Zumbo shooting with Nugent
- Thread starter ryoushi
- Start date
- Status
ryoushi
Member
Hi Tom,
The reason I use a handle on the 'net is because employers do search for such web activity. I know where you're coming from though. Ryoushi is simply Japanese for fisherman.
It was a pleasure to talk with you and Jessica Sunday afternoon. That was the first time I'd ever tuned into your show and I reallly enjoyed it.
Brian in California 6.8SPC
The reason I use a handle on the 'net is because employers do search for such web activity. I know where you're coming from though. Ryoushi is simply Japanese for fisherman.
It was a pleasure to talk with you and Jessica Sunday afternoon. That was the first time I'd ever tuned into your show and I reallly enjoyed it.
Brian in California 6.8SPC
Mongo the Mutterer
Member
Bogie said:
I'm with you, Bogie. Zumbo has had his moment of fame (or infamy). We have to move on.
You probably know the old Missouri saying about payback... Zumbo has had his, now it is up to him to do what he has to do.
We have HR1022 to start to deal with, and I am sure by this time next month there will be other threats to our rights. In Missouri we have a Castle Doctrine and bills to remove the Permit to Acquire law to fight over.
We have little time to spend on Jim Zumbo. Stick a fork in him.
I would hope that we could use all this energy to do something constructive, but much of what's on the boards reminds me like scenes from some old western.
"Our Hero" is on the street or on the porch of the jail with an excited mob in front of him all calling for blood after some outrage has taken place (usually some sort of betrayal). Everyone is shouting for action and revenge when “Our Hero” asks for volunteers and supplies to go right the wrong. The crowd falls into a hush and the scene progresses to the inevitable slinking away of the crowd to the bar where they can go back to complaining instead of doing something constructive.
It’s such a cliché when it’s in an old western, but we can turn off the TV after our break from writing our Congresscritters and Newspapers and TV stations and get back to trying to do something constructive unlike the rabble in the movie.
"Our Hero" is on the street or on the porch of the jail with an excited mob in front of him all calling for blood after some outrage has taken place (usually some sort of betrayal). Everyone is shouting for action and revenge when “Our Hero” asks for volunteers and supplies to go right the wrong. The crowd falls into a hush and the scene progresses to the inevitable slinking away of the crowd to the bar where they can go back to complaining instead of doing something constructive.
It’s such a cliché when it’s in an old western, but we can turn off the TV after our break from writing our Congresscritters and Newspapers and TV stations and get back to trying to do something constructive unlike the rabble in the movie.
>>I'll use my real name in PMs, but not on the net in general. Got a couple of ex-wives looking for me and they're both gunnies.<<
NO MORE CALLS. We have a winner!
Biker, that's one I hadn't thought of. Hmmm. Food for thought. What I'm thinking is that I'm glad to not have any ex's. <grin>
NO MORE CALLS. We have a winner!
Biker, that's one I hadn't thought of. Hmmm. Food for thought. What I'm thinking is that I'm glad to not have any ex's. <grin>
If Zumbo will spend the nest two years on capirol hill fighting the 2nd cause I'll think about forgiving him. He can shoot and be photoed with all the AR platforms he wants but until he gets after congresscritters, whats the point. He could explain how a position on a subject can ruin your whole day. Actions ladies and gentlemen are what matters not photo ops.
I can definately understand the need for screen names.
Forget the employer issue for a moment. Think of identity theft. Its funny that I would be the one to mention that. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out my name. :banghead:
Maybe I should think about changing mine.
But as far as employer discrimination goes. If I were not my own boss I'd LOVE this to become an issue at my employer. The lawsuit would be expensive, but would set a strong precident, and would most likely be very lucrative for me after the initial investment of the suit. I assure you that I'd drive by every day I could in a Jag that employer would have paid for.
Not to derail this discussion-- but a good point has been brought up.
The PC environment of most corporate work-places has gotten out of control. At the last corportation I worked for before going independent, I KNEW better than to EVER mention my views on the 2nd A. I knew not to EVER mention that I even OWNED a firearm. Those things were called "CLM's" at the company--- Career Limiting Moves.
