearm. And if that's what they'd prefer to use, that's what they want you to use as well.

(Never mind that the "traditional sporting" arm chosen by many of them has its ancestry in military arms as well, or that the previous generations would have seen their choices as just as nouveau and unsporting as they see polymer self-loaders to be.)

And, then there is the corollary to this first group, who feels that modern polymer and stainless self-loaders don't belong in the woods because that will frighten the antis and non-hunters into banning hunting or guns.

Fortunately for most of us it is becoming harder and harder to locate anyone who still clings to these beliefs, and given another half-generation we should see the end of such blinkered and stifled fogeyism. For the time being, just smile and be tolerant of their intolerance, of course. :)

doc2rn
January 2, 2012, 01:04 AM
I went on a man-cation to a time share at a hunting camp in Idaho. They double booked but there was plenty of spare bunks to go around and the other Dad n son seemed nice enough. On the first day of hunting, after everyone made fun of my rimfire the night before, the son went and unloaded a full clip at an elk. He claimed it ran off and he didnt understand how it "got away". I went back up and found it shot 7 Xs bleeting in the scrub brush. I truely was overwhelmed by his attitude of "hey thats my elk", when I brought the cleaned animal back. I offered the skin, head and half the meat, but he claimed it was all his, even though he didnt bring it back. I truely believe novice hunters like this should start with a bolt action, but I must admit that FAL got the job done.

Smokey Joe
January 2, 2012, 02:01 AM
Several points here.

I for one, prefer walnut, blued steel, and a bolt action. That's what I grew up with and learned on. So that's what I mainly hunt with. But some of my hunting partners have used autoloading .308's that "look like a sporting weapon," and I see no difference between using that kind of rifle and using an M1A for hunting--in single mode.

Automatic firing weapons, IMHO, have no place in the game fields, and for that matter I don't know of any place, anywhere, that their use is legal for hunting. Unsporting, besides the danger of spraying bullets hither and yon, with no regard for a safe backstop, not to mention the ricochets.

As far as a magazine limit, I can't see the need. After one has shot at a deer (elk, sheep, rabbit, you name it) and missed, the animal is alarmed, and moving fast, and you're never going to get more than 1 or maybe 2 follow-up shots, no matter if your magazine holds 2 or 20 rounds. So what's the big deal?

Use of a "black rifle" for hunting?? Well, American hunters basically switched from lever-actions to bolt rifles because so many hunters experienced bolts rifles in WWI and II. A bolt rifle was what they learned to use, and that was the action with which they were comfortable. Now, many hunters are coming home from their military experiences with AR-15's, and THAT is the action with which they are comfortable. Why shouldn't they use that type of weapon for hunting? (I mean besides that the things are Jeezly loud on the range, due to the short bbl and the type of muzzle brake that is typical!)

With regard to Doc 2 Rn's experience, my understanding is that the game belongs to the hunter who "reduces it to posession," that is, actually kills it and tags it(or whatever is the local legality) not to mention field dressing and hauling it out. I have no use whatever for the "hunter" who shoots at an animal and makes any less than an all-out effort to humanely kill it as rapidly as possible. You leave a critter bleeding in the woods, you have abdicated any right to it, and shut up with your claims, lousy sportsman. Dark? Cold? Late? Tired? TOUGH! I truly believe that novice hunters like the one described should start by being educated in hunter ethics, before they even touch a firearm.

OK, that's off my chest. Now I'll get down off my soapbox.

BP44
January 2, 2012, 05:03 AM
Automatic firing weapons, IMHO, have no place in the game fields, and for that matter I don't know of any place, anywhere, that their use is legal for hunting. Unsporting, besides the danger of spraying bullets hither and yon, with no regard for a safe backstop, not to mention the ricochets.


Smokey Joe, I am not an advocate for full auto hunting.:D and I'm pretty sure we share many of the same ideas on hunting. Having said that a goof ball kid out on a skid road during deer or elk season with a good old fashioned bolt gun has been known to spray bullets carelessly and gut shoot anything in sight:uhoh: I feel it depends on the person not the weapon and in the end it comes down to morals/ethics and judgement.

I am simply trying to point out the "one link out of a dogs chain" theory with gun control and the fact that "sportsman" are actively involved when it comes to gun rights, The good and the bad.

