News article on the "terrorist" rifle blogging fiasco.

[Outlaws]

Great news article on the whole Zumbo fiasco.
http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_102081.asp

The Blog Heard 'Round The Industry
Jim Zumbo angers firearm enthusiasts
by Jim Shepherd
posted February 20, 2007

Click to Enlarge
Jim Zumbo, Hunting Editor for Outdoor Life magazine, angered firearms enthusiasts across the country with a weekend blog posting. His blog has now been suspended and sponsors are severing ties with Zumbo in spite of his apology.
This article is provided by Jim Shepherd in association with the "Outdoor Wire," a feed service specializing in the outdoor industry.

Legendary hunting writer Jim Zumbo has incurred the wrath of thousands of shooting enthusiasts with a weekend posting on his now-suspended blog for Outdoor Life magazine.

In the posting, Zumbo said "assault rifles" (or "terrorist" rifles as he went on to refer to them) had "no place" among "our hunting community." Adding that in his "humble opinion…these things have no place in hunting" because "We don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern."



Zumbo went on to say "game departments should ban them from the praries (sic) and woods."

That kicked off a firestorm among owners of so-called "black rifles". Within hours, internet sites had reproduced the offending blog, kicking off thousands of angry emails and internet postings.

Subsequently, in what may one day be classified as the worst apology ever written (aptly titled "I was wrong, BIG TIME") Zumbo attempted to soothe readers, attributing his remarks to being tired following a long day of hunting coyotes in extreme weather conditions.

He went on recount his 40 years of NRA membership and the United States Sportsmen's Alliance, an organization, which, he wrote, "actively fights anti-hunters and animal rights groups for hunter's rights." He also told readers he had plans to go hunting with an AR-style rifle to give them a try.

At that point, however, there was little, if anything, that would assuage an angry horde of electronically mobilized AR fans. They considered Zumbo's remarks as being tantamount to a sellout, with Zumbo offering up "black rifles" as a sacrificial lamb for anti-gun forces.

In an appearance on Tom Gresham's national radio show "Gun Talk" Sunday afternoon, Zumbo attempted to apologize, but listeners didn't seem to be buying his verbal apology. If anything, any attempt to assuage them only fanned the flames of outrage.

Over the course of the afternoon and evening, various executives associated with Zumbo posted their own comments on his blog site, attempting to deflect the anger at directed at Zumbo away from their companies.

It didn't work.

Instead, they found themselves under attack with angry feedback calling for everything from a boycott of all Remington products (a pair of Remington execs were mentioned as having been with Zumbo on his now ill-fated hunting trip) to cancellation of Outdoor Life magazine subscriptions and campaigns against all companies with connections to Zumbo.

Yesterday morning, responding to an onslaught of negative publicity, Remington CEO and President Tommy Millner released a statement severing "all sponsorship ties with Mr. Zumbo, effective immediately."

Zumbo was entitled to his opinion, Millner wrote, but the inflammatory comments were solely his and did 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, " wrote Millner, "and we will continue to vigorously fight to protect these rights. 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."

In conclusion, Millner expressed regret at the termination of a long-standing relationship with a "well-respected writer and life-long hunter."

Outdoor Life announced they were discontinuing the "Hunting With Zumbo" blog "for the time being" due to the "controversy surrounding Jim Zumbo's latest postings."

Their notice went on to remind readers "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 of the firearms we choose to own, shoot and take hunting."

Yesterday, anyone who didn't comment risked being lumped in with anti-gun forces. Any voices calling for reason and tolerance found themselves shouted down. And those writers professing support for Mr. Zumbo privately certainly weren't willing to go on the record with that support.

Additionally, Cabela's has not yet dropped their sponsorship of the Jim Zumbo Outdoors television show, Cabela's Frank Ross is being quoted as having said their legal department is "currently reviewing contractual obligations and commitments regarding our sponsorship of the Jim Zumbo Outdoors television show. "

"Jim's comments are as unfortunate as they are inappropriate," said National Shooting Sports Foundation president Doug Painter. "No one should divide firearms into good-gun, bad-gun categories."

Zumbo's ill-considered blog may not have been intended to create good-gun, bad-gun categories, but it has certainly raised firebrand rhetoric to an art form. Rather than hunters being supported by recreational and competitive shooting enthusiasts, they have now become "Fudds" to shooters who feel they have been labeled "terrorists" by a "hard-core hunter."

It's truly not a pretty picture, but may observers say it accurately reflects a widening gap between "traditional" and "non-traditional" shooting enthusiasts.

With Congress reconsidering the Assault Weapon Ban and Connecticut and New Jersey considering legislation that would limit handgun purchases to one per month, this latest schism is already being used as further evidence of the "need" to regulate firearms -all firearms - more stringently.

Jim Shepherd

 

[Dan from MI]

Jim, Jim, Jim.

If you get government to ban guns you don't like, don't start complaining when your "sniper rifle" is next. :banghead:

I can't stand gun owners who push for bans and run their mouths. "Terrorist rifles?" Those are the worst types of all.

 

[Robo_Railer]

It's truly not a pretty picture, but may observers say it accurately reflects a widening gap between "traditional" and "non-traditional" shooting enthusiasts.

With Congress reconsidering the Assault Weapon Ban and Connecticut and New Jersey considering legislation that would limit handgun purchases to one per month, this latest schism is already being used as further evidence of the "need" to regulate firearms -all firearms - more stringently.

We don't want to go there. United we stand, or some day, private gun ownership might be a distant memory.

Swat that camel on its nose.

 

[lance22]

Jim Zumbo - He's no Jeff Cooper !