For the large part, I learned to accept it. Finally I put my foot down on one issue. Our company was very e-mail oriented-- using MS exchange to link everyone at our various sites. Because of the area I worked in, it was not unsual for me to have to sort through over 200 e-mails in a day-- and figure out what was important and what was typical corporate spam, forwarded jokes, etc.
I started noticing that a LOT of my e-mails were from various "groups" that had formed within the company and were sanctioned by the company. These groups were primarily ethnic or orientation-oriented. It is my belief that nothing in my work in-box should be non-related to the job I am ACTUALLY doing, and in my desire to reduce my inbox size, I started requesting to be removed from certain mailing lists.
Some of the ones I requested removal from was the Gay/Lesbian support group, the African American employees network, etc. Being neither Gay/Lesbian nor African American, etc., I did not (and do not) see how this was relevant to me, or an aid in doing my job.
To make a long story longer....
Two days after I requested removal from approximately 4-5 groups, (my message to the groups was simply "Please remove me from this e-mail group. Thank you and have a great day!"), I was called into a meeting with our VICE PRESIDENT and grilled over my decision to be removed from the groups. the implication, I believe, was that I was somehow prejudice or discriminating against these groups.
I explained my reasons and explicitly stated that I did not appreciate my being guilty until I proved myself innocent. I also explained that I am certain a court would agree if I ever have reason to believe this ever became an issue in my career path.
Witch hunters come in many forms. I realize that my example was not specifically gun related, but every day we are forced to conform to this type of "conform to our vision of what your values should be, or fail" mentality.
As long as we run from this, we will always lose in an evolving culture. The ONLY way to combat this is to be prepared to take legal action. A NRA sticker on your car should not force you to work in the mailroom for the rest of your life.
John
Forget the employer issue for a moment. Think of identity theft. Its funny that I would be the one to mention that. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out my name. :banghead:
Maybe I should think about changing mine.
But as far as employer discrimination goes. If I were not my own boss I'd LOVE this to become an issue at my employer. The lawsuit would be expensive, but would set a strong precident, and would most likely be very lucrative for me after the initial investment of the suit. I assure you that I'd drive by every day I could in a Jag that employer would have paid for.
Not to derail this discussion-- but a good point has been brought up.
The PC environment of most corporate work-places has gotten out of control. At the last corportation I worked for before going independent, I KNEW better than to EVER mention my views on the 2nd A. I knew not to EVER mention that I even OWNED a firearm. Those things were called "CLM's" at the company--- Career Limiting Moves.
For the large part, I learned to accept it. Finally I put my foot down on one issue. Our company was very e-mail oriented-- using MS exchange to link everyone at our various sites. Because of the area I worked in, it was not unsual for me to have to sort through over 200 e-mails in a day-- and figure out what was important and what was typical corporate spam, forwarded jokes, etc.
I started noticing that a LOT of my e-mails were from various "groups" that had formed within the company and were sanctioned by the company. These groups were primarily ethnic or orientation-oriented. It is my belief that nothing in my work in-box should be non-related to the job I am ACTUALLY doing, and in my desire to reduce my inbox size, I started requesting to be removed from certain mailing lists.
Some of the ones I requested removal from was the Gay/Lesbian support group, the African American employees network, etc. Being neither Gay/Lesbian nor African American, etc., I did not (and do not) see how this was relevant to me, or an aid in doing my job.
To make a long story longer....
Two days after I requested removal from approximately 4-5 groups, (my message to the groups was simply "Please remove me from this e-mail group. Thank you and have a great day!"), I was called into a meeting with our VICE PRESIDENT and grilled over my decision to be removed from the groups. the implication, I believe, was that I was somehow prejudice or discriminating against these groups.
I explained my reasons and explicitly stated that I did not appreciate my being guilty until I proved myself innocent. I also explained that I am certain a court would agree if I ever have reason to believe this ever became an issue in my career path.
Witch hunters come in many forms. I realize that my example was not specifically gun related, but every day we are forced to conform to this type of "conform to our vision of what your values should be, or fail" mentality.
As long as we run from this, we will always lose in an evolving culture. The ONLY way to combat this is to be prepared to take legal action. A NRA sticker on your car should not force you to work in the mailroom for the rest of your life.
John
Last edited:
Green Lantern
Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2006
- Messages
- 1,665
Skimming through this topic reminded me of something I meant to do - ask the mods for permission to start a new "are you willing to give Zumbo a second chance" poll. Because I DIDN'T like the results of the first one when it was closed - More people saying NEVER than YES.