I guess I went on the ''Zumbo'' angle of the post:o I use an old pre 64 win for my blacktails and elk and still love shooting the doubles in the duck blind, but I dont care what the next guy uses as long as it works for him and more importantly the critter he is after. I have been know to take the AR's out after winter coyotes and for that they are great as I need follow up shots and alot of 'em as they seem to come in groups of two to three this time of year.

blume357@bellsouth.net
January 2, 2012, 09:11 AM
we can always take this to extremes... even though I grew up on a farm and kind of hunted up until I was 18 and left home, I have no desire to kill small or even large critters and really can't see why others do... with that said, I respect others doing this and would never speak against their right.... speaking of rights... the whole gun issue is about that... the right to protect yourself, your family, your property and the same of others who can't.. nothing to do with hunting. Full auto is silly, unless you have a couple hundred commies coming at you... but still they should have never been regulated let alone restricted (pre 1986 only)....

Ky Larry
January 2, 2012, 09:34 AM
I gave up hunting many years ago so I'm not really "in the loop." Sounds like some people are still trying to substitute fire power for skill.

An EBR semi-auto in .308 sounds like just the ticket for hunting deer and elk in rough, brushy terrain. It would be short, light, and easy to handle just like a lever carbine. I'll leave the question of mag capacity for hunting to people who are better informed. However, unethical slob hunters can't be cured by legislation.Trying to ban EBR's would probably result in a ban on Browning,Remington, Benelli,etc; sporting rifles.

buck460XVR
January 2, 2012, 11:06 AM
Are there still people that believe "black rifles" shouldn't be used for hunting?


Sure there is......but this is America and they are free to have a opinion and to freely express it. I remember when compound bows first came on the market and how many folks snibbled about those "new fangled contraptions". Now they are the standard and recurves and longbows are the exception. I remember seeing my first EBR in the woods some 20 years ago. While the gun caught my eye and seemed outta place at the time, it was the goofus using it that was the scarey part. Since they were legal to use, it made no difference to me. It still doesn't. Still, many of those that use them for hunting fit the profile of the first hunter I ever saw with one. Maybe that's what Zumbo meant, eh?

MistWolf
January 2, 2012, 04:49 PM
How in the hell did a discussion of "black rifles" for hunting turn to using full auto??

ShawnC
January 2, 2012, 05:42 PM
How in the hell did a discussion of "black rifles" for hunting turn to using full auto??

I think this is part of the problem. Someone say "black rifle" or "military style" and automatically the conversation jumps to "full auto".
Perhaps I should have worded the question differently, as I am aware that people don't care for AR's and AK's (honestly, other than the AR 10, I'm not much of fan either) but I don't think they should be banned from the woods, and I don't think they are "Terrorist Weapons".
Is the argument really against only certain kinds of people would choose to use this type of weapon, and those types of people would be undesirable? Because I go to the shooting range with those people never saw a difference between them and any other hunters. This isn't about 2A being related to hunting, it's about all gun owners looking out for each other.

tyeo098
January 2, 2012, 08:24 PM
3 round burst would be perfect IMO.
Especially since 223 is such a small calibre, 3 of em makes what.. .669 cal?
A lot more than the .23 restriction :D

22lr
January 2, 2012, 08:31 PM
I left Outdoorlife over the issue. They canned a great writer, with great talent because the gun community bullied them. I love gun owners, but seriously, this is still America and we are all allowed to have different opinions. I got my first subscription to Outdoorlife when I was 14 and saved up my money from cutting the neighbors grass to buy it, his articles were the first things I would read. His hunting trips, his rifle reviews and his writing style just made for articles that were enjoyable to read. I am still bitter about the tactical guys who got all butt hurt and bullied him out. To me it shows the ultimate lack of class when you take a man like Zumbo, and turn him into the villain.

I love my AR, my Galil, my decked out 10/22s and my tactical shotguns. But I also like my custom built Mauser actions. I hunt with bolt actions because I prefer bolt actions. Nothing against the guys who use ARs, but come on, we can coexist. Just because I (or Jim Zumbo) dont like hunting with ARs is no reason to raise all heck over the issue. I think the guys who take tactical carbine classes are silly and wasting money, but id never say they were wrong for doing so, its just not my cup of tea.

But ya back to the OPs questions. I dont like hunting with ARs. Ive done it, I just would rather have a bolt action.

Sam1911
January 2, 2012, 08:49 PM
They canned a great writer, with great talent because the gun community bullied them.That was a triumph. A lot of people needed to see that happen. I feel badly for poor Jim, as he was only the tool used to build something great. But, when you make your bed, sometimes you do have to lie down in it.

