Statement from Outdoor Life

Transcription

Hunting With Jim Zumbo
Main | Statement from Outdoor Life »
Due to the controversy surrounding Jim Zumbo’s recent postings, Outdoor Life
has decided to discontinue the “Hunting With Zumbo” blog for the time being.
Outdoor Life has always been, and will always be, a steadfast supporter of our
Second Amendment rights, which do not make distinctions based on the looks
Page 1 of 853
DI S C L A I M E R
In the spirit of free speech, our
bloggers are free to voice their
personal opinions. These opinions
not necessarily represent those of
Outdoor Life or its staff.
OU R
S I T E S
of the firearms we choose to own, shoot and take hunting. Please direct any
comments you have to [email protected].
February 16, 2007 in Hunting | Permalink
RE C E N T
P O S T S
AR C H I V E S
Comments
I also have no interest in using a combat-type gun in the woods. Auto rifles
February 2007
BO O K S A N D
VI D E O S
(especially those with large magazines) tend to promote a "spray and pray"
mentality, rather than a deliberative and carefully chosen humane harvest.
http://outdoorlife.blogs.com/zumbo/2007/02/assault_rifles_.html
2/19/2007
Page 2 of 853
Already too many hunters take impulsive shots at running game. Neither the
image of hunters as commandos nor the sight of wounded game will help us
with the public perception of hunting. I understand that using a combat rifle of
this type does not FORCE a hunter to hunt impulsively, but the vast majority of
hunters will be better served with a gun (like a bolt, lever or single shot) that is
likely lighter and more reliable anyway. If you insist on using an auto, there are
plenty of sporting models that have more than enough firepower for game. If
you don't care who you intimidate by the look of your firearm (or you secretly
enjoy looking like Rambo), you are not caring enough about the public
Subscribe to this blog's feed
perception of our endangered sport.
Powered by TypePad
Posted by: John M. Gagnon | February 16, 2007 at 11:47 PM
Jim, There is nothing quite like the feel of a quality wood stock in hand,
especially the one on your favorite sporting rifle. I carry and train with an AR15
on my job and I must admit it is a rush, but would not consider hunting with the
cold uncomfortable thing.
Posted by: Greg | February 17, 2007 at 12:33 AM
I'm not a huge fan of the whole tactical take that seems to be popular right now.
I really don't see the need for it. Traditional buttstocks and firearms have
worked fine for years.
I know remington and mossberg have a couple of collapsible stock turkey guns
on the market right now.
I don't find the stocks comfortable to use and I feel like I'm playing soldier.
Jim
Posted by: jstreet | February 17, 2007 at 01:11 AM
So what if people want to hunt with a rifle that does not "look" like the rest. I
personally do not own nor would I hunt with an Assault Rifle - But could care
less if that is what someone else prefers to hunt with. Make up your mind Jim -Divided we fall.
Posted by: Jwilliams | February 17, 2007 at 11:59 AM
If an AR-15 is considered a "terrorist" rifle, then what about all the other semiautomatic rifles out there such as mini-14's. All of those assault rifles are just
civilian versions of the M-16. I know they aren't automatic, heck i don't think
they even allow them to have a 3 round burst so it is kind of hard for me to even
consider them as assault rifles. I know they are all sinthetic and metal with no
wood but that isn't always a bad thing. I think I have even seen you Mr. Zumbo
with rifles that don't have any wood. I think the bigest reason I responded to
your article is that you called these rifles "terrorist" rifles. As far as i know we
are the only country that uses rifles like this so are you refering to our soldiers
as terrorists?
2/19/2007
Page 3 of 853
Posted by: Josh | February 17, 2007 at 01:08 PM
If an AR-15 is considered a "terrorist" rifle, then what about all the other semiautomatic rifles out there such as mini-14's. All of those assault rifles are just
civilian versions of the M-16. I know they aren't automatic, heck i don't think
they even allow them to have a 3 round burst so it is kind of hard for me to even
consider them as assault rifles. I know they are all sinthetic and metal with no
wood but that isn't always a bad thing. I think I have even seen you Mr. Zumbo
with rifles that don't have any wood. I think the bigest reason I responded to
your article is that you called these rifles "terrorist" rifles. As far as i know we
are the only country that uses rifles like this so are you refering to our soldiers
as terrorists?
Posted by: Josh | February 17, 2007 at 01:09 PM
I somewhat agree Jim. For normal hunting there is no place for them. I have
one & the only time it gets used is when there is a problem with feral dogs or
coyotes during calving. Other than those times the only use that it has is to stop
charging cans. This is the only other thing they are good for. Also the 7.62x39
has recieved a lot of press lately as a hunting rd, it has less power than the
old .30-30, & the .30-30 has been condemed for years as being underpowered
so why are hunting mags calling the 7.62 great?
Posted by: Buckdun | February 17, 2007 at 03:00 PM
When I varmint hunt I use a Mini-14, but I only use a 5 round clip. I also use a
ruger 10/22. I think hunting with a assault rifle is only okay if you have a 5
round clip in it.
Posted by: Eric | February 17, 2007 at 07:41 PM
Just wait 'til they come for your "high powered sniper rifle." If I were you, I
wouldn't divide gun owners as we are under attack and these kind of articles
only hurt the overall cause.
Posted by: Billy | February 17, 2007 at 08:26 PM
Your blog entry is disgusting. Asking game departments to ban the AR type
rifles in the woods? Calling them terrorist rifles? You are an enemy to the 2nd
Amendment on the same level as Sarah Brady with these types of blog entries.
Have you heard "Divided We Stand United We Fall"?
Posted by: Bryan | February 17, 2007 at 08:33 PM
I hunt with an AR. Why? Because in the standard .223 Rem /5.56 NATO
caliber, handloaded with 75 grain Swifts, it is perfect for South Texas Whitetails
and feral hogs.
My AR is NOT a terrorist rifle as when it isn't used for hunting, it is a fine rifle in
2/19/2007
Page 4 of 853
the Civillian Marksmanship Program. Target shooting and not from the bench. 3
position, about perfect practice for field shooting. The only change I make to
the rifle for hunting is ammo and removal of the weights. No fancy scope
necessary because it hits where I aim it and I know what it does at range.
And those bemoaning the use of .223 for deer have never tried it. Or are such
poor shots they need overkilling power to make up for their lack of skill. No
hunter should EVER take a shot they know they cannot make. And shooting
more than 2 boxes of ammo a year at targets on varying range is a confidence
builder. If I can see it, I can shoot it.
Posted by: Slyvester Putz | February 17, 2007 at 08:35 PM
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=548211
Posted by: Mike R. | February 17, 2007 at 08:36 PM
I cannot believe I just read that. For a minute, I thought I was on the Brady
website.
The "Traditional" rifles (wood stock, bolt action) are all but gone at high power
matches. Looking over the stats from Camp Perry this year, I seem to
remember that most of the winners used (gasp) AR-15 stle rifles.
If you are afraid of an inanimate object because of the way it looks, I humbly
suggest you seek professional help.
Posted by: Doug | February 17, 2007 at 08:37 PM
You sir are disgusting.
We all know you have a propensity for high-powered bolt action sniper rifles
capable of killing from hundreds of yards away. No reasonable hunter would
ever need such a weapon for civlized hunting in a civilized society.
The only thing one would ever need is a bow and arrow. The only people who
need high powered super bolt action sniper rifles are those playing commando,
and they need to be thrown in prison.
Posted by: Ben | February 17, 2007 at 08:39 PM
You sound like a writer for a fashion magazine.Those rifles are just not pretty.
They do not belong because I say so.
You should hunt with what I approve.
Government restrictions will come for your firearms too. Just look at the U.K.
they cannot own anything. Then who will stand with you? Please stand up for
all firearm types the Constitution says nothing about "sporting" use of a firearm.
Do not be scared be educated and informed and free.
Posted by: Jon | February 17, 2007 at 08:40 PM
2/19/2007
Page 5 of 853
Most of the public find your hunting rifles, which I call high powered sniper
rifles, terrifying.
Posted by: matt | February 17, 2007 at 08:41 PM
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=548054
Posted by: Paul | February 17, 2007 at 08:41 PM
I really have a hard time believing that someone as versed in firearms as Jim
Zumbo would be in the dark about the use of Ar's for sporting purposes. I'm
equally suprised he is unaware of the accuracy capability of these guns. There
are many manufacturers with accuracy guarantees of 1moa or 3/4 moa. What
are the claims for Remington, isn't it around 3moa. There are many other
hunting/fishing publications out in the world that have said many great things
about these guns. I guess I'm just suprised to see the seperation being created
here. Espescially when it all comes down to it, If they can take one semi-auto,
they can take another, and then who knows what's next.
Posted by: Ilikeallguns | February 17, 2007 at 08:41 PM
You are a disappointment to firearms
enthusiasts everywhere.
Posted by: JW | February 17, 2007 at 08:44 PM
Gee Mr. Zumbo, since an AR-15 looks exactly like the M-16 series weapons
our military uses, I guess a reasonable person can only conclude you are
calling our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines 'terrorists'.
My advice for you is if you chose not to hunt with an AR-15, don't do it but
please don't go around minding other peoples business.
" If you don't care who you intimidate by the look of your firearm (or you secretly
enjoy looking like Rambo), you are not caring enough about the public
perception of our endangered sport."
And it seems you are more concerned with your own selfish preconceptions on
how the world ougt to be than protecting the Second Amendemnt. To hell with
other tax payers and their rights, you are going to have things your way or no
way. Funny, last time I read the Second Amendment, the word 'hunting'
appeared no where in it? Coud it be there is in actual fact no constitutionally
protected right to hunt and it is merely a by-product (and a lesser one) of a
greater and more encompasing right?
You remind me of the old timers over on the Ham radio side of things that
would rather see Amateur Radio die completely than the morse code
requirement be dropped. They have become so set in their ways, so afraid of
even the slightest change, they would rather see the entire hobby die wtih them
2/19/2007
Page 6 of 853
that adapt to modern times in the most miniscule way. They look down their
nose at the new generation and percieve them as malcontents and hooligans,
lumping all into one category when they themselves have allowed their
predjudices to make of them the very thing they claim to despise.
You sir, are nothing more than a selfish coward who is willing to throw your
fellow shooters to the hungry wolves for your own self-serving reasons in the
vain hope you are eaten last. You sell out your fellow shooters instead of taking
a principled stand and supporting the shooting community as a whole.
If anyone is to blame for the current state of affairs, you will find him looking
back at you from your bathroom mirror.
Posted by: Paul Vargas | February 17, 2007 at 08:44 PM
Zumbo, your ignorance on weapons truly abounds in this writing. You say that
AR-15's are terrorist rifles so then i guess you are calling US Soldiers terrorists
as thay are the only military in the world that uses the AR-15 platform (in the
military this would be the M-16). Secondly, lets look at the facts of these
"terrorist" rifles. These are nothing more then semi-automatic 223 caliber rifles.
We all hunt and own a lot more powerful rifles then this to go shoot a deer, elk,
or bear in the US so why are those rifles then not demonized.
Or how bout the Remington 7400; thats a semi-automatic rifle that shoots a far
larger bullet then the little 223 the AR-15 shoots. SO why is the remington 7400
an ok gun to hunt with and not the AR=15. The remington has a 5 round box
mag and the AR-15 to legally hunt with it only has a 5 round box magazine so
why is there so much of a difference then??
Your ignorance abounds in this article and its people like you that will get all
rifles banned. Remember, you want to rid the country of these evil AR-15s that
shoot litte 22 caliber bullets, so what will stop the liberals of ridding this country
of rifles that shoots large caliber bullets(.30, 338 etc).
One last thing for all the above commentors: a clip loads a magazine and a
magazine loads a rifle. So your Ruger Mini-14 does not have a 5 round clip but
a 5 round magazine. So please remember, its magazine not clip. Say it again,
magazine not clip.
Well at least now i know its time to cancel my subscription to this magazine (the
one you read not load a rifle with) as this is as bad as reading a democratic
convention flyer.
Take care all and happy hunting!!!
Posted by: Aaron | February 17, 2007 at 08:44 PM
2/19/2007
Page 7 of 853
I used to respect you, Jim, but your comments are disappointing. What makes
your weapon of choice more noble than the next guy's? Also, maybe you
should pay more attention to the company you keep, particularly the executives
from Remington. Their company provides ammunition for these so-called
terrorist rifles. They'll be getting a letter from me.
Posted by: Erik S. | February 17, 2007 at 08:44 PM
First they took the "assault" rifles, but I didn't care because I couldn't hunt with
them.
Then they took the handguns, but I didn't care because a lot of folks don't hunt
with them.
Then they took the leaver action rifles and pump shotguns. I didn't say anything
because we can hunt without them.
Then they banned center fire rifles and and slugs. We could hunt with
buckshot.
Then they banned them all but it was too late. No one was there to stand
beside me in the fight to save the right to keep and bear arms.
We as gun owners stand and fall together. The attitute that you Mr.Zumbo have
will be the death of gun ownership in the USA. Your attitude is the same as the
"hunters" in England and that attitude is why they are in the state they are in.
If you think they just want my AR15 you are sadly mistaken. They want all arms
out of the hands of citizens.
I will close with some words from our current speaker of the house, Nancy
Pelosi. "If I could have got the votes that day I would have said Mr. and Mrs.
America TRUN THEM ALL IN."
TURN THEM ALL IN, united we stand and divided we fall.
Posted by: Charles Roberts II | February 17, 2007 at 08:45 PM
I have several AR-15`s and one AK-47 neither of which i`ve used for hunting
(I`ve got a 30-06 for that, which by the way started life as a Military Round)I use
my AR-15`s and AK-47 for plinking at the range cause there fun and cheap to
shoot. I shoot several thousand rounds a year and have become a better shot
just by shooting more than I would just using my deer rifles. You people who
call these rifles "terrorist" rifles or there "bullets" cop killers need to pull you
heads out of your a$$es. Politicians are trying to fool the average hunter by
saying they only want to ban "assult/sniper" rifles or "cop killer" bullets. Your
deer rifle with a scope on it is a sniper rifle and your 270, 308, 30/06, ect... will
penetrate a bullet prove vest just as easy as a "cop killing" 223/5.56 or 7.62
2/19/2007
Page 8 of 853
round will. Gun owners need to stick together because divided we`ll all will lose
to the gun grabers.
Posted by: todd4417 | February 17, 2007 at 08:51 PM
Allowing others to define a "reasonable firearm" on going to lead to a country
without a second amendment.
We all know that "Elk Rifle" is just a euphemism for a "Sniper Rifle" and that
"Bedside Handgun" is the "Criminals Weapon of choice." One mans "Duck
Gun" is another's "Trench Broom."
"Your humble opinion" is demonstrably defective.
Posted by: Adam Lamb | February 17, 2007 at 08:52 PM
You sir, sound like a shill for Sarah Brady and the VPC.
With your type of arrogance, Daniel Boone would've been forced to use a bow
and arrow since his muzzle loader would've been deemed an "assault rifle" by
the likes of you.
Posted by: All of the Bill of Rights, Not just those you like or agree with | February 17, 2007 at
08:53 PM
I can't believe a fellow gun owner in this day of unrelenting atacks on all our
american rights would say something like this let alone put it in writing. You and
your kind will be the end to private gun ownership in america.
Shame on you.
Please tell your editors that I will no longer purchase their publication and I will
dispose of all that I see laying in the doctors, dentists, garages, anywhere and
unfortunately my fathers end table just to help preserve our constitutional rights
that have already been destroyed by fools such as yourself.
Shame on you, you have forever lost a reader.
Stand together or fall apart!!!!!
Posted by: Mike T. | February 17, 2007 at 08:54 PM
If this magazine/writer wish to be so P.C., I formally request that you remove
the "Racks Calender" from this website. Oh, you know someone may be
offended by barely clothed females and we don't want to bring negative
attention to "huntin'..... We need to stand together to preserve everyone's 2A
RIGHTS!!!
Posted by: Tom F. | February 17, 2007 at 08:57 PM
"Only once in my life have I ever seen anyone using one of these firearms."
-Jim Zumbo
2/19/2007
Page 9 of 853
You need to get out more -or better yet, hand over the keyboard to someone
else who isn't afraid to experience the other shooting sports that are available.
Were hunting to become extinct, the same people who are "terrified" of AR15's
would be delighted.
Don't count on the rest of the gun owners to defend hunting if hunters don't
defend the 2nd Amendment.
Posted by: Ben | February 17, 2007 at 08:57 PM
We are our own worst enemy. I know MANY hunters who use AR's for hunting
and what is the difference between an AR that uses a 223 round or a bolt
action rifle that uses that same round? because of the looks? So because the
gun grabbers find a catch word like "assault rifle" for a semi automatic, How
long until they change the term "hunting rifle" to a "Sniper Rifle?" I cannot
believe a pro gun person would use the words "Ban" in one of his articles. Very
disappointing.
Posted by: Yoz | February 17, 2007 at 08:58 PM
I hope that Jim will re-consider what he's said. It's fairly easy to be duped by the
media sensationalism over firearms into casting an evil personnae on a
particular style of rifle. He should note that the last mall killing was shotgun
related.
Semi-auto ARs and AKs can do quite well with prairie dogs and believe it or not
some states allow them for deer hunting with a magazine limit.
To each his own but let's not allow our 2nd Amendment rights to be abridged
because of our cosmetic differences.
Posted by: Gordon Langston | February 17, 2007 at 09:00 PM
Yes, the firearm I was issued while deployed in the middle east was really a
"terrorist weapon." The semi-auto version I own at my house, and have taken
dozens of bucks with, would have been more at home shooting Israeli children.
That was heavily laden with sarcasm, if you couldn't tell.
This author is just about the dumbest son of a bitch I've ever encountered.
These jackass “Elmer Fudd” hunters give everyone that owns a firearm a bad
name.
Posted by: | February 17, 2007 at 09:06 PM
What despicable ignorance on display. First of all, how could a so-called
hunting writer be so far behind the times that he doesn't even realize AR's are
popular varmint rifles?
If .223 is an acceptible caliber for varmint hunting, then what difference does it
2/19/2007
Page 10 of 853
make if it looks like an AR?
You can be comfortable with "assault weapons have no place in hunting", and
I'll be comfortable with my rights as an American. If all hunters had your attitude
we'd be like England with most all guns outlawed, and self defense outlawed in
our own homes. I'm tired of garbage like this from hunting magazines. I'm
cancelling my subscription to outdoor life and will advise my father of this
magazine's attitude towards our second amendment rights.
You don't need to hunt, go to the grocery store like everyone else.
Posted by: Nathan | February 17, 2007 at 09:10 PM
You are living in a vacuum, and you have no clue.
Should we ban handguns for hunting, too?
Posted by: Harry | February 17, 2007 at 09:10 PM
Mr. Zumbo, I really don't care what you think about AR's, my right to own as
many as I want is a constitutional right. Ever heard of the 2nd amendment to
the American constitution.
You, Sir are the worst enemy of all. The gun owner who sells out other gun
owners.
Coward. COWARD is your name.
Posted by: Kevin | February 17, 2007 at 09:13 PM
I am proud to see what others are writing here and I agree 100% with them.
You are (now were) a respected outdoor writer and you have a duty to all
outdoorsman to protect the second ammendment whether you like the rifle the
other guy uses or not.
I shoot thousands of rounds a year through my various ARs and other "tactical"
weapons and I am a better, safer, and more accurate marksman for it.
It never fails though that each time I go to the range I see a guy with the
average "hunting" rifle totally mishandling the weapon and creating an unsafe
shooting environment. Often times they can't hit their target at a reasonable
range. We, Mr. Zumbo, refer to them and people like you as Fudds.
So now you know that ARs are accurate and I know that you're a Fudd.
My subscription has been cancelled.
Posted by: Stewart In Oregon | February 17, 2007 at 09:13 PM
UNBELIEVABLE!
So much for standing together!
You sir,have offended a vast number of sportsmen,gun owners,servicemen,etc
2/19/2007
Page 11 of 853
with your ignorance.
Maybe you should pick up a copy of Judd Cooney's excellent article from a
recent copy of Fur-Fish-Game and read his take on the AR15 as a sporting
firearm.Not that our Constitution even makes such a distinction!
You howver,do.Simply amazing!
Posted by: DaveinMD | February 17, 2007 at 09:14 PM
I have enjoyed Mr. Zumbo's articles for many years, however, after reading this
column I can assure you that I will never purchase another publication with his
byline. Likewise I will do my best to avoid any product that has his name
attached to it.
People like Mr. Zumbo will be touted as supporters of the "rights" of hunter
when the next ban comes around. Hunting is not a part of the 2A and enjoys no
protections against the whims of out of control legislatures. I can assure you
that I lose more and more respect for "hunters" that would see my rights
abridged because of their arrogant disdain for my choice in rifles.
Posted by: 96Ag | February 17, 2007 at 09:14 PM
I was quite dissapointed to read the blast by Jim Zumbo as to his version of
what I call a Semi-automatic firearm. I own a Ruger 10/22 and have been told it
is also an "Assult Rifle." Now, I'm going to really going to get it. I'm the proud
owner of a nice unused 1954 Russian SKS with all milled parts. Let me tell you
after some trigger work, it's a tack driver firing at bolt action speed. I may hunt
Deer with it using a five round magazine. Note: I'm a one shot kill hunter, there
will be no rapid fire. Please Jim, join the Hillary and Brady mob they need you!
Posted by: Jim Perkins | February 17, 2007 at 09:14 PM
When I hear people make such foolish comments as the ones you made in
your article one thought comes to mind. If the 2A only pertains to your idea of a
"hunting riffle" then I guess the 1A only pertains quill pens and scrolls. I think
you need to get yor heada out of the sand sir because obviously you dont fully
understand the 2A!!
Posted by: Mark | February 17, 2007 at 09:15 PM
Way to do research before making a retarded comment Zumbo!
Posted by: 2A | February 17, 2007 at 09:16 PM
I am absolutely amazed at the ignorance displayed in Mr. Zumbo's illogical
article posted above.
Rather than continue to voice my displeasure via an anonymous post on an
internet blog, I instead feel my time would be better spent addressing my
concerns with Remington. Surely they do not condone Mr. Zumbo's anti-gun
point of view, but I will most assuredly give them a chance to explain their
2/19/2007
Page 12 of 853
reaction to this drivel.
Posted by: Jason | February 17, 2007 at 09:17 PM
Jim is entitled to his opinion, but that is a huge cup of stupid.
Way to fight for someone who like things that you don't.
We are our own worst enemy.
Posted by: GeorgeInNePa | February 17, 2007 at 09:20 PM
Im am very surprised and at the same extremly disappointed, as an avid hunter
and collector of firearms that a outdoor writer would bash the appearance of an
ar-15, and call it a terrorist weapon. Is the 2nd ammendment nothing to this
industry?? why are you giving in to the anti-gun crowd? what is wrong with
hunting with a rifle that has the appearance of an assualt rifle? why should the
appearance of the gun matter in the case of hunting? I know several folks who
hunt deer with an SKS (7.62x39) and even more who hunt coyote and other
game with the ar15, and both are excellent choices accordingly. make a stand
for all out doorsmen and the 2nd ammendment. Do you actually think that the
majority of outdoorsman and hunters would support another gun ban?? no I
dont think so. Stand up for our freedoms and stop bashing them. I will nolonger
support a magazine or any media that has given in to the anti-gun cause.
Posted by: jace | February 17, 2007 at 09:21 PM
Im am very surprised and at the same extremly disappointed, as an avid hunter
and collector of firearms that a outdoor writer would bash the appearance of an
ar-15, and call it a terrorist weapon. Is the 2nd ammendment nothing to this
industry?? why are you giving in to the anti-gun crowd? what is wrong with
hunting with a rifle that has the appearance of an assualt rifle? why should the
appearance of the gun matter in the case of hunting? I know several folks who
hunt deer with an SKS (7.62x39) and even more who hunt coyote and other
game with the ar15, and both are excellent choices accordingly. make a stand
for all out doorsmen and the 2nd ammendment. Do you actually think that the
majority of outdoorsman and hunters would support another gun ban?? no I
dont think so. Stand up for our freedoms and stop bashing them. I will nolonger
support a magazine or any media that has given in to the anti-gun cause.
Posted by: jace | February 17, 2007 at 09:21 PM
I cannot believe that called the AR15 a "terrorist" weapon. It is attitudes like
yours that are not needed in the gun world, much less published in a magazine
such as this one.
The editors of this magazine are as much to blame as you. You should have
been called out on this and they should have refused to publish your article.
Perhaps you should try the AR15 before you print such garbage. You may find
2/19/2007
Page 13 of 853
that it is just as viable a weapon for sport as the next. Hell you might even enjoy
it if you open your closed mind.
Unless a full page apology is printed in the next issue to hit the stands I will
never buy another Outdoor Life.
Posted by: Larry M | February 17, 2007 at 09:21 PM
Wow. Just wow. What are you trying do? What was the goal of that worthless
Brady style drivel. Terrorist rifle? How moronic can you be. Just because you
don't care for them or are scared of them does not mean the rest of the world
is. Only you and "soccor moms" are scared of them.
I cannot believe the that you called the weapon of our military a "terrorist rifle"
Every responsible American should own an AR.
You are truly a clueless moron.Shame on you.
Posted by: B.G. | February 17, 2007 at 09:22 PM
Where did you come up with "To most of the public, an Assault Rifle is a
terrifying thing" Do you have anything to back that up? Or did you just make
that up? In what instance is an Assault Rifle a terrifying thing?
Posted by: FlyingPortagee | February 17, 2007 at 09:24 PM
They should all be banned. Do it for the children.
Posted by: cyanide | February 17, 2007 at 09:26 PM
The elitest content of this article rivals that of any left wing, "guns must be
banned" publication I've ever read!
By your own admission, you have no experience with the AR-15. If you had
bothered to actually ever hunt with one, or even just punch paper your opinion
could, and probably would be more favorable. Your comments would certainly
be more credible if you had ever used the AR.
When Eugene Stoner created the AR he created a firearm with a modular
platform, and there-in is one of the major benefits of the AR. By simply
changing upper receivers, one can go from the .223, to a 6.8, the new .204, or
a myriad of other calibers. These calibre changes can be accomplished in
about 3 minutes.
I also call myself a hunter, but that's all you and I share. I hunt 2-3 times per
week for prairie dogs, and coyotes, and use the AR-15 exclusively. I own other
firearms I could use, but prefer the AR-15 for some of the reasons stated.
I suggest you get an AR-15 and actively use it for a month. If you do, and find
you like it, and see the merits it has as a hunting firearm, will you be man
enough to write a retraction of this uninformed article?
2/19/2007
Page 14 of 853
Posted by: Bang-Flop | February 17, 2007 at 09:26 PM
I must be living in a vacuum. The guides on our hunt tell me that the use of boltaction, magazine-fed, multi-shot, smokeless-cartridge centerfire rifles with highpower sniper scopes (see picture at top of page) 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 "murderous sniper" 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 long-range carnage"
rifles. They tell me that some companies are producing murderous sniper 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 magazine-fed / multi-shot / smokelesscartridge / centerfire / optically-enhanced rifles. We've always been proud of
our "muzzle loading single-shot flintlocks."
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, a
murderous sniper rifle is a terrifying thing. Let's divorce ourselves from them. I
say game departments should ban them from the praries and woods.
-------------------------------------It sounds a little outrageous from this perspective, doesn't it?
It appears that you have fallen for the manipulative braying of the Brady and
VPC crowd and have allowed yourself to be become a tool in their gun-banning
plans. If you continue down the divisive path you have started on and continue
to help the gun-grabbers implement their agenda, in the end you will be one of
those who is responsible for denying your great-grandchildren the pleasures of
hunting with a fine firearm of any type.
Once the the gun-grabbers have finished with the so-called "assault weapons",
they will be coming for your bolt-action "sniper rifles", and then your "magazinefed, multi-shot" rifles (including lever and pump actions), and finally all "highpower" centerfire rifles, even the single-shot rifles. Is this the legacy you want to
leave?
Fortunately, it isn't too late to reverse your thinking and take a stand to
preserve the heritage you care for so deeply by defending the 2nd Amendment
in its entirety. After all, the 2nd Amendment is not, and never has been, about
protecting the right to hunt. It is a about the much more basic human right of
self-defense.
2/19/2007
Page 15 of 853
Thus, I urge you to re-think your knee-jerk emotional reaction against an
artificially classified group of firearms that you perceive to be "terrifying", and
work to unite instead of divide. Please, remember that we stand together or
hang alone.
Posted by: John Cazoway | February 17, 2007 at 09:26 PM
Judas.
Posted by: Thomas P. Randall | February 17, 2007 at 09:28 PM
i will never read or buy outdoor life magazine again .
Posted by: mark lindell | February 17, 2007 at 09:28 PM
i will never read or buy outdoor life magazine again .
Posted by: mark lindell | February 17, 2007 at 09:29 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
I am greatly disturbed by your comments above, concerning the AR 15. I am an
avid AR user. I have a switch barrel system, that is chambered for 22LR, 556,
6x45 and 458 Socom. I have used the various calibers hunting large and small
game, in Colorado and New Mexico. I am an ethical hunter who cherishes my
time afield, much like you, from what I have gathered from watching your
television show for the last 2 years. My sister-in-law just presented me with one
of your signed pictures from the last SHOT show. Basically, I have considered
myself a fan of your efforts over the years, promoting hunting through your
various outlets.
While I respect your opinion regarding AR's for hunting, I am afraid that I have
to strongly disagree. As you stated that your opinion has no basis in
experience, I would suggest that your reaction and opinion is of the knee jerk
variety, common to anti-gunners and anti-hunters. There will always exist
divisions within the hunting fraternity regarding, choice of weapon, fair chase,
trophy hunting and the like, but I like to think that we are all still family, fighting
to protect our love of hunting and the outdoors. You would call me a terrorist
because I choose to hunt with the same rifle that I might use to defend myself?
Because it is black, and semiautomatic? How is this different than the bird
hunter who might use his black semiauto Remington shotgun as a home
defense weapon? The gun ownership and hunting heritage in this country is
completey unique and special. They always have been one and the same. I am
truely sorry that you cannot see the connection. And I am greatly disturbed that
you have taken what should be considered an honest debate between ethical
hunters to this level of disparagment.
I would heartily encourage you to spend some time afield with someone who
could help enlighten you as to the use of the AR for hunting and varminting.
2/19/2007
Page 16 of 853
You could then at least formulate an educated opinion. I would welcome any
ethical hunter to my campfire, to cuss and discuss things. That debate is part of
what makes hunting enjoyable. But to be called a terroist for my choice of
weapon, by someone who has zero knowledge of what he talks about, is just
plain wrong, on so many levels.
Craig
Posted by: Craig | February 17, 2007 at 09:32 PM
I just saw this and to be honest, I am aghast. I have read Jim Zumbo's articles
on his experiences for years--since I was old enough to hunt-- and have greatly
admired this man and his work and exploitations.
Now I am seriously dissapointed with his generalizations on shooters and
firearms with respect to "assault" rifles and the shooters who use them. This
article really shows a lack of understanding, education, and a total disrespect
for fellow gun owners--hunters or not.
Before making such caustic and ignorant statements, I would have thought, a
worldly politically aware, Jim Zumbo would have done at least precursory
research on the matter and made himself more qualifed to make such
statments on the matter. He obviously does not even know or has been
exposed to the inherent accuracy of the AR15 platform. In this day and age of
gun control and dissappearing hunting lands, we all need to stick together and
realize that we all have a similar risk at stake. Giving some (firearms)control
away here or there is simply not acceptable--even though it may preserve our
own particular niche in a gun owning society.
I am heart heavy to know now that someone I have admired for so many years
would make such statements as these.
Sad day indeed.
Posted by: Chris Baynes | February 17, 2007 at 09:34 PM
I just saw this and to be honest, I am aghast. I have read Jim Zumbo's articles
on his experiences for years--since I was old enough to hunt-- and have greatly
admired this man and his work and exploitations.
Now I am seriously dissapointed with his generalizations on shooters and
firearms with respect to "assault" rifles and the shooters who use them. This
article really shows a lack of understanding, education, and a total disrespect
for fellow gun owners--hunters or not.
Before making such caustic and ignorant statements, I would have thought, a
worldly politically aware, Jim Zumbo would have done at least precursory
research on the matter and made himself more qualifed to make such
statments on the matter. He obviously does not even know or has been
2/19/2007
Page 17 of 853
exposed to the inherent accuracy of the AR15 platform. In this day and age of
gun control and dissappearing hunting lands, we all need to stick together and
realize that we all have a similar risk at stake. Giving some (firearms)control
away here or there is simply not acceptable--even though it may preserve our
own particular niche in a gun owning society.
I am heart heavy to know now that someone I have admired for so many years
would make such statements as these.
Sad day indeed.
Posted by: Chris Baynes | February 17, 2007 at 09:34 PM
I will never puchase outdoor life again either.
Unless I need some "terrorist" viagra.
You are very much a part of the cancer infecting our great country.
A closed minded ignorant fool, you obviously have no idea what is at stake.
David M. Fortier
InterMedia Outdoors
Field Editor
Shooting Times
RifleShooter
Shotgun News
Combat Arms
Guns&Ammo TV
Posted by: David M. Fortier | February 17, 2007 at 09:35 PM
Thank you David Fortier.
Good man.
It saddens me that you would consider publishing this garbage. The .223 is a
very common round to hunt with. Ar-15's may "look" different to your traditional
bolt action, but they fuction very much the same. Ar-15's are designed to
accomodate a variety of different people, men and women alike. They were
made to shoot comfortably and accurately. Rifles, in general, are not made for
hunting. They are made to shoot. The 2nd Amendment wasn't designated for
hunting either, it specifies that all Americans have the "right to keep and bear
arms." I hope you think about what you have written and try be opened minded
about different options to shooting. You may find that you enjoy shooting these
sporting rifles, because "we indeed are in the same fraternity...As they say,
2/19/2007
Page 18 of 853
different strokes for different folks. Enjoy it however you hunt." God Bless.
Posted by: pvc | February 17, 2007 at 09:38 PM
Mr. Zumbo, I grew up in a liberal-dominated town. I can tell you right now that
the left-leaning public perception of hunters is not a positive one. Show the
average person in my town a picture of a Remington 700, and they'll
immediately associate it with a "sniper rifle". Most people don't delve into our
sport, and their only perceptions are ones the media present to them.
There's no problem with you having an opinion. However, I DO have a problem
with the fact that you call for a ban on weapons you don't agree with. It's
depressing to see the division between "hunter" and "shooter" show so clearly.
Posted by: Ryan | February 17, 2007 at 09:38 PM
You've GOT to be out of your mind.
Why don't you just go ahead and join up with the anti-gun organizations, Mr.
Zumbo?
To my mind, the situation is utterly clear: If you're not FOR ALL OF OUR GUN
RIGHTS, THEN YOU'RE AGAINST SOME OF THEM.
You of all people should know better than to categorize a rifle by its looks. An
AR-15 is functionally just like any other rifle. The important part is merely that it
is a rifle, and while the .223 round it fires may indeed be inadequate for hunting
many sorts of larger game, it's a lightweight, reliable rifle that's usually VERY
accurate and they're a LOT of fun to shoot.
Emphasis on accuracy: I have been to the range during the run-up to deer
season many times, and seen "hunters" (and I use the term loosely" set up at
the bench, shoot five rounds at a target 50 yards away, bring in their target, see
that their five rounds are all within a six to ten inch circle, smile at each other,
congratulate each other at their great shooting, declare themselves ready for
dear season, and pack up...until they stop and stare at me with my plain jane
Bushmaster XM-15E2 (M16A2 lookalike) as I'm blowing dime sized five
shot groups through my targets at 100 yards,
repeatedly and consistently. And this is
out of an UNACCURIZED, box stock rifle with good reloads.
Of course, these blued steel and walnut loving, bolt-gun carrying "hunters" may
not see why I would use "that kind of gun" but
once I go out and bring my targets back and
tally up my scores, and they see them, then
they just HAVE to try out my rifle.
Not once has one of these gentlemen failed
to get a big grin on his face when he sees
2/19/2007
Page 19 of 853
how much fun this type of rifle is to shoot
and how accurate they are. They often go
out and buy one for themselves. And since
they're cheap to shoot, they shoot more
often and improve their marksmanship no matter what they're shooting.
Some of your boltgun buddies may have an AR in their gun safes, and I'd bet
you a dollar that they'd sooner give up their bolt guns than give up their EBR's.
(Evil Black Rifles.)
Heck, if there were terrorists in my area and it came down to citizens like me to
engage them, I'd MUCH rather rely on my AR than on a bolt rifle. It's a more
useful and versatile type of rifle, very utilitarian.
And finally, ALL of us who love shooting HAVE to stick together these days.
Make no mistake, the anti-gunners don't want SOME of the guns banned, they
want them ALL banned. If you think otherwise, you're delusional.
They'll succeed in getting something banned first by demonizing it. Don't fall for
their trap and think for yourself. Buy or borrow yourself an AR or other EBR and
learn that it's pure shooting goodness, no more and no less evil than any other
inanimate lump of steel, aluminum, plastic, and wood.
Don't become an unwitting stooge for the anti-gunners. Support ALL aspects of
the shooting sports and ALL types of firearms ownership. Because to do
otherwise is to invite the total loss of ALL our firearms rights to a bunch of
people who simply don't think straight and can't see the benefit of an armed
society.
Posted by: Groucho Marxist | February 17, 2007 at 09:42 PM
Mr. Zumbo:
I am shocked! How does a man of your background came to such an inane
(insane?) conclusion that the AR-15 is useless for hunting and a most
especially a "terrorist rifle"?
The .223 is a .223 regardless of what rifle it comes out of! Great for some uses,
and not others... For what it's worth, I've seen several AR-15s capable of
shooting sub-MOA. (Last time I checked, that's plenty good for varmint
hunting...)
Most of my thoughts have already been stated, but the bottom line is the
Second Amendment isn't about hunting! The drivel in your statements helps
nobody but the antis!
- My Remington .30-06 isn't a sniper rifle (but could be classified as such).
- My .357 Ruger GP-100 isn't a "law enforcement only" revolver (but could be
classified that way)
2/19/2007
Page 20 of 853
- My 1" Muzzy broadheads aren't "too accurate/extreme" (YET)
- My flash hider, collapsible stock, and magzines WERE classified illegal
(Happily, that day has temporarily passed for most of us... there are a few sad
exceptions)
We could go on and on with multiple examples, but hopefully you appreciate
how wrong your thinking is, and I hope you rethink your position.
Brian B.
Proud AR owner/user
Posted by: Brian B.. | February 17, 2007 at 09:44 PM
"But bottom line, whatever we hunt with, and however far we elect to shoot, we
indeed are in the same fraternity. We need to keep sight of the
objective ....being outdoors, challenging the quarry, and bringing home the
game when we're successful. As they say, different strokes for different folks.
Enjoy it, however you hunt"
Wonder who said that?
Guess whoever did, didn't really mean it.
Posted by: S | February 17, 2007 at 09:45 PM
I have an AR-15 and I use it for hunting both coyotes and small game such as
squirrel & rabbit. Before you get excited and scream terrorist, or get high &
mighty and proclaim that it will leave nothing left of the game allow me to
explain.
The .223 is a common varmint round, and the AR is known to be an
exceptionally accurate platform. In this role, it works great for coyotes. The high
capacity magazines that are sneered at are great for allowing quick follow-up
shots. If you think this is "spray & pray", then you insult someone whom who
have never met - a trait considered to be immature and foolish.
For small game, a conversion kit turns the .223 rifle into a .22LR rifle in about
15 seconds. Same accuracy and ease of use, but in the worlds most popular
caliber, and with far better ergonomics than the popular Ruger 10/22.
As far as the beauty aspect, it is in the eye of the beholder but....does it really
matter? I've seen some really pretty guns held by the most butt-ugly of hunters.
Either way, I don't think the game is impressed by how the rifle looks.
Posted by: Brad Benson | February 17, 2007 at 09:47 PM
Dear Jim ,
I hate to say it but .......DONT come back to Wyoming . I see the hunters hear
every year shoot their 10 rounds and head afield . I shoot 4000 plus rounds a
2/19/2007
Page 21 of 853
year out of my M1A assault rifle with a 20 round mag . I have filled my tag for
the past 4 years using this weapon with IRON SIGHTS . The farthest was a
pronghorn at 350 yrds . 1 Shot . I may not have a use for your pre 64
whinchester sniper rifle , or your Purdy shotgun . BUT I'm not going to say ban
them .
WE need to STAND together . YOU sir are creating a gap that will be the end of
shooting and hunting altogether .
Go to Camp Perry this year .......and Learn how to shoot before you open your
pie hole .
In the mean time STAY THE HELL out of MY state .
Posted by: Steve | February 17, 2007 at 09:48 PM
subscription cancelled
scumbag
no better then feinsteim
Posted by: b | February 17, 2007 at 09:49 PM
Jim Zumbo belongs in europe. There is no room left for shitstains like you in my
great country. Get the fuck out. Get out now. May posterity forget you, and may
your elitist mindset shield you from the saliva of our great ancestors, as they
surely spit upon you from heaven.
I wish they would ban sniper rifles too....I mean your bolt gun.
Posted by: John Hibberd | February 17, 2007 at 09:52 PM
"Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We
statement that hunters don't use assault rifles. We've always been proud of our
"sporting firearms.""
Sir ,you are just plain Ignorant.
The Politician who want to Take away our
guns DON'T CARE what type they are.
After they finish with the AR and AK owners,
They will be coming for YOUR guns.
Posted by: Jim | February 17, 2007 at 09:55 PM
"United States Constitution,
Bill of Rights, Amendment II
2/19/2007
Page 22 of 853
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right
of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Nope....I don't see anything that protects legal hunting implements in that
statement.
A semiauto rifle is a semiauto rifle, regardless of whether the stocks are wood
or plastic, aesthetic or utilitarian. Trying to appease the antis by restricting our
choice of rifle based on cosmetic features is futile. Forget it, they won't be
appeased until firearms and hunting are extinct.
Our Grandpas likely learned to shoot using their M1903 service rifles on a
military range. They later used those same surplus rifles to harvest game.
Today's US serviceman is taught to shoot using an M-16, even in places like
your old hunting grounds at USMA West Point, Jim. He's trained to know how
to safely and accurately use that rifle. NFA and game laws often preclude his
using a real M-16, but why can't he use a legal semi auto rifle, that is only
ergonomically similar to his M-16, to hunt?
The rifles you ascribe to having terrorist qualities are used in long range, iron
sight competition at Camp Perry, by both civilian and military competitors.
No one has changed legal magazine capacity or minimum caliber rules in game
law to accomodate these new rifles. The shooting community, as a whole,
would be best served by ensuring that these types of rifles are also seen in
positive use in the game fields of America.
To quote John Dickinson (1768) "Then join hand in hand, brave Americans all,
By uniting we stand, by dividing we fall; In so righteous a cause let us hope to
succeed, For heaven approves of each generous deed."
Posted by: Dave Geisert, Gunnery Sergeant, USMC | February 17, 2007 at 10:01 PM
I'm with Jim
There’s no rhyme or reason to have civilians with this type of firepower. It’s not
something that you could ever possibly justify. It’s insanity and it doesn’t fit in
society in any way.
Mr. Zumbo, You sir are part of the problem. You willingness to turn your back
on fellow gun enthusiast is repugnant and vile. When the gun haters come after
your "long range sniper rifle" you will know what the "sport utility rifle" crowd is
feeling right now.
Shame on you sir. I reguard you with contempt for your statements.
Good day.
2/19/2007
Page 23 of 853
Posted by: Colonel Arbour | February 17, 2007 at 10:04 PM
"I'm with Jim
society in any way.
"
Too bad that pesky US Constiution that you swore an oath to says otherwise.
I think it's time to let Remington know what kind of a scumbag traitor you are.
I know I'll make sure they get the message that people like you are hurting their
business.
Why don't you ban any caliber over 22LR. You know you may miss your game
and launch that bullet into space and shoot down the space shuttle by acident.
You need to get a clue.
Posted by: Kevin | February 17, 2007 at 10:06 PM
Nobody has to justify anything to you Dave.
It's our constitional right. Do you not understand that? An AR is no more
powerfull than any other semi rifle. How un-American of you.
Posted by: Bruce. G. II | February 17, 2007 at 10:06 PM
What a crock, subscription cancelled for sure. I'll never allow this magazine in
my home again. You do a disservice to all shooters and to all americans. I have
sold my Remington 700 to purchase a DPMS LR308 ( looks just like the
"terrorist" AR15 ) and I'll be hunting deer this year with it. I carried an M16 in
the service of my country and I've earned the right to own the civilian version
and hunt with it as I please. I guess since I'm not a magazine writer I dont know
any better.
Please don't hunt in Oregon, we can hunt with our AR15s here.
Posted by: Mark Wiesner | February 17, 2007 at 10:06 PM
""sport utility rifle"
I prefer the term "Homeland Defense Rifle"
You cannot be against Homeland Defense Rifles witout being against
Homeland Defense.
Posted by: M Johnson | February 17, 2007 at 10:07 PM
Quote:
2/19/2007
Page 24 of 853
""I'm with Jim
society in any way.""
End Quote
Isn't that what the British said at Lexington Green in 1775?
Posted by: An American | February 17, 2007 at 10:08 PM
Ooops, Sorry Dave
Sig block is below the post, not above.
Posted by: P Vargas | February 17, 2007 at 10:08 PM
I hunt coyotes and fox with my AR15. My rifle is as accurate as most bolt guns
and provides a quick followup shot in order to guarantee humane kills. Tell me
what is wrong with that? Stop trying to divide shooters and stop decrying legal
weapons.
Posted by: Jerry/Michigan | February 17, 2007 at 10:09 PM
Sir, I find your comments ignorant and distasteful. Why you would give fuel to
the morons that want to take your "sniper rifle" just as badly as my "assault
rifle" is beyond me! I hope you will have the good sense to recant your arrogant
and misguided remarks.
Posted by: Tracy | February 17, 2007 at 10:10 PM
Jim, I hate to break this to you, but the bolt action and lever action rifles you
seem to like are yesterday's "assault" weapons.
I suppose we should ban using those too?
And while we are at it, what's with all this use of military cartridges and
calibers? Time to ban the hunting use of the .223, the .308, the .30-06, the .300
Winchester Magnum....All of which are armor piercing to boot!
The last thing we want is to frighten the public by using high-powered military
calibers when killing game!
And one more thing....I have been hunting for a few decades now, and I have
seen quite a number of irresponsible hunters and to a man they have all been
packing bolt actions and lever actions.
If the weapon itself promotes irresponsible behavior, then obviously the bolt
and lever action weapons need to go!
For the children....
2/19/2007
Page 25 of 853
Posted by: John_Wayne777 | February 17, 2007 at 10:11 PM
subscription canceled
You make me sick.
Posted by: NeverKnowsBest | February 17, 2007 at 10:13 PM
I agree, I'm also not comfortable with people like yourself that hunt with these
highly accurized "SNIPER" rifles.
Did you know that you can kill a man at 1000 yards with those things? Hell, and
they shoot bullets that can cut right through the body armor that our Law
Enforcement protectors wear while making our streets safe.
Hunting with them also is not very sporting. Much like they Assault Rifle killers
that wander the woods throwing lead every where is not sporting, a man with
one of the super accurate "Sniper" rifles in calibers like 22-50, 243, 270, 308 (a
known sniper round), 30-06, and 300 win don't even have to stalk their game.
They can shoot them from 700 yards away. How is that sporting?
I say we ban everything but the old Kentucky rifle, that will get us back to the
roots of the sport without endangering any babies.
Posted by: MudBug | February 17, 2007 at 10:14 PM
I'm deeply saddened that a seemingly knowledgable sporting authority would
construct such a devisive and destructive tool such as this article. I will
undoubtedly ponder for days whether it is Mr. Zumbo, or the editorial staff of
Outdoor Life who has their head further up their rear end.
Outdoor Life, you have your work cut out for you to bring me back after this
blunder.
Posted by: Steve C. | February 17, 2007 at 10:18 PM
Short sighted. Narrow minded.
Just plain ignorant.
Posted by: John B | February 17, 2007 at 10:24 PM
I will never read or buy Outdoor Life magazine again. I think it's time they pulled
your column. You've obviously reached that Jimmmy the Greek/Howard Cosell
age where you say stupid things.
Posted by: JLH3 | February 17, 2007 at 10:25 PM
Dear Mr. Zumbo,
I am terribly disappointed by your latest blog entry entitled "Assault Rifles for
Hunters?" By calling for a ban on so-called assault weapons, you have placed
himself squarely in the camp of Brady/VPC firearms prohibitionists.
2/19/2007
Page 26 of 853
I suspect that you hope to protect the firearms you enjoy using by offering up a
sacrifice of firearms that you do not use. Unfortunately, this sort of parochial
thinking will backfire. The gun-grabbers will not be satisfied with banning just
"assault weapons". Once their appetite is whetted by a successful assault
weapons ban, they will use the momentum to redouble their efforts to ban all
firearms, including bolt-actions ("sniper rifles"), lever and pump-actions
("repeating rifles"), handguns ("concealable street-crime guns") and even
single-shot centerfire rifles ("high-powered, armor-piercing cartridge rifles").
Make no mistake, those who wish to gut our 2nd Amendment rights are
serious, and if unchecked they will not stop at any one arbitrarily defined class
of firearms. They wish to ban all firearms, including those commonly used in
our hunting heritage.
Mr. Zumbo, you decided to make a deal with the devil, one that will harm us all.
As short-sighted as I believe your thinking is, you do have a right, as an
American, to express your opinion. But I urge you to reconsider your viewpoint,
and even if you personally dislike so-called "assault weapons", do not use your
position in the media as a bully pulpit to further your harmful agenda.
As others have said, we hang together or hang alone.
Posted by: Fred W | February 17, 2007 at 10:25 PM
Dear Mr. Zumbo,
I am terribly disappointed by your latest blog entry entitled "Assault Rifles for
Hunters?" By calling for a ban on so-called assault weapons, you have placed
yourself squarely in the camp of Brady/VPC firearms prohibitionists.
I suspect that you hope to protect the firearms you enjoy using by offering up a
sacrifice of firearms that you do not use. Unfortunately, this sort of parochial
thinking will backfire. The gun-grabbers will not be satisfied with banning just
"assault weapons". Once their appetite is whetted by a successful assault
weapons ban, they will use the momentum to redouble their efforts to ban all
firearms, including bolt-actions ("sniper rifles"), lever and pump-actions
("repeating rifles"), handguns ("concealable street-crime guns") and even
single-shot centerfire rifles ("high-powered, armor-piercing cartridge rifles").
Make no mistake, those who wish to gut our 2nd Amendment rights are
serious, and if unchecked they will not stop at any one arbitrarily defined class
of firearms. They wish to ban all firearms, including those commonly used in
our hunting heritage.
Mr. Zumbo, you decided to make a deal with the devil, one that will harm us all.
As short-sighted as I believe your thinking is, you do have a right, as an
American, to express your opinion. But I urge you to reconsider your viewpoint,
2/19/2007
Page 27 of 853
and even if you personally dislike so-called "assault weapons", do not use your
position in the media as a bully pulpit to further your harmful agenda.
As others have said, we hang together or hang alone.
Posted by: Fred W | February 17, 2007 at 10:26 PM
JZ,
With all due respect I feel compelled to point out that you have fallen prey to
yellow journalism. The media loves to erroneously label certain rifles "assault
rifles" when in fact they merely look like their military counterparts.
True assault rifles are capable of being fired fully automatic. In other words, you
press the trigger and the firearm keeps shooting until you release the trigger or
the magazine runs dry.
99% of the so-called "assault rifles" we see in America merely look like those
weapons. When it comes to functionality they are not fully automatic, they are
semi-automatic. In other words, you pull the trigger & send one round
downrange. The weapon will not fire again until you release the trigger and pull
it a second time.
You tell me, are you going to assault an enemy pillbox with that?
The M16's/M4's our (USA) military uses are chambered in a 5.56 round. This
equates to .223 in standard caliber. We used to use .30-06 and then .308, both
of which are far more powerful. That's right, at least one of your hunting rifles is
probably chambered in a caliber designed for military use, and that round is far
more powerful the these so-called "assault rifles".
People, let's not get hung up on looks. All firearms are deadly when misused. A
trained man can do more damage with a scoped .308 remington 700 or a 870
shotgun than some nutjob with an ak47 in many instances. Instead let's close
ranks and defend the 2nd amendment, and let's work to educate people on
firearms. Let's support punishing criminals not firearms owners. Let's get some
common sense back in America. Thank you for reading.
Posted by: PBIR | February 17, 2007 at 10:26 PM
I am offended by you publicly calling my rifles "terrorist rifle". For one thing, you
are SOOOO ignorant that you think the "terrorist" use the AR15, try reading a
history book for once, the US military uses them, not terrorist. Are you calling
our men/women in uniform "TERRORIST"????????
As others have stated, many people (the media) call your bolt gun a "sniper
rifle", how do you like that? I used to subscribe to outdoor life, but I for sure will
never subscribe or buy one again. I refuse to pay for rubbish written by ignorant
people like Jim Zumbo. You are a plague on the american firearms community.
Posted by: Jimmy Hoffa | February 17, 2007 at 10:30 PM
2/19/2007
Page 28 of 853
I suppose you will allow me to depict every AR-15 rifle shooter's exasperation
at seeing a "Fudd" appear at the range. You may be familiar with the type:
Hunting orange cap, denim or flannel shirt, and carrying an old, rusty, woodstocked rifle that hasn't seen a cleaning rod in decades.
You see, this character only comes to the range the weekend before opening
day, a wad of tobacco lodged firmly in his cheek as he cranks off three rounds
at a paper plate stapled hastily at the 50 yard mark. He hits only twice, and
poorly, but says "Good enough" and ambles back to his pickup after giving the
AR-toting shooter a long, hostile glare.
This man is as much a stereotype as the shooters you so ignorantly and
sanctimoniously depict in your self-serving and foolishly written article.
I suppose you aren't familiar with the high-power shooters who compete
nationally with these evil rifles, printing groups so small, at such dazzlingly
distant targets, that your ancient, bias-crusted eyes would cross as you
attempted to reconcile how something so vulgar could achieve a feat you could
not on your best day.
Enjoy your rifle while you can. As I'm sure others have posted, it's only a matter
of time before they come for your "high-powered scoped sniper rifle".
With this one article, you have done a greater disservice to the shooting
community than you could ever have imagined. Its message rivals that of the
most rabid anti-gun protester.
I would very much like an email in response, but I doubt you have the courage.
BFLH
Posted by: BFLH | February 17, 2007 at 10:31 PM
First, you make this dumbass remark:
"I call them "assault" rifles, which may upset some people".
Yeah, it may upset some people because a semiautomatic rifle is not an
assault rifle, period. Even some others that have responded have called their
semiauto an assault rifle and an M1A would not be considered an assault rifle
because it's cartridge does not follow the criteria for the definition of an assault
rifle.
An assault rifle must be capable of firing more than one round per trigger
squeeze, period, so Mr. Zumbo, you have bought into the anti-gun pukes
definitions. Will you buy into their lies when they term all bolt action centerfire
rifles as sniper rifles? They have already started that crap, but you won't see
that until it is too late.
2/19/2007
Page 29 of 853
Besides, I have yet to see the word "hunting" in the Second Amendment. You
can now consider yourself lumped in with the likes of Diane Fienstein, Chucky
Shumer, Hillary Clinton, and Sarah Brady. Thank you for showing your true
colors. We don't need gun owners like you.
Posted by: LarryG | February 17, 2007 at 10:32 PM
Why do people feel the need to own assault type weapons? Law enforcement
and military should be the only people allowed to own them. They were
designed to kill people not animals.
Posted by: Chuck R. | February 17, 2007 at 10:33 PM
Mr. Zumbo, as a teenager who enjoys both hunting and your so called "Assault
Rifles" you sicken me. Your willingness to sell out your fellow shooters
endangers your precious "Hunting Guns" just as much as it endangers my AR15's and AK's.
As an older shooter your responsiblity shoud be to grow the next generation of
shooters instead of divide the shooting community. Instead of giving ammo to
gun grabbers like Sarah Brady perhapse you should ask yourself what will
happen once the ATF kicks down my door and shoots my dog. What guns will
they go after next? Probably your lever actions with 5 round "Clips."
And the no were in the 2nd ammendment do I see any provision for "Hunting
Guns." Instead I see provisions for individuals to own "Assault Rifles" to protect
this great country. Because your hunting rifles serve no purpose in defending
the homeland I will immediatly call my congress critter and ask that they
support a resolution to ban dangerous "Hunting Guns" that are not covered by
2nd ammendment. If you are willing to sell me out that I will do the same to you
sir. In this fight "We must all hang together or we shall all hang seperately."
I will be informing all of my friends that your so called "Outdoors Magazine" is a
worthless rag suited more for the outhouse than my living room. Consider my
subscription canceled.
Posted by: A Teenage Firearms Owner | February 17, 2007 at 10:33 PM
Some folks just don't like the combination of ergonomics and accuracy that a
well-built AR-platform rifle provides.
Now go look up Jim Carmichael, and tell him that Bogie has invited you to
shoot a nicely accurate AR-platform rifle. It's not going to win any of the
benchrest matches (from where I know Jim...), but it _is_ accurate enough for
prairie dog elimination, and it's fun to shoot.
Oh, and my _other_ prairie dog gun is a twenty pound .220 Russian... It's a
trifle more interesting, but hey...
2/19/2007
Page 30 of 853
Posted by: Bogie | February 17, 2007 at 10:36 PM
I use a Ar10(308) for hunting it is the same a as any AUTO loading rifle. It is
very good shooting weapon. I use a five round magazine( it is law here in Fla.)
like most auto loading rifles have. I DONT SPRAY AND PRAY with it. Hell I
have passed up alot of game with it. A so called assault rifle is just another gun
that just looks different. Tuna
Posted by: Tuna | February 17, 2007 at 10:43 PM
Others have already said it all. Some in brief, some in detail. I am with them
and against you.
Posted by: Ross F. | February 17, 2007 at 10:45 PM
It's called a fucking MAGAZINE, not a clip.
Unless you are using a Garand.
Posted by: ar15moto | February 17, 2007 at 10:45 PM
You know, I've heard that the gun owner's worst enemy is the gun owner, I
never understood that until now. I will not buy another Outdoor Life until some
type of retraction or apology is made.
Posted by: Bigfatts | February 17, 2007 at 10:47 PM
Mr. Zumbo, you haven't heard of using AR's for varmints? I am disappointed in
your lack of firearms knowledge. I have watched your shows from day 1, I will
do so no longer. I am not a hardcore "assault weapon" owner but I do own a
few AR-15's along with dozens of traditional weapons and to alienate a
segment of the hunting community because you don't like it, I find appalling.
http://www.ballisticbill.com/PD%20Video.htm
Posted by: Ballisticbill | February 17, 2007 at 10:47 PM
I cannot believe anyone thats so in the public eye with reguards to the shooting
sports could be so dimwhited. You sir have hurt more than you will ever know.
As I shoot high power service rifle AND 2 and 3 gun tactical competitions I find
your narrow view or the other shooting sports disturbing. Unlike you sir who
parlay in front of the camera a few weeks a year I myself shoot EVERY month.
I am an RSO for our local tactical shooting league and we are trying to promote
the shooting sports by allowing the use of sporting rifles in our venue. You
would best be advised to talk or write about what you know and keep the rest to
yourself.
as for Outdoor life magazine--SHAME ON YOU!!!
Remington Arms--keep your discount coupon I'm buying a Savage
2/19/2007
Page 31 of 853
Posted by: Vincent | February 17, 2007 at 10:47 PM
Anyone else see the big bad hunter using a "high-powered-rifle with a sniperscope" attached to it in the header picture of this article?
What's a matter fag boy, iron sights and a blunderbuss don't cut it for you?
Where's the sport in using a high-powered-rifle and a sniper-scope to kill an
animal from a distance of more than 50 yards?
Zumbo - You are nothing less than a Complete Moron. You are a disgrace.
Take your opinions and stuff them where they belong.
You have forever lost all credibility.
Posted by: PJK | February 17, 2007 at 10:50 PM
"Why do people feel the need to own assault type weapons? Law enforcement
designed to kill people not animals.
"
Chuck, the Bolt Action rifle was designed orginally to kill people. The Lever
Action Henry, the orginal lever action was designed to kill people.
Most popular Hunting and Handgun Cartridges were designed to kill people
originally or derive from one that was.
30-06, .308, 8mm Mauser, .223 Remmington, .357 Magnum, 45-70, 45 ACP
and every cartridge derived from those cases such as .270 and .243 which are
just about about every non-magnum centerfire cartridge in existence.
Perhaps every firearm except the shotgun was designed to originally to kill
people. Do you think that fact is of any cold comfort to those people massacred
in that Utah mall shooting last week by that 12 guage Shotgun weilding Bosnia
Muslim?
Even the Muzzleloader was designed to kill people too.
Do you have a point or are you simply that ignorant?
Perhaps Chuck, it is the person and not the weapon that makes the killer.
I think real sportsmen should distance themselves from the assault rifle crowd.
They are going to end up getting all our guns banned. If they can't hunt with a
bolt action rifle then they shouldn't be hunting at all.
John
2/19/2007
Page 32 of 853
Posted by: John Sutton | February 17, 2007 at 10:52 PM
Fucking fudd gunners......
Mr. Zumbo,
Quite frankly, your article demonstrates the connection between stupidity and
gun bans. You don't like the way they look so you want to ban them. Well, they
look the way they do for a very good reason. They are designed to defend
home and hearth against evil men, an eminently more noble purpose than
hunting which, while fun, is not an inalienable human right. Now, the things
which make an AR a good self-defense rifle do not detract from its ability to
accurately place rounds down target, which is what one needs for hunting.
Quite to the contrary, its ergonomics make it easier to shoot accurately. In
addition, the lack of an op rod makes it more accurate than most other semiautomatic designs. Quite simply, a man who uses such a weapon is hardly a
terrorist. He has simply accepted that technology progresses and has
pragmatically chosen a weapon suited to defense as well as hunting. We used
to call that "being smart."
Secondly, your motives for hating modern weapons are completely off base.
Trying to discourage these weapons to appease the gun banners simply
doesn't work. They are motivated by each victory to go after more and more
firearms. Case in point, after the AWB was passed, did they stop? No, they
kept trying to restrict more and more semi-autos, and succeeded in several
state governments (such as California and New York). In contrast, when we
stood together and stopped them from banning handguns back in the 1980s,
they gave up on that and went after what they saw as easier targets.
In short, anyone who wants to protect their sport is better served by standing
with their fellow gun owners and defending our sacred rights, rather than trying
to lick the hands of those who would be our masters.
Posted by: Jeff A. | February 17, 2007 at 10:53 PM
We would like to thank Mr. Zumbo for his unsolicited support of our agenda. He
truly understands that we are only after these senseless killing machines and
will NEVER come after his beloved high-powered snipe- err, HUNTING rifleunless, of course, they were to present a problem, too. We who are for
"reasonable" gun control are appreciative of such individuals as Mr. Dumbo, as
he does more to further our cause than we could ever hope for. Thanks, Mr.
Zumbo!
Sincerely;
Sarah Brady
John Kerry
2/19/2007
Page 33 of 853
Ted Kennedy
Diane Feinstein
Nancy Pelosi
Charles Shumer
Hey jackass fuckstick Paul Vargas, "assault weapon" is a liberal term.
You a liberal?
I have personally been forced to take cover from unsafe people running amok
in the woods. Not once, but twice in my life has this happened. On several
other occasions, while not having to physically take cover I have been witness
to volleys of fire that would rival the hardest of fighting in any war. On every one
of these occasions, the fire has been from what you term as "sporting firearms"
from what you euphamistically call "hunters". I have never had so much as a
single round that might remotely be called close from anyone with one of your
"terror" weapons. Incidentally, while my AR-15 may *look* like a military issue
firearm, it certainly is not. Yet, the "sporterized" mauser bolt action I have
chambered in .30-06 that I got in a trade from my father was indeed once upon
a time a military issued weapon, and not to the good guys either. Huh. Imagine
that.
Posted by: WB*aka*Soylent | February 17, 2007 at 10:55 PM
And the divide between hunters and shooters grows another foot wider. Thanks
Jim.
Posted by: Silicon Wolverine | February 17, 2007 at 10:55 PM
Way to go Mr. Zumbo! Thank you so very much for falling for...I mean standing
up for our cause. Your check is in the mail. See you at the DNC...your front row
seat is reserved!
-Nancy :D
Posted by: N. Pelosi | February 17, 2007 at 10:56 PM
Sofa King We Todd Ed
Posted by: Hillery Clinton | February 17, 2007 at 10:58 PM
Are you shitting me? This anti-gun drivel is from a "gun guy"? VERY surprised
to learn my 20" heavy barrel Bushmaster is a terrorist weapon, with no place in
the field, at the range, or even in my gun safe. Surprised to learn my SA vesion
of the same m4s & M16s I have shot at West Point are actually terrorist
weapons. Also surprised to learn from others who should know better that
'there is no place for that type of firepower in the hands of civilians'...Semper Fi
2/19/2007
Page 34 of 853
Mack! THAT is EXACTLY the type of firepower that should be in OUR hands,
and for very good reasons - that is what the Constitution you supposedly took
an oath to support and defend is all about. I know I took my oath seriously, and
damn well knew & UNDERSTOOD what it meant!
Whether for self defense, common defense, for pursuit of game, for pursuit of
happiness and to protect property - OUR right (ALL of ours), OUR choice!
Sheesh :(
Posted by: shield20 | February 17, 2007 at 11:00 PM
@ Mr. Dumbo
You have no idea what you are talking about. When they come for your hunting
guns for all I care they can have them. You and your fudds have sold me out so
I will return the favor. Fuck you asshole.
@ Outdoor Life
Seeing how you have allowed this worthless crap to be sperad by those who
write for you magazine you may consider my subscription canceled. Fuck you.
@ Remington
Seeing how you have bought and payed for this drivel you may take your .17
cal Spitfire and shove it up your ass. My money will no longer go to your
products, I'll stick with those who make Evil Black Rifles and know what the
shooting sports are all about. Fuck You.
Posted by: White Knight | February 17, 2007 at 11:00 PM
I'm a hunter and will pretty much discount whatever Zumbo says from now on.
You just made Dave Petzal seem intelligent.
There are few bolt guns that are as intrinsically accurate as an AR. It's actually,
to me, the ideal coyote gun, mine is outfitted with a flattop and a Nikon scope.
Great varmint outfit for $600.
Posted by: AndyC | February 17, 2007 at 11:02 PM
Wow. I've always respected your articles and opinions.
Till now.
You really pissed off a lot of people with that idiotic statement, ahem, article,
ahem, tripe.
You've stated an opinion on so called assualt rifles". Now, please allow me my
opinion on your "sporting" rifle.
Do you really find pleasure in vaporizing a rodent at 500 yards? Wow, that must
be quite a rush. You seem to derive a great deal of satisfaction doing that.
You must take great pride in owning and maintaining a quality piece of
equipment and in being more than capable of making a difficult shot at
2/19/2007
Page 35 of 853
distance.
Now, take that pride in skill and equipment and transfer that over to my area of
expertise - owning, hunting and skillfully shooting a military grade firearm, in
this case a Bushmaster XM-15 E2S, an AR-15 to you.
This same weapon in select fire version (3 shot burst and full auto in some
cases)is carried by thousands of US servicemen and women today. Are you
calling them terrorists? Is that where your mindset is at?
That seems to be what your saying.
You should immediatly and without delay apoligize to the US Serviceman, right
now. After that, you should resign your position as a so called Sports writer.
Oh, by the way, my subscription to Outdoor life will be cancelled first thing
Tuesday morning. I refuse to help pay for a sponsor of your assinine opinions.
Gregg K.
Notice the signature is BELOW the post, not above. You guys are commenting
about the wrong guys posts!!!!
Yes, and while we're at it let's ban those high-powered sniper rifles that hunters
pass off as sporting firearms. There's no need for that kind of firepower in
civilian hands. Subscription to OL canceled.
Posted by: aquabump | February 17, 2007 at 11:05 PM
subscription cancelled
Posted by: Drew | February 17, 2007 at 11:08 PM
"Why do people feel the need to own assault type weapons? Law enforcement
designed to kill people not animals."
This remark is as stupid as the original article.
Posted by: LarryG | February 17, 2007 at 11:08 PM
Subscription canceled. If your going to use your posistion to take my
possessions than you don't need my money.
Remington,
Take your guns and shove them. I'll buy Colt.
You are an antigun FOOL
2/19/2007
Page 36 of 853
Et tu Zumbo?
2nd Amendment:
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
I come to bury the 2nd Amendment, not to praise it.
The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones: (80)
So let it be with the 2nd Amendment. The noble Zumbo
Hath told you the 2nd was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault;
And grievously hath the 2nd answer'd it.
Here, under leave of Zumbo and the rest,-- (85)
For Zumbo is an honourable man;
So are they all, all honorable men,-Come I to speak in the 2nd's funeral.
It was my friend, faithful and just to me:
But Zumbo says he was ambitious; (90)
And Zumbo is an honourable man.
He hath brought many captives home to Rome,
Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill:
Did this in the 2nd Amendement Caesar seem ambitious?
When that the poor have cried, the 2nd hath wept: (95)
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
Yet Zumbo says it was ambitious;
And Zumbo is an honourable man.
You all did see that on the Lupercal
I thrice presented him a kingly crown, (100)
Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
Yet Zumbo says it was ambitious;
And, sure, he is an honourable man.
I speak not to disprove what Zumbo spoke,
But here I am to speak what I do know. (105)
You all did love the 2nd Amendment once,--not without cause:
What cause withholds you, then, to mourn for it?-O judgment, thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason!--Bear with me;
My heart is in the coffin there with the 2nd Amendment, (110)
And I must pause till it come back to me.
Posted by: Jim B. | February 17, 2007 at 11:12 PM
A suggestion to Outdoor Life and Remington:
Drop Zumbo.
Posted by: Vit | February 17, 2007 at 11:13 PM
2/19/2007
Page 37 of 853
Why the heck do you need to hunt coyotes? Hunt anything? I've never seen the
local market out of food.
You sir, are a friend of the terrorist with your beliefs. There is a reason the
terrorists stuck those aircraft--the folks were unarmed. "Hunters" have done
squat to protect this country or make it great. Patriots, of which you aren't one,
made it great. Many patriots are indeed hunters, but obviously not all hunters
are patriots.
This is how the future you'd wish would play out:
Ban the black plastic guns.
Ban any semi auto.
Ban any repeater, be it bolt, pump, or lever gun.
All remaining single shot guns are kept at local police monitored gun clubs.
All civilian owned firearms are destroyed.
Division among the gun owners is a tool of the Antis, of which you are one.
Patrick Henry didn't give two squats about your coyote hunting and even
though I enjoy hunting, I'd never sell out my understanding of real freedom for a
minute of it.
I pity your slave mindset.
Posted by: Lance in texas | February 17, 2007 at 11:14 PM
I would have thought this moronic infighting between gun owners overwith...
I promise not to Purchase a Remington product until you are no longer writing
for them.
Go work for the Brady Center Jackass!
Posted by: RalphG | February 17, 2007 at 11:14 PM
Mr Zumbo,
You've single handedly divided the hunting and shooting community at a time in
our history, where we instead should all be uniting for a single purpose:
defending our beloved sport but more importantly, defending our inalienable
rights, which includes the 2nd Amendment.
Joe
Posted by: Joe | February 17, 2007 at 11:17 PM
I been hunting with Winchester 94 for years and never had a need for more of a
gun than that for hunting deer or coyote. To each their own but people think
they need a M16 with a big clip to take down a deer are crazy. You are going
hunting not to war.
2/19/2007
Page 38 of 853
Posted by: R. Clay | February 17, 2007 at 11:18 PM
So am I a terrorist because I enjoy bobcat hunting with an AK-47? What's so
wrong with hunting with a reliable gun that makes clean kills? Isn't that what
hunting is all about?
Posted by: Maser | February 17, 2007 at 11:18 PM
Mr Zumbo,
I'm so very happy to hear that you're willing to label those of us who own and
enjoy military pedigreed arms as "terrorists", and are pleased to throw us under
the bus as an offering to those who would disarm all of us, so that you could
enjoy another few years of hunting before it's your turn.
{Flips through Constitution, searching for references to gun sports and hunting,
fails to find any protections for same.}
In a time of danger in which shooters of all disciplines need unity, you advise
"divorcing" us.
With "friends" like you...
well, you know the rest.
Posted by: geekWithA.45 | February 17, 2007 at 11:18 PM
The shit storm just begins.
Posted by: Evil Black Rifle Owner | February 17, 2007 at 11:20 PM
Jim, you're a good guy and a helluva hunter. I suspect that's why the shock is
so great and the comments so stinging.
Accurate rifles are interesting, Jim, no matter the color or pistol grip. You may
not care for the candy-apple paint job on someone's benchrest rifle, but a good
sportsman doesn't criticize the owner and will judge the rifle on what it'll do.
I hope you rethink your position after some trigger time with a Rock River
Varminter or another good quality AR-15 type rifle. Yes it's different, but it just
might be fun, too.
Posted by: Rusty | February 17, 2007 at 11:20 PM
"I think real sportsmen should distance themselves from the assault rifle crowd.
They are going to end up getting all our guns banned. If they can't hunt with a
bolt action rifle then they shouldn't be hunting at all.
John"
John, it is your ilk who are the traitors selling out their fellow gun owners to the
enemy, not us. Out of unthinking cowardice, you would gladly recommend my
AR get banned however I wll not advocate deer hunting or bolt action 'SNIPER
2/19/2007
Page 39 of 853
RIFLES'(hint, that is your deer rifle) be banned. The difference is I am not a
selfish and short-sighted hypocrite who put my hobby before someone else's
constutionally protected right.
If the only reason you own a firearm is to occasionaly kill a deer for some trivial
non-essential sport, you should eliminate your worry. Sell your gun and visit the
meat section in your local supermarket a bit more.
We need more real gun owners and fewer so-called 'Sportsmen'.
Posted by: The Voice of Reason | February 17, 2007 at 11:21 PM
I'll be cancelling my subscription ASAP. In fact I will be demanding my money
back for the whole subscription! I will not fund extremist liberal anti-gunners!
Jim Zumbo, be honest with me, how much did the Brady campaign pay you to
write that crap?
Hey jimbo, here a nickel, go buy a clue!
Posted by: Tony Genovese | February 17, 2007 at 11:21 PM
Just took Zumbo's show off my TVO.
Click on link below to cancel Outdoor Life subscription
https://secure.customersvc.com/wes/servlet/Show
Posted by: ballisticbill | February 17, 2007 at 11:23 PM
Jim,
You may not realize it but you are as big a threat to freedom in this country as
Charles Schumer and Diane Fienstein. Your bigotry towards guns based solely
upon their external characteristics has no place in a medium that supports the
shooting industry. You are welcome to your opinions as this is a free country
but your employers should know that I vote with my dollars and as long as they
avail themselves of your services I will spend my money elsewhere.
-Larry
Mesa, Arizona
Posted by: Larry | February 17, 2007 at 11:23 PM
"I been hunting with Winchester 94 for years and never had a need for more of
a gun than that for hunting deer or coyote. To each their own but people think
they need a M16 with a big clip to take down a deer are crazy. You are going
hunting not to war."
Wrong. First of all, it is a magazine, not a clip. Second of all, IT'S NOT AN M16.
m16's are select fire and strictly regulated by the NFA and ATF. M16's are
2/19/2007
Page 40 of 853
FULLY AUTOMATIC. AR15's are NOT fully automatic. They fire only single
shots with seperate pulls of the trigger. Lastly, in the states that do allow
hunting with Ar15's, the "Big Clips" are limited 5 shots only. I suggest reading
some more of the above posts.
Posted by: pvc | February 17, 2007 at 11:24 PM
Stupid is as stupid does. You "sir" are clueless.
Your comment calling AR type rifles "Terrorist weapons" spits in the face of all
US Military members who have trained, carried and defended this nation with
the military version (M16) since its adoption in the 60s.
Calling these semiauto lookalikes "assault weapons" is a misleading main
stream media ploy to fool the sheeple of the US to fall in line with the
gunbanning liberals.
A true ASSAULT RIFLE is a weapon capable of select fire..ie, safe, semi,
full/burst. Civilian legal AR15 type rifles are SEMIAUTO ONLY. No different
than Rugers 10/22, Mini 14/30, Remington 7400 series, Browning BAR series,
etc.
Just because it looks like an M16(a true assault rifle) doesnt mean jack in the
real world to people exercising their GOD GIVEN COMMON SENSE.
I challenge you to show me where in the 2nd Amendment the words "hunting"
or "sporting purpose" are mentioned.
It aint about duck huntin!
You "sir" are a clueless Fudd and are a pawn of the gunbanning liberals
dragging this country to hell. As was mentioned by many others your beloved
scoped bolt actions are on the gungrabbers list under SNIPER RIFLE.
I do not subscribe to this magazine and will NEVER do so.
Brian Lee Rolfe
former military and Operation Iraqi Freedom civilian contractor.
Posted by: Southpaw67 | February 17, 2007 at 11:24 PM
this guy would vote for hillary clinton,what a idiot.
Posted by: JERRY | February 17, 2007 at 11:25 PM
To think I spent the last 26 years of my life in uniform, to defend your right to
say what you wrote... damn you sir.
>>>But bottom line, whatever we hunt with, and however far we elect to shoot,
2/19/2007
Page 41 of 853
we indeed are in the same fraternity. We need to keep sight of the
Enjoy it, however you hunt.<<<
The above is from one of Old Jimbos previous articles. It seems dementia may
have made an early stop in Crazy Jims brain.
Posted by: Evil Black Rifle Owner | February 17, 2007 at 11:28 PM
Opinions are like aholes. Everybody has one. Mr. Zumbos opinion stinks, just
like an
unwashed backside. He obviously doesn't get it.
Posted by: dj | February 17, 2007 at 11:30 PM
Zumbo is obviously a dinosaur with liberal views. He probably hunts with John
Kerry.
I find it interesting how quick he is to be critical of the majority of those who
might have read his articles.
I used to get Outdoor Life... I was considering renewing my subscription before
I read this, but it's out of the question now. I can't afford to support the likes of
these kinds of traitors to the cause of the 2nd amendment. I am a hunter, but I
am a gun owner and a supporter of the constitution first and foremost.
Zumbo, you can go to hell.
Posted by: Marshall Wirig | February 17, 2007 at 11:31 PM
You're an asswhipe, and too stupid to realize that once the AR-15 is banned,
you're beloved Marlin 30-30 will be next. Keep your head in the sand and
pretend that the 2nd amendment is all about hunting. Dumb ass.
Posted by: Curt Garlick | February 17, 2007 at 11:31 PM
I like to hunt with a bow. I like getting in close as it adds a greater thrill of the
hunt. There is NO place in the woods for any gun anymore......
Can you see where this argument goes? Don't knock another man because of
the tool he decides to use to do the job.
If they can ban my AR15, they can ban your "sporting" rifle too.
Posted by: BangStick | February 17, 2007 at 11:31 PM
The ignorance among gun owners amazes me. Never had a need for an M16
with a "big clip"
You sir are a fool and the post you made confirms it. You obviously dont know
2/19/2007
Page 42 of 853
anything about modern firearms. I believe this to be common of the "elmer
fudd" crowd. If you dont understand something it obviously must be wrong.
Do you need a car that can exceed the speed limit? Why not ban any car that
can travel faster than 65mph? Obviously they have no place on our highways.
Now what books should we start burning?
Just a follow up to my previous post.
FYI Jim: The second amendment does NOT guarantee your right to hunt. You
have no right to hunt under the constitution. You do have the right to keep and
bear arms of military configuration. Read up on the constitution before you
make ridiculous statements in your articles.
-Larry
Posted by: Larry | February 17, 2007 at 11:32 PM
So, what is the basis for your sporting rifles?
Well, if it's a bolt gun, chances are it's based on a Mauser, a MILITARY rifle.
Lot's of meat and game taken with Winchester 70s, sporterized Springfields,
Enfields, 1917s and the like.
What a moron.
I find your comments and attitude thoroughly despicable. The only people I
despise more than power hungry politicians are treasonous cowards like you.
Posted by: Brian | February 17, 2007 at 11:33 PM
You are a first class dumbass. How does it feel to be passed by the current
trends? I have hunted white tail deer for the last 6 years with an "assault rifle" in
5.56.
You need to retire.
Bob
Posted by: Bob | February 17, 2007 at 11:33 PM
Mr. Zumbo, I am an avid hunter and have been enjoying this great sport for
many years. I hunt upland birds with an over/under shotgun, varmints with a
bolt action rifle as well as an AR-15, deer with bolt action, single shot, and AR15 rifles, and have hunted Africa many times with bolt action rifles.
I am not a terrorist and am insulted by your article. You should be ashamed of
your ignorance and the article you wrote. Please support all hunters and their
right to own firearms or join the Brady Bunch. There is no middle of the road
when it comes to supporting our firearms heratige.
2/19/2007
Page 43 of 853
Posted by: Donald Cavanaugh | February 17, 2007 at 11:33 PM
not going the way you planned eh Jim?
You know not of what you speak old man. Next time, try to do a little research
before you spout off.
Posted by: Corey | February 17, 2007 at 11:35 PM
I enjoy my AR15's, as do my kids.
I work hard to earn money.
I decide where to spend my money,
My money won't go to a subscription with anything that Mr. Zumbo writes in.
Posted by: AMP | February 17, 2007 at 11:35 PM
I can not believe that a fellow American is so willing to call me a terrorist and
feed me to the wolves to save his own precious brood of boltguns. I am deeply
saddened and disturbed by this. This flies in the face of all that we should
believe in and all that many hundreds of thousands fought and died for. I own
and use guns of many varieties. They are tools. To use the argument that
certain guns are only meant for killing is preposterous when ANY gun can be
used for such a purpose. I cannot believe that there are throngs of "great white
hunters" out there that do not believe that we as Americans have the right to
defend ourselves against criminals and tyranny. I cannot believe that I and all
others who have an AR15 or AK47 have been offered up as sacrifices by those
who obviously do not deserve their guns for they have forsaken the reason that
we have them.
Jim, I loath you and all others like you. Your narrow minded, self serving view
will be the death of us all before long.
Posted by: yekim | February 17, 2007 at 11:35 PM
Why do you need a rapid fire bolt action sniper rifle? I've never needed
anything more than my muzzleloading hawken rifle to take deer. You gun nuts
with your high capacity "more thrusts per squeeze" bolt action rifles are a
menace to us real hunters who know how to take our time with each shot. I've
used the irons on my hawken just fine, scopes are for snipers. You a sniper
there Mr Zumbo?
This may be the biggest load of garbage I've ever heard come out of a
"sportsman's" mouth. These "military" weapons are the basis of the second
amendment, not the sole called "sporting" weapons. I have both, own both, use
both, hunt with both and it is obvious to anyone who's knows anything about
2/19/2007
Page 44 of 853
the preservation of the shooting sports that ALL gun owners need the support
of one another or they will ALL succumb to the liberal propaganda campaigne.
Thunk* That was the sound of my jim zumbo cookbook hitting the bottom of the
trash can.
Posted by: Joshua Howell | February 17, 2007 at 11:36 PM
What a load Mr. Zumbo! I hope Outdoor life can do some hard and fast back
peddling or there going to lose a lot of subscriptions over this, I know I will be
cancelling mine!!! I highly recommend anyone else to trade their's for a
subscription to American Hunter (NRA).
Posted by: Troy | February 17, 2007 at 11:36 PM
Mr. Zumbo is a Dumbo.
Total tool.
Posted by: Bill | February 17, 2007 at 11:37 PM
You sir,are a dumb-ass. i think you should take your beloved rifle to a Sarah
Brady gun buy back and them hunt with a club....that's all you deserve to use.
Posted by: david saxton | February 17, 2007 at 11:37 PM
I am truly amazed not only by your lack of understanding of modern firearm
technology, but by your admission of never having seen one of these "assault
rifles" used in the hunting field. I guess you really have been living in a vacuum!
I own a couple of AR15's, and I assure you that there are many many coyotes,
groundhogs, crows, and other game species who could attest to the hunting
efficiency of these fine rifles...if they were still alive. I would urge you to avail
yourself of an AR15 flat top precision rifle, take it on your next coyote hunt (with
some fine Remington ammo, of course) and see for yourself how wrong you
are. I can only hope you seek to get out of your "vacuum" and educate yourself.
As others have stated here, "United we stand, divided we fall".
Posted by: Mark Davis | February 17, 2007 at 11:37 PM
Wow Jim, I am very disappointed. "Terrorist rifles"? Come on Man, surely you
have to recognize that these rifles, or very similair versions of them, are
protecting your freedom, both here and abroad, to own what you like and hunt
with what you choose. I can only hope that you were under the influence of
some intoxicating beverage and surrounded by young, attractive, female
liberals when you submitted this opinion. That is the only excuse I would be
willing to accept. I have been a fan for many years and like I said, this is very
disappointing.
2/19/2007
Page 45 of 853
Somebody seems be be hitting the old bottle a little hard as of late....Idiot!
Posted by: H. Roberts | February 17, 2007 at 11:39 PM
I can hardly believe in an age when the 2nd Amendment is being attacked full
force, that there would be cells inside a struggling firearms community that work
to divide members from within. Your actions are the reason gun rights are
continually eroded and new anti-gun legislation passes unhindered.
Its mentalities like yours that get minority firearms banned. You are a selfish,
self-centered, conceited individual. You are the type that doesn't care if cheap
"Saturday Night Specials" are banned because crackheads use them. You are
the type that doesn't care if assault weapons and 50BMG rifles because
terrorists use them to shoot down planes and children You are the type that
doesn't care if pistols get banned because gangbangers carry them and kids
shoot schools up with them. You are the type that doesn't care if pump
shotguns get banned because its intimidating in sound and makes
homeowners escalate home invasions.
You WILL care when they come for your high powered sniper rifle because you
don't need rounds capable of dropping a 1000lb animal and scope
magnification of 10x because it allows you to kill people from 600 yards away
undetected.
You will get no help from your fellow shooters because you let them all drown.
You will truly be by yourself, and by then, there will be no one left to stand with
you.
You sir, abusing your ability to reach out to a large audience, are responsible
for playing a role in ruining America and it's a stab in the heart for every man
and woman that has given up their life or limb in defending this country to
secure these rights.
Jim and all the other's who put the mark of evil on an object, whats wrong with
you!!!
2nd A. is NOT for hunting! I'm a proud hunter.M16/ar15 type rifles are used by
police so are they terrorists?What about people who use ar15's for home
defence, are they terrorists also? What about target shooters, more terrorists?
Hunters who use ar15's to hunt are they terrorists? I know we all support the
trops who use as u put it ar15 terrorist type rifles. We will stand together orfall
alone!
I hear this same sort of BS when I go to a sporting clays/skeet/trap field. I don't
know how many times I have heard "I don't need a 15 round mag heck I don't
2/19/2007
Page 46 of 853
even own a pistol." from some jackass caring a $40k Kreigoff. This is really
good press for the anti gun agenda we are going to have to face in the
upcoming years HR1022 has already been introduced nothing like a good
beefy quote from someone in the industry to add some punch to their stance.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions but people in the media need to exercise
some restraint. Mr Zumbo what did you hope to accomplish by making these
statements? You have your opinion and I have my wallet. I have not bought a
single Ruger product after Bill Ruger stood up on the stage with Sara Brady.
And the same went for S&W until the company was sold. I will not be buying a
single issue of Outdoor Life while you still write for them. I also will be removing
any article with your name on it from the issues that we display at the indoor
range I work at for the public to read. They do not need to hear your BS.
Posted by: Pigdawg | February 17, 2007 at 11:40 PM
What is a scoped rifle to a someone who does not understand guns? A sniper
rifle.
A REAL hunter doesn't use a scope, that is the lazy man's way out. So why not
ban scoped rifles? Yes, friend, that is sarcasm.
The error you have is the same made by people who sit around and argue
9mm versus .45 ACP. Did you ever stop and think, that there is a reason
people hunt with AK variants and AR-15 rifles? That different people use
different weaponry?
Your good ol' .30-06 hunting rifle carries nearly twice the muzzle energy of a
7.62x39mm round, fired by most AK-47 and AKM variants, and almost three
times the energy of a 5.45mm variant of the AK-74 and later rifles. With energy
comes many unpleasant things; such as recoil, distance (good for open
spaces, bad if you don't want lead going through trees and into neighbors),
noise, muzzle flash, and sometimes length.
If you want to reduce recoil, you can add weight. This trade off causes more
problems.
I own two AK variants. Does it make me a terrorist to stand up for my rights?
The first fielded machine gun was carried by Lewis and Clarke, an Italian made
automatic capable of firing 22 rounds in 20 seconds. So, I doubt that since
Thomas Jefferson was both one of the founding fathers and the one who
authorized the expedition, that he left that out on accident.
My AK variants, however, are semi-automatic. An assault rifle is a select fire
rifle firing an intermediate cartridge, of light weight. Sorry friend, semi-automatic
does not equal select fire, unless you consider "safe" a type of fire.
Not all hunters have acres upon acres of hunting land to safely use .30-06,
.308, and such hunting rounds. Not all hunters can withstand the kick of such
2/19/2007
Page 47 of 853
rounds either. Does this make them a "terrorist"?
What of the Mauser design, used by the Germans in WWI and the Nazis in
WWII? What of the Millions of Americans and British lives taken by this design?
Does it make you a terrorist to own a sporter variant of this design, or a modern
Model 70?
We can divide amongst ourselves and bicker over necessity (when hunting in
itself is not needed), or we can stand together and defend ALL of our rights. I'll
vote to defend your right to own a handgun, when they are responsible for over
6,000 deaths in America year, if you defend my right to own a semi-automatic
clone of a military weapon, responsible for barely 2% of the deaths in America.
Posted by: Deric | February 17, 2007 at 11:41 PM
I think all high power hunting rifles (30.06 and larger) should be banned. the are
much more of a danger than a lowly assult rifle calibered weapon.
Posted by: Jerry Ithaca | February 17, 2007 at 11:42 PM
First of all, I'm GLAD I have a decent supply of Remington .380s stocked up.
Because after reading this elitist garbage, I couldn't feel any "dirtier" buying a
Remington product than if I knew that 50% of the purchase price would go to
IANSA.
...oh right. Since (IIRC) IANSA thinks that HUNTING with a single-shot rifle is
about the only "legitimate" use of a gun by a civvie (to hell with self-defense!), I
bet a lot of you guys have never even heard of them. Or would care if you did...
I wondered - starting with the first comment - if many of the people here in
agreement with Zumbo even realize that REAL "assault weapons" are highly
restricted for civvie ownership. And that the AR-15s and the AK-47 clones that
you see in the hands of hunters are SEMI-auto rifles. No more or less deadly
than any other "acceptable" hunting gun.
Or do some of you HONESTLY think that since Slick Willie's "Crime Bill"
expired in '04, you can go to the Wal-Mart and walk out 5 minutes later with a
full-auto machine gun???
That's what the gun-grabbers want you to think. And it looks like they've done a
decent job of it...
Posted by: KP | February 17, 2007 at 11:43 PM
Stay the hell out of Indiana, jimbob. I am going to go clean my Stag Arms
Model 4, which is known as an AR15 Assault Rifle to liberal, anti-american
shitstains such as yourself.
Don't come get me with you evil armor-piercing baby killer long range sniper
rifle.
2/19/2007
Page 48 of 853
Posted by: pissed off hoosier | February 17, 2007 at 11:43 PM
You dont get out much do you? Your article is the dumbest thing I have read all
week. You are so out of touch you can't find your ass.
Steve
Same poster, Deric, from above.
I also need to add, that I will no longer renew my subscription to Outdoor Life.
Your voice that hurts our rights, is powered by funds given to this magazine.
Thus, unfortunately, I must no longer pay these funds and I will advice fellow
subscribers to quit doing so as well.
Posted by: Deric | February 17, 2007 at 11:46 PM
My next firearms purchase was going to be a Remington Bolt Action. If this
article is any indication of how Remington feels about various types of firearms,
I will be skipping my Remington Bolt Action purchase. I would rather give my
money to FN or Savage.
Mr. Zumbo, you are costing your advertisers money when you spew this type of
bile.
Posted by: Doug | February 17, 2007 at 11:47 PM
Zumbo: Never heard of ya, but I'll guarantee you that after that scurilous piece
you authored condemning AR15's, etc., your name will be recognizable by
quite a few more folks out here in "terrorist" land.
Wake up bean bag, the gun banners are out to take YOUR bolt action, wood
stocked HUNTING rifle away from YOU because YOU represent a threat to all
corrupt and unprincipled politicians by simply possessing a means of defiance.
But of course, on their way to take your gun away from you, these politicians
will center in on our AR15's, as they make a much easier target, what with
HUNTERS like you playing the divide and conquer game.
Go back to your CONSERVATION club, Zumbo, and never fear, we who
belong to GUN CLUBS will protect your 2nd. Amendment rights with our
AR15's.
Posted by: jimmyjet | February 17, 2007 at 11:48 PM
I will never watch or record another one of your shows Jim. I will also never buy
or read another Outdoor Life. I cannot believe you wrote that trash. I feel like
someone just kicked me in the balls.
As a descendant of one of the Minutemen emblazoned on the statue in
Concord Massachussets, I take great offense at being labeled a "terrorist"
2/19/2007
Page 49 of 853
because I happen to enjoy shooting the AR platform.
I would advise Mr. Zumro to forcibly remove his head from his rectum before he
does any more damage to the shooting sports. Unless, of course, he's made a
decision to become the designated "sensible hunting spokesman" for the VPC /
Brady campaign to trot out every time they attempt to further restrict our
shooting sports and need a mouthpiece.
Most of of us that enjoy shooting the AR platform are not using "Assault Rifles"
- we are using semi automatic sporting rifles that are equipped with "evil" black
metal hardware, parkerized finishes, and plastic stocks, instead of
"respectable" deeply blued barrels and actions in pretty laminated wood stocks.
The few that actually do shoot "Assault Rifles" jump through myriad hoops and
paperwork to be able to fire fully automatic weapons... and since no state or
territory allows full autos for hunting, they are by nature excluded from this
discussion.
While I respect his right to his opinion, in this day and age where there are
those that would seek to disarm us by any means available, his comments only
add ammo to the anti-gunners arsenals. Using the proven tactic of "divide and
conquer", the anti-gunners use intimidating but vague terms like "assault" to try
to fragment those within our sport, as well as convince non-shooters to support
the prohibition of law abiding sportsmen (and women) from owning certain
firearms.
Let me remind him of another recently used intimidating but vague term
proffered by anti-gunners: "Sniper rifle". It describes a weapon capable of 1
MOA accuracy, usually equipped with a telescopic sight, capable of striking a
killing shot at distances in excess of 100 yards. And unlike so-called "assault
weapons", they don't care about plastic or wood, blued or black, pistol grips or
magazine capacity.
Does this sound vaguely like any of the "hunting" rifles in your collection, Jim?
Because it looks a lot like the one you're holding in that picture at the top of this
page.
Oh, in closing - the Second Amendment makes no reference to hunting, so
don't hope for the courts to save you once the gun grabbers have succeeded in
banning all the "non sporting" firearms, and then they come for your "hunting
guns".
Posted by: Doug W. | February 17, 2007 at 11:49 PM
Way to go Jimbo. You've just alienated a large portion of people who read the
rag you write for. Are you trying to reduce OutdoorLife's subscriptions? You've
got a good start on it.
As for me, never again.
2/19/2007
Page 50 of 853
Posted by: Jay Lindholm | February 17, 2007 at 11:49 PM
I never did like your show to begin with. And to end with,, you are another dark
stain on the 2nd Amendment. Nothing more than a wolf in sheeps clothing. Old
lady clinton is calling. You better go answer the phone real quick. Wouldn't
want to make that thing mad would you?
Posted by: Glen Shaffer | February 17, 2007 at 11:49 PM
Fuck you Jim and the horse you rode in on. You are an elitist bastard.
Fuck you Jim and the horse you rode in on. You are an elitist bastard.
WOW!! What have you done?? Can 'O' Worms! I bet you weren't thinking this
when you wrote this blog huh? I applaud you sir for speaking you mind and
letting us know how you feel. I also thank you for exercising the freedom I help
protect for you everyday. Can you imagine if you said this in one of the "other"
countries where you would most likely be imprisoned or killed for saying
anything you want too? Good on you Jim. I really hope you don't loose your job
over this but you know what happens when you speak your mind. People get
offended. I bet if you said "Auto-Loading" rifles instead of "Assault Rifles" not so
many people would be so "offended" right now. Oh well hindsight is 20/20.
Shawn
Posted by: The Knight Of Light | February 17, 2007 at 11:51 PM
Hey Jeff Zumbo, There are hundreds of thousands of the AR-15 in civilian
hands across the United States. They come in every popular hunting caliber
and even in a few you haven't heard of. Their popularity is growing and they are
not going away. Many of them are more precise and all are more versatile than
your wood-stocked hunting rifle. When narrow minded humbugs like yourself
have gone the way of the dinosaur, young men like myself will be fulfilling our
God-given destiny of being stewards of creation with the latest in high tech
weaponry.
Posted by: Schulze | February 17, 2007 at 11:52 PM
You are a disgrace to gun owners. In my opinion you are worse than the Brady
bunch because you are an enemy from within. With the gun debate, you are
either 100% with us or 100% against us, because believe me, they are coming
after "sniper" rifles....oops, I meant scoped hunting rifles. Collaborator. Molon
Labe!!
Posted by: Slinger646 | February 17, 2007 at 11:52 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
2/19/2007
Page 51 of 853
These type of comments from you; is the number one reason I do not like most
hunters. The other 10% are great Americans. Every hunter or sportsman I have
ever meet in the 90% class. Is more concerned with what experts like yourself
write or push on them. and talk about how great XYZ is with no facts to back it
up.
I pray that Remington Arms and Outdoor life drops you as fast as they can.
Your words have a very narrow view and only hurt the 2nd amendment as a
whole. Your personal view of a type and style of firearm does not suite you.
Thats ok, I understand that.
But to flat out call a type of firearm the names you have is just sorry. I hope you
have enjoyed your career because I think it just ended.
The ability of the antigun group's to ban the .50BMG in one state. Is only the
start. The good news is, at your age you will never see the harm you have
caused this great country of mine.
I am still young and will have to fight old idiots like you for many years to come.
Thank you for my start with battling the antigun crowd.
John Boyette
Posted by: J.Boyette | February 17, 2007 at 11:53 PM
If that 7.62 or 5.56 was fired from a Ruger bolt-action would you still consider it
an assault rifle?
Posted by: Mike | February 17, 2007 at 11:53 PM
The only thing I have to say Jimbo is your a freaking idiot not worthy of the gun
industry or even being a US citizen under our constitution. Sara Brady and
Diane Idiotstein really need you!!! And they call you a gun writer....
Bawahhhhhhhahahahaha!!
Posted by: MrKrink | February 17, 2007 at 11:54 PM
I am an Army veteran and I have several AR15s. It is extremely offensive and
retarded to say I own "terrorist weapons". You are a tool of the anti-gun left and
the Brady campaign. You have the same goal of banning these rifles. You think
your cruddy bolt gun will safe from the gun grabbers, but after they ban all the
so-called "assault rifles", they will come after yours.
Posted by: Scott | February 17, 2007 at 11:56 PM
You are the worst type of gun owner.
You think your guns are fine and all nice and whatever...and anything thats
"evil" looking is bad, terrorist-like, and the spawn of the devil himself.
You should be banned from writing articles, voicing an opinion, kicked out of
2/19/2007
Page 52 of 853
the NRA, and be labeled as unpatriotic.
Ever hear of the 2nd Ammendment? I guess not.....
its not in place so you can hunt some deer in the woods with your $2k hunting
rifle that has a 3 round integral mag, newsflash to you bud.
Your article makes me sick. People such as yourself will be the downfall of ALL
gun owners. One by one... Go ahead and "poo poo" our guns, wait till they
come for your "super accurate, high power sniper rifles of doom"....yeah, its
your grandpa's old 30-30 they will come after next.
Posted by: Matt | February 17, 2007 at 11:58 PM
Hey Jim, what do you need your high powered sniper rifle for? You know you
can kill at 1000 meters with that thing! It's an implement of TERROR!
Suck it Jim. Suck it long. Suck it hard.
Posted by: Fastguy45 | February 17, 2007 at 11:58 PM
Well what can I say that hasn't already been said.Your short sightedness is
really your down fall.What next do I have to drive a certain make of truck? wear
certain type camo?go to a certain church?shoot a certain rifle my ass.get off
your high horse and join the hunting american's............
Posted by: david white eagle | February 17, 2007 at 11:58 PM
Hey fellas - take it easy on Jim.
He is obviously trying to create a bit of controversy (publicity) here with his
original statement. No one who purports to believe in hunting and gun
ownership plus writes for Outdoor life could be so uninformed about guns and
intentionally make a statement associating our armed forces and police with
terrorists becasue of the weapons they use... or could they?
Posted by: Paul | February 17, 2007 at 11:59 PM
Pardon me sir but your article makes you look like a sensationalist idiot and you
obviously are not a proponent of the 2nd Amendment. I am a law enforcement
firearms instructor, a concealed carry handgun instructor and a NRA certified
instructor. I own several variants of your "assault rifle" and I have no criminal
record nor will I. I am law abiding (abviously) citizen and I resent being
associated with a terrorist, as I'm sure many law abiding folks that have read
your article do.
You sir, owe a whole bunch of good people here and in the firearms fraternity,
a sincere public apology !
Posted by: Robert H. | February 17, 2007 at 11:59 PM
2/19/2007
Page 53 of 853
Jim
Saying "I had no clue" is a big clue to me of how out of touch you are in the
hunting world.Take a look at the predator and varmit hunting industry and see
how many people are hunting with in your words "assault rifles",(which is a term
the liberal gun banners came up with).You have a right to your opinion under
the Bill of Rights,but you might want to check the same Bill of Rights and check
the 2nd amendment.
Comments like yours in a public venue is only harming hunters in the long run.
Have a nice day!
Posted by: Scott Ruff | February 17, 2007 at 11:59 PM
I do believe you just flushed your carrier down the fucking toilet nice job.
Posted by: Robert (crazed Thats right Loki) | February 18, 2007 at 12:00 AM
To Mr. Dumbo and his stupid elitist ilk. What difference does it make what
platform the projectile is ignited?
You and the other "clip" crowd just prove again that there is such a great divide
that exists in today's gun owners.
Why do you pander to the politicians that classify your "hunting" weapons?
Posted by: NoQtr | February 18, 2007 at 12:01 AM
You have your ideals, opinion and a inherent right to drool them. However,
since you have this public space to post your dribble; you win the responsibility
to read critque your own harm.
I read through your piece several times.
At first read, it is obvious you have a opinion...by definition words or belief in
something that only has to do with you. Futhermore, an opinion without any
support of factual evidence. I'll continue this reply without factual evidence
against. Save that for round 2. In the least, you have a very common opinion
with the anti-gun folks or urban political skirts.
After second read it becomes apparent that you, yourself, believe that your
limited experience in hunting makes you a worthy soapbox in firearm
regulation. Then you follow to state your own ignorance. It is then apparent that
you feel threatened from something that is totally new or foreign to you. Read
your own words. Therefore the apology?
The vacuum you live in is self-created.
I doubt you did too much harm, I never heard of you till someone blew the
moron whistle. I must be living in a vacuum.
I don't come to belittle you, I rather we as responsible gunowners and
sportsmen *and women* be on the same page.
2/19/2007
Page 54 of 853
Wake up tomorrow and do better, it's not all about you.
Posted by: Boomholzer | February 18, 2007 at 12:01 AM
I will never read or buy outdoor life magazine again nether will I renew my
subscription.
Posted by: Robert Olson | February 18, 2007 at 12:02 AM
Damn Fudds are gonna get us all kilt.
Posted by: Sarah B. | February 18, 2007 at 12:03 AM
Dammit Jim, shut the fuck up.
Posted by: Hillary Clinton | February 18, 2007 at 12:04 AM
Oh yeah and by the way that rifle you got there in the picture is a SNIPER
RIFLE..............we definitely need to get rid of those, don't need anyone hiding
and shooting people with that "highly accurate hunting rifle"!!! Hey Remington,
fire this anti-gun anti-American disgrace to gun owner idiot!!
Posted by: MrKrink | February 18, 2007 at 12:04 AM
I shot my first deer this year with a tactical SWAT sniper rifle. It has a harris
bipod, 10x mildot scope, 26" bull barrel, synthetic stock, and custom cheek pad.
Capable of 1000yrd shots in expert hands. Of course, I could just call it a
scoped .308 boltaction hunting rifle. I could likewise call your long guns sniper
rifles as they have the same capabilities. So what if my AR scares the granola
heads? in reality it is a auto loader rifle in .223rem, functionally identical to the
thousands of other so called "hunting guns" in the same caliber. It just happens
to have fantastic ergonomics and exotic appearence.
Posted by: Mik | February 18, 2007 at 12:06 AM
I am a hunting guide and will be passing this to all my clients. I will be asking for
them to inform the entire hunting community about this outrage.
I have kept my thoughts about you to myself until now.
You are a overweight blowhard that needs his hand held by paid hunting
guides to drive you to nearly tame game animals.
Outdoor life cancelled..... everything Remington will be leaving my house
today !!
Please do us a favor and resign. it's the only honarable thing to do.
Posted by: waterfowlmaniack | February 18, 2007 at 12:07 AM
Jim, I'm sure the NRA does not agree with you. Do you think the old mountain
men might have said something similar when the '56 Spencer or the Henry
Rifle came out? They might have considered themselves "traditionalist" and