I'm not saying that we should put the guy on a pedestal, but we sure shouldn't be putting him on the gallows either!
If we cast the man to the outer darkness no matter what he does to try and win back our favor, then we do nothing but give ammo to those that call us a bunch of "bloodthirsty witch hunters!"
I'm not saying you're a bad person if you haven't forgiven him yet. I never got to see the apology, but I was skeptical based on others' takes on it. And frankly the "jury is still out" in my book.
PEOPLE *CAN* CHANGE for the better! It's just easier for some than for others.
When I first came here - *I* didn't have a problem with the current gun-control measures saying the mentally ill and felons can't have guns. Until someone posed a question to me (and they DIDN'T lop my head off in the process): "If someone is too unstable or dangerous to be trusted with a gun, then WHY is s/he freely walking the streets?"
It "clicked" then.
I also had a somewhat dim view of full-auto weapons before as well. That has been fixed as well, thanks NOT to personal attacks, but REASON.
With Zumbo, well, as long as he's been around it apparently took a LOT more to get it to "CLICK" with him. There was NOTHING AT ALL un-reasonable about "Zumboing" his career for his anti-RKBA views.
But, IMHO, we need to LET UP on the attack and see if we've really "knocked some sense into him!"
...but STILL keep our guard up...just in case!
I'm not saying that we should put the guy on a pedestal, but we sure shouldn't be putting him on the gallows either!
If we cast the man to the outer darkness no matter what he does to try and win back our favor, then we do nothing but give ammo to those that call us a bunch of "bloodthirsty witch hunters!"
I'm not saying you're a bad person if you haven't forgiven him yet. I never got to see the apology, but I was skeptical based on others' takes on it. And frankly the "jury is still out" in my book.
PEOPLE *CAN* CHANGE for the better! It's just easier for some than for others.
When I first came here - *I* didn't have a problem with the current gun-control measures saying the mentally ill and felons can't have guns. Until someone posed a question to me (and they DIDN'T lop my head off in the process): "If someone is too unstable or dangerous to be trusted with a gun, then WHY is s/he freely walking the streets?"
It "clicked" then.
I also had a somewhat dim view of full-auto weapons before as well. That has been fixed as well, thanks NOT to personal attacks, but REASON.
With Zumbo, well, as long as he's been around it apparently took a LOT more to get it to "CLICK" with him. There was NOTHING AT ALL un-reasonable about "Zumboing" his career for his anti-RKBA views.
But, IMHO, we need to LET UP on the attack and see if we've really "knocked some sense into him!"
...but STILL keep our guard up...just in case!
tinygnat219
Member
Good for Zumbo.
I am personally glad to see that he is at least trying the "EBR". Hopefully, he recants his statements and a reenergized, reinvigorated Zumbo goes after Pelosi.
I am personally glad to see that he is at least trying the "EBR". Hopefully, he recants his statements and a reenergized, reinvigorated Zumbo goes after Pelosi.
tinygnat219
Member
This is good enough for me.
Zumbo Apology on the Nuge's website:
http://nugeboard.tednugent.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/286904.html
posted 02-22-2007 11:49 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The last few days have been an educational experience, to say the least. My ill-conceived inflammatory blog, as all of you now know, set off a firestorm that, I’m told, has never before been equaled. I’m not proud of that.
Let me say this at the outset. My words here are from the heart, and all mine. No one can censor me, and I answer to no one but myself. And I have no one to blame but myself. Outdoor Life, a magazine that I worked for full-time as Hunting Editor for almost 30 years, fired me yesterday. My TV show was cancelled yesterday. Many of my sponsors have issued statements on their website to sever all relationships. This may cause many of you to do backflips and dance in the streets, but, of course, I’m not laughing, nor am I looking for sympathy. I don’t want a pity party.
They say hindsight is golden. Looking back, I can’t believe I said the words “ban” and “terrorist” in the context that I did. I don’t know what I was thinking when I wrote that. I can explain this as sheer ignorance and an irresponsible use of words. What I’ve learned over the last few days has enlightened and amazed me. As a guy who hunts 200 days a year, does seminars on hunting, wrote for six hunting magazines, had a hunting TV show, and wrote 20 books on hunting, how could I have been so ignorant and out of touch with reality in the world of hunting and shooting?