(As my favorite of Despair.com's demotivational posters says, "It may be that your purpose in life is only to serve as a warning to others." http://www.despair.com/mis24x30prin.html)

I love gun owners, but seriously, this is still America and we are all allowed to have different opinions. Yup, and this is still America where nothing says you'll be immune from the results of your words or actions. Jim made a deliberate choice. He attacked (not disagreed with, ATTACKED) the beliefs and choices of others and used his bully pulpit as a public figure to make a stand for something. Something destructive. Something hurtful. Something wrong, that should not be. Unfortunately for him -- but fortunately for everyone else -- the tide had finally turned against foes in the hunting garb of "friends" who would try to hurt the rest of us in that way.

Just because I (or Jim Zumbo) dont like hunting with ARs is no reason to raise all heck over the issue.I'm afraid you don't remember clearly what ol' Jim said.

Let me refresh your memory:

...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."

That's not expressing a personal preference to use walnut & blued steel when out butchering bambi. That's the dying howl of the snob hunter who would sell other gun owners out at the polls, ridicule them in the field, and declare the most popular firearm in America a "terrorist rifle."

He knew what he was doing. He took a chance on standing up for discrimination and denigration of others for some of the most blinkered, stupid, and illogical reasons known to man. He sowed the wind and reaped the whirlwind. Good for him.

I harbor no personal feelings against the man. But his words and beliefs on this matter are anathema. I'm sorry to see him hurt by the response he bought for himself. But I'm so very proud of "US" for making such a strong statement of solidarity and the power of our own beliefs.

We often wonder if we're making any impact and if any of the powerful or influential know or care what us in the "silent majority" really believe. That week, folks all over the world knew that Americans will be keeping their "assault rifles" thank-you-very-much. It was a GREAT day.

BP44
January 2, 2012, 09:13 PM
Sam1911, Thanks for putting words togeather that I simply couldnt.

"Are there still people that believe "black rifles" shouldn't be used for hunting? No flaming or judging, but if you feel this way I'm just curious what the justification is"

I guess Full auto came up as a justification, it is viewed by the sheep and even sportsman as evil and useless much like Zumbo described the black rifles.

I am sorry if I took this post of topic I was looking to much into what Mr.Zumbo had said and to me gun rights and the topic of discussion are related.

JohnBT
January 2, 2012, 09:13 PM
It wasn't just the "tactical guys" either, don't fool yourself by blaming just one group for the reaction. I own one AR clone I bought for the heck of it to give it a chance and it's still my least favorite gun.

I don't feel butt hurt, but you sound like you are.

John

BP44
January 2, 2012, 09:45 PM
Naaa, not butt hurt I just didnt want to take you thread off topic any more than I already did.:D

22lr
January 2, 2012, 09:56 PM
Im to lazy to type it all out myself, so ill just reference the Wikipedia article on the incident.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Zumbo

And his letter to the Senate about his statement that was read on the Senate floor.

http://www.nraila.org/news/read/inthenews.aspx?id=9177

A quote in that letter

Jim Zumbo
That in mind, Sen. Levin must know that almost immediately after I wrote those remarks, I recanted and apologized to the millions of Americans who lawfully and responsibly own, compete with and hunt with semi-automatic rifles. I took a “crash course” on these firearms and visited with my good friend Ted Nugent on his ranch in Texas, where I personally shot an AR-15 and educated myself with these firearms.

And on his website he has this to say.


Jim Zumbo
My career moved along nicely. I had written 23 books on hunting and fishing, was on a nationwide seminar circuit, and had written about 2,000 magazine articles, and I had a TV show, Jim Zumbo Outdoors. Then, on February 16, 2007, I wrote a blog in my Outdoor Life page about assault rifles that created an instant firestorm among America's gun owners. Within a few days, I was radioactive in the industry. There was an editorial in the Washington Post that was carried by several hundred newspapers around the country, an editorial in the New York Times, a satire about me on the Comedy Channel, and countless articles by gun and hunting writers. Less than a week after the firestorm started, most of my sponsors pulled out of my TV show, and the editors who I worked for backed off. Todd Smith, editor-in-chief of Outdoor Life magazine, asked me for my resignation, and I was suddenly without employment. I was done writing, and my TV show was on hiatus. Many of the companies that supported me in the past issued severance statements with me on their websites, as did shooting and firearms organizations such as the NRA and NSSF. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation was the only organization to express a positive statement on their website.

Ted Nugent immediately came to my rescue, and I flew to his ranch in Texas to learn about the so-called black rifles. Ted wanted to use my ignorance as an example of an avid hunter who was unaware of the popularity and uses of these firearms. He taught me a great deal. I went on to work with the Second Amendment Foundation, denounced a statement by an anti-gun senator and exposed his strategy to continually work his flawed words in the Congressional Record, and attended a three day assault rifle course, which I immensely enjoyed. I wrote about that experience in an article in SWAT magazine.