disparaged the new firearm of the day. The AR is certainly an inheritantly
2/19/2007
Page 55 of 853
accurate firearm, and largely the reason for its popularity among the varmint
and predator hunting crowd. Not to mention the added advantage of quick
follow up shots.
As one who just recently started shooting and hunting with an AR, I still love the
blued steel and wood grain of a fine bolt gun. I support your legal right to hunt
with what you like. I hope you will afford me the same courtesy.
Posted by: Sean Willis | February 18, 2007 at 12:08 AM
And just what are you going to do when they come for your "sniper rifle" Jim?
I used to read you....I just cancelled my subscription. I get enough of this crap
from Diane Feinstein.
Posted by: Flinter | February 18, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Jim,
Make no mistake, the gun banners will get around to you too. If you think you
can placate them you are mistaken. It is a shame to see someone so shortsighted have such a platform to betray other gun owners. I guess my dollars will
go elsewhere. Thanks for letting me know whom I can trust. It clearly isn't
REMINGTON.
Eric
Posted by: Eric | February 18, 2007 at 12:09 AM
One more thing, as much as I cherish hunting and will do whatever I can to
ensure it's continuation, it has nothing to do with the second ammendment; I
would completely abandon the sport if was necessary to protect my right to
bear arms.
Posted by: Mik | February 18, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
In response to your disapproval of using a semi-auto version of our our
currently issued military long arm for varmint (pest control) hunting, I ask the
follwing questions:
As I recall, progressive governmets such as Mexico and some sub-saharan
african nations have outlawed the use of Military calibers in pursuit of game.
Are you advocating a similar mindset?
At what point do we outlaw the use of a mauser '98 in 7x57? That's the rife
used to kill thousands of out grandfathers.
Or an enfield .303? How many third world countries were "terrorized" during the
British occuptation by that assult weapon?
Some folks still use military rifles of these calibers in the pursuit of deer sized
2/19/2007
Page 56 of 853
game. Are they unenlightend slobs intent on living out adolescent military
fantasies?
By what criteria should "game departments... ban them from the praries and
woods"?
Magazine capacity?
Barrel Length?
Stock composition? (My camo stocked 870 is an assult weapon?)
Caliber?
Balistics?
Your opinon of tastefulness and tradition?
I stand in serious awe of your ignorance. Please remind Remingtom what they
are getting when they send you off on a canned hunt with a rife to review.
Maybe they already do know.
In that case I refer them to the corporate earnings records of Smith and
Wesson between 1995 and 2005.
Posted by: Steve, too | February 18, 2007 at 12:10 AM
Jim, that hurt. I thought we were friends.
Posted by: TTBoy | February 18, 2007 at 12:11 AM
Dumbo,
That was a stupid way of selling out fellow gun owners that spend alot of
money to Remington. Remington sells assault rifle ammuntion. You bit the
hand that feeds you dumbass.
Posted by: Gun-guy | February 18, 2007 at 12:13 AM
It's a shame you are so out of touch with reality, my AR-15 isn't an assault rifle
as you allege, it merely LOOKS like one, there is a huge difference.
You fail to understand that the same people who want to deny me the use of an
AR-15 by mistakenly calling it an assault rifle are the exact same people who
want to take away your hunting rifle by describing it as a sniper rifle.
I'm disappointed in you, I thought you would know better...
Posted by: John | February 18, 2007 at 12:14 AM
Jim,
I’m an avid hunter and have enjoyed reading your articles for a long time.
Don’t really know the first thing about these terrorist rifles and to be honest,
don’t really care to know.
But good god man. Could have done more harm to our sport/culture/passion if
2/19/2007
Page 57 of 853
you had tried.
This division between Sportsmen (hunters) and those who enjoy military type
weapons must stop, or we’re going to be throwing rocks at deer. Nothing will be
left for you or me to hunt with.
I don’t see why I might need an M-16 or an AK-47, but that doesn’t mean I have
any right to preclude others from possession and enjoyment (granted it’s legal).
The Second Amendment is there to protect ALL of our firearm rights. I don’t
seem to remember it saying anything about hunting.
Our (yours and mine) ignorance probably leads us to not understanding these
other firearms, but you attitude/arrogance is harmful to us all. Your article
leaves me no option, but to cancel my subscription. I will also be writing letters
to Outdoor Life and to Remington expressing my displeasure. I hope to see a
quick end to your career.
Chris Smith
Portland, Oregon
Posted by: Chris Smith | February 18, 2007 at 12:14 AM
I am very disappointed to read commentary like this from somone I have come
to consider one of Outdoor Life's halmark writers. Mr.Zumbo you sir are a
terrible disappointment to me and thousands of other readers of Outdoor Life. I
grew up reading this magazine and always took great stock in what the great
Jack O Connor the later Jim Carmichael and even you have penned until now.
You sully a fine outdoor publication with a long history .The anti gun PC drivel
you have penned makes you exactly the type of person the ANTI GUN lobby
loves, one of our own turning on us. The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting
further more the rifles you mention that you feel have no sporting purpose are
perfectly useable for just that. I often have used an AR15 for pest control and
varmints for well over 20 years on my farm. Further more there are many
people who successfully I might add use the 7.62x39mm cartridge in AK style
rifles and SKS carbines to take everything from deer to varmints. Quit hanging
on to your stodgy ideas of what YOU think is apporpiate for a sproting arm is
and what should or can be used by the guy in the field. you disgust me sir!
Posted by: The Ghost of Jack O Connor and Julian Hatcher | February 18, 2007 at 12:14 AM
I don't subscribe to Outdoor Life so I can't cancel that, but I used to watch Mr
Zumbo on the Outdoor Channel. Not any more, no credibility now.
Posted by: Tom | February 18, 2007 at 12:14 AM
Hey guys,
Posted by: jstreet | February 18, 2007 at 12:15 AM
I am very disappointed to read commentary like this from somone I have come
2/19/2007
Page 58 of 853
to consider one of Outdoor Life's halmark writers. Mr.Zumbo you sir are a
terrible disappointment to me and thousands of other readers of Outdoor Life. I
grew up reading this magazine and always took great stock in what the great
Jack O Connor the later Jim Carmichael and even you have penned until now.
You sully a fine outdoor publication with a long history .The anti gun PC drivel
you have penned makes you exactly the type of person the ANTI GUN lobby
loves, one of our own turning on us. The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting
further more the rifles you mention that you feel have no sporting purpose are
perfectly useable for just that. I often have used an AR15 for pest control and
varmints for well over 20 years on my farm. Further more there are many
people who successfully I might add use the 7.62x39mm cartridge in AK style
rifles and SKS carbines to take everything from deer to varmints. Quit hanging
on to your stodgy ideas of what YOU think is apporpiate for a sproting arm is
and what should or can be used by the guy in the field. you disgust me sir!
There are a lot of companies out there building AR's that are tack drivers with
bull barrels, and it still shoots a 223 varmit bullet.
when they take your guns, they will take
them all. Not just assault rifles. They are going to take your shotgun, 22 rifle,
anything they deam as a weapon capable of shooting a modern cartridge
projectile. They may even take your black powder guns.
More people have died at the hands of baseball bats, and shotguns than
assault rifles. You are a blind brainwashed idiot, You are a gun control nut, and
give gun grabbers a good name to stop hunting, and owning a gun.
FORGET ME BUYING ANYMORE OF YOUR COMPANIES MAGAZINES, OR
PRODUCT ENDORSEMENTS.
Posted by: ron | February 18, 2007 at 12:17 AM
Personally, I use conventional arms for hunting but I own all types and I must
say that you insult me and everyone who owns firearms and hunts. You're
entitled to your opinion and are free to openly express it to be sure but so am I.
In my opinion you are a small, narrow minded, ignorant person.
I have usually bought around six issues of Outdoor Life a year off the shelf for
over thirty years but now O.L. can thank you and only you for making darn well
certain that I will never pick up another issue again. You can be rest assured
that the people I've pointed this article out to have agreed and are taking the
same stance. There's more than enough reading material out there and the
likes of you and O.L. aren't at all necessary.
Posted by: R. McGowan | February 18, 2007 at 12:18 AM
Mr. Zumbo:
2/19/2007
Page 59 of 853
You are correct. You are living in a vacuum.
Not only are you unaware of the accuracy and utility of what you refer to as
assault weapons, you are also unaware that hunting is no longer a fraternity,
nor has it been for many years. Women are out there in the woods too, and
some of them even hunt with military style weapons.
I am not currently a subscriber of Outdoor Life, but I am going to pick up just
one more copy so I can write to the sponsors of this magazine to tell them what
I think of your editorial.
Saddened.
Posted by: sgtlmj | February 18, 2007 at 12:19 AM
Mr. Zumbo, you and all of the other ignorant "elmer fudd" types had best wake
up and smell the coffee before it's too late...this is an all-or-nothing fight for our
rights that we are in.
Today, they're trying to take away our "assault rifles"...tomorrow, they'll be
coming after your "sniper rifle".
You either support the right to keep and bear arms or you do not...period.
Judging from your attitude and assinine ramblings posted above, you appear to
be little more than an elitist who does not care about the people's 2nd
Amendment rights as a whole...as long as you can keep your bolt-action rifles,
screw everyone else...
I truly hope you have the opportunity to carefully re-think your position...from
the unemployment line.
It'll be a cold day in Hell before I buy another Remington product as long as
you're on their payroll. I've budgeted for a .300 Win. Mag rifle this year...I WAS
going to buy a Remington 700...now I'll be purchasing something from either
the Savage or Browning product lines.
Posted by: Bruce Q. | February 18, 2007 at 12:19 AM
What an incredibly arrogant ass you are sir and a true enemy to all of our
freedoms.
You are certainly welcome to call them what you will. The same constitution
that gives you that right give others the right to own semi-automatic firearms.
But your statement that they have no place in the woods is ill-informed. Many
hunters use semi-automatic firearms for hunting, and many manufacturers sell
them for that purpose. In fact, when they're dressed in "hunting garb" you'd be
hard pressed to recognize many semi-automatic rifles as "terrorist rifles" as you
2/19/2007
Page 60 of 853
like to call them.
And, more to the point: these days, there are other reasons to be armed in the
woods. If you stumble upon an illegal drug lab in a remote location, you may
wish for more self-defense capability than the average muzzle-loader provides.
Posted by: JohnKSa | February 18, 2007 at 12:21 AM
Jim Zumbo 2007: "-I call them "assault" rifles", "I see no place for these
weapons among our hunting fraternity. I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist"
rifles."
2008: Democratic controlled House and Senate emboldened by the mighty
sportsman Jim Zumbo ban possession of "Terrorist Assault rifles" with no
grandfather clause, turn 'em in folks.
Various gun control groups together with animal rights activists 2009: High
power sniper rifles with sniper scopes capable of penetrating police body armor
are readily available to terrorists with little or no background checks. No one in
America "needs" to hunt as meat is readily available in the grocery stores;
nowhere in the US Constitution is the "Right to hunt" enumerated.
2010: Possession of all centerfire and rimfire rifles and riflescopes are banned,
turn them in folks.
Jim you really should know better, we have to hang together or we're going to
hang separately on the issue of gun control. Please call your friends and find
one that owns an AR-15 and try shooting it some afternoon, nothing serious,
just throw some cans down range and have at it, you just might have some fun.
If you come through Florida email me, I'll take you plinking with my wife, kids,
and an AR-15, they all love shooting Ar-15 "Assault Rifles."
Posted by: AC-130U Gunship guy | February 18, 2007 at 12:22 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
I see the ant-gunners have gotten to you. The use of a semi-auto for hunting
does not make one a terrorist. The AR type rifles can be quite accurate rivaling
traditional bolt action accuracy. When rifle manufacterers see there is a
demand for accurate semi-auto's in small centerfire calibers and begin making
them...they will sell to ethical hunters. By making a statement like you have
done, you've allowed the door to be opened wider for the divide and conquer
agenda of the leftist anti-gun faction in this country.
Posted by: Mike B | February 18, 2007 at 12:22 AM
Jim, I'm disappointed.
I have always enjoyed hunting with "military-type" firearms. Moreover, I've
especially enjoyed hunting with military-type firearms I have worked on as
2/19/2007
Page 61 of 853
home gunsmithing projects (rebuilding, refinishing, accurizing, etc.). While your
personal tastes may differ from mine, you have no more right to critize my
choice of hunting arm, than I have to criticize your choice. Although, I am sorely
tempted to characterize you as being nothing more than a shill for the "latest
and greatest" product from the major arms manufacturers. I feel so inferior now
that I know I don't own the same .17 gee-whiz-a-ma-bob or the .35 beltedimproved as the Great Zumbo.
You call for a "ban" on certain types of guns for hunting. It should take only one
shot for a competent hunter to make a competent kill. What next Jim? A ban on
all repeaters? You really need to re-think your position on this.
Gary Jeter
FAL Files moderator
Posted by: Gary Jeter | February 18, 2007 at 12:23 AM
Your an idiot, but a useful one.
Keep up the good work.
Me and Teddy Kennedy will be over later. Have your shoe shine kit ready boy.
The Honorable Chuckles "the Jew" Schumer.
Posted by: Charles Schumer | February 18, 2007 at 12:23 AM
Damn, the same company PAYING for the advert space here is the parent
company for the cartridge defamed (.223 REMINGTON) has to be IRONY.
Might I send them a little "heads up"?
Hitting you in the BOTTOM LINE might slap you into REALITY.
Posted by: Slyvester Putz | February 18, 2007 at 12:25 AM
I will no longer be doing business with Remington so long as they employ such
an anti-Second Amendment spokesman as yourself. No guns, no ammo, no
cleaning products, nada! You are a disgrace and so is Remington for signing
your paycheck. I'll be taking my business elsewhere.
Posted by: Chris White | February 18, 2007 at 12:25 AM
I'd much rather hunt with some AR type guns then some of the poorly crafted
garbage Remington is putting out. You might see that if you wern't way down in
their pockets. Hey Jim, your credibility just left town
Posted by: Rocky | February 18, 2007 at 12:26 AM
How old are you Zumbo? Are you too old to even handle a firearm?
Lets ban you to a retirement community that the only thing you shoot anymore
is your mouth.
Posted by: Chad | February 18, 2007 at 12:27 AM
2/19/2007
Page 62 of 853
Jim Zumbo = Keyboard Cowboy
I used to respect a sportsman that always "seemed" to be doing the right thing.
Now, it merely seems that the shepard was nothing more than a wolf in sheeps
clothing. Beware of the wolf, he comes in the night to collect those things that
are most dear to us. Zumbo, if I ever see you hunting anything more than so
much as a spear, a sling or a longbow, I will preach to the world the depth of
your hypocricy.
Posted by: Jeffrey Holly | February 18, 2007 at 12:28 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
How disappointed I am to read this article. I've read Outdoor Life for many,
many years. Starting as a teenager in the mid-70s. I basically grew up
pheasant and quail hunting with my dad.
In the past several years I've enjoyed many of your articles and have come to
respect your values and hunting ethics. But now that's all been flushed down
the drain because of this one article. You see, the second rifle I purchased with
my own money was an AR15 in 1979. I used it for prairedog hunting on the
plains of Nebr. for many years. I now live in western Colorado and while I no
longer hunt upland game I do hunt deer and elk. But I still own an AR15. In fact
I shoot it much more frequently than I do my hunting rifles.
The old adage "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend your right to
say it" is a fine example of how we respect the freedom of speech recognized
in the First Amendment but it's an attitude that is too sorely lacking in defending
our beloved Second Amendment.
All firearms owners NEED to stand together and defend what each other owns
and uses or we will surely suffer the fate Pres. Lincoln foresaw when he stated
"A house divided will surely fall."
Sometimes we are our own worst enemies.
And you, Mr. Zumbo, will have a tough time redeeming yourself in my eyes.
Greg Fuller
Posted by: Greg Fuller | February 18, 2007 at 12:28 AM
Mr. Zumbo. I have enjoyed your articles for several years, and especially
enjoyed the article in which you described Chuck Yeager giving you "his" rifle.
You have been an enjoyment. However, I will never read another article by you
or buy another magazine to which you contribute.
As we all know, a firearm is just a tool: It's the person behind it that makes the
difference. The projectile is the implement that does the final damage, not the
2/19/2007
Page 63 of 853
rifle.
A rifle is a rifle, no matter it's appearance.
Were I you, and I admit I'm not, I would rethink my stance on your AR15
statements. Most owners of AR15s are law abiding Americans, just as you
probably are. I'm sure you can put forth at least one example of terrorist usage
of an AR15, but that's NOT the point. The point is it's the TERRORIST using a
tool, not the tool causing the terrorist.
Best wishes, Scott
Posted by: scott | February 18, 2007 at 12:28 AM
Wow. Jim, that's the end of you and outdoorlife at this end of the info
superhighway.
I'm sure it's redundant by now, but I'm copying your stupidity to every firearm
forum I'm apart of, as well as every commercial enterprise I'm associate with.
With friends like you, the industry and gunowning community needs no
enemies.
You also wrote: "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."
You must not get out much.
Posted by: Jeff | February 18, 2007 at 12:28 AM
Mr. Zumbo, you need to quit going on those canned hunts and get out in the
real world. As a law enforcement officer I train with and carry an AR-15 for duty
use. I also hunt with an AR-15, AK-47 and even a russian SKS. I probably
shoot more in 1 year than you have in the last 20 years. You sir are not
qualified to open your mouth when it comes to an AR. Do not write about things
that you know nothing about.
Posted by: HP608 | February 18, 2007 at 12:28 AM
Wow. Despicable.
I can not even begin to fathom why you would write such tripe.
Mark M.
Posted by: Mark M | February 18, 2007 at 12:29 AM
I'm one of the terrorist you speak of, I have evil WWII bolt action military rifles
and some cold war era semi-auto rifles, but lucky for you I only shoot paper
targets.
Your right, killing animals should be reserved for boring sporting guns. It would
be wrong to use a piece of history to snuff some animal.
2/19/2007
Page 64 of 853
I will defend peoples PRIVILEGE to hunt, as long as they defend me RIGHT to
own military arms.
I could care less if the only way you will ever feel like a man is to take the life of
animals who can't hurt you, I will defend your animal killing hobby.
Personally I'm all for people being able to hunt animals, I just don't see what it
has to do with the 2nd Amendment.
Posted by: Buster Charlie | February 18, 2007 at 12:29 AM
You just lost another reader. I find your attitude pompous and disgusting. I own
bolt rifles, lever rifles, pump rifles and semi-auto rifles including an AR15 I just
built and two AK-47s. Why would someone who is a "gun guy" want to see
someones 2A rights infringed upon? Would I hunt with my AR or AK only if
needed. I have other rifles better suited, but both the AR and AK are capable
when used within their limitations. Ballistics for the 7.62 X 39 is inequivalent to
the 30-30, should we also ban the 30-30? I find your terrorist comments equally
as disgusting. Have you forgotten that the U.S. military uses the AR platform as
well as the AK platform on a limited basis? Are you calling those of us in
uniform terrorists as well? I enjoy shooting and hunting and now I will enjoy it
without reading venomous garbage from you.
Posted by: Don | February 18, 2007 at 12:30 AM
As most here have stated, your anti-AR15 drivel is shocking, to say the least, to
be coming from someone associated with a firearms publication. Let me tell you
about my AR15:
I carry it most nights while I'm out there protecting life and property of those that
would do you harm.
I take it with me when my tactical team is called into action to protect my life
and yours.
I take it with me into the field to hunt varmints and the like.
I take it with me to the range, to teach my children responsible firearms
ownership, marksmanship, and to bond and strengthen the love of our family.
I take it home to protect my family from evil doers that would like to harm my
family.
I take it to firearms competitions to enjoy a sporting event, and compete to
strengthen my skills.
I take it to train others in the tactical use of the AR15 so that they also have the
proper tools to protect their lives, and yours.
I also support the right of any other law abiding citizen to own an AR15 for
2/19/2007
Page 65 of 853
many of the same reasons I own one.
And YOU want to take it away from me because you don't approve of how it
looks???
My subscription to Outdoor life just ended,and you have made my decision as
to renewing it very easy.
Donnie
Posted by: Donnie P | February 18, 2007 at 12:31 AM
Purchasing Remington products: NO WAY as long as Zumbo the Dumbo is
associated with Remington. He needs to go!
Posted by: Frank | February 18, 2007 at 12:31 AM
You sicken me, and you are a disgrace to hunting and shooting
Posted by: Jack Pianalto | February 18, 2007 at 12:31 AM
Thanks Jim, at least they're off my ass for awhile.
Posted by: George Bush | February 18, 2007 at 12:33 AM
THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS,SHALL NOT BE
INFRINGED!What part of that do you not understand?
You sir are a traitor that has turned his back upon his fellow,freedom loving
Americans.
Posted by: Shawn | February 18, 2007 at 12:33 AM
Wow, as others have said, I thought this website must have been hijacked and
modified by Sarah Brady or Barack Obama. The AR15 is probably THE
American rifle of our time, and serves a multitude of useful functions including:
hunting small to medium sized game, target shooting, self defense... and yes,
even protecting the right of people to make ignorant statements.
Everyone has the right to their own opinion of course...just as they have a right
to choose better magazines to subscribe to and/or better "traditional" rifle and
ammo brands.
Posted by: D. Holt | February 18, 2007 at 12:34 AM
Mr.Zumbo,
Do yourself a favor. Lie to everyone with an apology saying that you didn't
mean what you said about "assault rifles". Blame it on being drunk or
something, you Elmer Fudd idiot.
Posted by: john silva | February 18, 2007 at 12:35 AM
Hey Jim, how many opinionated assholes does it take to change a light bulb?
2/19/2007
Page 66 of 853
Just one.
We hold it up, and the world revolves around us.
Posted by: Nancy Pelosi | February 18, 2007 at 12:35 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
A few wise words for you from a man you may have heard of...
"We must all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Please place this quote in the context of your article Mr. Zumbo & ruminate on
it.
I'm sure its meaning will become clear.
Best regards,
NY Patriot
Posted by: NY Patriot | February 18, 2007 at 12:36 AM
Your comments are out of line Zumbo...I enjoy ALL firearms and do not have
an elitist mentality like yours.
United we stand, divided we fall...
Posted by: NRAJOE from Toledo,OH | February 18, 2007 at 12:36 AM
Looking good honey, now come here and suck my dick.
Posted by: Diane Feinstein | February 18, 2007 at 12:37 AM
Its called the 2nd amendment. Hunting is not mentioned. But the government
is. Think about it.
Posted by: Skeet | February 18, 2007 at 12:39 AM
I am dumbfounded that Mr Zumbo would write such tripe. He is no better than
the Brady Bunch or any other anti-gun group.
I am disgusted with Mr Zumbo for writing such pure crap and with Outdoor Life
for printing it.
Cross off another reader.
Wait til the NRA gets a hold of this!
ZM
Posted by: Patrick | February 18, 2007 at 12:40 AM
Thinking the anti's will stop at "assault rifles" is like thinking Hitler would stop at
Chezkoslavakia.
2/19/2007
Page 67 of 853
Zumbo the Chamberlain of the shooting sports
Posted by: Aaron Green | February 18, 2007 at 12:42 AM
An insult to all that have served with this outstanding rifle.
US Army terrorist, Gulf War, Version 1.0
Posted by: American Infidel | February 18, 2007 at 12:43 AM
You sir, Mr. Zumbo come off as an elitest snob. The AR is more than capable
as a varmit rifle. And you want a ban because of what? How it looks? Just
because we own an AR instantly marks us off as a criminal in your mind? You
are no friend of the 2nd amendment and no different than Sarah Brady. Let's
not forget that the latest mall shooting was with a shotgun. Maybe we should
take away duck guns as well. Don't want to be lumped in with those crazy duck
hunters.
You sir are the worst kind of anti-2a crowd.
Posted by: Phil | February 18, 2007 at 12:43 AM
Mr. Zumbo, I am not enamored with your attempts to divide the gun community
or compromise anti-gun lawmakers with regard to any gun ownership issue. I
suppose that you're statements can simply be interpreted as your defeatest
strategy of sidlining up with the popular liberal political sentiments. Are you
doing this so you can hang onto your dear "hunting rifle" when a democratic-led
government stomps on the 2nd Amendment once and for all? Might I remind
you that the 2nd Amendment is NOT about hunting or hunter's rights. The Bill
of Rights is about the carefully engineered balance of power between The
People and a tyrannical centralized FedGov that is already run amok.
I could turn the tables on you. What if I were to say that even as a gun owner, I
am a non-hunter who belives that killing for sport is a barbaric pastime that
demonstrates a latent anti-social disorders? Sure!! Maybe I could claim that
people who hunt for sport are dangerous because they can suppress their
murderous psyche!! Now I don't actually believe my previous two statements,
but see how easy it would be to cast hunters in an equally politically tenuous
light? In consideration of our sensitive political era, instead of dividing the
community, you need to be using your platform to help unite firearm owners.
Anti-gun lawmakers aren't going to distinguish firearm types next time. They've
learned their lesson in that regard. They will go the way of the other disarmed
nations by whittling away at ammo caliber & regulations. Your .308 bolt action
will be an equally useful club as my FAL when 30 caliber ammo is banned.
Whether you like AR-15s or not, to claim that they are "terrorist rifles" is simply
preposterous. In case you didn't pay attention to national news, it was your
beloved shotgun was used in a mall shooting in SLC this past weekend. The
2/19/2007
Page 68 of 853
same shooting was cited by the liberal lawmaker from PA who reintroduced
new gun ban legislation this past week, when the shooting itself had nothing to
do with any high-caliber semi-automatic rifles. It was a 12 gauge, hunting gun.
You'll certainly get your tits in a whistle when they come calling for your 870.
Cancelling my subscription to OutdoorLife with a follow-up letter to your
managing editor is step #1. Sending a letter to Remington explaining how I will
not purchase any Remington product until they abandon sponsorship of any
media with which you are affiliated is step #2. I will further assist the various
"fire missions" that are gaining steam.
Good luck with whatever you choose to do as the next chapter in your career.
Posted by: M Hiles | February 18, 2007 at 12:43 AM
Terrorist kill more people with cars and buses so lets ban cars and buses, Mr. Z
Also ending my subscription to Outdoor life
Jim Capt. Retired
Posted by: Jim Erickson | February 18, 2007 at 12:44 AM
I had been contemplating whether or not to renew my Outdoor Life and Field
and Stream magazine subscriptions. Decision made at this point. I dumped
them both. Mr. Zumbo's TV show will never again be shown in my house, and
the books I own that he wrote will become range fodder for my military style
rifles. I don't hunt with my AR rifles. I don't hunt with bow and arrow. I don't hunt
with handguns. You get the idea, I don't use them but don't want to step on
other people's rights to use them.
Posted by: Scott Gilmore | February 18, 2007 at 12:45 AM
I dont appreciate the Terrorist comment.
I will bet neither do my fellow service members and LEO's who use these
"Terrorist" rifles and who you have now called "terrorists". Do yourself a favor
test a Match grade precision AR-15 set up for varmits, maybe it will help pull
your head out of the vacum( or maybe it's in a certain orifice).
I shoot .223 Remington ammo made by Remington to hunt varmits with. Are
you saying Remington Supplies Terrorists?
I guess OUTDOOR life is only for a certain few individuals with certain
firearms? Even though you (zumbo) consider me a "terrorist" can I still be in
your select club and own my L.C. SMITH, A.H FOX,
REMINGTON,BROWNING, MOSSBERG Shotguns and REMINGTON,
SAVAGE, RUGER, WINCHESTER, H&R/NEF rifles?. Or are they now my
terror weapons too? If you own of those types of Firearms too does that make
you guilty by association or is that a uneducated, bigoted statement like the one
2/19/2007
Page 69 of 853
you made?
Now is not the time to stab other firearms owners in the back because you don't
like what they like.
Go ahead ban my Guns your will be next.
Posted by: MattB | February 18, 2007 at 12:45 AM
You are such a bigot, you're no better than a duche in the KKK. You are'nt a
man if the sight of a military partern rifle makes you wet your pants. The
founding Fathers intended that "we the people", had the same arms as the
standing army had. Just because weaapons have improved over the last 231
years dosn't mean that its not our right to own these arms. The 2A is the last
check, when all else has failed to keep the tyranicle Gov at bay. It dosn't have
anything to do w/hunting. Hunting is a tool the gov uses to keep animal pops
under control. I gues you could say that the gov is trampling on animal rights. I
think i'll email the NRA,the SAF, the GOA, and the JPFO. Lets see what they
have to say about continuing to support your career.
Posted by: S. Fisher | February 18, 2007 at 12:45 AM
I'm terribly disappointed in reading what you have written. After all your years
as a hunter this is what you have to offer? You of all people should know better.
Your narrative is incredibly arrogant and reminds me, frankly, of the drivel
published by the Brady Bunch. What, really, is the substantive difference, for
example, between a semiautomatic hunting rifle (see
http://hunting.about.com/cs/guns/tp/tp_auto_rifles.htm for a brief list) and a
semiautomatic AR-15? The difference is appearance only. Where's your
discussion of banning semiauto hunting rifles?
You should also know that your post will provide fodder for those who wish to
ban hunting altogether and start the process for registration and ultimately
confiscation of all firearms.
I thought you were on the side of liberty and freedom, but I must have been
mistaken.
Posted by: JC | February 18, 2007 at 12:46 AM
Ok, Lets see the M24 the USA's Army Sniper Rifle is a Remington 700 action. I
guess the Synthetic Remington 700 BDL I own is now a bonafide Sniper Rifle.
Funny I just hunt with it, but now I can be labeled a terrorist because terrorist
use sniper weapons. I own several AR-15's and my Les Bauer Ultimate AR I
have taken several times prairie dog hunting. I shoot 10 times more than the
bolt action shooter. Guess what. That means I contribute 10x more to
ammunition tax that helps hunting. I also help the bottom line of the folks like
Remington because I buy 10 times more ammo than the Bolt action shooter.
2/19/2007
Page 70 of 853
My AR cost more than the sniper rifle (Rem 700) I have by about 3 times. So
guess what? Again I have paid more in taxes for the government to use. The
way I see it, gun makers should be pushing AR style guns because the residual
increase in income for companies like Remington who makes ammo is a given.
Thanks for nothing. As far as the .223 being weak, I use a .308 in S. Africa to
drop with one shop everything from a Stine Buck to Kudu. Of course if you were
there, I'm sure you would want a 416 Rigby because the .308 isn't powerful
enough. Shows what you know.
Posted by: Paul Winters | February 18, 2007 at 12:47 AM
"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."
Yes, you have no clue.
Posted by: Not smart | February 18, 2007 at 12:48 AM
Zumbo's comments are bogus. I know several people besides myself that use
"assault weapons" for hunting as well as myself. If a 5 round mag is installed in
a semi auto AK or AR type rifle it is no more lethal than any other semi auto rifle
but is less destructive than a multi shot shotgun. I see no differences in any
semi auto rifle except for configuration. If he feels that about military
configuration semi auto rifles he must also feel the same about all semi auto
rifles. What if someone was to speak out about the bolt action scoped (sniper
configuration) rifles how would he stand. As gun owners we are responsible for
protecting our rights especially now with the democrats (jackasses) are in
office. They want to take all guns away. If ignorant people in public places keep
making hipocritical anti gun statements (like Zumbo) we will be divided and will
fall and unfortunately end up saying bye to our second ammendment rights as
well as our firearms. If one thing is taken from us another will soon follow.
Posted by: walt | February 18, 2007 at 12:48 AM
wow... what a truly stupid piece of garbage he wrote. AR15's aren't tack
drivers? Mine doesn't even have a bull barrel, and it has a heavy single stage
trigger. At 100 yards I can put 20 shots in a group that a pop bottle lid will
cover. And I've only shot my AR at 100 yard distance two times! Imagine if I put
a better trigger, a bull barrel, and shot more with it!! It'd be even more of a tack
driver.
You say an AR15 makes someone turn to the spray and pray method of
shooting. How do you come to this conclusion? I could go hunting with my AR
and a 30 round mag.. and I'd only take one shot. If I missed, I'd let the animal
go. But magazine capacity does nothing to make someone shoot wildy. It is
ALL ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL HUNTER!! You want to talk about cowardly
hunting.. hunt like a real man.. with no scents, calls, antler rattles. Do it like a
2/19/2007
Page 71 of 853
man and hunt by pure chance and luck. Using calls and scents to lure an
animal in, is much more cowardly than using an AR15 to hunt an animal!
I sincerely hope that since a lot of hunters are stupid when it comes to rifles like
the AR15 or AK47, not caring if they are banned.. don't wait for me to shed a
tear when your hunting grounds dry up and your rifles are deemed sniper rifles.
You bring it upon yourself if this is the view you take of our other rifles and
weapons we have the right to own.
If you choose to protect only one type of weapon, rest assured, they will
eventually end up with only your weapon left to ban. And don't count on them
being scared to take yours. Afterall, what are you going to do to defend against
the govt, with a single shot bolt action rifle? One shot, one kill? I see it more as,
one shot, one kill. Then hundreds of shots, YOUR DEAD.
You need to give up your job of writing articles on guns or hunting. Morons like
you are selling our 2nd amendment rights down the drain.
Posted by: Jed | February 18, 2007 at 12:49 AM
Wow Jim,
You truly are the worst enemy of all gun owners out there. Thanks to people
like you we are fighting a constant uphill battle to keep our right to keep and
bear arms.
Shame on you! You sir are a disgrace to all freedom loving Americans!
Posted by: Matt Marshall | February 18, 2007 at 12:49 AM
Mr. Zumbo.... I just don't have the words to express how much harm your
narrow view does to our common cause.
I will say, that as a hunter for 33 years, I've hunted with 30-30 Lever actions,
Bolt actions, Single Shot Encores, Pump actions, Recurve and Compound
Bows. It seems absurd to conclude, that by taking my 1/2 MOA AR15 out with
suitable ammunition to harvest a Deer, Coyote or Feral Hog, that suddenly my
hunt is deemed unworthy because of the appearance of the rifle used to pursue
them.
As a respected member of the hunting and shooting community your
irresponsible statements are no help to ANY hunters or shooters and are
certainly welcomed by Sara Brady and Hillary Clinton.
I'm very sorry to have wasted my respect on you for so long. I will thank you for
letting people know just how little you respect the second amendment and
those who actually understand just what it means.
Posted by: Oulufinn | February 18, 2007 at 12:49 AM
Zumbo is clearly out of touch and more foe than friend.
2/19/2007
Page 72 of 853
Still, I think we can do without the profanity and all the garbage posts. Send him
a message, and his employers.
But do it like the man Zumbo imagines himself to be.
Posted by: Bud | February 18, 2007 at 12:50 AM
Well Mr. Jim, Sounds to me like you will be running for a Congressional seat on
the Democrat Party ticket.
You just don't get the whole idea behind the 2nd Ammendment do you? After
they come and get the EBR's, "they" WILL be coming for your bolt action
'sniper rifle'.
Stop living in a fantasy world where you assume Your guns are safe and legal.
Posted by: Easy | February 18, 2007 at 12:51 AM
As a member of the United States armed forces with a 16 month deployment
fighting real "terrorists" and an AR-15 owning citizen, I am very, very offended
by the insinuation that anyone owning an AR-15 is himself a terrorist. How dare
you.
Posted by: Paul | February 18, 2007 at 12:52 AM
I just can't believe what I read from someone I thought I respected.You must be
getting a check from the brady bunch,hopefully you won't get many more from
Outdoorlife or Remington.Getting you off the payroll may be their only hope of
recovering from this.
Posted by: Johnny | February 18, 2007 at 12:53 AM
All your guns belong to us.
Posted by: twizzledik | February 18, 2007 at 12:53 AM
That stupid fucking hat of yours must be to tight.
Posted by: Stupid hat hater. | February 18, 2007 at 12:57 AM
Hey,with you position on gun, you are pro-genocide.
Posted by: James B | February 18, 2007 at 12:57 AM
Moron! After reading what you have to say on this subject that is the only word
that is appropriate. To have a supposed supporter of the shooting and hunting
comminity using terms like "terrorist rifle" it will be a wonder if we are able to
preserve our 2nd amendment rights in the future. (BTW dumbass, how many
terrorists have you seen fielding an AR-15 anyways? They are most commonly
found with AK-47's, another "assualt rifle", but I'm sure that you knew that,
didn't you??????)
2/19/2007
Page 73 of 853
I could care less about using one of these rifles (notice the lack of an "assualt"
or "terrorist" preceptor, not bad for someone whom is not an overpaid poster
boy for the industry ehh?) for hunting myself. But, I at least have the brainpower
to realize that we should not be giving the anti's any fuel to their way of
thinking. We (as in the shooting and hunting community, sorry to keep having to
spell things out, I just want to make sure that your simple mind is following)
need to support one another in our endevours, irregardless of whether or not
we choose to do things the same way or not. As long as it is legal, we can not
afford to look down our noses at the way that our friends do things or pretty
soon none of it will be legal. Please think before you go flapping your gums.
Good day sir (and I use that term very loosely).
Posted by: Nate | February 18, 2007 at 12:57 AM
I don't know who this Jim Dildo guy is, but due to his anti-(other than what he
likes)gun and 2nd amendment views that are supported by Remington, I will
never purchase another Remington firearm, bullet, or reloading component.
As for this Outdoor Life magazine, I've never read or subscribed to it, and now I
have a good reason not to. Ever.
Thank you for selling law abiding Americans down the river, assholes.
Posted by: jnewson | February 18, 2007 at 12:58 AM
Jim,
I'm deeply saddened to see someone of your caliber thinking the way you are.
As others have stated, the 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting. Hunting is a
privilage given to us by the State. (A privilage in which I partake and enjoy. One
I hope that my children will be able to enjoy). Owning firearms is a right given to
us by our Founding Fathers. Protecting our families, property and Country is a
liberty given to us by God.
Unfortunately, it appears that you have fallen victim to the liberal media and the
anti-gun agenda. It will be people like you who feed these entities with the fuel
they need to deliberately nibble at our rights until there are none left. Once they
have "assault weapons" banned, there will be another like you saying, "I don't
see the need for hunters to use sniper rifles to take game." Only then will you
maybe understand where we are coming from.
For the sake of everyone reading this, I hope you are never forced to
understand.
I will never pick up an Outdoor Life rag again. I will also be writing Remington
about this.
2/19/2007
Page 74 of 853
"Tyranny is the exercise of some power over a man, which is not warranted by
law, or necessary for the public safety. A people can never be deprived of their
liberties, while they retain in their own hands, a power sufficient to any other
power in the state." Federalist Noah Webster
Posted by: Brian | February 18, 2007 at 12:59 AM
Well, I guess with what was said here by Zumbo, and what has been said by
others in regards to the hunting with the .50 article, I wont be sending any
money to Outdoor life, and will inform my customers of the same. I wont be
redundant here and say what others have said, but I do want to say that YOU
Mr. Zumbo ARE in a vaccuum.
to base a firearm on its appearance? come on, give me a break, i suppose we
should ban them all because they are not single shot rifles with wood huh?
How about we target the unethical hunters, and criminals and not what they
use...go to the source of the problem, same as in crime, if i hit someone with
my ford, does that mean that ford is bad and no one should have one, but
chevys are ok? of course not, and if my chevy can pull that trailer up a
mountain same as your dodge, why would you complain about me using the
chevy...it does the job.
Posted by: Kevin R. | February 18, 2007 at 01:01 AM
As an additional comment to go with my first posting at around 11:00pm I add
this:
No Remington product will be purchased by anyone in my household again
until Mr. Zumbo is off the Remington payroll. No publication will be on my
coffee table again until Mr. Zumbo is likewise removed from the payroll.
I purchase and use 2,000 - 4,000 rounds of amunition every year for my AR-15
alone. At least another 500 - 1,000 in 9mm parabellum. God only knows how
many .22LR cartidges. Until today, my .30-06, .30-30, and .25-06 ammunition
has been remington. Also the few boxes of .38 spcl, and .410 ammunition have
likewise been Remington.
"Give them the rifle, *SELL* them the cartridge" works both ways.
Posted by: WB*aka*Soylent | February 18, 2007 at 01:01 AM
ever consider moving to canada?
-or maybe china?
Posted by: anti commies | February 18, 2007 at 01:03 AM
You are a fucking POS, fuck you Zumbo, go suckle on Hillary Clinton's bosoms
a little more, you uninformed fucktard, good day, sir.
Posted by: Zumbo Hater | February 18, 2007 at 01:03 AM
2/19/2007
Page 75 of 853
You are a fucking POS, fuck you Zumbo, go suckle on Hillary Clinton's bosoms
a little more, you uninformed fucktard, good day, sir.
Posted by: Zumbo Hater | February 18, 2007 at 01:03 AM
Fuck you Jim.
This was posted by Grim on Assault Web. Sounds like a VERY GOOD idea. I
don't own just guns, rifles, assault weapons any more. They're all "HOMELAND
DEFENSE RIFLES".
I don't know where it got started, or who coined it....but the term "Homeland
Defense Rifle" became a good laugh for us all. But after thinking about, I feel it
isn't a joke. I feel we should go out of our way to make that a keyword amongst
the Law Abiding gun owner/shooter community (and all splinters of it). Why?
Well, because that's what they have ALWAYS been, but now a gracious and
well defined name has come to light. If you use the term to the point enough, it
will stick.
We all know that "Assault Rifles" by modern times definition is false. Assault
rifle meant select fire...etc.....BUT a few Democraps and Leftwingers got a hold
of it and plastered it all over till' it became a newly defined word/term. We
embraced it mostly for the humor & shock value. "Yeah, I own guns, I have
some old lever actions, a revolver....OH, and a few 'assault rifles' (then a good
laugh as you mock the term)
But, its not OUR term, it was handed to us by the enemy to scare the sheeple.
So why should we continue using it? I didn't buy my AK style rifles for hunting, I
sure as hell didn't buy them for marksmanship related shooting events, I bought
them as a tool of defense and deterrence to those that want to threaten me in
any form, whether a criminal attacking my home or a power attacking my rights.
So I feel we should take this new term that WE chose, that describes OUR
'tools' for what they really are and have ALWAYS been. These, my friends, are
the freeman's modern day musket. My dream as of now, is to see that this new
DESCRIPTIVE DEFINITION, LABEL, TERM, WHATEVER be used SO
COMMONLY that the lefties actually bring it up on CNN, FOXNEWS etc.... Let
them scoff, let them 'spin' this, try to mock it, hell, LET THEM MOCK IT,
BUT.....DON'T back down, don't flinch, continue using it till' it is forced into the
sheeples mind. If the powers that be wanna use fear of terrorism to justify their
actions, them I for damn sure will use it to CLARIFY my reason for owning
these weapons. They expect us to shit in our pants.....they show videos of
terrorists training with 'Military weapons', Well guess what, You can't put a cat
in a dog fight. Lets use their "fear factor" against them, lets not only coin this
2/19/2007
Page 76 of 853
new label, lets MINT it!!
From now on, every time you make a post, or are in a conversation with a
sheeple or even a fellow Patriot, and the need comes to use the term 'Assault
Rifle'----catch yourself and use the RIGHT term "Homeland Defense
Rifle"......Put pressure on Major dealers to start using the phrase in their
advertising,"ON SALE This Week: Homeland Defense Rifles..." Lets turn this
tide in OUR favor for once.
Think it about......please, this is a bigger deal then you think. I know it sounds a
bit silly at first, or even a bit pointless, but look at the BIG picture. The existing
term was used to disarm us, as well as "Non-Sporting features/rifle" Let them
try to deny us our "Homeland Defense Rifles" How does that sound. If it is used
enough, it will be a forced vocabulary, the media will mock it at first or ignore it,
but if we PERSIST without hesitation, then the term will be set in stone, as well
as the hearts & minds of many. Please help me make this a reality
Posted by: Derby FALs | February 18, 2007 at 01:06 AM
Okay folks, now that most of you are on the same page.... what are you going
to do about it??? (hint) GET OUT AND VOTE!!!!! In the mean time, make sure
to get your wife, kids, friends, and neighbors out to go shooting. It is the only
way to save your rights that will die in 08 if you remain quiet. If you don't do it
now, we will all be sorry.
Posted by: RT | February 18, 2007 at 01:07 AM
oh, thanks a lot.
I will make sure that the 10,000 rounds of ammunition i shoot every year does
not have remington written anywhere on it.
Posted by: freedom | February 18, 2007 at 01:07 AM
The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. If your kind wishes to
continue your hunting traditions then being on the side of the gun grabbers is
not the way to achieve your goal. You are on our side right?
I would cancel my subscription, but I actually did that a long time ago when
your magazine ceased being about the outdoors and more about
advertisements and trucks.
Posted by: NMA | February 18, 2007 at 01:07 AM
Seriously where have you been? I used to use an AR15 for hunting before they
became illegal in my county along with taking a deer with a bow and arrow
which is also illegal. I hope you know what is at stake Sir. I will never read your
magazine or any magazine you are affilated with. Say hi to Hillary for me.
Posted by: rjh | February 18, 2007 at 01:08 AM
2/19/2007
Page 77 of 853
Dear Mr.Zumbo,
I would first like to apologize for my fellow gun owners, they have forgotten that
in order to flourish we must educate.
It is readily obvious that Mr. Zumbo has his head up his fourth point of contact,
and as such must be practicing cranial proctology, so henceforth in this lesson
we shall forever call him Richard Cranium. (In case you cannot hear me Mr.
Zumbo, if you will insert the short name for Richard and the common name for
Cranium I am sure you will understand my meaning.)
That being said I will take you to task on your ignorance.
1. Can you define "Assault Rifle" for me?
Answer: An assault rifle is one which is capable of firing more than 1 round per
activation of the trigger.
Does an AR-15, AR-10, DPMS LR-308, AK-47, or a host of many other rifles
sold to the civilian population in this country fit that description? Answer: NO!!!
2. Can you define "Terrorist" for me.
Answer: A terroist is defined as a person or group of persons intent on
enforcing their agenda on others by acts of violence or force of arms.
Does this describe the law abiding citizen in this country with a legally bought
and purchased firearm? Answer: NO!!!
To sum up this first part 1.There are no assault rifles in the hands of civilians.
2. There are no terrorists in the woods or game fields.
Now to task with your agenda. Mr. Richard Cranium (Zumbo) What are you
trying to accomplish? It appears that you and The "Honorable" John Cary, have
alot in common, he says that our military is a bunch of uneducated boobs, you
say they are terrorists, because Mr.Cranium, they do carry "Assault Rifles",
although they are doing a job you are to old and to inept to do. Did you ever
serve in the military sir?
Who will stand with you when they come to take your shotgun or rifle, after your
comments I am sure no one that I know.
I cannot think of a more short sighted view than yours. I would like to further
educate you on the rifles that are currently in use in the game fields of the
country. There are many AR based rifles that are in use, other than
the .223/5.56, there are variants in .243 Win, .260 Remington, 6.5 Grendel, 6.8
SPC, .458 SOCOM, .50 Beuwolf, 7.62 X 39, .308 Win/7.62 X 51, .300RSAUM,
as well as others, and do you know what those calibers have in common Mr.
Cranium? Most of them can be chambered in the Browning BAR or the
Remington 7400, both of which I would like to remind you are gas operated,
SEMI-automatic rifles, whose design was based in large part on the Browning
BAR of WW1 and WW2 fame. The same operating system of the AR and the
AK. OOPS!!! They are based on MILITARY weapons and yet to folks like you,
they are acceptable so why not a rifle that looks different, the AK and the SKS
have wood stocks, that is not so different from the Browning and Remington
2/19/2007
Page 78 of 853
rifles. It would behoove you to accept the job of staff writer for the democratic
party, they often spout such uninformed and uneducated drivel as you have
done in your recent post, it is just that you can spell better than they can.
On a personal note: Mr. Zumbo, I cannot understand you at all, me and my
family used to wait to get your next video or book and we would all share them,
it was you that got us into bugleing and cow calling for elk. You were one of us,
a common guy that got out in the woods and made good doing something we
only dreamed we could do full time, and did it well. You must by now realize
that you have a offended a great many of us and it may not be repairable at this
point, because as I sit and write this, my family and many families across this
country are canceling subscriptions and destroying everything they ever had of
yours. Do you remember "The Dixie Chicks" Mr. Zumbo? They did not care
what people thought either, I have not heard much from them lately, have
you???? I will also be sending a letter to Remington to see if they agree with
you. Your words have shown you to be both a traitor and a coward. I will close
by saying that if you were in my yard on fire, I would not let my dog urinate on
you to put out the flames.
Sincerely,
James Horton
Posted by: James Horton | February 18, 2007 at 01:11 AM
Damn Jim, youre one of us.
Come to the other side.
Trust me, you'll like it, kisses.
Posted by: Flaming Faggot Assholes | February 18, 2007 at 01:11 AM
I am suprised that someone who would support the 2nd amendment would
write an article as you have. I have hunted with AR15's, Ak47's ect. and there is
nothing wrong with that. By your term of an AR being an assault weapon
shouldn't we ban your rifles with scopes as they can be classified as a sniper
rifle?
Ignorance is now on you and shame on you for not supporting and defending
the constitutional rights of all American citizens no matter how you feel about a
style of rifle. I am suprised you would post anti-gun garbage.
Posted by: Ben | February 18, 2007 at 01:11 AM
Oh, almost forgot. I won't be buying a Remmy bolt rife as I had planned to this
spring. I will spend my money with Savage, or maybe an old Winny. Not one
penny of my money will go to Remmy until you are gone and that company
apologises for your despicable actions.
Oh, almost forgot. I won't be buying a Remmy bolt rife as I had planned to this
2/19/2007
Page 79 of 853
spring. I will spend my money with Savage, or maybe an old Winny. Not one
penny of my money will go to Remmy until you are gone and that company
apologises for your despicable actions.
Doesnt look like this article is going the way you planned
Posted by: Yoz | February 18, 2007 at 01:11 AM
Fuck you, assholes. Its my opinion, if you dont like it, kiss my ass.
Posted by: Jim Zumbo | February 18, 2007 at 01:13 AM
AR-15, a terrorist rifle.
Perhaps you are the terrorist (of the 2nd amendment).
The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. If you didn't know the
2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting nor is my choice of arms open
for your approval.
Posted by: Bill Paradise | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 AM
Jim, get the FUCK out of Wyoming, you are a DISGRACE to the firearm
community and to MY HOME STATE.
Posted by: REM788 | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 AM
AR-15, a terrorist rifle.
Perhaps you are the terrorist (of the 2nd amendment).
The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. If you didn't know the
2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting nor is my choice of arms open
for your approval.
Posted by: Bill Paradise | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 AM
Poor Jim ,
Im calling Remington on Monday and telling them Im now a Savage owner .
Thanks to Jim .
PS Wendy's is hiring Jim .........
Posted by: Steve | February 18, 2007 at 01:15 AM
Why are you such a stupid coward?
You think throwing the semi-auto gun owners and the handgun owners under
the bus is gonna save your hobby.
The Anti's want all our guns.
Divided we Fall.
2/19/2007
Page 80 of 853
Outdoor Life needs to reconsider the senility of their contributors. Zumbo is a
disgrace to all gun-owners. Very poor choice of words--I've lost all respect for
you Jim.
Posted by: outdoor not | February 18, 2007 at 01:16 AM
Jim, I don't know who you are, but I'm actually glad about that. I can't believe
you could support the use of one type of gun but completely alienate those of
us who shoot another type of gun. I tell you what, my AR15 is a sub MOA gun,
every bit as accurate as a fancy bolt action whizbang "hunting" rifle. I have no
problems demonstrating that, and people generally say something along the
lines of "wow, I had no idea they were accurate like that."
I have hunted with AR15's. I have also hunted with AK type rifles. They work.
Enough said. I don't need to invest thousands of dollars into a "precision" bolt
action, when a $300 AK or a $800 AR will do the job just as well.
I will not be reading any more of your writing.
GFY.
Posted by: Zack | February 18, 2007 at 01:16 AM
My inital reaction was disgust at your narrow minded opinion.
I would like to point out that ALL shooters weather they hunt or not PAY tax on
firearms, ammunition and associated gear that goes toward game preservation.
Yet you will gladly sit by and let our guns be taken.
Who will stand up for your bolt gun when they have already taken my semiautos?
I woulnt be there for you When they get down to your muzzleloaders either.
I dont hunt but you have inspired me. I am going to hunt Coyote and
Groundhog With my suppresed AR-15 and a FULL 30 round Magazine.
I am glad I am not like you and hope that you will someday learn the meaning
of personal liberty.
Posted by: jim | February 18, 2007 at 01:17 AM
Bring back the AWB. "For Law Enforcement use only" is the way it should be.
No one should have the right to own these. It makes us all look bad.
Posted by: Trey McDowell | February 18, 2007 at 01:17 AM
Mr Zumbo.
I love all 3 of my AK style rifles. I have taken my last 3 deer with one of them.
They have the power of a 30-30, but are much more comfortable to shoot. I
support your right to own a boring old bolt action 30/06 with a scope on it, so
2/19/2007
Page 81 of 853
what the heck is your problem with what I own? I'm waiting to see how
Remington reacts to your foolishness before I decide if I should buy any more
of their products.
Posted by: Tim Kleinschmidt | February 18, 2007 at 01:17 AM
Yawn...............
That was pretty disgusting. Colonel Cooper would have loved this thread.
Jimbo a HOPLOPHOBE! Who'd a thunk it? If, I hear about a retraction, I may
start reading Outdoor Life again.
Posted by: Derby FALs | February 18, 2007 at 01:18 AM
Because of Mr. Zumbo's actions in his blog, I will no longer buy, watch, or
participate with any product that is associated with Mr. Zumbo. What a FAKE!!
I'm going to go buy a couple more AR's now!!
Eddie
Posted by: eddief | February 18, 2007 at 01:19 AM
"Bring back the AWB. "For Law Enforcement use only" is the way it should be.
No one should have the right to own these. It makes us all look bad."
No, Trey, it's Mr. Zumbo's (as well as yours) apalling ignorance that makes us
all look bad!
Hunting rifles? You mean those ultra high-powered assassination tools you
hunters use? Four or five times the power of the rifles issued to our armed
forces and fitted with thousand dollar optics, those sniper rifles can murder
people from over half a mile away. Rifles like that are the choice of hit men,
assassination squads, and terrorists the world over. Not only that but these
rifles use ammunition that’s been banned by the Geneva Conventions. This
ammunition is designed to maximize damage to its victim. Unlike conventional
gunshot wounds, hunting rifle wounds are usually simply unsurvivable.
Sorta pisses you off when you hear your favorite firearms described like that,
don’t it? Well, everything I said is more true than the garbage in this opinion
piece. Believe me, the gun grabbers of the world will come after hunters next.
They will ban optics as the tools of snipers, then they will ban centerfire rifles
that “can shoot through both sides of a bullet proof vest.” Then they will go after
shotguns with bores big enough to be considered artillery. (everything
over .410)
The shooting community had better hang together or we’ll hang apart. Gun
2/19/2007
Page 82 of 853
grabbers want ALL guns banned.
Posted by: Thuban | February 18, 2007 at 01:21 AM
I'm Jim Zumbo, too.
Jim, ya know, I feel for you, you are turning into that european trash that thinks
only the rich should be able to hunt. I can't believe you actually put this where
people can see it. A firearm is a firearm, all that matters is that it is fired from
the shoulder. I thought you were a bigger man than this. OL needs to send you
on your merry way. I have canceled my subscription because of your rant. have
a wonderful day. Les Green
Posted by: Leslie Green | February 18, 2007 at 01:21 AM
So, Mr. Zumbo,
Did you enjoy your career as an outdoor writer and hunting personality? Has
the Clinton campaign contacted you yet about your next career venture? I have
contacted Outdoor Life. I will be contacting Remington on Tuesday. Take your
polarizing opinions and shove them somewhere... painful.
Posted by: Rob Chemberlin | February 18, 2007 at 01:21 AM
Uh, Brother Zumbo, I think you just shit in your Post Toasties.
Posted by: J.B. Summey | February 18, 2007 at 01:22 AM
Well, at least I know now what magazine NOT to subscribe to.
Posted by: psr | February 18, 2007 at 01:22 AM
It is sad to see people like you Mr. Zumbo throw fellow gun owners under the
bus in order to protect you "fraternity". The Second Amendment has nothing to
do with hunting.
Posted by: Ryan | February 18, 2007 at 01:23 AM
Funny, I just looked at the U.S. CONSTITUTION and NO WHERE does the
second amendment mention HUNTING.
Isn't that strange? I wonder what version YOU were reading.
Your arrogance is only exceeded by your ignorance.
Posted by: Dave | February 18, 2007 at 01:23 AM
lol
Posted by: Zim Jumbo | February 18, 2007 at 01:23 AM
Quote:
Fuck you, assholes. Its my opinion, if you dont like it, kiss my ass.
2/19/2007
Page 83 of 853
Well, your opinion just cost Remington my business also, and maybe my stores
ordering anymore Remington Bullets, or Rifles.
You have done a great injustice to the american hunter with your wise opinion
that is worth nothing now. You may now go away a discraced man.
Cranial Rectal Inversion Syndrome (CRIS)as I refer to it as. YOU GOT YOUR
HEAD UP YOUR ASS>
Posted by: Spurzmaker | February 18, 2007 at 01:23 AM
Dude, that was a spoof.
Posted by: | February 18, 2007 at 01:24 AM
I have never heard of you before this. I have never hunted and do not care for it
too much save if I were to survive off of it. I own military/law enforcement style
weapons save for one turkey gun given as a gift. I do not frown upon hunters,
to each their own. You sir, have insulted everything I stand for when I prepare
to defend my country in case she calls upon me. I am not a "terrorist", I am a
patriot ready to die defending my country using efficient means to do so. The
fact that you do not understand this deep commitment is sad.
Many people do not understand the duty it takes to be free. Freedom requires
constant vigilance and a somber willingness to lay your life on the line for it. If
you want to play it "safe" be a slave to the government. If you wish to breathe
free air, you will pick up a "terrorist" gun and be prepared to take down both
tyranny and invasion alike.
You are a disgrace to all those who have given their lives to this country past,
present, and sadly future. You sir, should be fired. I definitely will not purchase
a Remington firearm and will not read any publication with you in it.
Go to Hell (from an atheist no less),
Samuel J. Macon
Posted by: Big Mac | February 18, 2007 at 01:25 AM
Jim,
Your out of touch. With your opinion,and statement. The Ar-15 in a
Varmint /target platform is no different than a bolt action varminter,The
difference being semi auto vs. bolt.
Both firearms are designed to slay varmints at long distance.. And yes both can
be used to slay soft targets. What is the difference?
It has always been a custom of the American Sportsman to convert military
rifles into "sporterized" configurations for hunting shooting comp. or just plinking
2/19/2007
Page 84 of 853
dare I say Mauser. Or should I go back further into our American History of the
firearm.
Before you slam on something that you dont know why dont you take the time
to research, and get to know those sportsmen that you have clumped into
terrorists. I would bet money that you would see versions of a younger you!
Do some trigger time with a ar-15 platform varmenter and see what you can do
at 600 yards with 69gr Sierra Match Kings.
If you at least approach with an open mind you may find that you were wrong.
WR~
Posted by: WR (rip) Nielson | February 18, 2007 at 01:25 AM
You Fudds are as much a threat to the 2A as the brady bunch. I can't believe
someone like this would make the same argument the crazies in kali do, "OMG
it looks scary, so it can't be good!". Even though we all know that they can
shoot the exact same rounds with the same balistics. I'd rather have the better
ergonomics of an evil looking gun over an uncomfortable traditonal stock.
Thanks for being part of the problem.
Posted by: Mike | February 18, 2007 at 01:26 AM
Well, so much for that Remington Model 700 I was looking at. I'm voting with
my dollar and getting a CZ 527 in the Zumbo-terrorist's caliber: .223
Posted by: Mark | February 18, 2007 at 01:26 AM
Zumbo, your playing right in to the anti's hands. Stupid comments like you
made causes infighting that the anti's can & will use to put an end to our right to
hunt and own firearms. WAKE UP!!!
Posted by: WB | February 18, 2007 at 01:26 AM
Nice work there, Zumbo.
Karl Marx had a term for dupes like you - "useful idiots." The term referred to
self-haters a Communist could point to that would help them pull down their
enemies from within.
You are a "useful idiot" to the manic anti-gun people.
Hope you're happy about that, Elmer.
Posted by: samsong | February 18, 2007 at 01:27 AM
>>Fuck you, assholes. Its my opinion, if you dont like it, kiss my ass<<
Not Jim Zumbo.
2/19/2007
Page 85 of 853
Posted by: Dan B | February 18, 2007 at 01:27 AM
Mr. Zumbo, while you were off blissfully hunting and ignoring what Congress
was up to during the summer of 2004 the Senate was considering an extension
to the ban of those "assault rifles" you want to yank out of our hands. One of
the riders on that extension was going to ban ALL centerfire rifle ammo that is
too "powerful", meaning as powerful as a .223 Remington. If this ban became
law, Remington would have stopped making hunting rifle ammunition
altogether, and YOU would not now be railing against the use of "unsporting"
arms in the field. YOU would be out of a job, and crying about how YOU can't
hunt with your prized bolt rifle. I've read a great deal of the vitriolic comments,
and you deserve each and every one of them. I hope this adds some
perspective to your position on gun ownership and why hunters who are
ignorant about gun control won't hunt for much longer.
Posted by: Jeremy | February 18, 2007 at 01:28 AM
I won't support you or remington. Screw Outdoor life.
The Constitution protects my right to ARMS. I choose to use my ARMS to hunt.
There is no right to hunt. ONLY ARMS are protected.
I don't want to be associated with cowardly hunters who fear thier own rights
protected by LAW.
We should work to end possesion of "sporting" rifles that have no Constitutional
purpose or those that oppose the Constitution. Only ARMS are protected.
Cowards are not protected either.
Posted by: Armed Citizen | February 18, 2007 at 01:30 AM
Sounds like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face to me. I don't use my AR15 to shoot Bambi, and it would not be my first choice to hunt any animal.
However, I find the desire to ban the use of the AR in hunting absurd and
ignorant.
Posted by: Troy LaPlante | February 18, 2007 at 01:30 AM
""I'm with Jim
society in any way.""
End Quote
And you call yourself a Marine that swore to defend the US Condtitution??
We're here, we're Geared! Get used to it!
2/19/2007
Page 86 of 853
What amazes me is that you don't even know what an assault rifle is. It is not
how it looks, A semi auto rifle is NOT an assault rifle, a fully auto rifle is. I agree
with the other posters, you have done a great dis-service to the gun owners of
america, and with the ego you have to think you speak for all gun owners and
hunters is beyond words. With people like you, attempting to speak in our
behalf, now wonder why people are worried about our 2d ammendment rights
being stripped, on bullet at a time. By the way who is paying you?
Ed
Posted by: Ed Hoffer | February 18, 2007 at 01:33 AM
Man, this is some funny shit.
Posted by: Funny Shit Man | February 18, 2007 at 01:34 AM
The AR15 was not designed for hunting. It's bullets are designed to tumble
instead of expand. I don't understand why anyone would want one of these.
Another Fudd opened his pie hole for all the world to see. I hope the 30 pieces
of silver were worth it. Enjoy your sniper rifles while you can.
Ain't the internet just a real bitch at times like this? You have no clue just how
far and fast this is spreading. You sir, are toast as a gun writer.
Posted by: Not a Hunter | February 18, 2007 at 01:34 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
I can assure you that the AR15 platform is one of the favorite rifles for predator
and varmint hunting, the fastest growing segment of the sport of hunting.
AR15s are used by thousands of the most avid and dedicated hunters on a
year round basis, and for very good reasons.
The AR15 is inherently accurate, costing half as much as the typical blueprinted
bolt gun of similar accuracy, and is very well suited to the fast action often
required to successfully and humanely hunt predators.
The AR15 is in fact so popular for predator and varmint hunting that many of
the major manufacturers make and sell "Predator" and "Varmint" models, just
as the manufacturers of bolt guns do.
Apart from the valid points brought up by others regarding our 2nd amendment
rights, you sir exhibit an appalling ignorance of the hunting community. It is a
travesty that you are actually paid to write articles for hunters.
I won't be buying Outdoor Life again anytime soon.
Leon Rogers
2/19/2007
Page 87 of 853
Secretary
Board of Directors
PredatorMasters.com
Posted by: nmleon | February 18, 2007 at 01:35 AM
I run across people like you occasionally, Mr. Zumbo. They always want to
know why I "need" the rifles I have.
Fortunately, our beloved Constitution doesn't contain a "Bill of Needs".
I usually ask them why they "need" a huge 4-wheel-drive SUV, or a travel
trailer, or whatever. And I'll ask you now, Mr. Zumbo, why do you "need" to
hunt?
I have no desire to kill any animal, including humans. But I own military-style
rifles. I have a desire to be as proficient as possible with these weapons,
because someday I may darn well need them.
Let's hope you never have to find out why the people may need such weapons.
Posted by: Lazarus Long | February 18, 2007 at 01:35 AM
I was thinking of getting a subscription to outdoor life but if this is the "quality" of
your firearms coverage forget it. I guess by your logic We should take away
your varmint/beanfield rifles because they are "sniper" rifles. Gun owners like
you make me sick! The rest of us are fighting to save the second amendment
and your using it for bird cage liner.
Posted by: MSP | February 18, 2007 at 01:36 AM
This shit aint funny
Posted by: The Editors | February 18, 2007 at 01:36 AM
Mr. Zumbo
Are you a active NRA member? Personal opinion is one thing but your article
lacks any corroborating fact which would support such a scathing attack on a
semi-automatic rifle which has been proved time and time again as a fine
competitive firearm not to mention many natural attributes for hunting small light
skinned game. EGO does some funny things to the mind and it may be time for
you to consider retirement on the journalistic level. I canceled my subscription
to Outdoor Life and a letter of Protest will be faxed to Remington first thing.
GlockMan
Hi-Point Firearms Forum Admin
http://hipoint.7.forumer.com
Posted by: GlockMan | February 18, 2007 at 01:36 AM
I'm about to turn 27 years old, and have built to Romanian AK47 rifles, and one
2/19/2007
Page 88 of 853
Stag Arms AR15.
I guess it's pretty sad when a teenager can see through your garbage.
I must also be a terrorist, devoid of the fact that I love this country, and George
Washington is me greatest idol.
Posted by: Kevin | February 18, 2007 at 01:37 AM
And how much did Eddie Stevenson, PR Manager for Remington Arms, Greg
Dennison, who is senior research engineer for Remington pay you to say this
nonsense?
A gun is a gun is a gun. Regardless of the fact that it has an auto switch, is
semi-automatic, or has a scary big magazine. The second ammendment
specifically protects "militia" weapons, the kind designed for fighting, not
hunting. But because every firearm has some fighting capacity, they are all
protected.
We don't all hunt, I shoot for fun. I've no problem with hunters, and many of my
friends hunt. But why should I sacrififice my RIGHT to bear arms because you
don't see a use for them (ignorantly so)in a sport that doesn't have any kind of
constitutional protection?
Posted by: Tony | February 18, 2007 at 01:37 AM
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive
treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known
and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the
gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very
halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in
accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he
appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul
of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars
of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is
less to fear".
Marcus Cicero, 43 B.C.
Posted by: ballisticbill | February 18, 2007 at 01:38 AM
I have killed many prairie dogs with my AR-15.
There are no assualt weapons, only people who would assault others with
guns, knives, tire irons, etc.
Mr. Zumbo couldn't be more wrong. Just because a gun looks mean and nasty,
doesn't make it so. The very rifle Zumbo carries with him is more than likely
deadlier at longer range than any of the so-called assault weapons he
2/19/2007
Page 89 of 853
condemns.
You would never hear Ted Nugent write such a counter-productive piece.
Posted by: Ward Parker | February 18, 2007 at 01:38 AM
You know, I'm tired of defending what I choose to use in the field to the likes of
the author. I've never ONCE advocated that the weapons used by others be
banned because I didn't personally like them or see the need for them.
My hunting rifle is a .308 FAL. I comply with all the laws of my state and so I
couldn't give a rip what 'Zumbo' thinks of it. We'll see who's left to stand with
him when the 'everything but break action rim-fires ban' comes for his weapon
of choice.
What drivel.
Posted by: Grunteled | February 18, 2007 at 01:40 AM
Selling out semi-automatic rifle owners because you want to protect your own
sport is about as effective as a Jewish informant working for the Gestapo.
The "gun grabbers" will get around to your "Death from half a mile sniper rifles"
soon enough. It will just be a little bit later than everyone else in the firearm
owning community that you probably plan on selling out. (Although I suspect
PETA and their ilk will put a stop to your fetish for killing defenseless animals
first)
Please be assured that I shall be contacting Remington to make it crystal clear
that neither I, nor my family, will be buying a single Remington product until you
either publicly apologize for your misguided comments, or you are off the
payroll (directly or indirectly) of Remington. I will also ensure that your views,
and their sponsorship by Remington, are made known to the 3000+ members
of my local club.
Posted by: Stuart Clubb | February 18, 2007 at 01:40 AM
Thanks for nothing Jim. "Outdoor Life" hasn't been worth a nickel since Jack
O'Connor left, and you're one of the main reasons. You have done a million
dollar's worth of damage to the Second Amendment. Congratulations.
John Strahl
Posted by: John Strahl | February 18, 2007 at 01:40 AM
"When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
2/19/2007
Page 90 of 853
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out."
Ring a Bell...Zumbo?
Posted by: LongGun1 | February 18, 2007 at 01:41 AM
Jim's blog got PWN3D!!!!
I hope you've enjoyed your career, I think it's about to be over. At least, I'm
going to do everything in my power to make sure it is. First, I am going to link
this discussion in every firearms forum I know of. Second, I am going to
personally write Outdoor Life and explain to them exactly why they should
disassociate themselves with you immediately. Lastly, I am going to write to
Remington and demand that they sever all ties with you.
Best of luck with the unemployment office,
Austin
Posted by: Austin Carnes | February 18, 2007 at 01:42 AM
The guy is another Bill Ruger.
HE needs to be banned.
He thinks that if he is nice...the crododile will eat him...last.
Hillary is not even in power yet and he is already 'kissing up'.
The author is a 'Vicci' collaborator.
I can't believe that in times like these when we face anti-gun sentiment
everywhere, that anyone within "our community" would make such a statement.
Tell me Mr. Zumbo, are you an NRA member? Being a gun owner I sure hope
you are. If so, do you read NRA literature? Please, take some time to analyze
our situation from all angles and protect all gun owners...including yourself. As
others have already said, without unity, we will fall to the anti's.
Posted by: 6guns | February 18, 2007 at 01:44 AM
Sir,
With all due respect, you are a jack ass! If I'm going to assault somebody, I'll
2/19/2007
Page 91 of 853
use a Remington 870 shotgun. You are definitely part of the problem and not
part of the cure. Mentalities like yours rationalized the ideals behind NFA '34,
GCA '68, MG freeze of '86, Importation ban of '89, AW ban of '94, and the
complete ban of everything soon to come. You are a disgrace to the shooting
community and a torrie by the standards of our Founding Father's whose
struggle allowed us to have what we have. There were no compromises then
and there certainly shouldn't be any now. If you enjoy what you do, do it! Don't
shit on me for enjoying what I do which boils down to being the same thing.
I'll take any shot you can with your scoped "huntin' rifle" with my civvy M1A
using the irons and maintain the same effectiveness with the shot placement on
any game put before me at any range. The difference is I can attach a bayonet
and insert a 20 round magazine on my rifle.
You're preaching to the wrong choir and perhaps you should consider
relocating to a safer country, like Iraq, where the criminals aren't running
rampant with assault weapons. Perhaps something closer to home like Los
Angeles is more your speed. Everyone knows there is not an ounce of criminal
activity there due to the restrictive gun laws that are in place.
I hope that all of the negative feedback you have received thus far will help you
in removing your head from your fourth point of contact. If not, I'm certain the
Democrats wil welcome you as a member of their socialist party. You have my
condolences, as you really dont't have a clue.
Posted by: Surly in SD | February 18, 2007 at 01:44 AM
Perhaps the single most discouraging thing I have read in the past year. The
RKBA is truely in trouble when this arrogant drivel comes from within the
shooting/hunting community.
Outdoor Life will be the Outlaw Life if certain lawmakers had their way. I will
now add Zumbo to this list of enemies of the 2nd...
Posted by: JB | February 18, 2007 at 01:45 AM
It's a sad day when this type of excrement is printed in what I thought was a
pro-gun Magazine. I hate to break it to you, but the Second Amendment is
more about protecting the AR-15 than your typical Wal-mart Special. I've never
read anything about hunting being protected in the Bill of Rights. The intent of
the Second Amendment is for militia style weapons. Maybe it shoud read,
"Hunting With Dumbo" at the top instead.
"The AR15 was not designed for hunting. It's bullets are designed to tumble
instead of expand. I don't understand why anyone would want one of these."
I had to repeat this nonsense for posterity. The mere fact that such drivel was
2/19/2007
Page 92 of 853
mentioned demonstrates the lack of education and hints at the total ignorance
of folks out there. I find it utterly incomprehensible that such a statement such
as this could be possibly made when it is more than blatantly obvious
that .223/5.56 comes in a much wider variety of loadings than just about any
other cartridge. This is like saying that 12 gauge is only good for birds. The
utter asininity of such a comment even goes so far as to ignore the long history
of military cartridges developing a following in the sporting world. You doofuses
would probalby wet yourselves if someone had posted somehting similar about
the .30-06, which, by the way, was loaded with a spitzer bullet which (OMG!) is
designed to yaw (not tumble you moron) when it hits its intended target.
I realize now that I have used alot of really long words describing how stupid
you are so in an effort to condense things into a manner for those of you who
are unable to comprehend what i have said:
You dumb. You not know nothing about what you post about.
Posted by: yekim | February 18, 2007 at 01:48 AM
Jim I just turned 60 and served in the military during Viet Nam and grew up in
the Army shooting the M-14, then the M-16, the AR.
I've been a bolt guy all my life shooting big game and varmints and even
though I'm a bolt guy I know several folks that are shooting AR platforms every
bit as accurate as any bolt gun I've owned.
Not only are they accurate and effective they can be had in calibers such as the
243, 223 and the fine 204 Ruger and more fine varmint calibers.
To say they are "Terrorist" guns is doing a real disfavor to the sportsman that
use them for varmint hunting and exceptional target guns.
I can't believe a distinguished and knowledgeable gun writer, hunter and
sportsman like you could overlook the shooters, builders and hunters that do
use these fine accurate weapons.
Posted by: FaucettB | February 18, 2007 at 01:49 AM
For unfavorable remarks, regarding the utility of the AR-15; the outdoor writer,
formerly known as Jim Zumbo...has now rightfully earned the title: Dumbo
Zumbo. I hope you repeatedly fall off your chair Dumbo!!!
Sir beleive you are correct and terrist weapons should be outlawed Lets start
with your wooden stocked bolt action sniper rifles. Also lets ban all sights for
sniper rifles. Time to outlaw accurate ammo too. Only snipers and other
antisocial people or terrorists need fire arms that hit inside a barn. Please send
me Info on how to ban all firearms. Thank you
2/19/2007
Page 93 of 853
Posted by: Robert Shulka | February 18, 2007 at 01:50 AM
I can't believe some of these comments. You people are way too paranoid. Do
you really think the government is going to take away your guns? No way could
they ever do that. You all arm yourself to the teeth with AK47s and M16s just
waiting for a revolution that will never happen. Get a life.
Posted by: JP | February 18, 2007 at 01:50 AM
Jim Z. you've been teh pwn3d!!!1
Robert, while I don't believe there is going to be a revolution, do you honestly
believe the government cant take away guns?
Posted by: BW | February 18, 2007 at 01:52 AM
Wow, those are some really ignorant comments and obvious bias. Your story
sounds like it was written by someone from the liberal news media, not
someone who is an avid hunter and fellow gun owner. Writing ignorant
statements like that does no one any good, except those that look to disarm we
law abiding citizens. Dividing gun owners is a huge step in the wrong direction!
It's too bad you are unable to see that, most likely through your own selfishness
and desire to preserve your own hobby. What is the difference between a
Remington Semi-Auto Woodsmaster .308 and a Springfield SOCOM II Rifle?
They are both chambered for the same cartridge and neither capable of a
higher rate of fire than the other. An AR is chambered for .223 which is an even
smaller cartridge! What makes one of them a "terrorist" gun? Are you saying
that the way a gun looks makes it a "terrorist" gun? Pure ignorance. Find a new
hobby and lifestyle, we don't need gun owners like you betraying us.
Posted by: Lee Stahlecker | February 18, 2007 at 01:52 AM
I like pie!
Posted by: ar15 owner | February 18, 2007 at 01:52 AM
I used to hunt. A lot. Suddenly, sportsmen are pushing for more restrictions on
the game you can take, to the point it is no longer "fun". I have hunting rifles
and shotguns that I haven't fired, with no exageration, in ten years. License
fees are rising, there is less ground and less game.
I shoot my AR (Terrorist Rifle- where do you come up with that, because it
doesnt have a wood stock and blued steel?) and my pistols (15 round
magazines, probably an "Assault Pistol" in your book, with no reason to be in a
holster) practically every weekend.
A few more flaws in your logicAn assault rifle is "Select-fire". Meaning it is capable of either semi-auto, or fullauto fire.
2/19/2007
Page 94 of 853
"Sporting Semi-Autos"- The Ruger mini-14 is functionally the same as an AR15.
The Remington semi-autos fire more powerful ammunition than the AR.
"Terrorist Rifle"- A "Terrorist" is a person, an individual. "Terrorism" is the act of
inciting terror, usually for financial or political benefit. An inanimate object (Rifle,
Knife.......Toaster) is unable to act on its own, and therefore cannot be a
"Terrorist".
Three people I know personally have just ended their subscriptions to OL. All
because of this article. I hope the hunting career works out for you, because
your magazine just lost a pile of money due to this stunt.
I plan to contact them directly monday. Remington will also hear from me.
You are no better than Chuck Schumer, Hillary Klinton, or Diane Swinestein.
Posted by: Travis | February 18, 2007 at 01:52 AM
Survivor of Texas Massacre Testifies in Congress on "Assault Weapons" Ban
http://www.washingtonceasefire.com/content/view/23/35/
Posted by: George W | February 18, 2007 at 01:52 AM
Survivor of Texas Massacre Testifies in Congress on "Assault Weapons" Ban
http://www.washingtonceasefire.com/content/view/23/35/
Posted by: George W | February 18, 2007 at 01:52 AM
Jim sez - Oh teh noes!!!
Hey asshat!! Why don't you ask the citizens of New Orleans about what the
gubment does when it is deemed "necessary" to confiscate guns. The gubment
didn't pick and choose "hunting" from "evil black rifle". THEY TOOK THEM
ALL!!!! YOU IDIOT!!!
RENOUNCE YOUR CITIZENSHIP AND GO TO HELL AND TAKE THE
OTHER FUDDS WITH YOU!!!
Posted by: Pissed Off Citizen | February 18, 2007 at 01:53 AM
So it is generally believed that you should use the most accurate rifle possible
while hunting in order to produce a humane one shot kill, correct? If that is true
then why would I not use the most accurate rifle in the most appropriate caliber
that I own to hunt coyotes? Oh I see because someone who is led to animals
by someone else who does the actual work of hunting feels that owning said
rifle makes me a "terrorist."
This is honestly the most offensive column I have ever read, to call me, not to
mention the thousands of men and women who have put themselves in harms
2/19/2007
Page 95 of 853
way since the AR series was adapted by the US military "terrorists" because
you don't care for the looks of the rifle they carry is completely ignorant and
close minded. You have humilated yourself and a fine magazine to boot.
Posted by: Todd | February 18, 2007 at 01:54 AM
The second amendment gives us the right to bear arms. To the best of my
knowledge it didn't specify what kind we could have.
Hunting is a priviledge that we can have if we hunt in a responsible manner.
We need to follow laws, for example, that specify magazine capacity, etc for
hunting. If there is no law that prohibits using a rifle to hunt with, then it can be
used, no matter anyone's opinion, including yours.
You have done a great disservice to hunters and gun collectors, and you
probably realize it by now.
One thing to remember: if we were to choose between diplomats amd riflemen
to defend our every freedom, and chose diplomats, we sure as heck wouldn't
be speaking English right now.
Posted by: Jim Seavers | February 18, 2007 at 01:54 AM
What on earth are you writing Zumbo? You have no clue. You have now
become one of them.
Your rifle is black and shiny. Does that make it evil? Don't get caught up in the
Democrat's hogwash where a rifle is defined based on how it looks, not how it
actually functions.
Heck, back in the day smoothbore muskets were the rage. Why don't you use
one of those, instead of that stainless steel and plastic rifle that you are
pictured with at the top of this page.
Your's is a bolt action, mine is a semi-auto, and they are both made of stainless
steel, plastic, and aluminum. They are both tools, and you are a tool as well, in
more ways than one. A tool of the left wing agenda, and a tool in general.
Posted by: Andy M | February 18, 2007 at 01:55 AM
Pie is good
Mr. Zumbo:
Used to think you were cool, and had my kids watch your show. After this
Sarah Brady immitation, we are gone...nite nite
Posted by: John Whittington | February 18, 2007 at 01:56 AM
Spend just five minutes reading The Ammo Oracle http://www.ammooracle.com.
2/19/2007
Page 96 of 853
Fat Jim, you are the man version of Rosie O'donnell. You are fat, disgusting,
and wouldn't know what the 2Amd. was if it ate your head like that Alaska
brown bear did to that fag-boy Timothy Treadwell guy.
Go change your diaper old man, the leakage is as bad as what is coming out of
your mouth.
Posted by: newbushmaster | February 18, 2007 at 01:57 AM
Who has an email address for Remington Corporate office? I demand an
apology from them and Outdoor Life.
The AR-15 and the AK-47 are the guns of choice of drug dealers. Do you really
want to be associated with these people?
Posted by: Brandon Mills | February 18, 2007 at 01:58 AM
Hunting for a job, Starring Jim Zumbo
You folks do realize that the posters name is at the bottom of the comment
under the solid line, not at the top.
Dave Geisert, Gunnery Sergeant, USMC wrote the comments above his name,
not below it.
Posted by: Innocent Bystander | February 18, 2007 at 02:00 AM
Arfcommers, U Rawk
Geez guys! I understand your right to be upset with Zumbo over what you
consider to be stupid remarks but this has gotten out of hand. He didn't murder
anyone, he voiced an opinion. I know landowners who won't allow military style
weapons on their property at all. I know they aren't any different than a semiautomatic rifle with a walnut stock, but perception is a problem with guns and
gun owners. This public hanging isn't going to make anyone on the other side
see any reason to not think gun owners are out of control.
Posted by: american gun owner | February 18, 2007 at 02:02 AM
With friends like you, who needs enemies? I own AR-15 rifles, do I go around
shooting school children, or hi-jacking buses? No I don't, and neither do the
millions of gun owners you have labeled "terrorists" simply because they own
these types of rifles.
What is the difference in using an AR-15 for hunting, than a bolt action rifle in
the same caliber? I honestly don't see any. If you do not want to hunt with one,
2/19/2007
Page 97 of 853
then don't. Please don't encoach on my rights to do so.
"I say game departments should ban them from the praries and woods."
the stupidity of this comment must be preserved...
You Sir disgust me. They say that gunowners are our own worst enemy. I didn't
believe it until I read your ridiculous article. Consider my subscription cancelled,
and I hope your career doesn't last long. With an attitude like yours, all guns will
be banned in not time at all. Think before you write.
Posted by: Shawn | February 18, 2007 at 02:02 AM
It's always nice to read an article where the reader finds out that he's a terrorist
because he owns a semiautomatic rifle. Way to represent the shooting sports
Zumbo.
Posted by: Sam Alleman | February 18, 2007 at 02:02 AM
We are outraged by the increase in gun violence in America, especially the
recent high-profile shootings at a mall and in a workplace. Unfortunately,
incidents like this happen all too often in all parts of this nation.
All Americans have the right to be safe from gun violence in their homes,
neighborhoods, schools, and places of work and worship and all children have
the right to grow up in environments free from the threat of gun violence.
It is too easy for anyone -- children, teens, and troubled adults -- to access
firearms in this country and the lethality of guns make death or severe injury
more likely. This must stop!
Posted by: Sara Brady | February 18, 2007 at 02:02 AM
It may do the author, and the corporation behind him, to be reminded that the
2nd Amendment is not about hunting rights in the least. He gets to keep his
recreational rifles as a side benefit to the rifle as a weapon. Perfect examples of
which are the AK and AR designs.
What he chooses to hunt with and what I choose to hunt with are irrelevant to
the topic of gun control. If he wants to keep a nice bolt action rifle, he better
damn well defend the AR with every last breath.
The pompous tone taken to imply that only his way is the proper way to hunt
adds insult to injury.
Posted by: David H. | February 18, 2007 at 02:03 AM
AGO, its called a "fire mission".
2/19/2007
Page 98 of 853
Sir, I have never met you, or read any of what you have blogged before. Good
thing, cause I seriously think you stepped on your meat with this blog. Happy
hunting!
Posted by: elguapo | February 18, 2007 at 02:06 AM
The Curly Shuffle
When me and my friends go out on the town
We can't sit still and we can't sit down
We don't like to fight and we don't like to scuffle
But we dance all night doing the Curly shuffle
(Hey Moe! Hey Moe!) Hey Moe! Hey Moe!
(Well, nyuck, nyuck, nyuck, nyuck!) Well, nyuck, nyuck, nyuck, nyuck!
(La da dee, la da dee) La da dee, la da dee
(Woo woo woo woo!) Woo woo woo woo!
Well, we never miss a chance we get up and dance and do the Curly shuffle
Well, me and my friends love Curly and Moe
We love Curly's brother, Shemp and his fat clone, Joe
It's such a delight to boogie and hustle
Dancing all night doing the Curly shuffle
(Well, nyuck nyuck nyuck nyuck!) Well, nyuck nyuck nyuck nyuck!
(Wee dee dee dee, wee dee dee dee!) Wee dee dee dee, wee dee dee dee
dee!
(Oh, a wise guy!) Oh, a wise guy!
Well, we never miss a chance, we get up and dance and do the Curly shuffle
[break]
Well, me and my friends, we all love to see
Comedy classics on late night TV
Those knuckleheads get in a scuffle
They push and they shove doing the Curly shuffle
(Well, nyuck nyuck nyuck nyuck!) Well, nyuck nyuck nyuck nyuck!
(Look at the grouse, look at the grouse) Look at the grouse, look at the grouse
(Woof! Woof!) Woof! Woof!
Well, we never miss a chance we get up and dance and do the Curly shuffle
(That's right)
We do the Curly shuffle (What did you say?)
We do the Curly shuffle (That's what I thought you said!)
2/19/2007
Page 99 of 853
We do the Curly shuffle (ah ah ah ah!)
We do the Curly shuffle (Sointenly!)
We never miss a chance we get up and dance and do the Curly shuffle
Innocent Bystander,
Thanks for clarifying that for me!! The hate mail I'm getting is pretty vicious,
& I 'm glad you all are giving JZ an equally bad time!
Semper Fi,
Dave
Posted by: Dave Geisert, Gunnery Sergeant, USMC | February 18, 2007 at 02:06 AM
Brandon Mills- thats like saying that a Ford Taurus or Chevy Monte Carlo are
the "Cars of Speeders", simply because someone drives them around a track
on sundays.
The majority of Taurus and Monte Carlo owners are law abiding, sane
individuals. The same can be said of those who own semiautomatic rifles.
I could not disagree more. Really speaks volumes about what Mr. Zumbo
knows nothing about...Sad to see someone with such a strong voice say
something so off base. What other semi-automatic rifles and shotguns will he
say are terrorist weapons next? How about my Ruger 10/22 or my Benelli
Semi-automatic shotgun. Get Real. An AR-15 is no more dangerous than any
other rifle. The truth is a semi-automatic rifle or shotgun is a valued tool for the
sportsman or woman. Hunting conditions dictate what firearm we choose most
often. Jim Zumbo does not speak for all sportsman. I won't be reading any
magazine that he contributes to.
Posted by: Greg in Montana | February 18, 2007 at 02:07 AM
I didnt know i was a terrorist. Here all my life i had been thinking that i was a
responsible law abiding citizen of the greatest nation in history.
apparently the fact that i coyote hunt with an AK-47 makes me a blood thirsty
terrorist. Here i was thinking that a mid power semi-automatic made sence for
hunting fast wary game in dence undergrowth. Guess i was wrong.
Not only am i apparently wrong, but the fact that people use these types of
weapons for sporting purposes seems to have no bearing on their effectiveness
as sporting weapons. who knew.
Jim, you DO realize that your precious Remington bolt action designs are
based off of the old Mauser actions right? You DO realize that such bolt actions
2/19/2007
Page 100 of 853
were designed and used primarily for military purposes untill after WWII right?
You DO realize that most of the common cartridges fired from these actions are
either military cartridges, or are based off of military cartridges right?
Your precious "sporting" arms are nothing more than evil blood-thirsty "terrorist"
guns with fancy furiture. ;)
Posted by: Josh | February 18, 2007 at 02:07 AM
I would just like to remind Mr. Zumbo thar "AR" does not stand for "Assault
Rifle". Although it doesn't look like the preferred rifle of Mr. Zumbo, they share
the same purpose and intent, and will eventually be banned just the same if he
continues to contribute more negative images of civilian owned firearms.
Posted by: Christopher Quijano | February 18, 2007 at 02:08 AM
The AR-15 and the AK-47 are the guns of choice of drug dealers. Do you really
want to be associated with these people?
Posted by: Brandon Mills | February 18, 2007 at 01:58 AM
I don't care who else uses guns I enjoy, I shoot for me, not for an ignorant ass
hats perception of me.
Posted by: Tony | February 18, 2007 at 02:08 AM
I would just like to remind Mr. Zumbo thar "AR" does not stand for "Assault
Rifle". Although it doesn't look like the preferred rifle of Mr. Zumbo, they share
the same purpose and intent, and will eventually be banned just the same if he
continues to contribute more negative images of civilian owned firearms.
Posted by: Christopher Quijano | February 18, 2007 at 02:09 AM
Looking closely at your picture on the top, you are using a rifle with a synthetic
stock. Pretty terroristic. Oh, it is a bolt action and not semi auto. The bolt rifle
was developed for use by the military. Remember Mauser? Perhaps, you
should be using only rocks and spears because all fire arms were originally
developed for the miltary. If your problem is with the operating system, I believe
that Remington has the 342 as well as other models and manufacturers that all
make semi auto hunting rifles. You are showing ignorance of the equipment
and bigotry against those that use it. So, I will no longer read any of your
articles because I have lost ALL respect for you and do now consider your
opinion to be garbage. As a fire arms enthusiast, you are too close minded and
are no better than those that pass the unconstitutional laws that try to deny us
our second amendment rights.
Posted by: Psywarrior | February 18, 2007 at 02:10 AM
Mr. Zumbo, have you been living under a rock for the past thirty years? I can't
believe anyone who claims any level of expertise as a hunter or firearm owner
2/19/2007
Page 101 of 853
could make such comments. You don't even seem to understand than an
assault rifle is a selective fire weapon. The semiautomatic AR's that scare you
so much are no different from any other semiautomatic rifle. So long as the
hunter using one follows the fish and game laws, why should you care if he
uses one?
Posted by: Cosmoline | February 18, 2007 at 02:10 AM
Jim Zumbo is a better Sportsman than any of you all here. His choice in
choosing better sporting firearms for hunting instead of combat type weapons
proves it.
Posted by: Jake | February 18, 2007 at 02:10 AM
"The AR-15 and the AK-47 are the guns of choice of drug dealers. Do you
really want to be associated with these people?
Posted by: Brandon Mills | February 18, 2007 at 01:58 AM"
And what about the bolt action rifle that killed president Kennedy? Do I then
assume that you and Mr. Zumbo are prancing around in the woods fantasizing
about that particular act while you're carrying your precious bolt actions?
Posted by: WB*aka*Soylent | February 18, 2007 at 02:11 AM
You have got to be kidding me. What do you think the gun control freaks are
going to come after once they ban my evil baby killing AR15? That's right
jackass, your precious sporting firearms. They will call them high powered
sniper rifles capable of killing targets from miles away. Who do you think you
are? You think by banning my guns you'll be saving yours? Get your head out
of your ass.
Posted by: Colin | February 18, 2007 at 02:12 AM
proves it.
Mr Zumbo,
as a long time reader i am appauled by your comments. when you say "Let's
divorce ourselves from them. I say game departments should ban them from
the praries and woods.", you are giving the left just exactly what they want. they
will try to step by step disarm the entire US. what you refere to as "sporting
firearms" will be on the chopping block at some time or another also...........i
hope that you are happy that you have pissed off a bunch of firearms and
sporting enthusiasts.....
2/19/2007
Page 102 of 853
Posted by: Brett | February 18, 2007 at 02:12 AM
A firearm is a firearm is a firearm...
To say an AR is not "good enough" to hunt is silly... as silly as saying that your
rifle does not belong in the woods because it is not a muzzle loader.
So I dont have to rack the bolt... who cares. So you don't have to pack your
powder between each shot... who cares.
Listen pal... get some perspective. We don't need to go putting a label on guns.
First the AR will be called an "assult weapon" ...lets say it gets banned again
(not that the ban did a darn thing except drive up the prices)). The next label is
that your Deer rifle is a "sniper rifle" (your weapon becomes the next target)... if
you can't see where this is going.. your head may just be up in a dark stinky
place where usually toilet paper goes.
Gun owners ALL... we need to stick together to keep out right to keep AND
bear arms. Let us not be divded.
Posted by: Offers | February 18, 2007 at 02:12 AM
Jim Zumbo is my daddy, and arfcom is teh poo
Jim...You are a dumn ass...
Posted by: launchpad | February 18, 2007 at 02:15 AM
I was considering buying a Remington Custom Shop Mountain Rifle this year.
Maybe I will just hunt with my old style "assault rifle" this year (Enfield .303
British) and spend my money on a new AR15.
Posted by: Chris | February 18, 2007 at 02:15 AM
proves it.
posted by Jake
Since when did you Jake know everyones hunting skills posting on this board. I
bet Jake can't make a 850 yard shot with a sharps rifle. So, does that make my
Sharps Rifle a long range terrorist weapon JAKE. It still fires a freaking bullet
you idiot. It's not a matter of what gun you shoot you Idiot, it still fires a bullet.
Shotgun, 22 rifle, 223, 300 win mag, 270, 308, they will all shoot a bullet you
idiot.
Posted by: Spurzmaker | February 18, 2007 at 02:15 AM
"The AR15 was not designed for hunting. It's bullets are designed to tumble
2/19/2007
Page 103 of 853
instead of expand. I don't understand why anyone would want one of these."
Great. Another idiot that has not clue what he's talking about.
Posted by: Donnie P | February 18, 2007 at 02:16 AM
You make me sick. You're the worst kind of traitor to the second amendment
there is.
Posted by: Jack Jackman | February 18, 2007 at 02:17 AM
Jim Zumbro is killing defenseless animals with a high powered SNIPER RIFLE!
These are the weapons of choice for terrorists the world over and should be
banned outright!
Afterall we don't want to be lumped together with the terrorists who use
SNIPER RIFLES, right?
Jim Zumbro is a dumbo.
Posted by: Greybeard | February 18, 2007 at 02:17 AM
Are you high?
Its Fudds like you who will sit quietly by while "evil" .50 cal rifles are banned
because it doesn't affect you.
You will sit by while "evil" semi-autos are banned, because it doesn't affect you.
You will sit by while "evil" high cap pistols are banned, 'cause it don't matter to
you.
And when they come for your precious hunting rifles, nobody will be left to
stand up for you.
Go to any High Power Rifle competition and see what rifle rules the roost.
There are plenty of AR's that will shoot circles around bolt guns and are perfect
varmint rifles.
Do the shooting sports a favor and go collect stamps.
Posted by: Joe | February 18, 2007 at 02:18 AM
banned outright!
2/19/2007
Page 104 of 853
Perhaps the numerous terrorists here should let Remington know we don't
need their products if they stand behind comments like this...
Steve Jackson
Senior Vice President, CFO, Treasurer and Corporate Secretary of Remington
870 Remington Drive
PO Box 700
Madison, NC 27025-0700
Phone: 336-548-8700
Fax: 336-548-7801
"Geez guys! I understand your right to be upset with Zumbo over what you
see any reason to not think gun owners are out of control."
Yes, perception is a problem. The realities of the situation have little to do with
how policy is formed. That's why people get really upset when a respected
outdoor writer like Zumbo comes out with this stance. Who's more likely to get
quoted in the next NYT article on assault weapons-Zumbo or one of the dozens
of hunting and gun writers who have no problem with ARs?
The Second Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with hunting, folks, and
the political forces that wish to do away with ARs and AKs are also very keen
on tightly regulating the use and ownership of your 870 and Model 94. Go look
what happened to the Brits. It's not about what types of rifles you own or what
you do with them-it's about the fact that you represent the American tradition of
marksmanship, skill at arms, self reliance and individuality that makes the
condo dwellers who've never eaten meat that wasn't from Harris Teeter
uncomfortable.
In his photo, Zumbo's holding a synthetic stocked, stainless steel, high powered
rifle mounting a telescopic scope. Very similar to the types of weapons used my
military snipers in Iraq and assassins around the world. Seems like the light
weight, resistance to the elements, and hard hitting power at long range offered
by that rifle make it a perfect choice for terrorists. Why does he need that to
hunt deer or whatever? It certainly doesn't look like a tradional wood stocked
deer gun.
2/19/2007
Page 105 of 853
I can't believe what I just read. It's that elitist BS that will get ALL our guns
banned. You folks are so much better than the average sheeple. You have set
our 2nd amendment fight back 20 years, now the brady bunch can point to a
man in the industry (see even he doesn't like those evil black rifles) RKBA is
not about hunting. Now I have to add OUTDOOR LIFE and REMINGTON of all
things to the long list of companies that won't be getting my money anymore!!!
THANKS
Posted by: tom | February 18, 2007 at 02:22 AM
I have an AR-15 that is twenty years old, and it is by far the most accurate rifle I
own. It makes an excellent varmint rifle.
With good optics and good ammo, it will shoot 1/4 MOA from a benchrest. I'll
keep it until I pass it on to my son.
I don't consider myself a "terrorist" for owning a semi-automatic rifle that can
shoot a 1/4" group at 100 yards. And I hope that no game department or other
government agency will ever tell me I can't take it into the field to shoot.
I was surprised at the language you used in your article. I'm also surprised the
editors let you post it. You've alienated a large segment of the shooting
community.
Posted by: Dave B. | February 18, 2007 at 02:22 AM
Yes, encourage people to only buy the most traditional brand rifle, to only shoot
3 rounds a year, and to not know a thing about their sport besides how to kill an
animal at 75 yards that isn't moving. Great job.
Oh, and nice fake name. "Zumbo" hahaha How could anyone take this guy
seriously?
You're just an elitist pig who's only concern is what free new rifle or gear you'll
be getting from the marketing pimps. That "sporting arm" of yours was built
around a bolt action designed for military use. God! You're such a celf-centered
quisling tool!
I'll never buy Outdoor Life again!
Posted by: white beaner | February 18, 2007 at 02:22 AM
"Geez guys! I understand your right to be upset with Zumbo over what you
2/19/2007
Page 106 of 853
see any reason to not think gun owners are out of control."
Yes, perception is a problem. The realities of the situation have little to do with
how policy is formed. That's why people get really upset when a respected
outdoor writer like Zumbo comes out with this stance. Who's more likely to get
quoted in the next NYT article on assault weapons-Zumbo or one of the dozens
of hunting and gun writers who have no problem with ARs?
The Second Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with hunting, folks, and
the political forces that wish to do away with ARs and AKs are also very keen
on tightly regulating the use and ownership of your 870 and Model 94. Go look
what happened to the Brits. It's not about what types of rifles you own or what
you do with them-it's about the fact that you represent the American tradition of
marksmanship, skill at arms, self reliance and individuality that makes the
condo dwellers who've never eaten meat that wasn't from Harris Teeter
uncomfortable.
In his photo, Zumbo's holding a synthetic stocked, stainless steel, high powered
rifle mounting a telescopic scope. Very similar to the types of weapons used my
military snipers in Iraq and assassins around the world. Seems like the light
weight, resistance to the elements, and hard hitting power at long range offered
by that rifle make it a perfect choice for terrorists. Why does he need that to
hunt deer or whatever? It certainly doesn't look like a tradional wood stocked
deer gun.
Posted by: Bryan | February 18, 2007 at 02:22 AM
Did ya know there's a Maria Sharapova thread cooking in ARFcom Team?
Posted by: President Bill Clinton | February 18, 2007 at 02:22 AM
Today I was out shooting and used Remington ammunition.
Because they sponsored Mr Zumbo I will not be buying any more Remington
ammo or reloading supplies. I also bought a Remington shotgun a few weeks
ago. That's the last Remington firearm I will be purchasing.
Since Remington chooses to sponsor an anti-gun writer they will get no more
money from me.
Posted by: Robert | February 18, 2007 at 02:24 AM
Today I was out shooting and used Remington ammunition.
Because they sponsored Mr Zumbo I will not be buying any more Remington
ammo or reloading supplies. I also bought a Remington shotgun a few weeks
ago. That's the last Remington firearm I will be purchasing.
Since Remington chooses to sponsor an anti-gun writer they will get no more
money from me.
2/19/2007
Page 107 of 853
Jim,
Calling for a ban on rifles based on their aesthetics is absolutely ridiculous. It is
the same thing *most* of us have been fighting against for many, many years.
They are no more dangerous than the average deer rifle; no more dangerous
than the rifles you have at home!
What's next, banning certain camo patterns if the enemy is using them?
Banning 50 cal muzzle-loaders because military sniper rifles are made in that
caliber too?
You are wrong on this one, Mr. Zumbo. Dead wrong.
Regards,
Jeff Christensen
Everett, WA
Posted by: Jeff Christensen | February 18, 2007 at 02:26 AM
banned outright!
This is truly sad. damage done from within is ten times worse than out. I can
not patronize this writer or his supporters.
Deekin
Posted by: Deekin | February 18, 2007 at 02:26 AM
I just read the blog entry that Jim Zumbo had posted about AR and AK rifles.
Jim, do you even know what an assault rifle is? Apparently you do not!
Examples of assault rifles include the M16 rifle and the AK-47. This is because
the M16 and the AK-47 are selective fire rifles. The M16 is capable of shooting
in semi automatic or in fully automatic mode, which was a 3 round burst when I
was in the Army. Semi-automatic rifles, including commercial versions of the
AR-15, and "automatic" rifles limited to firing "single shots" are not assault rifles
as they are not selective fire.
2/19/2007
Page 108 of 853
Don't get me wrong, I hunt with a Remington 700 bull barrel 25-06 for deer,
antelope, and coyotes just like a lot of Americans do. But when you try to divide
gun owners of this great country by telling all of us hunters what rifle we should
or should not be hunting with, then you sir need to have a "Hillary 08" sticker
posted in the back window of your pickup. You're providing the anti-gunners
with more ammo to disarm this country, which they are slowly doing every year.
Since you've called the assault rifle a "terrorist rifle", do you consider all of our
US soldiers terrorists since they carry AR type rifles while they're defending our
country? They will sure be glad to hear your biased opinion of them. Or was
your statement just directed at all of us law abiding gun owners of this country?
Jim, while we're on the subject of hunting, when's the last time that you actually
had to pay for your own hunting licenses and tags for each state that you hunt
in? It must be nice to have sponsors to foot the bill for you, by supplying you
with hunting guides, by letting you hunt on private game ranches, or purchase
LOP hunting tags to hunt all the different species of big game that you get to
hunt each year. All of that so you can boast or brag about it on your tv show.
Look at me, I'm a great hunter!
In my opinion you're not a great hunter when you get to hunt for free with free
hunting licenses, tags, rifles, hunting equipment, etc.
I have to spend at least $50 every year just to apply for big game tags to try
and get a slim chance at drawing any tags to hunt any big game in my state
(Oregon). Of course, my state doesn't care about the hunters, they only care
about all the dollars that we hunters spend each year just to try and get the
chance to hunt any big game. The fish and game department has restricted big
game hunting tags so much, that the average hunter in our state would be
lucky to get to hunt maybe 3 branch antlered bulls in his/her hunting lifetime. It
takes approximately 10 to 11 preference points to draw a pronghorn antelope
tag in our state. That means that the average hunter might get a chance at
hunting 2 pronghorn antelope in his/her hunting lifetime in our state. This is
from hunters that cannot afford to pay big dollars to buy LOP tags from private
ranches, pay for hunting rights and guides on leased hunting grounds, or hunt
out of state.
Wildlife management was never ever supposed to be about making money, it
was meant for managing wildlife. The fish and game department don't even
know how to manage wildlife correctly either, by letting the liberals in our state
decide how they can control the cougar and bear populations in our state.
It's a sad world we live in today compared to 25 years ago. I come from a family
that every generation hunted and fished. Now you can hardly get a hunting tag
for anything. Out of the 6 big game hunting tags that I apply for each year, I
haven't drawn any tags for the last 2 years. When my nephews get old enough
2/19/2007
Page 109 of 853
to hunt and carry on the family tradition, there probably won't be any hunting
available for them either.
Posted by: Doug H. | February 18, 2007 at 02:27 AM
banned outright!
Jim Zumbo is a dumbo.
Sarah Brady wrote:
We are outraged by the increase in gun violence in America, snip.... and the
lethality of guns make death or severe injury more likely. This must stop.....snif
snivel..
Smoke another cigerette for me ok Sarah?
Posted by: Jim Brady | February 18, 2007 at 02:28 AM
Chalk up another cancelled subscription.
Zumbo, you need to get the hell out of the United States, and go find a country
more suited to you, you anti-American scumbag.
Pray you never need assistance from we so-called "terrorists", because you're
likely to find yourself up a particular creek without a paddle.
http://www.remingtonmilitary.com/
Wonder if these guys would appreciate being called "terrorists"
People who don't think assault weapons are more dangerous are fools. They
hold a much larger amount of ammo in their clips. Letting the shooter spray
their target with lead. Doesn't sound very sportsman like to me.
Well I guess I'm a terrorist then. What about my several AK types and FAL? I
will never read outdoor life again or from you again Mr. Zumbo, looks like I didnt
miss much.