But I was. I really can’t explain it, maybe because I just summarily dismissed the firearms in question in my mind when I saw them in magazines and catalogs. I saw one “black” firearm in a hunting camp in all my 50 years of hunting, and I shot one last year off a boat when fishing in Alaska. To tell the truth, it was fun and I enjoyed it immensely, but I never considered one for use in hunting. I have to tell you that I have had a revelation. I’m learning that many of my pals own AR-15’s and similar firearms and indeed use them for hunting. I was totally unaware that they were being used for legitimate hunting purposes. That is the absolute truth.
My biggest regret is not the financial impact of all this. I’m almost 67 and retirement is an option. The dreadful impact here is that I inadvertently struck a spear into the hearts of the people I love most…America’s gun owners. And, even though this huge cadre of dedicated people have succeeded in stripping me of my career, I hold no grudges. I will continue to stand as firm on pro hunting as I’ve ever done. But what’s different now is that I’ll do all I can to educate others who are, or were, as ignorant as I was about “black” rifles and the controversy that surrounds them. My promise to you is that I’ll learn all I can about these firearms, and by the time this week is out, I’ll order one. The NUGE has invited me to hunt with him using AR-15’s, and I’m eager to go, and learn. I’ll do all I can to spread the word.
I understand that many of you will not accept this apology, believing that the damage has been done and there’s no way to repair it. You have that right. But let me say this. I mentioned this above, and I’ll repeat it. I’m willing to seize this opportunity to educate hunters and shooters who shared my ignorance. If you’re willing to allow me to do that, we can indeed, in my mind, form a stronger bond within our ranks. Maybe in a roundabout way we can bring something good out of this.
Jim Zumbo
Zumbo Apology on the Nuge's website:
http://nugeboard.tednugent.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/286904.html
posted 02-22-2007 11:49 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The last few days have been an educational experience, to say the least. My ill-conceived inflammatory blog, as all of you now know, set off a firestorm that, I’m told, has never before been equaled. I’m not proud of that.
Let me say this at the outset. My words here are from the heart, and all mine. No one can censor me, and I answer to no one but myself. And I have no one to blame but myself. Outdoor Life, a magazine that I worked for full-time as Hunting Editor for almost 30 years, fired me yesterday. My TV show was cancelled yesterday. Many of my sponsors have issued statements on their website to sever all relationships. This may cause many of you to do backflips and dance in the streets, but, of course, I’m not laughing, nor am I looking for sympathy. I don’t want a pity party.
They say hindsight is golden. Looking back, I can’t believe I said the words “ban” and “terrorist” in the context that I did. I don’t know what I was thinking when I wrote that. I can explain this as sheer ignorance and an irresponsible use of words. What I’ve learned over the last few days has enlightened and amazed me. As a guy who hunts 200 days a year, does seminars on hunting, wrote for six hunting magazines, had a hunting TV show, and wrote 20 books on hunting, how could I have been so ignorant and out of touch with reality in the world of hunting and shooting?
But I was. I really can’t explain it, maybe because I just summarily dismissed the firearms in question in my mind when I saw them in magazines and catalogs. I saw one “black” firearm in a hunting camp in all my 50 years of hunting, and I shot one last year off a boat when fishing in Alaska. To tell the truth, it was fun and I enjoyed it immensely, but I never considered one for use in hunting. I have to tell you that I have had a revelation. I’m learning that many of my pals own AR-15’s and similar firearms and indeed use them for hunting. I was totally unaware that they were being used for legitimate hunting purposes. That is the absolute truth.
My biggest regret is not the financial impact of all this. I’m almost 67 and retirement is an option. The dreadful impact here is that I inadvertently struck a spear into the hearts of the people I love most…America’s gun owners. And, even though this huge cadre of dedicated people have succeeded in stripping me of my career, I hold no grudges. I will continue to stand as firm on pro hunting as I’ve ever done. But what’s different now is that I’ll do all I can to educate others who are, or were, as ignorant as I was about “black” rifles and the controversy that surrounds them. My promise to you is that I’ll learn all I can about these firearms, and by the time this week is out, I’ll order one. The NUGE has invited me to hunt with him using AR-15’s, and I’m eager to go, and learn. I’ll do all I can to spread the word.
