• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Interesting spin on Zumbo from a gun control group.

Ranb

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
11,313
Location
WA USA
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2003626251_rayschoenke20.html

Many gun owners have heard of Jim Zumbo’s problems after he spoke his mind about AR-15 and AK style rifles. Ray Schoenke, of the gun control group American Hunters and Shooters Association wrote the above piece to support Zumbo and criticize the NRA.

It is interesting to see that Mr. Schoenke did not include in the article the words that caused the uproar leading to Mr. Zumbo losing his position at Outdoor Life. Jim Zumbo said in part on his blog; “I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles……Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting……I say game departments should ban them from the prairies and woods.”

From the above link; “This incident is regrettable not only because it publicly humiliated an honorable sportsman, but also because it suggests that hunters and shooters are vindictive, close-minded zealots.”

If anyone is a close-minded zealot, it has to be Mr. Zumbo for calling AR-15’s a terrorist weapon that should be banned by game departments.

Also from the link; “If the NRA's leaders can turn on a hunting legend like Zumbo simply for engaging in a reasonable and rational discussion of a growing issue, what can they do to you and me?”

In my opinion, Mr. Zumbo’s comments were only reasonable sounding to the gun control zealots who support groups like the American Hunters and Shooters Association.

And; “As we fight to defend the Second Amendment, we also need to fight for access to and conservation of public lands.

The American Hunters and Shooters Association is actually fighting against the 2nd amendment.

Does anyone think that the NRA is capable of limiting First Amendment rights? Last I heard, the first amendment only prohibited the government from interfering with free speech. The NRA and any other non-government organization/person is free to do as it legally pleases when it comes to limiting speech in the USA.

Ranb
 
The initial comments were bizarre, in my opinion. What in the world is a "terrorist" firearm? If it's a weapon used by terrorists, then any gun could potentially be a "terrorist" gun. Is an M-16 a "hero" weapon, as it is used by the American armed forces?

Besides, even if the weapon in question is not very well suited to hunting (it may or may not be, I don't know), what about those who wish to use them for target shooting? Or those who simply wish to own one? As far as I can tell, the Second Amendment isn't specific on needing to have a good reason for having a gun.
 

Back
Top Bottom