2/19/2007
Page 110 of 853
I am a Police Officer in OK. I cannot belive a gun owner is saying these words.
We don't own guns to hunt or even to protect against criminals. Although both
are very good reasons to own a firearm. We own firearms to protect our rights.
And that means law abiding individuals should be able to own which ever type
of small arm they want.
Posted by: Sherrick | February 18, 2007 at 02:30 AM
AR15's are "terrorist rifles"? You must be one extremely uneducated &
prejudiced person. I pay pretty close attention to the news, and out of hundreds
of terrorist acts reported every year I can't think of even ONE incident where a
terrorist used one.
Also, if you have been brainwashed by a liberal anti-gun media into believing
that the shape, ergonomics or magazine capacity of a rifle is what makes a
hunter a 'good guy' or a 'bad guy' then you are truly a lost cause and
embarrassment to both hunters and gun owners in general. The shape of a
firearm doesn't make it or it's owner evil - the way a person uses it defines that.
Tens of millions of US gun owners own such rifles and shoot them legally
without hurting others - many of them are law enforcement and veterans!
Also, you call yourself a 'traditionalist' while concerning yourself with pandering
to the anti-gun crowds viewpoint on 'sporting arms'. I hate to tell you but once
the liberals ban so-called 'assault weapons' (semi-auto rifles that LOOK like
military weapons but only make one shot per trigger pull) they will take your
bolt-actions & shotguns as well. Don't take my word for it, take theirs!
And when speaking of 'terrorism', don't forget - the latest mall shooting was with
a pump shotgun AND every day terrorists are using bolt action rifles to snipe at
our soldiers. It's only a matter of time before liberals tell us they are too
dangerous to allow here in country.
Please educate yourself on the type of red blooded Americans that own and
use such rifles before you made broad sweeping generalizations about them.
Posted by: Daniel Drennan | February 18, 2007 at 02:30 AM
Nice, some of these idiot FUDDS still think a magazine is called a "clip". Also,
WTF does hunting have to do with the Second Amendment? Most states limit 5
- 10 rounds on hunting rifles anyway...just because it is capable of holding
more doesn't mean you HAVE to. ...and if your state doesn't limit capacity, then
more power to ya, it's no one's business. FUDDS will be the end of "us" true
supporters of the 2A. WAKE-UP fellow "hunters".
Posted by: Jackal | February 18, 2007 at 02:30 AM
Why do you feel you need to torture and kill little animals? You don't need to
2/19/2007
Page 111 of 853
eat them anymore. You should be target shooting and recycling the paper
targets. Hunters are murders ! OUTLAW HUNTING. Sounds stupid well so
does your article. Outdoor life Fire this idiot.
Posted by: Keith Schuch | February 18, 2007 at 02:31 AM
Yes let's divorce ourselves from freedom.
Get a life you commie shitbird. I took one of those terrorist M4 carbines and
defended our freedom with it for a year.
Why don't you go fight for something and then come back and tell people why
we should surrender it to the liberals.
We need to stand our ground and tell them "LIVE FREE OR DIE" because life
is worth a penny and even less without freedom.
Posted by: Austin | February 18, 2007 at 02:31 AM
Clips? Damn right, Garands are baby-killing death machines that deal out
murder 8 rounds at a time - via a clip....
Posted by: Maria Sharapova | February 18, 2007 at 02:32 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
In case you haven't figured this out, you have publically insulted a tightly knit
group of over 100,000. Maybe somewhere in your dimly lit thought process you
may remember what happened to Smith and Wesson when they sold out.
- NMA
Wow, amazed. Just got done writing a letter to ODL to cancel my subscription.
Mr.Zumbo has just stirred up the pot hasn't he? How can he make just
statements. Even worse, how are the editors at ODL going to allow this. I
believe anything a writer says is endorsed by his publishers, unless otherwise
noted. Terrorists use these "assault weapons" correct, and we don't want to be
lumped together, so we must stop using them. Terrorists also use vans, trucks,
SUVs, and cars as IEDs correct? So by your logic, we must rid ourselves of
these too. Boy will my wife be ticked when she finds out I'm getting rid of her
terroristic Expedition. Oh well, anything to keep me from being lumped in with
terrorists right Mr. Zumbo. No I'm off to see about having ODL channel
removed from my cable line up.
Posted by: Mr.C | February 18, 2007 at 02:32 AM
zumbo, So you use a sniper rifle instead of a terrorist rifle?Your logic makes no
sense at all.You are an insult and danger to the second amendment.I'm not a
hunter,but with guys like you around,who needs ted kennedy.
2/19/2007
Page 112 of 853
It's gonna' be a little tough explaining to my 11-year-old why we're canceling his
subscription to OL.
I guess the real question is what Mr. Z is being or has been paid to write this. I
say that in light of the current move by Democraps to reinstate the AR/AW ban,
but this time without a "sunset" clause. What's the matter, Mr. Z? Can't afford
that next trip to Africa, so you took the blood money?
Read the Second Amendment again. Then tell me where it restricts what arms
we have the right to keep and bear, or for what purpose we keep and bear
them.
Some Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves right now.....
"Jim Zumbo is a better Sportsman than any of you all here. His choice in
proves it."
This above post is exactly the mindset I have a problem with. The type of
firearm a person uses proves nothing at all. It is a tool to harvest game or rid a
ranchers field of varmints or predators. If one guy does it with a bolt action and
another with a AR-15, or yet another with a handgun It does not make one
hunter better than another. That comment is way off. Allen
Posted by: Allen | February 18, 2007 at 02:33 AM
U be thinkin dat he be bad 'nuff fo a Fooo-Tay G-Lock?
Posted by: Gang'sta fo life | February 18, 2007 at 02:34 AM
I propose we ban hunting. There's absolutely no need for it.
You can buy packaged meat in the stores - red meat, poultry.
Hell, let's ban fishing - you can buy fish in the store, too.
If idiocy wasn't the antithesis of my being, I'd start actively working to ban both,
just to spite you, Zumbo.
Fortunately, you and I are different - I'm not mentally challenged.
foolish firearm owner
ignorant 2nd amendment knowledge
sheep for the tyrants
shill for the anti-gun
coward
2/19/2007
Page 113 of 853
Posted by: C R L | February 18, 2007 at 02:37 AM
I've never heard of you before, I see I haven't missed much.
I don't hunt with an AR15 either but I am insulted by your attitude and stupidity.
Posted by: Reginald Nunez | February 18, 2007 at 02:37 AM
foolish firearm owner
ignorant 2nd amendment knowledge
sheep for the tyrants
shill for the anti-gun
coward
Posted by: C R L | February 18, 2007 at 02:37 AM
Take it from an Alaskan hunter, real sportsmen don't use scopes. Since you are
shortsighted, I guess its ok...
Posted by: Skishooter | February 18, 2007 at 02:38 AM
Jake writes:
People who don't think assault weapons are more dangerous are fools. They
hold a much larger amount of ammo in their clips. Letting the shooter spray
their target with lead. Doesn't sound very sportsman like to me.......
Something tells me Jake has never handled a firearm in his life, and lives with
his mother still.
Sprying the target.... lol. If you ever get a chance to handle a rifle, you may
notice things we call "sights" on them. If you line them up properly you hit the
target. No need to spray...aim and fire. Like Jim, only no misses.
Posted by: OneShotOneKill | February 18, 2007 at 02:38 AM
proves it.
posted by Jake
Since when did you Jake know everyones hunting skills posting on this board. I
bet Jake can't make a 850 yard shot with a sharps rifle. So, does that make my
Sharps Rifle a long range terrorist weapon JAKE. It still fires a freaking bullet
you idiot. It's not a matter of what gun you shoot you Idiot, it still fires a bullet.
Shotgun, 22 rifle, 223, 300 win mag, 270, 308, they will all shoot a bullet you
idiot.
Posted by: spurzmaker | February 18, 2007 at 02:39 AM
If you are worried about public opinion maybe you should give up hunting. After
all, no one NEEDS to hunt and a lot of people dislike it.
2/19/2007
Page 114 of 853
And then you are using a precision sniper rifle to hunt defenseless animals.
The horror. Those rifles are only good for killing things from a distance.
See how easy it is to turn even your wood stocked rifle into an something evil.
If you think banning one type f rifle will appease the anit gunners then you had
better think again. They will continue to take ban one kind at a time until they
are all gone. Including your hunting rifles.
Oh, and I will not be renewing my substription to a magazine that has you on
the payroll to spew your useless opinions.
Posted by: Chuck | February 18, 2007 at 02:40 AM
Wait until the antigun crowd comes for your bolt action "sniper rifle". You don't
get it, do you? The liberal anti gun freaks want ALL of your guns banned.
EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM GONE.
I own everything from a flintlock to an AK47. I enjoy shooting all of them, and I
and the people that I shoot with are certainly not terrorists (My deployed job is
to fight them in Iraq).
I happen to be a hunter safety instructor, a competitive shooter ( I shoot hi
power competitions with an AR15 at 600 yards with open sights), and an NRA
life member.
You know where you can stick your comments.
Posted by: Phill | February 18, 2007 at 02:40 AM
SSSSSHHHIITTSTORMMMMMMM!!!!
Posted by: Jeff B | February 18, 2007 at 02:41 AM
Perhaps these fine people from Remington's Military Product Division would
like to know that a sponsor of Remington thinks they are producing "terrorist
rifles"
It would interesting to see what their opinion is...
Michael Haugen
CW3 (R) USSF
Manager - Military Products Division
(P) 336.207.7180
(P) 360.458.6395
(E) [email protected]
Gregory Baradat
MSG (R) USSF
Military Products Representative
(P) 253.503.7129
2/19/2007
Page 115 of 853
(P) 253.3802850
(F) 253-267-5165
(E) [email protected]
Posted by: jb | February 18, 2007 at 02:42 AM
Smooth move, Fudd
Posted by: Rabon | February 18, 2007 at 02:42 AM
As a decorated Vietnam veteran and former Wash DC LEO, I declare you the
first dumb ass gun writer of 21st century.
I hate to break this to you since you obviously haven't a clue of what's been
happening in the last 20 years in your industry. There are other shooting sports
other than hunting unarmed animals.
A lot of us veterans, Vietnam and those brave men that were over in the Sand
Box who regularly shoot precision rifle and carbine matches.
Who the hell are you to get off telling me what my hobbies are or are not going
to be. I personally find hunting a dumb animal who can't shoot back and defend
themselves a joke.
By your stupid logic your "hunting" rifle is considered a "sniper" rifle used by
terriorists.
I think it's time for you to go out in the real world and find out what's going on in
the firearms industry or stop trying to be a gun writer.
Posted by: Rambosky | February 18, 2007 at 02:43 AM
Jim Zumbo is killing defenseless animals with a high powered SNIPER RIFLE!
banned outright!
Jim Zumbo is a Dumbo.
Mr.Zumbo, What a load of tripe and bilge mud you have seen fit to print.
I will not purchase a magazine, ezine, or any other material you are associated
with in the future.
Posted by: James Sanders | February 18, 2007 at 02:44 AM
I can't express my disappointment in Mr. Zumbo. That such a respected name
2/19/2007
Page 116 of 853
in the hunting field would publish such a short-sighted and offensive piece of
drivel is a sad sign.
I'm sure no one has ever hunted with a military rifle before - surely the Mauser
or the Springfield are only suitable for killing humans. What a terrible crock.
And calling the very arm that our fine military uses a "terrorist rifle" is an affront
to every single American. Period. How utterly and despicably sad.
I can't express my disappointment in Mr. Zumbo. That such a respected name
in the hunting field would publish such a short-sighted and offensive piece of
drivel is a sad sign.
I'm sure no one has ever hunted with a military rifle before - surely the Mauser
or the Springfield are only suitable for killing humans. What a terrible crock.
And calling the very arm that our fine military uses a "terrorist rifle" is an affront
to every single American. Period. How utterly and despicably sad.
Mr Zumbo,
You couldn't possibly need a high power sniper rifle capable of killing from
100's of yards away. Please turn it in immediately! Hunting coyotes? Do you
eat them or do just take pleasure in senseless killing? Please stop this
terroristic behavior immediately!
I am a hunter and competitive shooter. Unfortunately type of type of attitude is
all to common. Sporting clays shooters don't see a need for handguns, USPSA
shooters think hunters are fudds, hunters think anyone who owns a semi-auto
is a terrorist. This type of divisiveness hurts us ALL when it comes to protecting
our rights. United we stand, divided we fall. Your ignorant rhetoric just adds to
the problem. Maybe its time to get a clue or move on and retire into obscurity.
Posted by: jp | February 18, 2007 at 02:46 AM
Mr Zumbos ignorance is staggering.
Once again the Fudds show how little they know and their lack of willingness to
preserve the Second Ammendment.
Subscription Cancelled!!!!!!
This rag will never ebe in my home as long as this is the view held by your
magazine!
God help us!! The Fudds are going to cost us ALL of our guns!
The ignorance expressed by the author and all who are "Fudds" is dangerous
because it threatens the ownership of guns by the citizenry.
More damage is done by this type of idiot than is ever done by gun grabbers.
2/19/2007
Page 117 of 853
You sir are retarded and have now become another name to be held in such
"esteem" as Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, et al.
Your ignorance knows no bounds.
Again, subscription cancelled, and I will forward this to EVERYONE I KNOW.
Posted by: KangarooAr-15A3 | February 18, 2007 at 02:46 AM
What if someone sees you in the woods spraying down a deer with an M16 and
50 round clip. Don't you think it makes hunters look bad?
magazine!
I applaud Mr. Zumbo for the courage to stand up for some of us. I am glad he is
speaking his mind! He knows the truth that hunting with machine guns is wrong.
He is a strong voice for abolishing firearms. Most of todays weapons are too
destructive! I think most should be banned. As for hunting it just glorifies killing
innocent creatures. I don't care what people think I am afraid of guns and don't
like them. Good for you Mr. Zumbo tell it like it is.
Posted by: Elizabeth Dawson | February 18, 2007 at 02:48 AM
I got here from a gun board link.
I decided not to renew my subscription to Outdoor Life sometime in 1968,
2/19/2007
Page 118 of 853
therefore, I cannot cancel a subscription. Remington, on the other hand, will be
hearing from me.
I have no idea who this Zumbo person is as I pay little attention to those who
play at hunting and then publish their "exploits" for profit and to inflate their
egos.
After reading the "article" in question and some of the comments posted, I can
only conclude that this man has taken leave of his senses.
Mr. Zumbo, I strongly suggest you contact a medical professional. Medicine
has undergone tremendous advances since you and I were young men. There
are now drugs available that will make it seem all better.
Posted by: Popeye | February 18, 2007 at 02:49 AM
Please ban those high power sniper rifles there is no need for calibers capable
of killing out past 100 meters. They are easy to spot look for wood stocks, steel
barrels and the most dangerous ones have synthetic stocks. I know of one
person who uses one of these sniper killer rifles Jim Zumbo.
How is that Mr. Zumbo remember first the assault rifles then the hunting/ sniper
rifles? How’s Hillary’s campaign going? Are you her weapons expert or just a
drip under pressure?
Posted by: Gordon | February 18, 2007 at 02:50 AM
What if someone sees you in the woods spraying down a deer with an M16 and
50 round clip. Don't you think it makes hunters look bad?
Posted by: Jake
Isn't it past your bed time ? Don't make us call your daddy !
Posted by: Deekin | February 18, 2007 at 02:50 AM
Two feets they come a creepin
Like a black cat do
And two bodies are lyin naked
Creeper think he got nothin to lose
So he creeps into this house, yeah
And unlocks the door
And while a man reaching for his trousers
Shoots him full of .38 holes
Its a saturday night special
Got a barrel thats blue and cold
Aint no good for nothin
But put a man six feet in a hole
Big jims been drinkin whiskey
2/19/2007
Page 119 of 853
And playing poker on a losin night
Pretty soon, big jim starts a thinkin
Somebody been cheatin and lyin
So big jim commences to fightin
I wouldnt tell you no lie
And big jim done grab his pistol
Shot his friend right between the eyes
Hand guns are made for killin
Aint no good for nothin else
And if you like your whiskey
You might even shoot yourself
So why dont we dump em people
To the bottom of the sea
Before some fool come around here
Wanna shoot either you or me
Posted by: Janet Reno | February 18, 2007 at 02:52 AM
The Europeans consider Shotguns to be barbaric. Better give those up.
I'm pretty sure Sarah Brady would call your Hunting Rifle a Sniper Rifle. Better
give that one up too.
Look up the term "Useful Idiot" and think on that for a while.
Posted by: Esteban | February 18, 2007 at 02:53 AM
elizabeth dawson wrote:
Most of todays weapons are too destructive! I think most should be banned. As
for hunting it just glorifies killing innocent creatures. I don't care what people
think I am afraid of guns and don't like them. Good for you Mr. Zumbo tell it like
it is.
WTF: You are endorsing what he thinks, but you don't endorse hunting, Get
your gurdle out of your ear, and put your teeth back in. Look what you just said,
It makes you look like a total brainless blonde joke. Go somewhere else, and
talk about perfume. You make no sense.
magazine!
2/19/2007
Page 120 of 853
Nice job Zumbo. You've managed to alienate an entire group of people you
should be thanking instead.
That's right. Those of us you so deftly (and daftly) label "terrorists" are the very
ones who are most involved in the shooting sports. We're the match shooters,
the Range Safety Officers, the NRA-certified instructors. We're the people
bringing new folks into the shooting sports. We're the people who are talking
with Senators and Congressmen when another attack on the 2nd amendment
is launched.
But to you we are first and foremost terrorists.
Hopefully you and the rest of the 6-shot-per-year warriors for freedom never
have to find out exactly how important we are to you. Because if you do, it
means that you've gotten your way and our "assault rifles" have been banned.
And if that day comes, Zumbo, I guarantee you'll find out exactly how far up the
creek you really are. Because your bolt-action sniper rifles and your spray-andpray assault shotguns are going to be next on the block and we "terrorists"
aren't going to come to your aid.
Posted by: Yankee1911 | February 18, 2007 at 02:56 AM
Sir, when you imply that I am a terrorist because of my issued weapon at least
credit me in your writing for providing you the freedom to say what you want.
Mr. Zumbo, if you are such a "traditionalist" why aren't you hunting with a stick
that has a sharp stone attached to the end of it? How far back do you want to
conveniently go to support your educated opinion? I truly hope that Outdoor
Life, Field and Stream and Remington feel the economic pain that you have
caused. Simply unbelievable. I might have actually considered your opinion
based on it being just your opinion, but you unwisely chose to support your
opinion with unmitigated falsehoods while trying to impress us with "facts".
Terrible journalism, Mr. Zumbo, simply terrible.
2/19/2007
Page 121 of 853
Posted by: I'm in SHOCK!!! | February 18, 2007 at 02:58 AM
I would think a hunting rifle would be something that shoots 300 yards or less.
You really don't need much further than that or you just injure the animal with a
bad shot. Rifles that can take accurate shots past that should be for police use.
No need for that for hunting.
I would think a hunting rifle would be something that shoots 300 yards or less.
You really don't need much further than that or you just injure the animal with a
bad shot. Rifles that can take accurate shots past that should be for police use.
No need for that for hunting.
Elizabeth Dawson wrote:
like them. Good for you Mr. Zumbo tell it like it is. <
WTF:Lady get the girdle out of your ear, and put your teeth back in. Go
somewhere else and talk about perfumes, and blonde jokes.
Do you realize what you just said, You dont condone hunting innocent animals,
and you support this DUMBO for what he said. How many live brain cells do
you have in your head? He makes a living killing for MONEY with GUNS!
Get a life, and go somewhere else.
2/19/2007
Page 122 of 853
Fudd Fudd Fudd Fudd Fudd Fudd Fudd Fudd Fudd Fudd Fudd Fudd Fudd
2/19/2007
Page 123 of 853
Fudd
2/19/2007
Page 124 of 853
Pantywaist said: "What if someone sees you in the woods spraying down a
deer with an M16 and 50 round clip. Don't you think it makes hunters look
bad?"
It amazes me that people posting here are uneducated enough to post things
like that.
So called "assault weapons" (the type they are trying to ban) don't 'spray
bullets'. They fire one shot at a time like any other legal rifle. They don't fire
bursts and aren't automatic. Just because the magazine holds more rounds
DOESN'T mean that the shooter is less acurate, or will use all of those rounds
at one time.
The very first time I ever shot a rifle at 100 yards, it was an SKS/AK style rifle.
Never having shot beyond 25 yards before, at 100 I was able to hit a 12" metal
plate with EVERY shot using cheap ammo and iron sites. With practice that got
even better; with quality ammo the groups tightened more; with the addition of
a scope accuracy improved LOTS more.
The SKS & AK style rifles are very reliable but one of the less acurate 'assault'
style rifles - and even those are PLENTY acurate for hunting, as the above
experience indicates. Every one of my AK's or SKS's are more acurate than my
Marlin 336 30-30 lever action.
Posted by: Jerod Willis | February 18, 2007 at 03:01 AM
Traitor
Posted by: brad | February 18, 2007 at 03:02 AM
What a bunch of chicken littles. Oh, the sky is falling, the sky is falling. I'll never
buy remington guns or ammo again, I'll never read Outdoor Life again, I'll never
whatever again. You people sound like a bunch of children who aren't getting
their way. Grow up, shut up and go polish your bazookas. Zumbo's comments
aren't going to get guns banned in this country but this diatribe of ignorance
very well may.
Jake, you will injure an animal at 50 yards if you don't know what you are doing.
DUH!
A black powder rifle in a sharps model has a record shot at 1500 yards at the
adobe walls incident in 1860. Are you going to ban black powder too.
Jake, get a f'n life. It doesn't matter how far it is. You can injure a deer at 50
yards and not kill it.
2/19/2007
Page 125 of 853
"He knows the truth that hunting with machine guns is wrong"
I hope you people know that machine guns have been banned and/or heavily
regulated since 1935! That's not the type of rifle being discussed here.
The so called assault weapons here in the US (AK, AR etc) are NOT machine
guns, they are single shot per trigger pull just like any other semi-automatic
rifle.
Posted by: Daniel Watkins | February 18, 2007 at 03:03 AM
I just dont understand why the term "terrorist rifle" is even existent in this text.
There is no diffrence in many guns that we see in our everyday lives. An AR,
AK, mini 14, Remington 700. They all do the same thing. So why would you
have the audacity to insult and anger your own people. Apparently you have
some unresolved hatred for the owners of firearms that dont suit your fancy. If I
put a synthetic stock on your "sniper weapons" would they automatically be that
much more deadly, or would "terrorists be compelled to use them?. I submit
not. Its people like you that split the firearms community into cliques. I say we
stand together , we fall together, but it seems that you let personal agendas get
in the way of the fundamental ideals of most of the firearms community. You
always hear of people jumping on people who use "assault weapons" but if you
look at the numbers (which I have extensively) more people are killed by
"sporting weapons" every day. So I leave you with this thought. Why? why must
people be so scared of an AR but not a Savage rifle? both can kill just the
same.
Posted by: BCD | February 18, 2007 at 03:05 AM
Blanketly calling AR and AK rifles "terrorist" or assault rifles shows that you're
either very ignorant or have fallen for the lies/propaganda of the VPC and the
Brady Campaign. I'm appalled that a fellow gun owner has perpetuated the kind
of irrational foolishness that I and other gun owners have fought against for so
many years.
I'm not a hunter, but I've always argued that we should never support laws that
screw with hunters because such laws ultimately screw with ALL gun owners.
Mr. Zumbo, you've just made it harder for me to give a damn.
Posted by: A very disappointed gun owner | February 18, 2007 at 03:05 AM
It's the same misguided logic most liberals use as they are under the
impression that you can stop people from killing each other if we blame it on a
certain weapon or type of weapon.Do you recall the first murder took place
witout a firearm?Get real you Libtard, if all we had was rocks and sticks do
really think it would stop violence?You can be the first to ban sticks over 1 foot
and put a stop to all this madness,thank goodness for smart people like you.
2/19/2007
Page 126 of 853
Posted by: Dan | February 18, 2007 at 03:06 AM
IBTL
Maybe some of us think it is a bad idea for hunters to walk around in the woods
looking like Rambo.
Wow..just wow...
So I guess this means I sell "terrorist" weapons to the public now?
Subscription CANCELLED.
Posted by: JohnD | February 18, 2007 at 03:07 AM
And another thing, I have poopy pants will someone please change my diaper!
I am appalled by the lack of judgement shown both by the writer and the editor
until I would like to see an apology to the shooting community from outdoor
life .By the way I hunt with my ar15
Posted by: Nathanael Roberts | February 18, 2007 at 03:07 AM
looking like Rambo.
Posted by: Jake
You sir are the by-product of selective inbreeding !
"Hunting Fraternity"?
Get over it, gramps. We are all in this together- be it hunters, shooters, or
plinkers. You divide us with your above blog when you should be strengthening
and uniting us. Next, you will be complaining about using shotguns because of
the negative press from the recent, tragic Salt Lake City shooting. Help protect
the 2nd amendment, don't rot it from the inside. If not, time for you to retire.
Arch
Jake again enlightens us:
looking like Rambo.
Who cares what you think? If someone is obeying the law then who cares?
2/19/2007
Page 127 of 853
Maybe people shouldn't go into the woods dress in ghille suits like snipers for
deer hunting, eh? Since you own no firearms, and do not hunt, you have
nothing to add besides expounding your ignorance. Now go to bed little man.
Hi Jim- I am a fan of yours,but disagree with your stand on this topic.-joe
Posted by: JOSEPH WING | February 18, 2007 at 03:12 AM
Your just saying that because Remington can't sell their 100+ year old designs
with all the modern firearms that their competitors are coming out with.
That said, if you or any other hunter group manage to get my rifles banned. I
WILL drag you down with me, I will join the Brady campaign just so you lose
yours too. And I will make it my lifes work to ruin EVERYONE involved with the
ban.
Posted by: Mikeinflorida | February 18, 2007 at 03:15 AM
MESSAGE TO ALL FUDDS:
Repeat after me,
A CLIP IS NOT A MAGAZINE and A MAGAZINE IS NOT A CLIP, BUT BOTH
HOLD AMMUNITION!!
Jake...youre an idiot, stop yourself before you hurt yourself....do some real
research and get out and see for yourself before you write anymore.
Jake, your genes are breeding again. It's not really about the assault rifle, it is
about the rifle itself.
You missed the train on that one. the rifle, dim wit is using in his photo at the
top of the page if you haven't looked will kill up to 500 yards no problem. Now
you are saying to ban rifles over 300 yards. What are you going to do load a
sling shot with a rock.
Go fishing, and leave the hunting to us men, and qualified others.
I have just read the Zumbo article, and cannot express my utter disgust at the
ignorance and arrogance displayed by Mr. Zumbos' remarks! I have been a
hunter and sport shooter all my life. Over the years I have acquired many
handguns, shotguns, and rifles, including a couple of AK clones, and AR-15s,
(or in Zumbos' words, "Assualt Weapons").
But what about my old Remington 742? It really doesn't look or function that
much different than my SAR-1, and it shoots a much more powerfull 30-06
2/19/2007
Page 128 of 853
cartridge. Is that an "assualt rifle"? What about my Ruger 10/22? I even have a
few 30 round magazines, (that's clips for you Fudds), somewhere in the bottom
of my gun vault. And what about my Browning A5, or my Remington 870 and
Mossberg 835? Guess I'll have to turn them in, too.
Sorry, Jim, but I can't do that. All of my weapons are tools, and each has a
purpose. Some have specific purposes, and some are multi-purpose. Some
simply serve to make me smile when I shoot them. But I will fight for my right to
own ALL of them.
The divisiveness of Zumbos' remarks are poisonous, and more dangerous to
our 2A rights than anything the Brady Bunch can throw at us. If we want to
continue to enjoy our 2A rights, all sportsmen, hunters, sport shooters,
collectors, and even evil black rifle owners will have to put aside the yours/mine
attitude and stand as one. We, as firearms owners, are all in the same boat.
Unfortunately, Mr. Zumbo has just shot a very large hole in it's bottom.
Posted by: HammerHead | February 18, 2007 at 03:17 AM
I think any gun that is legal to hunt with should not be put down and I also think
that if Mr Zumbo wants to continue making a living hunting and making his
shows in this free country he should better think his comments. It is only a
terrorist gun in the hands of a terrorist.
Posted by: Randy | February 18, 2007 at 03:17 AM
Jim, you ignorant slut.
Don't you know that your sniper, I mean, 'hunting' rifle is next on the list?
Didja know that the Second Amendment is NOT about "sporting guns?"
Get a clue already.
Posted by: David E | February 18, 2007 at 03:18 AM
I hope this SOB is laying awake late night worrying about these responses and
how it may affect his job. Even better I hope he gets pulled into a big office to
sit infront of a big chair to explain to some big wig what the hell was going
through his mind to word his opinions in such a manner. We are all entitled to
our opinions, but he very well could have worded it less hostile and insulting
and still have gotton his opinion accross to his readers. Maybe this is a lame
ass attempt at a publicity stunt. I mean links to this are popping up all over
forums, but the outcome isn't looking too good so far. Maybe he will be getting
checked into DETOX center soon and will be all better in a couple months
when the crack is out of his system. Once upon a time I respected you and your
words. Now I am ashamed to have ever spoken you name in a conversation.
Posted by: H. Harman | February 18, 2007 at 03:18 AM
As happens, my tastes run close to yours on firearms, and my opinions about
2/19/2007
Page 129 of 853
the PERSONAL need for an AR (in hunting) are somewhat similar to yours, and
my opinion of your ARTICLE is you are less than acute.
MY opinion of firearms is that they are tools to accomplish purposes, and I have
the ones I choose and give you that equal privilege. Don't tell me what to shoot
and I shant attempt to tell YOU what to shoot.
If you like muzzle loaders, or full auto, I have no opinion about your choices.
Equally if you like big 50's or .177 VMax i have no opinion. Single Shot or 100
round magazines, tisn't my place to define your enjoyment.
Whereas, you seem to think it' appropriate to cast from on high your somehow
sanctified opinion as if no one else had the capacity to run their own life.
WhatEVER did they do without you?
For all my personal lack of interest in evil black rifles per se, and for all my
personal mistrust of those who fondle and drool on them incessantly..
i must say you have offended ME deeply and with somewhat more evenhanded
restriction of your opinions you might've acquired an ally.
if i could ban evil black rifles or sanctimonious overstuffed jerks i know which
one would be most satisfying..
guys who push against the first amendment THAT hard oughta be darn glad
the second one is holding it up.
Posted by: mitch shrader | February 18, 2007 at 03:19 AM
Jim,
I hate you ask this. It might make you appear to be stupid but... do you know
the difference between a automatic and a semi automatic.
Do you know that real assault rifles are full automatics, not semi. AR's are semi
autos that have the apprarance of the military M16.
So your saying that if you don't like the way a rifle "looks" it should be banned?
Yes, your are a dumb ass and need to find another ocupation. Maybe you can
write about the shopping carts that they have at Walmart as you hand them out
to shoppers
Posted by: Rambosky | February 18, 2007 at 03:21 AM
Nothing wrong with using a semiautomatic weather proof rifle in the woods.
You sir have lost your credibilty.
Posted by: Gary | February 18, 2007 at 03:21 AM
Very dumb Jim. Very dumb. Do not expect assistance when they come for your
high powered bolt action sniper rifles.
2/19/2007
Page 130 of 853
This article is about the most ignorant I have read. "terrorist" rifles indeed!
Posted by: Kev Kline | February 18, 2007 at 03:22 AM
Sir, do you realize the harm you've done to the gun fraternity and to the Spirit of
2A?
Do you realize that you have joined the likes of the Brady Bunch and that
Nancy Pelossi will be dancing in the isles because of your comments?
Posted by: Colonel Daddy | February 18, 2007 at 03:22 AM
Wow, you seemed to have made quite a few friends here Jim.
Narrowmindedness and myopia have no place in journalism - you have of
course given shelter to both.
Well holy hell Jim!! If I understand what you are saying, then you should give up
your bolt gun. The receivers of most bolt guns are based on the Mauser action.
The Mauser was a WAR RIFLE used to kill humans. And you should only use
iron sights because SCOPES were used on those WAR RIFLES to kill humans.
You should go back to using sticks and stones and snares to catch/kill game.
BTW, I believe that most hunters don't hunt to survive and I believe that hunting
should be outlawed because we can buy food at the store. STUPID IDIOT!!
Was thinking of subscribing too OL but after reading this article that won't be
happening. Sounds like the Remington boys are feeling a pinch from the
exploding new military rifle market and had Mr. Zumbo try and lend them a
hand. Too bad, guess I'll have too buy another Bushmaster instead of a new
Remington. Then again what does my opinion matter, I own an Ar15 so
apparently I must be a terrorist!
Posted by: Chad | February 18, 2007 at 03:23 AM
News flash asshole, you are part of the problem. Who's pay-role are you on?
Why are you people so scared the government is going to take your guns?
Jim ZumboI see you have a new bunch of strong supporters! Just what you were after I
bet! I bet next time if your so lucky you might do a little bit more research?
"Elizabeth Dawson wrote:
2/19/2007
Page 131 of 853
like them. Good for you Mr. Zumbo tell it like it is"
I am glad to see your people coming out to support you. I think most in the
shooting industry just found out all we needed to know. Greg
Posted by: Greg from Montana | February 18, 2007 at 03:25 AM
Posted by: Greg Petrus | February 18, 2007 at 03:26 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
I can make my peace with your opinion and chalk it up to ignorance and
resistance to change. What I can not make piece with however is your use of
resources made available by the support of so many people who are avid
supporters of the very rifle you call a "terrorist rifle". If you insist on
broadcasting your ignorant views please utilize another more appropriate
method. To make matters worse you flaunt your association with a Remington
executive amongst your disparaging remarks. If you feel the AR15 is a "terrorist
rifle" maybe you would care to take a look at Remington's product line and
consider the 870 and 11-87 tactical models they offer. Are these weapons more
worthy in your mind? I view them as the same. Also consider the ammunition
lines of 5.56x45 specifically aimed at these weapons. If you feel this way
maybe you should stop associating with a company that provides "terrorist
weapons". I will no longer support Outdoor Life as long as they provide you a
tool to convey your disparaging remarks and I know plenty others feel the same
way. Did you honestly feel that these comments would be well received?
Maybe you should take some time and educate yourself on the AR15 and your
beloved public relation friendly "sporting firearms" as it seems your views
2/19/2007
Page 132 of 853
merely illustrate an ignorance of all things firearms related. I would have
expected better from someone in your position.
I've personally been hunting with an AR15 for quite some time. I've utilized it's
benefits primarily for varmint hunting and it has served me very well. The AR
platform lends itself well to accurate shooting and I've delivered accurate hits at
over 300yds on coyotes. The inline bore design of the AR allows for excellent
recoil characteristics and puts me back on target quickly. Furthermore the semiautomatic action prepares me for a follow up shot faster than any bolt action
without the need to change my position. Surely you can appreciate the
advantages of an amazingly quick follow up shot should the need arise. As a
responsible hunter I don't let the weapons abilities encourage me to make less
desirable shots, in fact I hunt in the same manner as with a bolt action. I merely
utilize the weapons abilities to augment my shooting to ensure a quick and
humane kill as is my goal. As a supposed hunting professional you would do
well to investigate the advantages of the weapon platform and considering
utilizing it to improve your own responsibility as a hunter.
Your statements clearly illustrate a resistance to change as the AR represents
the next step in weapons technology. The benefits I listed are a product of
advances in technology. Like it or not weapons are going to advance
regardless of your views on what is appropriate. Ironically your beloved bolt
actions are also a product of weapons technology and where once a feared
weapon that could have easily been deemed an "assault weapon" or "terror
rifle". It all depends on your perspective. British military used the advantages
afforded by bolt action rifles to massacre native residents of African colonies
during uprisings. Ironically it was the higher rate of fire afforded by the bolt
actions that allowed for the wholesale slaughter of natives. Lever-action rifles
served a similar roll in US military history against Native Americans. Similar
accounts can be given for every stage of firearm development. Each weapon
was considered terrifying in function and appearance among many. Your just
another stage in the resistance to change.
The real question is where do you draw the line? What made you chose the AR
as the breaking point? I say if you say the AR is too much why not go back to
trapdoor carbines? What about muzzleloaders? Bows? How about a spear?
Each weapon is just another stage in development, why is the AR over the
line? I imagine you find the AR offensive, whether your aware of it or not,
because it is the next stage beyond the era into which you were born. That
seems like an awfully ignorant position don't you think?
Other people have already cited your positions detrimental impact on gun
ownership rights in the US and the slippery slope you are supporting so I won't
beat a dead horse however there is something else you should consider.
Civilian purchases of firearms, particularly ARs, supports the research and
2/19/2007
Page 133 of 853
development and production of weapons for law enforcement and military.
Civilian revenue allows for the deeply discounted weapons provided to
government contracts as a result of the relatively high price we pay for the
same weapons, thereby differing costs. By nature, government contracts are
only occasionally awarded, often requiring large volumes in a timely manner.
Firearms companies like Rock River Arms, Bushmaster, Remington, and many
others would not be able to conduct the R&D neccesary to be competitive and
maintain the high volume capabilities required to turn out government contracts
in a timely manner. There are a couple companies out there, Heckler&Koch
and FN Herstal come to mind, that would be able to maintain contract
readiness without civilian support but they are few and far between and are
only capable of such due to their domination of domestic and foreign markets in
the area. The endless aray of weapons available as well as the competition
provided by the support of civilian customers ensures the quality of arms
utilized by our military and police departments. Your short sighted comments
only serve to hurt this special ability afforded by our constitution that makes our
country so great.
In the future I urge you to educate yourself on the amazing new technologies
available to modern sportsman and the impact of these technologies on the
bigger picture. If you find it appropriate to remain ignorant to these issues at the
very least don't pass on you beliefs and present them as the gospel truth in a
forum provided by those you speak against. I would also urge the editors of
your publication and the executives of the companies you claim association to
remain mindful of their audience and discontinue their support of your appaling
agenda. I will certainly discontinue my support of them as long as they utilize
that support to support you in your current way of thinking.
Posted by: CCarls | February 18, 2007 at 03:26 AM
jake wrote:
cause of you and bozo the clown there wanting to put restrictions on what we
do in a free country. JAKE, now go to bed its past your bed time little boy.
You should be in the sand box right now learning what a free country is about. I
did!!!
2/19/2007
Page 134 of 853
Posted by: Greg Petrus | February 18, 2007 at 03:26 AM
Jim Zumbo's morning:
ODL= outdoor life
*ring ring
Jim: Jim speaking.....
ODL: Jim, your fired
Jim: Sir, what do you mean I'm fired?
ODL: Jim, have you seen your blog?
JIM: Whats a blog? You mean the intranet?
ODL: Have you been smoking pot again Jim?
JIM: I thought they legalized pot?
ODL: Jim, stfu. Do you see how many subscriptions we've lost because of your
bullshit sellout?
Jim: (background noise: Diane, go back to bed...it's just work) Uh No. Lemme
check here on my computerater.....
Jim: Oh snap.
ODL: Yeah, snap alright.
Jim: Does this mean you aint paying for me to shoot them thar elk and deers in
them big pens this year so it looks like my fat ass can walk up and down them
dar heels?"
ODL: Yes jim you high fence fucktard, fired means your fired. No more hunting
on our coin and no more Ms. Feinstein under your desk.
Jim: Well, we can still date right?
ODL: Jim, you'll have plenty of spare time on your hands soon, so if you can
pick her out of your fat ass crack you can do whatever you want. Besides...why
would I care.... Your fired......Dumbass.....
Jim: Thanks sir, I was worried about that.....Fired, really?
ODL: Geezus Jim, you really are an idiot......
Jim: Well look how many people agreed with me
ODL: Two Jim, Two. 7698 people thought you was a sellout.
Jim: Well, ain't that like 20% or something?
ODL: No Jim....It's like .002%
Jim: damn.
ODL: I'm hanging up now.....We're using your last paycheck to clean the
2/19/2007
Page 135 of 853
crusties off the floor under your desk that Ms Feinstein left there...damn spitters
anyways..
Jim: My Diane would never do that!!
ODL: Click
ten minutes later......
ring ring*
Remington: Jim, wtf were you thinking?
Jim: I don't know sir.....I did just what Diane told me to do...she said it would
make me famous......
Rem: Well, your famous now alright. Your on every internet gun sight on the
planet.......hope your happy.
Jim. uh.......I don't know what to say......
Rem: You do know we sell more .223 ammo than all the other ammo combined
right?
Jim: uh.............
Rem: Are you listening to me you fat slob? Blaming AR15's on terrorism and
the demise of hunting is like blaming a SPOON for making you FAT.
Jim: I've been working out........
REM: shooting animals in cages is not working out Jim....you're a disgrace.....
Jim: I'm real sorry sir........
Rem: Well thats not gonna help our gun and ammo sales now is it Jim?
Jim: Well, what if I come out with a new cookbook?
Rem: STF jim. Your fired. You can't cook worth a shit anyways. Send back all
the free remington equipment we've sent you. Maybe you should call ruger.......
Jim: Do I need to send back my camo hoveround too?
Rem: Jim, try walking...........you'll lose weight.
Jim: Diane said if I kept eating this new cereal...uh....propo.....ganda......I would
lose weight?
Rem: Didn't I tell you to dump her after you got dumped by Ms. pelosi?
Jim: Yeah......I miss her blinking........and those lips....
REM: Christ I'm gonna vomit. Jim did I mention your fired?
Jim: Fired?
Rem: Click
Jim: Diane Honey, I thinks you lied to me. You said everyone hated those scary
black weapons and I'd be famous.....
Diane: bllllbrbrlllbr.
Jim: Sorry honey, I didn't know you were stuck under my fat Roll......
Diane: It's ok You fat bastard. (*gasping) You merely succumbed to our liberal
propaganda campaine. There's nothing to be ashamed of.
2/19/2007
Page 136 of 853
Jim: You mean you really are gonna take all my guns?
Diane: Well of course you dumb bastard.......It's for the children!!!
Posted by: Joshua Howell | February 18, 2007 at 03:27 AM
Mr. Zumbo, I did not know who you were prior to today. Now I do, but you will
be soon forgotten. I guess you figure bad attention better than no attention.
Wow! Ain't it a bitch!!
Posted by: Sam | February 18, 2007 at 03:28 AM
Ignorance is nothing to be proud of.
Not knowing anything about AR pattern rifles some 40 years after their
adoption by the US military is ignorant. In forty years the author has only seen
one in use? Indeed if there was a superlative form of ignorant, this would
qualify.
Forming an opinion about something that you are ignorant of is stupid.
Calling for the banning of something that you are ignorant of is outrageous.
I suspect that Mr. Zumbo was not always the fool that he appears to have
become. I would hope that his publisher will take this outrageous attack on his
fellow sportsmen as a clue that it is time for Mr. Zumbo to retire. With friends
like him, who needs enemies?
I've always tried to "divorce" myself from any communist who doesn't support
the Second Ammendment. I've been reading your work for years, but I just
stopped.
Mr.Zumbo, the ignorance you display to the shooting/hunting sports is sad. The
comments of bans and such is however, is just stupidty.
Remington, if your listeneing, you just lost another customer until this guy is
gone. I expect some sort of statement from Zumbo and Remington to clear this
up. If not, you will never see another penny of my 2nd Amendment supporting
dollars. That's a promise.
Posted by: Kelly | February 18, 2007 at 03:29 AM
Thank you for your assistance in getting terrorist weapons out of the hands of
children.
Posted by: Sarah Brady | February 18, 2007 at 03:29 AM
WOW JIMBO,you really got us ALL FIRED UP!!
heh. heh.maybe you aughta do some rethinking.but then maybe your just an
2/19/2007
Page 137 of 853
old dog and cant learn any new tricks.
IF you havnt gotten enough well deserved abuse here then I'd like to envite you
to come on over to Ted nugent.com and goto talkback,then click on
general,and look for
(Jim Zumbo gun grabber)and you'll find even more fans...heh.heh.heh...by the
way who ya votin for in o8 jim??...Hitlery? she,d love to make your wish come
true,and then some..thanks for the insight on your thought processes...
Posted by: maintncman | February 18, 2007 at 03:29 AM
This is right up there with Glenn St. Charles saying bow hunters in tree stands
and camo look like "gangsters" going to war with wildlife.
What we have here is another out of touch old guy who doesn't understand the
lay of the land anymore.
Stick to hunting stories and cookbooks for all our sakes.
Posted by: Fast Eddy | February 18, 2007 at 03:29 AM
Zumbo,
Firstly, I have canceled my subscription to your magazine, and will encourage
peers to cancel theirs as well.
Why? Owners of firearms have enough problems with the Feinstein's of the
world. For you to intentionally insult and divide the community of responsible
and legal firearms owners is not only irresponsible and ignorant, but also self
defeating.
Have you not been paying attention to movement against your so-called
sporting firearms which are increasingly being classified by gun grabbers as
sniper rifles with cop killing bullets/armor piercing bullets. I promise you, once
"assault weapons" are outlawed, you're precious bolt action weapons will be
next. Gun grabbers can not be appeased.
You are sad sir. You are more dangerous to the 2nd Amendment than the
Democratic Party. I will voice my concerns to your advertisers and the NRA. I
will advocate and promote boycotting your magazine every chance I get until
you issue a formal apology or you're fired.
Posted by: Armand | February 18, 2007 at 03:30 AM
Thanks for being a complete asshat Jim in helping divide the gun community.
Elitist prick! Hope you are out of a job.
Posted by: Another Arfcommer | February 18, 2007 at 03:30 AM
Jim Zumbo writes " Let's divorce ourselves from them" Fair enough but I will be
telling Remington arms, swarovski optics, mossyoak camo and Gerber knives
to divorce themselves from YOU
2/19/2007
Page 138 of 853
Posted by: waterfowlmaniack | February 18, 2007 at 03:31 AM
THE SAME REASON THAT YOU SHOULD BE SCARED THAT THEY ARE
GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS. If we don't pull together and stop absentminded comments like your own and vote against this type of legislation, they
WILL come after YOUR guns next. I guarantee it.
Posted by: pvc | February 18, 2007 at 03:32 AM
I can't believe I just read that.
The Second Amendment to the Constitution is not some mere technicality, nor
does it specify exactly what uses an 'arm' is to have. We can use them as we
see fit so long as we do not break any law in the doing. We can keep and bear
them and use them, or not, as we deem necessary. That someone should so
badly judge the legal use of a firearm by another is a horrifying thought.
Political Correctness has no place and should have no place inside the
confines of our most precious civil right. While I myself do not own an AR style
weapon, nor would I hunt with one myself, I certainly reserve that right should I
so chose to and providing the laws of my State do not forbid it. As a precision
rifle shooter myself, I can certainly appreciate the craftsmanship that goes into
a Baer AR-style firearm, and yes, they do make one with a varmint weight
barrel. That anyone anywhere to the right of Joe Stalin should equate that
weapon with a 'terrorist's' gun is simply outrageous.
Zumbo should do the right thing today and not only apologize to all of his
readers but resign and go into retirement as well. In a mere few hundred words,
he has done more damage to the legal gun owner's cause than any selfrighteous and delusional left-winger has in decades. Perhaps there's an
opening with the Brady Campaign for him.
Rod C. Venger (USAPatriot) Colorado Springs.
Posted by: Rod C. Venger (USAPatriot) | February 18, 2007 at 03:32 AM
Thank you for your assistance in getting terrorist weapons out of the hands of
children.
Posted by: Sarah Brady
HUH????
2/19/2007
Page 139 of 853
Ask the law abiding citizens of New Orleans who still have not gotten their's
back yet!!
SHEEP!!
Posted by: Disgusted | February 18, 2007 at 03:34 AM
It is truly disgusting to see a fellow hunter/gun enthusiast attack his fellow
sportsman because he does not care for the rifle they like. The Brady Bunch
will be happy to know that their campaign of lies and propaganda has been
swallowed hook, line and sinker by you for further dispersal to the masses via
Outdoor Life. Biased, uninformed and elitist snobs such as yourself is why
gunowners don't stand much of a chance in this country against those who
would ban a lawful person's right to keep and bear arms. You sicken me.
Posted by: Monte Kernell | February 18, 2007 at 03:35 AM
Jake again writes:
Tories like you said the same thing to Revere, Jefferson, Hamilton, Franklin,
and quite a few others you will no doubt study in school in a few years.
Posted by: NSA | February 18, 2007 at 03:35 AM
Gee, nice article. Sarah Brady would be proud of you. I hope that you realize sir
that once they get rid of our "assault weapons" or "terrorist weapons", that they
will want your "scoped-equipped sniper rifles" next.
For an outdoor writer, you are the best tool(and I do mean "tool")that the antigunners have, and I'm sure some granola-crunching gun-grabber is sitting at
home writing an e-mail or blog post right now saying "Look! we are winning!
even an Outdoor Life writer hates assault weapons!"
Thanks alot, asshat
I just got back into my chair after reading that one. Just about died.
Joshua Howell | February 18, 2007 at 03:27 AM
We will have to call Jake, Sir Writes alot, but with no thought, or brain to be
exact. I can't believe he isn't a plant.
We will have to call Jake, Sir Writes alot, but with no thought, or brain to be
exact. I can't believe he isn't a plant.
2/19/2007
Page 140 of 853
I honestly can't believe what I have read here. Jim Zumbo bashing what he
calls an assualt rifle? How can you be so ignorant?
How is a rifle like an AR, AK, Mini 14 or other semi auto rifles bad? When used
in hunting, they fire one round per trigger pull, just like a bolt action, lever
action, or pump action rifle. Is it because they extract the round without manual
manipulation?
That makes no sense. I thought that Jim Zumbo would be sensible enough to
know that it's not the gun that's evil, it's the person, but I guess not.
What next Jim? Perhaps blaming guns for killing people?
Surely you would also realize that a 30-30, 30-06, .308, .270 or many other
various calibers commonly used by hunters are more powerful than a 55
grain .223/5.56 bullet shot from an AR, or a 115 grain 7.62x39 bullet that an AK
and it's variants use. But I guess not.
Frankly, anyone ignorant enough to be scared of what you term an assault rifle
(assualt rifles are generally fully auto Jim, and as we all know, illegal to hunt
with) would also be scared of guns in general.
I used to hold you in high regard Jim, but it's amazing how one spat of
ignorance can change one's opinion, isn't it?
Do some research on the guns you condemn. Maybe then your ignorance on
the subject will be cured...
Posted by: Kyle Hirschi | February 18, 2007 at 03:40 AM
Since I have never purchased your magazine you have not profited from me. I
have read it in the barber shop though. I won't be doing that again. YOU
screwed up buddy. YOU said the wrong stuff to the wrong people. If you read
the comments to this blog you will see how many people know better than you.
If you can put some good spin to it you can always say: "Hardy, har..I KNEW
the people who read my articles are good gun owners and I KNEW they
wouldn't stand for that crap I was puttin' out. I just did it to show you how strong
you all are and to see if you were payin' close attention." Then you need to
STFU! Start writing about other aspects of things that happen outdoors, like
'How To Find Shade While Hunting' or '35 New Recipes For Wild Chicken' or
even 'How To Get The Best Mileage On Your Hunting Rig' but stay away from
anything about guns. You don't know enough to write about them. You know
only enough to be dangerous to the already threatened gun owners of America.
I know, you only care about hunting, so do us all a favor and stay away from
the tools that hunters use. You can read these posts (you won't) and see how
deep you stepped into it but for now, just stop writing about firearms. You are
2/19/2007
Page 141 of 853
going to put us at more risk if you say anymore. Sir, with all due respect, you
have outlived your usefulness at promoting any kind of outdoor life. Retire on
the kickbacks from the anti-gun lobby and get a real life.
-watchinPosted by: watchin | February 18, 2007 at 03:41 AM
You sir, are a disgrace, and beneath contempt.
Here's hoping Remington and Outdoor Life divorce themselves from YOU!
Posted by: Xavier | February 18, 2007 at 03:41 AM
You're calling me a terrorist? I am a "Purist at heart" I prefer lever, bolt, and
dare I say...Single Shot Rifles. However, I pack one of your "Terrorist" rifles in
the field 4-6 months out of the year. No, I'm not talking about the "Game Field".
I would rather not hunt with an AK or AR. However, calling them "Terrorist"
rifles? Gimme a break.
I guess Billary Clinton or Barak Obama is going to have you speak at their
fundraising dinners.
I hope the nice folks at Outdoor Life FIRES you!
Posted by: LAR | February 18, 2007 at 03:42 AM
Pathetic
Posted by: ED | February 18, 2007 at 03:43 AM
No more Remington
No more Outdoor Life
Posted by: Sick and Tired | February 18, 2007 at 03:43 AM
Good job Jim, you're falling right into the divide & conquer tactic the gun
banners use. If you hunters don't support my right to own a 'terrorist' rifle, do
you think I'm going to support your rights to continue hunting? Not a chance.
We either stick together or we all descend into a very dark future.
Posted by: SteVe | February 18, 2007 at 03:43 AM
here is the contact page for the letters to the editor. I am writing all four of them.
Let them parley the piles of emails they will get.
Everyone click on this link, and begin typing
http://www.outdoorlife.com/outdoor/contactus
Your animal murdering rights are not protected by the 2nd Amendment. My
right to own "terrorist" rifles are.
2/19/2007
Page 142 of 853
You're a grumpy old man and your opinions are a danger to the very sports that
your sponsors are responsible for.
I hope you get fired, your hunting buddies disown you, and the NRA scold you
and publicly humiliate you.
You sir, are a disgrace to our nation.
Posted by: Mike B. | February 18, 2007 at 03:44 AM
You are a moron!
You're so stupid, you sleep with a measuring tape to see how long you sleep.
You're a despicable fat ass too.
Posted by: George | February 18, 2007 at 03:46 AM
Yo Dumbo...er Zumbo,you friggen elitist snob pr-ick.
Looks like the damn, gun grabbers are infiltrating our ranks, doesn't matter
much as we can see the scum a mile away.
BTW, real smooth OL and Rem, your now on countless thousands black list
along with the rest of the anti-2nd amendment crowd.
Posted by: Mr.T | February 18, 2007 at 03:47 AM
here is the contact page for the letters to the editor. I am writing all four of them.
Let them parley the piles of emails they will get.
Everyone click on this link, and begin typing
Sir, your statements are treasonous. ALL firearms are killing implements
regardless of their configuration. Terms such as “Sporting purpose” and
“Assault Rifle” were coined by fearful individuals who are slowly chipping away
at OUR Second amendment right through unconstitutional legislation. Buying
into these cowardly peoples lies and supporting their misguided viewpoint will
get you nothing. Eventually they will come for your firearms, and then your
precious little hobby will be gone. For some of us, firearms are not only just a
hobby, but a means of defense and a form of “checks and balances” to keep
our governing body honest. This is reason for the Second Amendment. Read
the writings of Thomas Jefferson. By categorizing the very weapon that our own
armed forces use to defend our freedom as a “Terrorist rifle”. You have
alienated a huge portion of the rest of the shooting community, plus those
people in the armed forces and law enforcement. In fact you are stating that all
these people are “Terrorists” with your statement. That is treason.
2/19/2007
Page 143 of 853
Posted by: 2nd AmendmentRights | February 18, 2007 at 03:48 AM
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Don't know about you guys... but until Jimbo is dropped like a hot rock and
Remington says sorry.
My AR will NOT EAT Remington .223 ammo
____
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Posted by: offers | February 18, 2007 at 03:50 AM
Wow, this hurts. A man of his stature in the firearms/hunting world. He
obviously carries a big knife, b/c he just stuck it in thousands of his brothers
backs. Judas.
Posted by: Ashamed To Have Read This | February 18, 2007 at 03:51 AM
Bubba,
that was one of the most ignorant and asinine commentaries I've ever read.
So you'd like to band "assault rifles" from hunting? Reality check: they're
ALREADY banned.
Assault rifles are fully-automatic weapons of war, not semi-auto guns that have
metal and plastic instead of wood for stocks and look funny to hicks.
And if .30-30's are "underpowered," why do you suppose they've killed more
deer than anything else out there?
Posted by: troy2000 | February 18, 2007 at 03:52 AM
I will never buy another remington arm again. I think i'll stick to
Bushmaster,Armilite,DSA,Springfeild Armory. The 2nd Amendment has nothing
to do w/ hunting. It has everything to do w/ owning military style arms. The real
terrorist here is Zumbo, he want's to take away our right to defend ourself's
from those that would use evil against us, Be they forign or domestic.Btw i
should sell my 870 because ill calls it an assault shotgun!!!!Also the NRA
should drop their contract with the Outdoor chanel I'm a member I think i'll ask.
Posted by: Jason Miller | February 18, 2007 at 03:52 AM
The second amendment has absoltlutely nothing to do with hunting and
everything to do with self-defense and national defense.I enjoy hunting with my
300 SAUM but it's a hobby piece utilizing outdated technology while my
2/19/2007
Page 144 of 853
Armalite AR10 308 is a modern, accurate, self loading firearm that is my
"Liberty Teeth" and protected under the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States of America and I will give up my obsolete Remington Sendero
long before I give up my AR10 because real Americans have their priorities in
the right place.
PS:By advocating a position against the 2nd Amendment you have labeled
yourself a terrorist sympathizer and should be censured by the entire shooting
industry and gun rights industry.
You can have fun shooting tame Elk in a fenced yard while I wait for years to
get an Elk tag and take one in the wild like a real man ;)
Posted by: Mike Froman | February 18, 2007 at 03:52 AM
Idiot
Posted by: Insulted | February 18, 2007 at 03:53 AM
Can you say 'backfired', Dumbo?
Good luck with your new career as a walmart greeter
I plan to continue enjoying my 2nd ammendment rights, and shoot my evil AR15's and AK's.
Zumbo, you suck!!
Posted by: Fred | February 18, 2007 at 03:55 AM
Lay off the glue Jumbo!
I have one weapon and many firearms, i feel that referring to my firearms as
weapons, assault rifles or as you call them Terrorist Weapons implies an
intended use. The one i currently refer to as a weapon is my USP 40 that i keep
near my bed.
Who's side are you on? we certainly don't need another label attached to the
AR to fuel the gun grabbers, when they get their hands on our AR's do you
thing they will stop there? nope! it will only be one step closer to them going
after our bolt guns
Posted by: Ed | February 18, 2007 at 03:55 AM
Bubba,
that was one of the most ignorant and asinine commentaries I've ever read.
So you'd like to ban "assault rifles" from hunting? Reality check: they're
ALREADY banned.
Assault rifles are fully-automatic weapons of war, not semi-auto guns that have
2/19/2007
Page 145 of 853
metal and plastic instead of wood for stocks, and look funny to hicks like you.
And if .30-30's are "underpowered," why do you suppose they've killed more
deer than anything else out there?
All my guns happen to be machined steel and wood with bolt actions, but that's
an aesthetic choice on my part; I think they're pretty and feel good. I certainly
don't think the others are "terrorist guns."
Nice to know you believe th M-16 carried by our troops is a "terrorist weapon."
Posted by: troy2000 | February 18, 2007 at 03:55 AM
Hey, Zumbo, you fucking Commi! You are a disgrace as is everyone else for
being ignorant to the type of rifle one chooses to hunt game with. If I want to go
and shoot deer, coyotes, or hogs with my AR, I'm going to do it. Why? Because
it's my right as an American citizen and member of the Armed Forces. If you
don't like, that's fine, but don't try to take away or bash my right(s) that I and
others help to keep free. You Jim are one of the Domestic Enemies, as are the
antigunners, that are in the Oath of Enlistment.
Posted by: DLE88 | February 18, 2007 at 03:56 AM
I think you need to go to your nearest US military base and ask for a wake up
slap. Then you need to read the Constitution, and read real slow for the word
"hunting" in the 2nd Amendment. I am a hunter. I am also a rifleman who uses
AR and other semi automatic weapons regularly. If these are "terrorist rifles",
then are you calling me, a law abiding, Constitution defending, family man a
terrorist? I am cancelling my subscription to Outdoor Life, and writing to the
magazines key advertisers about my disgust for you and your ingnorant, antiConstitutional sewage of an article. You owe a lot of people an apology, and
you are in desperate need of an education.
Posted by: Doug | February 18, 2007 at 03:58 AM
Hunters say, "There is no reason to own a Assault Rifle." Some Hunters now
say, “there is no justified time to hunt with an Assault Rifle.”
Hello…the 2nd wasn’t given to us so we could hunt.
Well I say, The 2nd Amendment only provides for a “Well regulated militia”…it
doesn’t give a hunter the right to own a lever action, bolt action, single shot or
anything…. ONLY the Militia for the Defense of the state, may use and own
firearms…So ban the lever actions, bolt actions, and single shots. The cannot
be used effectively in modern combat.
I’m very serious here too. Guess what idiot…that is EXACTLY what the gun
control groups are pushing now. So if they get their way YOU (hunters) lose.
How dare you call me a terrorist? I have put my life on the line for years
2/19/2007
Page 146 of 853
protecting YOUR rights and freedoms…and this is how you repay me? Calling
me a Terrorist. I don’t care what you think of GW Bush and the conflict in the
Middle East, to call us; The United States Military terrorist… using terrorist
weapons is disgusting. You don’t deserver the Bill of Rights.
Posted by: JohnJ | February 18, 2007 at 03:59 AM
Oh, by the way, please stay the hell out of my state.
Besides, I think you might get scared if you stay around here too long, 'cuz I
see lots of owners of those evil 'terrorist' weapons around here. And yes, some
of them are even hunters...crazy, I know
Wow! Don't you have to have your articles approved before they're published?
If so and someone has then they need to be fired also.
Posted by: Larry | February 18, 2007 at 04:03 AM
Well, I guess it’s nice to know what Remington’s thinking about in these postelection days. Taking advantage of the situation to ban products Remington
doesn’t sell.
Better stock up on what ever Remington product you use to wax your wood
Zimbo. When word gets they may not be around much longer.
Posted by: Jim | February 18, 2007 at 04:03 AM
Good luck in retirement Jim,
I can guarantee remington and outdoorlife won't stand behind you. That would
take guts, and money means more than loyalty in today's world.
Posted by: rem870 | February 18, 2007 at 04:03 AM
Gun snobbery is one thing. But to actively seek to legislate one's gun
snobbery... dishonorable and quite base.
I've taken deer and elk with my FAL, as well as spending a great deal of quality
time at the range with it. I also own a Holland & Holland double rifle. I enjoy
them both. Both are finely made rifles, just with different design priorities.
Yes Mr. Zumbo, you are a gun snob. Nothing wrong with being a gun snob, I'm
a bit of one myself. But when you seek to use legislative force to push your
snobbery on others, you cross the line from mere snobbery, to bigotry.
Posted by: HiroProX | February 18, 2007 at 04:05 AM
You have no idea of what you are talking about. An AR-15 a terrorist rifle? Give
me a break. You appear to be one of the most ignorant excuses of a writer
about rifles of any sort. You should resign from writing articles, if this is all you
can do and write some trash that is truly wrong and just plain stupid. You have
2/19/2007
Page 147 of 853
the skewed views of some kind of old, senile idiot.
Posted by: Bill | February 18, 2007 at 04:08 AM
In addition to my previous comment
Suppose a black powder guy or Archer suggest for whatever reason that we do
away with bolt guns, do you thing your response would be similar to the ones
above?
I'm done this pisses me off so bad i'm boiling, another lost subscription here
Pure & utter ignorance! I can only hope your out of a job tomarrow and living
under a bridge. Given your stance on this issue I have absolutely no respect for
you or anyone that would employee you!
Posted by: Texasgunrights | February 18, 2007 at 04:10 AM
Just wait bonehead. It will be our black rifles first, THEN your SNIPER rifle.
That's right Jim, Your scoped Sniper rifle that can kill people at long distances..
Every type of weapon has been used in war INCLUDING your "hunting"
SNIPER RIFLE.
You're the kind of dope legislators like Schumer and Feinstein love.
Just dumb enough to think you'll be left with yours.
Posted by: RS | February 18, 2007 at 04:13 AM
It's obvious that "Jake" is Mr. Zumbo's and MS. Feinstein's illegitimate
daughter, so don't take her words too seriously. And I wonder if Mr. Zumbo can
get a job selling Remington Shavers? At least he'll have one friend - Britney.
Jake, dear, go back to sleep. Daddy Zumbo will still buy you a Barbie as soon
as his last kick-back check arrives.
Posted by: I'm still in SHOCK! | February 18, 2007 at 04:15 AM
Another "terrorist" subscription down.
Very disturbing to me, not to mention a regressionist and hoplophobic view on
your part. I am disappointed in you as a writer, thinker, leader, and firearm
owner.
Posted by: Sean | February 18, 2007 at 04:18 AM
Mr Zumbo,
I simply cannot believe that a firearms writer of your stature can suffer this kind
of historical disconnect. Do you not realize that most (if not all) of our current
"hunting" firearms were fathered by military arms of previous eras? That military
users, once they returned home, have ALWAYS bought and used arms similar
2/19/2007
Page 148 of 853
to those they used and encountered on battlefields around the globe? And yet
you would now deny this to the current and recent past generations.
Unbelievable.
Ironically, I see you ended your recent blog column/entry titled "More On Long
Range Shooting" this way:
Enjoy it, however you hunt."
Perhaps you could practice what you preach, just a little bit?
From a proud, ethical, retired military hunter using AR-style weapons...
Posted by: DJ | February 18, 2007 at 04:22 AM
I am truly AMAZED that such Anti 2nd Amendment garbage could come from
someone who should be defending it with every fiber of their being. You Mr.
Zumbo will not get one positive review from me, or any one I speak with at the
four shooting ranges I frequent, and compete at. Not one of us will see your
show on the Outdoor Channel, or purchase a magazine that mentions your
name. I urge others to spread the word as well, and I hope this blog will be your
swan song in the public eye!
Posted by: John M | February 18, 2007 at 04:22 AM
Ouch Zumbo, ouch.
Posted by: Burned... | February 18, 2007 at 04:23 AM
Renew Outdoor Life?
Not after reading this drivel.
Are you French?
"The Second Amendment ain't about duck huntin..."
Zumbo spelled sideways is Sarah Brady...
Posted by: Ernst | February 18, 2007 at 04:26 AM
First of all, most states only allow a 5 shot limit in the magazine to prevent
"spray and pray" with any firearm.
2/19/2007
Page 149 of 853
Second, the worst activity I have seen in public hunting lands and wildlife
management areas comes from those slob hunters, the evidence of which it
appears that the 12ga shotgun is popular. I rarely ever saw a pile of .223 or
7.62X39 out in the WMAs because Bubba got bored and picked a stump to
shoot at (and spook everything on four legs all the way to the next state).
But meanwhile it is quite common that every hunter owns an AR or AK variant,
even if they don't hunt with it. Naturally most hunters like to choose the right
tool for the job but honestly the AR and AK are great hunting firearms. And
anybody who has ever hunted wild boar in the sugar cane down in South
Florida who did not use an autoloader regretted it. I was one of them and I
ended up having to stab a boar to death.
No if you are the kind of fat, lazy, "Lincoln Navigator" hunter who thinks that
only the politically correct bolt-action is the way to go out in the field, then think
again. If you have $2000 of rifle and some nasty crap to get through, you will be
crying like a little girl when you get to the other side of that swamp or see what
your gun looks like the day after being caught in that blizzard. The AK and SKS
platform is made for all ranges of weather and horrible abuse. Sure it's not for a
guided hunt to Alaska to take out some mountain goat at 500 meters. And we
don't need to be told that.
Then there is the accuracy of the AR and it is perfect for varmints and small to
medium predators. We have a lot of ranges regularly holding 300m and 600m
matches with this platform and some include the other rifles as well like the
M1A and the FALs. All fine hunting rifles.
Yet the article seems to have that snobbish "I drive to my expensive guided
hunt with a Lincoln Navigator and am rich enough to still have guns even if we
had total gun control" mentality. What about all those people who want to hunt
yet cannot go out and afford that Remington? Do we tell them that this is an
exclusive sport like Golf perhaps? I would sooner see slobs get banned for their
activities rather than hunters be singled out for the types of rifles they have.
And those military rifles are made for some nasty places, and if you are not too
fat to leave a stand and go stalking through mud, snow, thickets, and every
other place the kinds of people who write articles like that are afraid to go (or
the guides won't take them because they are afraid their client will have a
cardiac incident and have to carry his big butt and expensive bolt-action back
out), then a military rifle is the best choice.
As far as the "image of hunters" is concerned, I say "Grow up". People are
going to think whatever they want about hunters no matter how much we try to
be nicey nicey and look all un-threatening. Lets see, many groups and
movements we despise constantly do in-your-face things to our society yet they
persist because of a compliant media and a political wing. Yet I see an article
2/19/2007
Page 150 of 853
here that say avert your eyes and fear them and don't use anything they don't
like, as if it makes a difference. They can do whatever they want, so we don't
need people in OUR OWN CAMP trying to do their work.
Finally, the enemy tried it before: dividing the hunting crowd and the more
militia-minded. They almost succeeded before hunters and patriots, most of
them being the same - except when someone writes and article like the one we
see here - realized what the ruse is. Sure ban those evil looking rifles that were
specifically designed to hurt kids and upset the Oprah Winfrey fan base and we
all knew they would never stop there. Even now they want to ban the .50 but
how far is that from a .338 Lapua? Some say the currently safe from
politics .338 Lapua is a better round than the .50BMG.
Articles like the one we have seen here are a disgrace. It is not informed and
makes the kind of assumptions only the Violence Policy Center and their
Hollywood prostitutes would make. At least it shows that there is still the risk of
the SNOB hunter who will watch everybody but themselves get disarmed so
long as they can grease a few politicians and/or get their politically correct or
super expensive rifles off the banned lists - until one gets stolen and used by
some nut or terrorist to "snipe" people. Then the rifle gets even more expensive
- but then they just go to Africa and get carried around by some little people.
We are all in this together, and we should be thankful to see that we have
amongst us some people who are not part of the struggle to maintain the
Second Amendment and the real tradition of hunting - that being the American
version of it, THAT ANY MAN can go hunting for it not being a "sport of kings".
Or people who think they are kingly enough to harbor ingnorance without
questioning themselves.
Posted by: Doktor Jeep | February 18, 2007 at 04:26 AM
How does it feel to know that you single-handedly put Remington Firearms out
of business by the ensuing boycott that is sure to follow your "article". I for one
will do my best to spread the word about this boycott of Remington products as
well as boycotting all your other sponsers until they fire your traitorous ass. I
think it might be time to retire in shame old man. Your losing it -- but then again
I never thought you had it anyway.
Posted by: gl | February 18, 2007 at 04:31 AM
;JHGUYR640)%^&$#VVuftyre+^$@
I Just Let my cat walk accross my keyboard
and he made more sense then that artical.
Posted by: James Townsend | February 18, 2007 at 04:31 AM
Semis are terrorist weapon ?!!?!!? WTH !! I use my WSAR10 as my main deer
2/19/2007
Page 151 of 853
rifle here in the wet brushy Pacific NW , Why ? Because the woods here are
hard on weapons and no telling when you'll come across a meth cooking
campsite or marijuana grow operation (of which I found a total of 11 in the past
15 years) believe me you don't want to be out here and get cornered with your
lil ole 4 rnd bolt action rifle ! I hunt with a 5 rnd with a couple of 30 rounders in
as backup . MORE inportantly the 2ND amendment ISN'T about hunting !
Posted by: Mortech | February 18, 2007 at 04:31 AM
Wow. Zumbo, huh. Like many others, I had not heard of you before today. I
guess, because, I don't subscribe to so called "gun rags" and "hunting rags".
This kind of crap is all the more telling that these worthless publications are a
mere advertisement for liberal money making companies, and overpaid self
proclaimed hunting experts.
I hunt, yes, but I don't need an "editor" from a magazine to tell me how to do it.
I own many rifles, shotguns, and pistols. I use a few of them everyday for my
paying job. I depend on guns for my livelyhood. I respect all firearm types and
their owners. As firearm owners, we share a common understanding of sport,
hobby, and freedom. Those that don't share that idealism have no place in the
editorial biz.
Zumbo, you have made it clear that you are a narrow minded, liberal, holier
than thou, hipocritical, idiot, and have no business telling REAL Americans,
what they should and shoudn't put in their gun safes. How dare you. Let me
ask, How many AR's were used in "terrorist" acts in the last ten years.....? I bet
zero.
Again, I don't subscribe to "gun and hunting rags" for this very bullcrap. But, my
attention was drawn to this betrayal of gunowners, by a forum, very dear to me.
I now will, make sure that I do not support ANY of the manufacturers that
support this person called Zumbo. I have seen the list of sponsorers, and I can
do without their products. I will also inform ALL of my gun owning associates
about these supporters and further diminish your support, Zumbo.
Good luck in the business that you betrayed.
Jim, How much have you donated to the Brady bunch?
Yup, A real ignorent gun snob, bought and paid for by those in the industry that
give him the goodies to play with. J.Z. He da man.
Unless Remington and Outdoor Life dis' this dope, I'm going to cancil my rifle
order and subscription.
Dan
2/19/2007
Page 152 of 853
Posted by: D. J. Kellar | February 18, 2007 at 04:36 AM
What a criminally ignorant statement you've made. For someone who,
ostensibly, knows about firearms, it's ponderous why you would debase an AR15 as a "terrorist rifle." Because, cosmetically, it's different?
Let's separate the action from the gun. Don't kid yourself, Zumbo: it's just as
likely that someone can commit an act of murder or terrorism with a bolt-action
rifle as they could with the AR-15.
I can only hope that the bulk of the comments here serve as an indicator of how
far off-base you are from the rest of your readership. Consider the use of the
backspace key the next time that you engage in empty sensationalism.
Posted by: Clayton Walker | February 18, 2007 at 04:39 AM
I would like to add my voice to those that have pointed out that Mr Zumbo is a
friend to the Anti- Constitutionalists.
Hunting is a very traditional and time honored part of mankind, calling it a sport
doesnt do its purpose in life justice.
BUT,the second amendment is NOT ABOUT HUNTING!!
I bet Mr Zumbo would get on his high horse if deer hunters publicly disclaimed
the sports of small varmint hunting as useless and cruel.
Posted by: Lamar Doolittle | February 18, 2007 at 04:39 AM
Wow didn't know being a Marine made me a "terrorist". I'm glad I have never
got this magazine.
For those who would like to let Remington know how you feel about Mr. Zumbo
calling millions of their customers "terrorists", here is their email contact form:
http://remington.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/remington.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php?
I've already let them know that if they continue to advertise on his blog, they've
seen my last dollar.
Matt
Posted by: Matt | February 18, 2007 at 04:41 AM
I was told of this blog and I couldn't believe it till i saw for my own eyes.
Did you get paid off or something? It must be something cause i dont think you
would take a bribe and i hope your not as ignorant as you sound.
Please be a student of history both ours and the rest of the worlds.
The first step in taking away guns/rights is to divide and then conquer.
They divide the types of guns up. They start by sectioning out hand guns. Then
2/19/2007
Page 153 of 853
the dreaded assault weapons from normal weapons.
Ignore the fact assault weapons are already illegal and prohibited to those who
jump the hoops and acquire them per the process. In fact the atf knows where
every legal automatic weapon is. yes every one because they have to get atf
approval and pay the tax on them.
After we get to this point we start to divide them up by features. It could be the
color the design the flash hider etc.
Now the first steps are done and the rest of the attack plan is implemented.
They start with hand guns. Those evil weapons with NO SPORTING
PURPOSE. They say there should be reasonable restrictions. Things like limits
of who can own where they can be carried etc. Then we may move on to
limiting the magazine capacity so mad men cant spray 15 rounds at a time.
Give the poor victims a chance to run while they reload after only ten rounds at
a time. A joke right?
Step by step we get to the complete loss of all handguns.
So they got rid of handguns and now they start in on long guns. Its the same
game plan. First reasonable restrictions. They again start with magazine
capacity to give the mass murder victims a chance to run while the attacker
reloads. Then the flash hider allows a sniper to conceal them selves. It is just
another step down the road. Now we move on to pistol grips because no
sporting weapons need pistol grips. So if we dont NEED these things lets get
rid of them. Try applying that logic to other things you enjoy in your life.
Now comes the cool part. They say that a certain type of action is dangerous
and they must save us from our selves. After all no hunters use semi automatic
weapons. Oops brain fart on my part cause they will never use the word semi
as automatic sounds better. Another one bites the dust. We have lost hand
guns then certain looking long guns then certain types of actions and that
should make the world safe. Thank god someone from california was there to
save me from my self.
On the road to save us from our self we have to march on. Now we are in
danger cause we are allowed to use certain calibers of weapons. We no longer
have anything but bolt action rifles and shotguns and single shot varieties of
each left. That damn 50 cal rifle. NO SPORTSMAN NEEDS A BULLET THAT
BIG. After all they just had a police officer talking about how 50 caliber
weapons can go thru a few police cars the officers vest the officer and kill your
mommy behind him. It doesnt matter that this event or one anywhere close has
ever happened, but we take away the ability to do so. Do you think they forgot
that most rifle rounds can do this? SHHHH THEY ARE SAVING THAT ONE
FOR LATER.
2/19/2007
Page 154 of 853
We now live in a world safe from our selves. Well no, because we still have
dangerous hi capacity bolt action weapons. Remember how much damage the
bolt action weapon can do and did in the world wars? All bolt actions must go.
At this point even most fence sitters start to get angry because we are now
touching real sportsman weapons. So they stop here ....well not quite. They pull
out the reasonable restrictions slogan that has worked so well in the past.
Long guns with pistol grips are not sporting weapons so they must go cause
they are really SNIPER weapons. I know cause i saw that movie where the
Russian sniper and German sniper used these types of weapons. But we
already took those. Um not all of them. every rifle that doesnt have a straight
stock and has the little palm swell in the stock to hold with your hands have a
pistol grip.
Don't believe me look up the democrats list of guns they wanted to ban just
before the 2004 election. this list included wording that would have coverd most
shotguns and rifles. the real scary part is the ATF not the elected officials say
what weapons are included in the wording of the bill.
Then the scopes are gone. after all a sniper uses a scope and traditional
hunters always used open sights till the beginning of the 1900's.
Since hunters sportsman target shooters dont engage in these activities we
should have a central area to safely store these weapons like say a police
station or"shooting clubs" . They try a few times to push this thru till finally they
do so.
Now we are all safe from ther evil inanimate gun and the irresponsible and well
meaning gun owner. Gosh darn i have to admit that all of us law abiding people
bow to the great law and have no more weapons except for the hunting or
target shooting activities. We have to go to the government run shooting clubs
or police stations to check out those guns.
You laugh and say this is absurd. It is kinda funny and stupid to think things will
go the way i said.
Remember that thing i said about being a student of history? Well this is Where
is comes into play. THIS EXACT SCENARIO HAS HAPPENED OVER AND
OVER AGAIN AROUND THE WORLD.This most prominently started with Hitler
in pre WWll europe.
YEP HITLER SURE PROTECTED HIS PEOPLE FROM CRIME. HELL HE
CARED SO MUCH HE COOKED MILLIONS OF THEM IN OVENS.
After Hitler and after wwll countries all over the world went thru the steps i
mentioned above. Sure it took years and in some cases decades but the end
2/19/2007
Page 155 of 853
result is just the same.
So where do we begin. Who decides what guns are good bad evil or
dangerous? More importantly where do we make them stop.
come on your smarter than this. arent you?
Posted by: chris allen | February 18, 2007 at 04:42 AM
Jim Z no support for you here. I disagree and think you have used very bad
judgement and poor choice of words. You know nothing about what you speak.
Too much of that going around these days. Lee
Posted by: Lee in ND | February 18, 2007 at 04:42 AM
About the only thing in this article that I agree with is that Jim Zumbo doesn't
have a clue.
Jim, your superaccurate "sporter" scoped rifle is nothing more than a sniper's
tool specifically designed to shoot innocent people from far away.
Here's how your article should have read:
Sniper Rifles For Hunters?
As I write this, I'm hunting coyotes in southeastern Wyoming with Joe
Treehugger, PR Manager for Big Rocks, Amy Birkenstock, who is senior
research engineer for Acme Clubs, and several writers. We're testing Big
Rock's brand new igneous models on coyotes.
I must be living in a vacuum. The guides on our hunt tell me that the use of
rifles with telescopic sights 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 "sniper" 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 sniper rifles that are "tackdrivers."
Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We
statement that hunters don't use sniper 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. These guns have absolutely
no sporting purpose and to most people they are a terrifying thing. Let's divorce
2/19/2007
Page 156 of 853
ourselves from them. I say game departments should ban them from the
praries and woods.
In my opinion, if you can't go naked into the woods and chase down a game
animal, bringing it down by throwing rocks, beating it with a wooden club, or
strangling it with your bare hands, then you have no business hunting.
Posted by: Bob | February 18, 2007 at 04:43 AM
Well, I think that we're pretty clear on zumbo's grasp of the 2nd. amendment. I
don't currently get Outdoor Life, and I won't in the future either. I'll be writting to
Remington next to let them know I won't be bothering to buy anything with their
name on it either. Just to be clear, YOU ASS SUCKING PARASITE, agreeing
with fienswine and company doesn't make you enlitened and reasonable. IT
JUST MAKES YOU A TRAITOROUS COWARD, JUST LIKE THE KOPO'S IN
AUSWITZ PRAYING ON THIER OWN. I won't pretend to speak for all gun
owners, but it looks like I speak for at least a few, we are all in the same boat
and you can get out and swim scum bag. I hear that you come to Colorado to
hunt upon occation. If so please look me up, I Elk hunt in area 48 and 49, I
drive a blue F-150. I would love to spit in your face, TRAITOR!
ummmm just kidding?
Posted by: Jim Dumbo | February 18, 2007 at 04:45 AM
There is a reason AR15.com is the largest firearms website in the world, Mr.
Zumbo.
Posted by: 82ndAbn | February 18, 2007 at 04:51 AM
"I must be living in a vacuum"
No, that's just what's inside your skull.
douchebag...
Mr. Zumbo,
I have always been a fan of yours and was shocked when I read your post
above. I now see you as part of the ever grown crowd of those that wish to do
the 2nd Amendment harm. You more than anyone should understand what is
at stake here and I'm saddened to know that one of my favorite outdoor
ambassadors is in fact an enemy of the 2nd Amendment.
The last time I looked, the 2nd Amendment wasn't about hunting and "sporting
firearms".
2/19/2007
Page 157 of 853
Sir, you have lost a supporter and fan today.
Posted by: Ray T. | February 18, 2007 at 04:56 AM
I'm glad you appreciate the time I spent in the Army carrying "terrorist"
weapons protecting your fat Elmer Fudd ass.
I hope you realize those of us who own "terrorist" weapons USED to buy a lot
of ammunition from your sponsor.
Posted by: JBR | February 18, 2007 at 04:57 AM
Jim, why don't you take a look a the FBI Statistics on Offenders and firearms.
According to the 1997 Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those
possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from a flea market or gun show for fewer than 2%
a retail store or pawnshop for about 12%
family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source for 80%
During the offense that brought them to prison, 15% of State inmates and 13%
of Federal inmates carried a handgun, and about 2%, a military-style
semiautomatic gun.
On average, State inmates possessing a firearm received sentences of 18
years, while those without a weapon had an average sentence of 12 years.
Among prisoners carrying a firearm during their crime, 40% of State inmates
and 56% of Federal inmates received a sentence enhancement because of the
firearm.
ssaults.
Also Incidents involving a firearm represented 9% of the 4.7 million violent
crimes of rape and sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault
in 2005.
These numbers are from the FBI.
A weapon design doesn't determine if it is an assualt weapon. How it is used is.
Start dealing with the criminals who use the WEAPONS (not assault weapon)
and you will solve the problem.
In posting my thoughts i almost forgot the most important thing.
Im sure jim doesnt care about what i think. I am just as sure that those who are
in business to sell to sportsman shooters and the like do care what i think and
WHERE I SPEND MY DOLLAR.
2/19/2007
Page 158 of 853
I AM SENDING JIM'S TRUE FEELINGS AS A GUN CONTROL ADVOCATE
TO EVERY PLACE I DO BUSINESS WITH AND EVERY PLACE THAT
SPONSORS JIM AND ANYTHING HE HAS TO DO.
I WILL TELL THEM THAT I WILL NOT SPEND A CENT TILL THEY DIVORCE
THEM SELVES FROM THOSE LIKE JIM THAT ADVOCATE GUN CONTROL.
There is nothing worse than a traitor and two faced betrayer of the shooting
sports. Sadly Jim is that man.
I may not spend much but i network with thousands of hunters and shooters
and interact with them daily at some level. They too feel as i do and that
amount of spending does matter
Posted by: chris allen | February 18, 2007 at 05:02 AM
"The AR-15 and the AK-47 are the guns of choice of drug dealers. Do you
really want to be associated with these people?"
So now I am a drug dealer. I am a terrorist and a drug dealer.
I can't believe that someone with such ignorance such as yourself could
possibly live long enough to learn to type, much less use a computer. I dearly
hope that you do not procreate.
Posted by: yekim | February 18, 2007 at 05:02 AM
You sound about as un-american as Hillary Klinton. A gun is a gun and does
the same end result. It is sad to think that your opinion will influence people to
believe that any gun is bad or wrong or even unsporting. After you ban one
then they will all follow you do realize that don't you. FU Idiot. Go back to
whatever Commie Country you came from. You POS
Posted by: onthedgeofmyseat | February 18, 2007 at 05:02 AM
Your kind of thinking is what will get all firearms baned.You should read the
Second Amendment.It aint about hunting.
All I can say is 'wow'.
In the struggle to keep our RKBA, the absolute WORST thing we as gun
owners can do is allow our rights to be tied to the wagon of hunting, as the
media so often tries to do (you don't need an AK for hunting, blah blah).
NEVER accept this from anyone, especially a politician - when he says he's for
'reasonable' gun control that 'won't affect hunting', that's a HUGE clue he has
no business being in a position of defending/upholding our Constitution,
because he obviously has no clue as to what it's about.
2/19/2007
Page 159 of 853
The second amendment says not word one about hunting. It is there to protect
us from the tyranny of the type ordinary armed citizens fought the British (and
WON) to be free of.
They gave us the Constitution to guarantee the PEOPLES rights, and LIMIT the
governments power. The Second Amendment truly guards all the others.
If I am ever in a position where I have to defend my Country, or our Constitution
from enemies (foreign or domestic), I really don't want to be limited to the guns
that you, dianne fineswine, or sarah brady approve of.
Don't be a fool.
Posted by: RKBA | February 18, 2007 at 05:05 AM
Jim,
I am very disappointed in your statements about the AR15 rifle.
I am a hunter, I also hold a CWL and I shoot AR15 rifles. So I guess I am a
terrorest also.
I firmly believe that if all firearm owners do not stand together, we lose the one
right, that keeps this country free. What you have done is to drive a wedge
deeper between the "fudds" and people like myself.
I could go on about the "fudds" but I wont, but if you do not stand with us, those
of us who own and shoot AR15 rifles, then when the day comes that we are
gone, your day will come and your bolt action rifles, will be labled sniper rifles,
and they to will be banned.
I can respect your view, and this is America, where you have the right to voice
your view, no matter how wrong it is.
But I have a right to my view, and can voice mine as well, I will start by stopping
my subscription to every magazine that prints your articles. I will encourage
others to do so as well. In addition I will also not support any sponsers of any
television program you may have, and will let them know as well.
You will now find just how much alot of good decent hard working people enjoy
the AR15 rifle. You have lost respect, and that is something you will have a
difficult time regaining.
In other words, you screwed the pooch ole boy.
Posted by: Rich | February 18, 2007 at 05:10 AM
WOW, not to say you must be narrow minded, Jim, but your post-it notes must
be less than an inch wide. Complete Fudd and an uninformed Fudd at that. Jim
can you say, Would you like fries with that.
2/19/2007
Page 160 of 853
Posted by: William | February 18, 2007 at 05:10 AM
zumbo,are you taking classes at berkley now?is sarah brady a good kisser?it
may be remington country where you're at,but not here after reading this this
article from you...my latest outdoor life just went in the trash...
Posted by: Alice Cooper | February 18, 2007 at 05:12 AM
Hey Zumbo, you familiar with the internet slang 'pwned'?
Well, you are now.
Go suck a 8====D, you dumb, fat, SOB
Sounds like Federal and BlackHills will profit from such stupidity. Because I'm
not shooting another box of remingtons.
Posted by: mark | February 18, 2007 at 05:15 AM
What with the quality problems that Remy has suffered over the last few years,
then they have some hack questioning uses of a type of rifle. Remy is batting a
1000%.
Mr Zumbo,
First of all, I find your above article to be really sad. You are obviously an
uninformed individual. Calling ar-15's terrorist rifles is ridiculous. Please do not
come crying to me when sarah brady takes your so called sporting rifles away
from you. I will not be reading any of your articles or buying any magazines with
your work in them EVER again.
Rod Johnson
Posted by: Rod | February 18, 2007 at 05:18 AM
I cant believe this IDIOT Jim "Dumbass" Zumbo! You are a stupid old fool. I
cant say anything better than my fellow AR-15 owners have already said but,
You need to retire and go to work for the Brady campaign. I will never buy
another ODL magazine as long as you are still writing for them!!! And I am
calling my cable provider to have ODL removed from my line up! Damn man we
are under assault for our weapon ownership and you just add fuel to the fire!
Posted by: Walter E. Powell JR | February 18, 2007 at 05:21 AM
I don't need to add much to what has already been said other than I will be
letting my subscripotion to your magazine expire this year.
I refuse to support anyone who is an enemy of our 2nd amendment and our
constitution.
2/19/2007
Page 161 of 853
Thanks for the heads up.
My money can be better spent elsewhere!
I bought an AR-15 with some of the money I earned fighting in a combat zone
(Iraq). Does that make me a terrorist?
Zumbo, normally I stay very tactful but you sir are a Dickhead and there is no
other way to say it.
Dear Remington, I called my local gun dealer yesterday and told him he was
basically a terrorist for selling AR-15's and AK's then I told him to cancel my
model 700 order.
I don't want an apology from Jim Zumbo and neither does anyone else;
damage control is for politicians, please just fire him and let him live in shame
with his "sporting rifles".
Thank you to everyone who also now thinks Jim Zumbo is a Dickhead. Let us
weed out our "bad eggs" on our own. Recognizing sheep in wolves clothing like
Jimmy boy should not go unnoticed.
Posted by: BigDave | February 18, 2007 at 05:27 AM
I wish columnists would thoroughly think things over before they write articles
that come not from emotion but from fact.
Mr. Zumbo should work for the NY Times because he has no credibility
whatsoever in my view. Remington might want to think about twice about
associating with this numbnut on the payroll for spouting such nonsense.
Posted by: A retired warrior from the US Armed Forces | February 18, 2007 at 05:30 AM
You are allowed to have an opinion. I know this because I cerfend that right
everyday I am given my "terrorist" weapon to defend this country as a member
of it's armed forces. Any weapon that allows a humane kill has it's place in a
hunting setting. AR15 style rifles are as good at taking game as your remington
bolt action is. I can't belive you were able to publish this unimformed BS.
Posted by: Joel | February 18, 2007 at 05:35 AM
Mr. Zumbo, Outdoor Life Magazine, and Remington. I do not hunt. Not because
I don't believe in it, but because I don't want to. I do however support the choice
of others to do so. Notice I said choice, not right. You have no right to hunt. I
however do have the right to keep and bear arms. It is my right that supports
your choice. My choice is to work hard to prevent fools like Mr. Zumbo from
allowing my rights to be infringed upon. I am a proud Law Enforcement Officer,
gun owner, and shooter. I hope Outdoor Life and Remington see these posts,
and act accordingly. God Bless America.
2/19/2007
Page 162 of 853
Posted by: sargespd | February 18, 2007 at 05:36 AM
Zumbo you are a fat, idiotic, dumbass. Please go screw yourself.
Posted by: AR15 fan | February 18, 2007 at 05:36 AM
Mr Zumbo,
The AR-15 has been allowed in the hands of many sportsmen for many years
and to inform you that it is an American made long gun used mainly by the
forces of the United States of America and it's allies!
To spew such drivel is a mis-guided, mindless and a poorly thought out effort to
divide the American shooting public!
Your writings are a fine example of Socialist/Communist rantings. Divide and
conquer is the technique and you sir do a fine job of it!
To set aside any one sub-group within the sporting arena is a very dangerous
process at best.
H. Michael
Posted by: H. Michael | February 18, 2007 at 05:39 AM
Your comments in this article have outraged just about everybody in our
shooting forum, 99 percent of the rifles I own are hunting rifles, here in Pa. we
are not allowed to use a semi auto rifle to hunt with. But I still own a couple!!!
Your comments, will, I assure you, lose Ourdoor Life many subscriptions in the
futuer, including mine!!
Posted by: Tim Krott | February 18, 2007 at 05:41 AM
Talking about aiding and abetting the enemy!...I thought I would never see one
of our own, sell us out to the other side.
A pox on your house, sir!
Posted by: SteveH | February 18, 2007 at 05:47 AM
I am a disabled veteran with a messed up wrist. It is far, far more comfortable
for me to shoot with a pistol grip than with traditional grips. Even MacMillans
are somewhat painful to use. That pretty much limits me to semi-auto military
pattern rifles.
But I guess my disability makes me a "terrorist" in your eyes since I don't drop
$4,000 on a uncomfortable bolt action and scope.
How you think that your "Sniper Rifle" is any different because it has poor
ergonomics is beyond me.
I won't spend another cent on Outdoor Life publications after reading this elitist
garbage.
2/19/2007
Page 163 of 853
Posted by: Dan Burris | February 18, 2007 at 05:50 AM
Please post your comments in Jim's other articles so everyone will know what
he is about!!
People like you are why all guns will one day be banned from the hands of all
civilians. The 2nd Amendment is not about "Hunting" and if you think that, you
are not only a fool, but a poor American. I will no longer purchase any
magazines you are associated with.
You are a disgrace to the firearms community.
Posted by: Shawn Nealon | February 18, 2007 at 05:55 AM
Mr.Zumbo
Everyone who enjoys firearms, regardless of their personal hobby, should be
sticking together.
The comments you made about the AR15,as I'm very sure you are aware, is
a .223 semi auto rifle, are very dissapointing to say the least.
AR15s are extremely accurate, and the .223 round is a very capable hunting
round. Most states, by law, limit the number of rounds a rifle can hold while
hunting. Therefore, the only difference between an AR and any other .223, is
purely cosmetic,which may be intimidating to some.
The truth of the matter is, all firearms are intimidating to those people who wish
to take them from us.
A case could be made that large bore "sporting" rifles have no sporting
purpose, due to their range, accuracy, and power. Most responsible shots
taken by hunters, due to their limitations, are within 100yds.
Who needs a rifle that can accurately shoot 500+yds? Only a sniper, intent on
killing innocent people from long distances. Sounds absurd, doesn't it?
You are a man who's views are respected in the firearm community, which,in
my opinion, makes your comments about the AR15, very irresponsible, and
damaging to all those who wish to protect The Right to keep and Bear Arms.
I would like to see a retraction of your statement concerning the AR15. You
certainly have every right not to do so, as I have the right to stop viewing the
Outdoorlife channel, or purchase products from your sponsors.
Thank you,
Alan
Posted by: Alan | February 18, 2007 at 05:55 AM
2/19/2007
Page 164 of 853
Zumbo is a dumbo.
A disgrace.
A moron.
Other than that, an amazing fellow!
Posted by: mateomasfeo | February 18, 2007 at 05:56 AM
Let's divorce ourselves from them Zumbo's. I say.
Talk about a heavy dose of self importance,,typical of most of the media left.
Must have been a nice fat check you got promised you sell out treasonous jerk.
Posted by: KenC | February 18, 2007 at 05:56 AM
You are officially now a has been, and OL, AND THEIR SPONSORS, is now in
bed w/the Brady Bunch.Couldn't have said it better myself than this below by
Kevin:
I am proud to see what others are writing here and I agree 100% with them.
You are (now were) a respected outdoor writer and you have a duty to all
outdoorsman to protect the second ammendment whether you like the rifle the
other guy uses or not.
I shoot thousands of rounds a year through my various ARs and other "tactical"
weapons and I am a better, safer, and more accurate marksman for it.
It never fails though that each time I go to the range I see a guy with the
average "hunting" rifle totally mishandling the weapon and creating an unsafe
shooting environment. Often times they can't hit their target at a reasonable
range. We, Mr. Zumbo, refer to them and people like you as Fudds.
So now you know that ARs are accurate and I know that you're a Fudd.
My subscription has been cancelled.
Posted by: Ted | February 18, 2007 at 05:58 AM
I have contacted Remington as well as other Outdoor life sponsors and notified
them I will no longer be purchasing their products.
I cannot support any companies that support the infringement of our
constitutional rights.
Wether by legislation or anti gun rhetoric spewed in a magazine article.
Won't be renewing My Outdoor life subscription either.
Posted by: DLC | February 18, 2007 at 06:03 AM
No need to say anything else as it's already been said. Remington and
Outdoorlife won't see anymore of my money.
2/19/2007
Page 165 of 853
To the AR guys who don't hunt: Don't judge all us hunters by the ramblings of
one uninformed, geriatric liberal.
Posted by: Awood | February 18, 2007 at 06:04 AM
Shame on you, Jim. And shame on me if I ever again spend one red cent to
buy a publication that would print, and therefore promote your gun-grabbibg
mentality.
Go stand over there next to Ted Kennedy....
Posted by: ima45dv8 | February 18, 2007 at 06:09 AM
I'm 66 years old and I hope I never get senile. Mr Zumbo, it's too late for you as
senility has arrived and kicked you in the butt. What thoughtless remarks to
make and at a time when the democrats are poised to pounce on we gun
owners. I suggest you retire and never write again, except for one last blog The retraction.
Posted by: Levergun shooter | February 18, 2007 at 06:12 AM
Upon completing the article above, the term came to mind..
"elitist."
I would have to concur with your observation that you may very well be, as you
put it, "living in a vacuum."
I sir, do not hunt. I choose not to. I however 100% support your desire to
exercise that ability along with your God given right to keep and bear arms,
regardless of its make or model.
As a hunter, one would think you would be far more interested in proper safety
education and learning then on your so called "image."
It is safe to state sir you have lost the focus of the 2nd Amendment and what it
entails. You also do poor service to Outdoor Life and Remington. I have read
Outdoor Life since I was a very young boy. It is beyond disappointing to read
your drivel attached to what I thought a peerless periodical.
Posted by: Johnny H. | February 18, 2007 at 06:16 AM
I cannot believe what I have just read, you have sold out to the anti-gun crowd,
insulted our heritage and freedoms, and joined the ranks of a magazine I will
never pick up again in my life until you sir do not put anymore articles in it.
PS I oun all kinds of firearms Winchesters, Brownings, Remingtons, etc etc and
some of my AR-15 will probably outshoot anything you own sir which is the
name of the game in ETHICAL HUNTING.
Posted by: David | February 18, 2007 at 06:17 AM
2/19/2007
Page 166 of 853
Once AR are banned, they'll come after bolt actions next, and it's astounding to
me that the writer of this article doesn't understand that.
The publishers of this magazine should require not just a knowledge of guns
and hunting, but also a fair degree of common sense before allowing someone
to write for this publication.
Mr.Zumbo,
My dad used to say that the best way to get your point across was to vote with
your wallet. Anybody who is as clueless as you are about the real meaning
behind the 2nd Amendment will NOT get any of my hard earned money.Nor will
any advertisers who should support you. Do you hear this Outdoor Life and
Remington?
Posted by: David J. Berend | February 18, 2007 at 06:22 AM
I cannot belive what you have stated
please review your comments and provide
a reply a.s.a.p.to all your readers
before you loose what is left.
Posted by: glenkey | February 18, 2007 at 06:23 AM
My state limits my MAGAZINE capacity to 5 rounds. My favorite hunting rifle is
an AK type firearm.
Ban a weapon because of how it looks?
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." Sigmund Freud, General Introduction to Psychoanalysis
I've read my last Outdoor Life and bought my last Remington product unless
you are fired immediately.
Mr. Zumbo, you are a moron. If I was running Remington, I would have started
to distance my company from you and your drivel YESTERDAY.
Dumbo's scoped bolt gun has no "reasonable relationship to the preservation or
efficiency of a well regulated militia", or is not "ordinary military equipment" as
written in US v. Miller, 1939.
The arms Zumbo paints as "terrorist" rifles are more in line with the intent of the
Second Amendment than his precious hunting gun.
Zumbo is a salty, closed-minded, elistist, old windbag. What is good, is only
2/19/2007
Page 167 of 853
what is good for Zumbo. He talks of bans like he himself is a protected class.
That "Sniper Rifle" is not immune from the gun grabbers. Amazing how
someone can be so old and yet so stupid.
Zumbo is sodded and ready for the pasture. You sir, are a disgrace to gun
owners everywhere.
Posted by: gun papa | February 18, 2007 at 06:30 AM
You are ignorant and misguided. You owe the gun community an apology.
Posted by: jvic | February 18, 2007 at 06:31 AM
I would like do know why you call it a "terrorist" rifle? When I think of how a
terrorist is armed I think of a ak-47 with WOOD on it, or a pkm?. I can't think of
the last time I saw the tali ban training with a ar15. Does this also make the
men and women of the united states armed forces who have bleed to defend
your right of free speech are terrorists?. If so I hope you live in California.
Posted by: BlindViper | February 18, 2007 at 06:36 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
Well, this is my first post to anyones BLOG. I read this article with great
distaste. I find it interesting that you were on a "junket" hunt and shoot with
Remington representatives, and chose that platform to stand up to these
"Terrorist" guns. I believe that labeling any firearm with such ridiculous tags is
irresponsible.
Guns don't kill people, people choose to kill people (Which is tragic and wrongbut let's be real about that). I don't see you calling Remington's sniper rifles the
tools of the devil (or a coward). If your trip was sponsored by Bushmaster or
Colt, I am sure you would have chosen your words quite differently.
I am a proud owner of traditional Model 70's and Model 700's (My personal
favorites). But as a Veteran, I also own and shoot a variety of those (Black)
guns you bastardize (Ironically my Remington 700 is Black also).
I believe that all human beings have a responsibility to be civil, and accountable
for their actions. It is their actions,not the tools they use, that earn them the
label of hobbyist, hunter, criminal, or terrorist. Your system of blaming a firearm
for your particular distaste, while allowed by the freedom of speech we enjoy, is
tainted by the politically slanted commentary in your article.
All men (and women) should be accountable for their actions. I enjoy my right
to keep and bear arms of my choosing, as you do. You are eroding that right
from an unexpected source. For that sir- I disagree with you!
Bruce
Posted by: Bruce | February 18, 2007 at 06:38 AM
2/19/2007
Page 168 of 853
Ethical hunters have fought for years against stereotyping. The very notion that
the "looks" a particular weapon has gives it a "place" and a "use" is one of the
biggest tools the 2nd amendment foes have used against us for years. Now,
my once respected author, you have joined the ranks of the clueless. The .223
caliber is the bullet of choice for many hunters for many different types of game,
REGARDLESS of the platform it is launched from.
I would go so far as to ask you if you would consider telling the Eugene Stoner,
countless vets myself included, that the rifle that he designed and they carry, is
nothing more than a "terrorist" rifle. Over the years, the AR15/M16 has evolved
into a sturdy accurate rifle now a favorite of competitive shooters in the U.S.
You have, in one simple article, gone from someone who I have respected for
years to someone who makes me wonder about the validity of anything you
have written. Your true colors are shining through right now Mr Zumbo. Mine
are red, white, and blue, and I cannot and will not support you, Outdoor Life or
Remington Arms any further until a full explanation or apology is issued.
Posted by: Nick | February 18, 2007 at 06:44 AM
I'm feelin ashamed now...Do any of y'all know how to rid myself of these types
of "terrorist weapons"...?...
Zumbo rhymes with Jumbo...
Rhymes with Gumbo...
Rhymes with Mutumbo...
...:}...
Posted by: The Law | February 18, 2007 at 06:45 AM
Wow! These are just the comments from overnight! I wonder what all-day
Sunday will bring?
Thanks for showing everyone what your true feelings are Jim. Gun owners
don't need friends like you.
Who is the better citizen? The civilian who owns the semi version of our
military's weapon (a "terrorist" rifle to you) or the guy who goes on an allexpense paid canned hunt to shoot animals he has no intention of consuming?
Who is the traitor?
You are nothing more than an ANTI GUN / Anti American, who has no
understanding of the Bill of Rights and our Constitution. I will never buy
Outdoor Life again while this idiot is with them.
Obviously cowardice and senility seem to be a Zumbo trait.
Posted by: Brian Woodworth | February 18, 2007 at 06:48 AM
2/19/2007
Page 169 of 853
http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=193751
I guess you should check out the link, then you can see one used for your type
of "sporting purpose", your ignorance and myopic view is disgusting and dare I
say ignorant!!!
Posted by: Clay | February 18, 2007 at 06:49 AM
I was going to post a comment, but the image of you with your sniper rifle has
made me feel faint.
Posted by: GerberSchwintz | February 18, 2007 at 06:50 AM
You have a right to your opinion, Jim- won by men with "terrorist" rifles.
Just don't expect me to fight for your children and grandchildren's right to keep
their 3-round bolt action.
I too will be contacting Outdoor Life and Remington on Monday.
Obviously Mr. "Coward" Zumbo has no clue when it comes to firearms. Using
his rationale we should ban any military type weapon from the field. I guess that
would include the Winchester Model 70 since it was a direct descendant from
that famous German Assault weapon the Mauser 1898. May as well include
Ruger 77's while you are at it. Oh....and since the Remington and Browning
autoloaders are descendants from the Browning BAR....those must go too.
Semi autos have no place in the field...right Zumbo Jumbo? I guess we should
ban the Colt 1911 .45 auto military style assault pistol too. Afterall....it is only
good for killing people right Zummy?
You hurt the gun owner cause. Semi Auto weapons have been in the field for
decades....Remember the Remington Model 6 auto loader with AK type safety
on the side of the rifle?
Some people are born to be idiots...and Zumbo is one of these. I retired from
the military and did not serve to watch our freedoms be eroded by idiots like