I understand that many of you will not accept this apology, believing that the damage has been done and there’s no way to repair it. You have that right. But let me say this. I mentioned this above, and I’ll repeat it. I’m willing to seize this opportunity to educate hunters and shooters who shared my ignorance. If you’re willing to allow me to do that, we can indeed, in my mind, form a stronger bond within our ranks. Maybe in a roundabout way we can bring something good out of this.
Jim Zumbo
Sistema1927
Member
Has anyone seen anyplace where Jim Zumbo has gotten off of his "hunting" kick and supports the right to have EBRs (or any other weapon) to defend hearth and home, keep tyrannical governments in check, and ward off terrorists and invaders?
I haven't yet.
We need for Jim Zumbo to clearly articulate the type of "Second Amendment Absolutism" that Ted Nugent and Tom Gresham talked about last Sunday. Then, and only then, will I be willing to welcome him back into the fold.
I haven't yet.
We need for Jim Zumbo to clearly articulate the type of "Second Amendment Absolutism" that Ted Nugent and Tom Gresham talked about last Sunday. Then, and only then, will I be willing to welcome him back into the fold.
When I was a kid it was impressed on me that the words “I’m sorry” were very important when making an apology, without them it was worthless.
I have yet to see Zumbo use the words "I'm sorry" anywhere. I also haven't seen him retract his remarks about terrorists and terrorist weapons.
So I guess shooting a couple of rounds with Nugent and having your picture taken with an AR makes everything better?
arthurcw
Member
Sorry for the long post.
I’m not sure Endless Compromise has done the job for us either?
For Public Figures in the firearms community there are some issues where you ARE either 100% for the 2nd Amendment or you are no better than an Anti. One of those issues is that ALL arms are protected by the 2nd amendment. That is a base argument that anyone who owns a firearm MUST be in step with or they are no better than a member of the Brady Bunch. For Billy Bob my neighbor and a hunter, it's no big deal. I can work on him slowly. But for someone who has the ear (eye) of thousands of readers, that is a travesty.
Now we can argue the practicalities of current law and how to change it all day and you don’t have to be 100% in any “camp”. You can insist on legislation that overturns every anti 2nd amendment law and ruling in the last 70 years. I can argue that it needs to be done slowly and that we didn’t get here overnight so it isn’t going to be fixed overnight. But the base principles can not be compromised on.
Jumbo showed that he believed (past tense intentional because that is all I am certain of) that not all guns deserver protection under the 2nd Amendment. His “apologies” were not. So he was “zumboed”. Now if it had been my unpublished neighbor, I would have worked longer and harder to convert him. But Zumbo had to be stopped. If he went on spouting that drivel in a public forum it would have done more to hurt the 2nd Amendment. Therefore if you are a prominent member of any firearms group and you actively denounce the 2nd Amendment, then you are a target.
Now he wants us to believe that he has changed his mind. I’m Ok with that. I’m a second chance kind of guy. If he shows through his deeds (which are his words because of his profession) that he steadfastly and continually supports the 2nd, then I’ll sit down to sup with him. But part of his rehabilitation is going to have to be trying to undo the damage he has done. That means MANY earnest attempts to convert hunters who don’t get it (or at least get them to not actively oppose the 2nd). That also means preaching against the (and to) anti’s.
Remember that Norma McCorvey decided that she had made a wrong turn and spent the rest of her life trying to undo it. I’m not saying that Zumbo has to make it the cornerstone of all his future work. But he will have to make an honest attempt. And lord knows it’s not going to be easy. He’s going to have to walk a fine line to keep Pro 2nd Amendment folks and “Might as well be anti” Hunters happy.
Just make the effort and I’ll be happy. Pink rifles? It’s a nice start. And a good one, I think.
This IN NO WAY translates to politicians and the average gun owner. Politicians can be used and traded depending on their stances and the circumstance. They don’t have to be 100% pro gun. They just can’t be anti gun (or anti a particular gun) crusaders. Regular Joe’s like Billy Bob can be worked on and slowly converted.
I’m not sure Endless Compromise has done the job for us either?
