Guest mikebohio Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! I am not a smoker. I hate when people smoke arround me. Ohio has just passed a law that I voted against banning smoking in all public places. This is the same thing. Never bring the government into peoples personal choices. Not only as hunters but as Americans. If you dont want to hunt a certain way so be it but never try to stop anyone ealse from doing what they enjoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! [ QUOTE ] Wow!! This thing got thrown so far out of context. I'll tell you what, with the situation we are in now, with the war and all. If I saw a couple people walking through the woods with AR's, It'd have me thinkin!! [/ QUOTE ] Just voicing my opinion again, Why is it that people, including myself, read into things and then tear them apart? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! [ QUOTE ] Assault Rifles For Hunters? As I write this, I'm hunting coyotes in southeastern Wyoming with Eddie Stevenson, PR Manager for Remington Arms, Greg Dennison, who is senior research engineer for Remington, and several writers. We're testing Remington's brand new .17 cal Spitfire bullet on coyotes. 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. I call them "assault" 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 assault rifles that are "tackdrivers." Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern. I've always been comfortable with the statement that hunters don't use assault rifles. We've always been proud of our "sporting firearms." 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 prairies and woods. UPDATE: As a point of clarification about this blog, it is important for everyone to realize that the opinions expressed here are Jim’s and not necessarily those of Outdoor Life. I’ve been friends with Jim for many years and have shared countless great times with him talking about both hunting and guns. While I totally support Jim’s right to express his point of view—this is his blog after all—I don’t happen to agree with him on this matter. His position that AR- and AK-style rifles don’t have a place among our “sporting arms” is not one that I personally, or Outdoor Life as a magazine, happens to share. In the six years that I’ve worked at Outdoor Life we have never wavered in our support of our Second Amendment rights, which don't, and shouldn’t, make a distinction about the cosmetic look of the guns that we choose take to our local gun clubs or into hunting camp. That said, I don’t expect every other hunter and sportsman out there to have a set of opinions that moves in lockstep with mine. So while I don’t share Jim’s view on this, I also know that he is still the same wonderfully talented and good-natured person he was before this post went up. For those of you who have followed him for all or part of his more than thirty years at Outdoor Life, I would ask you to bear that in mind before damning him with personal attacks. John B. Snow Executive Editor Outdoor Life [/ QUOTE ] In support of Mr. Zumbo, I would first like to say, I don't necessarily agree with the way Jim articulated his thoughts on AR and AK style rifles, but can understand completely what he was trying to convey to his cherished fellow hunters. The sad part is, that the Hunting community, is willing to watch this Good man's career be totally destroyed, simply because so many hunters misinterpreted what he was saying. He's being accused of speaking against the Second Amendment, which just isn't true. The Second Amendment reads: [ QUOTE ] 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. [/ QUOTE ] Nowhere does it mention your/our right to use whatever weapon we wish, when it comes to hunting. Hunting regulations are a separate issue entirely. I'm surprised that so many hunters, cannot separate the Second Amendment, from which firearms may or may not be appropriate for hunting use in the field. I don't even understand how the Second Amendment got into this conversation. Jim never once said that AR and AK style rifles should be banned from ownership in America, thus infringing on your Second Amendment rights to bear arms. He was instead trying to articulate how the general non-hunting public perceives you and I as hunters and how those millions of would be hunters, non-hunters, neutral bystanders, or even those would be anti's might be swayed to think one way or the other by the hunting community, and how we have a huge responsibility on our shoulders in how they perceive us. He's not worried about the present anti-gun, anti-hunting lobbyists out there. They already have their minds made up. He's more concerned (as am I) about the way the rest of the general public perceives the hunting community as a whole. Jim never once called hunters or the Armed forces for that matter, terrorists nor did he insinuate that any hunter or American soldier, hunting with an AR or AK rifle was a terrorist. I'm actually embarrassed and appalled that so many in the hunting community misunderstood him and mis-quoted him on this, and are willing to hang him out to dry. The important message I got from what Jim had to say, is that us hunters, might want to seriously think about regulating ourselves in the woods, before those who perceive us and out number us in the millions, decide to outlaw us because of our own stubbornness and near sightedness. I think it's time for those of us who can understand what he was actually trying to articulate in his statements, whether we agree with him or not, stand up and try to save this man's career, before it's too late. This is my personal opinion and not necessarily that of