Zumbo. He is simply another communist wanting to take guns away so he can
be alone in the field. He is a retard when it comes to guns.
Too bad duels are out of the question.
Posted by: Brian Woodworth | February 18, 2007 at 06:55 AM
Outdoor life is owned by Time4 Media, a division of Time Inc.
It ain't just the writer.
Posted by: RKBA | February 18, 2007 at 06:57 AM
2/19/2007
Page 170 of 853
After reading Mr. Zumbo's atricle, I am simply amazed at the level of stupidity
and ignorance he displays.
To me, one definition of a "terrorist" would be someone who wants to disarm
law biding citizens of the United States.
Mr. Zumbo, you are a fool and a coward.
Posted by: BerlinVet | February 18, 2007 at 06:58 AM
Jim, have watched you for years and enjoyed your hunting shows. As a hunter I
defend the right of all gun owners, not just hunters. I am totally surprised and
amazed your your narrow minded statements. All gun owners, whether they be
hunters, paper puncher, long range shooters or 3 gun matchers, need to
support each other and breach the dam in any way. I am sure Ted Kennedy
and Pilosi will be in contact with you to testify against the nasty black rifles and
will hold you in great esteem, up to the point they want to ban high powered
rifles in general.
You owe a lot of people and apology on this one. You have the right to say
what you think, but in your position you have a greater duty to do what is right.
Posted by: RJ Wesseler | February 18, 2007 at 06:59 AM
Jim- will you be at the NRA convention?
If so, look for me. I'll be the guy in the aisle handing out thousands of copies of
this article.
"Bushmaster Varminter" Don't leave home without it.
Posted by: Doug Crouse | February 18, 2007 at 07:01 AM
I was taken by surprise when I read this. Well now you join the ranks of
Bennedict Arnold, as far the hunting family goes.
I have forwarded your commnets about being terrorist weapons to some
hunting partners currently in Iraq. Word travels quickly among th troops.
Needless to say Outdoor Life goes on the bottom of the cat box now. I will not
use any products endorsed by you.
I hope you enjoy being an outcast !
Jim,
Go bury your head in the sand!
You sir are a coward and disgrace! You must be lacking full mental capacity to
let slip something so stupid.
Posted by: Jon Beaudry | February 18, 2007 at 07:03 AM
2/19/2007
Page 171 of 853
Well, I'm glad to know that I and all of my previous fellow service members are
"terrorists" according to Jim.
After I retired from the U.S. Army I picked up an AR-15 because I could shoot it
well, I used it for hunting along with my more traditional “wood stocked” rifles. In
a year or so the wife will be retiring from her job and we were buying a house
out west and I will be doing some more long-range hunting. I was going to be
buying a Remington rifle in the next month or so, but as long as they have you
as a spokesman, no longer. Someone else will get my money.
I purchased a subscription to Outdoor Life for my Son-in-Law for Christmas,
I’ve already talked to him and that subscription along with mine, will be
cancelled Tuesday. By the way, he is headed back to Iraq in June for his third
tour there, armed of course with that “terrorist” M-16.
You might want to re-think your stance on “military type” weapons, Remington
rifles are used widely throughout the Military and Police forces as “Sniper
Rifles”, when the Brady’s and VPC get done banning semi-auto’s, they will be
coming for the “Cop Killing” sniper rifles next.
Posted by: Donald | February 18, 2007 at 07:04 AM
Perhaps one day someone will decide your rifles are too high powered and
they have too great a range. Perhaps one day someone will decide you can
buy your meat at the store and see the animals you hunt in magazines or on
t.v.. Perhaps one day Every round with a certain velocity in feet per second will
be outlawed by someone who thinks they are much too dangerous for civilains.
Perhaps one day someone will decide all rounds over a particular caliber size
or weight in grains is too large or too heavy for civilains to own.
Who will you blame for this, Jim? Will your narrow, ignorant, self righteous,
presuptuous, pompous, little mind recognize what you have helped to create?
Will your children and their children look back at what you wrote and recognize
that you, and people like you, helped create rifts that destroyed the rights of
gun owners, target shooters, hunters, and outdoors men and women?
Will your children and their children and the children of countless outdoors
people look back at this sort polarizing drivle and be proud of you?
I will be posting a link to this blog in every firearms and hunting forum I belong
to. I will be encouraging others to withdrawl their support of you, the shows you
appear on, publications you may write for, and the companies who sponsor
you.
I am ashamed to have ever watched your shows and read your words with any
kind of admiration. I am even ashamed I purchased your jerky spices for my
venison this year.
2/19/2007
Page 172 of 853
You are a disgrace to the culture and the people who need you.
Michael M.
Oklahoma
Posted by: Michael M. | February 18, 2007 at 07:05 AM
WHAT AN ASS CRACK
i'll bet you had the soccer mom's standing in line to give you a bj after that bs
artical and hilliary was in the front of the line
Posted by: dps | February 18, 2007 at 07:06 AM
So, when did you go on Sarah Brady's payroll? Or was it George Soros
himself?
Seems to me you've been bought by sombody.
It's like saying someone shouldn't use a particular type of truck or ATV because
you don't like the looks of it. Did you know that terrorists have actually used
American made vehicles to do their dirty deeds?
Under you're theory, we should research and catalog what makes and models
of vehicles had been used in terrorist activities and ban them from the roads.
You also might want to consider that your heroes, Brady, Soros,Schumer and
Clinton consider bolt action rifles as "sniper" weapons, and they are on the list
too. People like you make it easier to start plucking firearms from that list and
after they get the semi-autos, they'll be coming after yours. Get used to that
concept, you help them get ours and you're next.
Oh, I almost forgot, you're an idiot.
That was absolutely disgusting, and you sir, are a bigot. How does the outward
appearance of a rifle affect it's function? How are these firearms any different
from a Remington or Browning autoloader?
We as gun owners all need to stick together to prevent anything from being
taken away. You have just done us a great disservice.
Posted by: Adam Byrnes | February 18, 2007 at 07:09 AM
Good Lord Jim,
The whole point of freedom, in fact the definition could be, use what you want,
traditional or no.
By your logic people should get rid of their Glocks, their Toyota truck (they
seem to be popular in the middle east) etc., etc.
If we can't convince each other that owning this weapon or that weapon
automatically makes us a criminal or terrorist, we're doomed.
Posted by: Al | February 18, 2007 at 07:11 AM
2/19/2007
Page 173 of 853
Mr. Zumbo.
I will try to remain as cordial as possible. I am currently in Iraq working as a
private security contractor and i am a former U.S. Marine Infantryman.
I am currently carrying an "Assault Rifle". I have never been called a Terrorist
before so i can now put that down in my book of "First's".
I am an avid hunter as well as a competitive rifle and pistol shooter. It has been
my experience that the vast majority of people who own "Assault rifles" are
FAR more proficient at harvesting game than your typical hunter who shoots
one box of ammo per year sighting in his deer rifle and then
either misses his deer or Elk or ass shoots them and looses an animal.
Furthermore, you as a formerly respected 2nd ammendment advocate have a
duty to promote the hunting and shooting sports and have just stepped on your
dick.
As others have said i will no longer support you or any periodical that publishes
your work. I am sending this information to all my contacts and urging them to
do the same.
I as a former US Marine fully realize what it costs our American fighting men
and women to allow you to exercise YOUR 1st ammendment rights.
However i will NOT allow you to label me/them or any other firearms owner a
"Terrorist" because we choose to exercise our 2nd ammendment rights.
I am not sure if you fully understand the meaning of the 2nd ammendment so
let me spell it out for you.
IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT HUNTING, you would do well to remember that.
Posted by: Buck Thomas | February 18, 2007 at 07:13 AM
Well I'll add to the others too. You are an idiot. I hope I get to read about it
when your "high powered, scoped, deadly centerfire sniper rifle" (your hunting
rifle) is made illegal. You must have mush for brains.
Also, I served in northern Iraq for a year and my men defended themselves with
M-16's (not available to civilians without the BATF license and $20,000, by the
way), and I don't appreciate it being referred to as a terrorist rifle. By the way, I
will not be subscribing to Outdoor Life.
Posted by: John H | February 18, 2007 at 07:14 AM
Zumbo,I think you just hit the self destruct button!
Wha??? Huh???
2/19/2007
Page 174 of 853
Assault Rifle? Assault is a behavior, Zumbo, not a device.
Terrorist Rifle? The idiocy of that misnomer almost defies rebuttal. The weapon
that is used almost exclusively by the United States Military (in it's original
incarnation as the M-16) and her allies is a "terrorist rifle?" Does anyone at
Outdoor Life even proof-read your drivel?
You, sir, are a fine example of why our Second Ammendment rights in this
country are under such vicious and, sadly, effective attack.
"DIVIDE AND CONQUER!!!" they cry.
You just hide in the woodline and say, "Leave me alone, they're the ones with
the terrorist rifles."
Idiot.
Posted by: James Rowland | February 18, 2007 at 07:16 AM
Mr. Zumbo
I can't beleive that a suppose to be sportsman would attack the 2nd
Amendment as you have. This is despicable, and you should be ashamed to
call yourself a sportsman. I believe that instead of writing for Outdoor Life you
would fit in better with the folks at HGI and Sarah Brady. If I were the Editor at
Outdoor Life I wouldn't have even published such garbage, and would have
given you your walking papers for your anti-gun views. Sir, I see that you need
to educate yourself more about firearms, before you put your pen to paper,
because you are very uneducated about rifle types.
Ron
PS: I will trash any copy of Outdoor Life I see laying around, and I'll make sure
all of my fellow sportman are aware of your antigun veiws.
Posted by: Ron | February 18, 2007 at 07:17 AM
"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."
Hey, moron! Just for your information, anything that goes BANG! is enough to
terrorize the general public. Nowadays, a backfiring car or truck has people
diving for cover. An "assault" rifles, just like your vaunted "hunting" rifles are
tools, designed to provide the user with a means to garner the same results.
Must you now post an article turning the Remington crowd against the Savage
boys? What about revolvers and automatics? Which one do you find more
suitable for YOUR needs?
2/19/2007
Page 175 of 853
Turn your back on fellow shooters and sportsman now, when faced with hungry
wolves scratching at our doors, and you may soon find yourself locked out in
the cold, unarmed, and defenseless.
Regardless of your choice of firearm, this is a fight we need to stand united. Not
one in which we separate into bands of personal preference and go it alone.
Wake up, Mr.Zumbo--for soon even your "hunting" rifle will be the target of
another anti's agenda.
Zumbo you commie bastard,
What the hell are you thinking . There should be a boycot of all Remington and
other products that has you on their payroll until they fire you.
Posted by: Spot | February 18, 2007 at 07:17 AM
Zumbo you commie bastard,
What the hell are you thinking . There should be a boycot of all Remington and
other products that has you on their payroll until they fire you.
Posted by: Spot | February 18, 2007 at 07:18 AM
I may be wrong, but from your article, it seems that you feel rifles should only
be used for hunting. The second ammendment was not made to ensure
Zumbo's right to hunting, it was made to ensure that Zumbo and his fellow
Americans could defend themselves properly from enemies, foreign and
domestic. Today's gun owners are constantly portrayed in the media as either
terrorists or - pardon the expression - radical redneck fools. By categorizing the
AR-15 as the tool of a terrorist, based on the similarity of appearance with the
M-16, you have just played into the hands of that same anti-gun zealotry.
I go fishing with my kids. I do not hunt. I have no intention of using my AR-15 as
a hunting rifle, and anyone that could think of doing so for large game is a fool.
You have a right to say whatever you want about the AR-15, but remember that
you have just marginated a large sector of potential magazine buyers with that
comment, myself included, as I do not want my children to read magazines that
call me a terrorist. Thank you very much.
Posted by: Hernando Cardona | February 18, 2007 at 07:22 AM
Oh great.
Another supposed expert in what is "good for us" spouting off in a public forum
about 'what is good and proper'.
Hey Jim, You and your 'opinions' can go take a flying you know what.
I haven't read such ignorance in a so-called "PRO GUN" magazine in a long
2/19/2007
Page 176 of 853
time.
I guess as long as your "Sniper Rifles" are safe, you'll just act as a quisling to
the rest of us, right?
What a goddam cowardly, stupid and pandering attitude.
Quit your job, you have no business writing for the shooting press. Another
Elmer Fudd Hunter sellling the various target shooters right down the toilet.
Of course, the biggest toilet is this guy's word processor. Certainly enough crap
rolling around in it.
Posted by: Windsor | February 18, 2007 at 07:24 AM
Looks like your little attempt at persuasion turn in the wrong direction
"...I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity"
Seems the firearm community no longer has a place for you. Nice work on the
sexist comment too 'hunting fraternity' i suppose the hunting sorority still isnt
allowed to vote!?
He says "Let's divorce ourselves from []" ar-15 weilding terrorist"
I say Lets divorce ourselves from Jim Zumbo!
Posted by: Z71 | February 18, 2007 at 07:24 AM
Oh great.
Another supposed expert in what is "good for us" spouting off in a public forum
about 'what is good and proper'.
Hey Jim, You and your 'opinions' can go take a flying you know what.
I haven't read such ignorance in a so-called "PRO GUN" magazine in a long
time.
I guess as long as your "Sniper Rifles" are safe, you'll just act as a quisling to
the rest of us, right?
What a goddam cowardly, stupid and pandering attitude.
Quit your job, you have no business writing for the shooting press. Another
Elmer Fudd Hunter selling the various target shooters right down the toilet.
Of course, the biggest toilet is this guy's word processor. Certainly enough crap
rolling around in it.
Posted by: Windsor | February 18, 2007 at 07:27 AM
So, Jim Did the Exec's at Remington put
you up to writing this? Or did Sarah Brady?
2/19/2007
Page 177 of 853
You being a "mouthpiece" on hunting should
do a little more homework on the arms used in the field today. I hunt coyote
with the .223 and deer with the .308, want to guess what is the rifle type?
the .223 is being put down range from an A2. The .308 is be fired from a FN
FAL. I am required by law where I live to use 5 round mags for hunting.
Surprised?
Not near as much as I am over this elmer fugg mentality that seems to pouring
out of your article.
P.S. I don't own an "Assult Weapon".
These are Battle Rifles. Like the Garand, oh wait ain't this the rifle that made
the '06
cartridge so popular? A Battle Rifle?
Posted by: robert taylor | February 18, 2007 at 07:27 AM
I used an AR15 for years hunting wood chucks in MD..
It is probably your age that made you a jerk.
Posted by: Flat Broke | February 18, 2007 at 07:28 AM
Zumbo, you're an ingnorant fool.
So, Mr. Zumbo, would you consider this a "terrorist assault weapon"?
http://www.remingtonmilitary.com/m24sws.htm
Yes, us normal ol' civilians can buy it, complete with the full deployment
package.
Hopefully that upsets you greatly, especially the fact that this "long-range
precision sniper system" is based on the Remington 700. You have one of
those, right? Perhaps you need to get rid of it, since it's an evil "sniper weapon
system."
Do it, please, for all the little children.
Posted by: Steve F. | February 18, 2007 at 07:33 AM
I will not buy this magazine ever again. As the saying goes "with friends like
you who needs enemies" , you are pathetic .
Posted by: ron brown | February 18, 2007 at 07:34 AM
Unbelievable, Jim you are part of the problem. You have no clue what you are
talking about and when you are fighting to keep your single shot rifle and ask
why are they banning these look no farther than your own mirror.
2/19/2007
Page 178 of 853
Yes, I've hunted with military style rifles and yes I have hunter with my Sako
bolt action. I'll continue to do both.
Wake-up and smell the coffee Jim... and after that go out a get a clue.
Posted by: Stephen G | February 18, 2007 at 07:35 AM
Enjoy it, however you hunt."...Quote..Jim Zumbo in his article (blog) on long
range hunting.
What a shame. At times I actually liked reading some of his stuff...No more! A
career ruineed by just not thinking it through. He has spent way too much time
with Time Warner folks at cocktail parties and not enough time in Prairie Dog
towns (he didn'y know folks were using AR-15s for varminting???????!!!!)
Has anyone seen an official response from Remington? This could turn into the
same situation that hammered S&W during the Clinton administration. It could
spell the end of Remington if they don't do some needed damage control.
Posted by: RoyB | February 18, 2007 at 07:38 AM
Assault RifleS...Lumped in with a bunch of people that terrorize the world...
What Bull****. Ever hear of Camp Perry??? Ever hear of the CMP or NRA
national championships??? I'll buy nothing that Zumbo endorses.
Posted by: Brion Zutell | February 18, 2007 at 07:38 AM
Jim,
I personally think you should change the name of the column to
"Hunting With Dumbo".
Thanks for shooting all gun-owners in the
heart. I personally have never hunted, but
refuse to support any organization that
wishes to outlaw the sport. i.e. ASPCA etc.
Hopefully you'll live to see the day the "Brady Bunch" comes after your "High
Powered,Scoped Sniper Rifle.
Think before you pull the trigger and before
you open your mouth.
Adios Dumbo.
Posted by: Tim D. | February 18, 2007 at 07:39 AM
You, sir (Mr. Zumbro) are an ignorant old fart...you are an embarrassment to all
gun owners, and hunters alike, for that matter. You are either too simple or
2/19/2007
Page 179 of 853
grossly ignorant of the potential ramifications which your misguided comments
harbor…
Your comments only bode well for the antigun crowd…you do not deserve the
right to be called a hunter nor a gun owner – as truly educated sportsmen know
the negative impact of comments… just like yours.
Do us all a favor stay home and out of the public’s image – and quit writing your
drivel.
Disappointed in You.
Jim in Montana
Posted by: Made in Montana | February 18, 2007 at 07:40 AM
Oh my. This isn't workin' out the way you expected I'd imagine.
This link is making the circuit on the gun discussion boards, and I'd estimate
gun owners are just getting started on you.
Good luck. I completely disagree with you, I think your article is selfish and
extremely short-sighted, but I'm wishing you good luck nonetheless, because
you're going to need it.
Posted by: W.M.P. | February 18, 2007 at 07:41 AM
You, sir (Mr. Zumbro) are an ignorant old fart...you are an embarrassment to all
gun owners, and hunters alike, for that matter. You are either too simple or
grossly ignorant of the potential ramifications which your misguided comments
harbor…
Your comments only bode well for the antigun crowd…you do not deserve the
right to be called a hunter nor a gun owner – as truly educated sportsmen know
the negative impact of comments… just like yours.
Do us all a favor stay home and out of the public’s image – and quit writing your
drivel.
Disappointed in You.
Jim in Montana
Posted by: Made in Montana | February 18, 2007 at 07:41 AM
well theres another one for the ANTI GUN crowd, who has no understanding of
the Bill of Rights and our Constitution. I will never buy Outdoor Life again while
this idiot is with them. +1 for me
Posted by: clay | February 18, 2007 at 07:41 AM
Well Jim,
Your "Fudd" mentality is the greatest problem gun owners face in this
2/19/2007
Page 180 of 853
country....worse than the anti gun crowd. At least we know where the antis
stand, but people like you snipe at gun owners from the shadows, spewing
ridiculous accusations to try and bolster your defective positions.
Your "mental picture" of people walking the woods carrying an AR15 as
"commandos" is akin to the picture many have of Texans walking around with
sixguns strapped on their hips...it's just not so and for you to propagate such
BS is nothing short of insanity. You should seek professional help for your
mental delusions.
You just lost Remington another customer and I will encourage every gun
owner and hunter I know to boycott all Remington products due to your
ignorant and arrogant writings and Remington's approval of it to be published.
I guess neither you nor Remington had the foresight to think about how far and
wide your article would spread among gun owners via the internet. Well it's out
there and the vast majority of gun owners are disgusted by it. You have done
Remington and the gun owning community a grave disservice and I hope it
impacts both you and Remington financially. One thing is for sure, Remington
will never see a dime of my money again and you should think about a different
line of work.
Posted by: Tom McLughlin | February 18, 2007 at 07:41 AM
WOW, JUST WOW.....I guess I have no business hunting prarie dogs with my
heavy barreled AR15 that shoots groups just as tight as my Remington 700's
(sniper rifle, deer rifle, elk rifle, whatever rifle...those are next on the list after so
called assualt rifles then handguns to be banned in the states.)
I cant believe someones views like this would be posted, calling our troups
terrorists. Calling 100's of thousands of American citizens terrorists.
Posted by: Varmint Hunter | February 18, 2007 at 07:44 AM
I can not believe I am reading a blog like this from one of our own! Hey Zumbo
are you on the Brady payroll? You certainly talk like the enemy. You are their
best allies in the war against the 2nd amendment. You see they want to divide
our ranks and chip away at our rights. Sure they will come after the "assault
rifles" But I bet they will come after your "Sniper Rifles" too! Yep, terrorists use
snipe rifles too just like assault rifles!
And further more I take all your comments about AR15s as very insulting. I
have accomplished more with my AR15 in legitimate competition than you have
ever done with any rifle you have owned. I have won National Trophies with my
"assault Rifle" You can look it up for yourself.
John Sylvester
NRA HighMaster class Highpower rifle
2/19/2007
Page 181 of 853
NRA HighMaster Class Long Range
Distinguished Rifleman #1530
Multiple Presidents 100 winner at Camp Perry
Nathan Hale Trophy Winner: Camp Perry 2001
Alice Bull Trophy Winner: Camp Perry 2005
Soldier of Marathon Trophy winner 2005:
Previous Pa State Service Rifle Champion
NRA 792 club
How bout you Zumbo?
Posted by: John from Pa | February 18, 2007 at 07:45 AM
You are not the brightest bulb in the box....are ya' ???
What's next.. Calling our soldiers baby killers??
Supporting NAMBLA ????
It's time to put you out to pasture.
Posted by: Smith357 | February 18, 2007 at 07:48 AM
In today's society, I *feal* there is no need for civilians have firearms. You need
to quit terrorizing the poor animals anyway. You can get food from the store just
like everyone else. If you get in trouble, just call the police. After all, the
Government has the only people trained to handle those scary guns anyway.
And what's with this "Free Speech" thing anyway?? Our founding fathers
couldn't possibly have forseen this whole inter-tube and blohg thingie run amok.
If you want free speech, either get a box to stand on and go to the town square
or start a single page printing press in your basement. Otherwise, explain your
"Need" for free speech, apply for a permit, give up your fingerprints and wait for
your background check to come back. Oh, and if you must hunt (until I can
finally get it outlawed), use a musket.
Posted by: sheeple baaaa, baaaa | February 18, 2007 at 07:48 AM
I hate being mean to the old and feeble of mind but as a US Marine I take
offense to you calling us terrorist. Since the M16 is the primary organic weapon
of the USMC, USA, USAF and not the weapon of choice for traditional terrorist I
must assume that you are calling all of us that serve with the M16 and its
variants terrorist. I didn't realize left wing loons published gun blogs I guess you
learn something new everyday. Your comment is completely lacking proper
thought and is simply ridiculous. Your ignorance of the AR/M16 platform is
astounding.
To you 'traditionalist' when you start hunting with sharp sticks then you can start
bagging on newer firearms. Whatever bolt action wood beauty you are using is
traditional to YOU but it is not to those who hunted before you nor those who
2/19/2007
Page 182 of 853
came after you.
As a gunwriter it sickens me to see someone parroting the words of the anti
gun crowd you need to hang up your manual typwriter after all I sure hope you
are not using a modern word processing program on a PC. Because that would
be progress something a closed minded zombie like you obviously thumbs his
nose at.
You can be sure that after I hit send I will spend quality time researching any
company that allows your words to appear in their magazine, blogs, and other
publications. I will then ensure I will not put my hard earned money towards
anything that even remotely advertises in your presence. Outdoor Life for
certain will never get another penny from me.
You sir need to retire you have failed to keep up with the times and are just
repeating the anti gun left. You are a disgrace to shooting sports and you
slander our armed services by describing them as terrorist. Those of us who
fight terrorist instead of just chatting about them know that the AR15 or its
variants are not being used by them. So you either purposefully lied to further
your anti gun agenda or you write stupid controversial things to gain attention.
Either way you do the community a huge disservice. Only complete dirtbags
publicly degrade any choice lawful, standard weapon system. Those who think
only their way is the right way or their shooting sport is the good one need to
shut up instead of fueling the liberal wackos. I enjoy ALL shooting sports not
just those I participate in and I respect what the individual chooses. What a
concept huh, simply freakin amazing.
PS
Those of you who consider yourselves traditionalist get yourselves.
Posted by: John K | February 18, 2007 at 07:50 AM
"I say game departments should ban them from the praries and woods"
Then ban books, then ban free speach....wait, then you couldn't spew your
words on the public at large in a free press. "The 2nd amendment puts teeth in
all the others" I've heard it said, including the one one you use, the 1st.
"I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles."..."We don't need to be lumped into
the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious
concern."Like police departments and the US military? Come on. I always
thought we used it for defense and protection of our freedom both at home and
abroad.
What could have been a great little PR piece on Remington's .17 cal Spitfire,
turned into an ugly "assualt" on gun owners both in the defense enforcement
and hunting communities.
2/19/2007
Page 183 of 853
Mr. Zumbo,
For years, I have enjoyed your writing, but you are way off base on this one.
You are playing into the hands of the antis, who will come for your beloved bolt
action rifle after they take away all the "evil" assault rifles. After all, military
snipers have used the Winchester Model 70 and Remington 700 for years. Why
would any hunter have a legitimate need for one of these "man-killers"?
Wake up and smell the coffee. If you don't think it sporting to hunt with a gun
that looks to you like a terrorist weapon, then don't do it. It is one thing or game
departments to make laws prohibiting hunting big game with underpowered
calibers, but no one has any business making a law prohibiting a gun that
doesn't "look" sporting.
We all do stupid things and have stupid opinions - just look at Bill Ruger selfservingly playing into the antis' hands so that there wouldn't be as much foreign
competition for his Mini-14. See the light and retract this inane blog and we'll
forgive you and move on. If you persist in your anti-gun rhetoric, I, for one, will
cease being one of your readers.
Posted by: Steve W | February 18, 2007 at 07:52 AM
Well Mr Zumbo, I am disgusted....the 2nd ammendment ain't about hunting...I
will be contacting Remington and showing my displeasure. People like you will
be the death of this country. I hope you remember this when they come to take
your high-powered sniper rifle.
Posted by: xavier | February 18, 2007 at 07:54 AM
You said: "Auto rifles (especially those with large magazines) tend to promote a
"spray and pray"" You are either an anti in disguise, or dazed and confused.
The use of Remmington's headers, your close connection with Remmington?
Make me wonder if this is a bait for comment. Of course, maybe Remmington is
jelous that they do not do AR's while everyone else does. In that case, the use
of imported Russian manufactired arms by Remmington suports the saying that
the lady doth protest too much.
My Remington Police 700 LTR is less useful than super long hunting guns (for
hunting) but I am not Mr. money bags. I dislike buying a weapon for single
purpose. I compete, and use AR's for competition. Every service has moved in
that direction, many services have nearly or comletely stopped M1A use. The
use of your big guns in hunting is eactly the overkill you pine against. 300
Winmag against rodentia leave little to clean. Go ahead and take a .17 into the
woods. For your afety, select tame woods. You do not want to be in Texas
Scrub and annoy a Boar.
Fortunately, comments like yours tend to promote activism on the part of
2/19/2007
Page 184 of 853
regular gun joes. But a more uselul comment might have been a comment
about recent lapses in Remmington Quality Control on their regular and middle
products. I can not affort the high end one so I have not noticed any QC falws
there.
Posted by: SSG Rick DeGraffenreid | February 18, 2007 at 07:56 AM
Dear Remington,
Get rid of the cancer (Jim Zumbo).
Having him on you blog equates to John Edwards/Amanda Marcott.
Posted by: Jed1899 | February 18, 2007 at 07:57 AM
Jim, I have been a faithful subscriber to Outdoor Life since 1969. Outdoor Life
is the first magazine I remember picking up in a barber shop to read. My three
sons were brought up reading Outdoor Life.
I cannot believe I'm reading this drivel from an editor of Outdoor Life.
I'm not really sure why you have such a problem with military-styled rifles in the
woods. Around our house, we generally prefer other styles. However, my sons
and I regularly hunt with rifles such as the M1 Garand, the Mini-14, the Mosin
Nagant. Up until last year, one of my favorite deer rifles was a Remington 742.
What weapons are you really against? Military arms? Semi-auto? Black ones?
Plastic stocks? Ones with a pistol grip? Detachable magazines? Should the 3006 be banned from hunting, because it is a military round? The 223 Rem? The
308 Win? What body is going to decide what is a proper hunting tool? You?
Sitting in my basement right now is the darkest meanest killing machine the
Good Lord ever inspired man to put on this earth. When you open it up and
look into the action, it exudes an air of ultimate danger. For over 100 years,
men have fought wars with these beasts. I've got a bunch of them. You do too.
I'm talking about the Mauser action and all its derivatives. Take any one of
them, look at it seriously, and you'll see the killing machine of its day. The
action was built to kill men, not deer. The stock configuration is just a bobbed
configuration of a military stock. This was the black weapon of its day. Keep
going, and this is true of every rifle in your inventory and mine, right back to the
smokepoles.
Look, my esthetics tell me I look foolish toting an AR-15 variant around in the
woods, same as you. However,I'm not going to be foolish enough to tell others
to keep them home. As soon as I do that, I open up the possibility that
someone else is going to tell me my gun is ugly and that I need to keep it out of
the woods, or that it needs to be registered as an ugly gun, or that I need to
turn it in to the ugly gun authority, or that I need to wear a sign around my neck
saying that I own an ugly gun.
2/19/2007
Page 185 of 853
I've got news for you Jim: Hunting is ugly. You go out in the woods, level the
barrel at an animal, pull the trigger and rearrange its innards until it stops
breathing. Then you gut it, skin it and eat it. We do it despite it being ugly. We
probably do it, because it's ugly. I enjoy it. You enjoy it. A whole lot of us enjoy
it, and that's how you earn a living and that's how Outdoor Life sells magazines.
At least until now. Somewhere along the way, Jim, you and your magazine lost
touch with that reality. As of this writing, I swear to you that there will not be
another Outdoor Life magazine read in this household until you are no longer
associated with the magazine.
If you want me, you can find me. I post at the 24hourcampfire.com and several
other online venues.
Posted by: The shaman | February 18, 2007 at 07:59 AM
What a sad state of affairs. I am sorry you do not care for a firearm, which I
may or may not CHOOSE TO OWN. Fortunately we live in a country where we
are free to do just that. Given todays current events and political jockeying by
politicians we, as supporters of the 2nd Ammendment, need to be standing
united. This infighting is crap. I bet the folks over at HCI are giddy as hell
reading this slop.
Mr Zumbo, you look really professional with your responses. Way to keep this
as grown-up as possibe.....yeahhh....
Remington and Outdoor Life, until this hypocryte ceases to work for you, I can
assure you that you will not get a red-cent out of me.
SFC Ferguson-Iraq
BTW- I carry one of those "terrorist" guns for a living, what doeas that make
me?
Posted by: Joshua Ferguson | February 18, 2007 at 08:01 AM
SIGH!
And this from a sportsman's magazine?
Hell in a hand-basket, I tell you, Hell in a hand-basket.
I for one have no desire to go "Hunting with Jim Zumbo". Ever! Or read his
dribble again.
Unbelievable, I only thought people that flew planes into buildings called me a
terrorist. Now I have American companies and American firearms magazines
calling me a terrorist.
I guess I should just turn in all my guns to the police and thank them for saving
2/19/2007
Page 186 of 853
me from myself.
Mr. Zumbo,this is the absolute WORST thing I have ever seen in print from a
"gunwriter". It is so wrong and incorrect on so many levels I don't even know
where to begin. I'll spare any rude,impolite comments.
Just know that YOU have done US,and yourself, a great disservice and I hope
you will rethink your position.
Please remember that those "terrorist,assault" rifles are out there defending
your right to your opinion...
Posted by: bigt7mm | February 18, 2007 at 08:03 AM
Hmmm, 2 responses to your article in 2 days. Then the shooting community
finds out about your anti-Second Amendment views and hundreds of angry
posts in 6 hours. I doubt if Outdoor Life and Remington are going to find the
humor in your ignorant opinions. You just cost them business that their
marketing departments spend thousands for every month. If only 1 out of a 100
people that found out about this gun bashing article posted a message, think
about how much damage you just did to the very people that sign your check.
Most of these people will copy and forward this inflamatory article to their
friends. If these angry posters email their fellow sportsmen (as I certainly will),
just how many customers have you lost for your sponsors? 1000, 10,000,
100,000? As a business owner myself, just 1 would be enough for one of my
employees to get a pink slip.
Your twisted misunderstanding of the 2nd Amendment just cost Outdoor Life
and Remington at lot of very loyal customers that took them years to develop.
I'm sure the NRA will be impressed with this also.
Outdoor Life: Just lost a subscription renewal, and their channel (#606) will be
deleted from my TV programing.
Remington: Just lost ALL of my business, including the new 11-87 I've wanted
all winter. I've been a loyal Remington gun owner for over 20 years. What a
shame.
Thanks for being a disgusting scum bag,
Tater
Ft. Worth, TX
Posted by: TaterSalad | February 18, 2007 at 08:03 AM
That is without a doubt the most disgusting and disturbing piece written by
someone that should be on "our" side. Do you even care or have any concept
of what the 2nd admindment is all about? I wonder if Remington and Outdoor
Life supports your position? I know I support those that support me.
2/19/2007
Page 187 of 853
Ed
Posted by: ed | February 18, 2007 at 08:04 AM
What a jackass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: ama168 | February 18, 2007 at 08:05 AM
To Outdoor Life:
For your magazine to support such comments by Jim Zumbo shows just how
out of touch you are with the majority of your readers.
While he should be allowed to have his opinion, the airing of such a divisive
editorial plays right into the hands of those who would like to confiscate ALL
firearms.
Zumbo has willingly given ammunition to the growing anti-gun crowd to bolster
their current game plan of "Divide & Conquer". His ignorance and shortsightedness is very sad, and he has done a disservice to all who cherish their
2nd amendment rights.
As a consequence of his actions and your tacit support of them, not only will I
not peruse Outdoor Life in the future, I will actively encourage family, friends,
and associates to do the same.
I believe the only course of action that is acceptable to win back your lost
readers is an immediate and heartfelt apology from your magazine, and the
retirement of Jim Zumbo from any future editorial comments.
I hope that a fine publication like Outdoor Life, which I personally have
purchased for years, will do the right thing and support us when we need them
the most.
Thank you for your time.
Michael Miller
Posted by: Michael Miller | February 18, 2007 at 08:06 AM
I respect Mr. Zumbo's right to express his opinion -- this is U. S. of A., after all.
I do not, however, respect OutdoorLife's decision to publish this editorial in a
forum that claims to be an advocate for the shooting sports.
OutdoorLife just lost its presence in my office's reception area.
Mr. Zumbo, you are about as far out of touch with reality as an American can
get. An assault rifle, by definition, is a carbine chambered in an intermediate
calibre that is capable of automatic fire. AR-15's and AK variants can in no way
2/19/2007
Page 188 of 853
be confused with such firearms. As far as being "terrorist rifles", the association
is pernicious and ignorant on your part. As a matter of fact, some might even
consider the tone and content of your posting to be cultural terrorism. We must
all stand together Mr. Zumbo, or we will surely fall alone...whether you are
sporting a Drilling or an SKS. My bayonette is fixed, of that there is no doubt.
Posted by: James Easley | February 18, 2007 at 08:06 AM
Actually, it should be the other way around. The more the public sees these
"assault weapons" in the hands of good people, the more acceptable they
become. The reason that they have such a stigma is because people only see
them in war and crime films, or on the 6 o'clock news.
Get a life, Zumbo...
Posted by: PJC | February 18, 2007 at 08:10 AM
Mr Zumbo, Are you on the bradycampaign.org paid writers list?
I find it interesting that a 'hunter' & 'gun owner' quotes propaganda straight from
the likes of anti-gunners.
a. What are you going to do when P.E.T.A. lobbies so hard that knee jerk
politicians ban hunting?
b. Chicago just banned shotguns in Cook county.
c. Hunting rifles can be called sniper weapons just as easily by anti-gun law
makers.
d.What difference does the cosmetics make of a guns appearance when they
all are basically a delivery system for shooting a bullet where you aim it?
A gun is a tool, it's the shooter that determines the target. Any gun can be used
by a terrorist.
So by your emotional feelings all 'assault rifles' should all be banned is just
foolishness of your own preconceived bias & ignorance.
I shall NEVER support your magazine ever again. And make sure every progun board hears about your anti-gun views. ~ SHoRTY / St Louis, MO.
Posted by: SHoRTY | February 18, 2007 at 08:12 AM
I am a man of few words so all I will say is FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!
A terrorist is an individual or group of individuals, a rifle is a rifle, nothing
more...and you are an idiot. Pull your head out. Divided we fall.
Sterling Woodruff
North Carolina
Posted by: Sterling Woodruff | February 18, 2007 at 08:13 AM
Jim,
2/19/2007
Page 189 of 853
In my humble opinion, you are not a true American and you may want to
consider finding yourself a nice little home in Australia or the UK, where you
can be with like-minded individuals.
Whether a person decides to hunt with a stainless steel handgun, a wooden
stock rifle, or a rifle made of plastic and steel doesn't change anything. Much
the same as it doesn't change a person depending on the type of car they
drive, or type of home they live in, or anything else for that matter. If it does,
then there really wouldn't be a point in allowing any cars on the road that could
travel faster then 70 MPH. There also wouldn't be any reason to allow a family
of 4 to own a house that has more than 3 bedrooms. It's just crazy to think what
a family of 4 could do with a 3,000 square foot hous with 4-5 bedrooms. The
insanity of it.
On a closing note, I honestly hope you take some heat over your comments
from your employer and if you aren't told to pack it up, you should definitely
consider packing it up. You're negative attitude towards firearms isn't good for
the various advertisers that pay the bills and certainly isn't going to win you any
friends among firarmes enthusiasts.
Posted by: Very concerned American citizen | February 18, 2007 at 08:16 AM
What a stupid comment. First of all anything in the hands of a criminal is an
"assault weapon" whether it is a gun, knife or baseball bat. Zim Zumbo is just
using the same terminology of the leftest socialist that have long wanted to
band not only automatic firearms but firearms altogether. My Remington 870 is
just as much an assault weapon as my AR-15! You make Hilary Clinton and her
supporters proud! I'm not longer a subscriber to OL and this is one of the
reasons why.
Posted by: Doug Turney | February 18, 2007 at 08:17 AM
Jim,
Why don't you reply and defend the stance you have taken?
Outdoor life will never get another penny from me, anyone in the
sporting/hunting world that will not stand with gun owners is not a friend to us.
I called outdoorlife and cancelled my subscription after 22 years.
Posted by: 2nd amendment | February 18, 2007 at 08:17 AM
Hold on, So you say if I choose to use a rifle that doesn't meet your approval in
the "looks" dept. I should have the government legislate against me! I have a
M14(semi-auto)that is a tack driver(oh that's .308 cal.)that I use for big game. I
have a M4(AR15 carbine .223) with a small scope that will drive tacks also out
to 300m or so. I use that for varmints. I have a pump shotgun, all steel, M37
riotgun copy that I use for all my shotgun needs(12 ga.) With the proper choke
2/19/2007
Page 190 of 853
tube in it, it can take all legal shotgun game. I have AKM's also that I mostly
play with on the range but double as camp guns. If you had your way I couldn't
use any of my guns except my 91/30 Mosin sniper in 54R(probably not that one
either). You are a "GUN SNOB" and definately not what our community(gun
owners) need. Please tell me what the difference is at point of impact between
a semi-auto Remington in .223 and my M4 in 5.56X45..............Mike
Posted by: Mike (retired military 24 years) | February 18, 2007 at 08:17 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
It is sad indeed to see snobbish senility enter your brain.
Liberals want this nation dis-armed, for their communistic reasons and you just
gave them great fodder for their cause. It addition, you seem to think you are a
wit. I think you are only half right.
Dan Patrick
Conservationist, hunter, outdoorsman.
Posted by: Dan Patrick | February 18, 2007 at 08:18 AM
Mr. Zumbo, it is time to put your pen in the drawer and retire as a "gun writer".
Had you attended the SHOT Show this year, you would have seen the plethora
of varmint hunting rifles based on the AR platform. Your printed opinions sound
more like something that would come out of Handgun Control, Brady Project, or
any of the upcoming Democratic Presidential candidate's offices. The Second
Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting. Jeff Cooper invented a perfect
word to describe those who fear a weapon simply because it's a weapon hoplophobe. You have just done more to hurt the 2A cause than any army of
hoplophobes could have hoped to do.
No magazine containing your by-line will ever be purchased by me again.
Posted by: Cliff | February 18, 2007 at 08:19 AM
Jim,we all understand you are getting your bread buttered by remington and it's
pretty obvious by your statements you are trying to ensure they sell more rifles
by taking out their competition.But are you serious.I thought when I read that
statement that it was from a bunny hugging peta card carrying lunatic.Jim you
really need to get out a little more.Go to PredatorMasters.com and take a look
around.I like a large number of hunters on there hunt the wiley coyote with an
ar-15.I'm of the one shot one kill opinion as are a lot of the members on that
site.I have never felt like a terrorist until you pointed it out to me.You have
opened a bag of worms Jim.I have had a subscription to outdoor life and have
bought several of your books.That was in the past tense.I will never support
someone like you,I can't trap in Arizona because the hunters wouldn't back my
legal rights here and allowed trapping to be outlawed.Once you give the antigun people one shred of a break in the hunting ranks they will swarm that like a
2/19/2007
Page 191 of 853
vulture on a carcass.Congratulations you are the one who has provided them
with that opportunity.Your remington ties have blinded you and I am ashamed
to say I have supported you and remington and outdoor life in the past.I own
several remington rifles and was considering buying another,you know what.I
think Savage will fulfill my needs just fine.Shame on you and all who think like
you.Mighty selfcentered and only thinking of the way you hunt is ok is so
offbase its unbelievable.I think I'll take my ar-15 and go shoot a coyote if its ok
with you Jim.PredatorMasters.com the best hunting site on the web.
Posted by: dlswaim | February 18, 2007 at 08:19 AM
One of the greatest things about this country is that (as of right now) it allows us
the choice to HUNT WITH WHATEVER TYPE OF RIFLE WE WANT, up to and
including the AR-15.
You Sir are a bigot, and by the way:
Thank you for calling me a terrorist.
I suggest you find yourself a job in the senate. They are always in need of a
good man to help trample our rights.
Perhaps Mr. Zumbo could enlighten us as to what correlation exist between
hunting and the Second Ammendment, since the Second Ammendment has
absolutely nothing to do with hunting ...
Here are a few quotes from Thomas Jefferson, many of which are in regard to
the right to bear arms. Strange how none of his comments refer to hunting.
Perhaps Mr. Zumbo would consider the author of the Declaration of
Independance and the third President of the United States a "terrorist".
Let's also remember that Thomas Jefferson is the man most responsible for
giving us all the right to keep and bear arms and that his opinion may actually
have some bearing on the subject at hand ...
"If ever there was a holy war, it was that which saved our liberties and gave us
independence"
"One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for
them"
"The law of self-preservation is higher than written law"
"Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day: But
a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued
unalterably through every change of Ministers, too plainly proves a deliberate,
systematic plan of reducing us to Slavery"
2/19/2007
Page 192 of 853
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms, disarm only those who are neither
inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the
assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to
prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater
confidence than an armed man"
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for
the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to
protect themselves against tyranny in government"
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take
everything you have .... The course of history shows that as a government
grows, liberty decreases"
"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise
the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness,
enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and
others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the
mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks"
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are
willing to work and give to those who would not"
"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those
entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into
tyranny"
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the
people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine"
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects
what never was and never will be... if we are to guard against ignorance and
remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed"
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn
around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law',
because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the
rights of the individual"
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty
than to those attending too small a degree of it"
"For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well organized and
armed militia is their best security"
"The same prudence which in private life would forbid our paying our own
money for unexplained projects, forbids it in the dispensation of the public
moneys"
2/19/2007
Page 193 of 853
"Our tenet ever was . . . that Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for
the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and
that, as it was never meant that they should provide for that welfare but by the
exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they
should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under
their action"
"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing ...
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The
people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be
discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If
they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of
death to the public liberty. ... And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's
rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts,
pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The
tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and
tyrants. It is its natural manure"
It would appear that Mr. Zumbo is no more than another uneducated, know-itall sports writer who wishes to force his own agenda onto the rest of us.
Speaking as an American, you sir disgust me ...
Posted by: Apache | February 18, 2007 at 08:21 AM
This article is upsetting. As someone already mentinoed I will be fowarding this
message to many people as it is so offensive. As many have said, in this day
and time you cant seperate hunters and "gun owners". I will be throwing away
my renewal form now.
Posted by: Ivan | February 18, 2007 at 08:24 AM
Jim:
You are a true trader to gun owners and I am no longer a fan of Jim Zumbo.
Where did you get this idea at oh I know while you and Hillary were having
dinner.
Posted by: Chris Fields | February 18, 2007 at 08:24 AM
Jim,
I commend you for exercising your first amendment rights.
But you are a misguided fool who, for the good of all American gun owners,
needs to keep your mouth shut. You know not of what you speak and it shows.
Did the Brady campaign pay you for your inane and senile remarks?
You HAVE to have heard by now the uproar you have generated, and not a
peep from you.
2/19/2007
Page 194 of 853
Don't just go, go AWAY.
Tell you what Jim, come back here a couple of years from now WHEN YOU
ARE HUNTING WITH A SPEAR because they took your evil GUN that shoots
those evil BULLETS and let us know if you think your comments are still
applicable. On second thought they may some day outlaw spears because they
were probably terrorist weapons in the stone age. So I guess you'll be hunting
with your bare hands.
Have you not read enough history to figure out the term 'incremental' as it
applies to law abiding citizens' loss of gun ownership rights? Do you actually
think that those of us law abiding gun owners that choose to use SEMIautomatic weapons to shoot targets and game are inclined to be terrorists? Is it
the fact that our weapons will hold multiple rounds? If that's the case, I know
people that can take that bolt action you are holding in that pic and shoot rapids
with it with not much more effort that those of us with magazine fed rifles.
I think to back up your blog you need to sell all of your (probably no-cost-toyou) weapons that hold multiple rounds to those of us that actually respect
each other's choice of weapons and don't intend to be be friggin terrorists.
So much for any future purchases of Outdoor Life. If they have the same
weapon mentallity as you do THEY won't even be around much longer since
there will be nothing to HUNT or SHOOT WITH!
Posted by: REELDOC | February 18, 2007 at 08:26 AM
Damn, I was just putting the finishing touches on my Remington XCR in 7mm
mag purchase. It was going to sit proudly in my safe next to my many ARs and
AKs. I guess it is too good for that now. Canceled.
Dear Dumbo, you might want to go get the "horse you rode in with" for my next
comment...
Posted by: Andrew | February 18, 2007 at 08:26 AM
mr zumbo, your statement about the "so called" terrorist rifles is completely out
of line. because you don't like the looks of them you are just like the anti gun
crowd. i don't own an ar 15,ak,or a sks but i'm not so narrow minded as to think
no one should be able to own them.i will contact outdoor life and remington
notifying both they should terminate your services you seem to be the type of
person who thinks people should only be allowed to have what you approve of
and nothing else.
Posted by: stan | February 18, 2007 at 08:26 AM
Then I guess this soldier with three combat tours and 17 years active service to
date is a terrorist. You are worse than the anti-gun politicians we have
2/19/2007
Page 195 of 853
"supporting" us on Congress. Why? Because you say you are pro gun then you
turn around and say it is okay to band certain types of guns because you don't
like them. have you been to Camp Perry for the national matches? If so then
you know that the AR15 series dominates the field. While the 55 grain .223 ball
round may not be suitable for most game, there are lots of custom loads out
there for taking out varmints and other game. Most states, if not all have limits
on magazine capacity for hunting so you point on high capacity magazines is a
waste of time. Spray and pray mentality from a hunter with a five round
magazine? I find that comment completely laughable. The cost quality ammo
and the sportsmanship found in most hunters makes this point another waste of
time.
Sir, what you have done is called me and millions of AR15 owners terrorists.
We may own them for different reasons ranging from personal protection, a
safety net to protect freedom, target and recreational shooting, collecting,
hunting and so on. We all own these guns because they are perfectly legal but
men like you using terms like "terrorist rifles" are doing all you can to take care
of that small freedom. You remind me of John Kerry: a decorated veteran he is
but he is still a coward and no friend of mine! I hope Remington shows you the
door if you fail to apologize for your foolish use of words!
Posted by: Scott Hyde | February 18, 2007 at 08:27 AM
I find highly disconcerting that an avid hunter, which has NEVER used an AR15, would call the rifle a "terrorist" weapon.
Based solely on Jim's article, I guess we'll classify everyone in the US Air Force
as a terrorist.
My first hunting rifle was lever action, Winchester 30-30. After I reached my
16th birthday, my brother asked me if I would like to "trade" rifles and he let me
carry his AR-15. Although we saw no deer that particular day, we went to a
local area, used by most folks as a rifle range, and I fired, at that time, the
sweetest rifle I had ever held.
Not taking anything from the Winchester 30-30, my experience with it made me
love the AR-15 even more. The rifle was SWEET! I soon found that whatever
you were pointed at, up to 100 yards away, was what you hit EVERYTIME.
I assure you neither my brother nor I was a terrorist for carrying (i.e. hunting)
the AR-15. To this day it has been the most accurate open sighted rifles I have
ever fired, and if you put a scope on the AR-15, it is even more accurate.
No Jim, your wrong about the AR-15, and due to Outdoor Life printing your
article, and your paranoid comments, I will definitely neither purchase the
magazine anytime soon, nor will I keep it in the smallest room of my house or
read it while sitting on the coldest seat at hunting camp.
2/19/2007
Page 196 of 853
Posted by: Peace Warrior | February 18, 2007 at 08:28 AM
How much did the libs pay you to turncoat?
Posted by: I Am Rose | February 18, 2007 at 08:28 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
I hate to berate someone but, you sir, are an idiot. It's people like you that help
dissolve our Consitutional RIGHTS.
With more education about these "terrorist weapons", you'll find they do in fact,
have a place in hunting and sporting events.
No weapon is immune from misuse. Just ask Martin Luther King Jr.
Posted by: Tyrone Jackson | February 18, 2007 at 08:28 AM
Wow, you are right! I changed the stock and pistol grip to a sporter
configuration, use a lower capacity magazine, changed to a flat top
configuration with a low profile front gas block, now the evil profile is gone.
Then, I had some custom handguards made out of the finest wood, Now it
shoots much better.
Oh, while I was in there, I permanently attached the 30-30 upper I had specially
made so that I could be a hunter using a hunting round.
I'm trying to design a change that will allow the rifle to be manually operated
with a bolt action. It will be hard, but I'm just sure it will make a better hunting
rifle if done that way, if nothing else it will dampen my urge to spray the woods
with lead.
Wait a minute, with the pistol grip gone, I could get a lever instead of a bolt.
Would that be ok, Jim "Fudd" Zumbo?
Posted by: kmoore | February 18, 2007 at 08:29 AM
My subscription to Outdoor Life is now cancelled. I have forwarded this link to
all my fellow shooting and hunting enthusiasts.
Jim Zumbo, you are a moron.
I know dozens of varmiters that hunt with AR style rifles. Not only that, but I
took my first whitetail at age 9 with a .223 Mini-14. Since then I have taken
numerous Javelina with ARs.
I've also taken hogs and mulies with ARs chambered in .458 SOCOM.
Your ignorance is astounding.
Posted by: BlueCrusader | February 18, 2007 at 08:30 AM
I recently read an article by Mike Venturino, who used to be an avid varmint
2/19/2007
Page 197 of 853
hunter but gave up the sport long ago to feed his Sharps/blackpowder rifle
desires. The article focused on his return to the varmint hunting scene with his
good frien Clint Smith. If you know EITHER of these people (I do not
personally, just through their writings) you will find them every bit as ethical and
humane hunters as you, Mr. Zumbo.
Well, surprise, surprise on the world when in that article Mike Venturino was
given an AR based rifle to test on a prarie dog hunt his first time back out from
his hiatus. Mike had never even considered AR's as a viable varmint shooting
platform, but that all changed on the very first shot. He went on to write
wonderful things about the AR and its use in hunting.
So, I guess what I want to ask is.......do you consider these two people (one a
decorated Vietnam Vet, by the way, who used that evil "Assault rifle" to defend
out freedoms abroad)to be the ignorant, "traditionally incorrect" hunters you
have condemned in your entry?
Sorry Zumbo, but I never really considered you much of an "authority" on
anything, and now I call you just plain ignorant.
Posted by: Brian Miville | February 18, 2007 at 08:30 AM
You discust me! You have the ignorance to call a symbol of our freedom a
"terrorist rifle"??? You are a cannibal that is eating away at our 2nd amendment
rights. I own one of these so called "terrorist rifles" and I choose to hunt with it.
If you don't like them, don't use one. Just keep your ignorant liberal comments
to yourself!
Posted by: Bob B | February 18, 2007 at 08:30 AM
Never buying your magazine again. I'll just buy charmin.
Posted by: Wes Marden | February 18, 2007 at 08:32 AM
I'll put my AR-15s and AR-10 up against 99% of Remingtons. Every year we
see more plastic, more low quality MIM parts and more parts made overseas,
including in China, on Remington guns.
I have heard that this Hillary Clinton-ish tripe is pretty common among
Remington higher ups. Not surprising from the company that restricts sales of
"law enforcement" firearms like some of their bolt guns and pump shotguns
while trying to foster their laughably substandard pump gun as a law
enforcement weapon.
Sleep with dogs...
Posted by: Aimless | February 18, 2007 at 08:33 AM
Mr. Zumbo's editorial is both out of touch and hypocritical.
AR-15 variants are now the most common centerfire rifle in the United States.
2/19/2007
Page 198 of 853
Hundreds of thousands are sold every year on the commercial market. People
use them for self-defense, many forms of competitive shooting, and hunting.
You just alientated hundreds of thousands of people who own and use AR-15
style rifles.
The antigue designs you use for hunting, were all "assault" or "battle" weapons
of their day. The various lever action repeaters were very much advanced over
anything that came before them. They were used to great effect "taming the
west" during the late 1800s. The Mauser designed action found on many
modern bolt action rifles was use by both sides in World War 1 and 2. The
cartridges your hunting rifles fire all orginated directly, or indirectly as military
cartridges.
Our ancestors might find your use of modern center-fire cartidge based
firearms with high power optics as unsportsmanlike as you find the use of AR15s. If you want to be sporting, stalk your prey in a loin cloth and leap down on
it with a knife stabbing it to death.
The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. It has everything to do
with being equipped with modern arms and being skilled in their use for the
preservation of Liberty.
Posted by: Russell Phagan | February 18, 2007 at 08:34 AM
That is the biggest bucket of dumb I've seen on the internet this week, and
that's saying something.
Posted by: WS | February 18, 2007 at 08:34 AM
Traitor!
Posted by: Deborah G | February 18, 2007 at 08:35 AM
I find your small mind, to be a lethal weapon against the rights of all Americans.
Your narrow/prejudice view of collectors and shooters of military type
firearms...sickens me. I go out and punch holes in paper all the time. I don't
hunt, but don't maintain the attitude that hunters "like to kill stuff" either...thou,
that may be the case. You need to shut up, collect whatever $$$ it is
somebody's paying you for the vile excrement spewing out of your head....and
go drink some more Pelosi/Brady Kool-Aid. MORON!!
Posted by: Mike Ricketts | February 18, 2007 at 08:35 AM
Oh by the way,
Here is a new graphic header from your blog.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/SHoRTY3000/dumbosblog.png
Who is Jim Zumbo?
2/19/2007
Page 199 of 853
Never saw a black gun in the field? Sounds like you never served our country
Jim.
On a guided hunt with Remington? Interesting....Remington manufactures most
of the ammunition made for these black guns.
May be there ought to be a law about obnoxious gun writers who assault their
readers with poorly thought out opinions.
Posted by: Averil | February 18, 2007 at 08:36 AM
I just read it. I don't believe it. If the rifle was pink or had wood, would that make
it any different? I have hunted varmits with my AR. It is very accurate and is
NOT an assault weapon or TERRORIST gun. It is a SEMI-AUTO just like any
other semi-auto deer or small game rifle. Not that I know what Jim Z. and
Outdoor Life stand for, don't expect to see me watching your show or buying
Outdoor Life again. This is really sad. It's a gun for gods sake. There are plenty
of people that think you shouldn't own any gun.
I guess you are on that side of the table as far as I am concerned now. What's
next, my semi-auto .22 Ruger. There is absolutely NO difference in the
function. I don't want to hear the B.S. about converting them to full auto either.
That can be done with any semi-auto. Maybe you should cansider Muzzle
loaders as the only acceptable hunting weapon.
I don't know what else to say about it. I hope at least you think about how dumb
those comments are. If Remington still supports you I guess I am done with
them as well. Before I forget I better shut the reminder off on the set to remind
me to watch the rest of the bear hunt. I guess I have a right to my opinion as
well eh?
You are an ignorant sack of shit. I hope you suffer dearly for your words. You
should know better dickweed.
We are our own worst enemy. Divide and conquer, it works. Well Elmer Fudd
turn in that evil assault shotgun. That Horrific anti-aircraft/bird sky blaster has
no sporting purpose. At the Trolley mall in Idaho it was just such an evil weapon
responsible for five deaths and four maimings. Ban all guns! Police state here
we come!
Posted by: Bruce Given | February 18, 2007 at 08:37 AM
This is a pretty sad commentary, and somewhat offensive to a huge segment of
gun owners. Thanks for calling me a terrorist. Remember the Protestant
minister in Germany in WWII who said, "First they came for the communists
2/19/2007
Page 200 of 853
and I didn't say anything because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the
socialists and I didn't say anything because I wasn't a socialist. Then they came
for the Jews and I didn't say anything because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came
for the Catholics and I didn't say anything because I wasn't a Catholic. Then
they came for me and there was no one left to speak up for me."? That's you,
Mr. Zumbo.
And while I certainly respect your viewpoint to speak your mind, you darn well
better believe that I'll speak my mind on every occasion. If I'm at a party and
hunting comes up, why I'll just cluck cluck cluck and ask the soccer mom why
anybody needs to hunt. Why would anyone ever want to hurt poor little bambi?
And when somebody at work asks why you need a shotgun for "sport
shooting", I'll just roll my eyes and say "we'll never understand those people why anyone needs to shoot to feel better is beyond me." And when someone
asks about why people hunt, I'll speak my mind - I'll offer that it doesn't take
much skill to sit out in the woods and wait until some coyote walks by before
shooting it in cold blood.
You get the idea - it's the whole divided we stand thing. I’m not asking you to
endorse my view of recreational shooting, but, please, don’t paint a target on
my back for the liberals and sacrifice my interests just to save yourself a little bit
of time. They’ll get around to you when they’re done with us.
Rick
Posted by: rick | February 18, 2007 at 08:37 AM
I am not a hunter but have enjoyed target shooting since the 1970’s. I use
many rifles that you do not find appropriate for hunting but are excellent target
rifles in my sport. I respect your choice to use a high-powered Remington
sniper rifle to murder animals for sport. I only ask that you respect my Second
Amendment Right to keep any arms that I see fit to possess. Now go and shoot
yourself some crow.
Posted by: RBH III | February 18, 2007 at 08:38 AM
The second amendment is not about hunting.
It's about the right to bear arms.
It's about protection from a tyrannical government.
It shall not be infringed.
You sir, are not understanding.
The Remington 870, mossberg 500, Remington 700 are all current ISSUED
military service firearms.
All would be banned by your drivel.
2/19/2007
Page 201 of 853
The 2nd Admendment says nothing about "Hunting"!!! Have you read it lately?
Do some research as to what our "Founding Fathers" were saying, and why
they put that admendment 2nd!!!
Your "high powered sniper terrorist rifles" should be banned!!!
WOW
Thanks for telling us what should and should not be LEGAL Mr.Clinton!
This is a pro gun site that employs someone like this?
I will make sure not to support this nor anything associated with you!
Absolutly pathetic
I will be contacting the ADVERTISERS TO EXPRESS MY DISPLEASURE
Never saw a black gun in the field? Sounds like you never served our country
Jim.
Yeah! When I was risking my neck for you in Southeast Asia, where were you?
Probably claiming you had flat feet or some such lie, and screwing my girl. You
are pathetic.
Posted by: USMC | February 18, 2007 at 08:39 AM
I am not a hunter but have enjoyed target shooting since the 1970’s. I use
many rifles that you do not find appropriate for hunting but are excellent target
rifles in my sport. I respect your choice to use a high-powered Remington
sniper rifle to murder animals for sport. I only ask that you respect my Second
Amendment Right to keep any arms that I see fit to possess. Now go and shoot
yourself some crow.
Posted by: RBH III | February 18, 2007 at 08:39 AM
of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Just what part of shall not be infringed don't you get?
Posted by: Henry Reilly | February 18, 2007 at 08:39 AM
You can't have it both ways Mr. Zumbo. The 2nd Amendment is not about
hunting and never was. Eliminating classes of rifles just because an old dimwit
like you thinks they don't fit a traditional role is defacto gun control in itself.
I can see you now leading the charge to eliminate repeating rifles in the 1800's
and keep only single shot percussion guns. God forbid common people enjoy
those "terrorist" Spencer Carbines.
2/19/2007
Page 202 of 853
Posted by: Don Blackburn | February 18, 2007 at 08:42 AM
Mr. Zumbo, which side of the fence do you shoot from? How dare you choose
which firearm is right or wrong? Is the projectile from an AR different than one
from a bolt? Please clairify, in the meantime I WONT be watching!
Posted by: DII shoots | February 18, 2007 at 08:43 AM
Jim Zumbo is a Moron - Guess I won't be subscribing to Outdoor Life.
I'm not a terrorists or a hunter and I can't believe a fellow gun owner in this day
of unrelenting attacks on gun owners would say something like this, let alone
put it in writing.
You are a gun owners worst enemy of all. You degrade and disrespect from the
inside. Any gun owner who sells out other gun owners like a cancer ... and you
publicize it.
Its no wonder the gun grabbers have such an easy time of it ... they have one
goal and they all focus on it. Too many gun owners only care about their little
corner of the world and are obvilious to everything around them.
Shame on you.
Posted by: Tony Bozarth | February 18, 2007 at 08:45 AM
My Remington 1100 operates on similar principles to the terrorist AR15.
Therefore, I must be rid of it too. Spray-and-pray when hunting waterfowl,
rabbit, and upland game. The mere presence of the Remington 1100 will cause
me to subvert the American way of life. Evil, evil semiauto gun.
Remington ... I will not be purchasing another product of yours.
Posted by: MitchbSC | February 18, 2007 at 08:45 AM
Mr Zumbo,
I whole heartedly disagree w/your opinion.
I say, Remington and Outdoor Life should divorce themselves from YOU. A
man who defines what firearms, we as hunters, should be allowed to use.
We, as hunters, don't need you to further constrain our sport or our heritage.
I cannot believe that Remington and Outdoor Life actually sponsor you.
I will no longer purchase either.
MAJ Jay Sehbuski
Posted by: MAJ Jay Shebuski | February 18, 2007 at 08:46 AM
2/19/2007
Page 203 of 853
After two tours in Iraq and seeing terrorists I don’t think I am one. I cannot
believe that someone in your position would make such a statement towards
firearms owners in general. You are validating the anti gun agenda with a
statement like that. The ambiguous term "sporting Arms" does not only
translate to wood stock traditional firearms. I own several Remington rifles and
have used the M24 SWS in combat, it is sad too see that they back someone
like you.
I'm done with Outdoor Life. Only once have you seen one used? You admit you
live in a vaccum and are ignorant of what's happening in the fields and we're
supposed to value your opinion! Your editors must be in the same vaccum. Lots
of luck getting your head out of your butt!
Posted by: Rick Elliott | February 18, 2007 at 08:47 AM
Well you made my decision. I was torn between the new Remington 105 cti and
a Benelli Legacy.
You know, European gun vs. good ole American iron?
I mean, those Europeans are for gun control and quite frankly are a little
snobbish in regards to us Americans.
Just like you.
I really like the Benelli.
Posted by: kev | February 18, 2007 at 08:47 AM
The real "terrorist" weapon is the double barrel shotgun.In less than one
second a person can send twenty four thirty caliber slugs downrange at well
over one thousand feet per second.If the anti-gun nuts have infiltrated to the
point that alledged pro-second admendment hunting magazines are now calling
for the criminalizing of legal firearms this country is lost.Perry Rawls
Posted by: Perry Rawls | February 18, 2007 at 08:48 AM
So I own a CZ527 and a Bushmaster. Both shoot the same exact round but
2/19/2007
Page 204 of 853
one makes me a "hunter" and the other makes me "terrorist"?
For the love of God, if anything illustrates the idiot "divide and conquer"
mentality that is causing our RIGHTS to be stolen by politicians every day, this
is it.
What's even more appalling is that NOWHERE in the Second Amendment do I
find a reference to the RIGHT to hunt, but it clearly is about SELF-DEFENSE.
You and your type seem to have no problem throwing non-hunters under the
wheels of the bus, destroying our RIGHTS to save your non-existent ones.
Posted by: Patrick | February 18, 2007 at 08:48 AM
Hey Dumbass...........Why have you failed to comment on your little bit of
literature? Scared?
One more subscription canceled, and one more letter to Remington to let them
know who they sponsor.
Posted by: Peter G | February 18, 2007 at 08:49 AM
Note to Outdoor Life:
As an advid reader of your magazine (not any longer until Mr. Zumbo is in the
unemployment line) I am forced, by Mr. Zumbo's comments, to discontinue
buying your magazine. I personally use a Bushmaster AR-15 to hunt coyotes
and other varmints. A rifle of this type that produces sub MOA groups @ 100
yds. is a very acceptable firearm to hunt with. It's time for the American public
to realize almost every firearm produced is suitable for hunting, and not just for
"terriorist" attacks.
I have met many shooters with Mr. Zumbo's snooty attitude towards "the other
rifles", and thank God it wasn't raining.
Note to Remington:
I know selling or not using my Remington firearms will not affect your sells now,
but ZERO future purchases and NOT buying your ammo and other products
may.
2/19/2007
Page 205 of 853
I have self-imposed a BAN on buying Remington products until something is
done about Mr. Zumbo.
By supporting Mr. Zumbo, you are only hurting yourself and others.
The future of the firearms sport and industry depends on all of us standing
together.
Please take the about comment into consideration.
Posted by: Dan Butts | February 18, 2007 at 08:50 AM
Jim is your last name Zumbo or Dumbo? I am shocked to read your ridiculous
comments that refer to the AR-15 platform as a "terrorist" rifle. If this is the
demented logic you are applying why not call all bolt action rifles with any optic
an "Assassins Sniper Rifle"? Nice job trying to divide gun owners. There is no
room in the US anymore for people with your provincial Elmer Fudd mentality.
Posted by: Jonathan | February 18, 2007 at 08:50 AM
I'VE BOUGHT MY LAST REMINGTON!
Posted by: Jeff | February 18, 2007 at 08:51 AM
Wow, talk about "the enemy within". Maybe I should remember this "hunter's"
stance on our firearms rights when it comes to my vote on hunting issues. They
do occassionally come up on ballots. Anyone who believes that bolt actions
and shotguns will be safe from the anti-gunners once they ban "assault
weapons" is pathectically ill informed. Gun owners have to stick together.
BTW Mr Zumbo, Just how much game have you taken with your sniper rifle in
recent years that wasn't let to you on a game ranch? Must be pretty difficult to
shoot deer that are used to being fed off the back of a truck! LOL!
Since when does the package affect what is inside? If I want a v8 pickup why
should you care if I buy a Dodge, Ford or Chevy? That kind of logic will be the
cause of all firearms being taken away one kind at a time. I'll bet you could go
to work at handgun control tomorrow if you wanted to. I'll second what another
poster said " don't just go, go away."
We don't need friends like you.
Rick N
Jim,
I don't own either an AR or an AK but I like to know that if I wanted to I could. I
don't think I can add much more to the above posts other than to add my name
to the list of people that find you to be irresponsible in your word choice. As a
gun owner and collector I am concerned about what may happen in our current
2/19/2007
Page 206 of 853
congress and wish you would think before providing them any more sound
bites. It would be nice to see you answer all the people who have taken the
time to write.
Hunting is about firing a projectile or bb- shot at a particular target. Does it
make a difference what the weapon looks like as long as it does the job
properly? Zumbo is an idiot & I don't care what he looks like.
Posted by: Trapfreek | February 18, 2007 at 08:52 AM
When they come and get your high power rifle, you will scream about your 2A
rights.
The only thing you have done with this article is to divide the pro-gun people
and make it easier for our defeat.
You should be ashamed.
Posted by: Stephen Anderson | February 18, 2007 at 08:53 AM
rights.
rights.
rights.
Oh by the way,
Here is a new graphic header from your blog.
2/19/2007
Page 207 of 853
Uninformed fool.
Just wait untill the good guys at the www.gunbroker.com fourms get a wiff of
this.
What a idiot.
Posted by: Guns-n-painthorses | February 18, 2007 at 08:54 AM
your ignorance is matched only by your.... ignorance.
Posted by: Chapperjoe | February 18, 2007 at 08:55 AM
I can't believe that was written by a so called respected gun writer.
First outlaw the "assault" rifles, next they come after your "sniper" rifle. The
citizen, now unarmed becomes a subject and you become unemployed. Who
looses more?
Did the Brady crowd pay you to write that article?
You are a disgrace to all gun owners and have lost all respect and any
credibility you might have had with me.
It's not yor business what I hunt with. I might not be able to afford a nice walnut
stocked pre '64 Model 70 in 300 WinMag. The only rifle I might own may be a
M1 Garand. Good enough to hunt deer, elk or bear? Would you consider it an
assault rifle? Would you consider the 1700 area Brown Bess and assault rifle?
Guess what? In it's time it was and without it, we just might still be British
subjects and pay homage to the Queen.
Might be time to start writing about social affairs such as tea parties and plitical
fund raisers.
I'm writing to ALL advertisers of ODL, if they want to support this line of
thinking, I'm not buying any of their products.
This is a free country, well at least until they take our guns, you are entitled to
your opinion as I am to mine.
Posted by: A J Christ | February 18, 2007 at 08:56 AM
You sir are an arrogant old fool. If not for the Second Ammendment your blog
would not even exist. Divide and conquer, get it?? I trust that the readers of this
heresy will in like protest with their wallets. It does not appear that you have
many who agree with you. Outdoor Life, not!!
May be time for the rocker and a bib, you think?
Posted by: US Citizen | February 18, 2007 at 08:56 AM
2/19/2007
Page 208 of 853
You sir have let me down. I do not beleive you should be alowed to write for
such a fine magazine! I personally will not have anything to do with Outdoorlife
for as long as you are associated with them! You Mr. Zumbo make me sick and
are a traitor to this country in my eyes!
Posted by: Brian Richey | February 18, 2007 at 08:57 AM
Prairie Dog hunters using Ak type weapons? Bwahhahaha!
Maybe it's time for you to see if you can get a job writing an "outdoors" column
for the New York Times! But first be sure to research mountain biking and rock
climbing a bitPosted by: John D | February 18, 2007 at 08:58 AM
Dear Editors,
So after reading Jim Zumbo's misguided view about hunting with the wrong
kind of rifles, we now can classify OL as anti-gun, to be boycotted as such!
I will contact OL advertiser's and relay my concerns.
Posted by: Clayt in Maine | February 18, 2007 at 08:58 AM
Am I on the Outdoor Life site or the Brady gun grabbers site? This is pure
balderdash, straight out of the gun banners' talking points. I am perilously close
to cancelling my subscription to Outdoor Life.
Posted by: James Hargis | February 18, 2007 at 08:59 AM
I don't like they way old, overweight, male caucasians look. I don't see where
they have any use in society. I think we should ban them all.
BTW, nice sniper rifle you got there...
Posted by: Tyrone's roomate who can't believe what he just read. | February 18, 2007 at 08:59 AM
I just hope that sportsmen no matter what firearm they choose to take to the
field, that they refrain from smoking what you must have smoked prior to
penning that article!!!!!
Posted by: J HURD | February 18, 2007 at 08:59 AM
Prairie Dog hunters using Ak type weapons? Bwahhahaha!
Maybe it's time for you to see if you can get a job writing an "outdoors" column
for the New York Times! But first be sure to research mountain biking and rock
climbing a bitPosted by: John D | February 18, 2007 at 09:00 AM
Zumbo, you're done. Enjoy retirement. I don't own an AR15 but these
comments you make hurt all American gun owners.
Posted by: Joe Richardson | February 18, 2007 at 09:00 AM
2/19/2007
Page 209 of 853
I guess my AR15 won't be digesting any Remington in the future.
Zumbo, you are a fool. We don't need industry advocates like you. It's all or
none you fossil.
Posted by: Nick G | February 18, 2007 at 09:00 AM
Zumbo,
Whether your ideas come from ignorance or flat-out stupidity, those are about
the dumbest things you could've said. What a dope.
Posted by: Dave Lauren | February 18, 2007 at 09:00 AM
Wow, sounds like somebody is ready for a pair of warm slippers, a rocking
chair, and some nice Lawrence Welk music to sooth them in their dotage. Good
bye, Zumbo, and Outdoor Life. Your better days have passed. Idiots.
Posted by: richard dean | February 18, 2007 at 09:01 AM
I only have one thing to add:
You Knucklehead. (shakes head)
Posted by: Paul in Arizona | February 18, 2007 at 09:01 AM
My sub to ODL has been canceled...
I cannot support someone supporting the idea of banning a weapon that could
be used to defend my family and is a wonderful platform to get out and just
plink around at the range.
The next couple years are going to be interesting times and we need to be
united in our beliefs.
Ar's and Ak's first, then my BAR in .270 then my Extrema 12ga you see where
this is going.
Whats that little island down under where they got rid of all the evil
guns??.........
Posted by: Al from Texas | February 18, 2007 at 09:01 AM
Yeah Jim you're living in a vacuum, you need to get some oxygen for that one
brain cell you might have left. I can get 3" groups at 100 yards with my
Bulgarian SLR95, that's as good as any .30-30.
Of course to any person who wants to throw away your consitutional rights
every bolt action gun you own would be considered a sniper rifle.
have thought about this and well, consider my subscription cancelled!
2/19/2007
Page 210 of 853
Posted by: R.G. | February 18, 2007 at 09:03 AM
I also love traditional and older guns. I don't have any personal desire or use for
tactical style guns...
But, having said that I am smart enough to see the foolishness of the argument
about them being "assault weapons." I thought anyone versed in guns was
smart enough to know that the term is non-existent and is purposeful disinformation targeted at the registrations and future confiscation of firearms as a
whole. To hear a fellow firearms enthusiast and hunter speak of "Assault
Weapons" means he has either been bought off by some faction of the Anti's
lobby, or he has personal issues that need to be resolved!
I am disgusted by this blatant show of anti-American liberties and freedoms as
guaranteed to us by the 2nd amendment. I find it offensive and intellectually
dishonest!!!
That's right lets prejudice ourselves against something because it looks mean
or bad... or even worse, because it is packaged in a technological form that we
don't like aesthetically even though in function it performs no differently than
firearms introduced over 100 years ago!
Gee, that sounds intelligent...
Posted by: American Nimrod | February 18, 2007 at 09:03 AM
These are some of Zumbo's sponsors REMINGTON
SWAROVSKI
GERBER KNIVES
MOSSY OAK
CABELA'S
SAFARI CLUB INTERNATIONAL
STONEY POINT PRODUCTS
HI MOUNTAIN SEASONINGS
Posted by: notrega | February 18, 2007 at 09:05 AM
AR15 is an assault rifle??? An AR has no place in the field?
I USED to think you were pretty sharp about guns and hunting in general. Wow,
I am kind of surprised at this ludricous article you wrote. How much more
misguided could you, Jim Zumbo get???
At a time when all gun owners should be uniting, Jim Zumbo the well known
writer about hunting and guns writes an idiotic article classifying an AR as a
'terrorist' rifle.
Have you become the outdoor writer for the NY Times? Are you writing the
guidelines for the next Assault Weapons Ban by the democrat lead congress
and senate?
2/19/2007
Page 211 of 853
Zumbo, it appears that time has passed you by.
Posted by: JPP | February 18, 2007 at 09:06 AM
Jim Zumbo's morning:
ODL= outdoor life
*ring ring
ODL: Jim, your fired
Jim: Sir, what do you mean I'm fired?
ODL: Jim, have you seen your blog?
JIM: Whats a blog? You mean the intranet?
ODL: Have you been smoking pot again Jim?
JIM: I thought they legalized pot?
ODL: Jim, stfu. Do you see how many subscriptions we've lost because of your
bullshit sellout?
Jim: (background noise: Diane, go back to bed...it's just work) Uh No. Lemme
check here on my computerater.....
Jim: Oh snap.
ODL: Yeah, snap alright.
Jim: Does this mean you aint paying for me to shoot them thar elk and deers in
them big pens this year so it looks like my fat ass can walk up and down them
dar heels?"
ODL: Yes jim you high fence fucktard, fired means your fired. No more hunting
on our coin and no more Ms. Feinstein under your desk.
Jim: Well, we can still date right?
ODL: Jim, you'll have plenty of spare time on your hands soon, so if you can
pick her out of your fat ass crack you can do whatever you want. Besides...why
would I care.... Your fired......Dumbass.....
Jim: Thanks sir, I was worried about that.....Fired, really?
ODL: Geezus Jim, you really are an idiot......
Jim: Well look how many people agreed with me
ODL: Two Jim, Two. 7698 people thought you was a sellout.
Jim: Well, ain't that like 20% or something?
ODL: No Jim....It's like .002%
Jim: damn.
ODL: I'm hanging up now.....We're using your last paycheck to clean the
crusties off the floor under your desk that Ms Feinstein left there...damn spitters
anyways..
Jim: My Diane would never do that!!
ODL: Click
ten minutes later......
2/19/2007
Page 212 of 853
ring ring*
Remington: Jim, wtf were you thinking?
Jim: I don't know sir.....I did just what Diane told me to do...she said it would
make me famous......
Rem: Well, your famous now alright. Your on every internet gun sight on the
planet.......hope your happy.
Jim. uh.......I don't know what to say......
Rem: You do know we sell more .223 ammo than all the other ammo combined
right?
Jim: uh.............
Rem: Are you listening to me you fat slob? Blaming AR15's on terrorism and
the demise of hunting is like blaming a SPOON for making you FAT.
Jim: I've been working out........
REM: shooting animals in cages is not working out Jim....you're a disgrace.....
Jim: I'm real sorry sir........
Rem: Well thats not gonna help our gun and ammo sales now is it Jim?
Jim: Well, what if I come out with a new cookbook?
Rem: STF jim. Your fired. You can't cook worth a shit anyways. Send back all
the free remington equipment we've sent you. Maybe you should call ruger.......
Jim: Do I need to send back my camo hoveround too?
Rem: Jim, try walking...........you'll lose weight.
Jim: Diane said if I kept eating this new cereal...uh....propo.....ganda......I would
lose weight?
Rem: Didn't I tell you to dump her after you got dumped by Ms. pelosi?
Jim: Yeah......I miss her blinking........and those lips....
REM: Christ I'm gonna vomit. Jim did I mention your fired?
Jim: Fired?
Rem: Click
Jim: Diane Honey, I thinks you lied to me. You said everyone hated those scary
black weapons and I'd be famous.....
Diane: bllllbrbrlllbr.
Jim: Sorry honey, I didn't know you were stuck under my fat Roll......
Diane: It's ok You fat bastard. (*gasping) You merely succumbed to our liberal
propaganda campaine. There's nothing to be ashamed of.
Jim: You mean you really are gonna take all my guns?
Diane: Well of course you dumb bastard.......It's for the children!!!
WOW
2/19/2007
Page 213 of 853
Thanks for telling us what should and should not be LEGAL Mr.Clinton!
This is a pro gun site that employs someone like this?
I will make sure not to support this nor anything associated with you!
Absolutly pathetic
I will be contacting the ADVERTISERS TO EXPRESS MY DISPLEASURE
You are a douschebag.
Posted by: douschebag | February 18, 2007 at 09:07 AM
You are a douschebag.
Posted by: douschebag | February 18, 2007 at 09:09 AM
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and remington is entitled to publish
this one. I just wonder how much of the motivation for this article was financial?
Remington does not have a rifle that can compete with the AR, so they get their
pet gun writer to denigrate them. Would they print an article by Mr. Zumbo
describing how chintzy he thought the extractors are in the 700? I went with CZ
years ago.
Mr. Zumbo, you have shown your true colors. I believe you to be a quisling.
Posted by: Sean | February 18, 2007 at 09:09 AM
If I know one thing I know this, I'm done purchasing Remington products.
Posted by: A Constitutionalist Patriot | February 18, 2007 at 09:09 AM
You got one thing right, Jim.
You're living in a vacuum.
Or more probably, 50 years in the past. To promote banning firearms is a low to
which I never thought I'd see you or this magazine sink. You've lost a long time
reader. And Remington has just lost a customer.
Posted by: Andy Rice | February 18, 2007 at 09:09 AM
I am a relatively new subscriber (only 12 years) but my father-in-law has been a
subscriber since '72...
He was 18 years active in the U.S.M.C. and he defended this country with your
""terrorist rifles."
He will be calling in his Outdoor Life subscription cancellation along with myself.
Posted by: Leonard R | February 18, 2007 at 09:09 AM
Jim "Brady" Zumbo...I do believe that you have been wearing your hat a bit to
tight. The picture at the top of your blog shows you holding one of those deadly
2/19/2007
Page 214 of 853
sniper rifles topped off with a high powered optical sighting device. Are you
going to post this blog of yours over on the Brady Campaign website? It would
fit their adgenda very nicely.
No more Outdoor life magazines for me or Remington Products as far as that
goes. I sure wouldn't want to shoot any Remington ammo in my ugly black rifle.
Posted by: RU98A | February 18, 2007 at 09:10 AM
Mr. Zumbo, please repeat after me;
I deeply regret
Stepping in the Shit
And promise
To never let my Dumb Ass
Publicly Embarass me again
Just utter this phrase over and over to all you meet for the next six months.
Posted by: Jack | February 18, 2007 at 09:11 AM
You very nicely demonstrate a point I’ve been trying to make for a long time:
being pro-hunting does not necessarily mean being pro-gun. Hunters are a
bigger threat to our gun rights than the Bradys and Schumers of the world. Your
posting proves that.
Posted by: Jacob | February 18, 2007 at 09:11 AM
Mr. Zumbo:
I am greatly disappointed in your view of the role of the "Evil Black Rifles". Your
attitude will leave you standing alone in defense of your sport should the
Pelosi's, Schumer's and Clinton's become successful in outlawing the
possession of "Military Weapons".
Of course they would NEVER try to ban something as innocuous as a rifle that
is capable of engaging a target at a distance of 500+ yards or a shotgun that
can be devastating if used by a terrorist.
Fortunately, hunting is not mentioned in the Second Amendment you have
nothing to fear should it be eliminated??????
Posted by: Daniel Slanker | February 18, 2007 at 09:11 AM
my gun is better than your gun ?
what are you , a 2 year old ?
and Remington sponsers you ?
will make my next bolt action a SAKO
2/19/2007
Page 215 of 853
Posted by: pahapoika | February 18, 2007 at 09:12 AM
Well, maybe now Outdoor Life will understand why I never renewed my
subscription years ago.
THis is old school thinking. And frankly, while I am close to 50, I'm not quite
ready to take on the narrow mindedness Zumbo has displayed.
You, sir--are practicing the Divide and Conquor prictice. You see, I do not hunt.
I am a target shooter and have ZERO use for your hunting rifles. But I would
NEVER try to divide us up and offer up your beloved bolt action rifle for
banning. Using your logic makes about as much sense as me, pushing for a
ban on hunting because I choose not to hunt. I wouldn't do that. Live YOUR life.
I'll live mine.
Posted by: Rick Kalich | February 18, 2007 at 09:12 AM
You are a moron.
Well mr fudd, you must have never heard of divide and conquer. I dont hunt,
but support your right to do so. Once the grabbers take away my right to own
firearms of my choice, do you honestly think they wont come after your deadly
scoped sniper rifles, capable of killing out past 500 yards? I will say this mr
fudd, once my second ammendment rights are gone ( and the second aint
about duck hunting mr fudd ) I will work hard, donate money, and vote for
people who will outlaw hunting and take all guns.
Whatcha think of that mr. fudd?
Posted by: John Cook | February 18, 2007 at 09:14 AM
I will not buy a single book or magazine your name appears in from this day
forward. You are a closed minded idiot. I will also refuse to purchase products
from your sponsors, such as Remington, as long as they continue to sponsor
you.
Posted by: David in LA | February 18, 2007 at 09:15 AM
Wow, unbelievable.
Hey, I have a hunting dog. But wait a minute, the same dog has the capability
of biting someone in the act of home defense. Should my dog now be banned?
What do we do about that problem?
There's no end to this type of mindset.
Or, what if we discover that most terrorists wear Nike shoes, do we ban those
too?
Remington products are now out for me too.
2/19/2007
Page 216 of 853
Then, by your way of thinking, sir, should bird hunters and Trap shooters be
limited to only single shot, break open shotguns? Should handgun hunting not
be allowed? Where, exactly do you think the line should be drawn? Since you
apparently think that AR-15s have no place in hunting, what other restrictions
would you choose to place on legitmate, law abiding hunters (and citizens)? I
find your opinion specious, at best, dangerous, at worst. If this is the attitude
that pervades 'Outdoor Life', then I know one magazine that I shall never
purchase.
Posted by: Gregg | February 18, 2007 at 09:16 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
You sir, are an idiot and a traitor to our cause. Semi-automatic actions have
been around for more than a hundred years. Cosmetics aside, that is all an AR15 is, a semi-automatic rifle, the same as any other semi-automatic.
An "ASSAULT" rifle, is a rifle fireing an intermediate sized cartridge [smaller
than a rifle, larger than a pistol], with a selector switch allowing FULLY auto fire,
as well as semi-auto fire.
Please sir, keep your political feelings, and phobia's to yourself.
If this is what the magazine, "Outdoor Life", supports, I will no longer buy it.
Posted by: Rick | February 18, 2007 at 09:17 AM
I'm certain back in the day when Lever guns first came out,guys like Jim were
making comments about the lever gun being the Gun of choice of outlaws &
renagades,Of course it had No place in the fine sport of hunting!If it offends the
limp wristed public so what,I just never figured we had any Limp wrister's
writeing for outdoor magazines.I guess I was wrong
Posted by: Kevin Neal | February 18, 2007 at 09:17 AM
Zumbo used to have credibility until now.
AR 15s have their place among law abiding citizens if they are used in hunting
or not.
I will no longer read OL or anything Zumbo writes, as this article of his shows
that he has slipped in principal or coherency.
Adversiters will be contacted!!
Posted by: Roger | February 18, 2007 at 09:17 AM
I can't believe this made it far enough to be published
subscription canceled
Here is outdoor life's contact info if You want to tell em how You feel.
2/19/2007
Page 217 of 853
I just sent emails to all editors and sales departments.
While most AKs aren't accurate enough for varmints at long range, they're fine
for eastern whitetail hunting, both in accuracy and power.
Most ARs are as accurate as most bolt rifles.
Current terrorist weapons of choice are airplanes and improvised explosive
devices. Insurgents and patriots in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc., mostly aren't
"terrorists."
Divided we fall.
If I susbcribed to Outdoor Life -- or whatever it is you write for -- I'd immediately
cancel.
-C
Terrorist rifle? Then I suppose my grandfathers pre 64 model 70 is a Insurgent
sniper rifle? I'm ashamed that my 870 pump shotgun is probably now a riot gun
forever?
Get with the program, pardner! Everybody that isn't just like you is not bad. This
is another example of holier than thou writers going through their pathetic
carrer with blinders on. Move to San Francisco and join the Rainbow coalition
dude!
Posted by: 7.62bthp | February 18, 2007 at 09:18 AM
Jim, I've read Outdoor Life since the mid 60's and hunted since the late 50's, so
you might say that I'm a bit of a traditionalist too.
It is amazing to me, however, that someone could have this kind of attitude
after all the attacks that our sport has been through in the last 40 or so years. I
woke up when the old semi-auto .22 that I got for my 12th birthday was banned
because it would hold 21 rounds of .22 shorts in the tubular magazine.
Are you a member of the NRA or a state rifle association? I would guess not by
the comments you made. You will need all the support of the other shooters
when the "deadly long range sniping rifles" that you use come under attack.
Dave
2/19/2007
Page 218 of 853
Jim,HAVE YOU BUMPED YOUR HEAD?????????
Sir, my AR-15 and my AR-10 are not "assault weapons." Indeed, sir, they are
not "weapons" at all, for I use them to fight no one. They are target rifles. And if
I were a hunter, they would also be hunting rifles.
You insinuate that they are not "tack drivers." I am one of the 600-yard shooters
at the Port Malabar Rifle and Pistol Club at Palm Bay, Florida. The AR-15,
equipped with a 24- or 26-inch barrel, is the target rifle of choice for a majority
of long-range shooting enthusiasts, although I personally prefer my AR-10.
The large majority of our rounds, sir, fall within the ten ring. Many scores are
200 for 20 rounds. We would invite you to bring your "comfortable" woodenstocked rifles to shoot with us, but alas, we don't wish to keep company with
such a bigot as you.
You, sir, are an ancient, and outdated icon. You have now fallen from your
perch of respect above most shooters. You are invited to give up your firearms
and go join the Brady Bunch. You can now be classed by Second Amendment
lovers as dispicable, just as they are.
I am through with you, sir, as I am through with Outdoor Life Magazine, and I
am through with Remington firearms and ammunition.
I invite you to leave through the door from which you entered.
Eric Keyes
True lover of the Constitution and ALL of the Bill of Rights
Posted by: Eric Keyes | February 18, 2007 at 09:19 AM
You're old and need to go. Did Sarah Brady give you a blow job or something?
I will never pick up another copy of Outdoor Life. And I didn't like Remington in
the first place. Way to go, Zumbo!
The 2nd Amendment ain't about duck hunting!
Posted by: Scott Davis | February 18, 2007 at 09:20 AM
You're old and need to go. Did Sarah Brady give you a blow job or something?
2/19/2007
Page 219 of 853
A Rifle is a Tool the assault can only come from the user.
Shocking and very dissapionting to see this misguided
pundent fuel the fire of the gun grabbers.
Posted by: Briscoe Darling | February 18, 2007 at 09:22 AM
Are we on the Brady Bill website? This is more anti Second Amendment than
the democrats that just took office. We have been betrayed by corporate greed
once again and sold out by "one of our own." I can only pray for the future of
our children and that they will have any Bill of Rights guaranteed freedoms left.
Posted by: nick | February 18, 2007 at 09:22 AM
Zumbo=Dumbo
When did you and Sarah Brady start keeping company?
You don't represent me or any hunter I know so stop with the BS about
"assault" rifles when you don't know what you are talking about.
Posted by: Brian Davis | February 18, 2007 at 09:22 AM
Mr. Zumbo has been buying into the Brady campaign propaganda. There is no
place in the hunting community for canibalistic outdoor writers who know
nothing about what they write.
Shame on Mr. Zumbo and shame on OL for printing this rubbish. Subscription
cancelled. Sponsors notified.
I don't hunt. I don't care to hunt. However, I have always been a steadfast
supporter of the hunting community. I enjoy articles about stalking various prey.
I can appreciate fine traditional bolt and shotguns. I can also appreciate fine
military style firearms. They all have their place. You should see the look on
non gunowners faces when I show them a 5.56 cartridge vs the politically
correct .45-70 or .30-06. Be careful what you wish for. The anti-gun groups are
allied with the anti-hunters. Others have stated before "divided we fall".
For many people, guns are more than a hobby. They are first and foremost
defensive tools. Last time I checked, there is no right to hunt. Also, most police
property rooms are filled with traditional sporting arms. Believe me, the anti-gun
2/19/2007
Page 220 of 853
crowd will let this fact be known when they come for yours.
Field and Stream pulled this same stunt during the hype over Assault Weapons
back in 1989. I was a subscriber but cancelled my subscription when it was
clear to me they were advocating the government taking away my property.
You sir have guaranteed I will never pay a dime to your employer as long as
the official line is to sell out fellow gun owners just because their guns are
frowned upon.
Posted by: Albert | February 18, 2007 at 09:24 AM
Jim,
We're not all wealthy and maybe one or two guns is all we can afford. But then
maybe you're not writting for the common man? Remington, please consuder
this with your next ad budget! AR-15 type guns are useful too!
Posted by: cwagner | February 18, 2007 at 09:24 AM
Vacuum sounds right. When you believe you can call the shots for all hunters,
you have lost me completely. I have no interest whatever in "varmint" hunting,
and none whatever in tactical rifles. I also have no interest whatever in sell-outs
that divide gunowners when the Second Amendment is under attack. Count me
as one who will not patronize either Outdoor Life or Remington in the future.
Posted by: D. Belcher | February 18, 2007 at 09:24 AM
Posted by: Mr Fixit | February 18, 2007 at 09:24 AM
I never thought that I would ever be called a "terrorist" by an outdoor writer.
Do you honestly think the antis will leave your hunting guns alone after they
ban all others? Of course not. You are either very misguided at best, or a closet
anti at worst.
I will let the sponsors of both this web page and the magazine know my outrage
and of my desire not to support any company that will willingly sponsor
someone who has just given yet another handhold to the brady bunch
Ted Murphy
2/19/2007
Page 221 of 853
Posted by: Ted Murphy | February 18, 2007 at 09:25 AM
From your writing, you are now an old man in dotage. Sorry, happens to all of
us at some point or another.
Posted by: Josef C | February 18, 2007 at 09:25 AM
I can't believe a writer for a hunting magazine can be so ignorant. You want to
ban certain rifles? Do you think that won't trickle down to your precious bolt
action? Have you even been outdoors lately? I own many various styles of rifles
each having their own pro's and con's and I'll be damned if some halfassed
writer is going to tell me which is right or wrong to own and hunt with.
I think they should ban bolt action rifles because I am afraid of it. Hunting
should only be done with a bow ar maybe a sharp stick.
Posted by: dhuze | February 18, 2007 at 09:26 AM
I suggest everyone copy and save this page. Print it out and mail a copy to
Outdoor Life advertisers along with an email of the copy also. If you would like
to let Outdoor Life know how you feel directly, here's their PR contact info:
Outdoor Life Public Relations
[email protected]
If someone can find a list of current Outdoor Life advertisers please post them.
Here is the contact information for Remington:
Remington Arms Company, Inc.
870 Remington Drive
P.O. Box 700
Madison, NC 27025-0700
TEL: 1-800-243-9700
Fax: 1-336-548-7801
I also suggest everyone forward a copy of this page to Jim Zumbo's show
sponsors. They can all be found here: http://www.jimzumbo.com/links.html
Steve
Clayton, NM
19 years of service to be told I carry a "terrorist" rifle.....What an ignorant
person you are.
During 17 months in OIF I, I never saw a dead insurgent with an AR. My
"terrorist" rilfe functioned flawlessly though. I thank you for paying your taxes
and providing me with such a fine "terrorist" rifle to defend this great country
with.
2/19/2007
Page 222 of 853
As others have mentioned here, I will boycott all the companies that support
you. No one that supports ANY form of gun control will get any of my money.
Crawl back under your rock.
Posted by: Brent S | February 18, 2007 at 09:26 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
I have always considered you to be an exceptional champion of our 2nd
Ammendment rights, but I am afraid that is no longer the case.
MANY people consider the AR15 to be the best varmint and hog rifle on the
planet. Now I find out that many of us are TERRORISTS! You have just given
the VPC there next promotional poster and ad campaign. Thanks for nothing!
Posted by: Doug S | February 18, 2007 at 09:27 AM
Jim,
I would hope Remington and Outdoor Life will recognize you don't have enough
political/intellectual/hunting savy to be respresenting them. I knew it years ago
watching your hunting shows. I'm all for a man having an opinion, even a poorly
thought out one and freedom of the press is a wonderful thing, but you should
have enough sense to know when you are an unwitting pawn of the anti-gun
crowd and further should have had the good sense to keep your opinion to
yourself. I don't own an AR type gun, but that is a personal decision. I also don't
own a Corvette for a similar reason, but I know enough not force my personal
bias on those that do. Have a nice retirement---it's time.
Posted by: dimecovers3 | February 18, 2007 at 09:27 AM
"To most of the public, an assault rifle is a terrifying thing."
Has it ever occured to you that the reason these rifles carry a stigma like this is
because those in the media, like yourself, paint them that way? I can
appreciate someone being "traditional". If that's the case, then don't hunt with
them. Taking the opportunity to bash something you don't understand or is
different make you a narrow-minded bigot, not "traditional".
Posted by: Karl | February 18, 2007 at 09:28 AM
What country ya from ???? My great-great-grandfather used a 40 cal flint to rid
this country of people like YOU !!!!
Posted by: Glen | February 18, 2007 at 09:29 AM
I am very disappointed in you, Jim. I am a former police officer and gun owner. I
am not a terrorist. There is nothing wrong with me using any legal weapon that I
think will suit my needs when hunting, whether it is an "assault rifle" as you call
them, or one of YOUR choosing.
2/19/2007
Page 223 of 853
Posted by: major | February 18, 2007 at 09:29 AM
I am very disappointed in you, Jim. I am a former police officer and gun owner. I
am not a terrorist. There is nothing wrong with me using any legal weapon that I
think will suit my needs when hunting, whether it is an "assault rifle" as you call
them, or one of YOUR choosing.
Posted by: major | February 18, 2007 at 09:29 AM
Yo, genius: You don't think they'll be coming after your "sniper rifles" next, you
"animal murderer"?
Posted by: David Codrea | February 18, 2007 at 09:29 AM
Les Baer garrenttees thier AR15 to ½ MOA at 300 yards; the perfect varmet
rifle. Tell me which Remington offering do they garrenttee to ½ MOA?
Your brain fosselized first!
Remington and Outdoor Life you've seen my last dime until this Brady Center
plant is gone!
Posted by: RDG44 | February 18, 2007 at 09:30 AM
I find it hard to believe that someone can from one side of there mouth
advocate the right to keep and bare arms and from the other make statements
like that. Isn't that being some form of a hypocrite?
Posted by: A.J. LaMendola | February 18, 2007 at 09:30 AM
I hunt predators with my terrorist rifle.
You make me sick.
Posted by: JimTh from AR15.com | February 18, 2007 at 09:32 AM
Zumbo, now would be a good time to unzip your trousers and check to see
whether your gear is intact. Your fear of non traditional firearms and article
concerning use of them (along any vein) reminds me of the ranting of a liberal
woman. I am curious as to what you were under the influence of when you
conceived this position? Whats next,the virtues of Hillary in '08 ?
Until Outhouse Life dismisses you I will never purchase another copy and will
take every copy I find in any waiting room and put it in the garbage where it
belongs.
You ought to be ashamed....
Posted by: Peter Giess | February 18, 2007 at 09:32 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
I noticed your article on semi auto rifles (military types) for hunting. I do not use
2/19/2007
Page 224 of 853
them as I prefer a revolver, a contender or a single shot rifle. I do not own one
of them because they do not appeal to me.
However, I am concerned that we should not legislate the type that is allowed
as a hunting weapon. I was particularly concerned at your use of the
description "terrorist rifle." We do not need to add to the anti-gunners fodder.
Please rethink your use of this term.
Regards
Posted by: Marvin Sartin | February 18, 2007 at 09:32 AM
Wow. I can't believe what I just read. What a moron. I could go on and on, but i
think it has been covered pretty well in the above hundred posts. I will never
purchase a magazine that this guy is associated with. Never. I hope he gets
canned really quickly.
No apology required, just get rid of him.
What a pompous individual you are. When did it become your place to
determine who uses which type of firearm to hunt with? Either you can not
discern the technology that has been around for over 100 years, or you’ve been
fooled in to the myth that a “Military Style rifle” is a true “Assault Rifle”.
As for calling these rifles “terrorist rifles”, you are an even bigger fool. How do
you equate a Hunter with an AR-15, with “group of people who terrorize the
world with them”? Or maybe your reference was to the United States Military,
since you weren’t very specific?
I guess it’s not Politically correct to kill a coyote, unless it’s with a Traditional
rifle.
You are entitled to you opinion, and you know what opinions are like, because
everyone has one.
I for one will cease to do business with your sponsors.
Posted by: E Hartman | February 18, 2007 at 09:33 AM
I know OLB, Ted Nugent, Magnum Oppus won't support ya, nor myself. Woods
might though.
I know you're proly off the old rocker by know but stay in there, as you need
more
sit down time.
I guess my old Ted Williams that held both 22LR and 22short sold at [b]Sears
and Roebucks[/b] with a capacity to hold 14 rounds with a semi auto action
should have been banned back in the 60's too.
2/19/2007
Page 225 of 853
That was the gun my dad taught me to shoot when I was about 5 years old.
Imagine that, kids squirrel hunting with a semi auto.
How do you feel about kids hunting?
I'm really scared to have asked that.
Posted by: laughing fox | February 18, 2007 at 09:33 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
I'm very disappointed in your attitude regarding "assault rifles". That's not even
a proper term for these rifles. You've been brainwashed by your liberal buddies
into beleiving that any rifle that doesn't fit the stereotyped hunting rifle must be
banned from use. Get real.
Where do you think some of our hunting ammo originates from? Military
rounds.
If the hunter is proficient with their choice in rifles, so be it. It's not up to you to
decide.
Your about one mindless paragraph away from losing another longtime reader.
Posted by: R. White | February 18, 2007 at 09:34 AM
That is ridiculous.Are you going to say the Garand and mauser 98's should be
banned also as the were as you put it "assault rifles" also.While were at it lets
ban tube fed semi auto rimfires too.I'm done listening to you and am done with
your mag.Go find some nice liberals to hang out with.
Posted by: steve | February 18, 2007 at 09:34 AM
Calling a AR a terrorist rifle shows how ignorant you are, and a discredit to our
military. Please fire this guy. Life is about change. Old people hate change.
Posted by: ADOY | February 18, 2007 at 09:34 AM
Wow. That is one very ignorant and arrogant article Zumbo. I'm glad you were
so upfront with your opinion though. Now I'll never be duped into buying a
magazine with one of your articles inside.
Thanks for the heads up!
LW
Posted by: LW McVay | February 18, 2007 at 09:35 AM
These are some of Zumbo's sponsors REMINGTON
SWAROVSKI
GERBER KNIVES
2/19/2007
Page 226 of 853
MOSSY OAK
CABELA'S
Call them all. Let them know that we do not support companies that stand by
Dumbo.
Sir:
When it comes to gun control, there is no gray area..you are either pro gun, pro
2nd ammendment or anti gun, anti 2nd ammendment.
No fence straddling.Your comments re assault type rifles for sporting purposes
would make you decidedly anti gun!
You might feel more at home among the Clinton/Brady/ Anti Gun faction than
among sportsmen.
Posted by: R. Meyer | February 18, 2007 at 09:35 AM
Note to self;
Never purchase another copy of Outdoor Life or Remington products.
Mr. Zumbo, sir, you are truly clueless to the fact that you are doing more
damage to all American gun owners than your "leftist" friends could ever do.
As an American soldier serving in the "Sand Box," I take great offense to you
grouping me with terrorist by the type of weapon that was issued to me. By the
way, this may cause you great pain, but most of the younger soldiers over here
are planning on purchasing AR-15 type weapons on their return to the States.
Furthermore, be very grateful that this group of fine Americans, I mean
“terrorist,” by your definition, are defending your rights to be stupid in a public
forum with a weapon system that you classify as a “tack-driving terrorist
weapon.”
God bless the United States and all her Soldiers, Sailor, Airmen and Marines,
past and present.
Sergeant First Class
United States Army
Baghdad, Iraq
Posted by: American Citizen-Soldier | February 18, 2007 at 09:38 AM
Quoting Zumbo,
"I had no clue. Only once in my life have I ever seen anyone using one of these
firearms.".
2/19/2007
Page 227 of 853
Then what makes you think you have the knowledge, experience, or authority
to say what you did?
It's like George W. Bush commenting on foreign relations, the economy,
domestic affairs, the environment, social programs, healthcare, education, or
just about anything else... Sure, it's job-related, but that don't mean you know
what you're doing.
Posted by: LR-308 | February 18, 2007 at 09:39 AM
Jim,
I believe in our individual rights to the extent I spent 21 years in the military
