Article

2007-02-24 Home Front: Culture Wars

'Terrorist' Remark Puts Outdoorsman's Career in Jeopardy

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2007-02-24 14:05|| || Front Page|| [7 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 There's a good summation here

Posted by Steve">Steve 2007-02-24 15:45|| 2007-02-24 15:45|| Front Page Top

#2 the Brady campaign could hire him.... then again, they have little use for him, except for quoting him. Idiot forgot who his audience was. Now, he can still write..on some obscure unpaid blog

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-02-24 16:07|| 2007-02-24 16:07|| Front Page Top

#3 btw - excellent link Steve, thx

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-02-24 16:14|| 2007-02-24 16:14|| Front Page Top

#4 More info at the Gun Talk site:

Something fascinating just happened. I suspect it will be studied by those who do such things, but at this point, it is clear that last weekend we saw a sea change in the way gun owners react to threats.

We can take away from this experience several observations.

The first is that this attitude of "just let them take those ugly, black guns" is common among hunters and competitive shooters. Anyone with that attitude is a fool. Sit down with a hunter from England or Australia, hear him tell the story of what happened there, and watch the tears well up in his eyes when he says they never thought the government would take away their hunting guns. To gun banners, there is no such thing as a good gun. They want them all. When Tom Diaz, of the Violence Policy Center, was on Gun Talk, I forced him to admit that he would like to ban all guns. What about the police, I asked. Once we get all the other guns, he said, the police won't need their guns, either.

A ban on black guns, or "Saturday Night Specials," or 50-caliber rifles, is a ban on all our guns. There is no such thing as a bad gun or a good gun. We can't throw babies off the back of the sled, thinking it will keep the wolves away from us.

The next thing we learn from this is that the world has just changed. This entire episode took place inside of 36 hours, on a weekend -- a three-day weekend for President's Day. It happened...and this is important...entirely on the internet. The original posting was on the net, the reaction was on the net, the emails demanding that companies break off with Zumbo were on the net, and the reactions from the companies were all on their web sites. This was completely an internet event. It was a nuclear explosion, with tens of thousands of messages posted, spanning all the firearms-related web sites.

Posted by Steve">Steve 2007-02-24 16:18|| 2007-02-24 16:18|| Front Page Top

#5 Gun is just a tool. Much depends on the brains that control the tool. For example, in Russia it is not uncommon to go hunting with machine guns - inherited from Soviet Union, so what?

Posted by Nesvarbukas 2007-02-24 16:24|| 2007-02-24 16:24|| Front Page Top

#6 Zumbo really stepped in shit with this one. Tamara K., never one to suffer idiocy lightly, rips Zumbo a new orifice here, in Who the hell is Jim Zumbo? and reams it out a little more here in Can open. Worms everywhere. She does a nice summing-up-- with a VERY pointed lesson in the power of the blogosphere-- in An Army of Davids, illustrated.

I have no idea WTF Zumbo was using for brains when he wrote that column. I've encountered hints of his sniffy kind of anti-AR snobbery before in hunters from time to time; my best guess is they consider Black Rifle enthusiasts reckless extremists who'll "ruin everything" for those oh-so-gentlemanly hunters.

What they don't seem to get through their thick skulls is that banning the sale of AR-type guns is just a prelude to banning the sale of **ALL** guns, then confiscating the whole lot. Because the Constitution, AFAIK, doesn't say Jack Shit about any "right to hunt". If they can take away my ARs, and the ban is upheld by the USSC, there is no logical barrier to their confiscation of anything that can fire a bullet.

Like the AoS said: enjoy your free time, Zumbo.

Posted by Dave D.">Dave D. 2007-02-24 16:43|| 2007-02-24 16:43|| Front Page Top

#7 Incredible eruption of pissed-off, had-enough gun owners took place less than a week ago.

Now that it has almost reached the national stage my best guess is that gun writers et al have are likely paying much, much closer attention to what they write.

And in all this, one clear message: You want to ban guns, best polish up your resume. It is now considered career suicide.

And the idea: that an assault weapon is nothing more that a terrorist firearm: what possessed Zumbo to utter such foolishness?

Did it feel good, Zumbo?

Posted by badanov 2007-02-24 16:45|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2007-02-24 16:45|| Front Page Top

#8 Further thoughts-- and some damn good ones-- from Kim du Toit here and here. In the first link he does a good job of showing the lack of any important functional differences between hunting firearms and those Evil Black Rifles that Zumbo was tut-tutting about.

Posted by Dave D.">Dave D. 2007-02-24 17:11|| 2007-02-24 17:11|| Front Page Top

#9 They came first for the mail order gun sales,
and I didn't speak up because I bought mine locally
Then they came for the cop killer bullets,
and I didn't speak up because I didnt buy them.
Then they came for the Saturday Night Specials,
and I didn't speak up because I bought expensive guns.
Then they came for the Plastic Guns,
and I didn't speak up because I had steel ones.
Then they came for the Assault Weapons,
And I didnt speak up because I was a hunter.
Then they came for me,
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

Posted by Steve">Steve 2007-02-24 17:56|| 2007-02-24 17:56|| Front Page Top

#10 TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 311

§ 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

It take a true liar to pervert the very words of the Constitution to rationalize that this is not what the founding father meant to protect by the 2d Amendment. Since both the M-16 and the AK-47 are pretty much the basic firearm of military forces worldwide, the only implication can be that ownership of said weapons is protected until the Constitution is so altered by legal amendment.

Posted by Procopius2k 2007-02-24 22:16|| 2007-02-24 22:16|| Front Page Top

23:56 Darkydark
23:52 Sic_Semper_Tyrannus
23:46 Mike N.
23:21 RD
23:21 Thrump Snairong6534
23:18 RD
23:08 49 Pan
23:08 RD
23:04 Captain America
22:52 3dc
22:52 IG-88
22:51 RD
22:49 SR-71
22:44 Chiper Threreger8956
22:40 SR-71
22:32 Thrump Snairong6534
22:30 Chiper Threreger8956
22:26 Chiper Threreger8956
22:18 Redneck Jim
22:18 Sic_Semper_Tyrannus
22:16 Procopius2k
22:11 JohnQC
22:06 Procopius2k
22:02 Sic_Semper_Tyrannus