I think this explanation is better than what I could do. An old man got pissed off about ARs in hunting, cooled off and realized what he had just said. It happens, I just don't think he needed to be fired over it. What he said in the blog post was wrong, but I cant think of anything else he could have done to apologize to gun owners. If he had just said "o ya, about that, my bad" then of course there would be an issue. But he has done everything humanly possible to recant his statement and apologize to gun owners and in my eyes its recanted.

22lr
January 2, 2012, 10:05 PM
I guess I said all that to say differing opinions are what make the firearms community great. It just seems the minority is always suppressed. The assault rifle minority was suppressed for a while, and now the tables have turned. Either way its wrong and a happy median could easily be reached if each side understood the other.

ShawnC
January 2, 2012, 10:26 PM
I haven't read anything by him recently, and it sounds like he made amends. But it was more than just his opinion. Antis used that blog to beat pro 2A's over the head, and that was the real damage. Luckily we rose up above it, and it seems to have had no lasting effect.
I kind of knew it would veer off into nailing him again, but that wasn't my intention with my OP. Really, what I wanted to know is, is there still a line between traditional hunters and another part of the shooting community that keeps a significant amount of one side basically blowing off the other side when it comes to 2A. Are there still a significant amount of the hunting community that says "They can have those 'assault rifles' as long as they leave my hunting rifle alone". If that is your attitude, and maybe we're all over that now, then what is the difference between shooting a .308 from an AR 10, or a Remington 700? I am a hunter, and haven't met anyone like this, but if it is a problem, hopefully we can change some minds here and keep the 2A community on the same page.

Edit: I just read his letter to congress in 2007, and it was enough for me to forgive him his digression.

Sam1911
January 2, 2012, 11:01 PM
The assault rifle minority was suppressed for a while, and now the tables have turned. Either way its wrong and a happy median could easily be reached if each side understood the other.

It is not so simple. The good folks who sometimes chose to shoot modern design autoloading rifles were REpressed and were denigrated and attacked. Not just by Jim, and certainly not first by him. But he was loud and proud about it. He'd obviously been putting a lot of thought into it. And decided to hurt the "fraternity" he claimed to speak for rather than unify it.

The tables have turned? No. No, not really. Now that the my-old-time-way-or-the-highway crowd has been effectively broken, you're not seeing public statements talking about how we aught to kick those useless old broken down lever guns and bolt rifles out of the field, or how "we" have no need for "those" folks in our ranks. We are healthier now, smarter, wiser for having policed our ranks. The tables haven't turned, so now there's a new master in town. No, we've excised a cancer and taken measures to make the body whole.

ShawnC
January 2, 2012, 11:45 PM
The tables have turned? No. No, not really. Now that the my-old-time-way-or-the-highway crowd has been effectively broken, you're not seeing public statements talking about how we aught to kick those useless old broken down lever guns and bolt rifles out of the field, or how "we" have no need for "those" folks in our ranks. We are healthier now, smarter, wiser for having policed our ranks. The tables haven't turned, so now there's a new master in town. No, we've excised a cancer and taken measures to make the body whole.

If this is the prevailing attitude, then I would say "Lesson Learned." :)

Patriotme
January 3, 2012, 02:47 AM
I know long time hunters that think AR's are all full auto. They just don't know any better or have any first hand experience so they believe what they see on TV. I offer to let new shooters try my AR when I take them to the range. It's worth a box of Wolf to educate another voter, gun enthusiast and future gun owner.

wlewisiii
January 3, 2012, 10:33 AM
All I know is that in the woods where I hunt, if you hear one shot, then someone got a deer. If you hear a second shot, then there is, perhaps, a 25-50% chance someone got a deer. If you hear a third shot, the deer is in the next county laughing at the fool behind the trigger.

Personally I don't like AR's. I carried one in the Army and never want to touch one of the [censored] things again. But get one in a real caliber and knock yourself out. I'll be happy to keep carrying my .30-30 lever and bringing home a deer per shot.

Chemistry Guy
January 3, 2012, 11:00 AM
When a bad incident occurs, sometimes it is difficult to objectively place blame. At the skeet range I go to the only people that "misbehave" tend to be the under-thirty crowd with short barreled pump shotguns. After a while you tend to associate the individual's behavior with the firearm used, and for some people I can tell that some of the animosity carries over to the type of firearm. While most people would call BS, I know that there are some at the club that would support a ban on pump shotguns under 20". If they really thought about it they might change their mind, but often you are not thinking real clearly when angry.