protectiing them. ALL OF THEM. What have you done for the country and
individual freedoms?
I don't own a AR-15 or AK, but I do own a lot of historic battle rifles from the first
and second world war era. You want to take them away also?
I hope you read at least half the post here and come the conclusion that you
poked a hornets nest with your uninformed comments. Are you enlightened
yet?
Mr Zumbo, You are an Idiot and because of your Idiotic comments I will boycott
ODL and all of its advertiser's. I will be posting your article on the Bulletin board
at the gun club with a suggestion to boycott ODL and its advertiser's-If
Remington made an AR-15 rifle I don't think you would have written such
useless crap. Maybe you should be writing for the Brady Group or PETA
Posted by: Duke | February 18, 2007 at 09:39 AM
http://www.jimzumbo.com/links.html
The sponsors have recieved my thoughts and a link to this thread.
Assault weapons?????????
What ?????????
I think that saying that ARs and AKs have no place in hunting is an elitist
statement along the lines of "Only people who wear fashionable, expensive
clothes, and drive a luxury car should be allowed to play the links on our
country club." It's snobbery, pure and simple. The assumption here is that
people who hunt with military-style (and they're just "style" with the appearance,
but not the function) rifles are spray-and-pray yahoos who aren't serious
hunters. What if someone cannot afford a $2500 custom rifle? An AK (or an
2/19/2007
Page 228 of 853
SKS for that matter) are solid, inexpensive firearms that are available to many,
and - if the shooter does his part, can be accurate enough to hunt game with.
Besides, getting gun owners to denounce other gun owners is exactly what the
gun-grabbers want. I'm sure they're clapping with glee if they read this blog.
Disgusting.
Posted by: Brian S. | February 18, 2007 at 09:41 AM
No Outdooe Life foe me. I'll stick with publications that stick with me. Boycott
Zumbo and Outdoor Life!
Posted by: Rob | February 18, 2007 at 09:41 AM
Jim,
The west coast blacktail I took this year with my FAL was equally as dead as
the one I took last season with my boltgun.
Showing up in hunting camp with an appropriate caliber semi auto does not
raise eyebrows. You sir, must do your research on the top of a barstool, and
from the looks of this written drivel, your writing soon follows. That said, when
was the last time you actually walked on a hunt. From the looks of things: a
long time. Maybe I don't believe your use of vehicles is appropriate, maybe it
runs afoul of my idea of what hunting should be.
Ask any outfitter to level with you. The last thing they want to see stepping out
of the floatplane is some old gasbag like yourself with his pimped out
Weatherby Magnum Boltgun or his Bargain Store special Remington Boltgun,
neither of which the client can hit with.
My black rifles are rugged, accurate and durable. They can take the knocks of
hunting travel and weather conditions better than any of my more traditional
rifles.
In short, your ignorance in writing this is stupifying. This is directly damaging to
RKBA. Leave the attempts at humor to Pat McManus.
....oh, and there will be follow up letters to your employers regarding your
behavior and its relation to their bottom line.
Now man up and write a complete and sincere apology AND retraction if you
still have a shred of dignity.
Posted by: Brian P. | February 18, 2007 at 09:41 AM
I respond to some of your statements thusly:
"I call them "assault" rifles, which may upset some people. Excuse me, maybe
2/19/2007
Page 229 of 853
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.""
Technically, they are not assault rifles as ALL assault rifles are machine guns.
You are not only a tradicionalist but also intolerant, and ignorant. The reason
why terrorists would use REAL assault rifles is because they are the best tool
for the JOB. You are stupidly falling into the trap the anti-Bill of Rights people
have so cleverly laid for you. You are confusing the TOOL with the USER.
"Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting."
You do not decide what has a place in hunting or not. A firearm is just that, a
tool. If you can afford a $5,000 hand made tool and I can only afford a $500
tool, what does it matter as long as they both get the job done correctly? What
does it matter if I can use my tool for hunting and for defending my life and my
nation?
"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
"sporting firearms.""
Whether you are aware or not, you are already a target of anti-Bill of Rights
people. And you are their best ally as you swallow their lies and deceipts. Your
hunting rifle is the next target in their agenda as a "high power sniper rifle".
"SPORTING FIREARMS" is a term initially used by Nazi Germany in their
weapons law. They also pioneered the concept of sporting use. They made
people believe that firearms that did not have a sporting use were inherently
evil, (sounds familiar?). We copied their language for our own GCA of 1968.
You are thinking just like they want you to think.
Your SPORTING FIREARM, if you are a student of history, started life as a
combat tool. Only later was it modified to kill game or shoot at targets. Our
founding fathers used what we would now considered "Assault Rifles" against
the British. Only in the last 50 years the American Citizen is less well armed
that the corresponding Regular Army Soldier.
"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."
THE ONLY THING HUNTING HAS TO DO WITH FREEDOM IS THAT IT IS
GOOD PRACTICE. THE SECOND AMMENDMENT IS NOT ABOUT
HUNTING, IS ABOUT PRESERVING THE ABILITY TO DEFEND THE
NATION AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC BY HAVING
THE ABILITY TO OUTGUN THEM AT ANY TIME.
2/19/2007
Page 230 of 853
It is fools like you who divide the firearm owining Americans creating your
artificial, arbitrary and self defeating divisions. Your stupidy is delivering us into
the hands of our enemies by allowing them to remove the TOOLS that guarntee
our freedom.
I am sure that WHEN they take your HUNTING RIFLE away as a HIGH
POWER SNIPER RIFLE you will happily take golf, or knitting. We true
PATRIOTS who understand the use of RIFLES will have a more difficult time,
as we will understand that it is not the tool that was taken, but our Right to
Defend Ourselves.
Posted by: E.L. Rodz. | February 18, 2007 at 09:41 AM
Jim Zumbo,
You sir are the "terrorist". You have used your pen to assault the right of others.
We will use our wallets to insure you will no longer be able to do this.
No more Remington products.
"The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world
with fools."
Posted by: Dongizmo | February 18, 2007 at 09:41 AM
Jim, I am really saddened to read this tripe from someone that I highly
respected until now. I am a recently retired U.S. Marine infantryman, a veteran
of Desert Storm, Somalia, OIF, and Afghanistan. I am a hunter, I am a
conservationist, I am a Patriot, and one thing I am now after reading this article
is a FORMER subscriber to Outdoor Life magazine. You can thank me later
when I stand up for your rights along with many others when they come for your
"Sniper Rifles"
Posted by: canucksvt | February 18, 2007 at 09:41 AM
You sir are a narrow minded, traitorous bigoted idiot. I could elaborate, but it is
foolish to counsel fools. Many others have already expressed my view.
Posted by: Scott Battles | February 18, 2007 at 09:43 AM
First of all, cancel my subscription. Second, we use the AR15 family of rifles for
varmtis and hogs down here in Texas. We also like the dual-purpose nature of
the gun for Kantrina-like scenarios. We're kinda fond of the Second
Amendment too.
I will be sending E-mail to Outdoor Life and every vendor that advertizes with
them for your anti gun statements. Sarah Bradey would be a better employer
for you!
Posted by: Kenny Volner | February 18, 2007 at 09:44 AM
2/19/2007
Page 231 of 853
Well Jim, while you are entitled to your opinion, it seems to me that in view of
the fight we've been having over our rights, it should at least be an informed
one. Yours, by your own statement, is not.
With friends like you, we don't need friends. Now that you've announced your
desire to throw a sizable number of hunters under the bus, don't be surprised
when those people are not there when the bus is coming for you.
Posted by: Stu Farish | February 18, 2007 at 09:44 AM
I'm utterly disappointed. Mr.Zumbo, how long do you think that it will take for
your idiotic musings to appear in anti-gun blogs? Before you are quoted by the
likes of Schumer, Clinton, Feinstein and Pelosi from the halls of congress? You
will be portrayed as the "Dean" of American outdoor writers and as such it will
be loudly trumpeted that "the majority of hunters want these guns banned". You
know the position that you held (past tense) in the great fraternity of outdoors
men and you sold us out. Branding tens of thousands of hunters as terrorists
because, on occasion, the weapon that they take afield doesn't look like your
idea of what how a rifle should look is asinine. Needless to say no product that
you shill for, no publication that you write for, no media outlet that provides you
a podium for your lies will ever see a dime of my money again. I will be
contacting each and everyone of them to express my outrage that they pay you
at the same time you advocate taking two of my guns (both customized AR-15s
used for target shooting and varmint hunting) from me.
Posted by: John Sandy | February 18, 2007 at 09:44 AM
Perhaps these military-style weapons do not have a place in the hunting
culture. May I respectfully remind the poster, however, that the Second
Amendment was written to explicitly protect the common ownership of military
rifles.
Posted by: Doesn't own an assault rifle | February 18, 2007 at 09:46 AM
I consider Mr. Zumbo's post to be offensive to me in so many ways .... as a
hunter, as a citizen and as a man who has spent the last 33 years serving his
country in the armed forces. It is hard to understand a man who would now,
one day after my retirement, seems to consider me a terrorist all because I
choose to hunt coyotes with an AR-15.
"Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We
"sporting firearms."
2/19/2007
Page 232 of 853
I have been subscribing to Outdoor Life since 1964. Never again.
Posted by: Leonard M | February 18, 2007 at 09:46 AM
WRONG!!!, ZUMBO, you are the terrorist. Your views are very misguided. If
you were any kind of American you would understand how import at the 2ND
Amendment is. I really do love all my Remington shotguns and bolt rifles that I
use for hunting. I hope Remington does not feel the same as you or I will have
to stop buying their guns.
You are a disgrace to our American Hunting heritage and all Americans.
I would suggest this column be printed off and passed around with our active
duty people.....they will "Love" it.
Do the proper thing Zumbo....aplogize....and resign.
what a fool.
Posted by: Brian Woodworth USN(Ret) - (terrorist according to Jim Dumbo) | February 18, 2007
at 09:46 AM
We are all entitled to our opinions but, mine aren't published and circulated
among thousands of people that love to hunt. I suspect Jim, you didn't really
have a clue otherwise, you wouldn't have made such comments. Enjoy
whatever it is you decide to do in your retirement. You've had a great run!
To Remington:
I deployed to fight terrorists, not to come home and be categorized as one due
to my choice private rifles. Until you withdraw your support for Mr. Zumbo, I will
no longer buy any Remington products.
Interesting words but what do they mean? I figure I shoot somewhere around
250 rounds every two weeks from my pistols alone. In fact, one week ago I
bought a new pistol and 250 rounds of ammunition, Remington's UMC, and it
was gone within 1.5 hours at the range.
So let's extrapolate those numbers shall we? Two-hundred and fifty rounds
every two weeks, is 6,500 rounds of pistol ammo that I will not be buying from
Remington this next year. That does not include the thousands of rounds I
shoot out of my "terrorist rifles" each year. If I guestimated 10,000 rounds I put
down range yearly, that would probably be on the low side. I am but one
shooter of MANY.
How many rounds does your average hunter put down range? I would be
generous if I said 1%.
2/19/2007
Page 233 of 853
As I said before, I am just one shooter of many, and I participate on many
bulletin boards on the Internet. I WILL spread the word about your support of
this "gentleman" and his self-defeating views. Remington needs to find new
writers to sponsor.
This is just one more reason that we NEED a 10 day waiting period before we
are allowed to publish our opinions. The government needs to do a background
check on the writer, affirm that he is able to publish acceptable material and
has a NEED to say what they wish to say. Then we need to make sure that
they only have enough ink to publish 500 words and that they can only publich
one artical a month.
These measures will keep "terroist writers" from publishing crap harmful to the
Constitution and scaring the American public.
Way to point out the flaws in the First Amendment Jim, without useful idiots like
you, the liberals would get nowhere in this nation.
Posted by: FAL Shooter | February 18, 2007 at 09:47 AM
That was a very sad article. Sad because it was so ignorant of the challenges
we face. I would like to remind you that hunting is not mentioned in the 2nd
amendment. Just the higher principal of a free citizen's right to bare arms. This
elitist attitude among some hunters that you are a "special class" among
sportsmen will not help you if those with an agenda to change our society get
their way.
Posted by: Glenn Cuttrell | February 18, 2007 at 09:47 AM
That is the most idiotic bunch of dribble i have ever read. Just because your
sponsors don't make an military style firearm like an AR you pump out that kind
of bull. For years i have carried an woodmaster (remington) with a clip. It fires
as fast as any AR i have shot. I have hunted varmints with both. What is the
difference? there isn't any. You are way out of line. I just retired you from my list
of writers. but you will be happy to know that i put you in with ted kennedy. You
guys make great bed fellows. Kind of hard to believe anyone in the world that
hunts would stand for this type of article, so out goes the OL too.
Posted by: DW | February 18, 2007 at 09:47 AM
I can't beleive you wrote that nonsense! You lack experience and knowledge to
write about this sport. I will never subscribe to a magazine that has writers with
your opinion on staff.
You should do some research on a class of weapons before you put your foot
in your mouth.
2/19/2007
Page 234 of 853
Semi auto only rifles are NOT Assault Weapons. That is a name made up by
our buddy "Slick Willy" and his anti-gun friends.
You are aware that they want to take away your Evil High Powered Sniper
Rifles and put serial numbers on your ammo and tax it until you can't afford
ammo anymore.
I like my C&R Bolt guns and my "Evil" semi auto Garands, but would also use
my AR and AK "Assault Rifles" for hunting as they are well suited for that
purpose.
Posted by: valkyrie0002 | February 18, 2007 at 09:48 AM
Gee, you're not the brightest bulb in the circuit, are you? As one of Sarah
Brady's little lapdogs, aren't you afraid of losing your little rifle in the picture
above, which looks an awful lot like the deadly assassin's weapon used by Lee
Harvey Oswald in 1963. Why would any hunter need a weapon that can fire
more than one shot at as time without reloading?
You have ended your career on a decidedly low note.
It is disappointing to find this type of ignorance anywhere, much less on a site
that should be 'pro-2nd amendment'.
Posted by: Ross | February 18, 2007 at 09:49 AM
How much did Sarah Brady pay you to write this article?
You make me sick and i will never read anything you write again Jim!
You should know better than to write an article like this right now!
Posted by: rick p | February 18, 2007 at 09:50 AM
Totally disgusting and untruthful article written by an ignorant man. Calling the
AR15 a terrorist rifle is like calling a scoped deer rifle an "evil sniper rifle". You
are no friend of the Second Amendment or our rights as Americans. I am
writing ODL and your advertisers advising them of my boycott.
Posted by: Charlie | February 18, 2007 at 09:51 AM
Jim,
I don't like to hunt coyotes. Therefore I could assume your same flawed attitude
and say that all coyote hunters are bloodthirsty psycopaths and our hunting
fraternity has no room for them. Next you'll be saying that autoloader shotguns
also are terrorist weapons and we should only hunt (nay, be allowed to own)
over and unders. Don't be an a$$. In troubled times like these we do not need
you as a voice for our interests. Seems like it is time for you to hang it up and
take your dated (and very jaded) attitude and beliefs with you. So long -
2/19/2007
Page 235 of 853
hopefully. As the saying goes - "You don't need to go home - you just can't stay
here".
Posted by: tomk | February 18, 2007 at 09:51 AM
All I have to say is the following:
E-mail sent to Remington.
Posted by: Absit | February 18, 2007 at 09:51 AM
Yeah you should let Remington, and Outdoor life magazine know that you are
no longer respected by a nation full of shooters. Oh wait, don't worry about it,
we will tell them with our wallets. Way to go, you just got yourself fired.
Posted by: Nate | February 18, 2007 at 09:52 AM
so,by extention...ANY semi automatic rifle which fails your "smell test" is a
weapon of which their only for terrorist usage?
what a load of bull excrement,the weapon in question was for civilian use
previous to the adoption by the US military forces.
further,your definition is abitrary and capricious.
lastly,there is a reason we own these and other firearms.....it's called personal
freedom,and liberty...you might look that up sometime in your reading of others
previous works.
Posted by: Mike Dillemuth | February 18, 2007 at 09:52 AM
After reading Mr. Zumbo's comments on the AR-15,I have to say I'm sick to my
stomach and ashamed that Remington and Outdoor life would have anything to
do with this traitor.I read Outdoor life for many years,but never again.I own
many Remington firearms,but never again.I own and shoot a AR-15 match rifle
and have hunted coyote with it using a legal 9 round magazine and it is not a
terrorist weapon.Only a moron would think such a thing.If the gun owners in this
great nation of ours don't stand our ground,then everything will be lost."United
We Stand and Divided We Fall"
Posted by: Donnie Bunch | February 18, 2007 at 09:53 AM
Well, it's a safe bet that I won't EVER subscribe to this rag "Outdoor Life". What
a colossally ignorant halfwit you are, Zumbo.
I'm a Soldier in the US Army. The message I get from your little rant here is that
you think that I & my buds are all terrorists.
I'll fight for your right to say/print what you please, but at the same time I'll
exercise my right to tell you to GO F@%K yourself, assclown.
Here's a little tip for ya ... if you like firearms, don't EVER say or print anything
that can be construed as anti-second amendment. Think you can manage that,
genius?
2/19/2007
Page 236 of 853
Posted by: James | February 18, 2007 at 09:53 AM
I stopped reading your drivel about 5 years ago. I will never purchase anything
you write, any product you endorse, or the products of those who endorse you.
Note to Remington, ODL, Cabelas, the publisher of his elk hunting garbage and
many others: Zumbo is out of touch with your customer base and a potential
liability.
Posted by: Lew | February 18, 2007 at 09:53 AM
Good job cannibal, not only am i a "right wing gun nut" but now i'm a terrorist
too, thanks for keeping me updated as to my status in society, what a bafoon!!!
Subscibtion cancelled!!!
I'm certain this arguement was made by back in the day by people who thought
that Lever actions were the weapons of choice for Outlaws and renagades.No
respectable citizen would be caught hunting with one.
I make no consideration for what the limp wristed public might think about it.We
have advance's in Firearm technology
And if something better comes along why not use it?If im going to spend my
hard earned money for a Rifle would it not make sense to buy the most
advanced thing on the market?
something that could be used for multiple Task?
AR-15 will do just that.Anything from yote's in the boondocks to Looters in new
orleans.I make no apologys for owning one,I don't care one bit if it offends the
general public,They can go back to things they really care about like the death
of Anna Nichol Smith
Posted by: Kevin Neal | February 18, 2007 at 09:54 AM
Well Jim, Try and remember the 2nd Amendment.Now be ashamed of yourself
for ever bringing this up. You have lost a lot of support here including me!
Posted by: Tim O | February 18, 2007 at 09:54 AM
I hunt prairie dogs, deer, and coyote with ARs. A conventional wood stocked
bolt action is lighter but I don't have one and don't see a reason to bgo buy one
when my AR-10 does the job fine.
If you think that cutting these rifles out of the market will protect your hunting
rifles though, and your handguns, you're kidding yourself. Your unfortunate
words have made you an "anti" in my eyes... you can't be halfway.
Posted by: Ernie Wilson | February 18, 2007 at 09:55 AM
Tell Remington what you think of their dollars supporting this guy.
http://remington.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/remington.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php?
2/19/2007
Page 237 of 853
p_sid=49R5Eyui&p_accessibility=0&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPSZwX3NvcnRfYnk9JnBfZ
Mr Zumbo
e-mail sent to Remington and Outdoorlife and Your show will not be on my TV.
Posted by: John DeMoss | February 18, 2007 at 09:55 AM
Well, there goes the Remington I was saving for. I guess Winchester will be
happy to take my money.
So, all the people who got out of the military, who bought a familiar rifle
because they did not want to learn another rifle, are terrorists who have no
business hunting. Glad you made that clear.
DanH
Posted by: DanH | February 18, 2007 at 09:56 AM
Jim, I was just wondering, will you be voting for Hillary Clinton next year? It's
time for you to retire!
Posted by: Jim Carr | February 18, 2007 at 09:56 AM
Dear Jim,
Please reread the 2nd amendment.
Note it has nothing to do with hunting.
That is all.
Sincerely,
Jacob Erickson
Posted by: Jacob E | February 18, 2007 at 09:57 AM
Hey Jimbo, I won't be buying any more Remington products till, YOU'RE
FIRED!! Nothing from Outdoor Life, as long as you are on the payroll. I won't
watch any show on TV that features you. I will not buy products from any
company that sponsers you, or these shows.
Time to RETIRE !!
Thanks, ASSHAT
KP
Posted by: kp | February 18, 2007 at 09:57 AM
Doofus!
Posted by: Glenn W | February 18, 2007 at 09:59 AM
Sheesh, Zumbo;
2/19/2007
Page 238 of 853
Hang together or hang seperately?
Now, turn in your "Evil Sniper Rifle" to Sarah Brady and shut up.
it's for the children
Posted by: Mike in Seattle | February 18, 2007 at 09:59 AM
These "terrorist rifles" look the way they do because of the strange concept
called eronomics. A pistol grip provides a much more natural hand position. A
multi-position stock makes them adaptable to different shooters. The inline
barrel and stock reduces recoil induced displacement off the target. These rifles
are made of modern synthetic materials to make them lighter and more
durable. In short, they are modern. M-O-D-E-R-N. Can you say it? Do you
understand what it means? Or should we all go back to using the matchlock?
I do believe that your ratings are going to take a major hit. I for one will never
again watch your show, even for a public recantation of this nonsense.
Posted by: DGreen | February 18, 2007 at 09:59 AM
These "terrorist rifles" look the way they do because of the strange concept
called eronomics. A pistol grip provides a much more natural hand position. A
multi-position stock makes them adaptable to different shooters. The inline
barrel and stock reduces recoil induced displacement off the target. These rifles
are made of modern synthetic materials to make them lighter and more
durable. In short, they are modern. M-O-D-E-R-N. Can you say it? Do you
understand what it means? Or should we all go back to using the matchlock?
I do believe that your ratings are going to take a major hit. I for one will never
again watch your show, even for a public recantation of this nonsense.
Posted by: DGreen | February 18, 2007 at 09:59 AM
Jim is evidently a very uninformed writer who does NOT represent me.
I have an AR-15 semi automatic rifle and I have a 5 round magazine to use with
it for hunting. There is nothing wrong with it. What is the difference between
that and my Remington 742 Woodmaster with a 5 round magazine?? NONE.
Some of us just like to hunt with a little variety.
I believe the death of the 2A is going to be partly because of the hunting
public's attitude. Some hunters feel as long as they have their shotgun for birds
and their deer rifle for larger game, there is no need for a private citizen to own
anything else such as handguns and semi auto defense rifles. I say nonsense.
Outdoor life, Remington and Jim Zumbo are on my boycott list, because of their
anti Second Amendment (2A) views. I will never read Outdoor Life again!
I have several Remington shotguns and rifles but I will buy NO more
Remington's!!
Jim Zumbo, you are NOT one of us, you, Outdoor Life and Remington do NOT
2/19/2007
Page 239 of 853
speak for me.
Jim Hall
Garland, TX
I have lost all respect for Zumbow and Outdoor Life. Gun bans? Based on gun
type? The most absurd thing I have ever seen in the pages of this magazine.
Zumbo has fallen into the hands of the anti gun people. I am currently a
subscriber to Outdoor Life and will NEVER renew again because of this most
ridiculous article!
Jimbo, I've read your articles for years and have enjoyed most of them. But
your aticulate enjoyment of bashing a "weapon" such as the AR-15, M-16, is
appalling. Since when was the weapon I and all other US forces issued, a
terrorist weapon? You call yourself a hunter and an advocate of the "right for
the people to keep and bear arms?" Excuse me? You sound like you write for
CNN, not Outdoor Life. And as the magazine name implies, hunting with all
types of rifles IS outdoor life. When's the last time you went huntin"? You think
the AR-15 is only capable of killing men, women, and children? I know of
several that are capable of sub- MOA accuracy right out of the box. If a hunter
wants a weapon that carries more than just a couple of rounds in the mag., so
what? Does that mean you're going to empty the whole magazine into your
quarry? Hell no! It means you like the convenience of not having to reload
everytime you pull the trigger.
I think you'd better issue one hell of a PUBLIC appology to everyone you
insulted, to include our military servicemen, hunters, and sportsmen. When you
spout out bile crap like this, you're no better for the betterment of the sporting
comunity than Diane Fienstien or Ted Kennedy. We as a shooting base MUST
stick together on ALL aspects of the shooting, hunting fraternity.
I won't pick up another issue of O.S. till I hear of your upcoming and inevitable
appollogy!
Jim Foster
box 201
Bartley, NE 69020
Posted by: Jim Foster | February 18, 2007 at 10:00 AM
No more Remingtons for me if they're going to be associated with a gun
grabber.
Posted by: az shooter | February 18, 2007 at 10:00 AM
You just called every man serving our nation a terrorist. Do you understand
2/19/2007
Page 240 of 853
that? Have you ever served? Obviously not. You sir, are a traitorous bitch.
There's a thing in your head called a brain. Take your's out and play with it. It is
doing you no good locked up in storage.
You stink worse than a pile of monkey spunk.
Posted by: MSG. Steve Hartsell USMC | February 18, 2007 at 10:00 AM
I can not believe ... specifically I was blindsided you would say such
nonsense... The AR is just a tool similar to your semi-automatic pistol, semiauto .22 rifles, semi-auto hunting rifle and/or shotgun. They all have their place.
Why do we not outlaw them all and just let the criminals have them?
I was an avid watcher of your outdoor show... you had always seemed like an
open minded gentleman. Now it appears that you are giving into the
opposition... I know that this great country allows for freedom of speech which
is everyone's right... but it also provides me the choice to watch or not to watch
your show and/or support your sponsors.
Posted by: Tom Sullivan | February 18, 2007 at 10:00 AM
WOW, just WOW. I can not believe what you wrote. Do you realize that you
have just taken the side of the Anti-hunting and Anti-gun groups with the words
you just had written. Your ignorance on the subject shines bright Zumbo. You
just lost another fan and a supporter of yours. I will no longer support you or
anything your involved with. The companies of which products you endorse will
be getting a letter stating why I will no longer be purchasing them. You sir have
lost your ways and now lost support.
Bravo on an excellent article!
Posted by: Charles Schumer | February 18, 2007 at 10:03 AM
Pity I don't have a subscription to cancel. I'll just have to never again purchase
this commie rag off the rack as I have done in times past.
Zumbo Fudd is a traitor to the Constitution and American shooters. But what
should one expect from someone with such an effeminate nature.
Fudd's rifles ARE considered sniper rifles by a lot of people, and he best wake
up and see what is going on around him. Further, Fudd should be fired for this
act of treason.
Remington had best come up with a very good apology for this one!
jim
Posted by: Jim Hunter | February 18, 2007 at 10:04 AM
2/19/2007
Page 241 of 853
You just ended it for yourself.
What a fool.
Look at all the replies,do to what has been written,by YOU.
Remington,and any other sponser you have,will see this web page,I assure
you.
Every magazine,hunting show,and anything else I can do to dive you out of the
public eye will be done.
You sir,are finished.
Posted by: Bob McMullen | February 18, 2007 at 10:04 AM
To Remington:
I have to post just one more point. Do you notice how many members of the
United States' Military who are offended by these comments? Do you really
want to be associated with a writer who insults those of us in the military by
lumping us in with the group we are currently fighting? Seems like a bad PR
position to take. Your PR guy might want to get off his butt there in Wyoming
and start fixing the problem this writer caused. Your company does sponsor
him and this page. If that is the image you want to portray, that's fine, but
expect a backlash.
OK Sarah, let's go after those "terrorist rifles".
Then let's go after those dreaded sniper rifles. Yes, those are the ones that
have telescopic sights and that can hit a target the size of a man's head at
hundreds and hundreds of yards. Yes, the "sportsmen" hide them as "hunting
rifles" but we know better, don't we?
Then we must eliminate these incredibly destructive shotguns. They are the
worst close-range anti personnel weapon this side of a hand grenade. Some of
them are semi-auto, yes, you heard right, semi-auto just like the "terrorist
assault rifles". These bad boys can sling more than an ounce of deadly shot for
each pull of the trigger, sending hundreds of projectiles dozens of yards,
destroying everything in their path. Again, these "sportsmen" hide these in the
guise of "bird hunting guns". Snicker, snicker, how stupid do they think we are?
Posted by: Al | February 18, 2007 at 10:04 AM
Jim: I doubt if Jack O'Conner could have lived down comments like that, what
make you think you can?
I hunt coyotes with scoped flat-top AR15 and if it's within 300 yards, it's dead.
Not you, anyone else, including the government can have it, not ever.
Posted by: Craig S. | February 18, 2007 at 10:05 AM
2/19/2007
Page 242 of 853
Im so disappointed in you.
Guess I'll have to find a new magazine to subscribe to.
Posted by: Paul B, | February 18, 2007 at 10:05 AM
So Jimbo, you're a hunting snob. I've met people like you before. More
specifically, you're a bolt-action hunting snob. I've met all sorts of "shooting"
snobs in my time whether they be hunting snobs, shotgun snobs, or rimfire
snobs (no, I'm serious about the rimfire snobs).
Well guess what? I don't hunt. I don't personally feel the urge to go snipe at
small furry creatures. But I don't go around condeming people who do!
Posted by: Poramin | February 18, 2007 at 10:05 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
Since AR-15 variants have the potential to be every bit as capable for hunting
as any more "traditional" rifle, I can only assume that your disapproval is based
on your perception that ARs aren't "pretty" enough.
I'm an ugly man--does that mean I shouldn't be permitted to hunt with any kind
of firearm?
Throwing your fellow gun owners under the bus of gun ban advocacy, in some
abject, futile attempt at appeasement, is both traitorous and contemptible.
You disgust me.
Posted by: kjhof (AKA 45superman) | February 18, 2007 at 10:05 AM
We all need to remember....dollars speak loudest....don't support Outdoor Life
or folks like Zumbo.
We can vote many ways...no money speaks louder than a ballot.
Posted by: Ed Bowen | February 18, 2007 at 10:06 AM
My thoughts exactly! Glad to see we are on the same page!!
Well.........no more Outdoor Life mags for me or anything else having to do with
Zumbo.
Was watching his shows on TV...no more.
Was enjoying my time here until this.....I won't be back now.
You want to try to get rid of some of my firearms........I'll have nothing to do with
you....except to tell everyone what you have done. Betrayal!
Trying to pander to the liberals doesn't work, you moron.
2/19/2007
Page 243 of 853
I would suggest that everyone that feels the same as most of us seem to, to
"vote" with our money.
Since Outdoor life seems to support Zumbo and this &*(%, then don't buy their
products or anything supported by them.
Posted by: Jim Skinner | February 18, 2007 at 10:07 AM
Way to go, Jim. I'm not even a hunter, yet I know that calling for a ban of a
particular type of firearm because *you* don't see a use for it, or the public is
"afraid" of it is just idiotic.
Are you (and the rest of your gun-grabbing ilk in Congress) saying that a single
shot from your precious "hunting rifle" won't kill a man just as dead as an AR-15
will? (here's a hint: it's all about shot placement)
Maybe we should just go ahead and ban everything but the musket, since that's
all our Forefathers had to work with. In fact, maybe we should ban ALL
firearms, since they can ALL kill a man if used irresponsibly or with criminal
intent.
Hey Jim, after you've successfully helped facilitate a complete ban on all
firearms and thereby on hunting, sport shooting and self-defense, it'll be pretty
hard to hunt with pointy sticks won't it?
Idiot.
Posted by: Monica Ricci | February 18, 2007 at 10:07 AM
I will not be renewing my Outdoor Life subscription nor will I support it's
advertisers. Zumbo you are now part of the problem, how does it feel?
Posted by: VA Shooter | February 18, 2007 at 10:08 AM
You sir are a disgrace to gun owners.
Posted by: RN | February 18, 2007 at 10:08 AM
The more I read this the more upset I am getting.... Zumbo, you are a complete
moron and should not be allowed to speak for gun owners.
How much is the Brady Campaign paying you these days?
Posted by: Stephen P Grasso | February 18, 2007 at 10:08 AM
Now I'm really glad I cancelled my subscription to your magazine. I will
occasionally pick up a copy at the airport, but those days are over. Until this
article is removed, I will also stop purchasing any Remington products and
encouraging my friends/co-workers to do the same.
I imagine you were looking for this type of response...shock media seems to be
the cool thing these days. Congratulations, you got it! Too bad you couldn't
2/19/2007
Page 244 of 853
shock us with something positive and enlightening.
I have found that once someone starts "going negative" the end is near. Good
luck in retirement, you need it...
Posted by: Adam | February 18, 2007 at 10:08 AM
I don’t want to take up space and repeat other comments, but divided we fall.. I
disagree with your analysis of AK, AR, A what ever, a gun is a gun, 2nd
Amendment is not about hunting anyway!
Respectfully
Posted by: Wm. G. Barrett | February 18, 2007 at 10:09 AM
You sir are a douchebag. No more money for Outdoor Life, EVER.
Posted by: I. P. Freely | February 18, 2007 at 10:11 AM
What the Hell are you thinking????? Divided we Fall!!!! Take away AK's, AR's
next its Remington 700's . Look at Canada and Austrailia.
Posted by: todd | February 18, 2007 at 10:12 AM
Well Jim, you have just executed a perfect 'insert foot into mouth' operation. I
for one thank you for revealing your anti-gun and anti-2nd amendment bigotry.
You can rest assured that I will no longer be buying from your advertisers.
Its hard enough for us to hang on to our gun rights without people like you
displaying your ignorance in public. How about you try to educate yourself
before you shoot your mouth off the next time?
The AR and AK Sport Utility Rifles are more popular these days because
people, hunters included, like them. The do the job that the individual asks of it.
You may not like them, and you are entitled to your opinions, but you cross the
line when you say things like:
"I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles."
and
"I say game departments should ban them from the praries and woods."
Attempting to connect SUR owners with terrorists is just plain irresponsible.
And calling for a ban? You ought to be joining the Brady bunch. Your sponsors
and publisher will be hearing from us.
Posted by: LibertyNews | February 18, 2007 at 10:12 AM
I'm stunned......simply stunned.
Every one that has posted here needs to tell three other SHOOTERS about this
article....no matter what or why they shoot. And everyone that knows about it
2/19/2007
Page 245 of 853
needs to contact every one of his sponsors, their board of directors, and any
contact pertaining to Zumbo's connections within the shooting community....
And get him OUT of the shooting community.
Zumbo, you are a cancer, and need to be removed from the American shooting
communitie's collective body.
Posted by: C.W.P. | February 18, 2007 at 10:12 AM
When I was new at my job and made a mistake I was asked
What were you thinking?
So I ask you in regards to this.
What were you thinking.
Mr Zumbo. I am amazed that you accept monies and other goodies from
Remington. This company makes ammunition in calibers that fit those evil
assault rifles that you badmouth. Sir, I would ask you to not only separate
yourself from that "Terrorist-Supporting" Company but to return any and all
profits and product you may have received from them. We wouldn't want you
involved with Enemies of the United States, Do we?
Posted by: Miggy | February 18, 2007 at 10:14 AM
I do not own nor shoot autos except a 10/22. That said I am disappointed in this
read! Everything about it was wrong and I was most disappointed with the
comment *We don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize
the world with them, which is an obvious concern.* I would prefer to see Mr.
Zumbo promoting ALL guns instead of being like being like the ignorant people
out there who have no clue and lump the terrorist in with us (the outdoor
sportsman). A gun is a gun no matter how it is made. I prefer the single shots
myself but don't run around knocking the hunter who enjoys the automatics,
muzzle loaders, shotguns and archery which all can be used in a terrorist way. I
am also embarrassed to see one of the last surviving American legend names
(Rem) appear in such an outrages read that mentions nothing about the the
results of the field test which would be very interesting. I sure wish we
Americans could deal with the real problems in our society and INMO a gun is
not the problem, we need to deal with the problem person using them in a
wrong/illegal way This is not a good way to get a true outdoorsman to read your
magazine!
Posted by: Gary Wenzl | February 18, 2007 at 10:14 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
Your comments are asinine and idiotic in the extreme. Hunters and shooters
2/19/2007
Page 246 of 853
should be walking side by side, not stabbing each other in the back.
I am an avid hunter, I use whatever tools I see fit for the situation. I hunt with
bolt action rifles for deer, I hunt with pump and semi-automatic shotguns for
waterfowl, dove, chucker and quail, and I hunt for feral hogs with a semiautomatic rifle. I also use handguns to hunt deer and feral hogs as well. I have
shot just as many feral hogs with a handgun ( a Wilson Combat .45ACP) as I
have with my AR15 or my FN-FAL.
As a member of the Federal Law Enforcement community, I find that your
comments are demeaning to all who use a semi-automatic in the performance
of their duties. So I am a terrorist now? I'll remember that when I am on the
Border with Mexico, doing my damned best to keep terrorists and illegal aliens
out of our country. All while carrying a semi-automatic to protect myself and the
citizens of this great nation.
You, Sir, make Judas seem like a Kindergarten teacher.
I will never purchase anything from any of your sponsors. I tend to shoot
approximately [b]TEN THOUSAND[/b] rounds a year between my hunting and
duty firearms. I will not utilize a single Remington product again, including both
of my bolt action rifles. I would rather purchase Smith&Wesson, Colt, DPMS,
Rock River Arms and all those other companies that stand up for all of our
rights, not just for elitist snobs like Mr. Zumbo.
I will never buy an Outdoor Life magazine ever again as long as I live. You
should be ashamed for allowing this type of drivel to be published. It is
demeaning to all of us who truly cherish freedom.
Posted by: KiloDeltaBravo | February 18, 2007 at 10:14 AM
You make me sick.
When my black rifle is outlawed I will not lift a finger to save your bolt action.
Posted by: J. Goudy | February 18, 2007 at 10:14 AM
I'm sending a letter to Remington about this, I think they'll be awwwfully curious
about their posterboy jim zumbo.
I'm also spreading this to the various gun forums and groups that I'm a member
of on the internet.
If the second amendment only has to do with hunting, then maybe the first
amendment only has to do with paper and quills. about tea time isnt it?
Jim Zumbo, you are a tool.
-spike
Posted by: Spike | February 18, 2007 at 10:15 AM
2/19/2007
Page 247 of 853
I happened to agree with Mr. Zumbo. I don't know that I'd go as far as to call
them "terrorist" rifles but I can honestly say that my sentiments regarding them
are nearly identical to his as far as hunting goes. I just don't get it.
By my way of thinking it's like taking your standard family sedan and dressing it
up to look like a Cup car to run out for groceries. The difference is, the guy with
the car just looks like an idiot to John Q Public. The guy with the assualt style
rifle looks like a gun toting crazy nut to John Q Public(read non-hunter).
There simply is no need for it and unlike other issues, this one has a VERY
NEGATIVE image attached to it.
Posted by: Jay Anglin | February 18, 2007 at 10:15 AM
You need to eat your oatmeal so you can get all the crap you are spewing out
of your system.
Posted by: Wilfered Brimely | February 18, 2007 at 10:15 AM
I used to subscribe to Field & Stream but they seemed to write with a "holier
than thou" attitude so I switched to Outdoor Life. I guess the cancer has spread
and it's safe to say I won't be supporting this publication any more.
Gun owners cannot afford to divide the lines. And I cannot afford to support any
individual, group or company who promotes the issue.
Posted by: D H | February 18, 2007 at 10:15 AM
Jim, just remember one thing EVERY FIRE ARM MADE TODAY WAS AT ONE
TIME AN ASSAULT RIFLE! As each new improvement was made for war, it
was adopted by hunters/shooters for personnal use. Keep in mind BAR's were
legal to own up untill about 50 years ago. Do I advocate hunting with a BAR?
NOPE, but at the same time, the LOOK of my firearm is what gets it
demonized, along with the caliber. Is a 50 BMG to much? Then how about
a .50 cal muzzle loader? Both are .50 cal, so what is the difference? How about
a 45-70? 30-06 was part of Patton's army in the girand, but you can't hunt with
a .30 carbine in some states becuase the ammo is underpowered. DON'T
HELP THE GUN BANNERS! They will cite you as a hunter who gets it, and use
your own words to help take away another increment of gun ownership! WAKE
UP!
Posted by: Michael Alan Bridges | February 18, 2007 at 10:15 AM
Mr. Zumbnuts,
I am going to the dentist this week, nothing serious just a cleaning.
Wanted to let you know that each time I go to the Doctor or Dentist I will be
taking the Outdoor Life Mags and tossing them.
2/19/2007
Page 248 of 853
Magazines and traitors like you we do not need. Good luck with the retirement!
Posted by: Jeff Huber | February 18, 2007 at 10:16 AM
What gives you the right to say what should be banned and what shouldn't.
What troubles me is that you are "testing" a new round by killing Coyotes? I
think that should be banned.
And let's not forget OutdoorLife Magazine.
It's time for anyone that has a subscription to this leftist, elitist magazine to
cancel it. I wonder who is really in charge at OutdoorLife, and who the editor is.
They're surely NOT 2nd Ammendment supporters.
Posted by: C.W.P. | February 18, 2007 at 10:17 AM
Zumbo, I'll bet the Coyotes veiw you as a terrorist with your politically correct
'hunting gun'.
Posted by: john paulic | February 18, 2007 at 10:17 AM
When gun enthusiasts and gun owners turn on their own it is the beginning of
the end. The 2nd amendment is there to protect all of us. Undermining the 2nd
amendment will turn us all into sheeple.
Wake up, everyone!! Keep the 2nd amendment alive!!
Posted by: Karen | February 18, 2007 at 10:17 AM
Mr. Zumbo, you have spoken like a bona fide liberal dipshit. You must have
been Summa Cum Laude at the John Kerry University of Clown Arts. I hope
you can sustain yourself on the cold enmity of your (former) peers, because, if
your employers have any brains at all, you'll be unemployed come Monday
morning.
Posted by: Anthony S. Taylor | February 18, 2007 at 10:17 AM
The fear. The insanity.
Why shouldn't I be able to own a semi automatic weapon? For that matter, how
about a select fire weapon?
I mean, as we all know, if we gave select fire weapons to legal gun owners they
would *instantly* become murderous, indiscriminate killers right? I'm sure I
speak for everyone here when I say that as soon as I even touch a machine
gun the first thing I want to do with it is to head for the nearest place with
clusters of people and kill 'em all. The sarcasm should be evident here.
Good God. Use your heads people. Even if fully automatic weapons were legal
the problems that would arise from such ownership by those that are already
2/19/2007
Page 249 of 853
legal to own firearms would be pretty much nill. And the criminals who really
want one? They would just convert a semi or find one on the black market
(which already exists). It's not as if they care what the law says.
Stop the fear.
Posted by: Riptide | February 18, 2007 at 10:18 AM
What a damn shame. I will be letting your sponsors, including Remington since
they are advertising on this page, know what I feel about this situation.
Hopefully enough people will cancel their subscriptions to ODL and stop buying
products from ODL's sponsors to get you fired. I know I will be doing both.
What you just wrote is the definition of a career-defining and career-ending
move rolled into one.
Posted by: Matt in Texas | February 18, 2007 at 10:18 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
I was rather disappointed to read this latest blog entry. It disturbs me that
someone of your stature, a supposed gun owner no less, would be reduced to
making derogatory comments about the rifle choice of many of his fellow
Americans. I am further disturbed to see that you not only fallaciously refer to
my AR-15 as an “assault rifle” but that you have gone one further by calling it a
“terrorist rifle”. The AR-15 platform is a proven weapons system, and a proven
hunting rifle that has been in use by American hunters and law enforcement
officers for decades. In fact, my dad brings my AR to work with him everyday
where it rides “shotgun” with him in his police cruiser. I am truly disappointed
that you would imply that my father and I are terrorists simply because our
choice of rifle is different from the rifles that you prefer.
I myself am no hunter. However, I would never trample on your privilege to hunt
with the weapon of your choice. It is discouraging that you would use your
position to trample on the choices of others. It is also discouraging that a wellrespected publication like Outdoor Life would support this sort of elitist rhetoric.
If this truly is the position of Outdoor Life, I will never purchase one of their
magazines until their position is changed and people like you Mr. Zumbo are no
longer on their payroll. As for you Mr. Zumbo, I will never watch your TV
program, purchase any books you might publish, or purchase any magazine
that employs you. Your attitude is simply unacceptable from a gun owner, and
your publications are now unacceptable to me as well.
I have lately been considering purchasing a precision bolt-action rifle. I had
been torn between two platforms, the Remington 700P and the FN Herstal SPR
A1. If Remington truly supports the views that you espouse Mr. Zumbo, I will
never purchase a Remington product again. I am only twenty and most of my
2/19/2007
Page 250 of 853
gun-buying years are ahead of me, there is no telling how much of my business
Remington has lost. At least I know that FN supports the rights of Americans to
possess what you deride as “assault weapons” and “terrorist rifles” with their
release of the FS2000 and PS90 to Americans in the last year or two.
I truly hope that you realize the error of your ways and issue a public retraction
of this blog entry. I personally will not be holding my breath.
Posted by: Ian Beuckelaere | February 18, 2007 at 10:18 AM
There is no fool like an old fool. I was always taught it is better to remain silent
and thought a fool, than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt. However I
must admit I am glad that most fools do eventually show their true colors as it
makes it easier to know who the real enemies are. I am continually amazed at
the better than thou attitude and arrogance of so many in the shooting sports
industry. On a side note, I have to wonder how many hunting accidents
involved shotguns and bolt action rifles compared to ARs or AR clones.
Additionally the 2nd amendment is not about hunting and one gun verses
another it is about free people owning what ever they choose. You Sir should
be ashamed and need to resign from any firearm related endeavors. Seek
counsel and try to right your wrongs.
Posted by: Gary Kellems | February 18, 2007 at 10:18 AM
Here are your thirty pieces.
I hope you enjoy them, as I have posted on several forums the need to contact
your advertisers and have them dump your site and magazine. I imagine that
Remington, Gerber, Swarovski, and Cabela's will not be too happy to recieve
several hundred emails in regards to these sad and foolish writings.
Nathan Bell
Posted by: Nathan Bell | February 18, 2007 at 10:18 AM
I believe that your association of AR type rifles with "terrorists" is grossly
irresponsible and idiotic. They allow you to write for an outdoors publication?
The best comment yet appeared early on in the comments:
"Just wait 'til they come for your "high powered sniper rifle."
Posted by: George Walker | February 18, 2007 at 10:19 AM
Did you let one of your Remington hunting buddies write this blog? I mean,
they're probably paying for your hunting trip and providing you with a few "gifts",
right?
This is the kind of drivel that's given gun writers such a poor reputation over the
last two decades.
2/19/2007
Page 251 of 853
Posted by: EddieCoyle | February 18, 2007 at 10:19 AM
Not only do you start off by embracing the buzz word "assault rifle" of anti-gun
campaigners to weapons that don't fit the classification, you go on to toss out
what could be considered the best phrase to help in creating anti-gun laws"terrorist guns". Maybe the problem stems from the fact that you consider
hunting to be an elite fraternity that needs to exclude certain firearms. Once
within the laws about magazine capacity and such, who are you or anyone to
rail against what another person likes and is comfortable shooting. Not only is
gun collecting an American hobby, it's also one that is not limited to specific
types of guns and for good reason.
All you did was cry about how the weapon looks, but you seem to have no
problem with the function of a semi-automatic rifle. It makes me wonder if you
have as much contempt for a traditional Prussian saiga as you seem to have
for an Ak variant with a pistol grip.
people constantly talk about how the ak/ar platform is a "combat" rifle and how
it promotes a "spray and pray mentality. that sounds good until you look at the
statistics. Not only are most of these guns NEVER used in any type of 'combat'
even defined in the most open of ways, but the majority of rounds fired in
America are used for target shooting. If the look of a gun scares you more than
the person behind it, you might want to think about therapy.
As an aside, it looks like it's time to cancel my subscription to outdoor life. I'm
not interesting in getting a gun magazine that promotes ignorant and baseless
anti-gun views, albeit if only by hosting blog spots online. I've got better things
to use my money for.
Posted by: Cigolon | February 18, 2007 at 10:19 AM
I never was a fan of yours and your recent statements underscores why. Is it
"THE" look of the AR-15 that bothers you so ? Is it because it is semi auto ?
They (Ar-15's)look like terrorists weapons ..... Do you go by plane to your
"hunts"? Those great big airplanes look like terrorists weapons to me. Do you
drive anywhere ? Better not be driving around in one of those terrorist
weapons. Mr Jim Zumbo, you are a disgrace to hunters and firearm owners all
across this great nation.
Posted by: Mike Sullivan | February 18, 2007 at 10:19 AM
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the
right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Nope, don't see anything about "sporting purposes" or "hunting" in there.
What I do see is "security" and "Arms".
arms
2/19/2007
Page 252 of 853
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English armes (plural) weapons, from Anglo-French, from
Latin arma
1 a : a means (as a weapon) of offense or defense
See, the word "arms" is inherently martial in its nature; it is the root word of
"army" and "armament".
I don't hunt, but I support hunting and all of the shooting sports. Unfortunately I
cannot say the same for many in your "hunting fraternity" who have given me
dispariging looks or made ignorant comments when I was at the range with my
AR rifle.
"What do you need that for?"
Indeed. Enjoy the rest of your career, Mr.Zumbo, such as it is.
Posted by: Thekatar | February 18, 2007 at 10:19 AM
Zumbo,
You were one of my heros when I started hunting as a kid. What is wrong with
you now? Did you drink the purple kool-aid too?
I see a couple of years ago you had no trouble taking a North Kaibab Trophy
Mule Deer tag from the state of AZ. How many "Black rifle" guys that live in AZ
paid taxes supporting the AZG&F to supply you that tag.
Oh yeah, wait you only got that tag after US Outfitters sued the state to allow
them to guide you and others on the hunt.
I now think you are full of shit. You write all this crap about hunting but you now
constantly have a guide showing you the way. I have no more respect for you.
I haven't subscribed to that "rag" OL for 20 years or more. Now I will toss all
your books I own so my kids will never be tempted to read them either.
YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN WHERE YOU CAME FROM!!!!
Posted by: George Foreman | February 18, 2007 at 10:20 AM
You've obviously outlived your usefulness as an outdoors writer as it appears
you are slowly getting out of touch with reality. It's probably a good time to retire
and live out your remaining years in peace and tranquility.
I've grown up with you, read countless articles you've written and watched
many programs with you. However, after these completely stupid statements
above anytime I see something written by or the face of Zumbo the old
hypocritical idiot, I'll flip the page or turn the channel.
You may have done a lot of hunting and gained a lot of experience but you've
2/19/2007
Page 253 of 853
lost all respect and I no longer have a use for you.
Posted by: Michael V | February 18, 2007 at 10:20 AM
I will wrtie to everyone of these sponsors and demand that they withdraw their
advertising from this magazine because of this antigun position...
REMINGTON
SWAROVSKI
GERBER KNIVES
MOSSY OAK
CABELA'S
Posted by: Ohio LEO | February 18, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Why would Remington make 7.62x39 cal ammo if it's only for terrorists?
Hmmm.....
I'm sure that Jim isn't worried about everyone loosing their guns.....he's special.
Nobody would come after his. He's one of the beautiful people.
Idiot
Posted by: Just one of the little guys | February 18, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Thank you Mr Zumbo. Jim and I would like to put your article on our web page
as an endorsement for our short-term agenda. Unfortunately, you may not like
our long-term agenda!
Posted by: Sarah and Jim B. | February 18, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
I truly wish that you had stopped writing before either senility or dementia took
over. I think that you have greatly effected the bottom line of both Remington
and Outdoor Life. I will never buy another Remington or subscribe to Outdoor
life until you are no longer affiliated with either. I own and hunt with a couple of
these "Homeland Denfense Rifles" and enjoy them on the range. I am not a
"Rambo" or a "Terrorist" but consider myself a citizen of the United States. I am
sorry for you to end your career on such an issue.
Posted by: W Gray | February 18, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Mr. Zumbo and Outdoor Life,
Since you don't support the Second Amendment, I cannot support you or your
liberal magazine. There is a stack of them at work in our lounge, and tomorrow
they are all going in the trash. I will inform all hunters I know that Outdoor Life
has taken a stand against semi-automatic firearms and in favor of the Assault
2/19/2007
Page 254 of 853
Weapons Ban being renewed. You sir are a traitor to the Constitution and a
disgrace to sportsmen everywhere. True shooting sportsmen support all
shooting sports. When I shoot an IPSC 3-gun match using a "terrorist rifle", I
am a sportsman. When you shoot ducks with a shotgun, you are a sportsman. I
support your rights, but being a coward and liar you don't support mine. Fine,
but be assured gun owners will now retaliate by dropping any support of this
magazine or any companies you are affiliated with. I work for a major gun
maker and will make sure we never advertise in your publication. You are either
with us or against us in fighting the war against our gun rights.
As for the rest of you "sportsmen" who posted supporting mister Dumbo, you
are also worthless.
John
Way to go.....divide the shooting community....BTW: The second ammendment
is not about hunting!
I think it has all been said. Traitor, elitist, mouthpiece for anti-RKBA groups.
I will also cancel my subscription to OL.
I will never buy another Remington product.
If you are fired, I will reconsider.
Posted by: 7.62mmFMJ | February 18, 2007 at 10:23 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
You should be ashamed of your comments regarding law abiding citizens and
their choices in particular guns, Outdoor Life and Remington should also be
ashamed of themselves for allowing you to post such anti-gun comments.
I was considering a purchase of a bolt action rifle in .223 and was looking at the
Remington and the Savage.
After reading your comments, if I do make a purchase it will probably not be the
Remington.
Posted by: phideaux4886 | February 18, 2007 at 10:24 AM
You my friend, are the enemy!
Typical "holier than thou" PC Bullsh*t!
Thou Sucketh!
Posted by: Woody Cofield | February 18, 2007 at 10:24 AM
Hope you have a good retirement package, cause it's coming up fast. Once
2/19/2007
Page 255 of 853
your sponsors see the response to your little booboo, they will drop you like a
hot potato. You can always park cars for the Brady bunch...
Posted by: Don Blair | February 18, 2007 at 10:24 AM
Unbelievable drivell comming from a so-called hunter/sportsman/outdoorsman.
Mr.Zumbo, you opened up a can of worms you were not prepared for. Good
luck with your gig at outdoor life. I'm sure when the brass at ODL gets wind of
this your career will take a turn for the worse. Well, maybe you can become a
politician? Heck, with your mindset maybe you can hold a benefit dinner for
Hillary?
Now, onto ODL and your sponsors:
REMINGTON: Glad I bought my son a Savage..
SWAROVSKI: I like Nikon better anyway..
GERBER KNIVES: Been looking for a new carry knife, guess I'll get that
Benchmade..
MOSSY OAK: Looks like no more camo gear from them...
CABELA'S: Woohoo, Gander mountain here I come...
The rest are on the "ban" list now too. Congratulations Mr.Zumbo.
Regards, a AK owner/hunter/shooter and outdoorsman in PA.
Posted by: Jay | February 18, 2007 at 10:24 AM
Dear Mr. Zumbo,
I was horrified reading your latest blog entry "Assault Rifles for Hunters?".
Calling for a ban on so-called assault weapons, by a hunter and "Sporting"
firearms enthusiast who is widely read, is at best reprehensible, and at worst
horribly irresponsible and dangerous to the "sporting" activity that you so
seemingly love. You have just pulled a "Hanoi Jane" on the people who support
your livelihood. Yes; aiding, abetting and comforting those who wish to do all of
us harm. You have essentially given ammunition to those politicians who wish
to take your bolt action "sporting" rifle and your over and under "sporting"
shotgun from your cold dead hands.
You have made a grievous and flawed observation in your argument. The sight
of any firearm, including a single shot bolt gun to the general urban bound
person uninitiated to hunting arms represents the same threat of a so called
assault rifle. To those people, it does not matter if you carry a single shot rifle or
an M-60 in the woods or fields, your appearance, wearing hunting attire,
2/19/2007
Page 256 of 853
brandishing a weapon is a horrible threat to their society.
You may have been better served by writing an article on why the first
amendment is not essential to a free society, and how government censorship
of published media should be accepted. In the end, the results may be the
same for you, as I suspect you will now find a tremendous out lash from your
readership and viewership, to the point that many will stop subscriptions to any
forum for which you write or appear, and boycott any product that your may
endorse. The free market will sort it out.
It is my sincere hope that a very large population of firearms owners will have
learned the painful political lesson of incrementalism that has occurred in
recent years. You, of all people should know better.
I implore you to rethink your position for the good of your "sport".
Provided you rethink and publicly retract your statements, you may be forgiven,
but your ill-conceived words will not be forgotten by your peers.
Charles J. Martinak
Posted by: Charles J. Martinak | February 18, 2007 at 10:24 AM
As an owner of an AR15 rifle, I take great offense at your libelous accusation
that I am a terrorist.
This is what I sent to every contact I could find at outdoor life:
________________________
Outdoor Life's viewing audience, and the way your organization is viewed
in the eyes of the hunting and shooting public has been seriously
damaged by the comments of the hosts of one of your shows. This should
affect your advertising reveneus.
Mr. Zumbo has demonstrated a position of clear firearms ignorance, and a
position that is clearly a treacherous betrayal of the 2nd amendment.
That your network is being used as a platform to strike at the heart of
the 2nd amendment is shocking to me, and many many others.
The internet bulletin boards are aflame with outrage at Mr. Zumbo's
comments here:
If Mr. Zumbo's position is representative of the rest of Outdoor Life as
an organization, you can expect a steady and justified decline in
advertising dollars as most of the shooting republic realizes that
Outdoor Life is not pro 2nd amendment, but simply a typically liberal
anti-gun media outlet dressed in Realtree.
2/19/2007
Page 257 of 853
Respectfully Submitted,
------------------------------Posted by: | February 18, 2007 at 10:25 AM
I think it's time you retired - you are so out of touch with the mainstream of the
shooting sports it's almost unbelievable.
I'm sure your comments will very soon be featured proudly among the anti-gun
web sites and in the liberal rags like the NY Times, promoting gun bans.
If this is the way you think, you're no friend to the 2nd Amendment or to
shooters.
Posted by: Bob Yerzak | February 18, 2007 at 10:25 AM
Email addresses for his sponsores. Thanks to a post on AR-15 board.
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Tell them of how you feel of their dollars supporting this individual.
Unbelievable drivell comming from a so-called hunter/sportsman/outdoorsman.
Mr.Zumbo, you opened up a can of worms you were not prepared for. Good
luck with your gig at outdoor life. I'm sure when the brass at ODL gets wind of
this your career will take a turn for the worse. Well, maybe you can become a
politician? Heck, with your mindset maybe you can hold a benefit dinner for
Hillary?
Now, onto ODL and your sponsors:
REMINGTON: Glad I bought my son a Savage..
SWAROVSKI: I like Nikon better anyway..
GERBER KNIVES: Been looking for a new carry knife, guess I'll get that
Benchmade..
MOSSY OAK: Looks like no more camo gear from them...
CABELA'S: Woohoo, Gander mountain here I come...
The rest are on the "ban" list now too. Congratulations Mr.Zumbo.
2/19/2007
Page 258 of 853
Regards, a AK owner/hunter/shooter and outdoorsman in PA.
Posted by: Jay | February 18, 2007 at 10:26 AM
Your bolt gun is a WWI Assault Rifle, should we ban it?
Every hunting design rifle on the planet has at one time been a primary issue
rifle of some mailitary. Only a complete idiot wouldn't know that.
Oh, I forgot who I was addressing!
Posted by: Pissed Off! | February 18, 2007 at 10:27 AM
As K-mart soon learned after Rosie gun basher
became their spokeswomen, irate gun owning customers became K-Marts
nemisis.
I think the relationship between you
and Remington will now suffer the same fate....
As someone above put it, you truly have stepped on your own dick.
Posted by: §§§ Raven §§§ | February 18, 2007 at 10:27 AM
Mr Zumbo,
I don't own an AR, AK, or any other type of semi-auto rifle. I never have cared
for semi-auto's. I hunt with bolt actions and single shots. "Sporting" rifles in your
terms. Even though I personally have no use for an AR-15, who am I to judge
someone else for hunting with one. It is a firearm that isn't any different than
any other firearm. Reading your article has really opened my eyes to the future
for gun owners. There won't be one because of fellow hunters and shooters like
yourself! Suporting a ban on one type of firearm is setting all the rest up to be
banned. I have enjoyed your articles, but I will no longer read a word you write
as I would feel as though I am supporting anti-gun legislation in one way or
another. I won't be renewing my Outdoor Life subscription! Zumbo you are no
better then Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and the rest of the anti-gun idiots!
Posted by: Aaron Robnolte | February 18, 2007 at 10:27 AM
that will gust give these gun grabbers a place to start. let them have those rifles
then they will want more. we can not let them get started.
Posted by: hdrider | February 18, 2007 at 10:28 AM
I think I will email the NRA and ask then to stop running OLN ads in American
Rifleman and give them a link to your stupid ass comments. What I hunt with is
none of your damn business. If I chose to use my AR or my AK it's up to me,
not some socialist old fart. If I chose to hunt with a bolt gun it would be
my .50BMG.
2/19/2007
Page 259 of 853
Posted by: AKETHAN | February 18, 2007 at 10:29 AM
Note to Outdoor Life: Get rid of this guy before it is too late. Making a profit on a
magazine is tough these days. It is even tougher when you piss off your
customer base like this.
Note to Remington: Pull your sponsorship before you go down with the ship.
Jim:
I can only believe that either you are working for the anti-gun movement or you
are an ignorant fool. I can only hope the Democratic party doesn't use your
article against us in next years election. Do you have any idea what damage
you may have caused the shooting and hunting sports? You should be
ashamed of yourself.
You have one course of action if you really love the hunting and shooting
sports. Apologize, retire into obscurity and never endorse another product. I will
never purchase anything associated with your name.
Posted by: Mark Bogert | February 18, 2007 at 10:29 AM
thanks alot ASSHOLE!! I feel Remington should SHITCAN your ASS right now!!
Do you realize how much Remington ammo we purchase for these rifles?????
You are calling all of us terrorists you SON OF A BITCH!!!It's people like you
that have caused our country to be in such a state of distress.Way to goASSCLOWN!!!
Posted by: 9mmsubgun-m11 | February 18, 2007 at 10:29 AM
And some people see no need for a hunter to use an obvious "sniper
rifle" (highly accurate bolt action rifle topped with a high-powered scope) while
they are in the woods. I think we should revert all "sporting arms" definitions to
include only black powder and lead cast bullets ignited by flint. Percussion caps
can be left up to our lawmakers for debate. They are possibly too modern.
I personally have no need or use for an AR-15 or one of its clones for hunting
purposes. However, many states that allow them for hunting purposes limit the
magazine capacity when engaged in those hunting activities. Ruger sold out to
the 1994 ban on full-capacity magazines in a quid pro quo scenario that left it's
Mini-14 and Mini-30 untouched by other bans that sought to take away semiauto magazine-fed rifles. I'm not about to jump into bed with that kind of
mentality nor will I give Nancy Pelosi and her ilk ANY ground--not an inch--with
my rights.
Mr. Zumbo's opinions, although protected by the 1st Ammendment, encroach
the 2nd Ammendment by playing into the hands of those who want to portray
our right to Keep and Bear Arms as relavent only to "sporting arms". At the risk
of sounding cliche, the Second Ammendment "ain't about duck hunting".
2/19/2007
Page 260 of 853
How does Mr. Zumbo feel about rifles chambered for the venerable .50 BMG
cartrige? Is that a terrorist weapon as well? Many of the Pelosi-types who will
use his rhetoric would also claim that the rifle pictured with Mr. Zumbo at the
top of this page is a tool of criminals and terrorists who would play the role of
"sniper" on our city streets.
What about the Springfield M1A? What about the Remington 7400 or the
Benelli R1? Remington advertises on this page. What should we say about the
sales of their Sendero which is far more accurate and more suitable for sniper
applications than even the PSS in my humble opinion. Remington's Marine
Magnum is obviously not a sporting firearms but is perfectly legal for certain
types of hunting in certain states. I call for a complete boycot of Remington until
they pull the Marine Magnum from their line of products or reduce its magazine
capacity and add to its barrel length.
Sounds stupid doesn't it? Maybe Mr. Zumbo ought to look in the mirror. When
they come for the AR-15 Mr. Zumbo won't say anything. When they come for
the semi-auto shotgun Mr. Zumbo won't say anything. When they come for the
scoped bolt-action rifle, nobody will be there to help Mr. Zumbo because
everyone else will have been disarmed by people who share his opinions.
Apathetic sportsmen who don't know how to "live and let live" are the antithesis
of what it takes to maintain our gun rights.
You sir are just what the left wants and needs to further their agenda of
stripping Americans of their right to own firearms and to be able to defend
themselves and their families.
Hitler and other monsters of the past learned that an unarmed citizen is one
that can be easily forced into submission giving up their freedoms. To quote a
very great American...
"What country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time
to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance.
Let them take arms."-Thomas Jefferson
Posted by: John Ward | February 18, 2007 at 10:29 AM
Even if I didn't hunt with my AR (I do), I would be just as angry over the drivel
which I read this morning.
I have a right to own such rifles and it has nothing to do with hunting. Mr.
Zumbo's ignorance and arrogance is the kind of complacent attitude that allows
legislation against gun owners to be passed. I have traditional wood stocked
bolt actions for purely hunting pursuits. Those are far less important to me than
my rifle which makes me a capable member of The Nation of Riflemen.
2/19/2007
Page 261 of 853
Since the good men and women in green are currently using the Stoner design
to kill terrorists in the Middle East, I think an AR-15 is more properly called the
Anti-Terrorist rifle.
Unbelievable.
I am encouraged to see the replies of a good many gun owners who
understand the true purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
Posted by: Greg | February 18, 2007 at 10:29 AM
If youre such a "traditionalist" way arent you hunting with a club or stick?
You sicken me in the most offensive way!
I'm now cancling my subscription with OL!
If youre fired, I may reconsider.
I also will be NOT purchasing any Remington products until this wrong has
been made right.
As an owner of both "terrorist rifles" and hunting rifles, I'm deeply offended.
Posted by: eric | February 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
"I applaud Mr. Zumbo for the courage to stand up for some of us. I am glad he
is speaking his mind! He knows the truth that hunting with machine guns is
wrong. He is a strong voice for abolishing firearms. Most of todays weapons are
too destructive! I think most should be banned. As for hunting it just glorifies
killing innocent creatures. I don't care what people think I am afraid of guns and
don't like them. Good for you Mr. Zumbo tell it like it is."
Kangaroo,
You're a bigger fucktard than Jumbo. You don't have the brain cells to figure
out the difference between a semi auto rifle and a machinegun. Dumbass
Oh yea, full auto weapons are still legel. They are illegal to hunt with you retard.
Posted by: Don | February 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
when Clinton signed the crime bill i went out and bought a mini 14 just to have
the papers go across saying i bought it the day he signed the bill.
i would love to have a ar for my coyote calling. right now i shoot a 788
Remington and that is where Remington screwed up they should have never
stopped building that rifle.
i have had coyotes come in 8 at a time the most i ever get out of a group is
three due to a three shot clip. i could please a lot more of my ranching buddies
if i had that fast follow up shot. the ar is the right gun for coyote control.
soon everyone in wyoming will need one if the usfws doesnt accept wyoming's
wolf plan soon I'll be ready for vigilante predator control.
as far as wyoming is concerned they can approve the plan or close out their
2/19/2007
Page 262 of 853
experiment in our state and remove all their wolves. or we the people will do it
for them. accept it as we want it or get them the hell out.
are you going to vote for Hillary? i to am deeply saddened by this mentality if
you don't like some kind of rifle don't buy one.
Dear Mr. Zumbo,
I was horrified reading your latest blog entry "Assault Rifles for Hunters?".
Calling for a ban on so-called assault weapons, by a hunter and "Sporting"
firearms enthusiast who is widely read, is at best reprehensible, and at worst
horribly irresponsible and dangerous to the "sporting" activity that you so
seemingly love. You have just pulled a "Hanoi Jane" on the people who support
your livelihood. Yes; aiding, abetting and comforting those who wish to do all of
us harm. You have essentially given ammunition to those politicians who wish
to take your bolt action "sporting" rifle and your over and under "sporting"
shotgun from your cold dead hands.
You have made a grievous and flawed observation in your argument. The sight
of any firearm, including a single shot bolt gun to the general urban bound
person uninitiated to hunting arms represents the same threat of a so called
assault rifle. To those people, it does not matter if you carry a single shot rifle or
an M-60 in the woods or fields, your appearance, wearing hunting attire,
brandishing a weapon is a horrible threat to their society.
You may have been better served by writing an article on why the first
amendment is not essential to a free society, and how government censorship
of published media should be accepted. In the end, the results may be the
same for you, as I suspect you will now find a tremendous out lash from your
readership and viewership, to the point that many will stop subscriptions to any
forum for which you write or appear, and boycott any product that your may
endorse. The free market will sort it out.
It is my sincere hope that a very large population of firearms owners will have
learned the painful political lesson of incrementalism that has occurred in
recent years. You, of all people should know better.
I implore you to rethink your position for the good of your "sport".
Provided you rethink and publicly retract your statements, you may be forgiven,
but your ill-conceived words will not be forgotten by your peers.
Sincerely,
Charles J. Martinak
Posted by: Charles J. Martinak | February 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
2/19/2007
Page 263 of 853
I respect your opinion and it's no longer of any further interest to me. Your sport
is not my sport and you appear to identify uses for gun ownership that only fit
your specific needs. I agree with some of your logic, but "spray and pray" is just
as irresponsible as getting a "noise shot" with a bolt action rifle. The public's
perception of gun owners and hunters is more affected by irresponsible use
rather than the kind of firearm being used. I don't think I'll watch your show
anymore or patronize your sponsors (but how will I know, if I don't watch your
show?). Dang!
Posted by: Mark Forbord | February 18, 2007 at 10:31 AM
You should change your name to Dumbo and start a new career as a flying
elephant in the Circus, because you have no place as a writer for a shooting
magazine. Perhaps the Brady's , Clintons or Senator Kerry need some help. I
think you'd fit right in with them.
I can't believe that you would say things like that about the AR and AK
platforms. The same weapons our troops and Allies are using to fight terrorists
around the globe. Have you ever fired or even seen an AR varminter rifle?
Your article sounds like it was written by tan ignorant left wing gun grabber.
Maybe we should re-enact the AWB so they stop making rifles with evil bayonet
lugs.
Molon Labe
Posted by: Rich McMahon | February 18, 2007 at 10:31 AM
when Clinton signed the crime bill i went out and bought a mini 14 just to have
the papers go across saying i bought it the day he signed the bill.
i would love to have a ar for my coyote calling. right now i shoot a 788
Remington and that is where Remington screwed up they should have never
stopped building that rifle.
i have had coyotes come in 8 at a time the most i ever get out of a group is
three due to a three shot clip. i could please a lot more of my ranching buddies
if i had that fast follow up shot. the ar is the right gun for coyote control.
soon everyone in wyoming will need one if the usfws doesnt accept wyoming's
wolf plan soon I'll be ready for vigilante predator control.
as far as wyoming is concerned they can approve the plan or close out their
experiment in our state and remove all their wolves. or we the people will do it
for them. accept it as we want it or get them the hell out.
are you going to vote for Hillary? i to am deeply saddened by this mentality if
you don't like some kind of rifle don't buy one.
Congratulations! You have just taken the bait put out by all of the people and
groups who are in favor of gun control. The tactic they are now using is trying to
2/19/2007
Page 264 of 853
split outdoorsmen and shooters, plus, once they ban "assault rifles", they can
focus on handguns next, then our hunting rifles. They want you to compromise.
When you compromise, you take one step closer to their way of thinking, but
they won't step towards yours. More crap like this and I'll start a boycott
campaign against Outdoor Life's sponsors.
Posted by: mark gilbert | February 18, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Sir,
I must say that I do not agree with your statements about the ar-15 or for that
matter the ak rifles.
If you take a hard look at firearms made today, you will see that stainless
synthetic is overtaking blue/wood rifles.
Iron sights have all but disapeared on centerfire bolt actions.
Semi-auto handguns out-sell revolvers probably 5 to 1.
In-line black powder rifles outsell traditional sidelocks 10 to 1.
I myself do use a sks rifle in the truck for hog hunting for multiple kills. (they are
a destructive pest in these parts)
Times are changing. AR-15 rifles today are capable of sub-moa.
It is all about the 2nd Admendment. To discard one group of rifles is a disservice to all gun owners. Once we start down this slippery slope, the next
things coming will be ban side-locks because they are not as powerful as inlines. Revolvers do not have sufficient power in the field so they are banned.
Archery is no longer allowed due to in-humane kills. And of course the big one,
if the ar-15 has no place in hunting, then the general population really should
not be allowed to own one!
The "hang together or hang seperately" seems to apply here. As far as the "evil
sniper rifle", was there not a few years ago a California push by Feinstein(?) to
go after scoped rifles in that state calling them sniper rifles?
And if you are still going to stand by your statements, what is next? Banning all
22LR guns as insufficient for hunting? How about Banning the 22 lr because it
causes more property damage than all other rounds combined?
Sounds like you are indeed following the Brady camp in trying to blame the
gun, not the shooter!
Posted by: david | February 18, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
I only wish that I still subscribed to your magazine so that I could cancel my
subscription again.
As a sports writer, your ignorance in this area is inexcusable. The “assault
weapons” of which you write, are only determined by cosmetic characteristics
of pistol grips, flash hiders, and bayonet lugs.
A true assault weapon is capable of fully automatic or selective fire, but the
2/19/2007
Page 265 of 853
weapons that you mention are semi-automatic rifles. Read that as Military-style
rifles as opposed to true Military assault rifles. These same rifles are used in
serious marksmanship events (NRA and Civilian Marksmanship Program
sanctioned events.) You sound like the folks who lament the sun setting of the
federal Assault Weapons Ban; that ban had little if any effect on crime, and it
exploited tragedies to attack and undermine the Constitutional right to keep and
bear arms.
As a hunter and competitive shooter, I see many gun owners that do not mind
the idea of banning guns that they do not use. They feel that they do not "need"
these kinds of weapons, so they do not care if the rifles are outlawed. What
they do not realize (particularly many hunting sportspersons) is that there is
legislation in the works to broaden the list of firearms in the present ban to
include many semi-auto shotguns and other sporting arms. How long will it take
for scoped deer rifles to be considered sniper rifles?
No increased sense of security is worth the surrendering of a single right or
liberty, no matter how small.
Mr. Zumbo,
I don't own what you call a terrorist rifle, but I do own older "assault" rifles. You
know, Mausers, Enfields, and Winchester 94 carbines. You, Sir, are pitiful. I will
be carefully watching to see who publishes your work.
Posted by: Greg S. | February 18, 2007 at 10:33 AM
You sir, have no clue. Not only are you badly misinformed about hunting, your
knowledge of hunting rifles is on a par with squat.
Did you sleep with Rosie Odonal last night or was it Diane Fienstien.
You Sir have lost every ounce of credibility That I ever had for you as a firearm
supporter. You might as wel join forcws with PETA and start supporting their
cause also. You really do not have a clue about the firearms you are bashing.
What ol Jim doesn't get is that he is promoting the division of hunters and
actually helping the anti hunting community.
His logic is retarded at best, a semi-automatic gun is still a semi-automatic gun
whether it is blued & wood or if it is a black, scary-looking gun, like an AK or
AR.
His logic is flawed because if he thinks these make hunting coyotes & prairie
dogs easier, then by all means, he should remove his scopes, throw away his
2/19/2007
Page 266 of 853
compound bows, and his inline muzzleloaders.
Of course he admits he has no experience shooting these weapons, which
flaws his ideas further.
Jim, call Senator McCarthy, and jump on her bandwagon to renew & make
permanent the Clinton Assault Weapons ban! She needs anti-hunters like you
in her court.
Get a clue Jim, your sponsors should dump you
sorry rich that last post is mine don't know how it put your name on it.
Posted by: cmiddleton | February 18, 2007 at 10:34 AM
You sir, need to seriously consider retirement. You are out of touch with the
modern gun owner population. Your comments make you irrelevant to this day
and age.
Posted by: RWS | February 18, 2007 at 10:34 AM
Subscription terminated
Will be on the phone first thing monday asking for it and your head on a platter.
Calling Remington and asking for them to give me your head on a platter.
...Let's not lose sight of our goals. Sure, I'd like to see Zumbo fired and lose all
his sponsors. Putting Remington out of business, (unreal, anyway) does not
help us one bit. Don't you think the antis would love to see another gunmaker
go belly up?
...Don't just rant here. FOLLOW THROUGH with the promises to write letters
and emails to all his sponsors. As for OL, I dropped them years ago when they
started catering to elitists and ignoring those of us who can't afford $3000 rifles
or ten day Alaskan hunts.
Posted by: tap | February 18, 2007 at 10:34 AM
Instead of playing into the hands of the ignorant that don't recognize the fact
that there is no difference between the end result of a .223 Remington cartrige
fired from an AR-15 and one fired by a semi-auto "sporting arm", we need to
fight the ignorance that fuels the gun-grab fire. Mr. Zumbo hasn't figured that
out yet.
Jim,
So why are you out there hunting with a terrorist sniper rifle? I see no place for
2/19/2007
Page 267 of 853
these sniper weapons among our hunting fraternity.
Posted by: Chae | February 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Jim, make the last article or piece that you write, your resignation. What a
disappointment to our God given right to self-defense.
Posted by: Disappointed | February 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Name should Dumbo not Zumbo, looks and thinks like Dumbo. What a sad
sack of crap.
Posted by: Jeff in MI | February 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Outdoor life used to be my favorite magazine until I read this drivel. If an
another article appears in Outdoor Life about suppressing my 2nd Amendment
rights I will cancel the remaining two years of my subscription.
Posted by: Ronald Hollowell | February 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Nice job, Zumbo
We'll be ignoring any of the drivel you put out as an "outdoor writer".
Your "opinions" now carry the same weight as the "opinions" of Babs Streisand
and Sean Penn.
Moron.
Posted by: arfmel | February 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
I used Remington's "Ask a question" link above to send them this.
How can you have a man with Zumbo's opinions on the 2nd amendment
represent Remington to the shooting community? As I look over gun store
shelves, I will remember your spokesman as I'm making my choices. The
second amemdment is not about hunting. This makes my blood boil to see
comments like his from the firearms industry.
Posted by: Panzerschreck | February 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Subscription cancelled. Remington boycotted.
If I wanted to be exposed to this lever of stupidity, I'd go th the DNC website.
You are a disgrace to all who hold the Second Amendment dear.
Posted by: IDaman | February 18, 2007 at 10:36 AM
I'm sorry my choice of 'personal defense weapon' doesn't conform to your selfannointed higher standards as to whats appropriate to use for hunting......
When did you suddenly become the conscience of what constitutes appropriate
gun ownership ???
Have you ever even fired one ??
2/19/2007
Page 268 of 853
Out of fairness I'll simply discontinue OL's subscription and doing business with
your embedded advertisers, so I can supplement my ammo expense.
Posted by: Tom M. | February 18, 2007 at 10:36 AM
Mr. Zumbo
Thank you for standing up for my (our) Second Amendment Rights. It's too bad
there is something about "Shall not be Infringed" you don't quite understand.
You see the 2nd is not about elk hunting it's about freedom.
It appears you are ready to give yours up to the gun grabbers of todays world.
Posted by: WIlliam Fair | February 18, 2007 at 10:36 AM
Zumbo,you are a fool and a traitor to the firearm industry and to all firearm
owners.It's obvious that Remington required you to write this arrogant article
which proves they are slidding down hill with sales.Attacking another rifle that is
experiencing exceptional sales is proof of that.I believe Outdoor Life is just as
ignorant as Zumbo for allowing his arrogance to go to print.I have purchased
my last Remington and only hope Winchester brings back the model 70.
Posted by: LBenson | February 18, 2007 at 10:37 AM
Are you completely insane? As a collector and avid shooter I think you better
read the 2nd again and get off your high horse. By the way I no longer hunt so I
believe you should stop your blood thirsty savage killing of animals. How's it
feel now you pompous fool.
Posted by: Joe O'Neill | February 18, 2007 at 10:37 AM
You are the classic "useful idiot".
I'm off to write all your sponsors to suggest to them that you become
unemployed.
Posted by: Bob Y | February 18, 2007 at 10:37 AM
Mr. Zumbo
Thank you for standing up for my (our) Second Amendment Rights. It's too bad
there is something about "Shall not be Infringed" you don't quite understand.
You see the 2nd is not about elk hunting it's about freedom.
It appears you are ready to give yours up to the gun grabbers of todays world.
Posted by: WIlliam Fair | February 18, 2007 at 10:37 AM
will the staff at OutDoor life Please check to see if Sarah Brady's brain was
transplanted into Jim Zumbo's head!Or at least make sure he is taking the
proper dose of medication that he should be using!!!I would check for CWD
2/19/2007
Page 269 of 853
while your at it.
Posted by: STEVE CAREY | February 18, 2007 at 10:37 AM
This is absolutely offensive to all law abiding hunters and firearms owners.
I too consider myself a tradionalist, having numerous bolt guns from which to
pick. I als enjoy the benefits of AR type rifles. As a matter of fact, my 9year old
daughter will deer hunt this fall. Considering the AR with its evil colapsable
stock fits her best and also has virtually no recoil, she will likely harvest her first
whitetail with the firearm.
Considering you views and Remington's tolerance, I may sell off a few M700s
to fund another AR.
Posted by: Steve B | February 18, 2007 at 10:38 AM
I think Remington, and Outdoor Life would be wise to get as far away from you
as possible Mr. Zumbo, before you do any more damage to their reputation.
Posted by: AS | February 18, 2007 at 10:38 AM
Way to go Dumbo.
Posted by: John Smith | February 18, 2007 at 10:38 AM
What a damn shame. This piece you wrote disgusts me as a gun owner and
full-supporter of the 2nd Ammendment rights for all Americans.
I can only hope my fellow ODL subscribers will promptly cancel their
subscriptions to ODL and refrain from buying any products from ODL's
sponsors. I know I will. I am also extremely disappointed that the Remington
representatives you were with did not disassociate themselves from you the
moment you wrote this inciteful piece. For this reason, I will be e-mailing
Remington letting them know that I will not be buying any of their products until
they break their ties with you. Something tells me this is not what Remington is
going to want to hear from a lot of gun owners.
I can only hope ODL will lose thier sponsors and promptly fire you. You have
disgraced both yourself and ODL in the process. What you just wrote can be
defined as both a career-defining and career-ending move rolled into one.
An apology cannot fix the situation because you knew what you were writing
and the kind of reaction it would invoke.
Here's hoping I never see you writing anything again for any gun-related
magazine. Good riddance.
Posted by: Matt in Texas | February 18, 2007 at 10:39 AM
You have to be kidding me, my AR15 isn't any different than your Remington
rifle. Both are tools when used properly that give the same outcome. By making
2/19/2007
Page 270 of 853
the absurd comments you did you have once again given in to the anti-gun
movement. They will not see the difference between both of our rifles. They will
just make sure no one is able to own either. Before you speak please realize
your words and actions affect many people. Please get educated before the
gun you use may be seen useless by someone else.
Posted by: Okiefireman | February 18, 2007 at 10:41 AM
This needs repeating every hundred posts or so:
Email addresses for his sponsors. Thanks to a post on AR-15 board.
Thanks AR15.com
Posted by: Steve, Too | February 18, 2007 at 10:42 AM
I am very disappointed by your views Mr. Zumbo. I will be voting against you
with my pocket book at every opportunity.
Posted by: Jay T | February 18, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Jim you are a complete dumbass. Way to go.
Posted by: steve koski | February 18, 2007 at 10:42 AM
I am disappointed because behind me in my gunsafe is 19 remington guns,
among several terrorist rifles also... had I known what I know now I would never
purchsed one, remingtom brand gun and I will cancel my subscription to
outdoor life. I no longer respect Mr zumbo in any way.
Posted by: Keng747 | February 18, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Hit'em where it hurts. Cancel your subscriptions to outdoor life or simply don't
renew. A public apology by the editor would be the only thing to change my
mind.
Posted by: Larry Arnold | February 18, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Jim, You should be ashamed of yourself. Kind of an elitist attitude don't you
think - telling someone else what guns they should like. Of course you are
entitled to your opinion. Welcome to America.
Posted by: Gary Smith | February 18, 2007 at 10:44 AM
2/19/2007
Page 271 of 853
I don't even know what to say. It's one thing to say there are better choices for
hunting than a semi-auto rifle styled after a military rifle but it's quite another
matter to insult every owner of these rifles by calling them terrorists.
Just because Mr. Zumbo doesn't care for these rifles doesn't mean they have
no place in the shooting sports. I saw a previous post mention the word
arrogance and I think that's the appropriate word.
How long has Mr. Zumbo been on the payroll of the Brady Campaign, anyway?
How long does he think the gun banners will let him keep his Remington 700
once they've succeeded in banning the AR15s?
I've reconsidered. Zumbo isn't arrogant, he's an idiot.
Posted by: Dr. Frank Latimer | February 18, 2007 at 10:44 AM
Zumbo = Quisling
Posted by: JR | February 18, 2007 at 10:44 AM
Zumbo, you are an asshat of the highest order.
That is all.
Posted by: QuietShootr | February 18, 2007 at 10:45 AM
Between Zumbo's comments and OL's insistence on featuring full-page dingle
enhancer ads, I will never subscribe again. I don't want my kids reading either
of these forms of crap.
Joe
Posted by: Fargo | February 18, 2007 at 10:45 AM
Congratulations. You just caused Remington and Outdoor Life to lose another
customer for life.... me. Keep up the good work (sarcasm), 2 generations from
now our children will be hunting varmints with slingshots because all firearms
are banned.
What a joke you are..... friend of sportsmen? Not.
Posted by: J Farina | February 18, 2007 at 10:45 AM
The simple fact anyone allowed you stupidity to be published, that Remington
associates with you, and that a major magazine promotes your idiocy makes
me wonder which America my children will grow up in.
Sir, time to retire to a silent post.
What a load of BS.
2/19/2007
Page 272 of 853
Posted by: Mike in Nebraska | February 18, 2007 at 10:45 AM
'nough said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Wayne | February 18, 2007 at 10:45 AM
You sir have lost your mind. Please refrain from posting your pro-idiot opinions
anymore. When the gun-grabbers try to take our "terrorist" guns and you back
them, who will back you when they try to take your precious bolt-guns?
Posted by: Jon | February 18, 2007 at 10:45 AM
The anti-gun establishment clearly has you crappin' your pants. You've done
exactly as they planned by using your position as a writer to deflect attention
from your beloved "sniper rifles" to the high profile "assault weapons", and
further widen the growing rift between owners of various types of guns.
Shooters of your age know they only have a few remaining years to enjoy
shooting sports, so you will do whatever it takes to protect your own interests
for that little remaining time. Those of us younger in years than you, who hunt
with the same "sporting rifles", understand that we're next once the "assault
weapons" fall victim to the gun grabbers.
Other than like minded (and aged) hunters, you'll have little support on this
issue from younger hunters.
Posted by: CR | February 18, 2007 at 10:45 AM
Time to hang it up you old douche bag, I will be canceling my subscription.
Posted by: Jonathan | February 18, 2007 at 10:46 AM
Your willful ignorance astounds me. The reason people will hunt with an AR is
not because they want is not to act like "Rambo" or whatever misconception
you churned out it's to become proficient with a weapon that can do damn near
everything. From shooting various speed shooting competitions, to hunting, to
being propped up against the wall for self defence.
Oh and its magazine not clip. You sound like a 12 year old.
Just remember one thing, Mr. Zumbo: the second amendment isn't about
hunting. Consider that when you speak out against non-hunting uses of
firearms, because you have even less protection for your use than I do for
mine.
Posted by: Kyle | February 18, 2007 at 10:47 AM
I would like to thank Outdoor Life for giving me another reason to make sure I
do not shell out any of my hard earned money for the elitist editorializing of this
kind. Gun rights means all guns, regardless of looks.
2/19/2007
Page 273 of 853
I wonder if Mr Zumbo would change his tune at all if he could see how well
some of the .223WSSM, .243 ruger, or .308 AR's work for hunting, or if he
would just turn up his nose at the mere sight of one of these wonderful guns
based only on their looks.
Posted by: YOPD | February 18, 2007 at 10:47 AM
Vox Populi, bright boy.
Well, it looks lke the Simple minded Magazine Writer has been dupped by the
words of and twisted preachers of te anti 2nd amendment crowd.
Zumbo all I have to say to you is you are clueless and I hope by reading some
of the comments left here concerning a choice of firearm for hunting, you will
concider the Stupidity of your Comments and Publically Apologise.
Zumbo states that, "To most of the public, an assault rifle is a terrifying thing."
His whole attitude is the exact reason this idea exists. Thank you, sir, for
helping to re-educate us and help spread the lies and misinformation that
circulates about these firearms. You are doing nothing but perpetuating the
cycle. You are an absolute disgrace to the gun-owning community. Your
attitude of exclusion of any firearm you deem "not necessary" or that has (in
your eyes) "no purpose" is an alienation of the rest of us. When are you going
to learn that a firearm is simply a firearm, and that the operator is the one in
question?
Posted by: Curt | February 18, 2007 at 10:48 AM
RELAX guys! Remember: Zumbo is a *commercial* writer. Frequently,
commercial writers print some stupid comment just to get a large response. As
in:
"See, Boss? I had 300+ reader responses for my last article. Aren't I great?
Give me a raise!"
Same stuff as the monthly gun rags: It is *ALL* about convincing the
advertisers the author has readers. The money people (advertisers) never look
at the actual feedback.
Good racket if it pays the bills.
Posted by: RayP | February 18, 2007 at 10:48 AM
The first thing I thought when I opened this page was "Who the Heck is Jim
Zumbo?". Nextthing I thought after reading it was "Who Cares about Jim
Zumbo?" You sir should be on the unemployment line for writing such asinine
comments.
2/19/2007
Page 274 of 853
I have a Precision AR10 that will outshoot any rifle you could ever hope to own.
To be a snob like you is to lose all 2A rights eventually.
I take it you think you cant go hunting with a handgun either, since
Gangbangers use them in drug crimes?? How asinine.
Also, gun ownership and 2A rights have ZERO to do with Hunting...
You do realize that Hunting can be seen as Barbaric and mean to animals by
certain animal rights groups, so if you keep hiding behind that rock to protect
your 2A rights, don't worry, yore next on the list. the Safeway has plenty of
meat for you to buy, no need for hunting, Right??
Posted by: CDiPrecision | February 18, 2007 at 10:49 AM
You sir are nothing but a two bit fool. "Sporting" is nothing but a term used by
anti-gunners to split the 2A vote so that they may gain the apathy of those with
"sporting" rifles to make the "non-sporting" illegal and then in turn make the
"sporting" illegal because they are in the minority once the other guns are gone.
I suggest you grow a backbone and learn that no gun is more sporting than
another regardless of stock material or action type, both of which are matter of
preference: they ALL have a barrel, trigger, and sights.
Oh, and so you don't get the wrong idea: I love my bolt-action guns just as I
love my ARs. Variety is the spice of life.
Posted by: Arthur | February 18, 2007 at 10:49 AM
This is what happens when you let a delusional, dementia ridden, old has been
play with the computer. He really doesn’t understand what he is saying, he just
knows if he punches the keys on the keyboard, the screen lights up. Mr.
Zumbo’s firearms should be confiscated before he hurts himself or someone
else, he obviously doesn’t posses the acumen for handling them safely
anymore!
Posted by: T | February 18, 2007 at 10:49 AM
AFTER a career as a police officer and as a person who carried one of those
"terrorist rifles" in my car for many years I have to congratulate you. IN one brief
comment you have managed to insult and castigate a majority of law
enforcement agencies in the United States and their memebers who take to the
streets every day. In case yuo have not been watching the news lately, PDs are
arming their officers with large numbers of "terrorist weapons" these days. I
guess all the better to fight terrorists??? I wonder how they will feel when they
are made aware that Outdoor Life and Remington sponsor someone who calls
them terrorists?
Furhter you have greatly reduced your position as a "knowledgable" firearms
2/19/2007
Page 275 of 853
authority by displaying for all the world to see your blatant ignorance and
prejudice on something you admittedly know nothing about.
As the owner of one of those "terrorist" DMPS heavy barrel ARs I have found
its accuracy out of the box was only outshone by the long departed 788
Remington in .223. I have taken various amounts of small game with it and yet
according to your vaunted wisdom it has no place but to terrorize.
Mr. Zumbo, on this topic you have indeed placed yourself in the position of
being the South end of Northbound horse.
Posted by: LAWCOP | February 18, 2007 at 10:50 AM
There isn't much I can add that hasn't already been said. I believe you summed
my feelings up perfectly in your own second paragraph when you said "I must
be living in a vacuum." and "I had no clue." I have to agree.
Posted by: prairieviper | February 18, 2007 at 10:50 AM
I find these comments rephrensible and laden with ignorance. Consider the
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield rifle of WW1. In the day, that was a battle rifle with
a ten-round magazine capable of putting thirty or more aimed rounds of .303
British in a foot square at three hundred meters. Does that count as an assault
rifle?
Yet countless hundreds of thousands of those rifles have been used to harvest
deer, elk, and whatever else for the better part of a century.
It is both ignorant and divisive to look down on military firearms. Furthermore,
as soon as a hunting rifle can match the accuracy and reliability of my FAL or
sheer reliability and inexpensive price of my Saiga-12, I will certainly consider
buying it.
Posted by: Pariah Dog | February 18, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Shame on you, Jim Zumbo. When they come for your pretty hunting rifle, you'll
have only yourself to thank. Divided we fall, indeed. You are a disgrace to all
Americans.
Listen up, Remington. No more Remington products for my household until you
discontinue Zumbo's sponsorship.
Posted by: Jambog | February 18, 2007 at 10:51 AM
In order to qualify to hunt, you must hunt like an Indian. First, no overweight
guys with prescription lenses, clear glasses or eye protection. Secondly, no
firearms at all. Remember, we are going back to the original American Indians.
You are limited to hunting with a rock, a homemade knife, a homemade bow
and arrow set, an atlatal, spear or rabbit stick. It was terrifying to the American
Indian on the street to see a guy walking around with a musket, so no firearms.
2/19/2007
Page 276 of 853
Posted by: Brian Cochran | February 18, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Sorry folks, but i agree with Jim , i don't think that there is a need or a place for
these guns in hunting . He did not say as far as i can tell that you couldn't or
shouldn't own one, just that it was not as usefull as other types of guns for
hunting.
rickf
Posted by: rick | February 18, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Here Mr. Dumbo is your fan base at it's finest , hope your happy, idiot,} "I
applaud Mr. Zumbo for the courage to stand up for some of us. I am glad he is
like them. Good for you Mr. Zumbo tell it like it is."
Zumbo, Perhaps your intent is to help the left wing extremists that surely intend
to end your hunting career. Are you a half-wit or just inbred? The demonizing
and labeling of ANY type of firearm is just a "baby step" used by the gun
grabber to reach the eventual goal. Their goal is a society like Australia or the
UK. Look up the crime #'s, if you can read. You, sir have taken the bait.
Judging by the others here that have posted, I am not alone in my thinking. We
have enough opposition without one of our own joining any anti-gun band
wagon. And, by the way, I own an AR-15 (the AR stands for Armalite, not
Assault, as any historian would know), that could outshoot any weapon you
own on it's worst day.
Posted by: T.Bannister | February 18, 2007 at 10:52 AM
Jim,
You need to get out of your cloistered environment of canned hunts and see
what the rest of the shooting community is doing with their firearms. Your
comment on "terrorist" rifles was the single most ignorant thing I've ever read
from someone who should know better. Shame on you.
Posted by: John Dunn | February 18, 2007 at 10:52 AM
Zumbo, Perhaps your intent is to help the left wing extremists that surely intend
to end your hunting career. Are you a half-wit or just inbred? The demonizing
and labeling of ANY type of firearm is just a "baby step" used by the gun
grabber to reach the eventual goal. Their goal is a society like Australia or the
UK. Look up the crime #'s, if you can read. You, sir have taken the bait.
Judging by the others here that have posted, I am not alone in my thinking. We
have enough opposition without one of our own joining any anti-gun band
2/19/2007
Page 277 of 853
wagon. And, by the way, I own an AR-15 (the AR stands for Armalite, not
Assault, as any historian would know), that could outshoot any weapon you
own on it's worst day.
Posted by: T.Bannister | February 18, 2007 at 10:52 AM
You know what really frosts my cookies? Hunters with assualt vehicles. There's
nothing like a good 2-wheeled drive truck with factory rims. But some hunters
are charging around the woods in 4-wheel drive vehicles. These are the same
models that gang-bangers are terrorizing our neighborhoods with. Others are
driving Hummers, just like the military uses. We don't need that either!
Now some people here are probably going to think that you and Greg of
Remington Arms are a couple of slack-jawed sell-outs trying to renew the
company's glory days, but that's crazy talk.
Posted by: Iron Horse Tamer | February 18, 2007 at 10:53 AM
I formerly liked Zumbo, but that just goes to prove we all make mistakes. This is
a deplorable piece . . . divide & conquer, anyone? Zumbo owes an apology or
should be fired. No more Outdoor Life for me. And I'm not so sure I'll ever by
another Remington product until either a retraction or other appropriate action
is in evidence.
Posted by: koja48 | February 18, 2007 at 10:54 AM
An AR15 IS NOT an "Assault RIFLE" !!! Even by NRA standards it isn't. To be
an assault rifle you have to have Selective Fire capabilities.
The AR15 is the 30-30 of yesteryear.
Get out of your cave or "Ivory Tower". Better yet ... visit the ER at local hospital
because you have a severe case of cranium-rectal inversion. Sure glad I
decided NOT to renew my subscription this winter.
Posted by: Will Adams | February 18, 2007 at 10:54 AM
All these years you pulled the wool over our eyes... You're finally revealed as a
traitor in disguise.
A double agent for the Brady Bunch you are, you should covered with feathers
and tar.
Posted by: LMW | February 18, 2007 at 10:54 AM
Here is the email I sent to Remington Dear Reminton Arms,
I am very disappointed with the recent BLOG on Outdoor Life's website by Jim
Zumbo concerning AR and AK style firearms. Saying these firearms, especially
AR stlye firearms, are the weapons of terrorists, is unforgivably insulting to over
40 years worth of servicemen and law enforcement officers.
2/19/2007
Page 278 of 853
I have been using Remington Firearms since my father bought me one for my
12th birthday. I own more Remingtons that any other brand of firearm, use
Remington gun oil and bore cleaner, and shoot Remington ammunition. I will
no longer do so as long as Remington continues to sponsor or support Mr.
Zumbo.
Thank you for your time and attention
Chris Seay
Posted by: CRSinTN | February 18, 2007 at 10:54 AM
Your ignorance appals me.
How can you say these things and think your own "hunting rifles" are safe? If,
as you say: "Only once in my life have I ever seen anyone using one of these
firearms." then you need to spend more time among your shooting community.
I am sorry if you are frightened by the scary black rifle. Sadly, your unfounded
fear is no reason to condem it. The AR15 is accurate and efficient. The only
terrorst here is YOU. People like YOU Zumbo are a threat to our 2A rights.
I hereby withdraw any future support of OL.
Posted by: Craig R. | February 18, 2007 at 10:54 AM
SIr, If you can't say or write intelligently or atleast informed, about firearms
please retire. I will never support the likes of you and the Anti Crowd.
Please retire Sir, you speak as a FOOL.
Perhaps the author would be happier living in Communist China, since he
obviously hates our 2nd Admendment. I'll be calling 1st thing Monday morning
to cancel my subscription.
Posted by: Jon M from PA | February 18, 2007 at 10:55 AM
Zumbo, what a fool you are,, sounds like you been smoking crack when you
wrote that article..
Posted by: Pat | February 18, 2007 at 10:56 AM
I can't believe an outsdoorsman could/would make so many stupid comments.
You sir are a divider. I believe I speak for many when I say we neither want
your opinion nor support what you said. The OL subscription offer I just got in
the mail has gone into the trash. Nor will I be purchasing anything from
Remington. If OL or Remington wants my business they had better make a
VERY public apology. Mr Zumbo I think it may be time for you to take your
death dealing military based sniper rifles, I mean hunting rifles, and retire to
2/19/2007
Page 279 of 853
Florida and take up shuffleboard instead.
Posted by: Dallas | February 18, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Mr. Zumbo, I live 40 miles away from the recent shooting in the Salt Lake City
mall. The murderer killed five and wounded four with a pump shotgun in under
six minutes. I can't for the life of me unerstand why civilians are allowed to own
terrifying things like pump shotguns. I see no place in sporting fields or
anywhere else for a devastatingly deadly killing machine like a pump shotgun.
See where the logic can take the narrow-minded?
Posted by: G LaMar | February 18, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Are you really that stupid or just trolling? I find it appalling that in 2007 with a
newly-elected Democratic Congress in power that a well-known gun writer
would post what amounts to a press release for the Brady Bunch.
Now more than ever, "We must hang together, gentlemen...else, we shall most
assuredly hang separately."
Benjamin Franklin said that, by the way, in case your knowledge of history is as
deficient as it is of the current political climate.
You are entitled to your opinion. I hope that in the future before you shoot your
mouth off you'll consider the potential damage you do to our side by expressing
it, however. Next time you circle the wagons, point your guns out, not in.
Posted by: Dave Markowitz | February 18, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Wow!
Once all those "terrorist" ARs and AKs are gone, your "terrorist sniper rifles" will
be next.
Maybe you can start a new column: "Sportsman's Spears" .
Posted by: John Walters | February 18, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Dear Outdoor Life: Do not renew my subscription.
Mr. Zumbo is the reason.
Posted by: KenH | February 18, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Your comments are hilarious!
In 1875, did settlers bemoan the '73 Winchester for its tube magazine and lever
action? IT SHOULD BE BANNED!
Learn about the history of firearms and you might learn that it all starts with
military firearms in the private sector improved far beyond the original designs.
You're comments are ignorant and uneducated. You are closed-minded and
2/19/2007
Page 280 of 853
the fact that you hold these opinions while also having a voice in the gun
community makes me sad. This makes you more harmful to our gun rights than
all the gun grabbers.
As I saw quoted before, I can't wait to see your reaction when they classify your
beloved old hunting rifle as a "sniper rifle".
Posted by: History - Don't make me repeat myself | February 18, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Dear Outdoor Life: Do not renew my subscription.
Mr. Zumbo is the reason.
Posted by: KenH | February 18, 2007 at 10:57 AM
"Terrorsist rifles"? Does that mean you consider accurate scoped bolt actions
chambered for high power centerfire cartridges "sniper weapons"?
You have surely done a disserivice to gun entusiasts, hunters included, down.
Outdoor life, it's too glossy to use as TP.. Hmm I guess it would start a good
fire. Mr Feinbo SCREW YOU IN THE MOUTH!
Posted by: plumber | February 18, 2007 at 10:59 AM
WOW,
That was a big cup of stupid you drank.
I am truly amazed you would have the audacity to post something as mindless
as this. A man in your position should be fighting to help preserve our rights as
gun owners, not denigrate other gun owners. We are all law-abiding citizens,
and we also hunt. We legally own the weapons you claim are "terrorist" rifles.
Sir, all you are doing is providing more fuel for the antis, and you are only
fooling yourself if you think they will stop with just semiautos. How long do you
think it will be before your hunting rifle is also termed a "terrorist sniper rifle"?
It is truly a sad day, and you can guarantee my subscription and that of my
father's to Outdoor Life will be cancelled Monday morning. I am also sending a
letter to anyone who has sponsored this page to let them know they won't see
one red cent of my money as long as they contribute to unfounded foolishness
such as this.
Posted by: Jason | February 18, 2007 at 10:59 AM
I am really disappointed to read the collumn of a well known gun writer and to
see this rubbish in it. The writer has not only alienated a large number of gun
owners and hunters, but he has shown a distinct lack of knowlege regarding
2/19/2007