Realtree Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdhunter39 Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! were's my 50 cal , i think i wanna rip off a few rounds on a flock of geese , or maybe use a hand gernade to flush a covy of quail , why not just buy a sniper rifle , and shoot a deer a few miles away , i think not , i want to hunt , with my corked ( to hold three shotgun shells ) shotgun , not storm the beach fronts , what next IED'S , smart bullets , dive bombing our game we hunt , let me just grab the abraham tank instead of my ATV , this is how i feel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! It's one thing for him to have his opinion about the guns like: [ QUOTE ] I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity. [/ QUOTE ] But for a statement as stupid as: [ QUOTE ] I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles. [/ QUOTE ] to come from him is asinine. It's also one thing for a nobody Joe Schmuckatelli to say something stupid like that but when a so called "expert" celebrity from the hunting world says something like that it will be used against us. What about the bolt action guns he uses to hunt with? They are used by military snipers which are cold blooded killers, plain and simple. One of the tactics of a military sniper is to envoke terror in the enemy. So does this make a deer rifle a terror weapon? It's only a tool. Hunting involves killing. Weapons and ammunition are designed for killing as effectively as possible. If the truth hurts, take up knitting. Luckily, the Second Ammendment is not about hunters. Too many people have the "as long as it does not affect me, I don't care atitude". Zumbo printed an retraction to try to cover his butt once the feces hit the orbiting devise. This was nothing but damage control trying to save his hide with his sponsors, just like a politician. One Oh-crap wipes out 100 atta-boys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! Yep, like AJ points out here, there is really no way to take out of context what Mr Zumbo says here. He said what he said and it is pretty cut and dry. His remarks in my opinion I will maintain are somewhat ignorant and were careless. Kind of like the media after the DC area shooters calling virtually every shooting that was high profile coming from "assualt rifles" or "snipers". Pretty well ignorant comments that do all law abiding gun owners absolutely no good whatsover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nut Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! Interesting thread. I wonder where some of you would stand if Zumbo had said bad things about crossbows also. Just throwing that out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adjam5 Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! [ QUOTE ] Yep, like AJ points out here, there is really no way to take out of context what Mr Zumbo says here. He said what he said and it is pretty cut and dry. His remarks in my opinion I will maintain are somewhat ignorant and were careless. [/ QUOTE ] ditto...you expect more from a ambassador of the sport. So who does Zumbo go to for damage control help? Uncle Ted. The Nuge should set him straight. Zumbo's sponsors must have been bombarded with emails railing against his statements, leading to his retraction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! [ QUOTE ] Yep, like AJ points out here, there is really no way to take out of context what Mr Zumbo says here. He said what he said and it is pretty cut and dry. His remarks in my opinion I will maintain are somewhat ignorant and were careless. Kind of like the media after the DC area shooters calling virtually every shooting that was high profile coming from "assualt rifles" or "snipers". Pretty well ignorant comments that do all law abiding gun owners absolutely no good whatsover. [/ QUOTE ]Point taken. Now answer me this. Were the AR's and AK's made for hunting? Or were they made for War? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! [ QUOTE ] Were the AR's and AK's made for hunting? Or were they made for War? [/ QUOTE ] We can see that you are confused Randy. Here is a little dose of reality for you. Guns were designed for war. The Remington 700, Winchester 70, Browning A-Bolt, Weatherby Vanguard and Mark V as well as hundred and hundreds more bolt actions were designed after the Mauser 9x series of guns as well as the Springfield 1903, the Enfield, and others. Guess what they were designed for? Yep, they were not developed to be gopher getters. Lets go back farther, the Henry 1860 lever action rifle was a military rifle and predecessor to the Winchester line of lever guns. Go back farther, the Sharps, Trapdoor Springfield, Remington Rollingblock, and other single shot breechloaders were designed as military rifles. technically, since these were all military weapons, they are all "assault weapons". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nature_Boy Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! All weapons were created for the same task at hand, some simply look different than others. People get caught up in the "evil black rifle" syndrom when it is simply just another weapon choice. And uppers can be made for the rifle to shoot most of your common "hunting rifle" caliburs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adjam5 Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! [ QUOTE ] Now answer me this. Were the AR's and AK's made for hunting? Or were they made for War? [/ QUOTE ] They were made for reliability and function. Wether you punch paper, bad guys or animals. Part of hunting is the kill. So we are judging weapons SOLELY on cosmetics? MY AK functions EXACTLY like my mini 14, the remington 7600, the Browning BAR...the list goes on. Cosmetic judgement of firearms(based on how they look) is small minded and the same thinking as the people who would have us turn them all in. 1st it was a the semi auto guns...then the bayonet lug....then the flash hider...then the threaded barrel...then the pistol grip, then the detachable mag, then the folding stock. JEEESH! Whats next? Maybe all America should have is single shots huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogdoc Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! Every man is entitled to his opinion--it's his opinion and only his--you guys are getting too upset and taking it too personal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! Simmer down fella's. Sheesh,.....I didn't mean to ruffle feather's. I understand that guns were made for war, I'm sure Zumbo know's this too. I'm fairly confident that the Remingtom 700 I have sitting in the gun cabinet was not made for killing people. Did the idea for this gun come from past and or present wars? Without a doubt!! Nobody's denying that. So when you say "cosmetics" sorry, I gotta agree that "cosmetics" change how a particular weapon is viewed. If you go back to one of my earlier post I said something to the effect of seeing two guys walking through the woods with AR's. My opinion stays the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyote Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! My AR 15 was made for sporting purposes. Thus it's name..............."Bushmaster Varminter" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogdoc Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! Just copied this from the Remington Website: [ QUOTE ] Remington to Sever Sponsorship Ties with Jim Zumbo Madison, North Carolina – As a result of comments made by Mr. Jim Zumbo in recent postings on his blog site, Remington Arms Company, Inc., has severed all sponsorship ties with Mr. Zumbo effective immediately. While Mr. Zumbo is entitled to his opinions and has the constitutional right to freely express those opinions, these comments are solely his, and do not reflect the views of Remington. “Remington has spent tens of millions of dollars defending our Second Amendment rights to privately own and possess firearms and we will continue to vigorously fight to protect these rights,” commented Tommy Millner, Remington’s CEO and President. “As hunters and shooters of all interest levels, we should strive to utilize this unfortunate occurrence to unite as a whole in support of our Second Amendment rights.” We regret having to terminate our long-standing relationship with Mr. Zumbo, who is a well-respected writer and life-long hunter. [/ QUOTE ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Posted February 19, 2007 Report Share Posted February 19, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! [ QUOTE ] Just copied this from the Remington Website: [ QUOTE ] Remington to Sever Sponsorship Ties with Jim Zumbo Madison, North Carolina – As a result of comments made by Mr. Jim Zumbo in recent postings on his blog site, Remington Arms Company, Inc., has severed all sponsorship ties with Mr. Zumbo effective immediately. While Mr. Zumbo is entitled to his opinions and has the constitutional right to freely express those opinions, these comments are solely his, and do not reflect the views of Remington. “Remington has spent tens of millions of dollars defending our Second Amendment rights to privately own and possess firearms and we will continue to vigorously fight to protect these rights,” commented Tommy Millner, Remington’s CEO and President. “As hunters and shooters of all interest levels, we should strive to utilize this unfortunate occurrence to unite as a whole in support of our Second Amendment rights.” We regret having to terminate our long-standing relationship with Mr. Zumbo, who is a well-respected writer and life-long hunter. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ]What a shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebeilgard Posted February 20, 2007 Report Share Posted February 20, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! sure do wish folks, and companies, would take a step back and think this whole thing through. or, maybe they did... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowtechTurkeyHunter Posted February 20, 2007 Report Share Posted February 20, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! [ QUOTE ] sure do wish folks, and companies, would take a step back and think this whole thing through. or, maybe they did... [/ QUOTE ] This is Cabelas standard response to inquiries [ QUOTE ] Thanks for your comments. While Cabela’s believes everyone has the right to express their own opinions, we strongly disagree with Jim Zumbo’s February 16 posting on his Hunting with Jim Zumbo blog on Outdoor Life’s Web site. Throughout our 46-year history, Cabela’s has firmly supported all aspects of shooting sports. We strongly support the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and the right of every U.S. citizen to purchase, own and enjoy any legal firearm of their choosing. While we fully support Mr. Zumbo’s First Amendment right of free speech, we believe his opinions on this matter are counter to those shared by Cabela’s and many of our customers. Cabela’s Legal Department is currently reviewing contractual obligations and commitments regarding our sponsorship of the Jim Zumbo Outdoors television show. [/ QUOTE ] and this is his other major sponsor ... actually his MAIN sponsor http://www.himtnjerky.com/ Read the red at the