For Public Figures in the firearms community there are some issues where you ARE either 100% for the 2nd Amendment or you are no better than an Anti. One of those issues is that ALL arms are protected by the 2nd amendment. That is a base argument that anyone who owns a firearm MUST be in step with or they are no better than a member of the Brady Bunch. For Billy Bob my neighbor and a hunter, it's no big deal. I can work on him slowly. But for someone who has the ear (eye) of thousands of readers, that is a travesty.
Now we can argue the practicalities of current law and how to change it all day and you don’t have to be 100% in any “camp”. You can insist on legislation that overturns every anti 2nd amendment law and ruling in the last 70 years. I can argue that it needs to be done slowly and that we didn’t get here overnight so it isn’t going to be fixed overnight. But the base principles can not be compromised on.
Jumbo showed that he believed (past tense intentional because that is all I am certain of) that not all guns deserver protection under the 2nd Amendment. His “apologies” were not. So he was “zumboed”. Now if it had been my unpublished neighbor, I would have worked longer and harder to convert him. But Zumbo had to be stopped. If he went on spouting that drivel in a public forum it would have done more to hurt the 2nd Amendment. Therefore if you are a prominent member of any firearms group and you actively denounce the 2nd Amendment, then you are a target.
Now he wants us to believe that he has changed his mind. I’m Ok with that. I’m a second chance kind of guy. If he shows through his deeds (which are his words because of his profession) that he steadfastly and continually supports the 2nd, then I’ll sit down to sup with him. But part of his rehabilitation is going to have to be trying to undo the damage he has done. That means MANY earnest attempts to convert hunters who don’t get it (or at least get them to not actively oppose the 2nd). That also means preaching against the (and to) anti’s.
Remember that Norma McCorvey decided that she had made a wrong turn and spent the rest of her life trying to undo it. I’m not saying that Zumbo has to make it the cornerstone of all his future work. But he will have to make an honest attempt. And lord knows it’s not going to be easy. He’s going to have to walk a fine line to keep Pro 2nd Amendment folks and “Might as well be anti” Hunters happy.
Just make the effort and I’ll be happy. Pink rifles? It’s a nice start. And a good one, I think.
This IN NO WAY translates to politicians and the average gun owner. Politicians can be used and traded depending on their stances and the circumstance. They don’t have to be 100% pro gun. They just can’t be anti gun (or anti a particular gun) crusaders. Regular Joe’s like Billy Bob can be worked on and slowly converted.
Every day I see more and more "assault weapon" crap hurled by the gun-banners. They are starting to hit hard on for a new ban. Zumbo's name keeps getting brought up and this whole thing used against us.
He may have "apologized", but i won't believe him until he starts doing some actions. He needs to get off Nuge's ranch and get out there and start promoting our rights. He needs to promote the rights to arms regardless of their looks. He needs to refute his previous comments, not just to us, but to those that are using this situtation and his comments against us.
His chance to make good is right here in front of all of our faces and I don't see him doing anything.
Saying I was wrong, and shooting some ARs with Ted Nugent and then coming back in under the radar, and remembering to not mention those "evil terror rifles" again isn't going to cut it.
PS. and why's he shooting that pink striped one? Shoot a normal looking black or green one. This isn't some funny situation. It is serious and these are our rights we're talking about. Shoot a normal one and then promote it and our rights.
He may have "apologized", but i won't believe him until he starts doing some actions. He needs to get off Nuge's ranch and get out there and start promoting our rights. He needs to promote the rights to arms regardless of their looks. He needs to refute his previous comments, not just to us, but to those that are using this situtation and his comments against us.
His chance to make good is right here in front of all of our faces and I don't see him doing anything.
Saying I was wrong, and shooting some ARs with Ted Nugent and then coming back in under the radar, and remembering to not mention those "evil terror rifles" again isn't going to cut it.
PS. and why's he shooting that pink striped one? Shoot a normal looking black or green one. This isn't some funny situation. It is serious and these are our rights we're talking about. Shoot a normal one and then promote it and our rights.
+ 1
As much as I'd like to see us all move forward and even perhaps see Jim Zumbo become a useful agent, I have to agree with this point.
I've said all along in this issue that he MUST challenge those using his words against the 2nd Amendment if he is to stage a recovery.
IMO, this would be the first indication that his words are sincere.