Page 281 of 853
automatic firerms.
In the first place, alledging that modern "terrorist" autoloading rifles are not as
reliable as sporting rifle is just plain idiotic and shows the writer has not kept
abreast of the design changes in AR's and others over the past forty years. It is
akin to saying the 1911 is unreliable with anything but ball ammo.
I am a police officer, and my department issues and uses AR's. We are often
seen in public with it as we respond to higher rist situations and things like bank
alarms. Although the administration delayed for years in issuing these rifles
because they were afraid of scaring the citizens, since we adopted them in
1999 we have not recievesd a single complaint or negative comment. I talk to
people regularly with my AR strapped on and I have never observed anything
to support the statemnt that "to the public an assault rifle is a terrifying thing".
I challenge the writer to produce any data or even anecdotal evidence to
support the writer's claim that using an auto loader promotes a "spray and pray"
mentality. This argument was used in police circles for a couple of decades by
administrators who resisted issuing auto pistols to officers. (They also resisited
issuing ballistic vests in many departments, believing they would make the
officers over confident and reckless.) I don't believe any such evidence exists.
..."the vast majority of hunters will be better served with a gun (like a bolt, lever
or single shot) that is likely lighter and more reliable anyway." Give me a break.
I'm sorry. but this just sounds like another moron who believes he knows what's
best for me. (Hey, pistol target shooters do not need any thing larger than
a .22)
Who's side is this guy on, anyway? He doesn't seem to know.
Posted by: Jeff Hanna | February 18, 2007 at 11:00 AM
Jim Zumbo, or I should say Dumbo, you are truly a clueless jackass! Are you
trying to impress the likes of Hillary Clinton, Sarah Brady, Nancy Pelosi, and
Dianne Feinstein? I bet you hang out with your buddies like Bill Clinton, John
Kerry, Barack Obama, and Charles Schumer along with Ted Kennedy, who
provides the alcohol. Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Saddam Hussein, Idi Amin, and
Mao Zedong would've been proud of you.
I guess that I'm one of these so-called "terrorists" since I own an AR and an AK
along with other kinds of military-styled rifles. By the way, military-styled rifles is
the correct and proper term, not "assault rifles"! Both John Kerry and Barack
Obama would be pleased that you referred to our brave men and women in our
armed forces who are putting their lives on the line by serving in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and everywhere else in the world as "terrorists" since they carry
"terrorist" rifles.
2/19/2007
Page 282 of 853
I've already sent emails to Outdoor Life, Remington, and your other sponsors.
Along with emails, I'll be making phone calls as well. I will boycott them until
they decide to fire you! That's right, they will not get any of my hard-earned
money until they do the right thing and get rid of you. What you've said was
disgusting to everyone!
Posted by: Keith S. | February 18, 2007 at 11:00 AM
I don't hunt. I'm not interested in killing anything that isn't trying to kill me first. If
a deer trys to sneak into my window at 3am, I'll shoot him with one of my
handguns or perhaps my "terrorist rifle".
I support YOUR gun rights because I believe in the US Constitution and I will
NOT compromise YOUR rights just to save MINE. If people like you keep
stabbing ANY part of gun rights in the back, you'll soon find that once they've
grabbed our guns, they will come after yours next. And you'll deserve
everything that happens to you.
How pro-gun Americans can put put up with some of the pompous bigotry I
read in the article above is a mystery to me.
Mr. Zumbo should be ashamed of himself for his blatent anti-gun bigotry.
Maybe he just thinks he's somehow better than other gun owners.
wow, Jim;
You messed up.
better clarify things before you become a regualr at the local gun shows, selling
all your old stuff.
Posted by: mike cyrwus | February 18, 2007 at 11:02 AM
Dear Mr Zumbo,
Respect is a strange thing. t takes a long time to gain it, yet it can be lost in an
instant.
Over many years of reading your columns and watching your TV shows, I have
built up a great deal of respect for you. I just lost every last shred of it in the
past five minutes. I lost most of my respect for Outdoor Life magazine as well.
Like it or not Jimmy, AR-15s have become a very viable platform for hunting
varmits and predator. Your head must be planted pretty deeply in some hole (in
the ground or elsewhere) to not notice that for the past several years.
But that's not real basis for my lost respect. My guess, Jim, is that you believe
the Second Amendment is meant to protect our right to hunt. What part of "shall
not be infringed." don't you understand, Jim?
2/19/2007
Page 283 of 853
If the Antis get their way, so called "assault weapons" will be the first to go.
After that, it'll most likely be rifles, with their high-power scopes, powerful
ammunition, and ability for snipers to inflict death at incredibly long ranges.
Yes, Jim, they may not come after your blued steel and walnut first, but make
no mistake, they WILL come after them.
Solidarity in the face of this onslaught against our rights is important, and the
way I see it, Jim, you just sold out a significant part of the outdoors community
to save your own arse for awhile. Sellouts deserve no respect and will certainly
have none of mine.
Never again will I read your column, nor watch your TV show, nor partonize any
of your sponsors. Letters to your sponsors will be forthcoming.
Posted by: Patrick Kim | February 18, 2007 at 11:02 AM
Jim, I've read your columns for years,and I'm astounded that you would call me
a terrorist.
You see I carried the evil M-16 rifle during my 20 years in the Army and bought
an AR-15 to hunt coyotes with. I also hunt with a FAL (great feral hog gun) I
shoot several thousand rounds a year through them at the range for an
enjoyable hobby.
You have proven with your ill-conceived article that you are an enemy of the
second amendment and freedom loving gun owners nationwide. While You
certainly have a right to your opinion,so do I.
So, I will NEVER again subscribe to Outdoor life and will cancel my current
subscription.
Also since I notice that REMINGTON sponsors this column and apparently your
views I will NEVER buy another Remington firearm or ammunition.
Zumbo, You are a traitor.
Posted by: Allen | February 18, 2007 at 11:02 AM
I hope Remington fires your sellout traitorous A$$. Until I hear otherwise I will
take it remington wants to tank in the same fashion S&W did after their sellout.
Posted by: KenC | February 18, 2007 at 11:02 AM
Sir, you are absolutely correct as stated in your second paragraph, you don’t
have a clue! You should immediately wake up and smell what you’re shoveling.
During the revolutionary war and in all conflicts since, the populous has
defended themselves with the arms of the times. And oh by the way, those very
same arms were used for hunting. Are you starting to get it yet? Is a flintlock or
cap and ball gun a terrorist weapon? The modern gun of the times is - oh no,
here it comes, the AR15. I’m a private land owner and I use my AR15 to take
several deer a year along with dogs and other problem animals. I use the 75 gr.
AMAX and the 77 gr, Sierra HPBT bullets. Not having ever taken a shot at a
2/19/2007
Page 284 of 853
deer beyond 200 yards, I can tell you that every deer has been taken with a
clean chest shot (only one) and the animal has dropped where it stood with a
minimum or tissue damage. So what are you saying to us that don’t particularly
desire to haul our traditional bolt action hunting rifle out of our safes and use
them? Are we second class citizens? Are we not good enough to hunt in your
league? Does belonging to the “Elitist” class require I have my wooden
stocked, scoped bolt action, brand name available for your inspection? I don’t
particularly desire to do all the maintenance required of a wooden stocked bolt
gun. I have quite a nice collection of hunting/competition/plinking guns and I
happen to like to get the job done, wipe down the gun and put it away without
having to spend any more time on the task than required. I think the AR line are
perfect utilitarian firearms. Does that make me a terrorist? What an arrogant
and pompous ass! You have no business espousing your comments to the
public. Too bad you don’t find the AR line of rifles esthetically pleasing. I do.
Wake up.
Posted by: Ken Davis | February 18, 2007 at 11:02 AM
Email to your editor Mr.Zumbo
Sir,
I just finished reading the disgusting dribble spewed forth by Jim Zumbo in his
on line article "Assault Rifles For Hunters?" written February 16, 2007. As a
true supporter of our constitutional rights I am completely taken a back by his
comments about the AR-15 and the AK-47 type rifles. If he and his values are
what your magazine are about, I ask you at this time to please cancel my
subscription to your “Left Wing,” liberal magazine. It is comments like Mr.
Dumbo's and the abusive platform he uses to spread his anti-gun views that will
leave our great nation and it’s law abiding citizens unarmed and defenseless
just as they have done in England and Australia with their anti-gun views and
fire-arm seizures. People like Jim Zumbo must be squelched in their tracks
before they come knocking on our doors to take even the "High Powered Long Range -Sniper Rifle" he uses. I am shocked!
PLEASE CANCEL MY SUBSCRIPTION RIGHT NOW!!!!!
Posted by: Scott | February 18, 2007 at 11:02 AM
I hope you turn your NRA membership in because we NRA members do not
needyour face among us.
OH and maybe you should save some of your mney so you can join PETA. I
am sure they will welcome a "Thinker" like you with Open Arms.
After reading this article, even though i've never picked up Outdoor Life
magazine, i'm not going to. Calling AR's and AK's terrorist rifles? What makes
2/19/2007
Page 285 of 853
them so much worse than your bolt or lever guns? I'm a teenager, and
responses I get from the rifles I shoot that are negative come from 2 kinds of
people...anti-gunners, and Fudds. I've even got people who are extremely
against semi-auto guns to shoot my rifles, and I told them it was sure to put a
smile on their face. It did. I myself don't see the point to benchrest rifles. They
are much too accurate for civilian use. I think these "sniper rifles" should be
banned from the public, as there is no sporting use for them. WAKE UP. Read
the 2nd Amendment. Nowhere in it does it mention a single thing about
hunting. The 2nd Amendment is about the people's right to protect themselves,
their family, their state, their country, or whatever else might be important to
protect. You aren't helping gun owners any by ignorantly spewing this BS. If
you don't want to hunt with an AR or AK, fine, don't do so. But to ban them?
Who give you the right to decide what an American citizen is able to purchase
for their own personal want or need? I live in a hunting heavy area, and if I ever
do start hunting, i'm going to use the same weapons I know and trust. That
wouldn't be a bolt gun. All this coming from a 16 year old. Have fun in
retirement, seems you've lost quite a bit of a following (and your respect and
credibility with it.) You and others like you have no right to slowly dissolve a
right that I and many, many others hold dear. Go out and shoot some AR's and
AK's. They're fine rifles. Until then, your comment is completely uncalled for,
uneducated, and useless. You're either with us or against us...
Sincerely,
Tyler
Posted by: Tyler | February 18, 2007 at 11:02 AM
Dear Mr. Zumbo;
Maybe you need to be reminded that explosives are the terrorists weapons of
choice. Being that gun powder is an explosive, maybe we need to ban all gun
powder and the tools that use it, all firearms and weapons.
Or maybe you think Massad Ayoob isn’t qualified to make this statement,
"For many years now, Springfield Armory has been in the forefront of those in
the industry fighting legislation that would prevent law-abiding American
citizens from owning certain firearms. Since it fires only one shot at a time, the
Springfield does not fit a semantically correct definition of an “assault rifle.” Its
rugged construction and inherent accuracy makes it suitable for hunting, so
long as its 20-round magazine doesn’t exceed game law limits.
In the Kalahari Desert in 1987, I took the magazine out of my other M1A and
hunted with it as a single shot, with only the one cartridge in the chamber. I shot
a handsome Springbok at some 350 yards. The M1A’s accuracy speaks for
itself."
2/19/2007
Page 286 of 853
Your ignorance is only detrimental to supporting the Sacred Second
Amendment. I will no longer support any company that has any type of
association with you. Maybe your next article ought to be Jim Zumbo and
Michael Moore decide how to interpret the Sacred Second Amendment.
Posted by: Ed Lissauer | February 18, 2007 at 11:03 AM
Dear Mr. Zumbo;
Maybe you need to be reminded that explosives are the terrorists weapons of
choice. Being that gun powder is an explosive, maybe we need to ban all gun
powder and the tools that use it, all firearms and weapons.
Or maybe you think Massad Ayoob isn’t qualified to make this statement,
"For many years now, Springfield Armory has been in the forefront of those in
the industry fighting legislation that would prevent law-abiding American
citizens from owning certain firearms. Since it fires only one shot at a time, the
Springfield does not fit a semantically correct definition of an “assault rifle.” Its
rugged construction and inherent accuracy makes it suitable for hunting, so
long as its 20-round magazine doesn’t exceed game law limits.
In the Kalahari Desert in 1987, I took the magazine out of my other M1A and
hunted with it as a single shot, with only the one cartridge in the chamber. I shot
a handsome Springbok at some 350 yards. The M1A’s accuracy speaks for
itself."
Your ignorance is only detrimental to supporting the Sacred Second
Amendment. I will no longer support any company that has any type of
association with you. Maybe your next article ought to be Jim Zumbo and
Michael Moore decide how to interpret the Sacred Second Amendment.
Posted by: Ed Lissauer | February 18, 2007 at 11:03 AM
You Mr. Zumbo my friend, are the equivalent of that smelly stuff growing on the
end of bigfoots dick.
Posted by: The Pirate | February 18, 2007 at 11:03 AM
You are a complete sell out. People like you CONTRIBUTE to the loss of our
rights. Gun type has NOTHING to do with "hunting", its a personal preference.
I have always said "vote with your dollars" and while i HAD no idea who you
were prior to reading this you can best believe that i will not offer ANY company
$.01 for any product that you're associated with.
Thanks for coming out of the closet and showing us your true colors...
Posted by: Magnum Mike | February 18, 2007 at 11:04 AM
Mr. Zumbo, if you will excuse me..."you are full of it". I can't belive a writer for
2/19/2007
Page 287 of 853
an outdoor magazine would make such a ridicilous statement as you just did. I
am a long time shooter and collector, and at one time did my share of hunting.
You are making a very serious mistake in calling one "type" of firearm a terroist
weapon. I too, like others here, would not typically take an "tactical" weapon,
and I use that term only for illustration, hunting. You are making a very serious
mistake. A firearm is a firearm is a firearm. They all do the same thing, they just
look different. Yes, public perception is important, and the hunter needs to take
that into consideration, but stop classifying firearms. That could be a fatal
mistake to all of us.
I have no place to use a .50 cal long range bolt action rifle....but one sure would
be fun to play with! But what if I "needed" one? Would you deny me of that? If
you would, then you have no business calling yourself an American, you would
just be taking up the position of our country's most dangerous, internal
enemies.
NOW, GIMMIE A BREAK, THINKABOUT!......and if you don't "get the picture",
then you can take your rag Outdoor Life and put it where the sun don't shine.
Wake up!
Posted by: Charles Lee | February 18, 2007 at 11:04 AM
enemies.
Wake up!
Well I guess I am sorry, Since I can't afford high dollar remingtons and ruger
and so one, I am sorry the I bought a nice affordable SKS to hunt with, I guess I
2/19/2007
Page 288 of 853
need to stop huning right away since I use an evil black rifle
Posted by: Dustin Williams | February 18, 2007 at 11:04 AM
Just one word "Ignorant"
Posted by: Walter | February 18, 2007 at 11:04 AM
enemies.
Wake up!
well you know what? i have both wood/plastic bolt actions and they are
accurate sniper weapons to the vpc, etc. when they want your sniper rifles who
will help you? after all they are much more deadly as it's "one shot one kill from
afar"
ar15 are just another semiauto firearm - if the black offends you try calvary
arms pink furniture
otherwise kindly remember the 2nd ammendment isn't about hunting ducks.
Posted by: jwp | February 18, 2007 at 11:04 AM
You sir are nothing more than a "shill" for the bolt action community.
Your astounding lack of knowledge in the semi auto sporting rifle industry leave
little doubt that you are clearly behind the times and beligerent toward a great
majority of the shooting community.
Semi auto, magazine fed weapons such as the AR-15 platform are prevalent in
many aspects of the hunting and target shooting community, from the Civilian
Marksmanship Program to the deer stand, the AR has made significant impact
2/19/2007
Page 289 of 853
on the entire industry.
For you to call these weapons "terrorist" instruments is not only incorrect, it is
also irresponsible and inflamatory.
Had you bothered to conduct any research into this weapon, you would have
been quite astounded to see that these rifles are in use not only as sporting
weapons, but are also quite prevalent in many law enforcement armories as
well.
"Terrorist" indeed.
Jim Zumbo's truly stupid comments and unfounded and ignorant(uneducated!)
opinions on 'AR-15's'...are one of the main reasons that I dropped my
subscription to OL and will not review it...no matter how many solicitations they
send me!
Zumbo ought to be truly embarassed...
But no doubt is blissful in his ignorance!
Eric
Zumbo, You can go to Hell, and I will go to Texas. I will research who your
sponsors are, and let them know your comments are the reason I won't be
buying their products anymore.
Jim,
Your comments are both near-sighted and hopelessly obtuse.They also reveal
a complete disregard for the intent and purpose of the second ammendment to
the Constitution. You are no less an enemy of personal liberty than those
among our number who would dictate that we should all drive economy subcompact automobiles because that is all that is required to get us out and
about- After all, who could possibly need a Corvette for highway use when the
speed limit is 55? Answer; We are(or were) a Country born of rugged
individualism and as such, we want what we want because we can and
because we dare! It is our right to do what we will so long as we do not infringe
on the rights of another Citizen!
Should a future turncoat among our brothers in freedom (a muzzleloading
enthusiast for instance) castigate your choice of firearms and howl for your bolt
action rifle to be decried as a terrorist's sniper weapon, then the barb will strike
home for you. I fear your limited reasoning capabilities will forestall your
perception of reality until such time as the wolves are at your own throat.
2/19/2007
Page 290 of 853
Regardless, your right to free speech is not one I wish to rob you of. I'm an
individual who loves freedom and liberty after all. Still, I'll not have you rob me
of my free speech or my firearms either. Therefore, I will not be purchasing any
more of Remingtons ammunition to feed my AR15, mini 14's or any other
firearm of whatsoever caliber or type, until such time as Remington shall relent
of their sponsorship of you and your devisive proclaimations. That is a shame
as I am a long time buyer and advocate of their UMC line. I will forego your
other sponsors as well. I shall excercise my free speech and do my talking with
my dollars.
Posted by: Powerkicker | February 18, 2007 at 11:06 AM
Zumbo is clearly anything but humble, and has no concern for the freedom of
his fellow countrymen. I've never read him before, but this column clearly
shows me he's an enemy of the 2nd Amendment. Nonetheless, I'm deeply
embarrassed by the vulgarities and ad hominem attacks by many of the
commenters. You may be the side of rights and freedoms, guys, but you're not
helping when you spew thoughtless crap instead of reasoned arguments.
Mr. Zumbo,
I found your thoughts to be nothing more than fuel for the Anti-Gunners and
ignorant. It is for this reason that I have removed your TV show from my TIVO
and will no longer support the Remington brand. Perhaps if Remington made
"terrorist" rifles, you would have a different view on the AR's value in hunting.
Enjoy your "sniper" rifle while you have it; they will come for that next, Mr.
Zumbo.
Posted by: RSB from Illinois | February 18, 2007 at 11:06 AM
I always knew that you weren't fit fo the same profession as David Petzal, but
this seals it. Go back to your vacuum. The real world is a substantially better
place without you.
Posted by: Frank V. | February 18, 2007 at 11:06 AM
This is just sad. A supposed "sportsman" and "gun-owner" who thinks that just
because a firearm has a certain look-and-feel it should be banned for legitimate
use in "their particular sport". It is such feeble and short-sighted way of thinking
that has allowed the anti-gun/liberal forces to slowly take away our
Constitutional Rights.
I own no less than 5 AR-type rifles. Three are "tactical carbine"-types, one is a
High-Power match rifle, and the other one is a legitimate Varminter with a 24inch barrel that I use to hunt, well, "varmints" (DUH!!). And no, I don't "sprayand-pray" when I go varminting and I do not shoot at prey that is closer than
300-yards away - this at least gives the critters a sporting chance.
2/19/2007
Page 291 of 853
Isn't it a shame that the anti-gun forces are a lot more united thaan us gunowners. Until we stop stratifying ourselves into such categories as: tacticians,
competitors, hunters, shotgunners, hangunners, bullseye shooters, etc; we will
not be able to prevent the loss of our "Right to Keep and Bear Arms."
BTW, the guns that Mr. Zumbo advocates for hunting purposes are basically
the same guns that are used by Military and Police Snipers. So maybe the
game departments should ban those as well and only allow single-shot rifles.
When will it all stop?
Posted by: Carlos | February 18, 2007 at 11:06 AM
"A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right
of the People to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but just because something isn't a traditional
"hunting rifle", it is still valuable to the security of a free state, and the
Constitution gives us the right to possess what Comrade Zumbo considers a
"Terrorist rifle", and even the fully-automatic variation thereof, and the Supreme
Court has acknowledged that right(U.S v. Miller, 1937). Like it or not, just as
you have your First Amendment right to publish these disgusting words, we
have a Second Amendment right to own "AK-47s", AR-15s, and every other
semi-automatic rifle that the news media calls an "assault weapon" in order to
bring in greater ratings and, quite probably, to further their own agendas. We
also have the right to legitimately own the fully automatic and selective fire
versions of those rifles, currently banned by the unconstitutional "Firearms
Owner's Protection Act of 1986". You can't choose which part of the
Constitution you like. It protects us only if all of the limitations it places on
government are followed and respected, and, in the event that they are not,
that unconstitutional actions are terminated. We are country based off of
freedom, Mr. Zumbo, and that includes the freedom to own firearms for any
purpose that is not prohibited by law(i.e. violent crime).
Not to mention, as other posters have, that the only reason you kill game is
because you pull the trigger, Mr. Zumbo. Just because somebody hunts with an
AK or an SKS(the 7.62x39 is ballistically(sp?) very similar to the .30-30, which
has been used to kill countless deer since it's advent), it does not mean that
they are terrorists, or even bad hunters.
You mention that there is no place for "terrorist rifles", yet many AR-15 variants
are specifically designed for hunting prairie dogs, coyotes, and other small
game and fur bearers.
Furthermore, what you call "terrorist rifles" are mechanically the same as the
more "politically correct" Remington Model 750 and 7400 rifles. They may not
use the same operating system, but they are identical in that they fire only one
2/19/2007
Page 292 of 853
round per pull of the trigger. Therefore, if you believe that the SKS, along with
semi-automatic variants of the AK-47, AKM, M16, etc. are "terrorist rifles", then
so are the other rifles that I have mentioned. You can't have it both ways, Mr.
Zumbo. Also, I should ad that I don't like you disrespecting Remington by
affiliating their rifles with terrorists when they are kind enough to support your
blog.
I'd like to finish by leaving this for all of the gun owners to ponder: If we, as gun
owners, fail to see the legitimacy in the ownership of all small arms, even
though we may not use them or even care for them, then eventually none of us
will have no guns. Need proof? Many non-handgun owners in Great Britain
supported the handgun ban over there. Now they have no semi-automatic
centerfire rifles to hunt or target shoot with.
Posted by: Matt P | February 18, 2007 at 11:06 AM
To say that I am disappointed would be an understatment:( I will NEVER buy
another Remington Firearm and NEVER pick up another Outdoor Life. You sir
are a disgrace to law abiding hunters & firearms owners everywhere. You sold
out the 2nd amendment. As an ex-serviceman I am affended by your remarks.
Posted by: Kevin N. | February 18, 2007 at 11:06 AM
I can't believe you'd write such an article. You obviously don't care about the
gun rights of all us law abiding and lawa enforcing citizens. Glad you can make
such a crazy comment based on your many years of experience of hunting.
Why don't you try using one if you are such a great hunter and see if it works.
Also, why don't you take your head out of your ass and come ride the streets
with me and you'll see what guns are really used when terrorizing.
Posted by: James S | February 18, 2007 at 11:07 AM
It is a pity that Mr. Zumbo has written such an article. He merely gives more
ammo (Figuratively speaking) to those who wish to abolish the ownership of
any gun. The Feinsteins, Schumers, Boxers, etal., of this country are constantly
finding newer and more ridiculous pretenses for banning guns and ammunition,
and attitudes like the one Mr. Zumbo displays here only helps them and their
cause. (Too accurate, too powerful, too many bullets, don't like the looks, pistol
grip, flash suppresser, bayonet mount, the Black Talon has "razor sharp" edges
that "cut" the person who is shot as the bullet penetrates the body, criminals
use that gun, the "mafia" uses that gun, gang members use that gun, terrorists
use that gun, the list is seemingly endless)
If we follow Mr. Zumbo's idea, shouldn't he be using a single shot black powder
rifle? Or perhaps a longbow? Or maybe even a pointed stick? Or better yet,
shouldn't all hunters be required to hunt with their bare hands, because "I must
be living in a vacuum. The guides on our hunt tell me that the use of sharp
sticks have a rapidly growing following among hunters. I had no clue. Only
2/19/2007
Page 293 of 853
once in my life have I ever seen anyone using one of these sticks.
I call them "assault" sticks, which may upset some people. Excuse me, maybe
fraternity."
In the end, we (all hunters and shooters of any sort) must band together to
protect shooting and hunting, and to ensure it is there for future generations.
We are ridiculed as knuckle dragging, mouth breathing, drooling, bloodthirsty,
redneck slobs, and that image, in many parts of the country is the way they see
us. The real truth is much different, as we all know. We simply refuse to toe the
line that they demand of us, and we refuse to believe the lines that they are
doing their darndest to spoon feed us, whether we want it or not. We can't
change how we are portrayed, but we MUST change the way we do things. All
shooters must support each other, (even if we wouldn't PERSONALLY use that
kind of gun), ALL guns must be protected, because as soon as one becomes
banned, ways will be found to make the others illegal too.
Zumbo- I am an AR15 rifle owner and a hunter.
I was disgusted to read that garbage of an
article of yours in Outdoor Life magazine.
I thought I was on a Brady or a Clinton / Sch
umer website. I can assure you one thing I
will no longer buy an Outdoorlife magazine.
I will also contact Remington and Outdoor
life as well. You make me nauseous. You are
no friend of sportsmen anywhere.
Posted by: Chuck Timblin | February 18, 2007 at 11:07 AM
Whats really funny, is the premise of the article in the first place. He, and
several other overweight ignorant dinks, are goning to waddle out in the Wy
prairre, and maybe, shoot one or two coyotes,and draw a conclusion as to the
viability of the "new" 17 caliber bullet....give me a break.
Posted by: Vic | February 18, 2007 at 11:07 AM
Well Jim you've done it now. I'm the same age as you but far from being blind
to the tender freedom with have. Everyday I see the passive public fall into
traps of the anti-gun, anti-hunting well of defeat. My suggestion to you is call
one of the AR manufacture like Rock River Armament or DPMS and request a
2/19/2007
Page 294 of 853
review of one of there varmint rifles. Take it to the range with a 10 round
magazine and experience the feeling. You don't need to be a "Jar-Head" or
"Para-Trooper" to appreciate the quality and simplicity a quality firearm
provides.
Also, if your ever wanting a follow-up shot on a pair of Coyotes, I believe you
will change your mine. By the way a 60 plus year old farts like you and I can
apologies.
Posted by: William Moore | February 18, 2007 at 11:07 AM
I never was a fan of outdoor life, and if Remington is endorsing you, well i
guess its time i write remington and tell them i am selling my remingtons and
refuse to buy anything remington, till they get rid of the moron in their stable, I
can't believe i actually watched your shows on tv, after the statements you have
made , you dont even belong on a sporting/hunting channel period, calling your
fellow gun owners terrorist, , I don't own an AR15 because i cannot afford one,
but if i had the money i'd have one in my cabnet just like all the other owners
do, you Jim are way outta line with this publication, i hope when everyone is
done with you, you wont have a sponsor or a place on national tv.
Posted by: steve | February 18, 2007 at 11:08 AM
Personally, I think we should all be hunting with spears. Spears are FAR FAR
more reliable than any bolt action remington ever was. I know that my
Remington US Military Model M1903A3, with bayonet attached, was nowhere
as reliable for killing deer as just my sharp spear. Besides, who needs 5 rounds
of high powered smokeless ammo. Even if you were unsporting enough to
actually use a gun, one shot of .54 lead ball propelled by blackpowder will stop
that horrible waste of ammunition caused by repeaters. Remember, the US
Ordinance Board put that magazine cut off on M1903s for a reason! Spray and
pray! We don't need that in our sport.
In case you can't tell, I'm being sarcastic. I have hunted with M1 Carbines since
literally the 1960s, and have known others who did as well. I have hunted with
M1As, .303 enfields, blackpowder, and you name it. Your inane rant only
serves to insure that ALL our guns are taken away. The ONLY limitation on
what kinds of guns are used, should be the caliber of ammunition, to insure a
clean kill of the particular animal, and perhaps, restrict the power of the ammo
in such places with hi population density to avoid injuring people off in the
distance, like a 7.62x29 mm cartridge, short range, so no injuries in the next
town if you miss.
Let's look at this. AR-15's are increasing in popularity, Remington doesn't have
an AR-15 and has been losing market share for the last two years. Did
Remington put Jim up to this to try to stop from losing market share to the AR-
2/19/2007
Page 295 of 853
15's that they do not manufacuture? I wonder if what he got from Remington
was worth selling out his sport for?
While I might agree that the use of AK or AR type rifles is unsporting, if game
can be harvested humanely with them I don't see why they shouldn't be
allowed.
But to lump owners of such firearms in with terrorists? Give me a break. It's
insulting to many in the community and displays a lack of knowledge on your
part.
I didn't have a reason to read your publication before, and I'll certainly
recommend against it now.
Posted by: James M. | February 18, 2007 at 11:08 AM
Clinton/Zumbo in 08'?.?.?.?!?!?!?!? It makes me sick to read comments like this
from someone who I thought was on our side. I always knew OutdoorLife/Field
and Stream was a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Posted by: neil | February 18, 2007 at 11:08 AM
IF you are a member of the NRA...they should kick you out. I usually just hear
your sponsor's words dribble out of your mouth. Say hello to Sarah Brady on
your way out.
You, sir are a tool of the radical Marxist left who seek ultimately to destroy your
humble and honorable sport of hunting as well as the "Assault Weapon" Buffs
ability to lawfully pursue their interests. I do not hunt simply because I choose
not to. Because I collect "Evil black rifles" instead does not mean I wish to ban
hunting because I have no personal interest in it. I also am not some anti
government wacko like the left wing you apparently are in line with. Comrade,
you need reeducation. Your politically correct attitudes are as dangerous to
hunting as they are to the 2nd amendment as well. Hunting is not the right
defined in the Bill of Rights. Its the right to ultimately command the destiny of
our own self-governance, armed with contemporary military arms as
individuals, not some sociaalist "Collective rights" mumbo jumbo. You , sir are a
disgrace to Outdoor Life and to the American way of life and self-governance. I
hope you get fired out the door so fast your head spins for weeks. Then you
can go join a hippie commune and chant while smokin' dope. Whatta jerk...
Posted by: GS | February 18, 2007 at 11:08 AM
Wow. I never knew that, the whole time I was deployed overseas with my M4
Carbine, I was actually a terrorist! Imagine my dismay.
2/19/2007
Page 296 of 853
There are no words for the disgust I feel for this Zumbo character, and ODL for
their decision to allow such drivel under their auspices.
Mr. Zumbo, may I suggest you forward a copy of your resume to the Violence
Policy Center? You sound like just the man they're looking for. You might as
well get it out in the open now, since you can't really hide your leftist leanings
anymore.
Posted by: Kenny | February 18, 2007 at 11:09 AM
A Zumbo column was recently added to the NRA's Shooting Illustrated
magazine.
Everyone should write the NRA and express their views there also.
Posted by: Bob Y | February 18, 2007 at 11:10 AM
Well I won’t be renewing my subscription until Jim Zumbo is off the payroll.
I have read and enjoyed Outdoor Life many times, and will continue to do
so...but this blog entry is, to me, indicative of a split growing in the firearms
community that does not need to be worsened.
I personally own and enjoy shooting a Dan Wesson .357 revolver; it's the most
accurate handgun I've ever shot, and probably recieves more range time than
anything else loaded with target wadcutters in .38 spl.
I also own a nice .17 HMR which will shoot MUCH better than I ever could; this
probably recieves the second most range time due to its simple, reliable bolt
action operation and incredible accuracy.
That having been said, I also own many semi-automatic AKM pattern rifles,
SKS rifles and a Ruger 10/22 with a folding stock. Why? Because they're fun!
To those posters (and the original author of this blog) saying that we "don't
need this kind of firepower in a civilian's hands":
Do you know anything about firearms?
"assault weapons bans", as termed by your anti-gun politicians, simply ban on
the basis of cosmetics. The demonized AR-15 rifle is no more powerful than the
mini-14 rifle sold at Wal-Mart; one just "looks mean". They take the same
cartridge, for crying out loud! Same thing with the AK-47 series rifles. The
Ruger Mini-30 takes the same cartridge, yet is not an "assault weapon"
because it does not "look scary".
The Uzis that the anti-gun types claimed would "flood our streets" after the AW
ban passed use the SAME cartridge as any 9mm handgun; same with the
MAC-11's demonized during the AW ban. In fact, they possibly shoot them less
efficiently, as in semi-auto form the Uzi and Mac pistols amounted to little more
than heavy, clunky (yet still neat, from a collector's point of view) 9mm pistols.
How does the amount of firepower contained in an "assault weapon" differ from
2/19/2007
Page 297 of 853
a "normal" weapon?
A "pistol grip" does not "let one fire faster", as is claimed on the brady
campaign website. Go to a range that lets you rent guns, and try a semi-auto
stocked with a "normal" stock. You will see this for yourself.
A folding stock does NOT allow for any sort of concealability-find someone who
owns a civilian legal AKM or AR-15 series rifle with either a folding or collapsing
stock, and tell me if you can conceal it even with the stock collapsed/folded.
You cannot! They were originally designed as a storage expedient for
paratroopers and perssonell in vehicles;it does not make them a more efficient
"killing machine", I have often found that folding or collapsing stocks make a
rifle HARDER to shoot! If anything, they make it a less efficient (but again, cool
from a collector's point of view) "killing machine", heh!
Bayonet lugs? This one's ridiculous. When's the last time you saw someone get
bayoneted on the 6 o clock news?
Flash hiders...the ATF itself cannot define a single, broad reaching definition of
what a flash hider is! During the ban, designs had to be submitted to see if they
could "reduce flash"; essentially this, in the industry, became a "slots versus
holes" thing. If your device had slots, it was BAD. If it had holes, it was...good?
It made little difference. Go to any rifle range that rents firearms, and rent a rifle
with a flash hider on the end. Fire it, and please tell me if you still believe that a
flash hider would "allow someone to shoot stealthily without detection", as had
been claimed on anti-gun websites.
A threaded barrel to "accept a silencer"? This is also silly. A sound moderator
can be joined to a firearm by MANY means besides threads-some use lugs,
others are integral, the possibilities are as endless as human creativity itself.
Threads have been used on rifles for many decades not for sound moderators,
but for easy removal and interchangability of muzzle devices like
compensators, "evil flash hiders" and simple barrel caps.
"Grenade launchers". This sounds scary, but in reference to "assault weapons",
this term legally has meant a spigot of 22mm diameter on the end of a rifle
designed to accept a rifle grenade. A rifle grenade is an older piece of
technology that, when propelled by a special blank (hard to locate on the
civilian market!) goes flying off the end. Problem for the anti-gunners: you
cannot legally purchase live rifle grenades! They fall int he same category
legally as hand grenades, rockets, etc; special paperwork is needed for EACH
INDIVIDUAL rifle grenade, and even among qualified agencies, they are
difficult to find, since they are a largely obsolete technology. This artifact of
earlier times hardly makes a "more efficient killing machine"; if anything, it often
adds weight and length to a rifle, and is a neat bit of history.
High capacity magazines? Get real.
I love mine, for the simple fact that it's less of a pain at the range. How can you,
as a gunwriter, not appreciate this?
The claims that it makes for a bad hunter....
2/19/2007
Page 298 of 853
If a hunter is sloppy or puts anyone else in danger (including making an
inhumane kill), does the problem not rest with the hunter themselves? Would
they not probably make the same error with a "sporting" rifle?
Claims that the .223 round is not suitable for deer have been soundly blown out
of the water by other posters. The blog author's lumping of all "assault rifle"
cartridges with "underpowered" is also a fallacy-the 7.62x39mm russian is
indeed a bit less powerful than the .30-30, but how many deer have been taken
with the .30-30? What about semi-autos in .308, 7.62x54R, 8mm Mauser
or .30-06, which would also fall under the scope of another "assault weapons
ban"? Can anyone with even an ounce of basic firearms knowledge actually
claim that these cartridges are "unsuitable for sporting use"?
And to the core of the issue: what is wrong with a semi-automatic weapon? I
often hear the term used as if it means something like a machine gun, both in
media and on the street. It does not. A semi-auto fires once for every pull of the
trigger, and ONLY once. That's it. The technology to do this has been with us
for well over one hundred years now; it's nothing new.
The author of this blog and many anti-gunners in general truly need to educate
themselves on the issue before trying to get legislation passed by politicians
who often know even LESS about firearms. I recall Senator Metzenbaum once
saying on a radio show that "assault weapons are ones designed to be fired
from the hip". The ignorance of this statement is astounding, as ANY gun can
be fired from the hip, and even selective fire military rifles are not "designed to
be fired from the hip". It is a hollywood term used by ignorant people.
Get real, folks.
Posted by: T. Miller | February 18, 2007 at 11:11 AM
Jimbo,
After reading this,I think I will go out today & purchase another "Assault Rifle".
I have more than I need but not all that I want! Thank you for all your efforts in
helping destroy the 2nd Ammendment from within!
Sarah,James,Chucky,Nancy & Dianne are proud of you!
You may have no reason to ever shoot or own one. Diane Feinstein has no
reason to shoot or own a bolt action or pump action gun.
We should let her make the rules instead of you. You are truley an old man
whose time has come and gone. Now go away.
Posted by: Ken | February 18, 2007 at 11:11 AM
Yup, the firing lines at Camp Perry and thousands of local gun clubs around the
country have been infiltrated by Jihaadi.
Time to retire, Mr. Zumbo, and go to work for the Hillary Clinton campaign as
2/19/2007
Page 299 of 853
an advisor and give expert testimony for the next gun control bill Rep. McCarthy
tries to foster on the American people. I suspect your career is coming to an
end anyway.
My subscription dollars will go elsewhere as long as you remain employed.
Posted by: Scott G. | February 18, 2007 at 11:11 AM
Jim,
YOU ARE AN IDIOT,LIBERAL&UNAMERICAN
Posted by: FRANK | February 18, 2007 at 11:11 AM
And IDIOTS like this are why we have the problem with GUN GRABBERS in
this country. So you don't like "assault" rifles? Well, you are pretty IGNORANT
since a REAL "assault rifle" is SELECT FIRE! Do you even KNOW what that
means? Well, with this type around and given space in a "national" mag, we'll
be lucky to have FLINTLOCKS. Would that be SPORTING enough for you,
dumbo?
Posted by: Neal Atkins | February 18, 2007 at 11:12 AM
Clinton/Zumbo in 08'? It makes me sick to read something like this from
someone we thought was on our side. I always knew Outdoor Life/ Field and
Stream was a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Posted by: Neil Z | February 18, 2007 at 11:12 AM
Wow, is all I can muster at this point.
Luckily someone posted a list of some of your sponsors email address so once
I can gather my thoughts I can make my feelings known to them, as it seems
your mind is already made up about our "terrorist rifles".
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Posted by: Scott A Cousino | February 18, 2007 at 11:12 AM
2/19/2007
Page 300 of 853
IF You are a member of the NRA, they should kick you out. I usually just hear
your sponsor's words dribble out of your mouth. Say hello to Sarah Brady on
your way out.
Posted by: Mike Kight | February 18, 2007 at 11:13 AM
This article does a great disservice to American hunters and firearms owners.
There isn't much else I can say that hasn't already been said.
Posted by: Bob | February 18, 2007 at 11:13 AM
As a Marine Corps veteran, physician, hunter and American Man I find you and
your comments an insult to all of the above.
Other than that, it's all been said. Divide and conquer indeed. Sad that Outdoor
Life had jumped on the socialist bandwagon. Good riddance to both you and
Outdoor Life.
Mr. Zumbo's stance doesn't surprise me. I've heard similar arguments from
other firearm owners that speak with disregard of the consequence of their
actions. Just remember to also voice your concerns of Mr. Zumbo's writings to
his sponsors!
Posted by: Keith R | February 18, 2007 at 11:13 AM
My firearms have never "assaulted" anyone and you sir must surely be
prejudice against black rifles!
Jim, when you go hunting you need to put the rounds on target in a precise
accurate manner. Out of the box a Rock River AR-15 will easily do 3/4 moa,
and with some handloading it can do sub 1/2 moa. If I'm shooting at range on a
prarie dog at 600yds, i'd much rather have a 1/2 moa gun as opposed to
Remingtons quality control of 3 moa. Responible people don't spray bullets with
AR's. On my last prarie dog hunting trip I was shooting slower than my dad who
was shooting a Remington 700 in .223. Why, becasue my gun was more
accurate. If you go to highpower matches everyone is shooting AR-15 in
service rifle, and in match rifle either a AR-10 chasis or a Tubbs 2k rifle. Semiauto's are no worse than hunting than a bolt gun. It's the person not the gun
that causes the problem.
Posted by: Shawn Agne | February 18, 2007 at 11:13 AM
Mr. Zumbo
How can you comment on something you have only seen used once in your
life? If you would educate yourself about other weapons other than your high
2/19/2007
Page 301 of 853
and mighty bolt action rifle, you may not look and sound like the people that are
trying to take away our second amendment rights as we speak. You calling
military style weapons,"terrorist rifles" is intolerable. In your opinion, everyone
who owns,uses,or manufactures military rifles are terrorist? As an owner of
such "Evil weapons" along with the military and millions of other gun owners, I
can assure you we are not terrorists.
How can you produce such an article when our 2nd amendment right are being
assaulted? You are simply a wolf for the gun grabbers in sheeps clothing.
The circulation department of Outdoor Life and Remington will appreciate you
taking money from their pockets with such irresponsible writing. And I'm sure
that the NRA, which has you mentioned in some of their articles, will be very
happy with your comments. I hope your walking papers are waiting for you
when show up for work tomorrow.
Posted by: Craig | February 18, 2007 at 11:14 AM
Zumbo, maybe OL should ban you for being a liberal gun grabber.
Posted by: BiggerStick47 | February 18, 2007 at 11:14 AM
I wouldn't use an AR15, mini 14, SKS, or Ak47/74 copy for hunting either. I am
more comfortable with bolt actions and lever guns. I don't use semi autos much
because they throw the brass everywhere I I never recover all of it and since I
reload I want to recover all the brass. I have no problem with people using what
you call assault rifles for hunting. People should use the gun they are most
comfortable with. They tend to be more accurate with guns that they are
comfortable with. Everyone's entitled to their opinions but, don't ever try to take
away someones rights. You can probably tell from above most of your
credability is now gone. I doubt it will ever return. Best of luck to ya Mr Zumbo.
To those who beliieve that such weapons should only be posessed by military
and law enforcement.....Hitler thought the same thing.The intention of the 2nd
Ammendment is to protect the poeple from an over agressive government.
Politicians prefer their peasants unarmed.
Monte
Posted by: Monte Stanloski | February 18, 2007 at 11:14 AM
When it comes to civil rights... we all hang together or we'll all hang seperately.
I spend thousands of dollars a year on shooting and hunting products. The
sponsors of your program will receive ZERO of those dollars until you are gone.
As a state concealed carry instructor I educate hundreds of people a year as to
their rights. Your sponsors will all be placed on the list I maintain of companies
2/19/2007
Page 302 of 853
that are to be avoided until they support the founders interpretation of the 2nd
Amendment.
Posted by: J Huggins | February 18, 2007 at 11:15 AM
REMINGTON - You should separate your business from this character. Us gun
folk are loyal to companies and brands... unless they support ideas like the one
Zumbo spouted here.
The separation needs to be vocal - not a back room, hush 'til it blows over deal.
Jim, I hunt with a Ruger #1 .270. I also hunt wild pigs with my dads (bring home
Garrand (5 round adapter clip.) the guy I hunt with carries a Winchester model
100 in .308. Please tell me what is the difference? Or an SKS for that matter?
They all are supposed to be limited to 5 rounds. right? We have enough trouble
with Nancy Pelosi, Hillery , Rebecca Peters etc. You are not helping much.
Walter Greer (Oldgoat46)
Posted by: walter greer | February 18, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Zumbo is a disgrace to all gun owners,referring to Ar's as terrorist rifles.Hasn't
he ever heard the saying "divided we fall"? I will never buy another magazine
that he writes for or watch anything on TV.
Posted by: Roger Rayfield | February 18, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Well, that was unbelievably stupid, uninformed, and counterproductive!! Jim,
you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'll bet you just lost 99.99% of what
little readership you had left. Certainly hope OL and Remington pay attention to
this outpouring of outrage.
Posted by: Old Ruger Guy | February 18, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Well, How can I ad more than agree with the above post,
YOU ARE A DUMB A55
The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting or defence against invaders, its
about shooting politicians (AKA defending ourselves against our government). I
think it's time you resign and send your resume to HCA.
What part of the 2nd Amendment mentions hunting? Lots of states, Maryland
right now, are trying to ban pretty much ALL semi autos. This includes
handguns and your precious wood stocked semi auto hunting rifles. What
about when the day comes when they say your bolt action is a sniper rifle and
they ban it? Or that precious lever action 30 30 that the movie stars twirl to
reload and sprays 10 rounds of bullets designed to kill? Surely something like
2/19/2007
Page 303 of 853
this has no place in the hands of a hunter.
You sir, need to wake up and take a look around.
Mr. Zumbo, I am greatly disturbed by your comments. I have read numerous
articles, seen many TV shows, heck, even have an autographed copy of one of
your wild game cookbooks. You were an influential author to my young and
impressionable mind, and to many others, I can be sure. I can only hope your
computer was hacked into by a Brady or Pelosi supporter. You have not only
blasted yourself in the foot by those comments, you have taken aim on the foot
of all responsible gun owners, and the 2nd Ammendment itself! You can rest
assured, those were the last words you have written that will be read by me, or
my friends and family. I will not purchase another Remington product as long as
you are sponsored by them, and will encourage those around me to do so as
well.
You should be ashamed of yourself--go stand in the corner.
It's disheartening to see a once respected gun-writer stoop to the level of a
Clinton or a Boxer. I'm a terrorist, because I own a gun Zumbo doesn't like?
Maybe Mister Zumbo needs to read the Constitution. Or have it read, and
explained, to him. Nowhere does the Second Amendment mention his love of
killing animals for fun.
Posted by: D. Scott Hewitt | February 18, 2007 at 11:16 AM
As soon as I am done typing this, I am calling my gun shop to CANCEL the
Remington 105CTI I have on order. If they ask why, I'll refer them to your piece.
Posted by: Thurman Beavers | February 18, 2007 at 11:17 AM
I will definetely not sending in the renewal slip I just recieved in the mail.
Didn't Remington develope the new 6.8 caliber that is the new rage in AR
uppers? Why would they hire someone to bad mouth one of their owne product
lines? I'll bet Zumbo has owned lots of Semi-auto shotguns in his lifetime.
Posted by: John Davis | February 18, 2007 at 11:17 AM
I can't believe I spent 20+ years in the military protecting your Constitutional
rights so you can tell me you think my guns are "terrorist guns" and shouldn't
be allowed.
You have played right into the hands of the anti-gun forces and their divide and
conquer strategy. You would ban guns for no other reason than you don't like
the way they look and the possible perception the public may have of them.
You sir, are an idiot.
I agree that AK's should not be used for varmiting, but only because I know the
2/19/2007
Page 304 of 853
7.62x39 is not capable of the accuaracy needed. The typical AR-15 however,
will outshoot most "civilian" rifles with no problem.
I have no use for any "Remchester" hunting rifle, but I would never condemn
anyone for having one, nor would I advocate banning them for any reason.
People like you are the reason we will gradually loose our firearms rights.
Posted by: James Davenport | February 18, 2007 at 11:17 AM
Hey Zumbo what happened? Did you fall on your head or did you just get so
old you can't think straight any more? I was shocked and disappointed by your
comments. You have become an ally of the stinking liberal anti gun crowd. You
just jumped into bed with Sarah Brady. This is going to come back and haunt
you as soon as the antis get hold of it. There is NO distinction between a
hunting rifle and an so called "assault weapon". They both do IDENTICALLY
the same thing. If you don't like a particular style of gun just say that don't go
into some hateful tirade that feeds the left's agenda. This is much bigger than
hunting this is our freedom. You should write a retraction immediately and
make up something to tell your gun owning readers you made a big mistake.
With all the idiots in congress now, we're in for the fight of our lives and you, A
HIGHLY VISIBLE GUN WRITER AND OWNER, have dealt us a another fine
setback. I don't think Remington would or can afford to support your stand. At
least I hope not.
Posted by: Gary D | February 18, 2007 at 11:18 AM
You are a fool. I will not renew my subscriptions. You can do without my
money.
Yes, you are “living in a vacuum”.
There is a special excise tax on all firearms and ammo that helps preserve
hunting, game, etc in this country.
I would think that the number of rounds of ammo that are purchased for the non
hunting shooting sports is significantly higher than those used to by hunters. My
yearly ammo use is around 5,000 rounds. That money is going to a spot in
which I do not participate. Yet you label me and my fellow competitors as
terrorists.
We all need to “burry the hatchet” here. We all need to educate the public that
the firearms they might be scared of are legal. Legal to own, and shoot;
weather, that be for hunting, competition, self defense, or collecting.
In that sprit Mr Zumbo I will pay the tuition for a 4 Day Practical rifle class at
Front Sight, Nv. I will pay the rental fee on an AR-15, and buy your ammo for
the class. My email address is [email protected].
2/19/2007
Page 305 of 853
Posted by: A | February 18, 2007 at 11:18 AM
Jim, why don't you start writing for Sarah and Jim Brady?
You article is false on so many levels. Assault weapons are full auto.
What difference does it make if a gun has a plastic or wood stock? What
difference is it if it has a magazine or single shot? The picture at the top of this
page shows you with a stainless barrel with a synthetic stock. Must be an
assault weapon.
Outdoor Life, get rid of this bafoon before he gets ALL of our guns taken away.
I am most disappointed in this.
Zumbo you truly are a careless, dangerous moron of the greatest extreme. A
little research on your behalf would have shown you that not only is the AR15
NOT a terrorist weapon of choice, but over the past two years our very own
U.S. Army, in cooperation with the Civilian Marksmanship Program, has called
upon civilians who excel in marksmanship with the AR15 to assist in training
troops as part of their SDM, Squad Designated Marksman, program.
To-date, hundreds of NCO instructors have been trained by civilian instructors
and likely saved countless lives overseas.
That anyone can take anything you write seriously from this point on is doubtful
as your credibility is worthless.
Ira
CMP SDM Instructor
Distinguished Rifleman (with the AR15)
Posted by: Ira R. | February 18, 2007 at 11:18 AM
I am truly saddened by your opinion on this issue. You have used your pulpit to
give ammunition to the enemy. Shame on you. I will use the best weapon given
us sportsmen and women to show my lack of support for your statements. I will
no longer spend my money on any of the magazines you appear in or the
sponsors you are affiliated with. A formal apology from you is in order, do the
right thing for sportsmen and women NOW.
Posted by: John MacEwan | February 18, 2007 at 11:19 AM
I just wanted to say thank you sir. Thank you for showing the whole world your
ignorance and bigotry. Not only did you make it blatantly obvious that you have
no idea what the meaning or purpose of the second amendment is (clue: it has
nothing to do with hunting nor does it guarantee anybody any right to do so),
2/19/2007
Page 306 of 853
you apparently are not much of a hunter either if you think a properly setup AR
has no hunting applications.
I do want to clear up at least one of your incorrect statements Contrary to your "traditionalist" views and the media's hype, an AR15, or any
other semi-auto only rifle, is NOT an assault weapon. As a professional writer, I
would assume you have access to dictionaries, encyclopedia’s and other
reference materials? I would suggest you refer to them before making
completely erroneous remarks. According to Wilipedia, the definition of an
Assault weapon is:
“An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle or carbine firing ammunition with muzzle
energies intermediate between those typical of pistol and battle rifle
ammunition…”
The key words there are “selective fire” meaning a weapon that can fire in both
semi and full auto modes. An AR15 is not a select fire weapon so hence; it is
not an Assault weapon. I could go on dissecting the errors and lies in your
article but it is clear that would be a waste of my time as my comments will be
falling on to a deaf and out of touch ear.
Zumbo on Feb 14.
Enjoy it, however you hunt."
Zumbo on Feb. 16.
"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."
Jeez he sounds more like John Kerry.
Posted by: Gary Smith | February 18, 2007 at 11:19 AM
Jim,
YOU ARE AN IDIOT,LIBERAL & UNAMERICAN
1.DROP HIM ODL
2.DROP HIM REMINGTON
Posted by: FRANK | February 18, 2007 at 11:19 AM
First off, thank you for calling our brave men and women overseas terrorists.
2/19/2007
Page 307 of 853
I'm sure my brother, who is currently a combat infantry man in the US Army
deployed to Afghanistan would appreciate the sentiment that he's carrying a
"terrorist rifle" around with him. I'm sure you can sympathize with him... oh wait,
you never served in the military did you? It's nice that you've had over "1,500
articles published in all the major outdoor magazines." Good job defending the
homeland! I'm sure terrorists right now are shaking in fear every time they
watch "Jim Zumbo Outdoors". Good job also, if I may say, on killing helpless
animals (deer) in all 50 states. If there is no good reason for us to own assault
rifles, I see no good reason for you to go from state to state killing defenseless
animals just so you can beat your chest and try and get a little respect from the
hunting community. Which is worse... using an AR-15 to kill a rabid coyote, or
going from state to state tromping through forests shooting animals for the hell
of it? Whatever respect I might have had for you, sir, just went out the window.
THINK before you write, and consider the implications your words and actions
might have before you say or do them.
Posted by: Erik | February 18, 2007 at 11:19 AM
I was thoroughly disgusted by your unfortunate comments and views, i will not
be patronizing your publication any further.
harry beck
Posted by: harry beck | February 18, 2007 at 11:20 AM
You must be working with Ceasefire MD. Just as they deliberately try to drive a
wedge between law abiding gun owners in Maryland, you happily play into their
game.
Do you really think that they will stop with their disarmament efforts once
they've gotten rid of the "evil black rifles"?
You should check out the Violence Policy Center's website to see that their
idea is to use an incremental approach to ban one class of firearms after
another until they have taken them all.
Posted by: Norton | February 18, 2007 at 11:20 AM
You know, I had a long response before I deleted it and posted this. I think that
Mr. Zumbo your career is done, especially since a lot of people said the were
cancelling their subscription. Comparing the rifles that most of us use as
"terrorist weapons" is something that the liberal tree huggers would say. What
you have said in your article is what the left wants to read, because basically
your article is showing the left that all gun owners are not on the same page.
Plus, what you wrote will also help the liberal left chip away at our 2nd
Amendment rights. And with your comments, they see that there is a greater
chance that it can be done. Thanks a lot for helping the enemy.
Posted by: lee | February 18, 2007 at 11:20 AM
2/19/2007
Page 308 of 853
WTF????????
I notice that Zumbo (hereafter referred to as Dumbo) has white hair.Could it be
possible that Alzheimer's or senile dementia is settling in?has Dumbo been to
the doctor lately?Will Outdoor Life get Dumbo help or retire him?
We don't need comments like Dumbo's.
Fire him.
Posted by: Mark Myers | February 18, 2007 at 11:20 AM
I can't believe you would spew this terrible gun grabber agenda. It is painfully
obvious that you do not have a clue. The agenda to ban our guns will not be
completed all at once. they will take one class at a time, like they did in
England. You have a right to your own opinion and I respect that, but do us all
a favor and keep your mouth shut about it.
Posted by: Dave Seely | February 18, 2007 at 11:21 AM
Thank you for making my decision on renewing Outdoor life. They called the
other day while I was gone and I'm telling them unless they fire you they're not
getting my money again. Hopefully you lose your job.
So is a M1 Garand a terrorist rifle? What about the Browning BAR? 1911?
These are all guns of Freedom. They fit in the same catagory as the Ar 15. So
are our soldiers TERRORISTS?
Because a Ar 15 is scary to the public should we quit using all guns that people
think look scary? Mabe I should quit having cased guns in my truck because
they're scary. Ya right, if you work for a outdoor magazine mabe you should act
like it.
I'm going to quit talking and go hunting with a Scary gun.
Posted by: Neil | February 18, 2007 at 11:21 AM
I have two words for Mr. Zumbo and for Outdoor Life allowing this to be
printed...
Profound disappointment.
In your moment of Zen, you've managed to betray every gun owner in America.
Dear Mr. Zumbo,
One can only presume that you are succumbing to old age (some might call it
'Dale Jarrett syndrome') and instead of penning lucid pieces on hunting have
devolved into staggering around hollering incoherently on blogs. Maybe Nancy
Pelosi has caught your eye and in a feeble attempt to woo the evil creature you
have decided that mindlessly parroting the line of the Brady campaign will
2/19/2007
Page 309 of 853
score points, and she will hop on her broom and screech off to Wyoming to
boink you into the afterlife. Heck, maybe you are contemplating switching
teams and want Ted Kennedy in on the action for an Alzheimers three-way.
The only other possible explanation is neural barotrauma from not wearing
hearing protection whilst ventilating the wiley Wyoming whistlepig with a
sporting .577 Nitro Express. Maybe it's time to start testing seniors for
coherence before permitting them to own firearms...
ps: Thanks for helping me decide between Swaro and Zeiss!
A note will be dispatched regarding your ramblings to the Management Team
notifying them that you have just cost them a sale.
http://www.swarovskioptik.com/?l=en#
(click on "about us" & management team to send a message)
Posted by: Dave from Iowa | February 18, 2007 at 11:21 AM
I, for one, am not a hunter, but I am a competitive marksman. I am also an
honorably discharged disabled veteran. I don't find a thrill in the killing of
animals, much less the killing of anything. I do not disparage others who do
since it is not my place to impair the freedoms of others.
I own several firearms, traditional rifles as well as your "terrorist" rifles. The
traditional rifles tend to stay in my safe as they are not as accurate nor as
enjoyable to shoot as your "terrorist" rifles. In addition, the traditional rifles are
not allowed in the "service rifle" category of high-power rifle competition. I
notice that the "service rifle" designation is primarily achieved through a
particular "look" while your "terrorist rifle" designation is also achieved through
a particular "look."
I practice on a public range. My counterparts shooting traditional rifles seem to
achieve groups the size of basketballs while I achieve groups the size of a
nickle at the same range with a "terrorist" rifle. My joy comes in accuracy and
precision. I do not feel the need to "spray and pray" in order to achieve such
accuracy.
I ask you, Mr. Zumbo, to write the Civilian Marksmanship Program and ask
them to redefine the "service rifle" category as the "terrorist" rifle category.
Please do it publically, so all competitive shooters will know you consider them
terrorists.
In closing, if you think that the type of rifle causes a particular type of behavior, I
caution you, look into your own heart and discover whether your true fear is that
you are such an undisciplined shooter than you could not be trusted with such
a rifle. If so, do us all a favor and cease shooting because we do not need such
undisciplined shooters marring the image of our sport.
2/19/2007
Page 310 of 853
Posted by: Chris Dye | February 18, 2007 at 11:21 AM
I can't believe that either Zumbo, Outdoor Life or Remington are so stupid that
they did not realize what a scandal these comments would cause. Maybe they
figure "any publicity is good publicity".
There is nothing inherent about the AK action that precludes it being a hunting
gun, Valmet has been selling high dollar AK type hunting guns for years.
Many ex-service people will want to get a semiauto AR because they are well
trained with it's military counterpart, the M16, M4 type rifles.
Zumbo selfishly believes that guns (some, as approved by him!) are only for
hunting. He should do some reading about history and the 2nd Amendment.
Steve
Posted by: SteveH | February 18, 2007 at 11:21 AM
Mr. Zumbos comments are a perfect example of sportsmans stupiidity! We are
our own worst enemies. I don't think killing deer over bait in Texas is sporting,
but I've watched Zumbo do it on television. I would fight for his right to do so
everyday. His comments are a danger to gun ownereship and hunting rights
everywhere.
Posted by: Brent | February 18, 2007 at 11:21 AM
Zumbo, do you think you are safe with your rifle? Liberals want do ban your
"sniper rifles" too.
/rant on: Thanks for your non support of the 2nd amendment. /rant off
Posted by: John B | February 18, 2007 at 11:22 AM
You meed to be reminded that the AR15/AR10 style of rifles is the fastest
growing and most popular segment of the firearms industry today.
When companies like S&W jump in to it, you know there's something to be said
about it.
These rifles are also matched with probably the largest after market parts and
accessories industry of any rifle, ever.
Fad?
I think not.
AR15/AR10 rifles are popular for their modular design, ease of maintenance,
reliability and accuracy.
(I can easily re-barrel my AR. My .308 Savage? Not so easy...)
.223 Rem. has become one of the hottest selling cartridges and one of the
most widely reloaded outside of handgun cartridges.
What is the difference of a .223 bolt gun and a .223 semi-auto? The ballistics
2/19/2007
Page 311 of 853
are going to be the same.
Oh, I see! You're just offended by the fact that they are black and scary looking!
This type of logic is not what I would expect from guy like you.
Having said that, the M16/M4 is widely used by police and military forces
around the world, not terrorist organizations.
Is this guy implying that our military forces are "terrorist" forces?
Please. The diatribe of lies in this article is making my stomach churn.
Posted by: Michael | February 18, 2007 at 11:23 AM
Jim,
Thats a dangerous attitude you have. I'm a traditionalist who likes fine wood
and deep bluing, I don't own an "assault rifle", yet. This is not a subjact open for
debate. You're either a supporter of the 2nd Ammendment or your not. If
hunters don't change their attitude of "well I don't hunt with it so the government
can have it" we won't be owning any guns in the near future.
I will no longer purchase OutdoorLife, Remington, nor any other products or
services having anything to do with Mr. Zumbo.
Robert Green
Posted by: RobG | February 18, 2007 at 11:23 AM
Jim Zumbo is an idiot and he needs to be removed from OL forever. His
comments are wrong on so many levels. From hunting, to rodent control, to
personal defense, to competition matches, ARs certainly have their place. We
need writers that will help educate the public, not promote the anti-gun
philosophy. I WILL NOT RENEW MY OUTDOOR LIFE SUBSCRIPTION AS
LONG AS ZUMBO IS ON STAFF OR DOESN"T APOLOGIZE FOR HIS
ASININE COMMENTS.
Mr. Zumbo:
I read with disgust your uniformed "opinion" of the use of military appearance
semi-automatic rifles for hunting.
As several have already pointed out in the chain of responses above, most
states require a three or five shot magazine. My home state of PA does NOT
permit the use of semi automatics of any type or appearance for hunting. So
there are controls in place to prevent wanton, irresponsible
"spraying" of bullets while hunting.
2/19/2007
Page 312 of 853
I own several military appearance rifles that are "tack drivers" and I regularly
shoot at targets and gongs out to 600 yds. I get a tremendous amount of
enjoyment and satsifaction from it. Your comments are tacit support for the
banning of such semiautomatic rifles from which I derive much enjoyment
without the killing of an animal.
Your comments are so much grist for the anti-assault-rifle gun control campaign
-- and I can see the quotes already -- "Noted sporing writer Jim Zumbo agrees
that there is no place for assault weapons in sport shooting . . ."
Let me make an observation, Mr. Zumbo, stealing a "page" from you:
I see photos in the hunting magazine articles depicting hunters using highmagnification scoped high-power bolt action rifles, which are nearly
indistinguishable from those used by military snipers in the conflict in Iraq. IMO,
there is no place for such scoped, high-powered rifles in hunting. My
grandfather, my father, and I all used lever action rifles with open sights with
which to take our Pennsylvania whitetails -- no high magnification sniper scope
was needed. In my humble opinion, I cannot understand why these hunters
think they need these high-powered scoped sniper rifles for hunting when all
they were meant for was killing, pure and simple.
How does THAT feel to YOU, Mr. Zumbo?
If you have no idea what you are writing about, it's best to stick to writing about
what you DO know, or at least go shoot some of these "assault rifles" before
you post such dross.
Rick Smith
aka "Noah Zark"
Posted by: Rick Smith | February 18, 2007 at 11:23 AM
Terrorist rifles? Are you insane?
I have varmint hunted for years with an AR15---the same type of rifle thousands
of competitive shooters use each year to compete at places like Camp Perry,
and other fine organized shooting events. The same type of rifles that hundreds
of thousands of fine young men and women in our military use to keep us free--so guys like Mr. Zumbo can write stupid stuff freely.
These rifles encourage "spray and pray"? Really? I thought you said you had
never seen anyone use one. So which is it?
The AR-15 is probably the best hunting rifle one can own. What other rifle do
you own Mr. Zumbo that can go from a service rifle in competition, to a varmint
rifle shooting .17 Remington, to a bison-meat getter in .458 Socom in the 30 or
so seconds it takes to change the upper?
2/19/2007
Page 313 of 853
You owe us all, especially your employer, an apology Mr. Zumbo...not that
many of us will be listening to you when you give it. Bye.
Posted by: AR-15's are Freedom Rifles | February 18, 2007 at 11:23 AM
I will no longer purchase OutdoorLife, Remington, nor any other products or
services having anything to do with Mr. Zumbo.
Robert Green
Posted by: RobG | February 18, 2007 at 11:23 AM
Wow...many of these replies make you guys sound worse than any anti-gun
advocate on the "looney left". I just can't believe how badly you are over
reacting. The man is entitled to his opinion(which I agree with). This is not a
healthy debate at all. The bulk of you sound more like knuckle dragging morons
the way you're reacting. My GOD! Get a grip!
Posted by: Jay Anglin | February 18, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Who woulda thunkit? A hunter calling for the banning of something other than
his own weapon. Not only is that selfish, it is foolish. "A house divided against
itself cannot stand." True then, true now. If we all take on this mentality then we
are doomed in the fight for our 2nd Amendment rights.
Posted by: Kyle | February 18, 2007 at 11:24 AM
In 40 years of reading various gun and hunting publications, Zumbo's article is
the worst piece of tripe I've seen. I didn't want to blame Outdoor Life until I
realized that this garbage made it past the editors desk and still got published.
From this day forward I will boycott any magazine or manufacturer who
associates themself with this moron.
Posted by: Larry B. | February 18, 2007 at 11:24 AM
I was going to post my own statements on Highpower competition, but
apparently Mr. Sylvester beat me to it.
What I will say is that, unless I see anything to the contrary, your shooting
buddies from Remington Arms (mentioned in the first paragraph of your post) at
least tacitly support your ill-founded position. I therefore will cease purchasing
any of my gear from Remington until they make a statement otherwise.
Snailmail stating same outbound forthwith. Great PR move, fellas.
Derek
Posted by: Derek | February 18, 2007 at 11:25 AM
'Assault Rifles' ???
2/19/2007
Page 314 of 853
The 89/91/93/95/96/98 series Mauser's were the premier Assault Rifles of their
day. The M1903/A1/A3 Springfield’s were Assault Rifles, as well.
Whatever happened to the idea that we must 'hang together, or, most
assuredly, we shall all hang separately.'
Your elitism and snobbery is only matched by your ignorance, Mr. Zumbo.
Remington Arms can continue to go broke slowly by selling Russian and
Serbian made firearms because their management cannot figure out how to
make them in the US, but they will have no spot in my Gun Safe.
Please inform Remington that they have lost another customer due to your
'enlightened and thoughtful' viewpoint, I am sure that they will be happy the
hear this.
Posted by: William Laczko | February 18, 2007 at 11:25 AM
I posted a comment above and the name came up Rick Smith? I am not Rick
Smith nor do I know a man named Rick Smith.
Posted by: Bruce | February 18, 2007 at 11:25 AM
This AR packing Granny thinks you, Mr. Zumbo, are in bed with the Brady
Bunch. I'm so disappointed in you. I think I'll be watching the Military Channel
for my hunting and firearm info from now on. As we fight the very tough fight to
keep our 2nd amendment rights your have to spout this ignorant garbage.
Remember, those of us that abide by the law are NOT dangers to others who
abide by the law--with any firearm. People who--I'm not even going on. You
sound like my idiot sister-in-law who was petrified I was going to kill her
because I keep a handgun on my person. What on earth was that "terrorist"
crap you chose to spount? You may be able to get unemployment insurance-with any luck.
Posted by: Laurie Berger | February 18, 2007 at 11:26 AM
I'm surprised, Jim, and saddened that you display no more sense about this
subject than would Sarah Brady.
Calling semi-autos "terrorist" is just plain dumb. What on earth possessed you
to have such an absense of common sense?
Posted by: Curtis | February 18, 2007 at 11:26 AM
Dear Dumbo:
Since when does the style or appearance of a hunters firearm determine if he
or she should be permitted to hunt in your elitist world. Just what we
need...another ignoramus in the field.
Posted by: Keith | February 18, 2007 at 11:26 AM
2/19/2007
Page 315 of 853
you are a pompus ass
on more Outdoor Life
and now i have to cancle my Rem700 XCR in .338 RUM
i hope your sponsers drop you for your artical
Posted by: shootlow | February 18, 2007 at 11:27 AM
I have bought my last Remington.
I have read my last Outdoor Life.
Please, Mr. Zumbo, stay the hell out of Wyoming, we dont want your kind out
here.
Posted by: Jerry York | February 18, 2007 at 11:27 AM
Put your money where your mouth is people!! Tell Remington that you'll no
longer buy their products as long as they support Jim!!!
He's the worst kind of gun owner out there, you can tell he would gladly turn his
guns in if told to do so. I'm sure he would turn his neighbors in if told to do so
also.
We do not need so called gun owners like this in our community. If you support
him or Remington then you are supporting anti gun bigots! This man is no
friend of ours and if he belong to the NRA or any other gun rights communities
they should kick him out! Crap like this sets us back more then you know and
the anti's will use this against us, just watch.
Posted by: Shawn K | February 18, 2007 at 11:27 AM
I will definetely not sending in the Outdoor Life renewal slip I just recieved in the
mail.
Didn't Remington develope the new 6.8 caliber that is the new rage in AR
uppers? Why would they hire someone to bad mouth one of their own product
lines? I'll bet Jim Zumbo has owned lots of Semi-auto shotguns in his lifetime.
Jim needs no further sponsorshiip from any outdoor companies.
Posted by: John Davis | February 18, 2007 at 11:29 AM
Once again I, am reminded why HUNTERS are a scourge to our society.
Posted by: Rollis R. Karvellis | February 18, 2007 at 11:29 AM
ARs and AKs terrorists rifles?
I'm sure that if Handgun Control hasn't already paid you your check is in the
mail.
You sir are disgusting.
Posted by: ed | February 18, 2007 at 11:30 AM
2/19/2007
Page 316 of 853
Jimmy-boy,
Wow, I'm not saying I read all of the replies, but I read most of them. Judging
by what 99.99% of the replies stated, hopefully you see how misguided your
views are. As for Remington, I own several of their rifles. I will never be
purchasing another one until they dicontinue supporting you.
Andy B.
Posted by: Andy B. | February 18, 2007 at 11:30 AM
What a stupid article. I would guess that subscription sales will go down very
quickly. I shoot an AR platform match rifle and worry constantly that my sport
will go down the tubes because of idiots like you.
Posted by: GR Swaney | February 18, 2007 at 11:30 AM
My screensaver is a pic of a MARINE with a M-14 "terrorizing" some ragheads.
I shoot AR-15's and have yet to see any terrorist using one. You are a dumb$H!+ for making a senile and retarded/ignorant statement. I hope Remy
removes you from the checkbook. A$$w!pe
Posted by: Robert Rodgers | February 18, 2007 at 11:30 AM
Thanks Jim,
you just made up my mind on resubscibing. NO THANK YOU!!! You are
obviously an uninformed Liberal Moron.
Posted by: G. Groomes | February 18, 2007 at 11:30 AM
Jay Anglin - you really don't get it, do you?
You Fudds weally cwack me up.
Posted by: Dave from Iowa | February 18, 2007 at 11:31 AM
Jim your opinion on “black” guns is very surprising to me, actually I’m aghast. I
use to enjoy watching your hunting shows and am very surprised to find how
ignorant you are. It is one thing to have these thoughts in your head but to
publish them shows extremely poor judgment. What the hell were you thinking.
This just gives the anti-s more fodder in their in their quest to ban all guns.
What you have written follows perfectly in line with their plan. Get one group of
guns banned at a time until all guns are banned.
Remington has fallen on hard times and due to your association with them I
fear they may not survive due to this.
I know I will not be purchasing any more Remingtons when I can purchase from
other companies that are not associated with anti-gun views such as yours.
This will make it much easier for others who are on the fence to buy Remington
or Savage (there are many) to pick Savage.
I personally do not use a black gun mostly because I do not care for the
2/19/2007
Page 317 of 853
aesthetics of them. They are just as much of a hunting gun as any other
though. Your Remington XCR looks as much different from Sharps as an AR.
That doesn’t make the AR bad just different. Just because I don’t care for the
looks of an AR doesn’t mean that I am not going to support others that want to
use them for hunting, I will. I may change my mind some day and decide that I
would like to hunt with a black gun, guess I wouldn’t have that opportunity if you
get your way.
Just because they look different than what you’re used to doesn’t make them
bad.
I still do not understand how you could post such blasphemy I feel very sorry for
you Jim. Something is definitely wrong with the way your mind is working, did
you recently have a Stroke? (I did not mean that as a joke)
I hope Mr. Zumbo, you enjoyed your expedition in the wilds of S.E. Wyoming.
Its my home and where I make a living. Unlike "sportsmen", hunting is often a
chore of varmint and predator control for me and others whose livelihood is
derived from the land, and much to your stated disdain, I use an AR-15. The
short of it is, it was selected as the best tool for my use for a few reasons after
many hours of applying different rifles to the tasks at hand.
That is a purely subjective opinion and preference, as is your condemnations of
these style of rifles, but your comment shows a contempt that I only share in my
ire for interlopers.
While I don't care how another feels about my firearms, I do take exception
when they call for a ban on them because they don't like them. That sir is the
only thing that should be banned, and in fact IS by constitutional right, the
second amendment has not a single thing to do with "hunting or sportsmen".
Please try to remember that the next time you visit the great state of Wyoming
where we embody the spirit of freedom.
The Second Amendment ain't about hunting, Mr. Z, it's about resisting an
oppressive government which ignores the will of the people. Your promotion of
the "us-versus-them" mentality is as despicable as the treasonous
congressional coalition's recent non-binding resolution "in support of the
troops."
Consider me one who will never again open the pages of Outdoor Life, at least
as long as Mr. Zumbo's work appears there.
Unfortunately my subscription just expired so I'll be unable to cancel it in Jim's
honor. But rest assured that my subscription account# 227353896 will not be
2/19/2007
Page 318 of 853
renewed because of this Zumbo character.
For the others, here is the Customer Service link to cancel:
http://secure.customersvc.com/servlet/Show?
WESPAGE=ou/home.html&MSRSMAG=OU
Posted by: BP | February 18, 2007 at 11:32 AM
How dare you, sir.
You are more of a danger to RKBA issues than any of the "honest" gun-haters.
Posted by: Chris_S | February 18, 2007 at 11:32 AM
Mr. Zumbo, You have made me a believer. You have convinced me that
oligarchs and plutocrats have infiltrated every aspect of our culture. You
obviously know better than anyone else how to take game in the field and you
are obviously compensated quite well by those whose purse strings you are
bound by. Please your worship, cleanse me of my iniquity. I promise to forsake
forever my “terrorist” semi automatic rifles and by your grace take up the arms
of the “assassin” I mean “sniper”, I mean what I really mean is avid gentlemen
sportsmen.
How dare you sir equate those who use magazine feed semi-automatic rifle to
terrorist. You are an insult to all those who responsibly participate in shooting
sports and hunting.
I have posted your drivel on the bulletin boards and in the news letter that goes
out to the 168 Soldiers in my unit and their families. I am quite sure that they
will not find your idiotic spewing any less seditious than I have. You see many
of us not only enjoy the outdoor sports such as hunting and fishing but we have
been on the front line in the war against terrorism. You think about that while
you perch yourself in your cozy little hunting lodge and preen yourself.
I have made the decision to forego the patronage of your sponsors and the
sponsors of outdoor life magazine.
The list of your Sponsors who I will not patronize:
REMINGTON
SWAROVSKI
GERBER KNIVES
MOSSY OAK
CABELA'S
[email protected]
2/19/2007
Page 319 of 853
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Posted by: John B. | February 18, 2007 at 11:33 AM
Hey, Jim...
In case you didn't notice, THE terrorist weapon of choice today seems to be the
high-capacity commercial airliner. Perhaps we could end terrorism by simply
limiting airliners to a maximum of ten seats, huh? Or limit how fast they can fly?
That'd hardly be less logical than your "thoughts."
Millions of people use airliners for reasons other than terrorism - just as millions
of people use guns (of ALL kinds) for reasons that do not endanger a single
soul. Guns are for more than just hunting, but perhaps you forgot why the
Second Amendment was written.
There may be another thing you didn't notice: the people who want to ban guns
don't limit themselves to just one kind. Ask the now-defenseless Brits or
Aussies how the camel got into their tent.
Posted by: Rocky Raab | February 18, 2007 at 11:34 AM
Jim,
I have e-mailed all your sponsors with a link to this site and a statement
advising them that I will no longer purchase any of their products while they
sponsor you.
Your stance on this issue is way out of line and at first, I thought your were
being sarcastic. When I realized you weren't, I thought you had been appointed
a spokesman for the Brady bunch.
In any event, I can appreciate your opinions on such matters, I only hope that
you can appreciate the response.
Here you go
2/19/2007
Page 320 of 853
Posted by: brad g | February 18, 2007 at 11:34 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
Although you are certainly entitled to your opinion, it disturbs me that you
consider a rifle to be a "terrorist" weapon merely based on looks. As you should
know, the AR-15 functions no differently than several other "sporting" rifles. It is
semi-automatic. Furthermore, game laws already prohibit hunting with high
capacity magazines, which is why 3- and 5-round magazines are available.
Firearms ownership is a Constitutional right . Hunting is not. Your elitist attitude
is divisive. Perhaps you should research the issue more.
If this is indicative of Remington corporate policy, my next gun purchase will
definitely not be a Remington.
I cant believe what I just read, calling the rifle our troops use a favorite of
terrorist? This article is disturbing and anti-gun, Remington has lost a loyal
customer as well as your magazine. Let it be known that Jim Zumbo has anti2nd amendment views.
I am selling my only Remington i dont need to support people like you.
lack of oxygen that happens to old people i hear!
Posted by: EFP III | February 18, 2007 at 11:35 AM
you make me sick!!
Wow....This is what we call in the business world a "career limiting move". I
suspect maybe the you fully intended to retire and wanted to go out in a blaze
of glory?
Whatever the reason, a "blaze" is certainly what you got. I haven't seen a
flaming like this since Chicago in 1871.
I'm not going to bother commenting on your blog. Plenty of folks more articulate
than I have covered every aspect. In fact, I regret ebing unable to read every
post here. If I could, I'd be a little more sure about not "jib jabbing" when I say
your name would fit nicely in with the bunch listed below....
Arnold, Chamberlain, Quisling.....get the picture?
Posted by: Allen Cowan | February 18, 2007 at 11:36 AM
What an incredibly foolish thing to say. I have an AR type rifle and I am NOT a
2/19/2007
Page 321 of 853
terrorist! I served my country honorably for 6 years as a US Naval Officer. I
believe in God. I don't steal. I've been married to the same woman for 26 years
and yet, you would label me a terrorist.
Mr. Zumbo, you are an idiot. BTW, it's spelled, "prairie".
Posted by: jeff | February 18, 2007 at 11:36 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
While I think hunting with muzzleloading firearms to be unethical, and the fact
that if you chose to hunt with one you get to hunt deer a week before I do (in
NH) just as unethical. I do not advocate the banning of hunting with them.
Because I happen to understand, just as many others who posted here, that
hunters and gun owners need to stand together and defend each other. Divided
we fall my friend.
Posted by: Chad Sylvester | February 18, 2007 at 11:37 AM
Yeah, those military style weapons, and their derivatives, are just not needed
for hunting and should be banned. You know, the Mauser Model 1898, the
Krag, the 1903 Springfield, the Winchester Models 12 and 97, the Colt SAA,
the rifled musket, any gas or recoil operated semi-auto. Military calibers, too,
have no place in the sporting realm. The .30-06, the .223, the 7mm and 8mm
Mausers, the .45 Colt, and the .45-70, just to name a few. The .30-30 is good
enough for anybody!
In case anybody missed it, the above is sarcasm. You stepped in it big time,
Mr. Zumbo. No more Remington products for me until you apologize.
Posted by: C in Oklahoma | February 18, 2007 at 11:38 AM
I am sure glad you are not a law maker. The spimle fact is, that you have
nothing except a wrong opinion that you feel should be passed on to the rest of
us. Maybe you and Dick Chainy should be hunting buddies.
I will sell the three Remingtons I have and will never buy another issue of
Outdoor Life as long as I live unless Dumbo is fired.
Posted by: Tim | February 18, 2007 at 11:38 AM
Terrorist weapon? Wow, yet another misuse of that word. I'll tell you what, keep
tacking "terror" onto anything and everything that you can and soon it'll have no
meaning at all. Words like "Clueless", "Opinionated" and "Fool" will carry more
weight.
I think that building a Varmint-class AR is a huge challenge. While I can't
imagine someone hunting with one, I bet one of those ridiculous California legal
ARs would meet most state standards for legal hunting trim. Our nation was
built by shit-starters that could care less about what everyone else thought/did.
2/19/2007
Page 322 of 853
I think that to sit and proffer your stubborn and myopic opinions in this way is
decidedly contrary to the spirit in which this country was founded.
That's right, this is a "terror blog".
-jcw
PS: I am going to go to the terror deli and get myself a terror pastrami on terror
rye, and wash it down with a terror cherry wishniak. You better believe it,
bubba. Ho, ho.
Posted by: John Waters | February 18, 2007 at 11:38 AM
I sir reject your comments out of hand. You seem intent on demonizing
Americans who mean you or others no harm. You are creating boogiemen for
those that are ignorant at best and are tryants at worst.
The second ammendment is not about hunting it is about freedom lets not fool
ourselves or try to fool others. An ar or an ak is no more leathal than my savage
in 300wm or my rem 700 in 30-06.
I question why you choose to insult Americans many of us former service men
and women by calling us terrorist. I fear you have been on too many canned
hunts using $2000-5000 rifles and shot guns and wish to see the days of
hanging a man for hunting the kings deer.I will be sending remmington a letter
informing them that you are not the kind of person that I associate with
outdoorsmen. I sir,think that you are a very selfish elite-ist shill and are proof
that some people will do anything for money. I have another "T"word for you
traitor.And yes I am a real Marine not like those fake posters that agree with
you.
Posted by: montfordpoint | February 18, 2007 at 11:38 AM
Mr. Zumbo;
I'm not going to insult you or your supporters. We are all entitled to our
opinions, and that's what I percieve you to be expressing. I just think yours
wrong.
You are undoubtedly a hunter of some reputation, and I'll suggest its well
deserved.
Like certain well advertised portions of one's anatomy, everyone has an
opinion.
Mine suggests that a firearm which is designed to be carried night and day, at
the ready; to be reliable and capable of downing a human sized quarry, has
every place in hunting. Accuracy is as much an attribute of the hunter as it is of
the firearm they choose to employ. If I can hit an NRA 100yd Highpower target
with an AR or an AK, and I can do so with regularity, then accuracy is not an
issue, for me, with thse rifles.
2/19/2007
Page 323 of 853
My opinion also suggest that when one undertakes to describe AR's and AK's
as spray and pray implements and terrorists' rifles, they betray a distinct degree
of shallownees in their thinking. They're not just for drive-by's and political
unrest anymore.
I'd suggest that if you undertook to bring, for instance, an LR260, or perhaps a
Saiga 20ga into the appropriate field on your next hunting foray, you might find
yourself experiencing a few pleasant surprises.
I think the more logical solution to this rather lengthy display of ire would be for
you to permit some better acquaintance on your own part with those
implements you deign to deprecate.
The other points I might make have already been amply, if abrasively, put forth
by other correspondents in this topic.
All I would add, simply, would be to paraphrase Ben Franklin when he
suggested that should we fail to hang together, we would surely all hang
separately.
With sincerest respect;
Greg Langelius
Posted by: Greg Langelius | February 18, 2007 at 11:38 AM
You can add me to the list of people who will no longer purchase OutdoorLife,
Remington, nor any other products or services having anything to do with Mr.
Zumbo.
I've prairie dog hunted with my AR-15, M1A1 and deer hunt with a Spas-12 all
without ever terrorizing anyone.
I also work in a firearms store, and you can bet that I will not be recommending
Remington products to our customers anymore.
Posted by: Robert Y. | February 18, 2007 at 11:39 AM
well you just lost a fan,how could you,,,no even better what gives you the right
to condemn a whole class of firearm.I do not hunt with them but I do own a few
and I can tell you I could take a yote much quicker and more humane with my
AR style rifle shooting 223 at 3/4 moa than you ever will shooting that .17
toy,,,for years everone has condemned shooting .22' long rifle at anything
bigger than a squirrel and look at you wanting a .17 over a .223
Posted by: garry cross | February 18, 2007 at 11:39 AM
well you just lost a fan,how could you,,,no even better what gives you the right
to condemn a whole class of firearm.I do not hunt with them but I do own a few
and I can tell you I could take a yote much quicker and more humane with my
2/19/2007
Page 324 of 853
AR style rifle shooting 223 at 3/4 moa than you ever will shooting that .17
toy,,,for years everone has condemned shooting .22' long rifle at anything
bigger than a squirrel and look at you wanting a .17 over a .223
Posted by: garry cross | February 18, 2007 at 11:39 AM
What an ignorant statement! Who are you to decide what people use in there
sporting endeavors? And, and far as referring to a AR as an assualt weapon,
you are so highly misinformed it is pathetic. You think those yotes and p-dogs
care what rifle launched that bullet? You are en elitist of the worst kind. Nothing
like getting in bed with the enemy.
Posted by: Corko | February 18, 2007 at 11:40 AM
What a shame that we have come to this. A gun writer accusing others gun
hobbyists of being terrorists becasue of their choice of fire arm. You have done
a service for me. I will never read or spend money on Outdoor life magazine if
they are supporting writers such as you.
Posted by: John Rensing | February 18, 2007 at 11:41 AM
we just want the handguns registered so those filthy eye-talians and dirty poles
that are coming here don't get one......
(NY state sullivan gun law circa 1920,'30's)
No more mail orders without FFL.......
(1969)
We just want background checks.....
We just want trigger locks........
we just want a waiting period.........
Why would anybody need to buy more than one gun a month??????
We want Federal dollars for gun buy backs...
(everybody knows criminal trash will exchange a $400 gun for $50 worth of free
groceries)
No one in Federal housing shall own a gun..
(Cuomo, HUD Secretary)
WE JUST WANT YOUR GUNS.
2/19/2007
Page 325 of 853
You stupid b@$tard... my .338 takes much bigger bullet thingys than a .223
does. If you think the anti gunners are going to let you keep your guns just
'cause they look nicer you are as F##(%*ing stupid as liberals who think radical
muslims aren't going to kill them because they want to pull out of Iraq.
Jim have fun riding the train to the re-education camp. I'll be long dead because
I'm not giving anything up.
I don't own an AR nor have I ever seen a prarie dog. But I have read the
Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. I know the intent.
This is a THEM and US fight.
You sir are now one of THEM
Posted by: Rich | February 18, 2007 at 11:41 AM
Oh, and by the way you anti-American, the venerable AR15 is NOT an
"ASSault Rifle" - it's an HPR (High Performance Rifle)
Posted by: BerlinVet | February 18, 2007 at 11:43 AM
The Zumbos of the world are the reason the US will eventually abolish the 2nd
amendment.
There is no functional difference between a AR15 and a wood stock semi suto
Remington hunting rifle. They only difference is their cosmetics and
ergonomics.
You sir should retire all of your firearms and stick to fishing or nature walks.
You represent everything that is wrong with the firearms community.
Here are some Outdoor life emails to let your opinions be known ...
[email protected],[email protected],
[email protected]
MR ZOOMBO IS A PEDOPHILE. HE LIKES TO TAKE YOUNG BOYS
HUNTING AND THEN MOLEST THEM. THAT"S WHY HE DOESN'T LIKE
ASSAULT RIFLES. WHEN HE WAS JUST A BOY OF TEN HE WAS RAPED
IN THE POOP CHUTE BY A MAN WIELDING AN AK-47. MR Z ALSO
BELONGS TO NAMBLA.
Posted by: FUCKZUMBO | February 18, 2007 at 11:43 AM
2/19/2007
Page 326 of 853
If you are receiving this email is because Jim Zumbo has just cost you my
business, and all my friends business. We will no long endorse, buy, use, or
recommend your products. If Jim Zumbo is fired, reprammanded, and a public
apology from his mouth on his tv show, it won't be enough. His stance on
calling americans terrorists, for owning guns in the fields is outrageous. He
tramples on our 2nd ammendment rights, and and what this country was
founded on.
You will feel the ripple of this article that you failed to edit, and financially,
because your magazine sales are going to bomb, and the product
endorsements are going to make an arrow at your next earnings meeting.
Give our best to Jimbo Zumbo on his way down with you guys, because he is
responsible for calling all gun owners terrorists.
There are a lot of other companies out there to choose from, and you won't be
getting these sales.
Thanks AR15.com
Once again I, am reminded why HUNTERS are a scourge to our society.
Who's side is this guy on? I'm so sick of this kind of division among the
shooting community. If we don't stand together we are doomed to go the way of
Australia. There is no right to hunt in the constitution. The second amendment
has nothing to do with hunting.
I used to respect Mr. Zumbo. Our shooting heritage is in grave danger. We
don't need Mr. Zumbo feeding the anti-gun crowd ammo against us. I will not
be patronizing any businesses with him as a representative.
2/19/2007
Page 327 of 853
If the author hates a type of firearm that is his right as it is my right to cancel my
subscription ( done ).
I also have a right to express my counter opinion to all those who read outdoor
publications and express my support for publications who encourage firearm
ownership -of any sort.
Mr.Zumbo (Dumbo ??) has shown poor aim in his choice of target and shot
himself in the foot ,in my opinion.
Posted by: John Irwin | February 18, 2007 at 11:45 AM
You know that irritating little drop of piss that hangs on the tip of you dick after
you piss, you know, the one you have to shake off, That's the Zumbo.
Posted by: Scott | February 18, 2007 at 11:45 AM
As a former action shooting competitor and predator hunter, I find Mr Zumbo's
views on AR type rifles downright irritating. The AR is a fine platform for
varmint/predator hunting as well as recreational shooting, never mind the fact
that the 2nd Ammendment has nothing to do with either of those.
As far as I am concerned, the advertisers on this site are supporting Jim's
unpatriotic views.
Come on Jim, a terrorist weapon? The AR platform is the exact opposite of
that!
Remember, divided we fall...
Posted by: ipsc | February 18, 2007 at 11:45 AM
It deeply disturbed me that a firearms enthusiast so savagely segregated a
population of the gun owning public in such a demeaning manner. As an owner
of a number of semi-auto rifles for sport, recreation and self defense; I am
constantly looking to expand my experiences and disciplines. I am looking
forward to my first hunting trip and have thoroughly enjoyed sporting clays for
the past year. To pigeon-hole a segment of the gun owning population is shortsighted, narrow-minded and just plain ignorant. I am confused as to the
motivation and thought process that it took to pen such vicious words, but I
know that I will not look to Outdoor Life as a resource to educate and assist me
in expanding my hobby and lifestyle. Good job, Mr. Zumbo.
Posted by: Ray | February 18, 2007 at 11:45 AM
Dear Mr. Zumbo,
I disagree with your stance on "assault" rifles. You imply that those of us that
own military style rifles are "terrorists" simply because of the type of rifle we
own.
2/19/2007
Page 328 of 853
As for their sporting use, let me just say that I own a scoped bolt action that
consistently shoots 3" groups @100 yards from the bench. I own a Springfield
M1A that I can consistently shoot 2" @ 100 yards from seated and prone... with
IRON sights.
I hunt with the Springfield.
Posted by: Troy | February 18, 2007 at 11:45 AM
Mr. Zumbo,
The Second Amendment (SA) gets weakened just a little more every time
someone with a pen or a camera spews forth this kind of fodder. What does
hunting and the Second Amendment have to do with one another? Very little.
Except, try hunting with your rifle once it's been abolished. Make no mistake.
The gun grabbers want your rifles too.
Your latest post is perhaps the most ignorant statement that I've ever read
coming from what I had once considered to be an outstanding rifleman and
statesman for our sport. I am very disappointed in you and your ramblings.
There is room for all in this sport.
Posted by: Randy Blevins | February 18, 2007 at 11:46 AM
You sir are a HYPOCRITE. here is a quote from the long range shooting
section of this SAME blog.
Enjoy it, however you hunt. "
So in the same breath you spew words like BAN and Terrorist rifles you say
this?
I too will contact your sponsers and boycott thier products until you are
released from their payroll.
Posted by: Steve Kragness | February 18, 2007 at 11:46 AM
Sir, you need to do a bit more research and get educated.
Miltary rifles have been used for hunting for decades. How many 98K Mausers
have been used for hunting?
Simply because it is a Semi-Automatic rifle does not disqualify it as a hunting
rifle. Browning, Ruger, Benelli, all make Semi-Auto hunting rifles. Rifles that
shoot more potent rounds than an AK-47. it seems you are more worried about
image.
Please read the Liberal, 'Violence Policy Centers' website and you will see that
your Bolt action, Scoped hunting rifle is also on the Democrats list of weapons
2/19/2007
Page 329 of 853
to ban.
You are being divisive and this type of thinking only serves our opponents
aims.
The 2nd Amendment is NOT about hunting.
Posted by: Rick Louis | February 18, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Zumbo,, you said it your self
"I must be living in a vacuum"
"I had no clue"
I bet you do now if you read these blogs,
and i bet your sponsers do now was well.
Posted by: Pat | February 18, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Time for this gun hating idiot to retire.We don't need more FUDDS helping to
ruin our second amendment rights!Dumbo ever use a 1100 for Daffy duck or a
760 for Bambi?Your hunting (sniper)rifles will be banned next after semi
automatics.
Outdoor Life magazine is NO BETTER for printing this CRAP!Calling millions of
gun owners terrorists!I say that we email every company that advertises in
Outdoor Life and then start a nationwide boycott of their products to bring this
worthless magazine to it's knees!
Posted by: mark454 | February 18, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Mr. Zoombo, go fuck yourself and die!
Posted by: JACKMEOFF | February 18, 2007 at 11:48 AM
3 things to say:
1. Subscription canceled
2. You, Mr Zumbo are a traitorous elitist snob of the worst kind. In a time when
the US government would love to disarm the people, you have shown yourself
to be an enemy of the 2nd Amendment and all gun owners. Disgusting.
3. The 2nd Amendment isn't about f****** duck hunting. Don't you get that? It is
imperative that civilians retain the right to keep and bear arms. ALL arms. The
kinds of arms for animal killing AND people killing. THAT is the point of the 2nd
ammendment.
Posted by: JD | February 18, 2007 at 11:48 AM
You make me sick. One hunter should stand up for all hunters. Have you no
idea what is at stake?
They won't just ban semi-autos, they will ban EVERYTHING.
Posted by: Logan | February 18, 2007 at 11:48 AM
2/19/2007
Page 330 of 853
Mr. Zumbo,
What is the difference between an AR-15 and a Remington 7400? You might
say one is a "sporting rifle" and one is a "terrorist rifle," when in reality the
differences between them are so slight that for practical purposes they are
identical. They both shoot the same round, they are both semi-automatic, they
both have detachable magazines. What's the difference? One looks "black and
scary" as the gun-grabbers would have the public believe, making it an "assault
rifle," or "terrorist rifle" in your own words. How asinine a conclusion is that?
It is precisely that kind of thinking that is going to lead us down the same road
that the Brits and the Aussies have followed. Wake up! The Second
Amendment has precisely nothing to do with hunting. A revival of the "Assault
Weapons Ban" is only the first slide down that slippery slope. If you value any
one of your firearms, you should reconsider your opinion on military weapons.
Join the fight to keep them in our hands and not confiscated by opressive
politicans that think they know what is best for us.
Unfortunately sir you are lacking in your firearms education. For a person
masqurading as an authority on firearms you are not very well rouned in your
knowledge of the firearms community as a whole.
You do not have to personally use black guns for hunting. I do not, and do not
use smoke poles either, but I recognize a persons right under the constitution
to their own choices.
Expressing these anti- gun sentiments just adds fuel to the anti-gun factions
case for totally disarming our free society.
Just remember that when then come for your guns.You could have done more
to support the firearms community
Posted by: thomashoward | February 18, 2007 at 11:50 AM
Assault Rifles? Terrorist Weapons? I prefer to think of them as Homeland
Defense Rifles. And, Jim, you can kiss my ass.
Attn: RMEF Committee Members
RE: Zumbo
Please keep the following points in mind while ordering merchandise for the
100's of upcoming banquets1) Apparently Zumbo is not a true friend of the hunting community. (We are
NOT obligated to fill our tables with his books)
2) Remington, OutdoorLife, etc support Zumbo.
RIFLE FACT-
2/19/2007
Page 331 of 853
There are FACTORY AR-15 rifles on the market with a 1/2 MOA written
accuracy guarantee.
What does Remington offer? A 1 1/2 MOA unwritten hope?
Posted by: exZumbofan | February 18, 2007 at 11:50 AM
I always find it disgusting how firearm hunters with bolt action rifles and indeed
those with black power muzzle and breach loading weapons see a vast divide
between their weapons and semi automatic rifles such as the AR series.
The muzzle loading rifle itself was the assault weapon in the 18th century up
until it was replaced with breech loading weapons in the latter half of the 19th
century.
The ever greater call for higher sustainable rates of fire lead to the bolt action
single shot and later bolt action repeaters. Indeed even the lever action rifles
frequently used for hunting were the assault weapons of their day.
Looking at the previous century the insurgencies and full scale wars were
fought with bolt action rifles until the latter half of the last century.
Once a move is made on repeating arms of any type the anti gun crowd will be
taking whatever aggressive action they can to eliminate bolt action and lever
action repeating arms as sure as the sun rises in the East.
The useful idiot moniker fits the clown that wrote that article.
Posted by: RonInAz | February 18, 2007 at 11:50 AM
You sir are a HYPOCRITE. here is a quote from the long range shooting
section of this SAME blog.
Enjoy it, however you hunt. "
So in the same breath you spew words like BAN and Terrorist rifles you say
this?
I too will contact your sponsers and boycott thier products until you are
released from their payroll.
Posted by: Steve Kragness | February 18, 2007 at 11:51 AM
Everything that needs to be said has been said, so I will just say this.
Dim Dumbo, you are an idiot of the highest magnitude.
Sponsors: Drop this fool, or I will never drop another dime.
Sincerely,
2/19/2007
Page 332 of 853
(Apparently) -A terrorist Hunter
I guess I'm a terrorist.
Hopefully, I've only terrorized groundhogs and targets during Highpower
matches. I got my first AR15 23 years ago to use on the farm. It stood up to
being carried on tractors, in trucks, and propped in combine cabs. The thick
coating of dust that accumulated in this environment was the enemy of
supposed "sporting arms" I had tried before, but the AR15 always performed
when called upon. In addition to it's durability, the accuracy was at least the
equal of bolt actions I had used and the zero never changed.
It's not just hunting fields that these ifles shine. I became an NRA Highpower
competitor, and shot the first few seasons using a "conventional" rifle. I went
the radical route and switched to an AR15, beating my previous high score in
the first match. I made Master classification within a month.
Now, had I gone with your way of thinking, I guess I should think that bolt, lever,
single shot, and slide action rifles should be tanked- But I don't, and have some
of each. I personally don't see the sense of gee-whiz inline muzzle loaders- But
more power to their users.
Thanks for the helping out the cause there, Jim.
Posted by: Barry McCown | February 18, 2007 at 11:52 AM
Mr. Zumbo:
You sir, are a nincompoop and your comments are simply asinine balderdash.
Posted by: Roberto Santiago | February 18, 2007 at 11:52 AM
No more Remington ammo for me. I'm sure Winchester, Hornady and Federal
are happy to have my money for thier fine products, including .223.
Posted by: AMC | February 18, 2007 at 11:52 AM
Mr Zumbo,
I have with interest watched a number of your shows on the dish network
channels.
That will come to an end for me, I will also contact them and request that your
shows are removed from their broadcasting, as I do not wish to fund blogs like
yours.
Also, I might add, the autographed zumbo cookbok just went into the trash, no
need to promote that either in this day & age.
Good luck on your retirement, I honestly wish you well.
2/19/2007
Page 333 of 853
zumbo, your a dumb ass, if you have no experience with the rifles, shut up.
calling them terrorist rifles is the stupidist thing ive heard. ar-15s are not
terrorist rifles, but rifles used by our soldiers and law enforcement. they are no
different than semi automatic min 14's or mini-30's or any other semi auto rifle.
they are a great choice of weapon for coyote hunters who hunt to help other
game. one of the best rifles in my opinion to have coyote hunting, to make sure
that predator doesnt get away alive.
Posted by: devin | February 18, 2007 at 11:53 AM
You are a fool.
You missed the boat on this one Mr. Zumbo. I feel as if you have betrayed law
abiding hunters and shooters.
Why do we 'need' the AR15. We may, we may not but that's not for you to
decide. It's already been decided.
Besides, the second amendment is commonly interpreted to mean average joe
can arm himself for such a time that rising against the government may be
necessary. I for one will take an AR over a hunting rifle any day.
Confused why you would have this opinion.
Complete idiot.....
Mr Zumbo, please go call another outfitter to drag your butt out on another ego
fulfilling hunt. I once had respect for you and your endeavors until we met in
either 2000 or 2001 in Utah at a hunters convention. My buddies and I left there
shaking our heads at your version of reality. Please stop speaking about what
we should or shouldn't be using in the woods, you are damaging our reputation.
Posted by: Brad Ledford | February 18, 2007 at 11:54 AM
I think everyone has covered this but I'm going to say it anyway. "terroist"
guns? Are you kidding me? What an idiot! What is the problem with AR's as
varmint guns? Mine shoots sub 1/2'' @100yds and here in AZ we are limited to
5 round magazines for semi autos. So what is really your problem with them?
I've seen tons of folks for years using AR/AK's for prarie dogs/coyotes/rabbits.
You really should get out more and stop giving the liberals ammunition. What a
a$$ hat you are!
Posted by: YOURANIDIOTJIM! | February 18, 2007 at 11:54 AM
My friend, you are dreadfully mistaken. Your comments on the AR disgust me.
2/19/2007
Page 334 of 853
Posted by: RobInPA | February 18, 2007 at 11:54 AM
I think everyone has covered this but I'm going to say it anyway. "terroist"
guns? Are you kidding me? What an idiot! What is the problem with AR's as
varmint guns? Mine shoots sub 1/2'' @100yds and here in AZ we are limited to
5 round magazines for semi autos. So what is really your problem with them?
I've seen tons of folks for years using AR/AK's for prarie dogs/coyotes/rabbits.
You really should get out more and stop giving the liberals ammunition. What a
a$$ hat you are!
Mr. Zumbo, I cannot believe what I just read. I have been involved in shooting
sports and hunting almost all of my life and I have seen AR-15 rifles (and
clones) used widely throughout both. To say that a firearm isn’t a ‘hunting rifle’
based on your views is exactly the strong-hold the gun banning politicians
want. As was posted earlier on your blog, how would you feel if your Remington
700 or Winchester M70 was deemed a ‘sniper’ rifle and then banned. Will you
be the one to place that label on them since they are/were used in the military
for that purpose? I don’t think that you would, so why then do you label an AR15 as a ‘terrorist’ rifle? That is one of the most outlandish things I have heard.
Are you using the ‘scary’ word as a new intimidation factor? I’m just trying to
figure out why someone in your position would launch an attack at fellow gun
owners? I own (and shoot) a variety of firearms, ranging from rolling blocks,
lever action, bolt action, and yes AR15’s. Each of them has a special place in
my collection and each of them get used. When I lived in Colorado I frequently
used my AR for coyote and prairie dog hunts along with my Ruger M77 MkII
22-250. The popularity of the AR15 in hunting sports has grown exponentially.
Is this something you fear? Do you feel that this rifle design will surpass your
beloved bolt actions? I love my bolt guns too, but I have a special place in my
heart for all firearms. There are some that I personally don’t care for, but I
would never suggest banning them. An anti-second amendment statement like
that really shows who’s side you are on. I hope that you reconsider your
statements and rescind them, but if not then we (the American Gun Owners) do
not need, or want, someone like you in the media spotlight.
Posted by: Joe Licht | February 18, 2007 at 11:54 AM
Boycott everyone Associated with Jim Zumbo!
Posted by: Keven Moore | February 18, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Jim;