I don't hunt with a rifle, so I don't know from first hand experience, but I would guess that something similar has been going on with hunting rifles. If, on average, more bad hunters use one particular style of rifle, then some will associate their ill will towards those practices with the tool being used.

TCB in TN
January 3, 2012, 11:20 AM
I think this explanation is better than what I could do. An old man got pissed off about ARs in hunting, cooled off and realized what he had just said. It happens, I just don't think he needed to be fired over it. What he said in the blog post was wrong, but I cant think of anything else he could have done to apologize to gun owners. If he had just said "o ya, about that, my bad" then of course there would be an issue. But he has done everything humanly possible to recant his statement and apologize to gun owners and in my eyes its recanted.

It is amazing how people "change" after the chickens come home to roost. I don't know Zumbo and he truly may have had a change of heart, but freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequences. When you derive your living from the public then you have to be aware of how the public really feels. Zumbo was wrong and he has paid for it.

I accepted his apology when it happened, but accepting his apology didn't mean I was ever going to support him again.

BTW I am not a black rifle guy. Honestly I don't currently even own a semi-auto rifle bigger than a .22lr. Further more I don't do much hunting anymore, but I support the right of anyone out there who can safely hunt, to use the tool of their choice (as long as it is a caliber sufficient to get the job done).

trex1310
January 3, 2012, 09:18 PM
As a lifelong hunter, I don't see a problem with it as long as it
meets the laws of your state as a hunting weapon. It's really
no different than a BAR.

d2wing
January 3, 2012, 10:25 PM
Thank you Sam1911 for posting. We should not have gun bigotry. Zumbo said what a lot
of people wrongly think. It's too bad that many hunters and gun owners want to impair the rights of others. I have my dislikes and opinions but I don't want to impose them on anyone and vice versa. It's called freedom. Zumbo had the right to expose himself as a gun bigot and paid for it. I'm glad he learned and now supports the rights of a broader range of gun owners. I hope we all learn something from this.

ralphie98
January 3, 2012, 11:22 PM
I had it out with one of the oldtimers at deer camp about this issue a couple years ago. Not only does he think you shouldn't be allowed to hunt with them but he doesn't even think we should own them. His one argument is the old "you don't need something like that" kinda argument. He hunts with a semi auto too but he doesn't get that an ar15 is the same thing that just looks different. Neither him or my dad are interested in even trying my AR15. I believe they are just uncomfortable around them but I couldn't tell yu why. Between the old mans stubborness and his bad hearing I have just given up on arguing with him.

d2wing
January 3, 2012, 11:25 PM
A liberal friend asked why I think we should have guns. I answered because the government does. If you get that, I don't know what to tell you. Parity I guess.

ShawnC
January 4, 2012, 03:14 AM
I don't hunt with a rifle, so I don't know from first hand experience, but I would guess that something similar has been going on with hunting rifles. If, on average, more bad hunters use one particular style of rifle, then some will associate their ill will towards those practices with the tool being used.

This type of bigotry doesn't end with rifle hunters. I know when I began hunting there was a huge anti crossbow crowd. Never did get that. There wasn't a "only crossbow during rifle season feeling", archers in a big way HATED crossbow users. Crossbows are only now just getting accepted as a hunting tool. Never made any sense to me.
It would be like spear hunters bemoaning the invention of the atl atl.

Sam1911
January 4, 2012, 08:20 AM
It would be like spear hunters bemoaning the invention of the atl atl.


When we look back at history in the middle-distance, say the last half of the 19th century, we tend to look at the introduction of the cartridge and repeating rifle as something that, surely, every shooter, hunter, and soldier must have just been ecstatic over.

I've come to the conclusion that if we wound back the clock we'd see some of the same attitudes voiced then about weapons we now consider to be the height of traditionalism, and even antiquated.

goon
January 4, 2012, 11:07 AM
Yes, there still are lots of people who'd make an issue of this. Semi-auto rifles are illegal for hunting in my state even though a good AR is entirely accurate enough and I've personally shot open sight 100 yard groups under an inch with a good semi-auto FAL. They wet their pants worrying about semi-auto rifles filling the air with lead as their owners haplessly spray rounds at bambi... but are perfectly OK with idiots who haplessly spray rounds out of their Remington 760's.

If you enjoyed reading about "Old Topic...Lesson Learned?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!