bottom Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryan1990 Posted February 20, 2007 Report Share Posted February 20, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! man i had so much respect for Zumbo too. i think he made a ridiculous statement. my good friend bought an AR-15 for hunting and it is very accurate and i believe we should have the right to hunt with any weapon we chose as long as it can adequitly take down the animal were hunting. i feel sorry for Zumbo though. after all the years he's worked to get were he is its all gone in a week just because of a stupid comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted February 20, 2007 Report Share Posted February 20, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! Question: Are you allowed to hunt varmints anywhere in the USA with a automatic weapon ? If so...where and WHY ? If not .... where and WHY NOT ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest realtrhunter Posted February 20, 2007 Report Share Posted February 20, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! This has to be the craziest topic in a long time. I personally don't agree with an statements against the assult weapons. It is all a matter of appearance. Remember the Brady Bill, if I remember right they wanted to ban awhole bunch of guns because of their appearance. As far as hunting with a .223 round, if it can ethically take down the animal then hunt with it. For those of you that compared hunting and military weapons....Get Real. What we do/did has nothing to do with this topic, other than the fact that we have protected your rights to have this discussion. Remember that is what they do for a living. Hopefully this thing doesn't get turned around and used on us from the true antis. That would be a shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob LeBlanc Posted February 20, 2007 Report Share Posted February 20, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! [ QUOTE ] So who does Zumbo go to for damage control help? Uncle Ted. The Nuge should set him straight. [/ QUOTE ] Don't ever compare Jim Zumbo to that Nugget Head. Zumbo is a credible and lifelong friend of hunters and shooters...worldwide. Nugent only uses our 'sport' like Paris Hilton uses her...well, you know...to keep his name in the limelight. It's disgraceful that so many of you would bail on someone who has been a part of the hunting fraternity for so long. Yeah...yeah...yeah...I know...Everyone is entitled to their opinion...as long as it agrees with yours. AK's ARE NOT HUNTING RIFLES...and trying to find your personal justifications to make them such, will only convince the ignorant and ill-informed...and all-the-while giving fodder to the anti's that we, as hunters, are nothing more than a bunch of Rambo-ites, jumping from tree to tree in the forest. AK's ARE THE WEAPON OF CHOICE FOR STREET GANGS AND TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS...WORLDWIDE. That is a statement of fact...and is what Zumbo is saying. It trully ticks me off that people, including his sponsors, would turn on him so quickly. Shame on you...shame on you all...Your loyalty to a well respected member of our fraternity is under-whelming. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted February 20, 2007 Report Share Posted February 20, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! [ QUOTE ] Are you allowed to hunt varmints anywhere in the USA with a automatic weapon ? [/ QUOTE ] Not that I am aware of but I don't know the law in all 50 states. You are missing the point. This has nothing to do with fully automatic Class III NFA weapons. The AR15 is the civilian version (semi automatic) of the M16 mitary weapon which happens to be capable of firing fully automatic. The same with the AK47 guns that civilians own. They are semi automatic versions of the military guns. The semi auto guns can be used for hunting is most states except PA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted February 20, 2007 Report Share Posted February 20, 2007 Re: Jim Zumbo\'s anti comments!! Pretty crazy really to see some of the responses here. The mini 14 "RANCH" rifle from what I understand was originally designed as a varmint control weapon. It is chambered in a .223. By this mentality, it is deemed an unnecessary weapon. Really classing weapons, we need to be a bit more careful. The media classes all hunting rifles as "sniper" rifles. Does this mean that is what they are? Absolutely not. The gun is nothing more than a tool, the person using it determines the use of the weapon and whether that weapon is being used for purposes it SHOULD be intended for or SHOULD NOT be intended for. There are those AR type rifles that are configured in a .308, that are semi auto. If someone chose to use one of these to hunt big game in this country and they were a hunter who followed the rules and in most cases were very effective with their accurate rifle, should we think less of them because the rifle has the ability to hold more than the standard 3 or 5 rounds most popular semi auto rifles like the BAR hold even though the hunter may chose only to have 3 rounds in that gun? What really is the difference in an AR in .308 and a BAR in .308 if both have only 3 rounds in them? Is it because of the APPEARANCE of teh weapon that we ASSUME its use? Should we deem these rifles as not being capable of being hunting rifles because some arrogant ignorant remarks were made by some named person who has been recognized by our sport? Really this type of thing whether we agree or not, only adds fuel to the antis already burning fire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.