John
As much as I'd like to see us all move forward and even perhaps see Jim Zumbo become a useful agent, I have to agree with this point.
I've said all along in this issue that he MUST challenge those using his words against the 2nd Amendment if he is to stage a recovery.
IMO, this would be the first indication that his words are sincere.
John
Green Lantern
Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2006
- Messages
- 1,665
Point. But do you think for one second that either of the three parties mentioned would even acknowlege GETTING such a letter, let alone printing it?
Gun-grabbers are a totally irrational lot, but at least when they keep throwing out Zumbo's name, we now have TWO things to do:
-Point out what happened to Zumbo
-Point out that he's now changed his views (or at least it LOOKS like he has....
)arthurcw
Member
Hmmm… is an interesting apology. I’ll take it for what it is; a man trying to figure life out.
For him as a Man:
Not many of us have “AH HA!” moments in our lives. No one should expect this event to have a “Road to Damascus” affect on Zumbo. He’s a hunter. He is going to look at things from a hunting perspective. If that is the way into his heart? Good. It’s not complete, it’s not perfect. And we need to gently remind him that it’s about the 2nd Amendment, not hunting. But he may be able to do some small good with this attitude and he may be able to grow into a true supporter of the 2nd. I’d like to meet the guy and help him in his conversion.
For him as a writer:
I think this shows we were right to “zumbo” him. He still does not get it and will only further the idea that the 2nd Amendment is somehow about “legitimate sporting purposes”. I regret that he lost his job. I wish him well. I hope that tomorrow is a bright day for him. I hope he does wake up one day and see that his sport is in danger from the same people who seek to take EBR’s out of the hands of citizens. When he gets around to figuring that out, I’ll have use for him as a writer.
Malone LaVeigh
Member
I'm a little dissappointed with his apology. Instead of his embracing the evil black rifle for hunting, I would rather hear him say, "I still don't have any use for those things, but I recognize that the Second Amendment is about a lot more than hunting."
He certainly screwed the pooch when he used terms like "terrorist," but I don't think there's anything wrong with having some people out there in the gun-using community who have no use for military-style sporting arms. His new-found popularity with anti-gunners might have made him a better ambassador for hunting (which is one of the biggest gateways to gun ownership) to a wider audience than we normally reach.
Oh, well, this whole thing was a mess and there's not much he could have done to salvage it. I wish the poor soul the best.
I do wrestle with the anonymity thing a bit. I have revealed my name and address to a couple of people here, but OTOH, I have received threats for some of my opinions. I think it's important that people hear opinions that are a bit out of the mainstream here, but I don't think it's worth getting shot over.
He certainly screwed the pooch when he used terms like "terrorist," but I don't think there's anything wrong with having some people out there in the gun-using community who have no use for military-style sporting arms. His new-found popularity with anti-gunners might have made him a better ambassador for hunting (which is one of the biggest gateways to gun ownership) to a wider audience than we normally reach.
Oh, well, this whole thing was a mess and there's not much he could have done to salvage it. I wish the poor soul the best.
And I've worked places where I dared not admit I was an environmentalist or ever voted for a Democrat.
I do wrestle with the anonymity thing a bit. I have revealed my name and address to a couple of people here, but OTOH, I have received threats for some of my opinions. I think it's important that people hear opinions that are a bit out of the mainstream here, but I don't think it's worth getting shot over.
Last edited:
It doesn't matter if they acknowledge it. It matters if he does it. It shows that he is interested in fixing the mistake that he made, rather than fixing his career. And even if he just got the letter in the legislative record, that would be a benefit, and he could certainly tell the world he told the other two parties to set the record straight, even if they refused to acknowledge it.
I take it that we can agree he hasn't done it?
The first point serves to negate the second. His career was threatened and he changed his mind under duress. And the fact is, outside of those that frequent these boards, no one really knows he changed his mind because he isn't sending the letters referenced above. He is preaching to the choir or, more accurately, he is preaching to the customers of his former/current sponsors.
Imagine if you will a trusted contractor is working at your home. He calls and tells you he set fire to the house. He is adamant it was a mistake, apologizes profusely, and hopes you will forgive him and hire him again. Meanwhile, the house is burning and he is doing nothing to put the fire out. That's the current situation.
- Status