As a gun writer myself, I am baffled by your monumental ignorance on this
topic. I don't travel as much as you I'm sure, but I have spent a lot of time on
trips with other writers, factory reps, and outfitters. I have never heard anyone
in the industry make such ludicrous statements in reference to semi-auto
2/19/2007
Page 335 of 853
firearms as you did in this article. Maybe you need to spend more time listening
to your fellow hunters and shooters and less time watching CNN.
Dan C Johnson
Posted by: Dan C johnson | February 18, 2007 at 11:55 AM
I cannot believe my eyes. I guess you have been sleeping with enemy behind
our backs. I truly still cannot believe a writer for an outdoor magazine.
Someone who "specializes" in guns could write such a thing. In this day where
our rights are under attack we do not need a stab in our back from our own
people. Maybe before you wrote this article of amazing speculation. You first
should have taken a poll before you drew your redicolous conclusion. Then
maybe you should have looked at Europe's gun history. Then just maybe you
will understand the stupidity of your error. In this world it is not about banning
"assault rifles." To them it is about banning guns across the board.
Oh yeah, what is the definition of an "assault rifle." From your article it's clear
you may not be able to even use a dictionary so I took the liberty for you.
"assault rifle
–noun
1. a military rifle capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, utilizing an
intermediate-power cartridge.
2. a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usu. modified to
allow only semiautomatic fire."
Let's think about that definition for a minute. A rifle capable of automatic fire.
Last I checked you still needed a Class III license to own an automatic weapon.
But you probably didn't research that. Your just to busy spewing out ignorant
made up facts.
Now lets think about your bolt action rifle you so proudly hold in your photo.
Lets also remember you are with the Remington employees as well. Because
you felt that you needed to point that out. Can you tell me what gun the United
States Marine Corps snipers used to use? I know you are to busy creating fake
facts so I'll answer the question for you. It just so happened to be the Reminton
700.
Now lets go back to that definition. "a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the
military assault rifle, usu. modified to allow only semiautomatic fire" Using your
defintion of an assault rifle your own bolt action gun should also be banned.
Because that gun was used by military forces and your gun is basically the
same thing as theirs.
Finally, I am calling for a boycott of Outdoor Life until we receive a public
apology from Mr. Zumbo. I also want you to not forget to go research Europe's
gun history and go read what all is outlawed there. I will also be writing
2/19/2007
Page 336 of 853
Remington and letting them know who they are in bed with. I will also be
writting the NRA and NSSF to let them know your feelings on gun ownership in
America.
Posted by: Robert Ruiz | February 18, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Wow, All AR’s are terrorist’s weapons! Our military is full of terrorists!
Clearly you believe all fun guns should be banned. I own a machinegun. Why?
It is fun to shoot. I have had it since 1981 and it has not caused me to go crazy
or turn into a terrorist.
The ‘2A’ does not say we should be allowed only single shot rifles for the
purpose of hunting or maybe you feel we should only have muzzle loaders.
You Sir are a trader to the ‘2A’ and the rights of all gun owners.
The Anti Gun Male - Julia Gorin
Let's be honest. He's scared of the thing. That's understandable--so am I.
But as a girl I have the luxury of being able to admit it. I don't have to
masquerade squeamishness as grand principle--in the interest of mankind, no
less.
A man does. He has to say things like "One Taniqua Hall is one too many," as
a New York radio talk show host did in referring to the 9-year old New York
girl who was accidentally shot last year by her 12-year old cousin playing
with his uncle's gun.
But the truth is he desperately needs Taniqua Hall, just like he needs as
many Columbines and Santees as can be mustered, until they spell an end to
the Second Amendment. And not for the benefit of the masses, but for the
benefit of his self-esteem.
He often accuses men with guns of "compensating for something." The truth is
quite the reverse. After all, how is he supposed to feel knowing there are
men out there who aren't intimidated by the big bad inanimate villain? How
is he to feel in the face of adolescent boys who have used the family gun
effectively to defend the family from an armed intruder? So if he can't
touch a gun, he doesn't want other men to be able to either. And to achieve
his ends, he'll use the only weapon he knows how to manipulate: the law.
Of course, sexual and psychological insecurities don't account for all men
who are against guns. Certainly there must be some whose motives are
genuine, who perhaps do care so much as to tirelessly look for policy
solutions to teenage vacuousness and aggression, and to parent and teacher
2/19/2007
Page 337 of 853
negligence. But for a potentially large underlying contributor,
psycho-sexual inadequacy has gone unexplored and unacknowledged. It's one
thing to not be comfortable with a firearm and therefore opt to not keep or
bear one. But it's another to impose the same handicap onto others.
People are suspicious of what they do not know--and not only does this man
not know how to use a gun, he doesn't know the men who do or the people
who
have defended themselves from injury or death just by brandishing a gun. But
he is better left in the dark; his life is hard enough knowing there are men
out there who don't sit cross-legged. That they're also able to handle a
firearm instead of being handled by it would be too much to bear for the
anti-gun male.
Such a man is also best kept huddled in urban centers, where he feels safer
than he might on his own in a rural setting, in an isolated house on a quiet
street where he would feel naked and helpless. Lacking the confidence that
would permit him to be sequestered in sparseness, and lacking a gun, he
finds comfort in the cloister of crowds.
The very ownership of a gun for defense of home and family implies some
assertiveness and a certain self-reliance. But if our man kept a gun in the
house, and an intruder broke in and started attacking his wife in front of
him, he wouldn't be able to later say, "He had a knife--there was nothing I
could do!" Passively watching in horror while already trying to make peace
with the violent act, scheduling a therapy session and forgiving the
perpetrator before the attack is even finished wouldn't be the option it
otherwise is.
No. Better to emasculate all men. Because let's face it: He's a lover, not a
fighter. And he doesn't want to get shot in case he sleeps with your wife.
Of course, it wouldn't be completely honest to not admit that owning a
firearm carries with it some risk to unintended targets. That's the tradeoff
with a gun: The right to defend one's life and way of life isn't without
peril to oneself. And the last thing this man wants to do is risk his
life--even if to save it. For he is guided by a dread fear for his life, and
has more confidence in almost anyone else's ability to protect him than his
own, preferring to place himself at the mercy of the villain or in the
sporadically competent hands of authorities (his line of defense consisting
of locks, alarm systems, reasoning with the attacker, calling the police or,
should fighting back occur to him, thrashing a heavy vase).
In short, he is a man begging for subjugation. He longs for its promise of
equality in helplessness. Because only when that strange, independent alpha
breed of male is helpless along with him will he feel adequate. Indeed, his
2/19/2007
Page 338 of 853
freedom lies in this other man's containment.
Posted by: Thomas Schooley | February 18, 2007 at 11:56 AM
Hey Jim,
I wanted to take a moment and let you know what a detriment to the gun
community you have now made yourself... Your statement is as ignorant as
saying that Percussion cap rifles are military and only hunters need matchlocks
or Flintlocks... AR,AK,FAL platform rifles of future generation hunters if people
like YOU don't get them banned...
Oh and:
http://www.amishrakefight.org/gfy/
Sincerely
Speedfreak
Posted by: Speedfreak | February 18, 2007 at 11:56 AM
Tis better to let people think you are an idiot than to open your mouth and
loudly proclaim you are an ignorant idiot.
Subscription cancelled.
Posted by: TriggerNometry | February 18, 2007 at 11:56 AM
Once again I, am reminded why hunters are a scourge to our society.
Professional suicide. Kill his career in one article.
Personally, I resist ANY attempt to ban ANY type of firearm for ANY legal
activety. Our right have been INFRINGED enough in regards to firearm use,
ownership, and possesion.
Commentary and apathy such as Zumbo's are exactly why we have the
ridiculous gun laws we have. Sign me up to the terrorist bandwagon, I own an
AR and have used for varmint control. The versatility of an AR is unmatched.
One rifle can be used for urban varmint control and wilderness varmints. We as
firearms owners either stand together and repel efforts from the limousine
liberals or we will be sheeple, led by the likes of Zumbo. I urge all firearms
owners to write letters to companies associated with Zumbo and ask them to
sever any relationship with someone who is detrimental to sportsman as a
whole.
Posted by: Shane O'Donley | February 18, 2007 at 11:56 AM
Oh yeah, one more thing-
2/19/2007
Page 339 of 853
Those with the "spray and pray" mentality? It doesn't matter what king of a rifle
they have. With an AR they are irresponsible. With a bolt gun, they are just as
irresponsible and end up gut shooting game. Common sense should have told
you this before you posted that drivel.
OTHER POSTERS I URGE YOU TO WRITE TO HIS EDITORS TO TRY TO
GET THIS CLOWN FIRED OR REPRIMANDED.
Oh yeah, one more thingThose with the "spray and pray" mentality? It doesn't matter what king of a rifle
they have. With an AR they are irresponsible. With a bolt gun, they are just as
irresponsible and end up gut shooting game. Common sense should have told
you this before you posted that drivel.
A fair bit of what needed to be said has already been written above; your tunnel
vision regarding this topic is remarkable.
For starters, you have a poor understanding of the definition of "sporting arms"
and their application in the field and on the range. There is a very nice lady in
Oregon that employs her AR type rifle to deadly effect on the local coyotes that
trespass and disturb her bird dogs; at 300 hundred yards, the 'yote is dead right
there.
I expect you will be looking for support from the general shooting public when
Sarah Brady, George Soros, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, and their
sycophants tell you to surrender your repeating bolt action sporting arms
because they are derived from Paul Mauser's assault weapon invented in the
19th Century.
For a while, they will permit you (as in allow, and also pay a tax for the
privilege), to hunt with a break open single shot firearm, as long as the caliber
is not .223 Remington, .30-06 Springfield, .308 Winchester, 7.62X39 Russian,
or any other cartridge that has ever been chambered in a firearm issued by any
military force in the world, and you can be certain that the caliber of everything
you own will be less that .50, including your muzzle loaders. Possession of the
brass for those calibers will also be regulated, with felony penalties, as "intent";
whether your intent is to reform those cases into other cartridges is irrelevant to
bureaucrats instructed to follow the law and the current interpretation into
regulations. The break open action will be judged (more likely "felt" in that
crowd, and whether that opinion can stand scrutiny is irrelevant) as
insufficiently strong to permit really dangerous cartridges. Dangerous will
remain undefined and left to their opinion.
2/19/2007
Page 340 of 853
To the banners, "it's obvious" that no one needs firearms of such power and
danger; that about sums the thought invested in your position, too.
Mr. Zumbo, we had all better hang together to preserve the Right to Keep and
Bear Arms. I suggest you do a little reading of the thoughts of the founders of
this country on the topic.
An AR-15 is an excellent weapon for introducing kids and women to shooting
sports, or for their next step after the .22 RF - the rifles are sufficiently light and
easy to carry, the recoil is light, the rifle can be chambered in a number of
useful cartridges, and the usable accuracy of virtually every AR type rifle built
with quality components and a little knowledge and care exceeds every single
sample of every bolt action rifle produced by Remington.
I can install a wood stock, forearm, and pistol grip on these gas operated bolt
action semi-automatic feed rifles, complete with checkering and premium wood;
the rifle will look like your definition of "sporting arm. Or, I can color anodize the
receivers blue, red, green, teal, or about any other choice, and install furniture
that is painted in any color of the rainbow; this rifle will look like a fair portion of
the rifles used for benchrest, position, and silhouette shooting; this rifle will also
look like a "sporting rifle". Are you starting to see a connection? Let me draw
you a picture, just in case - there is no fundamental difference. The firearm is
dependent on the character of the shooter, to paraphrase Jeff Cooper.
Articles such as this, and others written by professional writers of fiction and
entertainment with little or no first hand knowledge of shooting sports or hunting
and fishing, are precisely why I won't buy off the rack magazines unless I'm
desperate for reading material while passing through an airport. That may not
be an option in the future; the lead article in the last magazine I bought for that
purpose was about a video game popular in bars in the East.
Mr. Zumbo, you are an embarrassment to all shooters, no matter the sport they
pursue.
The AR-15: Proof that God Loves Us and Wants Us to be Happy.
Posted by: Lee L. | February 18, 2007 at 11:57 AM
I liken these AR guns(in a hunting environment)to a family passenger car that is
painted up to look like a "cup" car. The guy uses the car to go to work and run
out for groceries. The difference between the car and the gun is the guy with
the car will be viewed as an idiot to John Q. Public. The guy with the hunting
with the assault rifle(ie A.R.)will be viewed as a gun toting nut to John Q. Public
(read non-hunters, non-shooters).
Get a grip guys, this is diatribe directed at Mr. Zumbo, the manufacturers and
publishers is way over the top. This kind of reaction is why were are considered
2/19/2007
Page 341 of 853
a bunch of gun nuts. We are the minority and we will lose if this kind of behavior
is our version "healthy debate". If there is nothing to debate we will lose.
I will no longer continue to support your magazine due to the comments of Mr.
Jim Zumbo. I am not a terrorist and neither are the members of my family!!
Those who expect to reap the blessing of freedom must, like men,
undergo the fatigue of supporting it.
-- Thomas Paine
"Terrorist rifles", are they? How many terrorist attacks have happened in the
United States where one of your so-called "Terrorist Rifles" was used? I'll tell
you: ZERO.
Last time I checked, jetliners, IEDs and explosive vests were the weapons of
choice among terrorists. If it's not too much bother, you might consider getting
your facts straight before you go spewing falsehoods from your pulpit. It's a
concept called journalistic integrity. I would higly recommend you give it a try.
If someone wants to hunt deer with an M1A, so what?? If someone wants to
hunt prarie dogs with an AR15, so what?? Limit the magazine capacity to five
rounds - or three, or whatever - and let them hunt!
In lambasting these rifles for use in hunting, you ignore the real issue. The
selfloading military style rifle is not primarily a hunting rifle. Its primary use is
defensive - defense against terrorists, against the abscence of law enforcement
as in post Katrina New Orleans and post Rodney King verdict Los Angeles. Its
primary use is in home defense against home invaders who break down doors,
rob, rape, maim and murder - an increasingly popular sport among society's
psychopathic dregs.
The selfloading military style rifle also serves as the best and last defense
against arbitrary, autocratic rule by one's own government. In a nation such as
ours that has a Bill of Rights which proclaims the right of the people to be
armed as they see fit,any government that and moves to forcibly disarm its
citizens of ANY of their firearms -regardless of the type- does so illegitimately
and unlawfully and loses the moral right to govern.
I would like to congratulate you on your real accomplishment - sparking a
nationwide boycott of Outdoor Life magazine by shooters who actually care
about their right to arms - even those ugly, awful black "terrorist rifles" that
terrify the unthinking masses.
Posted by: Allan Y. | February 18, 2007 at 11:58 AM
Regardless of the type of gun being singled out here, the fact is that referring to
2/19/2007
Page 342 of 853
any gun that can be legally purchased in this country as a "terrorist" weapon is
a major disservice to all law abiding gun owners everywhere. This should never
be said by someone who claims to be a supporter of the Second Amendment.
Shame on you.
But Zunbo, if its an assault rifle, when you miss you can always jab him with
your bayonet...
Posted by: ED | February 18, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Jim Jumbo should be fired by Outdoor Life and never again seen on TV. I hope
I never have to share a hunting camp with him.
Posted by: Dr. Eric Hagberg | February 18, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Feeling the heat yet Mr. Zumbo?
You, Mr. Zumbo, are obviously misinformed, oppinionated, elitist and snobbery
is only matched by your ignorance and you are someone who can't be trusted
by the shooting public to make comments (yes, everyone is entitled to their
views but we trusted that someone like you in your position would be more
rational, unifying and truthful). I will be sending letters to Remington and
Outdoor life to hopefully see that you are silenced from public print! We're going
to smack you right in the wallet Jimbo! Judging by the views posted on this blog
I don't think I'm alone!
Posted by: Derek from MI | February 18, 2007 at 11:59 AM
I have been a fan of Mr. Zumbo's hunting shows and bought many of the
products he reprenented. No more.
Mr. Zumbo has joined the Anti Gun faction with his linking a weapon with the
people that misuse it.
I will no more use or buy products Mr. Zumbo represents because of his views.
Posted by: Derrill Nave | February 18, 2007 at 11:59 AM
You are an idiot buddy. Since when is the AR15 a terrorist weapon?? And they
actually have you writing about guns. Get rid of this guy please!
Posted by: Shawn McClay | February 18, 2007 at 11:59 AM
If you work to take away my "Assault Rifle", I will work to take away your right to
hunt. The constitution does not grant your the right to hunt.
With people like you on our side it is tough to figure out who our enemies are.
At least Sarah Brady does not pretend to be a friend of the sportsmen. You, sir,
2/19/2007
Page 343 of 853
are a traitor.
Posted by: dave | February 18, 2007 at 12:00 PM
I liken these AR guns(in a hunting environment)to a family passenger car that is
painted up to look like a "cup" car. The guy uses the car to go to work and run
out for groceries. The difference between the car and the gun is the guy with
the car will be viewed as an idiot to John Q. Public. The guy with the hunting
with the assault rifle(ie A.R.)will be viewed as a gun toting nut to John Q. Public
(read non-hunters, non-shooters).
Get a grip guys, this is diatribe directed at Mr. Zumbo, the manufacturers and
publishers is way over the top. This kind of reaction is why were are considered
a bunch of gun nuts. We are the minority and we will lose if this kind of behavior
is our version "healthy debate". If there is nothing to debate we will lose.
Posted by: Jay Anglin | February 18, 2007 at 12:00 PM
Subsciption canceled!
Posted by: Andrew | February 18, 2007 at 12:00 PM
Gee, I guess I will have to get rid of all my "assault rifles". The 1872 Mauser, oh
yeah, the 1872/84, and the 88, and the 98 (gee, does that mean the 03 as
well?) Oh, and the Smith Carbine, oh, and the neat little Enfields, and, all hell,
just get rid of all of 'em. You sound like one of our worse enemies, a turn coat,
and anti 2nd for sure.
Posted by: Don Staples | February 18, 2007 at 12:00 PM
Over 1300 posts already!
Its nice to see so many pro-gun people.
Posted by: John | February 18, 2007 at 12:01 PM
Typical over-the-hill elitist nonesense.
I can predict Jim's next column:
Nobody "needs" glass on their rifle to hunt, My grandpappy took lots of deer
with iron sights dagnabbit, and I don't see any reason for you to need a military
sniper scope on your rifle!
And Jacketed bullets, they're designed to go through an engine block! The
military designed 'em that way. Nobody needs anything more than a 20 to 1
cast lead slug.
These 15 shot pistols just make for poor marksmanship. Why, in my day we
had five beans in the wheel, and that suited everybody just fine. No reason for
a cop to have all those bullets, just so he can miss!
Next time I'm out for Ducks, I'll be using my fine Damascus Barrel side-by-side,
2/19/2007
Page 344 of 853
yessirebob,those low pressure black powder shells are just the ticket...
God forbid any shooter has different tastes or preferences than Jim.
Posted by: Bill S. | February 18, 2007 at 12:02 PM
Sir,
You are certainly entitled to your opinion on "assault weapons". I know that I
am entitled to mine.
Although I do not hunt with a military style rifle, I own several. I won't bother
getting into the relative merits, or lack thereof, in hunting with one.
I will however, advise you that YOU are what is allowing gun-banners to have
so much success. You create a wedge between "acceptable" firearms and their
uses, according to you and your bully pulpit.
Frankly, your "opinion" that these firearms are not up to your "traditional"
standards and your apparent willingness to have the government "ban" them
from the woods, point directly to your ignorance, your short-sightedness and/or
the fact that you seem to be a gun control advocate.
I for one, will vote with my wallet and have no further dealings with a magazine,
or any company, that tacitly supports your views, by sponsoring, or otherwise
compensating you for your babble.
Posted by: Jeff | February 18, 2007 at 12:02 PM
Man, talk about lack of reality and understanding of History. Do you know
Muskets were "Assault Weapons" used by Terrorist? You need to realize that
it's the same mechanics, just different clothes. Is the second amendment about
"Hunting"? If it is, I better re-read it since I've never seen any mention of it. Hell,
if it is, why do we even need a gun since we can go to any grocery store and
get what we need to eat? You are no "Friend" of the gun community and I'm
very dissapointed in the companies that would hire you as a mouthpiece. End
of rant
Posted by: Chris K | February 18, 2007 at 12:02 PM
I'm sure that Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein and the rest of their lot
appreciate your comments. Historically, the divide and conquer approach has
been very successful in disarming populations. This is exactly the approach
used in Australia and the UK. Your scoped sniper rifles with their armor piercing
bullets should be amoungst the first to go. Your ignoance astounds me.
We can hang together or we can hang seperately.
Posted by: RM Field | February 18, 2007 at 12:02 PM
It is nice to know that the Fudds, who use a bolt action rifle chambered in
2/19/2007
Page 345 of 853
calibers far better suited to taking human lives than the AR15/M16 family, are
really part of the Gun Control Movement, Diane Fienstein would be proud of
you Mr. Zumbo.
I on the other hand regard the AR15 as a fine weapon, while I am not a hunter I
chose a system that I am familiar with and have trained with for most of my
adult life.
As far as being a "terrorist's weapon", as a soldier I am amazed at your
ignorance and would not piss on you if you were on fire.
Nowhere does the Second Amendment mention hunting.
Don't worry my friends have died so you can spout your stupidity from the
safety of your delusional world.
Posted by: Texas Soldier | February 18, 2007 at 12:02 PM
Sounds like another idiot that thinks the US Constitution and 2nd Amendment
thereof has something to do with hunting. It doesn't.
AR and AK style rifles are very accurate and useful platforms. To condemn
them on the basis of looks is simply asinine.
Posted by: Vibe | February 18, 2007 at 12:02 PM
Wow... what a short sighted bit of reporting... no facts just opinion.... sad, very
sad..
Posted by: JimG | February 18, 2007 at 12:03 PM
You sir are disgusting.Your comments show total disregard for the second
amendment.Get off your a--,I mean bench and attempt to COMPETE with real
marksman.When will they come for your SNIPER RIFLE.It will be next.D Petrun
Highmaster,Distinguished Rifleman,Presidents 100.
I WILL NEVER CONSIDER OUTDOOR LIFE AS A VIABLE SOURCE FOR
OUTDOOR INFORMATION UNTIL YOU MAKE A PUBLIC APOLOGY.DP
Posted by: David Petrun | February 18, 2007 at 12:03 PM
While I agree with the overall sentiment of most who have commented on this
article, I am very disappointed in the ignorance of those who proclaim they will
never purchase another publication from Outdoor Life. Are you people serious?
Many of the comments are centered around our 2nd amendment rights and our
duty to protect those rights. At the same time however, they seem to be
throwing Mr. Zumbo's 1st amendment rights out the window. Just because you
disagree with him on this particular article doesn't mean anything else he has to
say in the future won't be pertinent or informative. Be mad at him if you want to,
but don't throw the baby out with the bath-water. He is a knowledgable man
who just happened to take an unpopular stance on this sole issue. For the
2/19/2007
Page 346 of 853
record, I disagree with him too, but for the most part he is one of my favorite
writers, and I can agree to disagree with him and leave it at that.
Posted by: Mike S. | February 18, 2007 at 12:03 PM
Mr Zumbo,
comments like yours in the above article do nothing but advance the agenda of
the gun-grabbing anti-2nd Amendment leftists in this country. To flatly state socalled "assault rifles" have no place in hunting, or are solely the weapon of
choice for "terrorists" worldwide is both disingenuous and ignorant on your part.
Please refrain in the future from aiding those who would eventually, at some
point in time, declare illegal ALL firearms in private US citizens hands...whether
your beloved bolt-action hunting rifle, or a dreaded black AR15 semiauto, which
I have used successfully over the years for both target shooting AND hunting.
Sincerely,
M Connor
Posted by: M Connor | February 18, 2007 at 12:03 PM
If we don't stand together now, what will happen when our next president takes
office and along with her Congress pass even more offensive gun laws.
What happens when the "sniper rifle" (any bolt gun with a scope) is included?
Wake up Guys!
Gun Nut? Why thank you! Yes I am!
They will never ban your hunting rifle with a scope...they'll call it a "sniper rifle"
first.
A rifle is a rifle. It takes a real idiot to think that the looks of a rifle somehow
change it purpose or value or distinguishes it from other firearms.
This article does nothing but suggest that firearms should be banned based on
if they look mean.
Posted by: Rob Henry | February 18, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Mr. Zumbo you are nothing but a traitor to the American people and gun
owners of America. No magazine you write for will ever be in my house again.
Posted by: Mike McCuskey | February 18, 2007 at 12:05 PM
JimI hope your sponsers dump your A$$ after those ignorant comments.
What part of 'Shall Not Be Infringed' don't you understand?
2/19/2007
Page 347 of 853
Posted by: Angry American | February 18, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Mike S. who are you? Nobody is throwing Zumbo's "first ammendments rights
out the window". He has a right to an opinion, we ahve a right to endorse his
opinion and those of his employers as well.
Posted by: Hernando Cardona | February 18, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Jim,
Your AR comments so off the mark I cannot begin to fathom just how to
express my frustration. AR's are available in so many configurations that there
is room to adapt it to all kinds of shooting. Furthermore, it makes no difference
how it looks--I have an AR with a wooden stock! The horror!
I strongly suggest you rethink your stance on this matter--you have your right to
your opinion, but it doesn't make you correct, and it certainly doesn't make you
a friend of the Second Amendment. I will be cancelling my "Outdoor Life"
subscription and no longer supporting your sponsors until there is some change
in thinking.
Regards,
Wyatt in VA
Posted by: Wyatt | February 18, 2007 at 12:06 PM
Mr. Zumbo, I'm a retired Army Lieutenant Colonel and have been an NRA Life
Member since I was a sergeant in West Germany in the early 70s.
I own a Colt carbine (LE6920) for two reasons. I carried the M-16 full auto
version of it for much of my adult life, and the Constitution I defended protects
my right to own the carbine. I don't use it for hunting, I own it for self protection
and the sheer fun of operating it in training and on the range.
The men and women I worked with in the Army have used that weapon for
good and decent purposes, not "terrorizing" innocents. For you to vilify a gun
for purely cosmetic reasons that you don't personally enjoy is your right, I
suppose. Vilifying by extension those of us who carried it in the service of our
country is despicable. No matter your intention, you are aiding those who will
restrict private ownership of firearms at every turn, and not just the rifles you
use for hunting.
First it's so-called assault rifles. Then the functionally identical semi-automatic,
centerfire rifles which many DO use for hunting will be targets. Semi-automatic
handguns have already been declared bad by the gun haters (witness the
restrictive legislation from the Clinton years on magazine capacity for private
citizens). There are already nearly a dozen states which allows its residents to
purchase only one handgun a month.
2/19/2007
Page 348 of 853
I don't even own one handgun for every foru or five years of my life, but that's
my choice to make.
Your effort to "divorce ourselves" from people who own ARs is precisely the
kind of fracture induced by weakness that those who will want to restrict
firearms ownership love to exploit.
You, sir, owe those of us veterans who carried M16 service rifles an apology,
and you need to re-think your strategy of appeasement. The notion that the gun
haters will stop with the guns that you personally don't use has no empirical
basis in fact.
Posted by: JBL | February 18, 2007 at 12:06 PM
founded on.
Thanks AR15.com
Posted by: spurzmaker | February 18, 2007 at 12:06 PM
2/19/2007
Page 349 of 853
I just want to thank you for grouping all AR-15 owners/users into the same lot
as terrorists. I suppose this includes law enforcement officers and our military.
Kudos to you for making such a broad generalization. Must be nice to sit at
your desk and write your articles with such a broad brush. Not thinking before
you write something must make your job increasingly easy.
Posted by: Steven VanDeKeere | February 18, 2007 at 12:06 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
Your coments are rediculous and your motives are questionable.
Remington doesn't make AR style firearms.
Too many outdoor writers pander to companies that provide trips and
equipment for review to writers that provide the types of reviews the companies
want.
Did Remington pay to take you on a hunting trip to promote their "Sporting"
rifle?
Posted by: Ralph | February 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Email from Remington:
PLEASE SEND THIS TO ALL THE PEOPLE ON THE ORIGINAL LIST.
1. THE AUTHOR OF THAT ARTICLE IS NOT I REPEAT NOT A REMINGTON
REP.
2. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE AUTHOR IS WAY OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE
GUNS OF
TODAY.
3. IT IS EQUALLY OBVIOUS THAT HE HAS FORMED HIS OWN OPINIONS
BASED ON A
CONVERSATION/S WITH GUIDES WHERE HE WAS HUNTING, NOT DUE
TO SOMETHING A
REMINGTON EMPLOYEE SAID.
PLEASE REST ASSURED THAT REMINGTON AS A COMPANY HAS
NOTHING AGAINST ARs
OF ANY KIND AS WITNESSED BY THE FACT THAT WE OURSELVES HAVE
A 308
VARIANT OF AN AR.
I will handle this.
V/R
Michael Haugen
CW3 (R) USSF
Manager - Military Products Division
2/19/2007
Page 350 of 853
Remington Arms Company Inc.
Posted by: Hernando Cardona | February 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
All I can say to this is I am in shock that an avid hunter and supposed gun
enthusiast could actually utter the words 'ban assualt rifles'.
It clearly shows your ignorance, or you have been bought by the Violence
Policy Center.
I can see disagreements over caliber, best wepaons platform for this type of
game or that, but to claim they need to be banned goes beyond the pale.
1. Would you please define what is an assault weapon?
2. Explain why a semi-automatic rifle is NOT a good idea for follow up shots?
3. Explain how the Second Amendment is ONLY for single shot hunting rifles.
While you are attempting to complete the impossibles tasks listed above, the
rest of the gun owners of this country will still be fighting for our rights to own
such weapons, as our Constitutional right.
I can only hope that you either see the fallacy in what your write, or turn in your
man card.
The RTKBA is not there to protect hunters Dumbo, its there protect us from our
Government, its your right to speak your mind, its also your right to be a f%
$king retard.
Posted by: Brian427Cobra | February 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Mr Zumbo,
Perhaps you should try reading the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights
sometime, assuming you can read in the first place. It spells out what people in
this country have a right to do, most specifically to own a firearm.
of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed......
No where in the Second Amendment does it refer to HUNTING or SPORTING
purposes. Hunting is a priviledge that can be taken away at the governments
whim, not a right as owning a firearm is. I submit to you that the only types of
weapons we have a right to own ARE military style weapons, and not your
precious duck guns and deer rifles.
The mere fact that many of your "sporting rifles" were originally designed as
military weapons only lends credence to your stupidity and ignorance.
2/19/2007
Page 351 of 853
As was stated here many times before, if the antis get a hold of this they will
have a field day with it. It's bad enough to have to turn on the news and hear
Sarah Brady crowing about getting guns out of the hands of civilians, I have to
come on to this web site (which is supposedly PRO GUN) and hear it too.
I do not have a subscription to Outdoor Life and never will because of you. Nor
will I shop for items advertised in your magazine or TV network. The sponsers
can thank you specifically for this.
Posted by: MCBALLPEEN | February 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Jim,
I have long respected your hunting tips, skill and prose. But for someone in the
gun community to be so ignorant of the basics of firearm use is appalling.
I hunt with my AR-15 for Prairie Dogs, Hog, small game, as well as coyotes.
But most of the AR family of guns I own go into target and 3-gun shooting
competition.
As far as being lumped into the "group of people who terrorize the world with
them", well the majority of folks running around in the various conflicts of the
world with AR-15/M-16s are US Troops. So I suspect you are suggesting that
the US military is a terrorist Organization.
As many others have said, your high-powered, scoped hunting rifle is far more
accurate at distance then most semi-auto "assault rifles". And they are often
referred to as 'sniper rifles' by the anti-gun crowd. Many of them would like to
see them banned as well. This is what they would like to see happen:
In 2 years, ban the "assault weapons."
In 5 years ban all handguns.
In 10 years, ban pump and semi-auto rifles.
In 15 years ban pump and semi-auto shotguns (the above bans have all been
enacted by places in our country already - Cook County, IL for example)
IN 20 years, ban all guns.
Seems as if you do not mind getting the ball rolling?
Ron Brace
Elk River, MN
Posted by: Doc Ron | February 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Jim,
I have long respected your hunting tips, skill and prose. But for someone in the
gun community to be so ignorant of the basics of firearm use is appalling.
I hunt with my AR-15 for Prairie Dogs, Hog, small game, as well as coyotes.
2/19/2007
Page 352 of 853
But most of the AR family of guns I own go into target and 3-gun shooting
competition.
As far as being lumped into the "group of people who terrorize the world with
them", well the majority of folks running around in the various conflicts of the
world with AR-15/M-16s are US Troops. So I suspect you are suggesting that
the US military is a terrorist Organization.
As many others have said, your high-powered, scoped hunting rifle is far more
accurate at distance then most semi-auto "assault rifles". And they are often
referred to as 'sniper rifles' by the anti-gun crowd. Many of them would like to
see them banned as well. This is what they would like to see happen:
In 2 years, ban the "assault weapons."
In 5 years ban all handguns.
In 10 years, ban pump and semi-auto rifles.
In 15 years ban pump and semi-auto shotguns (the above bans have all been
enacted by places in our country already - Cook County, IL for example)
In 20 years, ban all guns.
Seems as if you do not mind getting the ball rolling?
Ron Brace
Elk River, MN
Posted by: Doc Ron | February 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Lets see what the NRA Action Committee has to say about your comments,
Thread forwarded to all of the members of the NRA's executive branch. Maybe
if you enter a Rehab treatment center now you can blame this whole incident
on Booze or Drugs. Since this thread has also hit every Firearms related
Website on the net I would suggest immediate action on your part to reconsider
your statement and offer the appropriate apology before your employers lose to
many subscribers.
GlockMan
Hi-Point Firearms Forum Admin
http://hipoint.7.forumer.com
Posted by: GlockMan | February 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
For everyone that would like to express your opinion of Mr. Zumbo's anti-gun
positions, here's an updated email list of his sponsors:
2/19/2007
Page 353 of 853
Just copy and paste into the "To:" line of the email, and don't forget to add a
link to this page so they will understand you're not alone.
Stick that in your barrel commie Jim.
Tater
Ft. Worth
Posted by: TaterSalad | February 18, 2007 at 12:08 PM
It's a crying shame that Zumbo and other so-called sportsman, are willing to
sell out another group of firearms enthusiasts.
I also find it sad that a US Marine would stand with Zumbo against the 2nd
Amendment in his post.
At least we know we cannot count on Zumbo to stand with us in the protection
of our right to bear arms.
Posted by: Borderguy - A Federal LEO | February 18, 2007 at 12:08 PM
Remington I will never buy any more components or ammunition from you.
OUTDOR LIFE, I will bnever buy your magazine again.
Until this guy is gone, Zumbo is an idiot and an EMENY of the 2nd AD.
I'm glad their are hunter and target shooters and they are brothers and sisters
in the cause, but the 2nd Ad is about AR-15 and M1/M1A, tools to defent liberty
Posted by: Chuck Brant | February 18, 2007 at 12:08 PM
This is a disgraceful and dismaying comment from Jim Zumbo; it has the eliteist
flavor of the "gentleman hunter" who disdains the weapons used by the "lower
classes", who use pump shotguns instead of $5000+ upland game doubles.
Sorry Jim, this isn't "merry olde England" where only the priviledged get to
participate.
Someone sell him a clue please.
Posted by: Brian Lavin | February 18, 2007 at 12:08 PM
You sir are a big question mark for me. If you were a young product of todays
PC school system I could understand your ignorance. But by you pictures I
assume that you are at least my age .... how did you get through school without
learning American History?
2/19/2007
Page 354 of 853
It's not about hunting stupid .... the Second Amendment is about being sure
that 'we the people' have the final say ....
Your comment is like saying that the First Amendment does not apply to radio,
tv or the internet. Hopefully My Second Amendment rights will continue to allow
you to exercise your Frist Amendment rights.
"You can't fix stupid" ..... Ron White, Comedian
Posted by: Himilage | February 18, 2007 at 12:08 PM
Zumbo[LOSER]
Posted by: wofat | February 18, 2007 at 12:08 PM
I just noticed that this site is attributing the comments made to the wrong
posters. Some of the more obscene comments (made anonymously, are
unfairly being attributed to those using their real names and Email.
Perhaps that's what happened to Jim as well. LOL
Posted by: Dave Holt | February 18, 2007 at 12:09 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
You sir are no supporter of the gun community. Therefore, I refuse to support
those who support you.
Your ignorance and arrogance are...wow, just wow.
Posted by: john | February 18, 2007 at 12:09 PM
YOUR credibility is shot dumbo.
IT's all over the forums..
Why you did this is YOUR bussiness..
just like what WE prefer to hunt with is OURS..
Cochise
Posted by: Cochise | February 18, 2007 at 12:09 PM
I just can't believe the utter stupidity in your article Mr. Zumbo. I lost IQ points
reading it. No longer will I read Outdoor life because of your ignorance.
Posted by: Chris | February 18, 2007 at 12:10 PM
AR are designed for combat, not hunting. I have no problem with AR but it is
very dangerous. Also people popluation are exploding the hunting goes up.
More more people are hunting and public is getting crowd that is concerns.
2/19/2007
Page 355 of 853
Well chalk it up to "old dog, new tricks".
I like "terrorist" weapons because they are fun, more comfortable to use and
because the anti-gunners don't like them.
I can go through a long list of things that some people feel have "no use", that
however does not make them illegal. Unlike most of those things, firearms and
"terrorist weapons" are protected by the Second Amendment.
Yea that's right, protected by the Second Amendment. YOu need to do some
research and find out why the Second Amendment exists. Not for the National
Guard, not for shooting squirrels but for defense against criminals and tyranny.
I would love to hear you fools tell me how you would protect yourself from the
government backed Militias in Darfur with no weapons or single shot 22's?
Like it or not, our founders valued freedom at the end of gun. They intended for
us to be armed at an equal level to government, that way we could defend
ourselves against tyranny.
It's not about divination, the information is all out there for anyone to read, try it
sometimes and get a clue.
Posted by: AZ-Mike | February 18, 2007 at 12:10 PM
Disgusting. Another hoplophobe. A gunbanner in our midst. "Zumbo" should be
ashamed of himself. I'm sure he is not, however. He knows nothing of this
country's heritage. He is only interested in his sport, and insulting his "peers".
Posted by: M.B. | February 18, 2007 at 12:10 PM
What a shameful column. You sir, are ignorant, shortsighted, and doing a
massive disservice to your sport.
I find it insulting that you would lump our troops and all the skilled and
competent hunters and shooters out there in with 'Terrorists'. disgusting.
I hope this to be the last thing you write in a professional capacity, as your mind
seems to have slipped away from you.
You have insulted us all, shame on you.
Posted by: Sam Desmet | February 18, 2007 at 12:11 PM
2/19/2007
Page 356 of 853
Mr. Zumbo
I usually hunt with a Browning B78 falling block single shot in 7mm Mag. It's got
a great Leupold scope and beautiful wood. I don't own nor want what you
unfortunately refer to as an "assault rifle", but I've got a lot of friends who have
them and really enjoy them. I'm sure when the likes of Chuck Shumer, Nancy
Pelosi and their ilk manage to take the "assault rifles", they'll be coming for my
B78. And you have given them a great amount of encouragement. I hope
you've done a good job of providing for your retirement, because I see it rapidly
approaching. You have committed professional suicide in any field related to
firearms.
John Strahl
Posted by: John Strahl | February 18, 2007 at 12:11 PM
Way to go Jim, did Sarah Brady slip you some cash for your divide and conquer
diatribe?
Keep up your nonsense and the antigun crowd will you your words as more
ammunition to disarm us completely.
Maybe you'll be happy with your fixed sight single shot 30-30 and .gov alloted
ration of 10 rounds per year.
That is if your lucky enough to even have that.
Posted by: mike waters | February 18, 2007 at 12:11 PM
IF I FALL WITH MY RIFLE IN MY HANDS, AND I CANNOT PREFORM MY
DUTY, SOMEONE WILL PICK UP MY RIFLE, AND CARRY ON, KNOWING
THAT I SERVED MY COUNTRY... author/me
please people write the emails given on this board, it will only take a few
minutes of cutting and pasting the email addresses.
Preserve our heritage
I can’t begin to say how I fully agree with you. For once some one who fully
agrees with me! And to continue with your Idea, you should say Spoons are the
cause of fat people, Planes caused 9/11 not silly terrorists! And one we should
all agree on, Marriage is the primary cause of divorce!
For this very reason, I believe you should run to the President with the million
mom march and demand that spoons, planes and marriage be outlawed.
While you are at it, ask they remove all of the constitution of the United States.
You SIR are the Authority in what a sport is. But why stop there, become the
Authority on what the US should be.
I don’t personally own an ak, fal, sks, or ar. But I do believe in the right of the
2/19/2007
Page 357 of 853
people to own them and use them. If history has shown us any thing it is that
prohibition is not the solution to anything. The more you repel these guns, the
more people will want them. The problem SIR is not in the gun, it is in the
mentality of the people who do not know how to use them. What you should be
preaching is for Better firearms education, some thing SIR that I am sure would
prevent many of the horrible things said about these firearms. Not to mention
how it would help curve many of the things happening with them to the public.
Assault is a human condition! If I put an AK next to your trusty lever action on a
table, the AK will not jump on the lever and assault it, it will not load its self up
and shoot people around it. You should know that a firearm is completely
harmless unless it comes with HUMAN intervention. That Sir could become
assault if the person holding the gun is not educated in using it.
When you want to educate young people, you don’t remove the pencils for fear
they will stab each other with it, you show them how to use them to be creative
and write. The same is true with firearms. When a person in your situation
shows respect for a firearm and educates people in using them, they begin to
use them properly! When you call assault guns and weapons, they begin to
think of them as such. And it becomes natural that they will be used as such.
Just as if a teacher started to say pencils where meant to stab other people.
Just so we are clear on things Sir, remove my spoons and I will eat with my
hands when hungry enough. That is the human condition of thinking. And the
same is true of gun owners, remove their guns and they will find other ways or
defending themselves. Will you then talk about assault golf clubs, Assault
baseball bats, and assault spears?
Seems to me, you already lost a few readers here. I would think you might want
to spend a day on the range with a good semi auto AR and learn how sporting
one can be against a few metal plates at 100 yards.
Now you got me so upset, I will need to take my assault Mossberg out and
mercilessly assault a few clays before I can feel good again!
Posted by: Robert Bernier | February 18, 2007 at 12:12 PM
I just canceled my subscription to the Outdoor Channel and Outdoor Life.
Anyone who allows this sick mentality to flourish will not see another dime of
my money. It is a shame but I feel I must take the same course of action as you
have Jim Zumbo, hating all which I d not understand based on my feelings and
little to no common logic or understanding.
The standard calibers have gotten us by for over a hundred years, yet we move
forward and add to then umber of choices to better the hunt, shoot tighter
groups and to provide a quicker more humane kill. Based on your opinions and
mindset, we should not have progressed past about 1930 in the world of
shooting sports and hunting.
2/19/2007
Page 358 of 853
PS, I hunt coyotes with my "Assault" rifle for a number of reasons. The ability
for a very quick and accurate double tap on the target to assure a quick and
humane kill, the limited weight it adds to my gear the biggest reason of all, I
love the feel and handling of this firearm probably as much as any you have
ever owned. I carried this rifle through 7 years of service and know it top to
bottom, inside and out!
Perhaps Mr Zumbo, self righteous persons such as yourself would also like to
aid the anti hunter/firearm people a little more with your ignorance and lack of
sight beyond your own needs. I should turn in my Franchi AL48, semi auto
assault shotgun as well, as it has no place in the field, or my Ruger 10/22
assault rifle, my Marlin 597 semi auto assault rifle? They have cold plastic
stocks and use a box magazines, they obviously have no place in the woods
according to your brilliant thinking.
Well I will end there as I am sure you will never read these posts, what with
your foot in your mouth and your head firmly placed up your ass and all.
Posted by: Frantz | February 18, 2007 at 12:13 PM
Just looked at the drivel you posted. I am not a hunter, never hunted and
probably never will however I SUPPORT you’re right to hunt. The 2A is not
about hunting. Gun owners need to stand together and articles like the one you
posted do not help. My AR's are very accurate and punch more than their fair
share of holes in paper and coke cans, they are used safely. Your spray and
pray comment is irresponsible. The terrorist comment is reprehensible.
I buy from Remington and Cabala’s, both will hear from me.
John
Thanks Jim, for making work for me! My wife does not create as many
honeydoos in a week as you did in a stroke of your keyboard (same type of
keyboard as terrorists use, by the way)
My list for the day/week:
1) Cancel subscription to Outdoor Life
2) Write Outdoor Life and file formal complaint against you
3) Write Remington Arms and file complaint about you, and let them know I`m
done buying 1-3 rifles per year from them. I will also never buy Remington
BRASS or loaded AMMO from them to use in my AR-15 Bushmaster coyote
rifle. Imagine that,.... the company you pimp for sells ammo for terrorists
rifles.....
4) Write a form letter to send to all my friends (yes, even the non-hunting and
non-shooting friends that will also be dismayed and saddened that another
2/19/2007
Page 359 of 853
media type is trying to kill the 2nd ammendment,
which will then make all the other constitutional and Godgiven rights open for
attack)and tell them that we have another TRAITOR in our ranks pretending to
honor those that died for our freedom.
5) Write my representitives and ask them to enact legislation to outlaw all
terrorist weapons, like the bolt action SNIPER rifles that blowhards like you so
"Humbly" claim to be able to hit deer with at 800 yards.
6)Research all sporting goods companies to see where you are paid for
endorsements and notify them that you are now "Persona non grata" and that
we as LAW ABIDING gun owners are not terrorists and will not stand for having
a pompus ass call us such because we choose to own and shoot a weapon
you don`t "like".
7) Write Nancy Piglosi and notify her that we have discovered yet another
"Benadict Arnold" in our ranks and that she`ll need to find work for you once
Remington and Outdoor Life find you have outlived your usefullness selling
magazines ...er... clips, sorry.
You sir are a blowhard sucking up the readers dollars. You clearly do not care
about our rights. You care about the dollar. Well, you sure put your mouth in
gear before your brain. I`m sure you have lots of money put away already.
You`ll need it. I bet Remington dumps you like last nights sticky old whore.
Especially since you smell like 3 day old fish.
May the fleas of a thousand terrorist camels infest your armpits.
Posted by: No friend of yours | February 18, 2007 at 12:13 PM
Mausers were designed for combat too, yet pretty much every bolt gun uses a
Mauser action. Does that mean it's not a hunting gun too? Think before you
type.
Also, I have no idea what your population comment is supposed to mean, but
I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Posted by: JD | February 18, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Who was Zumbo????????
What is this Outdoor Life?????????????????
I didn't have a clue now I don't have to bother.
Posted by: BSlacker | February 18, 2007 at 12:14 PM
"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."
Indeed, sir, you must be living in a vacuum. At least one person has brought
2/19/2007
Page 360 of 853
one of these "terrorist rifles" to every varmint hunt I have taken part in over the
last 15 years, from Arizona and Texas to Iowa and South Dakota, and they
have performed every bit as well on prairie dogs, coyotes and feral hogs as any
other rifles in the same caliber that look less "scary." Lest you have any
illusions on the matter, those who are afraid of guns are afraid of _any_ guns; it
does not matter one iota whether they are "terrorist rifles" or bolt-actions.
I am a soldier and primarily a target shooter; I do not have the time nor money
to take part in guided hunts nor support a large variety of calibers. My "sporting
rifle" of choice is thus an AR, as it is the most affordable was for me to practice
my job skills and responsibly pursue a pasttime I enjoy. Most of my co-workers
are civlians and very few are gun owners, yet none of them have any issues
with my weapon of choice. In fact, aside from those who have told me point
blank that my guns should be taken away from me, the only ones who have an
issue with my AR are "hunters" such as yourself.
Since the entry of yours obviously came from the gut and not your head, I ask
that you re-examine your statement and ask yourself why you feel the way you
do. If you can come up with a logical, reasoned, well-informed opinion on the
matter by all means share it. If not, I expect an apology...but based on my
experience with "hunters" who have made the same statements to my face, I
won't be holding my breath.
Posted by: CDAT | February 18, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Hey Zumbo you should rename yourself Fudd, call me a terrorist? To bad I am
canceling my subscription to Outdoor Life as of now. I have had one since the
60's.
Also am sending emails to your sponsors. I hope they hurt your wallet
TRAITOR
Posted by: ken c | February 18, 2007 at 12:14 PM
WOW, Jim, I use to have some admiration and respect for you. Not so
anymore!!!! I don't personally use semiauto's, But, I certainly don't think it's
wrong for others to.
You can bet your sponsors will be getting my emails. I I will no longer purchase
any product that is affiliated with you!!!!
And, to the Sgt. whom posted this:
"There’s no rhyme or reason to have civilians with this type of firepower. It’s not
society in any way."
Firepwoer has absolutely nothing to do with,
Well with the exception that Japan didnt invade the mainland USA because we
they knew most every American had a firearm of some kind.
2/19/2007
Page 361 of 853
Taking away any firearm rights is just another ploy of disarming the public.
Illegal according to the 2nd Amendment if you hadn't notice.
All you supporting Jim in this view, I beg you to remember a couple of quotes
"we will disarm the public to make our streets safer"
Hitler 1937
"disarm the public, and tyranny follows"
Aristotle
Banning any firearm in any way, is Just So Wrong!!!!!
Personally I care not what my fellow American chooses to shoot or hunt with.
It's his or her's choice and Right!
Dave Jansen
Posted by: Dave Jansen | February 18, 2007 at 12:14 PM
founded on.
2/19/2007
Page 362 of 853
Thanks AR15.com
founded on.
Thanks AR15.com
Jim, you have a specific experience set that is now limiting your cognitive
abilities. You need to broaden your horizons a bit and look at the big picture.
You unwittingly work into the hands of the likes of Chucky Schummer,
incrementalizing the hunting and shooting fraternity.
How do you like being a pawn of the anti-gun, anti-American set?
Or is it willing accomplis?
You have no idea how many customers of your sponsors you just pissed off do
2/19/2007
Page 363 of 853
you?
Many of us hunters/shooters are multidimensional in our hunting and shooting
interests and persuits - unlike you.
What you are witnessing (to your apparent shock) is a cross-polination of
interests which will strengthen, not weaken our political power.
Your's is a pessimistic, John Mertha viewpoint and you score no political points
with your appologist/apeaser stance.
You seem to have no understanding whatsoever of the 2007 hunting/shooting
sitrep... a scary thing for people that use you as a spokesperson.
Remington just lost some major points with me. I'm in the market for a new allweather bolt gun - was looking at the 700 but I just decided on the Savage.
Maybe its time to retire there Jimbo...
Posted by: O.S.O.K. Texas | February 18, 2007 at 12:15 PM
Having the curse of living in a country that feels like you do, I have to say you
are wrong, a semi automatic rifle is not any more dangerous than a lever action
(and i can shoot my lever actions as fast as most semi rifles, and more
accurately than many hunters that i have the misfortune to see up here)
I find all of your fallacious arguments and suppositions sickening, I will never
buy this magazine again, and I will not be buying a remington product again. I
think I will stick with the other options.
oh and I don't currently own one of those oh so dangerous black rifles you
seem to wet yourself in ear of, but I would never decry them.
Posted by: William Marschner | February 18, 2007 at 12:15 PM
This site sucks, why is my post under someone else's name and vice versa?
Posted by: AZ-Mike | February 18, 2007 at 12:15 PM
Zumbo:
Your story has to be one the most ill-thought out, ignorant, unreached pieces of
leftest bull I have read since the "Brady Act" was portrayed as the savior of all
gun violence!
Please... "assault guns" (leftest anti gun nomenclature not mine) N hunting
have gone hand N hand since the Revolutionary war, since way before the first
30-40 Craig was modified for hunting. How about the many 03's have you seen
modified and used to take game over the years? The AK and AR's are just the
modern brethren of the weapons of past wars.
So you have no use for a semi-auto, an AK or AR style riffle to hunt with, say
that instead of the anti gun fuel you dumped in the laps of the gun control
2/19/2007
Page 364 of 853
groups.
I Hope you can live with the fact you have just aided and abided the very
criminals that want your hunting guns as well as every thing else out there that
goes bang when you pull a trigger. I bet Jeff Cooper is turning over in his grave
right now, so how about next time think about what you say before putting it in
print, it's called proof reading.
Posted by: Jim Sheldon | February 18, 2007 at 12:15 PM
Zumbo:
Your story has to be one the most ill-thought out, ignorant, unreached pieces of
leftest bull I have read since the "Brady Act" was portrayed as the savior of all
gun violence!
Please... "assault guns" (leftest anti gun nomenclature not mine) N hunting
have gone hand N hand since the Revolutionary war, since way before the first
30-40 Craig was modified for hunting. How about the many 03's have you seen
modified and used to take game over the years? The AK and AR's are just the
modern brethren of the weapons of past wars.
So you have no use for a semi-auto, an AK or AR style riffle to hunt with, say
that instead of the anti gun fuel you dumped in the laps of the gun control
groups.
I Hope you can live with the fact you have just aided and abided the very
criminals that want your hunting guns as well as every thing else out there that
goes bang when you pull a trigger. I bet Jeff Cooper is turning over in his grave
right now, so how about next time think about what you say before putting it in
print, it's called proof reading.
Sorry to disagree; while the AR's have a certain image they are, like all other
firearms, ultimately a tool in the hands of a person... like a camera or an electric
drill. Given that they can be used for very fine target work or horrible acts of
violence and mayhem at the will of the operator.
You have painted this issue with the same broad brush as many of the
"anti's"... too bad that you have such a "bully pulpit" to spread such
disinformation and claptrap to the readers of your magazine and to the general
public to whom (no doubt) you will be quoted by the aforementioned "anti's".
You have done all decent sportsmen a disservice.
Posted by: rokkor_x | February 18, 2007 at 12:16 PM
Never again will I purchase this magazine. Guns are gans to me and as
outdoorsman, it is our duty to take a stand and protect our rights. Not to bash
other outdoorsman for having a gun that is perfectly legal.
2/19/2007
Page 365 of 853
Posted by: wesley blanchard | February 18, 2007 at 12:17 PM
Count me as one who is disgusted in your personal opinion. Granted that is all
that it is - your opinion and you are entitled to it. However, I am also entitled to
my opinion and disgust is a very polite way to describe my feelings. Terrorists?
I am offended that you would even lump legal gun ownership in the same
breath with people that have no other goal but to destroy our country. I have
always enjoyed watching you on TV and reading what you write, but rest
assured that will stop. We, as gun owners, have enough trouble dealing with
anti's without someone who is supposed to be on our side kicking us in the
teeth.
Wow; stir up some debate. I own an AR15 but I don't consider myself a
terrorist. I don't hunt with it. I have yet to even shoot it. I wouldn't consider
hunting with a magazine fed semi-auto rifle or pistol for that matter. I would
collect such guns, as many would. I'd even collect a 4 bore, though I would
never hunt anything that required such power. Lets remember that the gun
banners are going after all our guns. We need to take each person's opinion in
context. We all have an opinion, as do the antis. We must support one
another's reasons for gun ownership.
A CNN news piece early in 2008.
"We are here today to discuss the divisive issue of gun control today. With us is
former outdoor writer and Hillary Clinton supporter Jim Zumbo, who was driven
from his livelihood because he advocated banning
semi automatic hunting rifles. "
Yes Paula, because I chose to stand with Sarah Brady, the right wing noise
machine drove me from the job I loved."
Posted by: John Frum | February 18, 2007 at 12:17 PM
Sorry, that was meant to read:
I personally don't use semi-auto's
Posted by: Dave Jansen | February 18, 2007 at 12:17 PM
As I recall, Sylvestor Stallone in his Rambo portrayal did not have an M-16. He
had a large knife. Mr. Zumbo is apparently ignorant of the fact that the socialists
want to disarm ALL of us. They know they can't do it at once, so they chip away
in stages with "common sense" gun control. This guy really needs to take a
look in the morror.
Posted by: Richard Davis | February 18, 2007 at 12:19 PM
2/19/2007
Page 366 of 853
this site is pitiful, switching my post with OSOK texas' post...
I still stand by my remonstrations towards outdoor life and Remington, Zumbo,
well, there is a special place in Hell for traitors like you
Posted by: William Marschner | February 18, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Sooo, who paid you how much to write that article? Pure democrat
propoganda. You're a disgrace to gun owners. You may as well join the Brady
Campaign. I wish I had that 2 minutes of my life back. What a shame.
Posted by: SRV | February 18, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Sir, I recommend you resign immediately. Save yourself from further
humiliation.
If an AR pattern rifle is for terrorists, what does that make our armed forces?
You should be more careful with your words, while the whole premise of your
argument is tragically misguided and anti-gun.
Shame on you!
Posted by: Josh Seigel | February 18, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Get bent!
Posted by: Thomas | February 18, 2007 at 12:20 PM
I may not agree with what you have to say Jim , but respect your right to say it,
even if it's a closed minded opinion. What do we omit next, overweight writers?
Posted by: Jim S. | February 18, 2007 at 12:20 PM
If Cabellas continues to sponsor this guy, I'll stop ordering from Cabelas.
A snail-mail letter is on the way to them.
Posted by: Michael Kocher | February 18, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Anyone think to save this yet before he takes it down? I don't know how or I
would. I hope your wallet hurts now dumbass! Were you high or drunk when
you wrote this?
Posted by: idiot you are | February 18, 2007 at 12:21 PM
I must agree with Mr. Zumbo on the fact that I don't really see any need for
machine guns in hunting. I have seen and known hunting idiots that shoot at
sounds or glipses in bushes. Could be an elk or could be a person.
I also greatly dislike photos of dozens of game animals set up to spell out
words. Very distatseful. These types of action only give anti-hunting groups
2/19/2007
Page 367 of 853
more amunition.
Jim Zumbo is welcome at my home or camp any time.
Posted by: A Grant | February 18, 2007 at 12:21 PM
We have used AR-15s for years to hunt prarie dogs. These "assault" rifles do
infact have their place in the hunting community. You sir, are a traitor to the 2nd
amendment.
Posted by: Tim | February 18, 2007 at 12:21 PM
Thank You Sir Being just one of the unwashed mass - I need your wise guidance.
Please sir - which rifles will you ALLOW me use - I understand that you are
much wiser than I and I must rely on your wisdom.
It is comforting to know that you and your "elite" friends are there to regulate my
RIGHTS.
Posted by: Steve Dobek | February 18, 2007 at 12:22 PM
I still like Jim and will continue to watch his shows, read his blog and use his
cook book. I also realize this is a touchy subject, and he is a very influential
writer, so the flame war is understandable.
Jim, repeat after me.
"I'm sorry. I was drunk. I was wrong."
If you don't like that, say your laptop was hijacked while you slept.
Hang in there buddy!
Posted by: Chris Eaton | February 18, 2007 at 12:22 PM
Jim -- look what you've done to yourself! This thing is only going to get worse -the shit storm is only beginning! Do the right thing -- take that Remington rifle of
yours, and suck on the barrel like a cock, until it ejeculates in your mouth!
Posted by: Karma | February 18, 2007 at 12:22 PM
Mr Zumbo,
Your comments are most disturbing. I am not, nor have I ever been a hunter. I
do not advocate the elimination of hunting as a cruel and unecessary sport.
Rather I advocate for the continued support of the hunting sports and on a
larger basis ALL Shooting sports.
It is precisely your type of devisive comments and elitist posturing which will
ultimately lead to the downfall, and elimination of firearms rights here within our
great Republic.
2/19/2007
Page 368 of 853
It will be a sad day indeed, when like in Australia, their Olympic Marksmanship
team must practice their sport OUTSIDE of their Country due to the restrictive
laws which have been passed making ownership of firearms onerous and
overly costly.
You sir are leading us down the same path, one weapon at a time. First the
AR's and AK's, then the scoped rifles, then the until finally we will have nothing
left.
Enjoy your Remington then. Oh sorry, they'll be outlawed by then as well.
Posted by: Lars Schmekel | February 18, 2007 at 12:23 PM
How do those thirty pieces of silver feel in you hand, Judas?
Don't show your face at the NRA annual meeting if you don't want to be boo'd
and hissed until you leave.
You disgust me. You turned your coat, aided and abetted the enemy, then you
dare to call me 'friend.'
I hope you rot in hell along with Benedict Arnold, you worthless scumbag!
All respect intended, of course.. Not that a "terrorist" such as myself respencts
much of anything..
Prepare for Jihad, as I have just issued a Fatwah against you, oh treacherous
infidel!
Posted by: Medula Oblongata | February 18, 2007 at 12:23 PM
I can't believe what I just read. Honestly can't believe it. What happened to the
"gun's don't kill people, people kill people" saying?
Mr. Zumbo, you should be ashamed of yourself and this magazine and Mr.
Zumbo's other sponsors should seriously consider putting this columnist "out to
pasture" because he is way out of touch with today's hunters and gun owners.
The use of the word "fraternity" is an a pathetic testament to how geriatric, oldschool thinking is warping today's gun issues.
Mr. Zumbo, are you and Nancy Pelosi pal's or something?
I'm disgusted.
Posted by: Randy | February 18, 2007 at 12:23 PM
Jim, I have been a fan of yours for years but do take issue with your comments
about
the AR-15 being a terrorist weapon.
The semi-auto AR-15 is no more of a terrorist weapon than a Browning semiautomatic rifle. Appearence has nothing to do with it. Your comments can
2/19/2007
Page 369 of 853
undermind our rights with those who do not believe you and I have a right to
possess any firearm.
Hope you will think harder before making these kinds of comments.
Posted by: Curtis Brady | February 18, 2007 at 12:24 PM
I cant believe you would chose to post our posts with alias names on them!
Who in hell is Jim Sheldon? We are Honest citizens here are we not? Siple
mistake no? Bob = Jim... I couldnt believe I wrote this and cound not find it till i
saw you put me down as "spurzmaker" trying to make it look like only a few
people are disagreeing with you are you? Your a Fraud all the way!
Use our real names if you want any of us to respect you
Posted by: Robert Bernier | February 18, 2007 at 12:24 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
Just a few points.
1. I'm in Colorado. In Colorado, we are REQUIRED by state hunting law to hunt
with a magazine of no more than 5 rounds. This would include the terrorist AR15. How would a terrorist AR-15 with a 5 round magazine encourage a spray
and pray mentality? The Remmington 7400 (also a semi auto) has a magazine
capacity of 5 rounds. Do hunters spray and pray when they are carrying a
7400, or do they magically transform to killing machines when carring the AR15?
2. A a terrorist AR-15 owner (who is insulted at being called a terrorist), I use
my terrorist AR-15 for many sporting purposes. I love target shooting with it.
Are you implying that hunting is the only legitiment shooting sport?
3. You probably are now aware that an AR-15 built with the proper parts will be
as almost as accurate as a bolt action rifle. Last I heard, accuracy was
paramount in hunting for that "humane kill". If you don't believe me, perhaps
you should travel to Camp Perry Ohio and talk to the high power rifle
competitors many of whom shoot variants of the terrorist AR-15.
Posted by: Dan | February 18, 2007 at 12:24 PM
The fact that you associate an AR15 with terrorism shows your lack of
knowledge and opinionated, narrowmindedness about a type of firearm that
you just don't wish to recognize. It's no different than any other firearm in the
hands of a law-abiding individual. Idiots like you give the anti's ammunition to
take away ALL firearms, not just the ones you don't see as appropriate. I can't
believe they employ someone like you to begin with. You are a boob and don't
speak for me or the hundreds of semi-auto owners I've met that feel as I do.
Posted by: Steve Matteo | February 18, 2007 at 12:24 PM
2/19/2007
Page 370 of 853
Remington will not receive another dime from me as long as Mr.Zumbo is in
their employ.This has to be the most arrogant and elitist drivel ever written by
someone who's supposed to be a firearms advocate.I got my first AR-15 thru
the CMP program,successor to the old DCM program that helps train this
nation's riflemen.I'm now a terrorist or wanna be "Rambo" because I don't shoot
Mr. Zumbo's politically correct (for the moment) style of rifle.This is the same
argument that the liberal's use,I know what's better for you than you do, that it's
the gun that's to blame not the person.Mr. Eddie Stevenson might want to look
at what Cook County,Ill. just banned as "assault" weapons that had previously
been legal.There's alot of Remington products that now can be no longer
owned there.I hope that he can see that Remington can't afford a person such
as Mr.Zumbo on the payroll.
Posted by: Les Welch | February 18, 2007 at 12:24 PM
You are a joke!!! I will never waste my time or money on anything that you are
envolved with!! You are a liberal puke!!
Posted by: L B Ohio | February 18, 2007 at 12:25 PM
Hunters and shooters are often times not related. But we need to stick together!
The gun grabbers started calling the AR and Ak "assault rifles" to scare people
into supporting their agenda of disarming all of us. If people like you support
this we will see them take away the "assault rifes" then your hunting rifle will in
their opinion become a "sniper rifle" and we see them take that as well. Be
careful with your words, your opinion is your right but so is the opinions of the
over 1300 comments on this post. Don't sell out others just b/c you dont
understand or like something. There is a bigger issue at stake here and that is
all of our gun rights.
Though I agree to some extent with his opinion of assault-type weapons in
hunting I think Zumbo has gone to far in calling them terroist weapons and
associating owners of said arms with terroism.
Terroist use REAL assault weapons, with automatic capability, not semi-auto
look alikes. The public believes what it hears and when it hears a so-called gun
expert spout out garbage like this... no wonder they are so nieve.
Gee thanks Remington and Outdoor Life for supporting BS like this. Let me run
off and spend some of my money on your products! WRONG!
Posted by: B.T. | February 18, 2007 at 12:25 PM
hile hitler
2/19/2007
Page 371 of 853
I am the proud owner of an AR15, a 30-30, a 12ga and a .357. The only reason
I would not take my AR (easily my most accurate and reliable weapon)hunting
is if only shotguns are allowed in an area. I love sporting clays (12 ga) plinking,
(all) and would like to eventually get into target competition, and my AR15 far
out-shoots my 30-30, even with the iron sights on my AR vs my 7 power scope
on my 30-30 that is calibrated and dead on. It baffles my mind how an avid
hunter especially one in the public eye would do so much to damage gun
ownership in America. AR15's are not automatic, they are civilian versions of
what our soldiers use, they are semi-auto. In order to own a fully auto, you
need to be licensed by the federal government to do so. First rule of writing...
Write about what you know... You obviously do not know what you are talking
about, and your editors are no better.
Posted by: Pamela | February 18, 2007 at 12:26 PM
I was shocked and disappointed by your comments. You have become an ally
of the stinking liberal anti gun crowd. You just jumped into bed with Sarah
Brady. This is going to come back and haunt you as soon as the antis get hold
of it. There is NO distinction between a hunting rifle and an so called "assault
weapon". They both do IDENTICALLY the same thing. If you don't like a
particular style of gun just say that don't go into some hateful tirade that feeds
the left's agenda. This is much bigger than hunting this is our freedom. You
should write a retraction immediately and make up something to tell your gun
owning readers you made a big mistake. With all the idiots in congress now,
we're in for the fight of our lives and you, A HIGHLY VISIBLE GUN WRITER
AND OWNER, have dealt us a another fine setback. I don't think Remington
would or can afford to support your stand. At least I hope not."
Posted by: Victor Cortes | February 18, 2007 at 12:26 PM
What a joke. See, my grandpa was a HUGE Remington 700 fan, and I'll
guarantee you that although my grandpa never owned an AR15 he is rolling
over in his grave. To hear this ABORTION of an opinion coming from this
magazine is mind numbing. It's funny you see-most people view this magazine
as "Pro-Gun", but I think it's obvious that it is only "Pro-Hunting" and the
products it can sell through that medium. The worst of it is that this magazine
will cut any ties it has to achieve that goal. Ah yes-the almighty dollar, how
cheap is your freedom? Mine was bought and paid for with blood and I'll defend
it with just that. But back to the Remington 700 comment, it all adds up now.
Jim Zumbo is nothing more than a puppet, the stage-Outdoor Life, and the
puppetmaster-Remington. It probably doesn't mean much, butI will give no
more money to any company, organization, or media outlet involved in this
blatant attack on my UNALIENABLE rights. There, I guess I get to cut the last
of the ties. Remember, the 2nd Amendment isn't about duck hunting.
Posted by: deerkillindad21 | February 18, 2007 at 12:26 PM
2/19/2007
Page 372 of 853
Mr. Zumbo,
It is a surprise to learn your opinion about modern firearms and your flat
ignorance regarding their effectiveness.
I will contact Remington and other firearm industry manufactures whom I
patronize and give my opinion of you and your article.
I remain,
Munkalido in Tualatin
Posted by: munkalido | February 18, 2007 at 12:27 PM
ARe you freaking kidding me? What about all those who hunt with their M1As?
Do you mean to tell me that instead of education we should just completely ban
these rifles. There is more use to these rifles than just hunting. Maybe someone
as short-sighted as you doesn't see it but the rest of the sport shooting
community does. You are a an embarrassment to all gun owners.
Posted by: Jimmy | February 18, 2007 at 12:27 PM
I was shocked and disappointed by your comments. You have become an ally
of the stinking liberal anti gun crowd. You just jumped into bed with Sarah
Brady. This is going to come back and haunt you as soon as the antis get hold
of it. There is NO distinction between a hunting rifle and an so called "assault
weapon". They both do IDENTICALLY the same thing. If you don't like a
particular style of gun just say that don't go into some hateful tirade that feeds
the left's agenda. This is much bigger than hunting this is our freedom. You
should write a retraction immediately and make up something to tell your gun
owning readers you made a big mistake. With all the idiots in congress now,
we're in for the fight of our lives and you, A HIGHLY VISIBLE GUN WRITER
AND OWNER, have dealt us a another fine setback. I don't think Remington
would or can afford to support your stand. At least I hope not."
Posted by: Victor Cortes | February 18, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Anyone, who feels Americans (that are not criminals) shouldn't be able to own
any type of firearm as long as they're responsible are stupid. Do us all a favor
and move to moscow where the Gov. can rule your life, not ours.
Posted by: Travis | February 18, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
You are indeed living in a vacuum. You are under the misguided belief that you
will be able to save your bolt guns from eventual confiscation if you toss the
semi-auto AR's and AK's etc. to the gun banning politicians. An appeaser is
one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. You Sir, are an appeaser
of the highest order. You have fallen for the gun banners line that they only
2/19/2007
Page 373 of 853
want "common sense gun laws". They are the ones who started the nonsense
that the right to keep and bear arms refers only to hunting and sporting
purposes. I suggest you go read the Constitution and think about what it
means.
Add me to list of people here who will not do business any company who
supports the gutting of the Second Amendment.
Posted by: Patrick | February 18, 2007 at 12:28 PM
All your Zumbo are belong to us.
You are on the way to destruction.
You have no chance to survive...make your time.
Posted by: HCI Home Office | February 18, 2007 at 12:29 PM
oops i meant hile hitler jim
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."Sigmund Freud, General Introduction to Psychoanalysis
Were you hunting with Sarah Brady by chance?
Posted by: jwp | February 18, 2007 at 12:30 PM
You arrogant self-centered man.
The 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting and it's not about fashionable firearms.
The only thing that should be banned is you from access to a pen or keyboard
until you learn to engage your brain before you post dribble like this again.
Posted by: Jeff B | February 18, 2007 at 12:30 PM
So, Zumbo doesn't like the AR platform?
Great! no one is forcing him to use it, but it sure sounds like Zumbo wants to
make our choices for us.
Great job. I look forward to seeing your column used by our collective enemies.
I'm stricly a paper-puncher, so by Zumbo's logic I should jump on the antihunting bandwagon.
Hope nobody lets it slip to Zumbo that the Remington PSS is a "Sniper Rifle"
and needs to be removed from civilian hands...oh-oh, the 700 is the same
thing...but, but, I shoot varmints with my heavy-barrel! It's not a sniper rifle!
wait! what are you doing? I paid a lot of money...
Posted by: Bill S. | February 18, 2007 at 12:30 PM
2/19/2007
Page 374 of 853
"There's no rhyme or reason to have civilians with this type of firepower. It's not
something that you could ever possibly justify. It's insanity and it doesn't fit
society in any way."
The British colonial government felt the same way. In April, 1775, they ordered
government troops to disarm some of the civilians on the outskirts of Boston.
Posted by: Dave B. | February 18, 2007 at 12:30 PM
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."Sigmund Freud, General Introduction to Psychoanalysis
Were you hunting with Sarah Brady by chance?
Posted by: jwp | February 18, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Mr. Zumbo, thanks to your idiotic statements concerning so called assault rifles
I will no longer purchase, Outdoor Life, Remington products, Swaraski, or
anything else associated with you. I live in the great state of Idaho. Please
refrain from visiting or otherwise coming to my state. You sir are not welcome
here. Change your name while your at it to Sarah Brady Zumbo, Traitor to the
American gun owner.
I can not believe that you have forgotten how hard it is to protect our 2nd
Amendment rights and gave perfect fodder to the anti-gun crowd. I can just see
the quotes now Jim Zumbo, a well respected hunter and firearms EXPERT has stated that "... I
see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity. I'll go so far as to
call them "terrorist" rifles"
You are a stupid, thoughtless, and ignorant.
Posted by: Reddot47 | February 18, 2007 at 12:32 PM
Jim, You're an Pretentious Asshole. The antigun left would love to melt down all
of our firearms, not just my restored 45 year old Battle Rifle. You moron, do you
frequently let your typing fingers get this far out ahead of your brain?
Ken Roberts
San Antonio, TX
Posted by: Ken Roberts | February 18, 2007 at 12:33 PM
"I don't use them and I don't like them and they look scary to folks, so they
should be banned." How does that kind of attitude differentiate you from Sarah
Brady? Here's a hint - it doesn't.
It's not up to you to decide what tool I should use in my hunting. For what it's
2/19/2007
Page 375 of 853
worth, I have hunted for the past four years now exclusively with AR-15 pattern
rifles. These rifles have been chambered in all sorts of things: 308, 7.62x39,
6.8SPC, and 223. I've used these rifles to drop numerous species of deer and a
passel of feral hogs ranging in size from 120lb to over 500lbs - all on foot and
most within 50 yards.
I consider the AR-15 a really useful lightweight platform that's ergonomically
exceptionally well suited to still hunting. More importantly, the AR-15 platform
lets me choose a number of chamberings to match the game and still be
shooting the same platform with the same internal parts and the same manualof-arms. It's a logical extension of the 'beware the man with one rifle, because
he probably knows how to use it' philosophy, only extended to incorporate
multiple chamberings to better match the game being hunted.
I could probably assemble a similar toolchest of shootin' irons out of Browning
BARs or Remington 7400s (and therefore placate your need for a 'traditional
looking rifle'). But I don't shoot them as well as I shoot the AR, so why would I
choose a tool that doesn't work as well for me based solely upon aesthetics?
I don't mind you using a wood-n-blued-steel boltgun; why begrudge me my
choice of tool? Freedom is as freedom does. If you don't step up and defend
ALL kinds of rifles, pretty soon you won't have ANY to defend. And the legal
gap between an AR-15 and a BAR is a lot smaller than you think...
If you have an issue with slob hunters, call 'em out for what they are regardless
of what they carry. But anyone that insinuates that having multiple rounds at my
disposal somehow makes me more liable to shoot indiscriminately is frankly
talking about things with which they have little practical experience. An ethical
hunter is an ethical hunter regardless of chosen tool. And certainly, the
converse is also true - a slob hunter is a slob hunter regardless of whether they
use an AKM-47 or a Cooper.
Sometimes gunowners are our own worst enemy.
Posted by: richard bernecker | February 18, 2007 at 12:33 PM
Shame on you.
Posted by: Johnny | February 18, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Getting stodgey in your advancing years Zumbo?
Articles like this play right into the eager gungrabbing hands of the
hoplophobes.
I've done my share of pest eradicarion with a military semisuto = an M1
Carbine. I also use 'traditional' boltaction weapons, if you hunt with it, it's a
hunting weapon. Too bad Remington dosen't make an "assault weapon", you'd
probably change your tune.
Posted by: Ziplok | February 18, 2007 at 12:34 PM
2/19/2007
Page 376 of 853
Mr. Zumbo:
I am writing as an avid hunter who grew up on a working ranch in the Big Bend
area of Texas. I am currently employed as a full time police officer for a large
municipal police Department in Texas. I have worked in Patrol for 11 years and
on SWAT for 8 years. I am also a Patrol Rifle instructor and a Precision Rifle
instructor.
Your characterization of the AR-15, AK-47 and those who use them is flat
wrong, sir, and you have done a great disservice to thousands of legitimate and
ethical hunters as well as hundreds of thousands of police officers, soldiers,
and citizens.
The AR-15 platform is being used by many ethical hunters for the legal taking
of game from rockchucks to elk. There are many different calibers available for
this system ranging from the small .223 all the way through .308 and .50
Beowulf. I have personally used a .223 for the hunting of hogs and it worked
quite well.
The SKS and AK-47 type of rifles are regularly used by honest, ethical hunters
for hunting whitetails, hogs, and other medium game. I have also used one of
these rifles for hunting.
The funny thing is, Mr. Zumbo, is that I never thought of myself as a terrorist
and I never once considered that I was using a "terrorist rifle." Many of my
friends and colleagues have used semi-automatic, magazine fed rifles during
the discharge of their official duties as police officers and soldiers. Many of
these same men have used similar rifles for the legal taking of game.
Those who would outlaw hunting, take our firearms from us, and disarm the
American people already have their sights set on bolt action rifles. Their efforts
will not stop at banning the .50 BMG or so-called "sniper rifles." The elk
hunter's .300 Win Mag is perfectly able to be used by any terrorist. As you
know, there are plenty of hunting rifles that can send a projectile through body
armor at more than 1/2 mile away. I'll bet that some your own elk rifles will do
that and more. Yet I would never, ever, believe that your rifle is a "terrorist rifle"
despite the fact that terrorists are in fact using bolt action rifles against our
soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.
What concerns me most about your article is not the overt ignorance you
display but rather the fact that your rhetoric is exactly what anti-hunters and
anti-gun types will use to support their own causes. They love it when
"legitimate" hunters decry the use of semi-automatic rifles and they positively
squeal with delight when someone with your credentials supports any kind of
government control or banning of such rifles. These same people will also one
day seek to ban the "sniper rifles" that your yourself currently possess in your
2/19/2007
Page 377 of 853
"arsenal," Mr. Zumbo.
I once had a great deal of respect for you and even read your book(s) when I
first started elk hunting. I also had a subscription to Outdoor Life magazine
which I allowed to lapse but I was intending to renew it. I will not purchase any
of your books in the future nor will I watch your T.V. show. I will not renew my
subscription to Outdoor Life until you are removed from the staff of that
magazine or until your apology to all gun owners, police officers, soldiers, and
hunters (specifically those of us who regularly use Ar-15's and other semiautomatic rifles for legal and ethical purposes) is printed in both the magazine
and online.
I will monitor my email's Inbox for your apology.
Sincerely yours,
Douglas Deaton
Posted by: Douglas Deaton | February 18, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Updated sponsor list for Mr. Anti-2nd Amendment. Let them know how you feel:
[email protected]
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Thanks to Tater od Ft. Worth and AR15.com
2/19/2007
Page 378 of 853
Repost every hundred or so.
Steve in Michigan
Posted by: Steve, too | February 18, 2007 at 12:36 PM
Bolt Action rifles are "Terrorist" rifles.
See Attached URL Have we already forgotten what Janet Reno/Bill
Clinton/Hillary Clinton were saying about bolt action rifles? Anything with a
scope was a sniper weapon. Let's get together on this or we shall see our
firearms takn away piece by piece
Mr. Zumbo, The shocking irresponsibility you showed by calling AR-15 owners
"terrorists" disgusts me.
I am going to take the time to sit down and write to every single one of your
sponsors. I will not only demand your unconditional termination, I will also
boycott their stores and products until you are released. I have expressed my
outrage to the following addresses/individuals:
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
I have no need for a retraction or apology as I will accept neither. You stated
your true thoughts on the matter.
Jeff Petersen
Posted by: Jeff Petersen | February 18, 2007 at 12:36 PM
Mr. Zumbo you are a complete moron.
I think you and the rest of the hunting elite need to really think about what I'm
going to say:
THE 2ND AMENDMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HUNTING!
Would your $10k over under have served you in the aftermath of Hurricane
2/19/2007
Page 379 of 853
Katrina? Maybe if your home was threatened by roving bands of clay pigeons.
I use an AR type firearm serving my country and for recreation. Am I a terrorist?
If you said yes please email me so we can meet up and discuss your answer
on a one on one basis.
You and all the other Elmer Fudds can take your compromising defeatist
theories on what is best for us dumb slobs (1 of which will be writing to get your
butt canned) and stick them in your cool looking safari hat.
I grew up in Wyoming on a working ranch and I used a Mini-14 "with large
magazines" for defense of my families property and myself.
You are elitist slime. People like you are counter-productive to the 2nd
Amendment.
Shame on you.
Posted by: Patrick | February 18, 2007 at 12:36 PM
Way to go Fudd, 2A never mentions the hunter, only the bearing of arms for the
common DEFENSE, and mentions the militia (again no hunters here).
The AR family has produced some fine results at Camp Perry, beating out bolt
guns.
Sorry but your comments are ignorant and hypocritical. Since as a hunter you
should only need a muzzle loader and not a quickly reloadable bolt action.
Posted by: To Keep and Bear Arms | February 18, 2007 at 12:36 PM
2/19/2007
Page 380 of 853
Steve in Michigan
Steve in Michigan
Mr. Zumbo,
I was an ardent fan of your writing. After reading your entry in this Blog....... I
am really confused.
From reading previous articles written by you; I had the impression you were
more inclined to tolerate a hunter/shooter/gun nut with different likes and
dislikes.... whether you agreed with them or not. I believe your entry in the Long
range shooting blog fits that description:
"I understand there's a group in PA that shoots deer at 1,000 yards and more.
More power to them. Just don't ask me to support that kind of "hunting."....".
Your outright attack on assault rifle owners/users in this blog is unconscionable
however. Altho I don't own a rifle that fits your description above; I fervently
believe we need to respect the rights of those who do. For you to call for
banning a firearm based on cosmetic appearance is flabbergasting and very,
very disappointing.
Perhaps you were under the influence while at the keyboard?
2/19/2007
Page 381 of 853
A long time reader.......
Posted by: Carl Nilsen | February 18, 2007 at 12:37 PM
You sir are anti gun,flaming the fire in an already unstable situation. Sir,do you
realize the people that are trying to ban this type of firearm are also looking to
ban your so called "hunting rifle"? It's only a matter of time if they win,you are
next.
I'm sure they will use something like um say, sniper rifle not "hunting rifle"
Where will you be then smartass.
You should be fired,those of us into shooting sports of any type don't need you.
John
Looks like the otherwise silent majority has spoken again. The very few that
support Zumbo's statements also go just a little farther indicating their true
belief. All guns should be banned.
Mr. Zumbo, by his own admission, does not keep up with current hunting trends
and is therefore no longer a credible source of hunter for hunters.
Please consider writing for a new audience. Sarah Brady is always hiring.
Too bad a fine company like Remington will be held accountable for the actions
of someone like you.
Posted by: William Murray | February 18, 2007 at 12:37 PM
I love the look and feel of a fine bolt gun. I also see the need and want to have
an ar style RIFLE. You call these "terrorist" rifles. So in saying that you are
calling every US Solider, airman, seaman, and marine a terrorist. I did my time
in the military for which i am proud, I didn't have to go to Iraq or anywhere else
to fight yet, I would have if they wanted me too. You sir are a disgrace to this
country and to all gun owners. Too bad I didn't have a subscription to Outdoor
Life because I would tell them just why I am canceling my subscription to them.
I will also pass along your thought to all of my ar owning friends. So they know
to never read or watch anything to do with your fat sorry ass.
Why don't you go and live in England I hear they are wanting some more Antigunners over there, and you sir will fit right in.
Posted by: Brett Young | February 18, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Way to go Fudd, 2A never mentions the hunter, only the bearing of arms for the
common DEFENSE, and mentions the militia (again no hunters here).
The AR family has produced some fine results at Camp Perry, beating out bolt
guns.
2/19/2007
Page 382 of 853
Sorry but your comments are ignorant and hypocritical. Since as a hunter you
should only need a muzzle loader and not a quickly reloadable bolt action.
Posted by: To Keep and Bear Arms | February 18, 2007 at 12:38 PM
This disgusts me, I'm a hunter too and a target shooter. Why are you giving
quotes to the gun grabbing Democrats.
Posted by: Dave M | February 18, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Is it time to retire yet? I shall no longer read the magazine either as they are
guilty by association for allowing you to publish such despotic autocratic tripe.
Why is it thay when some people get old they think their opinion is the only one
that matters and try to influence others?
Go find a nice nursing home and this is an 71 y.o. telling you this.
Posted by: Josh Sugarmann | February 18, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Zumbo:
About 20 years ago I had decided on my own that you were an idiot of the first
magnitude and quit reading the publication you wrote for (Outdoor Life) as it too
was becoming a joke for what it contained. Today you confirmed that feeling.
In my teen years, OL had been one of the main reasons I had developed an
intense love of the outdoors, fishing, hunting, and firearms in general. You and
some of the other writers who replaced the knowledgeable "old-timers" who
had made it a great publication have all for the most part cashed in big time
with the commercial aspects of the business, and in doing so, have lost all
sense of moral direction as to how you got where you are.
All I can imagine is that you must have been smoking dope to write such crap
as you did concerning a rifle that is just as legal to own and to hunt with as your
beloved bolt action rifles are. I honestly can’t believe that you are that naïve
and stupid. And for the record, I own a bunch of bolt action hunting rifles, but I
also own several AR-15 rifles that are just as useful as hunting tools as any of
the other types of rifles and shotguns that I own.
By opening your mouth in the stupid manner that you did, you confirmed what I
felt 20 years ago. You sir, are an idiot of the first magnitude who doesn't
deserve to have access to a pen and paper, let alone a computer to spread
your brand of stupidity.
I can only hope that the folks who sponsor you don't feel the same as you do,
including your corporate hunting partners (Remington employees) who were
with you when you wrote this drivel. If they do, we as gun owners may as well
all collectively write off the 2nd Amendment as its being torn away from us by
the very folks who get rich by selling us their products.
2/19/2007
Page 383 of 853
As I stated earlier, I won’t be writing to Outdoor Life as I long ago got tired of
the crap you and others like you were trying to cram down my apparently
ignorant throat concerning hunting. However, as a long time Remington owner,
rest assured they will be hearing from me – and I hope many others like me - in
the hopes that they will soon disassociate themselves from you. If they choose
to continue supporting idiots like you who are dangerous to the entire 2nd
Amendment movement, I hope they never sell another firearm to an American
citizen and hunter who values the freedom the 2nd Amendment provides for all
of us, irregardless of our personal choice in firearms.
You have done enough to erode our collective 2nd Amendment rights with your
anti “assault rifle” tirade that you should retire immediately and never write
again. We can’t afford to have your kind speaking for the rest of us.
Posted by: Former OL reader | February 18, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Time for poor old Jim to be put out to pasture, he has finally lost his mind.
Posted by: James Lane | February 18, 2007 at 12:39 PM
I agree. Your hunting rifle must be a "terrorist sniper rifle". Get a new job, YOU
DONT REPRESENT THE GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA!!!!
Posted by: Sean | February 18, 2007 at 12:39 PM
I would be totally OK with this commentary if it were saying "I don't agree with
them for hunting, so I won't use on myself". When it transitions to the "ban them
in the woods because I don't like them" argument, it crosses the line. Just
because you don't like the looks of it, think its 'scary', or don't agree with using
one for hunting, it doesn't mean that you should advocate nanny state
legislation to ban it for others who have no such reservations.
The public is "Terrorized" by assault rifles?? Oh no!!! They are black, plastic
and have a pistol grip (so does my bolt action Savage rifle with a sniper stock).
Some might even have a bayonet mount!! That doesn't make them any more
deadly. They just look like a military weapon. As a matter of fact, most of the
uneducated public is 'terrorized" by any type of gun, to include BB and pellet
guns. The don't understand any of it, so it scares them.
I would hazzard a guess that more people are killed in the US each year by
hunting rifles than by assault rifles. President Kennedy was killed by a scoped
hunting rifle. Why don't we ban those while we are at it?? That killing had more
impact than any killings by lunatics armed with "assault" rifles.
After assault rifles have been banned the next target for the gun control
advocates will be scoped rifles. They are far more precise, deadly, and look
every bit as fearsome as a short military style weapon. While we are at it, lets
also jump on the bandwagon to ban .50 cal rifles. Even though they have never
2/19/2007
Page 384 of 853
been involved in a single killing in the US they sure are scary!!! That movement
is already gaining steam in liberal strongholds like California and the northeast.
Advocating a ban on "assault" weapons for hunting will only lead to an eventual
ban on all pistols, rifles, scopes, hunting, etc.. Many seem to believe that just
because they don't understand it or agree with it, it is valid grounds to prohibit it
to others. As an American who treasures the fundamental priciples that this
nation was founded upon, I cannon agree with this manner of governance or
legislation.
Posted by: Scott Cunningham | February 18, 2007 at 12:39 PM
Cancel my subscription
Posted by: CO hunter | February 18, 2007 at 12:39 PM
Mr. Zumbo, you have screwed the pooch! I'm glad you are ready to retire from
writing! Your time has come. Give us all a break and just crawl back under the
porch and gnaw on your foot.
Posted by: Gutpile Charlie | February 18, 2007 at 12:40 PM
I own several "assault" rifles. I do not use them for hunting because I seldom
hunt. I do shoot quite a bit, and I am NOT a terrorist and these are not terrorist
rifles.
You just cost all of your sponsors including Remington (whos firearms I really
like) and ODL my business.
Posted by: Windustsearch | February 18, 2007 at 12:40 PM
This is truly disgraceful. As a hunter, it saddens me to no great end to see you
reenforce the "Fudd" sterotype of hunters. I've hunted with the standard
"sporting" firearms for over two decades. Last year, I retired my ol' .30/06
boltgun, for a new mountain companion;....an Alexander Arms AR-15 type rifle
chambered for the potent .50 Beowulf round. It's perfect for the type of hunting I
do. It's lighter than my old rifle. It's more ergonomic than my old rifle (allowing
me faster target acquisition and steadier aim). And it's also very accurate as
well. So does being a conscientious hunter, utilizing an AR rifle make me a
Rambo-type? Up your's if you believe so! Before you make generalizations and
do any more damage to our sport, or America's freedoms, do some honest
research into the subject Jim....
Posted by: Alan G. | February 18, 2007 at 12:41 PM
I to will no longer purchase any Remington products while Mr. Zumbo is still an
employee. The term "assault rifle" is a term coined by the gun grabbers of the
U.S. Assualt is an action and just like any other firearm the person is the one
that takes the action not the weapon! I can take any firearm that Remington
makes and make it appear to be an "Assault Weapon" because the critera is in
2/19/2007
Page 385 of 853
looks only. You Mr. Zumbo need to think before you write out this drivel. I will
not go into your use of "terrorist weapons" because i believe you have made
your own ignorance clear!!! The bill of Rights states that we have the right to
keep and bare arms it doesn't state only if they look a certain way or fit your
wants!!
Posted by: G B Ohio | February 18, 2007 at 12:41 PM
I am apalled, "separated we fall" Mr. Zumbo.
I will never read another article written by you.
Posted by: J. Painter | February 18, 2007 at 12:41 PM
This is not about guns!
The real issue is about the individual.
Today we are taught to beware of stereotyping and prejudice.
Should a gun or person be judged on the way it or they look?
Would TED NUGENT or JESUS be more acceptable to some if they had a
crew cut and were clean shaven?
The liberal left keeps boasting about their open minds but are the worst
offenders.
I have always tried to live by the Golden Rule. I have really tired not to offend
anyone. I now realize that no matter how hard I try to conform that I will
probably offend anyway.
So my black tuxedo will now be camo and my pink AR15 will return to black.
I think that ZUMBO with his prejudicial issues might become a liability to
Outdoor Life and Remington in the work place. I think that those sexual
harassment and racial profiling lawsuits should be rolling in by now.
Posted by: Bill Budinich | February 18, 2007 at 12:41 PM
Nice attitude. Wonder how he'll feel when someone else says his tackdriving
bolt-action is a 'sniper weapon' that only 'a terrorist would need'. Divide and
conquer...wonder what color pen he used to endorse the check from Charles
Schumer.
Posted by: commander_zero | February 18, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Wow, is Jim Zumbo sponsored by Sarah Brady? Yikes.
I can't believe what I just read..... Don't you write articles for some NRA
publications also?
Don't worry Jim, I'm contacting everyone that sponsors you. I spend alot of
money every year with Remington and Cabella's.
Idiots like you and your elitist attitude will sink us all!!!
2/19/2007
Page 386 of 853
Posted by: Mark Cooper | February 18, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Outdoor life has a forum board and this has not been brought up there, but it
should.
All should be aware of how important this subject is. I used to be a big fan of
outdoor life but this is too much.
Posted by: Gene Obenshain | February 18, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
I am a Moderator on PredatorMasters.com, the largest Predator Hunting
website forum on the internet. We average 1,000,000 hits a day (yes, you read
it right, one million!). Rest assured, I will make sure our membership are aware
of your comments concerning the AR15 and it's many variants. Your complete
lack of familiarity with this type of rifle, either extols your ignorance of the rifle
platform that is taking the shooting industry by storm, or (more likely) you are
puppeting the discontent of Remington and their loss of market share to the
AR15 rifle. Either way, you do a horrible disservice to the shooting industry. As
has been said many times now in this thread, Outdoor Life will likely loose a
tremendous amount of subscribers due to your ignorant, and divisive
comments. Hopefully Remington will also feel the pain of dissatisfied
consumers/sportsmen. I own two of the hated rifles you are referring as well as
16 other "PC" rifles. Comments such as yours will put all of my rifles in the
same category - BANNED!
I will do my part to ensure we continue to have a hunting and gun ownership
tradition in this country. I believe your comments should bring an end to your
tenure as a speaker for the outdoor community. Shame on Outdoor Life and
Remington for allowing your comments to attempt to divide us. As for being a
terrorist, myself and many others will readily defend our country at any given
moment. I didn't realize that made me a terrorist. So be it!
Posted by: Mike Granger | February 18, 2007 at 12:43 PM
RE NAMES:
Gentlemen, look at the NAME BELOW THE POST, not above it. That is where
your name goes.
Posted by: SteveH | February 18, 2007 at 12:43 PM
i own 3 or these 'terrorist weapons' and i am a practicing physician, not even
qualified remotely as a terrorist. i have hunted with them, but mostly i have
them because as a free citizen i have the right to have them .....for playing, for
huntin, for defending myself if need be....i really dont need to have a reason;
one of my friends here took a nice dall sheep with his!
one branch of my family has the terrorist weapon carried by my
gggggrandfather as a continental soldier serving under general nathaniel
2/19/2007
Page 387 of 853
greene; my ancestor and I would both find your attitude extremely sad, and
offensive!
your arguments are the same used by the liberal clintonista gun banners, i
really enjoy your writing but do not fall into the trap of thinking like those
oligarchs who do not trust us with sharp objects.
Posted by: harold cable | February 18, 2007 at 12:44 PM
Dear Sir,
Your comments are ignorant, selfish, and inaccurate (not to mention poorly
written).
I fail to see the difference to the coyote or prarie dog if it gets shot with an AR15
firing a .223 caliber round, or a bolt-action Remington 700 firing a .223 caliber
round. I'm sorry that the way these guns look "offend you" and look scary.
Maybe you should give up on wildlife writing and open a blog for the Million
Mom March. You could exchange more brilliant and well-thought ideas with
people like Rosie O'Donnell.
Obviously instead of using the position you somehow fell into as a hunting
columnist you choose instead to use it to further your own agenda of attacking
semi-auto rifles in order to (you think) secure more public legitimacy of the guns
that you like.
Its hunters like you who the Brady Campaign just loves. And don't think for a
minute after they ban the so-called "assault rifles" they won't be coming after
the rest. Including your hunting guns which they will no doubt portray as
"dangerous sniper-type rifles."
Posted by: Sam Adams | February 18, 2007 at 12:44 PM
ZUMBO.
I think it's time for you to retire.
And if you think I should not own and hunt with an AK then come over here and
take it from me.
You are an ingorant Elitist of the worst kind.
Posted by: GonzoX | February 18, 2007 at 12:44 PM
There is nothing that I can say that hasnt been said. Why would you put
yourself on a pedistal and make comments like that? Why dont you, Pelosi, and
Hillary get a room. Have you ever heard of "Divide and conquer"? DONT
separate firearms into groups with labels like "terrorist" or "assault". You make
it easier for the antis to take another step. Do us all a favor and keep your
mouth shut.
Posted by: Matt L. | February 18, 2007 at 12:44 PM
2/19/2007
Page 388 of 853
Mr Zumbo
Thanks so much for helping us out in our campaign to rid the USA of these evil
weapons. Your article was invaluable to the cause and helps us spread the
truth about evil weapons. I have enclosed a membership aplication for you and
Jim and I will even pay your dues since you are such a valuable new member.
God bless you for your couragous stand against these evil weapons
Sarah and Jim
Posted by: Brady Center for gun control | February 18, 2007 at 12:44 PM
Traitor.
Posted by: Kurt H | February 18, 2007 at 12:44 PM
Note to all Repubs like Giuliani who favor gun control: See the above posters
and how they've mobilized their voice in 24hrs in response to Zumbo's call to
limit 2nd ammendment rights. LOTS of votes to be lost by promoting this kind of
idiotic stance.
My OL subscription - poof gone
Remington products - never again
Posted by: Stevador | February 18, 2007 at 12:45 PM
Mr Zumbo, hopefully you will realize whats at stake. The Pelosis, Clintons,
Feinsteins and many others of the world want to eventually ban ALL guns. Why
would you help them?
I'm surprised to see an anti-second amendment, pro criminal article on your
site.
Posted by: RP | February 18, 2007 at 12:46 PM
I'm sad at your comments and that Outdoorlife and Remington are supportive
of the opinion that certian guns are "evil". I will remember this when I talk to
anyone that is considering buying a Remington or advertisers in Outdoorlife.
Posted by: Spangles | February 18, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
You may have your opinion but I have mine. I see you as naive dolt who can't
see past his own agenda. You have equated hundreds of thousands if not a
million people in this country "terrorist" simply because of the rifle they choose.
A rifle is a rifle, it is simply a tool. It doesn't matter if it is a single shot 22 or an
AR-10 in .308. It is the person who pulls the trigger who is responsible. I have
seen many people who can't practice good firearms saftey with a 22 rifle and
an AK-47. Neither is worse than the other it is the person, period. What you
speak of hunters doing with their "large capacity" magazines is simply asinine. I
2/19/2007
Page 389 of 853
hope that you reconsider your position for the sake of your job.
Posted by: Justin M. | February 18, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Until Zumbo is fired and dropped by all of his sponsors and associates I will
spend not another penny with any of them. He can apologize 'til the cows come
home and it will never be enough to change my mind. He is a traitor to the 2cnd
Ammendment and a disgrace to the firearms community which has contibuted
to his livelihood for many years.
Posted by: macbullet | February 18, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Well I must say this article is full of ignorance and anti-gun hype.This man is
just the sort of gun owner all other gun owners should fear.He is what I call a
traitor.
This man is intimidated simply by the looks of a firearm and speaks the same
nonsense that the anti-gun lefties do.Its a real shame that any gunowner would
think like this.I own so many called "assault rifles" and yes I do hunt with
them.They are effective contrary to this gentlemans opinions.I enjoy plinking
with them as well and will not sit back and let anyone tell me I cannot own them
simply because they look scary or some individual doesnt like them.
Posted by: Rob | February 18, 2007 at 12:48 PM
I honestly am at a loss of words from reading this shit Jim. I really can't believe
you have written this? I have written Remington and let them know my
thoughts. Hopefully this will be the last article I ever see of yours in print.
Terrorist weapon?
You can take my AR when you pry it from my cold dead hands.
Posted by: Joe H. | February 18, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Mr. Zumbo's opinion is indistinguishable from that of a Board member of the
Brady Coalition.
Others have dealt with his factual errors and outright treason to the Constitution
and, specifically, the Second Amendment to same.
While Mr. Zumbo is entitled to express his opinion, he is not immune from the
consequences of so doing. I will purchase neither Outdoor Life Magazine nor
any Remington product until Mr. Zumbo's employment by both organizations
has been terminated. If I should see Mr. Zumbo's name mentioned in
connection with any other firearm publication or product, I will refuse to buy that
manufacturer's product(s).
Posted by: raf | February 18, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
Frankly, you're a moron.
2/19/2007
Page 390 of 853
Please leave America and go hunt in England or Australia. We don't need folks
like you in this great nation.
Posted by: Bob King | February 18, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Well.... You have just lost All credibility with your "terrosist" remarks. I don't
know where to even start. This sounds like the same drivel that comes from the
Brady camp. Yea, go ahead and torpedo my rights to own, compete with, and
hunt with my AR15's. When they do that then they will start working on your
bolt guns, lever guns, and shotguns. I shoot, compete, and hunt with them. I do
so while obeying all laws and I do it safely. You are a sell out to the anti-gun
crowd you just don't realize it. Your lack of knowledge on this subject is
lasughable at best. You are a discrace to the 2nd ammendment.
If this is the best Outdoor Life can scrape off the bottom of their shoe then up I
am DONE with them. Too many other publications out there to promote our
sport than some wanna-be who has his head in the sand.
KS
Posted by: KS | February 18, 2007 at 12:48 PM
To the sponsors of Jim Zumbo,
I'm deeply offended by Mr. Zumbo's comments. As long a Mr. Zumbo is a
representative of your products I will not patronize you.
By the way most of the time I hunt with single shot rifles. I have hunted with AR
type rifles also. I also a NRA high-power competitor.
Campbell Boyd
Posted by: Campbell Boyd | February 18, 2007 at 12:48 PM
WATACROCKACACA.....Blatant ignorance, Zumbo.....
Posted by: Bob Christensen | February 18, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Maybe we sould ban hunters with mustaches?
I don't like the way they look just like you don't like the look of an AR rifle. I
don't have an AR. nor do I want one.
But your dictaor stance on hunting is incredibly self-righteous. you are NOT an
American.
Posted by: Sean | February 18, 2007 at 12:49 PM
In all my years of reading and participating in forums and blogs on the net, I've
never seen one catch on fire like this one. This guy Zumbo has really shown us
"where he is coming from", and we have the perfect opportunity to tell all that
support him how we feel toward this blatant betrayal of God given 2nd
Amendment Rights and traditions. Above, many posters have provided e-mail
2/19/2007
Page 391 of 853
addresses to all the sponspors and advertisers and I suggest we all, right now,
while the "iron's hot", go to every forum we post in, spread the word, spread
these addresses and encourage everyone to express their dismay. This is our
opportunity just to let all that control the purse where our heart is. Yes,
everyone as a "right to their opinion", however, if you opion is crap, then it is a
moot point, right?
Get out there and set the net on fire. Let everyone know what this dispicable
human has said and bring him down, now!
Posted by: The Chuck Meister | February 18, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Jim when are you retiring? Yesterday wouldnt be to soon.
Wish I hadnt resubscribed to the outdoor magazine. Why do people let there
allagator mouth overload the humming bird a$$..........................
Posted by: Orville stamereilers | February 18, 2007 at 12:50 PM
You sir are a usurper of the constitution of the United States. I am notifying
Remington that I am sending all thier unsold rifles and ammo back to the
distributor. I am also informing them that I will never have another Remington
product in my shop.
There you go, You just cost remington several thousand dollars a year. You
people that advocate banning any type of firearms are traitors to this country
and should be dragged out of your ivory tower and hung like the traitor that you
are.
Go to hell and take you brady friends with you. You are nothing but the scum of
the earth.
Posted by: Robert Fowler | February 18, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Dear Mr. Zumbo,
As a supporter of common sense gun control I am glad that we can both agree
that these weapons of terror have no use other than for senseless killing. I
hope that your articles will awaken the entire sporting community to the
violence and murder caused by assault rifles. Together we can unite with
common sense gun control organizations to find support for licensing and the
eventual elimination of automatic weapons from civilian ownership. Please do
not become discouraged by those who advocate some sort of antiquated right
to own these weapons of terror. I applaud you for having the courage to stand
up against right wing organizations such as the NRA and GOA on this
important issue.
Thank you,
Andy
Posted by: Andy | February 18, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Jim,
2/19/2007
Page 392 of 853
I've been reading you since I was a small child. That ended when I read this
blog. You, sir, are my enemy. I'm deeply saddened by this.
I don't agree with your carrying around shotguns and "hunting" rifles in the
forrest. These terrorist guns have killed millions of people and should be
banned from the woods. Maybe I'm a purist, but I think that only bow and arrow
and spears should be allowed while hunting. We don't want to give hunters a
bad name by allowing these terrorist weapons into our "club".
You sir are an idiot, and your opinion is worthless.
You're a friggin idiot. Remember the saying “We must all hang together, or
most assuredly we will all hang separately."
Posted by: Joey Allen | February 18, 2007 at 12:51 PM
This "guilty by association" theme is really pathetic.
Do YOU give good head because your daughter does?
Are you are simpathetic to serial killers because you went to the same college
as one?
Do you advocate drinking and driving because the guy that does is a fan of the
same football team as you or he drives the same car?
I'm embarassed by the lot of you...it's shameful behavior. He didn't call you
morons, or idiots, or fucksticks, or assholes, in fact he didn't even call you
terrorists.
This "guilty by association" theme is really pathetic.
Do YOU give good head because your daughter does?
Are you are simpathetic to serial killers because you went to the same college
as one?
Do you advocate drinking and driving because the guy that does is a fan of the
same football team as you or he drives the same car?
I'm embarassed by the lot of you...it's shameful behavior. He didn't call you
morons, or idiots, or fucksticks, or assholes, in fact he didn't even call you
terrorists.
Mr. Dumbo:
2/19/2007
Page 393 of 853
Your Elmer Fudd mentality about AR-15s and AKs makes you a traitor to the
2nd Amendment and the newest lap dog of the Brady Campaign, the so-called
"Million" Mom March and the anti-gunners on Capitol Hill. In case you haven't
figured it out yet there is a high correlation between those groups that are antigun and those groups that are anti-hunting. Your telescope-sighted rifle and
repeating scattergun are on the anti's confiscation and ban agenda too- just
further down their wish list than my AR-15s. Get your head out of your a**!
Posted by: Tom | February 18, 2007 at 12:52 PM
You sir should revert to using a heavy rock to beat your prey into submission.
Well that's in alignment with the dribble your recent blog reflects. Technology
changes and the fact remains that it's the person not the tool that kills.
Posted by: Rory | February 18, 2007 at 12:52 PM
It saddens me that someone as well respected as yourself has managed to
make it this far in life with such prejudices . A weapon does not kill anything nor
does it force someone to take on certain behaviours or characteristics simply
because you own it or Hunt with it . I have been using an AR platform to hunt
Ground Squirrels , Coyotes , Badgers and many other Varmint's . The .223
round is a very capable round and the AR platform was designed around it
which lends to it being reliable and acurate , everything a person wants in a
hunting rifle .
Grow with the times or go away Jim . As of right now you are no friend of the
2nd amendment or the hunting community when you make ignorant comments
like this which can only serve to hurt the cause of Hunting and Gun ownership
in the U.S.
Posted by: Michael Neff | February 18, 2007 at 12:53 PM
You should broaden your horizons a bit past you upturned nose and go watch
the kids shoot those terrorist rifles at Camp Perry sometime.
Posted by: George Patton | February 18, 2007 at 12:53 PM
I can only hope that Mr. Zumbo now understands what a dangerous and stupid
bit of trash he posted and an appology is now forthcoming. If not he should be
banned from every sporting publication and considered no better than Sara
Brady and her ilk.
Posted by: Dave | February 18, 2007 at 12:53 PM
It's time for Zumbo to come down. Outdoor Life as just buried it's self. The
magazine is finished...and why? Because the arrogrant prick named Zumbo
betrayed his entire base by publishing such a crock. Bring him down, take him
out. This crap has got to stop.
2/19/2007
Page 394 of 853
Posted by: Chucky Cheese | February 18, 2007 at 12:53 PM
which lends to it being reliable and accurate , everything a person wants in a
hunting rifle .
in the U.S.
As an Iraq War veteran and AR-15 owner, I take issue with your implication that
I am a "terrorist" for owning one type of rifle rather than another.
How about we judge people by their actions, rather than by the images that we
project onto them?
-MV
Posted by: Matthew V. | February 18, 2007 at 12:54 PM
Zumbo,
The bolt guns you think are hot stuff are nothing more than "Sniper Rifles" to
the Violence Policy Center. Beliefs such as yours only help get all weapons
banned and hunting along with it!
To say you are short sighted is to understate the condition. What possessed
you to write such a thoughtless diatribe against self loading military style rifles?
Alzheimer's kicking in is it?
Zumbo you are now and forever more "Dumbo" in the shooting world. I will be
emailing and calling Remington to request them to fire your ass Monday
morning, same with Outdoor Life.
Posted by: Schuetzenman | February 18, 2007 at 12:54 PM
I can only hope that Mr. Zumbo now understands what a dangerous and stupid
bit of trash he posted and an appology is now forthcoming. If not he should be
banned from every sporting publication and considered no better than Sara
Brady and her ilk.
Posted by: Dave | February 18, 2007 at 12:54 PM
2/19/2007
Page 395 of 853
which lends to it being reliable and accurate , everything a person wants in a
hunting rifle .
in the U.S.
I'm sorry, you used to be one of my "hunting heros" but I will not stand by while
you try to denigrate both my beloved AR-15 and beloved 2nd amendment.
I will never again read anything written by you and I have just dumped my
Zumbo book collection in the trash.
You, above all other, should realize the error of your ways. For shame!
Posted by: Marc | February 18, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Jim, et tu Brute? Nothing cuts quite as deep as a back stab from one of your
own. It's rather unfortunate you feel that way. Maybe you should go find a copy
of the Constitution and check under the 2nd Amendment, I don't see any
"hunting clause" in it. In fact, I would dare say that my AK (or AR, and M14, or
FAL) are far better protected by the 2nd Amendment than any of my hunting
rifles. Oh, by the way, that's not a "scoped hunting rifle" you have there, that's a
"Terrorist sniper rifle" to the anti's. Caesar, and the Brady Bunch, would be very
proud of your article.
You go ahead and collaborate, the rest of us will work on preserving yours and
our right to bear arms. Maybe when you're reduced to using 1 registered single
shot rifle (though I doubt, given your age and apparent early onset of
Alzheimer's you'll live much longer).
P.S. Apparently you hunt and shoot in some Ivory Tower club where people
only own original H&H's and 3 Generation old Brownings. I've hunted with my
M-14, my SKS, and varminted with my AR for years. So have my friends and
other members of my father's hunting and shooting club.
Posted by: Lysander | February 18, 2007 at 12:55 PM
I will echo Joe H,
"While Mr. Zumbo is entitled to express his opinion, he is not immune from the
2/19/2007
Page 396 of 853
consequences of so doing. I will purchase neither Outdoor Life Magazine nor
any Remington product until Mr. Zumbo's employment by both organizations
has been terminated. If I should see Mr. Zumbo's name mentioned in
connection with any other firearm publication or product, I will refuse to buy that
manufacturer's product(s)."
Ditto
Posted by: Dave H | February 18, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Isnt the point in hunting to make a clean kill and harvest no matter what type of
firearm you are using?
I will not subscribe to this magazine again because of the statements made by
Mr.Zumbo
Posted by: J Rada | February 18, 2007 at 12:55 PM
My subscription will be cancelled, and my thoughts were sent to:
- Proud AR Owner!
Posted by: alienated | February 18, 2007 at 12:55 PM
one word, FOOL.
Posted by: Ace | February 18, 2007 at 12:56 PM
Molon Labe M&!@^& F*&^$#!!
Posted by: bruce b | February 18, 2007 at 12:56 PM
Wow,
I think JZ is the reason I have not or will not ever purchase this magazine
again.
I have hunted with and have owned my own share of bolt action rifles. I have
also owned both AR and AK style rifles. I personally enjoy shooting an
accurized version of the AR15. I like the fact that not many believe how
accurate one of these rifles can be.
2/19/2007
Page 397 of 853
Anything can be used as a terrorist weapon... Look at peaople in palestine
throwing rocks. these rocks are meant to terrorize... however, I do not group
folks who use rocks in thier gardens as decorations as terrorists.
I sit here and wonder what has the world come to when someone who claims to
be a great sportsman and hunter can also in the same breath call an AR type
rifle a terrorist weapon. I think they are looking through blinders and have only
thought about what they like and the rest do not matter. I sir will fight for my
rights to hunt with whatever firearm I choose within the current laws of the
land... I will also fight for your right to own and use whatever firearms you
choose. I will however not critizise your choice of firearm.
to the poster who stated that the spray and pray method of hunting is promoted
by an AR type rifle you need to grow up. I have seen hunters unload the entire
magazine of a Lever action rifle (7 shots worth) on a deer. Not one round hit the
target... It sounded like a war going on.... What promotes spray and pray is not
having the confidence in the firearm and not taking the time to practice with it or
shoot it... That my friend is much more dangerous than someone who has shot
and trained with and is familiar with thier AR...
By the way.. the .223 is a great Coyote and and prairie dog round... wake up...
Posted by: Stacey | February 18, 2007 at 12:56 PM
Mr. Zumbo, you fail.
Posted by: James Berry | February 18, 2007 at 12:57 PM
If idea with this blog is to drive eyes to the Outdoor Life website--it is working.
Has any noticed the black humor in finding the line:
"Excuse me, maybe I'm a traditionalist..." written under a photo of Mr. Zumbo
holding a stainless steel, synthetic stocked, scoped, hunting rifle?
Looks like his traditional hunting rig is pretty much a direct descendent of my
20th Century .30/06 O3/A3 sniper rifle.
No Jim you are not a traditionalist. An apologist, a collaborator, a cad.
Remember to cut a deal with your backers to protect your 'traditional' hunting
rifle.
Posted by: Uygur | February 18, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Mr.Zumbo I just lost all respect I ever had for you, Your the kind of person that
helps fuel the anti-gun people in this country, and I hope outdoor life will be
happy to know that I'm ending my subscription.
Posted by: Mark | February 18, 2007 at 12:57 PM
2/19/2007
Page 398 of 853
Man, I feel like my dog just got run over.
I had to read Jim's article twice to make sure he wasn't just being sarcastic. It
must be tough to get senile. I have 3 Remington rifles and have bought 2 for
my sons; my next purchase will be a Savage. I will not support anyone who
gives Jim Z a paycheck. I spent 15 minutes trying to get through Outdoor Life's
customer service to cancel my subscription; I must not be the only one.
Jim, you have just outed yourself.
Posted by: J. Raymond | February 18, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Remington DOES SPONSER Mr. Zumbo:
http://www.outdoorchannel.com/showinfo.cfm?site=1&ShowID=450
Don't let them tell you differently!!!!
Posted by: Leonard R | February 18, 2007 at 12:57 PM
YOU are the reason I am cancelling my subscription. Maybe you should do us
all a favor and start writing about something you know about.
Posted by: BobB | February 18, 2007 at 12:58 PM
I am deeply disappointed in this comment, comparing AR-15's and AK-47's to
terrorist weapons. Although people have certainly hunted with fully automatic
versions of these guns, the vast majority of hunters are simply looking for a gun
that is light, sufficiently powerful, and yes, accurate. As you yourself note,
manufacturers are building them as "tackdrivers."
Why is this appealing? Because an average joe can get himself into a
"tackdriving" .223 for significantly less than a high end "hunting" rifle.
The snobbery of your position makes me think of those pistol shooters that look
down their nose at entry level guns, such as Hi-Point, or JA Arms. Certainly
lower end than a higher priced gun, but they exist as inexpensive alternativesalternatives that are constitutionally protected.
In your zeal to enforce the rigid heterodoxy of "pure hunting" you are
demonstrating your willingness to tread on the rights of legitimate gun owners
throughout America.
How are you better than Nancy Pelosi, or the Brady camp?
I have never been so saddened by something I have read on these pages.
Posted by: Steven | February 18, 2007 at 12:58 PM
Just about everything that can be said here has been so I'll just add that
thankfully I've never read any of your drivel nor the rag you publish it in and will
do my best to avoid it in the future. Hopefully your editors will make note of this.
Posted by: MarkF | February 18, 2007 at 12:58 PM
2/19/2007
Page 399 of 853
Just about everything that can be said here has been so I'll just add that
thankfully I've never read any of your drivel nor the rag you publish it in and will
do my best to avoid it in the future. Hopefully your editors will make note of this.
Posted by: MarkF | February 18, 2007 at 12:58 PM
Divide and conquer, they are winning!
This idea of my stype of gun is better than your's is simply BS!
You may prefer a single shot or a revolver, but you have NO right to tell the rest
of the world what they should think. I may desire to carry a synthetic stocked
rifle and you look down you nose on anything but high grade walnut; I may
prefer maple on my wood guns and keep them home or for gentle use.
It is a sad state of affairs this country is in and it not just guns. We have this
class system developing in which a few self-proclaimed experts tell the rest of
us working pee-ons what we are to lke and not like. NO, not only NO but.........
This simply means that we will loose ALL gun rights!!! Wake up and smell the
dung pile, it is growing stronger by the day.
Jim, maybe you would be willing to trade my AR-15 straight across for a new
Cooper so I can gain your approval?
Posted by: Bob | February 18, 2007 at 12:59 PM
"The possession of arms is vital for resisting tyranny, and that to be disarmed
by one's government is tantamount to being enslaved by it. The possession of
arms by the people is the ultimate warrant that government governs only with
the consent of the governed." - Jeff Snyder, "A Nation of Cowards"
"A government that abrogates any of the Bill of Rights, with or without the
majoritarian approval, forever acts illegitimately, becomes tyrannical, and loses
the moral right to govern." - Jeff Snyder
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." -Tacitus
Posted by: Allan Y. | February 18, 2007 at 12:59 PM
Jim is right in all things. I'm sending $20.00 to my local Million Mom March
chapter to help get these terrorist guns off our hunting fields and our streets.
I read that someone put a hole in the Alaska Pipeline with something called
a .338 Magnum, so I'm going to give them $20.00 to get rid of all of those bad
guns too.
A fellow with something called a pump-shotgun shot people in Salt Lake City,
so I'd better give them another $20.00 to go after those things too.
Dr. Martin Luther King was assasinated by a guy with a rifle that had a scope
on it, President Kennedy too, I think they call that a sniper-rifle,I'd better kick in
another $20.00
2/19/2007
Page 400 of 853
I hope that Jim writes another column like this soon, so I can know what guns
we have to get rid of.
Posted by: Myrmidon | February 18, 2007 at 12:59 PM
Mr Dumbo,
I have Never ever heard of you and I know why. I don't read Communist or
socialist writings. 1st of all I am going to make a concerted effort to get you
fired. This will posted on Any and Every Gun Message Board in the World by
tonite. You will Never work again in the Gun Industry. You just insulted Millions
of Law-Biding People, who just like you, loves their freedoms of Gun
Ownership.
Do you really think that the Anti-Gun Crowd will allow you to anyone a .308
Browning or Remington Bolt Rifle if they start banning Military Style Weapons
such as AR's again?
By you Being a Spokesman for Remington, you are in a Very Powerful position
when you speak. You are also Older and it seems Experienced so your Opinion
also carries weight with that.
What you don't seem to realize is that The USA and Guns are Very different
than they were when you grew up as a Youngster.
Men, Women and Children under Adult Supervision enjoy AR's and shooting all
kinds of Guns. Especially Military LOOKING ones. A Semi-Auto Rifle made by
Remington is No Different than a Colt AR-15 other THAN LOOKS. They Both
Do Exactly the Same Thing. They Can Kill and can be accurate. \
So, are you just against the way the Guns Look or are you simply an Outdated
Old Elmer Fudd who doesn't understand New Fangled Ideas like GPS, Cell
Phones, MP3's and Tactical Rifles?
I will be calling Remington in the Morning, My Subscription is cancelled to
Outdoor Life. I am THROWING AWAY All Issues of ANTI-GUN OUTDOOR
LIFE including all Issues from when I was a Kid. You are ANTI-GUN and Until
Remington does some explaining, REMINGTON IS also ANTI-GUN by
Supporting your rhetoric. Do Not Buy Remington Products of Any Kind Until this
Stupid Old Idiot is thrown out on his ass.
Whoa.... Mr. Zumbo, it appears you are getting quite a butt kicking over your
article. GOOD!!!!!
An AR-15 is technically an assault rifle... Okay, fine. So what. My brother-in-law
has an AR-15. Big deal. It reminds me of military bootcamp when I qualified on
the M-16 many years ago. I happen to like it. But calling it a "terrorist rifle" is
way over the line. By calling it that, you are calling each and every member of
2/19/2007
Page 401 of 853
our Armed Forces a terrorist! Way to go, pal....
Posted by: Butch | February 18, 2007 at 12:59 PM
If this is an example of your "thinking" and writing "ability" then I havn't been
missing a thing by not subscribing to "Outdoor Life"
You are an idiot.
Posted by: anon | February 18, 2007 at 01:00 PM
This article was printed in Outdoor Life magazine. There are many sports and
outdoor activities covered. Jim Zumbo considers himself an elitist "Big Game
Hunter". One of many sayings I like goes "Money talks, BS walks. Use the
sponsor link on Jim Zumbo's out dated website(2005) and hit this guy where it
hurts in his wallet. Don't waste your time replying to Zumbo. Let Outdoor Life,
The Outdoor Channel, Remington, Swarovski, Gerber Knifes, Cabela's, Safari
Club International, Stoney Point Products and High Mountain Seasoning know
what a slob this guy is. Zumbo is the Dixie Chicks of the Outdoor writers. He
has a right to say and write what he thinks. I can not believe Outdoor Life was
dumb enough to print it. I hope Zumbo is man enough to except what comes
with it, hopefully retirement with very little financial means and freebies for "Big
Game Hunts" I only hope it comes real soon.
Posted by: MDW | February 18, 2007 at 01:00 PM
I can see it now, the Hillary/Zumbo ticket in '08.
I am going to spend the next 15 minutes of my quite Sunday searching this
website and others for any and all of your sponsors. This will become my new
list of prodcuts and services to boycott.
Absolutely disgracefull.
Posted by: Peter | February 18, 2007 at 01:00 PM
Sorry, I could only read a fraction but agree with most of it and anything I have
to say has already been said.
Except maybe: An AR is a handy rifle or carbine that is easy to hit with. I think
that makes it a better hunting rifle than levers and bolts that I have used when
the game is within the capabilities of the cartridge. And from what has been
reported, a good rifleman with the right load can successfully take anything
from prairie dogs to white tail with a .223.
Again, we cannot forget that the 2nd amendment is about home and
community defense. And that means that the 2nd amendment protects the AR
at least as much is not more than a specialized bolt rifle.
Carry on.
2/19/2007
Page 402 of 853
I noticed quite a while back that the majority of the staff at OL and Field &
Stream too for that matter are a bunch of whore-mongering democrat Ted
Kennedy-esque liberals who just happen to hunt and fish--and who also (much
like liberals tend to do) pretend to know a lot more than they really do. Some of
the instructive articles have erroneous information in them that is downright
laughable for folks in the know. But these fools get paid to tell those more
foolish than themselves (it is supposed) how to hunt, fish, and shoot. Pedigreed
dilber-tards...
Both Outdoor Life and Field and Stream are barely fit for emergency toilet
paper. Too many New Englanders on staff at both rags for there to be much
edification coming forth from either one of them.
Dan
Posted by: Dan Newberry | February 18, 2007 at 01:01 PM
It's time for Zumbo to come down. Outdoor Life as just buried it's self. The
magazine is finished...and why? Because the arrogrant prick named Zumbo
betrayed his entire base by publishing such a crock. Bring him down, take him
out. This crap has got to stop.
Posted by: Chucky Cheese | February 18, 2007 at 01:02 PM
Zumgo the Dumbo is a quisling and a fool.
Posted by: Ronald Reagon | February 18, 2007 at 01:02 PM
Well it looks like I am going to have alot more time on my hands and save alot
of money.
Since I will not be reading the magazine anymore, or waste my time watching
any shows that Remington or Jim Dumbo is associated with I will save about 4
or 5 extara hours a week. And since I won't be buying Remington ammo, I can
better use my money buying winchester ammo and spending those extra 4 or 5
hours a week shooting Jim Dumbo targets with my AR getting ready for a
predator hunt. Zumbo you just made the biggest marketing boner in the history
of the outdoor world.
Posted by: Rus Gaylor | February 18, 2007 at 01:02 PM
Mr Zumbo, I have read several of your articles over the years and have really
enjoyed them. However, apparently you are now showing your true colors. You
are a hunter only, and not a friend of the 2nd Admendment. Do you realize I,
and thousands of others legally enjoy using these rifles to hunt with? They are
just as accurate as your .223 sniper weapon (insert Remington 700) that will be
under attack next by the Democraps? What about your spray and pray
Remington 11-87?
2/19/2007
Page 403 of 853
And you will be partly responsible for your ignorant response. We have to stand
together if we are to keep our heritage alive.
Remington and Outdoor Life, if you continue to support writers like this, I will be
forced to cancel my subscription and not use any Remington products. I have 2
sons who are starting to spend money on firearms and ammunition, and I have
sent a copy of this to them and several hundred firefighters on my email list.
Posted by: Ken Gray | February 18, 2007 at 01:02 PM
I can't own those up here in Canada... I gots me a Kel Tec(9) Das all I need for
me and my crew... I don't fear them "assault weapons" I fear them Gernades
and that crazy cracka Covert....
Bruce B
Posted by: Bruce B | February 18, 2007 at 01:02 PM
I am Deeply disgusted and aghast at these Comments by Jim Zumbo, I
personally do not own an AR based rifle, but I do own several AKM and SKS
based rifles most of which are excellent hunting rifles for Louisiana and
Mississippi woods or any other brushy areas. My main hunting Rifle (a Russian
SKS) has been proven to hold under 2 MOA Accuracy with great pointability for
deer and wild hogs. Are these also so called terrorist rifles and not to be used
for hunting? Are our forces overseas and here that are protecting our freedoms
with these Stoner based rifles, Terrorists?
I have Several Remington firearms all of which will NEVER be used again by
my hands, my Mossbergs and Browning work just as well if not better and the
companies have better intentions for all firearm enthusiasts and hunters even
though in some cases, are not even made in the USA.
Is hunting the only viable reason to have firearms? Are we to think that firearms
are for hunting only? Does Remington not have several models of firearms
designed to protect oneself from human beings in the most efficient manner?
The Marine Magnum, other tactical Shotguns and Remington 700 based rifles
come to mind (I guess I'll use my Browning for Elk hunts now).
Do you not think that the support of an Individual with views such as this pose a
threat yours and my 2nd amendment rights?
How can an outdoors or firearms company support the attitude of ANY firearm
having any sort of "ban" (using Zumbo's owns word) against it?
I have canceled my subscription to Outdoorlife magazine, removed all
Outdoorlife programs from my DVR recording list, removed the bolts from my
Remington firearms and Safed them in the back of my safe. Selling them would
support the company and something I am not prepared to do at this time.
Maybe when my Children inherit my Firearms, Remington, Outdoorlife and any
2/19/2007
Page 404 of 853
other "Supporters" and "Sponsors" of outdoorsman and firearms use will have
decided against FIGHTING our rights and begin fighting FOR our right and they
can then be proudly used again whether for Human protection or hunting.
Maybe a more likely case though, Remington and all other firearms
manufactures will be gone due to the loss of the civilian market due to "bans".
Or Social controls propagated by People like Jim Zumbo with the support of
Remington, Outdoorlife or Geber along with the like of Sarah Brady and Wiebe.
Will my kids even have the option of receiving those firearms or using them due
to Laws placed by people with ideas such as what this article state?
As for my lack of an AR based Platform, I will be remedying that issue this
week!
Thank you for your time, if you have any interest in keeping me as a customer
you will respond in some manner to distance your company away from this
divide and concur attitude.
Jesus, you are a hated man among guns. Why dont you take one of your non
terror guns and blow your head away. I hope Remington as well as OL drops
your butt.
Divided we fall.
Posted by: Gio | February 18, 2007 at 01:03 PM
Well it looks like I am going to have alot more time on my hands and save alot
of money.
Since I will not be reading the magazine anymore, or waste my time watching
any shows that Remington or Jim Dumbo is associated with I will save about 4
or 5 exta hours a week. And since I won't be buying Remington ammo, I can
better use my money buying winchester ammo and spending those extra 4 or 5
hours a week shooting Jim Dumbo targets with my AR getting ready for a
predator hunt. Zumbo you just made the biggest marketing boner in the history
of the outdoor world.
Posted by: Rus Gaylor | February 18, 2007 at 01:03 PM
Mr. Zumbo;
I am astonished by the magnitude and variety of outright anger (perhaps rage
would be a better, more concise descrptive) you have managed to excite
amongst the shooting community, to your detriment. To your magazine's
detriment. To your book publishers' detriment. To your magazine's advertisers'
detriment. Give me a little time and maybe I discover a few more detriments,
there's bound to be plenty more where these came from.
As far as I can tell, your name has just taken a prodigious dive in the respect of
2/19/2007
Page 405 of 853
the shooting comunity, and rightly so.
I am about to do something I once vehemently foreswore. I am going to
subscribe to a gun magazine; [i]Outdoor Life[/i], truth be told. I am doing so for
the sole purpose of acquainting myself with its advertisers, that I may extoll to
them your readily apparent virtues (NOT!!!).
I figure a missive per advertiser, once per issue, oh, say, for teh life of the
subscription, should get the concept across to them that when they paid to
advertise where your write, they just went and shot themselves squarely in the
foot. This one, I'll not let them forget so easily. In fact, I'll even remind
Remington specifically that you just dis'ed one of their very own products.
When you choose eyes to spit in, you sure aim high, don't you?
Cancel that subscription, hell no!
I want to see how many other Printclowns [i]OL[/i] employs. I figure if you
slipped through the net, there have to be a myriad more, milling around in the
editorial poopchute, just waiting to share wisdoms similar to yours with an
unsuspecting readership. Might as well chalk them up for the advertisers'
benefit as well. Oh, who knows; this could get to become a genuinely central
passtime to occupy my hopefuilly myriad retirement years, eh? I'm betting,
however, that I just might outlive [i]Outdoor Life[/i], long after your fiasco
becomes but a fond memory.
Thank you immensely for the opportunity to exercise my typing fingers yet
again. You are my idol (NOT!!!!).
Sincerely;
Greg Langelius
Dear Mr. Zumbo,
Dude! Have you lost your mind? I've seen some self destructive behavior in my
time, but this takes the cake. You've managed to alienate just about everyone
in the outdoor, shooting and hunting communities in one fell swoop. I wouldn't
exactly call you a coward. You must have brass balls the size of Mars in order
to submit this editorial. Not to mention the fact that you just became
Radioactive Man to any company that ever considered sponsoring you.
See the blinking light in front of you that just went out? That's you career, and
it's never coming on again!
Might as well sell all your guns and use the proceeds to buy a truckload of
cheap booze, cause those empty bottles are the only thing that's gonna listen
to you from this day on.
2/19/2007
Page 406 of 853
Sincerely,
Amazed in Oklahoma
P.S. Emails sent to all your sponsors, good luck Jackass!
Posted by: Glocktogo | February 18, 2007 at 01:03 PM
Well, my opinion of you just went to absolute zero. And it used to be pretty high.
:(
Perhaps you can find some way to salvage your reputation and dignity by
pulling your foot from your mouth.
Posted by: RMEF member | February 18, 2007 at 01:03 PM
I am so very dissapointed that you will ever be allowed to touch a firearm again
since your opinion here seems to be an attempt to cut the knees out from the
firearms industry. You should know anything we gun owners write will be
scrutinized and possibly used against us, first to take our semiautos and then
bolt actions and so on. I also must say that I'm dissapointed in outdoor life for
giving you a column. I wonder how they'll write a magazine about hunting and
fishing without hunting? If you are allowed to continue writing I hope that you
will choose your words better and not attack the very industry that supports
you. Oh by the way M16 pattern rifles have been used in the war AGAINST
terror if you'll notice and as a soldier I can't believe that you call it that as you
imply that I and my brothers and sisters in arms are terrorists.
Posted by: Al | February 18, 2007 at 01:04 PM
You just made a big mistake. Maybe the Brady bunch will take you on if you
need a job.
Posted by: AJG | February 18, 2007 at 01:05 PM
Jim,
I suggest you try out an AR-15 before writing any more of your ignorant drivel
about them. You might be surprised at their accuracy.
You have evidently become infected with a bad case of political correctness,
probably contracted from the nitwits at Outdoor Life, and their parent company
Time Warner.
Some people are "terrified" by the appearance of anyone with any gun. I fail to
see how validating their hoplophobia by banning the use of so called "assault
rifles" is of use to any thinking person.
Nitwit.
Posted by: Cleanhead | February 18, 2007 at 01:05 PM
2/19/2007
Page 407 of 853
This is a truly disgusting editorial from someone in the outdoors industry. With
guys like you around who needs Sarah Brady. Just wait for the day that they
want your high powered terrorist assasin Remington sniper rifle - why do you
need something more than a single shot 22 for anyway??? If your opinion
reflects that of Remington they just lost any future business from me.
Posted by: C. Stanfield | February 18, 2007 at 01:06 PM
Jim, I have several of your books & have always thought you were a good
writer & a smart, decent guy. Reading this crap that you wrote about "assault
rifles" just tells me you really are not a very bright guy.
You have fallen into the classic trap that several of my hunting friends have.
The good guns vs bad guns controversy that the liberal gun grabbers have
gotten the uninformed public to swallow. Then there you are, swallowing hook,
line, sinker & boat! While I choose to hunt w/ a bolt gun or single shot, I have no
problem w/ anyone using a semiauto. After all, a BAR in .308 is really no diff.
than a FN-FAL or AR-10. Put a 5rd mag. in it & go hunting.
You are not doing the sport or yourself any favors by falling for the stupid
antigun rhetoric. We stand together as gun owners/hunters or we all go the way
of Europe & much of the socialized world; no hunting or gun ownership except
for the rich & priviledged.
Posted by: fred | February 18, 2007 at 01:06 PM
Jim, your statement that "terrorist" rifles promote a "spray and pray" mindset is
no different than the silly claims anti-gun activists make implying that mere
possession of a firearm makes a paerson likely to snap and go on a killing
spree.
Shall I make a donation to Handgun Control Incorporated in your name?
Remember folks, this clown may or may not apologize, either way, he meant
what he said, keep hammering till he's fired, nothing less will do, he belongs in
the unemployment line for his comments, there is no place for cannibals when it
comes to our Bill Of Rights!
Hi Jim,
How is your day going?
Posted by: Steve Miller | February 18, 2007 at 01:06 PM
Personaly, I hunt with a lever action 22lr and 30/30, or a shotgun. I spent 20
years in the Air Force assigned to Civil Engineer units that required annual
qualification on the M-16 which is the full automatic big brother to the civilian
AR-15 Semi Automatic version, so I AM very familiar with the weapon in
2/19/2007
Page 408 of 853
question.
"Spray and pray" is not an accurate description of "assault guns" used for
sporting or hunting purposes. Full auto isn't allowed for hunting, and any sport
shooter knows that their accuracy suffers in full automatic mode. Those types
of shooters PRIDE themselves on target accuracy and/or humane kills.
"Terrorist weapons"?? Today's terrorists use any and everything available as a
weapon, box cutters, cell phones, aircraft, vehicles, fertilzer and diesel
fuel...etc.
It's a sad day when the terrorists win over a writer for the sportsmen of America
and he publicly calls for banning a firearm from use, so the terrorists have less
weapons to worry about stopping them.
My 30/30 was the 1800's equivilant to todays "assault gun".
Education, not fear, and not banning, is the key to solving problems.
Posted by: CJ | February 18, 2007 at 01:07 PM
Remington police / home defense shotguns (870, 1100) are "terrorist shotgun
weapons of mass destruction" that are only used by mass-murders to spray
death with dozens of unaimed bullets with every jerk of the trigger! No one
needs one of these mass destruction terrorist killing machines that are the
weapon of choice of drug-dealers and racists to hunt!
Remington's synthetic stocked black 700 series long-range sniper rifles are
capable of killing children at 100s of yards in the hands of terrorists! They are
capable of shooting down airplanes and blowing up limosines - they are the
mass-destruction tools of 'snipers' like those that murder wantonly in Kosovo
and Iraq! No one needs a precision death-dealing long-range sniper rifle in the
unneccessarily violent and murderous "magnum" claibers beloved of violent
psychopaths to hunt!
Ban them all. If it saves ONE CHILD then who cares about the animalslaughtering GUN NUTS and their culture of bloody violence they call "hunting."
The above is "satire". Wake up, Zumbo. Your wood-stocked, blue-steel
'politically-correct "hunting guns are just as 'evil' as an AR-15.
Posted by: Major Mike | February 18, 2007 at 01:07 PM
HAHAHAH!!!! Ain`t Amerika great? Yer getting yer sorry ASS kicked Jimbo
Dumbo!!!!
Posted by: Urablowhard | February 18, 2007 at 01:07 PM
Mr. Zumbo, I also found your comments disgusting and insulting. It is not your
place to dictate what hunters "need" or should use. While I certainly respect
your right to your opinion, but I will also exercise my right to not purchase
2/19/2007
Page 409 of 853
Outdoor Life magazine or the product of any company with which you are
affiliated.
Posted by: Kevin Collins | February 18, 2007 at 01:08 PM
While i do agree that the purpose of a semiauto rifle in hunting is questionabel,
youre likening them to terrorists is one of the most offensive things I have ever
heard. I challenge you to find one documented instance where an ar15 type
rifle was used by "terrorists". The 2nd amendment is having a hard enough time
without ignorat fools such as yourself spouting of mindless garbage such as
this. When the govenment bans ownership of these "terrorist" firearms the
banning of your precious bolt action "sporting" firearms is sure to follow closely.
Are you too obtuse to see this? My advise to you sir is to think before you
speak (or post). We dont need folks in shooting sports to help tighten the noose
aroung the 2nd amendment, we have enough opposition from without as it is.
Posted by: green | February 18, 2007 at 01:08 PM
[quote]I must be living in a vacuum.[/quote]
Apparently so.
You have stepped in it big time. I hang out in many forum boards that are
hunting and gun related. Your comments have created a firestorm on the net.
Why don't you move to Illinois? We are about to get an assault weapon ban
that sounds like it is right up your ally. Of course I'll have to turn in nearly all my
pistols due to magazine restrictions. My 870 Police will have to go also. Some
say my 1911 will have to go under the broad definition of magazine capacity.
The hunters here that are just like you helped put these clowns in office. Now
we are going to have the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. C'mon and join
us here in Illinois. You will fit right in.
Posted by: Ron T | February 18, 2007 at 01:09 PM
Remember Divide and Conquer,cuz next is "Assault Shotguns" then "Sniper"
Bolt actions. p.s. My AR shoots right with all my Remingtons.
Semi-auto "Assault Weapons" no Different from Many Hunting Guns
The primary fact is that a true "assault weapon" is a military firearm which can
be fired either "automatically" (many shots per trigger pull) or "semiautomatically" (one shot per trigger pull). In other words, a true assault weapon
is a machine gun which is already regulated by federal law.
The firearms that are covered by the so-called "assault weapons" laws are
semi-automatic handguns, rifles and shotguns. Some of these firearms are
made to look like a military-style weapon but are mechanically indistinguishable
from the traditional-looking deer rifle.
2/19/2007
Page 410 of 853
Mr Zumbo you are a disgrace to gun-owners everywhere and I will let your
sponsors know my objections.
Posted by: Jeffrey Finger | February 18, 2007 at 01:10 PM
Hey Zumbo, caught wind of your blog yet I never have heard of you and now I
know why....your an ignorant fool.
Remington..you should be ashamed to have your name next to this guys
words. Keep supporting individuals who make such ignorant generalizations
and statements like this and with no doubt you will lose a good number of
faithful shooters.
Posted by: Todd Hillhouse | February 18, 2007 at 01:10 PM
I just read Zumbo's comments and find them incredulous. I live in the country
and the owner's of the property adjacement to mine hunt. I would not be the
least concerned about the type of weapon they used to hunt with, only their
acumen, skill and regard for their safety and the safety of others around them.
Zumbo's comments reveal his ignorance regarding the characteristics of an
assault rifle versus the media's labeling of semi-auto weapons as assault
weapons. There are plenty of forums that he could join to educate himself.
Posted by: Jeffrey | February 18, 2007 at 01:10 PM
Jim,
My aren't we an elitist. I've been a cop for 16 years. I have enjoyed the shooting
sports since I was 6 years old. I have hunted a little mostly I punch paper and
plink. To play devils advocate here for a minute I would never dream of hunting
with one of those terrorist sniper rifles. You know what I am talking about don't
you, center fire , wood or synthetic stock, a smooth, light trigger and some sort
of optic from 1x to 20 x. Why I just don't understand why a hunter needs a rifle
that can kill at 1000 meters. Sarcasm off
What you fail to understand is one the 2nd amendment was never ever about
your or my rights to hunt it was about giving a citizen the right to own a suitable
defensive rifle. And two if the worst happens and an assault rifle ban is
reinstated, they are coming after your beautiful wood stock traditional firearms
next. We can stand together on this issue and realize guns are inanimate
objects that have no right or wrong about them. That it is the evil in men's
hearts and the degeneration of morals in this country the last 50 years,that
cause the crime and killing of our fellow man or we can all lose our rights piece
meal if the '08 elections go south all at once.
One other thing an AR-15, M-1a, DSA Fal, AR-10 or any of the other street
legal versions of military rifles out there are not Assault Rifles .They fire semi
automatically, that is one round for one pull of the trigger. The branding of
these weapons as "Assault Weapons and Rifles " was uncovered as part of a
2/19/2007
Page 411 of 853
marketing ploy the old handgun control organization I believe. It's been 12-15
years but I'll search around and try and post a copy of the internal memo on
this that got out.
Posted by: WGB | February 18, 2007 at 01:11 PM
Jim Z.,
You said:
" I also have no interest in using a combat-type gun in the woods."
What are you doing using a bolt action? Is your knowage of history so poor that
you forgot that from 1939-1945, the entire world was terrorized, by a few
nations that armed it's people with bolt action rifles?
Have you forgot, that there is no such thing as a rifle that has not been used for
combat ( including the single shot "trapdoor" Springfield ), and before that
muzzeloaders and before firearms - bows, and crossbows, and before that, the
spear.
You realy don't have the foggiest idea about what your what your talking about
do you?
Anytime you head out to shoot ( regardless of type of firearm ), you are using
something that has been developed and fine tuned, over the entire history of
combat, so saying that " I also have no interest in using a combat-type gun in
the woods ", is probably the highest form of hypocrisy, even that Rem 700,
action is used to make sniper rifles.
Wait a second - it just occured to me.
You like shooting bolt actions not to mention you recomend them as a firearm
that hunters should use, and the Nazies armed their army with bolt actions .....
coincidence?
Only if terrorist are the only ones to use semi-auto firearms.
Greg H.
Posted by: Greg H | February 18, 2007 at 01:11 PM
I also find the following quote interesting:
"Excuse me, maybe I'm a traditionalist..." & actually above is a photo of Mr.
Zumbo holding a stainless steel hunting rifle with synthetic stock, & scope.
What about using a standard site vs. a scope? Is that not the most traditional,
not using a scope.
2/19/2007
Page 412 of 853
Guess his modernized sniper rifle is approved. How is that traditional?
No Jim DUMBO you are not a traditionalist. You are the terrorist against our
uniformed personnel & the US company who produces the AR-15 with
associated variants.
Will be sure to send this to NRA who you also write for.
Posted by: bill | February 18, 2007 at 01:12 PM
Jim, Jim, Jim.
Every now and then in public life, someone writes or says something so
apparently thoughtless and staggeringly self-destructive we who read or hear it
are struck dumb with astonishment.
I'm reminded of the failure on Nixon's part to burn the recordings of his personal
conversations in the White House, John Kerry's pompous indictment of our
armed forces, and most recently John Edward's failure to dismiss anti-Christian
staff members until it was too late.
What these grand errors all share in common is supreme arrogance and selfabsorption, traits that enable a person to dismiss caution and act without
thought of consequence. What they also share in common is a clear point in
time that the public can point to and say "this was where he blew it."
Welcome to your moment, Jim.
On the upside, these self-destructive moments give us extremely rare insight
into what these people really think and believe.
There is no need on my part to reiterate the stunning inaccuracies of your
statements, or to detail the great and tangible harm you have done to our
Second Amendment Civil Right. Read the posts below mine. We expect this on
a daily basis from whining Statists and Biddys. But to have this come from "one
of us" is particularly hurtful and damaging.
Expect to see yourself quoted in Congress by the supporters of the next
"assault weapon" ban that comes down the pike. Smooth move, Jimbo.
Well, now I guess we'll work on damage control. First, you should know you are
no longer "one of us." I'm sure you'll be happy in your new digs next to the
Bradys and Schumers. And by the way, no parsing, apologies or retractions
can undo the damage you've done, because the forces that will use your
statements against us will not bother to print or mention them. I hope you enjoy
your new buddies. Don't expect to find them around a campfire sharing whiskey
in a tin cup and telling tall tales. They're not that kind of folks. And now, neither
are you.
2/19/2007
Page 413 of 853
Second, we'll avoid sending money to organizations, businesses (e.g.,
Remington) and publications (e.g. Outdoor Life) that support and/or employ
you. We don't enjoy doing this Jim, but you've left us no choice.
Again, welcome to your moment, Jim. I'm not sure how important the shooting
sports are in your life any more, but don't expect too many cheery "how you
doing"s at your next trip to the range.
You are now one of "them."
I'm Mr. Pink and I approve this message.
Posted by: Clifford Elsmann | February 18, 2007 at 01:12 PM
i bought my AR15 so i could have a higher level of competance with the
weapon i am issued to take into comabt in iraq. before i deployed we got to
shoot 50 rounds through our issue rifles to be deemed "proficeint." i wanted to
be better than average before i went to war. how could you call me a terrorist
for owning the same weapon i am issued by our government to defend your
rights? i dont hunt, do you think i should not be allowed to own a gun at all
then? i cant beleive you said this offensive stuff to me.
Posted by: samuel | February 18, 2007 at 01:12 PM
Thanks Jim! I was going to have to make the decision to recommend Kawasaki
or Polaris utility vehicles for our company, but you made the choice for me.
And trust that I will make sure Polaris knows why they were not picked.
This is simply appalling.
I don't hunt, I haven't in years. But I would never, ever consider throwing my
hunting brothers and sisters under the bus for mere temporary political gain.
We're all in this together, whether Zumbo likes it or not.
After all, I, the evil black terrorist rifle owner, only shoot paper. Zumbo shoots
poor defenseless cute little wabbits and squirrels and such. Who's got the PR
problem now, buddy?
Posted by: Peter | February 18, 2007 at 01:12 PM
I suggest you re-read the Bill of Rights.
The Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting.
Who is Jim Dumbo, anyway? Does his opinion count for anything?
2/19/2007
Page 414 of 853
Posted by: AndyC | February 18, 2007 at 01:13 PM
Sir, you have apparently stepped into shit when you assume that a blatant antigun propaganda such as your recent article would be well received. I see so
many mistaken Democrats beleiving we voted them in because they deserved
it and I see so many Republicans thinking they got beat because they weren't
as conservative as we would like but the truth is; we voted them out because
they were pissing on the Constitution and the Democrats will be next. There is
a resurgance of people in our nation that have come to realize that the
Constitution is our government's employment contract and not a gift from the
government to us.You have elected to join the enemy and may consider
yourself destroyed because you will never again have the ability to influence
the freedom loving people of this great nation.
Posted by: Darrell Wallace | February 18, 2007 at 01:13 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
I can not believe the drivel you published. An AR-15 is a terrorist weapon? You
have never seen anyone using one? You must live in a vaccum. First it is the
evil black rifle, then it will be our scoped deer rifle's because "snipers" use
them.
Embrace the 2nd amendment, don't hurt other shooting enthusiasts by
undermining it.
I will notify remington my displeasure also.
Posted by: Justice 23 | February 18, 2007 at 01:13 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
As someone who has enjoyed your articles in the past, I cannot express how
greatly disappointed I am in your position expressed in this article. As
gunowners, we expect attacks on our 2nd ammendment rights from outside our
community, but attacks from within are intolerable. Shame on you!
Posted by: Robert Brandkamp | February 18, 2007 at 01:13 PM
Here's a few pointers when searching for a new job on Monster.com, you
jackass.
Try keywords, like "moron," "pariah," and "traitor."
Look for positions that require little or no common sense. Maybe "intelligence is
optional."
I'm sure that the DNC is hiring. Maybe Pelosi needs a gimp.
Posted by: AUAlum2000 | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 PM
You assholes can all suck my dick!
Hillary 08
2/19/2007
Page 415 of 853
Posted by: ZumboJ | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 PM
Mr Zumbo
It is with great regret that you have been percieved by me and my peers as
providing a set back for the protection of the Constitution of the United States of
America, specifically the second amendment.
In light of your attemt to catagorize honest Americans as terrorist, we will still
defend your right to free speach. We would just hope that you use it a bit more
wisely in the future.
Posted by: USAF FIRST SERGEANT | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
As someone who has enjoyed your articles in the past, I cannot express how
greatly disappointed I am in your position expressed in this article. As
gunowners, we expect attacks on our 2nd ammendment rights from outside our
community, but attacks from within are intolerable. Shame on you!
Posted by: Robert Brandkamp | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 PM
Jim,
I find it disgusting that you're willing to sell out certain firearms simply because
of your ignorance. What YOU fail to realize is once you've compromised a
group of "military-type" firearms, you basically support confiscation of ALL
firearms in the near future. With "sportsman friends" like you, who the Hell
needs enemies?
Perhaps you need to review the Bill of Rights again, or quit your job and join
the radical anti-gun advocates.
Posted by: David | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 PM
I own many variants of AK 47 rifles and several bolt action C&R military rifles
and several bolt action "hunting rifles". I've never concidered myself a terrorist
either. In fact I'm a patriotic American. In my view a weapon is a weapon, crime
is crime, and death is death, it matters not how crime is accomplished. Your
bolt action Remington is just as lethal as my AK. How dare you put yourself
above me!
Posted by: Scott murphy | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 PM
Our gun rights won't disappear all at once, but a little at a time: Those are too
big, that one's too small, those are too ugly, that one's too cheap, etc. Take
away the "evil black rifles" fight, because we lose due to gun owners like you,
and in the next fight, your boltie looks a lot like a "high powered sniper rifle" with
almost double the power of the M16! (gasp!) or some other such rot.
Take the Mini-14. Mr. Ruger supported the original assault weapons ban. That
2/19/2007
Page 416 of 853
ban didn't affect his "sporting" semi-auto. However, many of the newer assault
weapons bans now name the Mini-14 by name. Bummer for Ruger. Their rifles
got banned later anyway. Why not hang together and try to fight these things...
keeping all our guns safe. As a gun writer once said, "whatever we hunt with,
and however far we elect to shoot, we indeed are in the same fraternity. We
need to keep sight of the objective"
Posted by: AughtSix | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 PM
Dear Mr. Zumbo, just a short note to tell you thanks for your recent comments
in your blog. You are absolutely correct. These right wing, red neck, inbred,
Billy Bob, down home, fundamentalist, southern, country types have no
business with these evil assault weapons. These are strickly tools for killing and
the unwashed masses should be kept as far from them as possible. My fellow
concerned patriots, Ted "Big Boy" Kennedy, Nancy "San Fran Nan" Pelosi,
Barbara "Punch Drunk" Boxer, The Democratic National Committee and all the
Islamo Facist terroist also wish to thank you for this great job you are doing.
The world will not be safe for socialism until all the guns are removed from the
masses' hands. This is a great thing you are doing.
Signed: Charlie "Up Chuck" Schumer
Posted by: The Honorable Charles Schumer | February 18, 2007 at 01:14 PM
I took two deer consecutively, one shot for each, with a evil black furniture AR
15 carbine this last season. By your terms and definitions Zumbo, I was
unethical, a terrorist, and generally ignorant deer hunter.
People like you do a disservice to all gun owners and hunters alike since you
love to split us all into little specialized groups. Just as the anti hunters do and
those that say they have our best interests in hand; VPC,the Brady's, Fienstein,
Hillery, Teddy, Schumer,Edwards, Boxer, Pelosi, and the list goes on.
Remington, Outdoors Life, and the others you get monies from should drop you
immediately before your bigotted writting does anymore harm to them. You sir, I
believe have done your self irreparable damage to your career.
Posted by: E Anderson | February 18, 2007 at 01:15 PM
Remember that in addition to posting here, spread the word among gun-owners
and sportsmen that this guy is on the Anti's side.
Everyone, use the links provided to explain your thoughts and refusal to do
business with anyone who would sell out the community.
Zumbo, feel free to retire and move to someplace safe in Europe, like France,
and keep your ignorance out of the Land of the Free.
SPREAD THE WORD ON ZUMBO---"ANTI GUN".
2/19/2007
Page 417 of 853
Posted by: Lance in texas | February 18, 2007 at 01:17 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
You have done the magazine and your reputation a huge disservice.
You should realize that Trophy-Sport Hunting is not guaranteed by the second
amendment(or ANY amendment)but legal firearms ownership is!
I hunt deer with a 10 shot, 10mm semiautomatic pistol. Is this a terrorist's
weapon?
To the editor of OL, please cancel my subscription and vett your writers a little
better next time, ok?
Posted by: Anthony Lombardo | February 18, 2007 at 01:17 PM
You should have your guns taken away, you are too damn stupid to own a gun.
(any gun)
Posted by: Rabon | February 18, 2007 at 01:17 PM
You sir are a disgrace to the 2nd amendment....
Posted by: Moose | February 18, 2007 at 01:17 PM
Andy brings up an interesting subject, no matter how inaccurate he articulated
it.
[Sadly you are VERY mis-informed in semi vs auto, and the "violence and
murder caused by assault rifles". Please enlighten the rest of us with some
facts - please show where we are wrong.]
In the mean time, let's be QUITE clear about this once and for all. The
Constitution, and in this specific case, the 2nd amendment, was drafted and
ratified by representatives of the people - FOR THE PEOPLE, and who trusted
those people alot MORE then they trusted the military, and alot more then they
trusted those would-be tryants in control of that power who would ill-use it. The
right to keep and bear arms will NEVER be out-dated, because the need for
arms by THE PEOPLE will never go away...there will always be someone who
would otherwise try to impose their will on the rest of us.
Posted by: shield20 | February 18, 2007 at 01:18 PM
Mr. Zumbo. You remind me a lot of Chuck Schumer. He says that he supports
the Second Amendment. However, he also thinks, like you apparently, that the
Second Amendment does not apply to the individual, but the collective people,
and in that regard, only to the militia.
You think that no one has a "need" for an "assault rifle." Well, no one has a
"need" to go hunting. We have plenty of grocery stores to provide you with
meat, and animal overpopulation can be taken care of by governmental
agencies. If the Second Amendment truly was about a "need", then the ATF
would be at your door tonight to confiscate all of your non-terrorist hunting
2/19/2007
Page 418 of 853
guns, because you have no "need" to own them.
The Second Amendment is about our individual rights to keep and bear arms
for defense of self, our property and our country. The Second Amendment does
not tell me that I can own an AR-15, it tells the Government to not infringe my
rights.
You have shown your true colors. Hopefully you will reconsider your beliefs on
gun ownership and get a better understanding of the Second Amendment. You
can hunt because the Second Amendment is there, but the Second
Amendment is not there for hunting.
Posted by: Joe K. | February 18, 2007 at 01:18 PM
I stopped subscribing to OL many years ago, as I felt they were becoming far
too liberal in their content. Their willingness to placate the growing spectre of
political correctnes, (fascism), before it was even fashionable sat entirely wrong
with me. It appears my gut instinct has proven correct. I am thoroghly
disappointed in OL, Jim Zumbo, and Remington Arms.
Posted by: Hoggryder | February 18, 2007 at 01:18 PM
Well, not that your opinion counts for a hill of beans, but the AR-15 platform
makes an excellent varmint gun. one does not need to manually operate a bolt
in order to be a 'true' hunter, only to be a true FUDD.
Your readers should check out the civilian marksmanship program before
deciding for themselves if AR 15 owners are to be called terrorists as you
suggest.
Posted by: Matt b | February 18, 2007 at 01:18 PM
Zumbo,
If you really don't have an idea of how popular the AR platform is in hunting and
target shooting, then you are no more a sportsman than a hunter. You are one
of the many people in our society that should not be allowed to own a firearm
because you don't have the mental capacity to understand that a firearm is an
inanimate object and it's the brain behind the finger that controls it. I'll bet you
don't believe we should ban Hummers or Ferraris because they look different
when they don't do the job any better than a Jeep or a Cavalier. It's about
FREEDOM and resposibility. Freedom to choose and taking responsibility for
your actions.
Mr Zumbo,
The AR platform is a rifle that many of us are intimately familiar with due to our
service to this country. It's quite apparent by your article that you feel US
service personnel and citizen AR owners are no better than terrorist.
2/19/2007
Page 419 of 853
You, Sir, are a pompous ass who deserves none of the freedoms, including the
freedom to write you ignorant drivel, for which the American service man and
woman has fought and died.
Posted by: Brent Smith | February 18, 2007 at 01:18 PM
Hillary DOES have a dick!! I always knew...
--AUAlum
Posted by: AUAlum2000 | February 18, 2007 at 01:19 PM
Sorry Jim, I simply cannot agree, you see, I'm a heterosexual.
Posted by: Max | February 18, 2007 at 01:20 PM
You sir are a fool, and so is anyone who agrees with you. One poster said it
best; "Divided We Fall". After they have banned my AR15, who's rifles do you
think they will be after next? Are you seriously naive enough to think that after
they have outlawed so called Assault Rifles they will stop there? Believe it as if
chiseled in stone that they will come for your "Hunting Rifles" next.
It amazes me that you don't seem to have any more insight into this problem
than it appears you do.
Posted by: Jim G | February 18, 2007 at 01:20 PM
I recently acquired a Colt AR-15 Sporter II. I haven't fired a carbine of this type
since Vietnam. I had forgotten how modular and adaptable the rifle is. The .233
Remington has long been one of my favorite rounds for my Contender. The AR15 is a pleasure to shoot!
My days of hunting ended when my last Springer died; but, my interest in
competitive shooting has increased over the years.
The AR-15 and it's derivative civilian and military products have served
sportsmen, law enforcement officers, combat infantrymen and our country well
for almost 50 years.
It is difficult to believe that any professional gun journalist could write an article
such as this and not expect his credentials to be called into question.
I expect his opinions will heretofore be discounted by many.
Posted by: Boris | February 18, 2007 at 01:21 PM
JimI was nearly speechless after reading your blog-I was sure that what I was
reading couldn`t have come from you.
For starters, an AR is not an assault rifle, as it`s merely a semi-automatic rifle
2/19/2007
Page 420 of 853
that “looks” like it`s military cousin-and the perpetuation of that misnomer only
adds to the attacks we take as gun owners.
Past that though, you`re doing the exact same thing that the anti`s do-you`re
deciding that AR owners, law-abiding American citizens, are not to be trusted
with a semi-auto .223, (5.56 mm), caliber rifle-which by the way, is the same
cartridge and action that many varmint hunters use in more traditional “looking”
weapons.
You`ve in effect, attacked the Second Amendment Jim, as the Second
Amendment has ZERO to do with hunting-it`s ALL about a law-abiding citizen`s
right to defend himself and his family. But you appear to have the ol` “heck-we
don`t need no assault rifle to kill deer with anyway” mentality. Thinking such as
this, beyond playing into the hands of the anti`s, only confuses the non-gun
owning public even further-and the liberal news media has already gone a
stellar job of that.
You`ve really screwed the pooch with the comments about banning the AR`sand you`ve insulted everyone of us who own one, as you`ve branded us
criminals by default.
I won`t go so far as to say that I`ll cancel my Outdoor Life subscription, or never
read another article of yours, but, you`ve certainly lost much of my respect, and
you`ve damaged the loyal following you once had.
To the Patriots out thereJOIN NRA
Posted by: Greg Russell | February 18, 2007 at 01:21 PM
This seems to be a trend with firearms ownership in America, although this is
Jim's opinion it divides the gun community, some think we should only be
allowed to own shotguns, some think pistols, some think bows and
arrows......the reality is, WE THE PEOPLE, LAW ABIDING, TAX PAYING,
should be able to own any gun we wish!!!! Period! We should be able to HUNT
with any type firearm WE WISH PERIOD, end of story, instead, we have law
makers of every state and government telling us and passing laws which are
suppose to be to protect ourselves from ourselves.........lets be real, we are not
dumbed down people who need saving ..............what we need to do is BAN
together get everyone on the same page and stop these legislators from
passing laws that prevent us from BEING AMERICAN.
Posted by: Dean | February 18, 2007 at 01:21 PM
"Assault" rifle? I can assault you with a baseball bat, should we call the
aluminum ones that are painted black "assault bats"? Sheesh. A rifle is a
TOOL, it matters not if it is black and holds 30 rounds, it is STILL just a rifle.
2/19/2007
Page 421 of 853
You are potentially more dangerous with a 7mm, 30.06 or .308 scoped rifle
(with a lovley wood stock) at 800 yards, than with an AR in .223 at 400, I mean,
come on! Calling a rifle an "assault" rifle is totally giving in to the bliss-ninnies
who are only starting the demonization with these rifles, they will eventually get
around to your "hunting" rifles, make no mistake. Your piece leaves me
doubting your dedication to firearms ownership in general, which makes
everything else you say suspect. Sorry.
Posted by: Tom | February 18, 2007 at 01:21 PM
Jim, I must say those comments are irrational. Did you actually think about
what you said before you said it? Did you relize the people who support would
be outraged? Give and inch and a foot will be taken soon after. I thought you
were on our side? I am very disappointed and will not support ANYTHING you
are associated with.
Posted by: Won't be supporting you anymore! | February 18, 2007 at 01:22 PM
You should be ashamed of yourself, I hope outdoor life and the outdoor
channel drop you. And if remington cant control their shills any better than this,
I will not buy anymore of thier products. Including the pump action rifle that
takes "TERRORIST RIFLE" magazines.
Posted by: Peace Maker | February 18, 2007 at 01:22 PM
I am dumbfounded ... no, I am crushed that
someone that has worked their entire life
to support and promote outdoor sports and
values can make a statement such as this.
I am emailing every sponsor on that list.
I want you to realize that we, the people
do have the power to protect our rights.
I most sincerely hope you have planned
for your retirement, cause I have no use
or tolerance for the invective that has
spewed from your keyboard.
You may want to consider employment from the
other side of this issue. Obviously that is
where you belong.
Posted by: Joe C. | February 18, 2007 at 01:23 PM
You know Jim you should have plenty of money to buy food. Why do you have
to kill all those poor animals? self defense?? Did you even eat any of the bear
you shot or was it just for "sport"? What gives you the right to have any kind of
weapon that may kill man or God's creatures? Your pickup truck could easily
2/19/2007
Page 422 of 853
become a terrorist weapon. I wish all cars and trucks were banned to protect
America's image. People like you deserve to live in a third world dictatorship to
see what freedom is all about. Do you want freedom for Jim Zumbo to do as he
pleases or the entire United States of America? FOAD.
Timothy Buzalski, Life member of the National Rifle Association.
Posted by: akethan | February 18, 2007 at 01:23 PM
Within the next couple years I plan on purchasing an over-under shotgun for
hunting and a bolt-action rifle for long range shooting. Until now, I had planned
on them being Remington. I 've owned at one time or another over two dozen
Remington rifles and shotguns in my life. Whilst this obnoxious elitest is part of
the Remington "family", I'll purchase no more Remington products, and unless
he is separated from Remington in the very near future, and Remington publicly
disavows itself from his wretched views, I'll never buy another Remington
product ever again. You have my word on that as a promise and a soleum vow
on all I hold of value or holy.
Posted by: H Mauck | February 18, 2007 at 01:24 PM
Well, well. Another NRA statist fraud. Surprise, surprise. Don't like my choice of
weaponry? Don't want me to use my AR for coyotes? Would you have me
choosing your weaponry?
I have an AR with floating heavy barrel with 1/7 twist. This is a minute of angle
gun at any distance I would be using it for coyotes. What's your problem?
Pathetic. The Second Amendment is utterly lost on you.
Mike Kemp
Posted by: Mike Kemp | February 18, 2007 at 01:24 PM
I find your comments disgusting and disturbing.
Devide and conquer. And you let yourself be a part of this idiotic anti-gun
position for what reason? Stupidity? Total ignorance on your part of what the
gun grabbers are trying to do in our country? Lost your mind?
Your hubris makes me sick. As a subscriber for many years, you have insulted
me with no regard to my 2d amendment rights.
I shoot many kinds of firearms. Most of them are blue and wood, but my most
recent purchase was a Bushmaster AR15. I love it. It's accurate and tough.
Have you ever heard about self defense? Do you care if you cause me to lose
the best tool available for the welfare of my family and myself.
I pity the youngsters who read your drivel and think you have a good
perspective on shooting. You are an enemy to all that I hold dear. I hope your
corrupt comments become the legacy of your soon to be completed career.
2/19/2007
Page 423 of 853
You are a fool.
Posted by: Bill D' | February 18, 2007 at 01:25 PM
It makes me sick to my stomach that someone who claims to be such a
firearms/outdoors enthusiast can be so ignorant. Mr. Zumbo should be
spreading disinformation at the VPC, HCI, or Brady website blogs.
Many of these "terrorist" rifles will print better groupings than his "sporting" rifles
with "quality wood stocks." Like many people have previously stated, these
"terrorist" rifles are functionally no different than many "sporting" semiautomatic firearms such as the Remington 7400 or Browning BAR.
Additionally, Zumbo has clearly never seen how effective the 5.56 / .223 round
can be on medium sized game.
Zumbo's ignorance and arrogance is plain disgusting.
Posted by: Tyrone | February 18, 2007 at 01:25 PM
Mr Zumbo i really think you are just a commentator not a writer in anyway. as a
writer would have done his homework on this one. as such in my eyes your no
better than Rosie or any other anti gun nut.
just because you own one doesn't tell the whole truth. as we can see your off
the deep end now looking for a life jacket. come twoards my side of the pool
and i will toss you a brick or maybe better yet one of your 10+ pound hunting
rifles. maybe that would help ya!
Posted by: Darin | February 18, 2007 at 01:25 PM
Well for any writers and potential writers let this be a lesson for you to
remember.
This moron has not only put his foot in his mouth but has made a complete ass
of himself.
I hope he had a good retirement plan and uses it.
The biggest shame is that I really enjoyed Outdoor life but as how they Ok'd
this article for publishing they must agree with it so it behooves me to cancel
my subcription and not do bussiness with anything he is associated with.
Until he is gone from the shooting scene any Rem. products and any others
that support him.
He needs to go to an assisted living facility.
www.gripsnstocks.com Hand crafted AKM stock sets.
Posted by: Scott Murphy | February 18, 2007 at 01:25 PM
Mr. Zumbo I would like to SIHPAPP.
2/19/2007
Page 424 of 853
That is all.
Posted by: Miter Benisderty | February 18, 2007 at 01:25 PM
Mr. Zumbo seems to want to use the word "terrorist" as an excuse to take away
our freedom to hunt with certain types of rifles.
The terrorists would be delighted.
I am not a subscriber to Outdoor Life, I guess I know why now. I am a lifelong
owner and user of Remington rifles, shotguns, ammo, accesories and even
clothes. Until I hear from Remington that they are no longer associated with Mr.
Zumbo I will no longer purchase Remington products.
Posted by: TJ | February 18, 2007 at 01:26 PM
Your comments make me sick...It is folks like you that add wood to the fire of
"Anti-gun" nuts all over this country. All gun owners must stick together to stop
the "Gun Grabbers" or we "ALL" will suffer.
An "AR" is not my choice for hunting, but I sure would not "put down" anyone
that chooses to use one for hunting.
We have plenty of "Game Laws" to cover this as to bullet weight, magazine
capacity etc.
You had better re-think your comments.
Also, that is sure nice looking WOOD on that rifle you are holding in that picture
of you.
Posted by: Jim H | February 18, 2007 at 01:26 PM
I have to respectfully submit that if you`re going to judge a firearm on it`s looks
rather than utility you are no better than any of the gunbanners and their
organizations that seek to ban those types of guns. The right to keep and bear
arms is not based on a right to hunt, although I see hunting as a right. It is
based on the right to self defense, defense of self, neighbors and country.
Varmint hunting is great practice and it should be encouraged.
The worse enemies we have in the fight to keep our rights are those among us
who would divide us and weaken us. It seems Zumbo has signed up on the
wrong side on this one.
Dan
Posted by: Dan in Naperville | February 18, 2007 at 01:27 PM
Mr Zumbos elitist attitude is only exceeded by his ignorance of the
sport/industry he supposedly represents .
If this magazine and it's sponsors do not take some kind of action against this
author . It can only mean that they support Mr Zumbos views . I guess time will
2/19/2007
Page 425 of 853
tell where they stand .
While I might not have a say in their final decision . I do have the ability to
express my displeasure by choosing where I spend my hard earned dollars !
Posted by: Not A Terrorist | February 18, 2007 at 01:27 PM
Sir, I'm apalled. Your position isn't merely ignorant, it's hypocritical. At the top of
your masthead on your blog, there is a picture of you with a rifle that is derived
from the Mauser Military Rifle and which for the most part is mechanically
identical to it. Around the turn of the last century, that was the Assault Rifle of
it's time.
The rifles that people use, change as does technology. People use AR-15s and
AKs and SKS carbines, because they're available, work well, and do what they
want them to do, for a price that they can afford. That includes hunters. The fact
that those rifles started out as military weapons in no way makes them any less
acceptable for civilian use than the Mauser ancestry of your rifle does.
In short, you're hoping to sell your fellow gun owners down the road to protect
your old assasult rifle from political actions directed against the new ones.
That's suicidal, especially since outfits like the Violence Policy Center classify
that Mauser derived rifle of yours as a "Sniper's Weapon". And they're trying to
ban those too.
The bottom line here is that unless you're willing to either go back to hunting
with a matchlock, or give up guns and hunting entirely, you either support
everybody's right to own their rifles of choice and hunt with them, or you allow
the other side to destroy us in detail. There's no middle ground on this and
anybody who thinks that there is, quite frankly, is delusional.
Hopefully you'll see the light before the gungrabbers can turn them all out.
Posted by: Michael Shirley | February 18, 2007 at 01:27 PM
The only thing that makes a rifle a terrorist rifle is the man behind it.
As a hunter you should understand that a $3000 rifle does not make a hunter,
and a true hunter can take game with an old hand me down rifle. In the same
way an AR-15 does not make a terrorist, and terrorist can and will use anything
as a weapon, e.g. boxcutters.
I vote we ban terrorist boxcutters before the terrorist rifle.
Posted by: J Chambers | February 18, 2007 at 01:28 PM
Right on jumbo ,you tell it like it is,but i see many a guntotin folk are upset at
you for taking away there rights which you havent yet.the folks dont relize its
not a right to hunt its a privledge yes down there you can own what ya want for
a fire arm up here no to any assault type weapons at all ,they are banned from
2/19/2007
Page 426 of 853
owning them so count your chickens guys and gals you still have them but
keep them on the range ,hell up here we are only alowed magazines with 5
shots tho you only need one now dont ya?
with being outnumbered and surrounded by bunny huggers one would want to
keep the peace so as you dont loose the ability to own such guns and the
bunny huggers are waiting every chance they get to make us hunters look bad
for the vote to take things away from us the law abidin huntin folk.. my thoughts
from up in cold country canada
Posted by: Canuck | February 18, 2007 at 01:28 PM
Hrmm. Seems everyone else has said pretty much anything I'd say.
How's it feel, Jim, finding out you're one of the bad guys?
A pox on you and the editors that allowed this drivel to be published.
Posted by: M.Free | February 18, 2007 at 01:28 PM
Dear Mr Zumbo,
Looks like you just took a giant dump on your own career. I am ending my
subscription to outdoor life magazine, and will tell everyone else i know to do
the same. At the same time i will be contacting remmington arms and let them
know that such a fine company has no need for someone of your mentality in
their ranks. Your comments as a whole were unamerican and anticonstitutional. I take great offense sir to being likened to terrorits when in fact
im a harworking American. I take even greater offense to someone so deeply
inside the shooting/hunting community that basically spits on the second
amendment. Ever hear of thinking before you speak? You should try it....
Posted by: non-combatant | February 18, 2007 at 01:28 PM
Jeez Jim,
Why don't you get out of your fat cushioned chair and shed yourself from living
high off corporate dole and pay attention to whats been current for the last 15
years? Your so deep into receiving freebies and responding in kind to the hand
that feeds you that you have lost sight of Constitutional reality. What's
comfortable for you is not in our country's best interest. You have penned
yourself into obsolesence.
Posted by: Chet Montana | February 18, 2007 at 01:28 PM
I own several rifles as well as shotguns. I hunt with a variety of rifles. From C&R
collectibles to an AR10 that I bought specifically to hunt deer with. In the years
that I have hunted with the AR I have successfully, and ethically harvested
several deer. I have also hunted with a mini 14 and Ar 15!
Plus I know of several close friends that use sks to hunt with. Myself have taken
my Russian sks into the woods.
2/19/2007
Page 427 of 853
I have also duck hunted with a hand me down former Military shotgun
Remington Model 11!
Mr Dumbo, I can not support you or the sponsors that are involved with you for
your closed minded attitude.
Posted by: Paul Elduce | February 18, 2007 at 01:29 PM
Carlos
Thanks for the note!
Rest assured that remington not only does not support jim's view, we totally
disagree! Ii have no explaination for his perspective.
I proudly own ar's and support everyones right to do so!
What makes me sick is how quickly people on the internet have called to
boycott remington. All Jim said was he was hunting with our people! This is
normal course in our industry. How else do peoplle think we field test with with
writers?
Remington has spent tens of millions of dollars to defend your rights and how
quickly the thanks is threat and boycott! Please feel Free to post that remington
does not agree with Zumbo in any way shape or form and we will assess our
relationship with him accordingly.
Tommy Millner
CEO and President
Dont look good for ya Jimmy boy .....
I own several rifles as well as shotguns. I hunt with a variety of rifles. From C&R
collectibles to an AR10 that I bought specifically to hunt deer with. In the years
that I have hunted with the AR I have successfully, and ethically harvested
several deer. I have also hunted with a mini 14 and Ar 15!
Plus I know of several close friends that use sks to hunt with. Myself have taken
my Russian sks into the woods.
I have also duck hunted with a hand me down former Military shotgun
Remington Model 11!
Mr Dumbo, I can not support you or the sponsors that are involved with you for
your closed minded attitude.
Posted by: Paul Elduce | February 18, 2007 at 01:30 PM
While compiling this article you must have been thinking to yourself 'this will be
the last piece I ever have published'. What a sour note to retire on! But not to
2/19/2007
Page 428 of 853
worry, at your age I doubt you'll live to see the extent of the damage you have
caused our country. After all, the 2nd Amendment is just another bonus your
generation will take to your graves along with Social Security and lifetime
careers with retirement benefits from a single employer. When your
grandchildren publicly distance themselves from your position may you look on
from your grave and wish you had made better choices.
Posted by: Craig P. Jenkins | February 18, 2007 at 01:30 PM
Whew!! Man what a read!! What happened to the Outdoor Life magazine I
cherished as a kid? We traded issues, and wore them into dog eared
nothingness in the school library...I read and REREAD every single article and
advertisement cover to cover!
Who let that fascist, commie bastard write for Outdoor Life is what I want to
know. He is a disgrace to the entire meaning of the 2nd Amendment and a
living testament to the abuse of the First.
I bet he's even a democrat...sheesh...I bet he'll vote for hillary if she's
nominated.
The only thing that needs 'banned' is that kind of subversive, similiterate, anti
American FILTH from the pages of Outdoor life.
Posted by: Jeff Emler | February 18, 2007 at 01:30 PM
Wow, seems like an odd way to make the end of one's career memorable...
Do you have no concern for the futures of all the (otherwise) fine companies
that you represent and who pay your salaries? From this point forward, any
company that I do not see shun you publicly, will be shunned by me - I don't
care how great their products are or how much I need/want one. There's
always an alternative, as you will soon, hopefully, learn.
Posted by: just one of many | February 18, 2007 at 01:31 PM
Email addresses for his sponsores. Thanks to a post on AR-15 board.
IF I FALL WITH MY RIFLE IN MY HANDS, AND I CANNOT PREFORM MY
DUTY, SOMEONE WILL PICK UP MY RIFLE, AND CARRY ON, KNOWING
2/19/2007
Page 429 of 853
THAT I SERVED MY COUNTRY... author/me
Good lord what an ignorant article. The public is made of up panicky,
uninformed sheep who see something they don't know anything about, and
they freak. Maybe more prevalent firearms familiarization programs are the
answer rather than gun bans. People spaz over firearms that look like assault
rifles because they don't understand them. I'm sure most people think ARs are
all full-auto machine guns too. It's called ignorance. Thanks for demonstrating
yours, Jim.
I just read the article by Jim Zumbo have never read such a disgusting article
by an outdoors writer in my life. You sir are in the wrong profession. I would like
to ask, what does guns and hunters have to do with owning any kind of firearm
anyway. People that equate gun ownership with only hunting has already gave
in the the gun control crowd.
Sir:
I live in NE Wyoming and get out a lot. For starters I would question your
assertion that there are a lot of "assault rifles" in the field. My observations,
while not 100% conclusive, would be quite the reverse. Frankly, I would also
question categorical statements by "guides". Everybody and his cousin around
here is an expert "guide" during hunting season. Their real prey is the wideeyed hunter from the concrete jungle who gets fleeced by the landowners, the
guides, and the local businesses. They also manage to tie up all the private
land from locals who do not ingratiate themselves with the local gentry. Why let
average people hunt when you can soak someone $2500 to shoot a mule deer-which, by the way, are just about over-running the place. I could shoot one a
day with a pistol with no real work involved.
Maybe that's why guides are frequently referred to as "game pimps" around
here.
As to ARs I do own one and shoot it frequently. I used them in the military, in
law enforcement, and now in retirement. I have the right to do so and can make
an excellent case for owning one. I have no interest in anything shotgun but I
do not feel the need to dump on those who enjoy them.
Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn what some gun writer from another
galaxy thinks.
Posted by: Thomas Casey | February 18, 2007 at 01:32 PM
It is time to retire you senile, overrated, under-educated,ignorant wretch. To call
2/19/2007
Page 430 of 853
an AR a terrorist weapon is the most ignorant comment I have ever read in a
magazine! You are a complete idiot.
Posted by: John Winkler | February 18, 2007 at 01:32 PM
Mr. Zumbo clearly is living in a vacum, and Remington Corporate Officers
should be far more aware of what their official spokesman is saying. Remington
recently was in the process of branding their own style of AR-15 type rifle, and
were it not for some internal bickering with the actual producer of those rifles
Remington would be marketing and enjoying the huge profits of selling these
rifles instead of Smith & Wesson who came in and picked up the deal.
Remingtons financial performance reports indicate key issues of market
imbalances, perhaps Remington would have been better served by selling all
those AR-15 style rifles that Smith & Wesson has been with such great success
recently and that Remington had first dibs on the deal with, then by continuing
to officially and publicly support such cancerous black marks like Mr. Zumbo
who are making serious problems for Remington every time he opens his
mouth.
Posted by: Tom H. | February 18, 2007 at 01:33 PM
Your comments are reprehensible to the firearms and outdoor sports
community. Your kind will lead to the demise of our great shooting sports in
America. Your views are elitist and wholly unjustified. I was surfing this site to
see if I wanted to subscribe to this publication. I will refrain on subscribing until
your column is removed.
Posted by: Rick | February 18, 2007 at 01:33 PM
I just wanted to take a moment to say thank you, Jim. You've given me a
reason NOT to purchase that subscription to Outdoor Life Magazine. I think
SWAT Magazine is looking more and more appealing. I can say with absolute
certainty that they most assuredly will not label me and other AR-15 enthusiasts
terrorists.
Posted by: Justin | February 18, 2007 at 01:34 PM
I vote we ban ignorant, pompous assholes.
Posted by: Andy from MN | February 18, 2007 at 01:34 PM
I have just lost ant respect I had for Jim Zumbo and any firearms/hunting
related company that would hire him to represent them.Me and my family have
collected and hunted with Remington firearms for 3 generations and if they
want a guy like this to represent them I will have nothing to do with Remington
arms from here on out.
Posted by: Cole Murphy | February 18, 2007 at 01:35 PM
Mr Zumbo with comments like yours you have either lived in a sheltered life or
2/19/2007
Page 431 of 853
have been locked in your basement your entire life. Your arrogance on this
subject matter is astonishing I do not know whether to despise you or feel pity
for you. However I think your comments will have become your untimely
epitaph in Outdoor Life and if not I will encourage those that subscribe to or
purchase Outdoor Life at newsstands to think twice about supporting this
magazine and its advertisers
Posted by: Wayne Zylik | February 18, 2007 at 01:35 PM
I carry an M4 in the course of my daily duties over here; I didn't realize until
now that in so doing I was "terrorizing the world". Thanks for enlightening me
Jim. I *used* to have a lot of respect for you and your knowledge of hunting;
now I know that you are just another elitist jerk perfectly willing to throw under
the bus every gun owner whose tastes don't mirror yours. You certainly have
the right to such opinions, just as I have, and will exercise, the right to not pick
up another copy of OL as long as you continue writing in it.
CPT Mark
FOB Warhorse, Iraq
Posted by: CPT Mark | February 18, 2007 at 01:35 PM
As much as I would like to Shit all over you, There is not much that I can say
that has not been already said...
Pissing on the headstones of those who have given all that they had to defend
our rights is not a good way to earn the respect of Free Men!
Posted by: Pat | February 18, 2007 at 01:35 PM
Idiot. If the uneducated masses are frightened by 'the look' of a military-style
firearm, they will be frightened by the look of ANY firearm. I may agree in
priciple it is definately more fun to shoot an animal at an incredibly long
distance with a firearm that is capable of that, giving the game absolutely no
chance of survival, it should not matter if the sock is synthetic (AR) or wood
(AK) and would you see the difference if you had a single round chambered or
a 50-round magazine? How about the Sniper motto, 1000 yards out, as you
prefer, "One shot, One kill'? would you prefer that to seeing what was going to
shoot you? Isn't that what makes 'game'animals, 'game' in the first place, them
living in a state of constant fear and being able to escape? Once again, you
Idiot...
Posted by: WarHall | February 18, 2007 at 01:35 PM
If this is all you know about the shooting sports, how did you get a job writing
about it?
So, It’s ok for you to own a “High Power Sniper Rifle” for killing an unarmed
2/19/2007
Page 432 of 853
deer, but it’s wrong for me to own a rifle that would allow myself to defend my
family better (much better than a bolt rifle) against armed attackers? I suppose
you hate handguns as well…
Spitting over your own constitution, you are a disgrace to your country, you
shouldn’t even be an American.
Why don’t you move to Brazil, they have some wonderful gun laws you should
find fit your mentality. Of course Drug Lords own the place, but citizens can
barely own a 22LR so you should be fine.
Your own soldiers in Iraq are wielding “terrorist” weapons? What’s wrong with
you?
Have you lost your “nuts” in some hunting accident or something?
Instead of sticking together, you step aside an burn other gun owners, just to
save your own yellow hide.
The way you shamelessly bend over to the antigun lobby is disgusting.
FerFAL
FerFAL
Posted by: FerFAL | February 18, 2007 at 01:36 PM
I have long respected your words Mr. Zumbo, but you have lost my respect with
this entry. You are letting the anti's win without firing the proverbial shot.
Let me remind you of the old saying:
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
When the next crop of gun grabbers come for your hunting rifles, be sure and
hand them over butt first.
Posted by: Michael Gilmet | February 18, 2007 at 01:36 PM
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!
Posted by: David | February 18, 2007 at 01:36 PM
Mr. Zumbo:
2/19/2007
Page 433 of 853
By the time you've reached this post, you are no doubt concerned about the
long term effects your post has generated. While it's easy to rankle shooters,
casting aspersions on any class of firearms is tantamount to treason in our
ranks.
Judging by your apparent age in your photo, you should have received enough
education to recall *muskets* were the “assault weapon of choice” in the 18th
century. They were worrisome enough that the British ordered their mass
confiscation thus sparking a catalyst that triggered the American Revolution.
Another “assault weapon” heralded recently was predicted to create oceans of
blood and seriously depopulate the earth. It was the ubiquitous Mauser 98,
which your very own pet hunting rifle was based on. You mention an
accompaniment of Remington folks, they are (no doubt here) familiar with the
Mauser 98. I can’t help wondering whether they realized the irony of your
remarks.
The term assault weapon is the punishment the next generation battle weapon
gets if it works as designed. In the future, another weapon will get the assault
rifle mantle, but it may be a moot point for us. Careless comments will make it
easier for our political opponents to remove our present day weapons. And, the
government has a no-trade back, no-forgiveness policy. Once a class of
weapon is restricted or outlawed, it’s permanent. The only question then is the
next class of weapon to assault.
Is this really what you want? If so, you have no place in our ranks. While your
article does not advocate banning these guns, it does go a long way to support
the lack of sporting use which has been the latest tactic anti-gun policy wonks
use to justify fiat restrictions and bans.
Many non-governmental organizations (NGOs), pseudo-NGOs and even a few
government orgs compare tactics and adopt “best of practice” techniques as a
strategy of learning from their own mistakes. Hijacking serious issues is now
the norm, not the exception. Know this: VPC, the Brady Bunch, et al are very
much aware of how guns disappeared in England, Australia and elsewhere by
a variety of tactics designed to confuse, exploit and misdirect anger and fear.
There is no merit in doing their work for them.
By castigating these guns, it becomes a circular self-fulfilling prophecy. The
reason why we don’t see them much is the negative press they often receive.
And the negative press is a major deterrent from public displays in otherwise
legitimate use. We need them displayed more in public, and for legitimate use.
When your favorite gun is no longer in normalized status, maybe your tune will
change.
Rick Davis
2/19/2007
Page 434 of 853
Exton, Pennsylvania.
Posted by: Rick Davis | February 18, 2007 at 01:36 PM
Consider my subscription cancelled! You have no say in what I use while
hunting. Terrorist rifle, I suppose that would also mean my m1 garand you putz.
Posted by: Thomas Cliffe | February 18, 2007 at 01:36 PM
Jimmy Boy, last time I checked the main weapon of death and destruction
unleased by TERRORISTS on the freedom-loving folks of the US of A was a
JUMBO COMMERCIAL AIRLINER. Are you saying you don't use the same
means to arrive at your beloved hunting grounds, especially overseas?
You're playing right into the hands of the Pelosi-Schumer-Kennedy-RangelBloomberg-Clinton crowd. No doubt, they'll pay you good money to come and
"falsify" before a senate committee when they NEXT move to rid us of our
guns. You can, no doubt, use the money to buy another SAFE AND
ACCEPTABLE BOLT-ACTION SINGLE-SHOT AIR RIFLE in a lovely shade of
non-violent PINK. And you, sir, will be known far and wide as the
traitor/hypocrite that you are. Be ashamed. Be VERY ashamed.
Posted by: Herald O'Truth | February 18, 2007 at 01:37 PM
Well, I guess I can't threaten to cancel my subscription since I don't already
subscribe. I will not however subscribe in the future so long as this horse's ass
is working for you. I agree he has the right to his opinion, but when his "opinion"
calls me and all the other law-abiding collectors and shooters of military style
rifles terrorists, that's more offensive jackass nonsense than I can take.
Posted by: Roger W. | February 18, 2007 at 01:37 PM
Zumbo is a fool and I for one am not surprised at his latest bull,I stopped buying
outdoor life years ago because of his elitist propaganda.
Posted by: JerryD | February 18, 2007 at 01:37 PM
ALL - Jim Zumbo in NO WAY speaks for Remington! His opinions are his own.
We at Remington take our 2nd Ammendment Rights extremely seriously and
ourselves market and manufacturer a AR based 308 rifle. Remington Arms
supports the lawful use of all firearms by thier owners in whatever legal manner
they choice. We are Remington feel that it is the diversity of our tastes and
uses of fireaems that should also be the binding element that assists us all in
defending the rights granted to us by our fore fathers.
Posted by: Michael Haugen | February 18, 2007 at 01:37 PM
2/19/2007
Page 435 of 853
Your blog reference the AR-15 is deplorable. No better word exists to describe
your comments. The AR-15 is an excellent rifle for target shooting, as
witnessed by senior and junior shooting clubs nationwide, and for hunting.
While I don't hunt with anything other than a .44 pistol, I have no heartburn
about what others deem suitable for hunting. As a former member of the
Screaming Eagles who used the M-1 and M-14s, now the M-16s, I take
exception to your referral to those who use these rifles as terrorists. Geez, what
country do you live in? Perhaps you should try England or Australia. My vote is
in my wallet...no more magazines with articles written by your hand...or any TV
programs of like ilk.
Posted by: Richard C. Whiting | February 18, 2007 at 01:38 PM
"When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
2/19/2007
Page 436 of 853
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out."
The 2nd amendment is in huge trouble because of people like your Mr Zumbo.
In case you havent noticed you have really stirred up a hornets nest in the
internet firearms community. You drastically underestimated the magnitude of
your comments. I hear your career gasping for its last breath. I am contanting
remmington and outdoor life magazine to let them know that I was unaware of
their anti-gun/anti-2nd amendment stance and see what they have to say.
good luck with your career, youre gonna need it.
MileHigh reader
Posted by: MileHigh reader | February 18, 2007 at 01:38 PM
Last time I checked, the weapons used in the worst terrorist attack on this
country were box cutters and airplanes. Maybe Mr. Zumbo should call for a ban
on these, because he is extremely lacking in his knowledge of firearms.
Posted by: Fred J. | February 18, 2007 at 01:38 PM
Mr. Zumbo.... your an idiot. I've cancelled my Outdoor Life subscription, and I'll
never watch your tv show again. And since Remington sponsors you, I'll make
sure they know they just lost my sales because of you as well.
Posted by: Allen Muehlbauer | February 18, 2007 at 01:39 PM
How much do you think Handgun Control Inc. or other anti-rights groups would
pay you to say "AR rifles are "terrorist rifles?"" It saddens me to read such a
bigoted statement. This is exactly what they have been trying to convince
Americans of for so long. An AR15 is a great varminting, competitive shooting,
home defense, and general plinking rifle. Plus it is very fun to shoot. Please
retract your foolish statement.
Posted by: Beccaio | February 18, 2007 at 01:39 PM
This post is for the author of this thread AR15s should be banned.
You Sir are anti gun and should work for the Bradey Camp or the Volience
Policy Center. You might be already. The 2nd Amendment is not for you to
impose your foolish opinions on the rest of us. The 2nd Amendment is not for
hunting.
That is a lie put out by the gun control folks who want to disarm you. These
people will not rest until the American public is completely disarmed. These
ideas of banning a group of firearms is how this starts. Lets remember that.
2/19/2007
Page 437 of 853
Posted by: Rob | February 18, 2007 at 01:40 PM
Mr. Zumbo,
Please tell me the difference between your
bolt-action HIGH POWERED rifle with telescopic
sights and synthetic stock and a SNIPER RIFLE.
Very little difference. If you are a true
sportsman than I urge you to hunt with a single shot rifle with iron sights like I
have
all my life. You see you have given the Gun Grabbers more ammunition
because after semi
autos are banned, then they will come for your
SNIPER RIFLE.
Posted by: Jim Regna | February 18, 2007 at 01:40 PM
Mr.Brady or Zimbo This is a article that one would expect to read at the VCP
website you are a disgrace to Hunters and sportsman alike Outdoorlife needs
to place a boot where the sun don't shine
Posted by: jmp-50bmg | February 18, 2007 at 01:40 PM
Gee, Jim Z
I really hope you have enough saved for retirement. That is likely your last
article you will ever write. Every one of your sponsors has a minimum of 1000
emails in their inbox saying they will never buy another product from them until
you are fired.
Oh, and those free "writers only" hunting trips that you get to try new product?
Gone. Test guns and gun gear? Gone.
I'm sure the VPC is looking for writers of made-up facts and inflammatory,
emotion-based arguements for their press releases though. Check out
www.monster.com
Posted by: Kris -- NRA Endowment Life Member | February 18, 2007 at 01:40 PM
Zumbo, you are an ignorant asshole. Time to find a new magazine to subscribe
to.
Posted by: JS | February 18, 2007 at 01:41 PM
Well I guess you might figure it out but the second amendment is NOT about
hunting. Fools like you erode everybody's rights. You have used a page from
the dummycrap's playbook now enjoy being unemployed have a nice
day..................... dork.
Posted by: Warhog | February 18, 2007 at 01:42 PM
Well Mr. Zumbo in one moment of sheer ignorance you have successfully cost
2/19/2007
Page 438 of 853
OL, Remington Arms, Cabelas and several other sponsors quite a bit of
business. You have demonstrated how the careless use of one guaranteed
right can only serve to damage another. Each and every amendment is as
important as another but you seem to have forgotten that fact. Enjoy your
moment of infamy.
Posted by: Zumbo's A Fool | February 18, 2007 at 01:42 PM
Well I guess you might figure it out but the second amendment is NOT about
hunting. Fools like you erode everybody's rights. You have used a page from
the dummycrap's playbook now enjoy being unemployed have a nice
day..................... dork.
Posted by: Warhog | February 18, 2007 at 01:42 PM
To all the anti's who, on this blog, seem to view Mr Zumbo as the savior of their
cause.........
The Anti Gun Male - Julia Gorin
Let's be honest. He's scared of the thing. That's understandable--so am I.
But as a girl I have the luxury of being able to admit it. I don't have to
masquerade squeamishness as grand principle--in the interest of mankind, no
less.
A man does. He has to say things like "One Taniqua Hall is one too many," as
a New York radio talk show host did in referring to the 9-year old New York
girl who was accidentally shot last year by her 12-year old cousin playing
with his uncle's gun.
But the truth is he desperately needs Taniqua Hall, just like he needs as
many Columbines and Santees as can be mustered, until they spell an end to
the Second Amendment. And not for the benefit of the masses, but for the
benefit of his self-esteem.
He often accuses men with guns of "compensating for something." The truth is
quite the reverse. After all, how is he supposed to feel knowing there are
men out there who aren't intimidated by the big bad inanimate villain? How
is he to feel in the face of adolescent boys who have used the family gun
effectively to defend the family from an armed intruder? So if he can't
touch a gun, he doesn't want other men to be able to either. And to achieve
his ends, he'll use the only weapon he knows how to manipulate: the law.
Of course, sexual and psychological insecurities don't account for all men
who are against guns. Certainly there must be some whose motives are
genuine, who perhaps do care so much as to tirelessly look for policy
solutions to teenage vacuousness and aggression, and to parent and teacher
negligence. But for a potentially large underlying contributor,
2/19/2007
Page 439 of 853
psycho-sexual inadequacy has gone unexplored and unacknowledged. It's one
thing to not be comfortable with a firearm and therefore opt to not keep or
bear one. But it's another to impose the same handicap onto others.
People are suspicious of what they do not know--and not only does this man
not know how to use a gun, he doesn't know the men who do or the people
who
have defended themselves from injury or death just by brandishing a gun. But
he is better left in the dark; his life is hard enough knowing there are men
out there who don't sit cross-legged. That they're also able to handle a
firearm instead of being handled by it would be too much to bear for the
anti-gun male.
Such a man is also best kept huddled in urban centers, where he feels safer
than he might on his own in a rural setting, in an isolated house on a quiet
street where he would feel naked and helpless. Lacking the confidence that
would permit him to be sequestered in sparseness, and lacking a gun, he
finds comfort in the cloister of crowds.
The very ownership of a gun for defense of home and family implies some
assertiveness and a certain self-reliance. But if our man kept a gun in the
house, and an intruder broke in and started attacking his wife in front of
him, he wouldn't be able to later say, "He had a knife--there was nothing I
could do!" Passively watching in horror while already trying to make peace
with the violent act, scheduling a therapy session and forgiving the
perpetrator before the attack is even finished wouldn't be the option it
otherwise is.
No. Better to emasculate all men. Because let's face it: He's a lover, not a
fighter. And he doesn't want to get shot in case he sleeps with your wife.
Of course, it wouldn't be completely honest to not admit that owning a
firearm carries with it some risk to unintended targets. That's the tradeoff
with a gun: The right to defend one's life and way of life isn't without
peril to oneself. And the last thing this man wants to do is risk his
life--even if to save it. For he is guided by a dread fear for his life, and
has more confidence in almost anyone else's ability to protect him than his
own, preferring to place himself at the mercy of the villain or in the
sporadically competent hands of authorities (his line of defense consisting
of locks, alarm systems, reasoning with the attacker, calling the police or,
should fighting back occur to him, thrashing a heavy vase).
In short, he is a man begging for subjugation. He longs for its promise of
equality in helplessness. Because only when that strange, independent alpha
breed of male is helpless along with him will he feel adequate. Indeed, his
freedom lies in this other man's containment.
2/19/2007
Page 440 of 853
Posted by: Thomas Schooley | February 18, 2007 at 01:43 PM
Time to go yet? I think so.
Bimbo Bumbo better pack up for the nursing home.
This guy is past his prime with his dispotic autocratic pap.
I will be among the many who will not buy any products from his sponsors.
Posted by: Bill in Fl. | February 18, 2007 at 01:43 PM
What a bunch of arrogant, ignorant, and elitist pile of dung. Rest assured that I
won’t be doing any business with any company associated with “Zumbo”.
Posted by: Erik | February 18, 2007 at 01:44 PM
When I first heard of Jim's comments, I assumed there was some
misunderstanding. Then I followed the link. Unbelievable that you made these
comments, Jim. Like so many others who have posted, I have watched your
show for the last time. I have not subscribed to nor purchased Outdoor Life for
many years, so obviously that will continue. Remington products are "verboten"
until you are no longer on their payroll. An apology or statement from you
and/or Remington will not be enough. I am 60+ years old and shoot all kinds of
firearms. I hunt deer and quail, but also shoot AR's and NFA firearms(you
know, Jim, the kind that requires a tax stamp and ATF's sign off. Talk about
"evil" guns!). The 2nd Amendment covers them all...hunting privileges and
sporting features be damned!
Posted by: Silvertip | February 18, 2007 at 01:44 PM
Ignorant sums it up. Jim is just a self proclaimed legend. Whats next? Whats
sporting to hunt, fish, ect.. Cant believe we would hear this from a sporting
magazine.
Posted by: Jeremiah Johnson | February 18, 2007 at 01:44 PM
Personally I have more respect for the hunter who tip-toes up within spittin'
distance of his prey and takes it with a long bow than a guy who nails a deer
half mile away with a .50 BMG round.
That being said I wouldn't deny either of them the right to pursue happiness in
their own way.
Ban semi-autos that don't look "traditional" and the next thing, will be all semiautos.
The .22-250 was used as a sniper round in Bosnia, so following your logic(?) all
varmint guns should be banned also.
At least I'll save some money by not renewing my subscription to the paper
edition of OL. I'll use it to buy .22-250 brass for my scoped single shot before
it's too late....
2/19/2007
Page 441 of 853
Jack
Posted by: Jack | February 18, 2007 at 01:44 PM
Another Brady sycophant. Ban guns, just not my guns. No doubt some lackey
for "Americans For Gun Safety" or the fools over at "The American Hunters and
Shooters Association" are lapping up Zumbo's nonsense and planning to post
it. See, that's the problem with blogs. Any idiot gets a forum.
Posted by: Kevin Starrett | February 18, 2007 at 01:45 PM
mr zumbo,
i am appalled at you arrorgance.
as I sit here with mr. stevenson from REMINGTON,hunting here on a payed
trip,with my new rifle that REM. wants me to use this week.
i belittle the rest of you for not doing as i do.
sir,these thoughts are dangerous.years ago the antigunners were asked their
defenition
of a sniper rifle,the answer was any centerfire calibre.i do not know your name
or reputation,never read your magazine.BUT
FOR YOU TO SAY YOU SPEAK FOR ME SIR, IS AS
IGNORANT AS YOUR COMMENTS.do as you will but you have no right to
speak for anyone,
except yourself.in the future,please remember this important fact.as you sir are
no more important,dont care who YOU hang with,than me.you would do well to
remember this in the future.
Posted by: jackie gantt | February 18, 2007 at 01:46 PM
Jim,
I would like to have a word with you.
CH
Posted by: charlton heston | February 18, 2007 at 01:46 PM
you are an idiot thats all i have to say .
YOU IDIOT.
Posted by: knightrider | February 18, 2007 at 01:46 PM
Jim you have the right to your opininon as I have the right to cancel my
subscription. I have lost all respect for you as a hunting enthusiast. My money
will better spent protecting our 2nd ammendment.
Posted by: Bart | February 18, 2007 at 01:46 PM
I trained with this rifle in the late 60s, I have two now and I find the comments
very troubling! At least we know where the author stands on freedom issues.
2/19/2007
Page 442 of 853
Posted by: Doug R | February 18, 2007 at 01:46 PM
Jim At this point, you have lost all credibility with me. You should know as well as
anyone that the Second Amendment does not relate to hunting in any way. You
should know as well as anyone that the AR-15 functions no differently than a
Browning BAR or a Remington 7400, in fact, it doesn't function any differently
than any semi-automatic pistol or semi-auto .22 rifle that so many of our youths
use each year when they are introduced to the great sport of hunting.
You have shown your complete ignorance by choosing to put your thoughts
into writing before you thought them through. Who are you to judge what
firearm a person should use for hunting? Who are you to try to dictate to others
what "sporting" is? What gives you any right whatesoever to judge what other
hunters do at all?
You have made a career out of profiting from people that shoot and hunt. You
can rest assured that we don't all share the same opinion on what the ideal
hunting firearm is, however, the vast majority of us possess the common sense
to know that what may be right for us, may not work well for others.
It is my hope that in the future, you will refrain from espousing your uneducated
opinion in a format that attracts national attention.
I am sickened that ANY outdoor related magazine would publish such diatribe
in the pages of their publication.
Could not disagree more – many here in Montana use their 223 assault rifles
on gofers and such – they are good people and do not need to have Uncle
Sam telling us what to do and think – what is right and what is wrong - we can
teach our own children - thanks just the same
In the LA riots the guys on the roof with their assault rifles kept their homes,
property and, most important, their families – when the society breaks down
and the police and militaries won’t respond to the rural areas what will I do…. I’ll
be taking care of myself, thanks
John
Posted by: JOHN | February 18, 2007 at 01:47 PM
What are you going to do when the only "sporting" firearm you can own is a
single shot? Turn it in like the rest of us.
The anti gunners do not like ANY firearms, they do not care if it is an AR15,
pistol or single shot twenty-two.
Outdoor life and Remington should stay far away from people like you. It's bad
PR.
2/19/2007
Page 443 of 853
Posted by: M Pepper | February 18, 2007 at 01:48 PM
Wow, It's a good thing you only speak for yourself and not for everyone else.
Try using one once, then make your opinions on this topic. Ignorance is the
only quality you show.
Until Outdoor Life fires you, and publicly repudiates the tripe you have written,
and issues an apology to all gun owners, I will never buy your magazine. In
addition, I am mounting a personal campaign against you, your sponsors and
anyone else who accommodates your leftist propaganda. You sir, are a
disgrace; an affront to the Constitution, and a tool for the anti-gun forces who
would just as soon take away your wood-stocked hunting rifle as my plastic
stocked AR. What an utter fool and a hypocrite you are!
Posted by: gmcem50 | February 18, 2007 at 01:49 PM
The whole purpose of the 2nd amendment is that law abiding citizens cannot
be restricted in their ownership and use of firearms. OK, I'll admit the
restrictions on full automatics, but even the Class III license guys agree with
that; and I'll agree on magazine capacity limits for firearms on the hunting field,
and there only. But, Sir Zumbo -- go after the bad guys and do not create a
category of bad things. Hell, you can go after game on your hunts with BB's
and Daisy rifles for all I care, but you commit a serious breach of firearms ethics
when you label a noble firearm -- great for range, plinking, target, etc. -- as a
terrorist weapon. I do not know what put your knickers in such a stupid twist but
you should apologize to the shooting world.
Heck, I'd never hunt with a Barrett .50BMG, but if I could aford one I'd love to
shoot it. And the 2nd amendment gives me that right without you or any of the
gun-haters calling me a terrorist.
Shame on you.
Posted by: Thomas A. Phemister | February 18, 2007 at 01:49 PM
Dear Jim,
Great job of divide-and-conquer - the check's in the mail, my brother.
Osama
Posted by: Osama Bin Laden | February 18, 2007 at 01:49 PM
ill never buy a remigton again if they pay morons like you there is a gun for
every thing. god help idiots like you
Posted by: DEERslayer | February 18, 2007 at 01:50 PM
Sorry choice of verbage sir!!
2/19/2007
Page 444 of 853
Joseph Goebles, would be proud!!
One question before I go,...
How do you like you now????
Posted by: Errorist Elite | February 18, 2007 at 01:50 PM
Sir you are a Traitor
Posted by: Dangerous Bob | February 18, 2007 at 01:50 PM
What if a person can only afford one rifle and they want an all purpose rifle?
Once they have investigated their options they decide an AR15 is the right “all
purpose” rifle for them. Should they not be allowed to use this rifle to hunt with
because it will offend someone? Or because you feel only a terrorist would use
such a weapon? What about a soldier in our military that would pick an AR15
because this is a familiar platform for him or her? Does hunting with such a
weapon make them a terrorist?
Does using a high powered, scoped, precision, bolt action rifle make you a
sniper? Such a rifle is capable of maki

Statement from Outdoor Life

Transcription

Similar documents

Winchester Ultra Shadow Marlin 1895 Ruger M77

SCI-Central Washington Chapter Rifle Raffle

1 Highlights of Memorial Day Congressional Recess Radio Tour

- Freedom Group

Nobuhiro Tajima Sets a New Record at Pikes Peak Nobuhiro Tajima

Special Wpns Grendel 2011 with cover

Far Ahead of his Time

– PDF – English

Robert Cressionnie - Old Hickory Gun Club

Avtomat Kalashnikova