When that day comes, Outdoor Life will be just fine with it; after all, they will still have small bore muzzle loaders for wabbit

Some of us didn't agree all the time with Jeff Cooper, but he influenced many gun magazines in the right direction. Sadly, Outdoor Life was influenced by Jim Zumbo and is going in the wrong direction. Cooper was a god compared to Brady Boy Zumbo.

They want to deny that their writers speak for their brand / business identity? They do, whether they want to admit it or not. Outdoor Life has done nothing but try to sweep this under the rug ... even after the burn they don't get it.

 

[Art Eatman]

Y'all are totally missing the point: What this whole deal shows is the power of the Internet and its blogs.

Even just ten or so years back, very few would have been aware of Zumbo's views. Were they published in the magazine for newstand/subscription reading, only a few letters to the editors would have resulted, with little dissemination on any sort of broad scale.

Now? Every company associated with Zumb is shivering and shaking.

It probably will get the attention of some of the would-be candidates for the Presidency as well.

TV program sponsors say that one snail-mail letter represents the views of 300 people. Emails and blog responses don't have those numbers, but a guess of ten or twenty to one is not unfair, I think.

Tens of thousands of people across the Internet, times the numbers of voters they influence or activate, can be very important in an election. It doesn't take that many in any one large area to swing a vote--and that affects such things as seats in the Congress.

Per this thread, http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=256874, it seems to have penetrated Giuliani's consciousness. He may not be any true friend, but he's aware of the importance of the issue.

Art

 

[Outlaws]

How did we miss the point? He posted something in a blog, a ton of people took action, and a few good sized companies realized very quickly their customers are not on Zumbozo's side of the fence.

Now the only thing I think we are missing is that only one news website considered this news fit to print.

 

[Art Eatman]

The point isn't Zumbo himself, but the reactions by companies to the Internet itself.

Prior to this, companies have seen the Internet as important mostly for providing a way for customers to be customers. Order stuff. Read about products. "Do bidness."

Now they are forced to reckon with it as a possible way to lose business and go broke.

It will carry over into the MSM, hate blogs as it may. In the past, MSM has believed that if it ignores any subject, or "spikes" some news item, nobody will know or care.

You can bet your boots that campaign advisors are taking note of this whole deal.

There are more blogs starting up, daily. There will be more, and the inter-connections and rapid spread of information is scary to TPTB.

It'll be interesting...

Art

 

[Kaylee]

this latest schism is already being used as further evidence of the "need" to regulate firearms -all firearms - more stringently.

Feh, and if no one complained, I bet the author of that little piece would have said "everyone agrees about the "need" to regulate firearms -all firearms - more stringently."

But yeah, what Art said.. this intraweb thing is the best thing to happen for our side since God invented the gas piston.

 

[ceetee]

There have been several science-fiction stories written about how (in some future world) instant feedback from an audience can determine the outcome of a televised or otherwise broadcast event. The most famous of these may be "The Running Man". This bears careful watching. Why is it that a hugely vocal outcry from an otherwise voiceless minority could shift public policy so far, and so quickly?

I mean, let's face it... assuming that each of the three or four thousand gun owners that responded to Zumbo's blog entries, or wrote scathing e-mails, represents 20 other gun owners... that's still only sixty to eighty thousand gun owners out of... What? Eighty million? What comes next? Do politicians change public policy based on internet outrage? Does Congress re-write laws based on the publicly exclaimed vitriol of one-tenth of one percent of the population?

On the incident in question, I do believe that every man has the right to express his opinion through use of whatever medium he chooses, and I also believe that if you loudly proclaim an unpopular opinion, you should be ready to reap the whirlwind. While I feel personally gratified that Jim Zumbo is losing his sponsors, I'm also saddened by the extreme lack of loyalty shown by employers to their employee. It seems to me a harsh way to teach a lesson. What's the best way to reach an anti? Take him shooting, of course. I think efforts should have been made to explore this attitude, not only as espoused by Zumbo, but by McRae and all the others that came out in support of Zumbo's position. Opportunities should have been given to broaden their viewpoints. If, after such opportunities, their attitudes remained the same, then relationships could have been terminated with no hard feelings. As it is, this issue has only further polarized shooters, dividing them into groups, and then driving wedges between those groups.

At a time when all shooters should be united, hunters and non-hunters alike, issues like this can only give the gun-banners more power. We shooters may yet have the opportunity to welcome people like Zumbo back into the fold (as may be). If given that opportunity, we should jump on it. If we don't hang together, surely we shall hang separately...

 

[alucard0822]

This whole deal should be just a taste of things to come on the national political scale. If we respond to threats against our rights with swift and overwhelming action we will be in a much better place than we were in 94 when the Brady bill was passed. Information, statistics and truth are on our side, most of the common lies that the antis spread work only because people don't verify them, and don't know better. In MD we are gearing up to fight a california based AWB, SB43 and spreading the word on this forum and throughout the community and calling for action are the best hope we have to kill it.

 

[Intune]

ceetee, I could see the man being able to mend his ways if he opined that a Bushmaster paled accuracy-wise to a Remmy 700 VLS having done a range test. His diatribe on "assault" rifles was waaay over the top for a gun owner. The firestorm will do more to help our cause than hurt it. I agree with take an Anti shooting. Works almost every time!

 

[Outlaws]

You can bet your boots that campaign advisors are taking note of this whole deal.

Why? As it stands now, the only place I see any info about this whole thing is on a few internet gun blogs, the OutdoorLife website, a small blurb on about 3 of the 6 sponsors websites, and that 1 single news article.

I don't think that counts enough to scare a politician. If this was something that got more press coverage, I would agree. But right now it was just a small "civil war" among the firearm community.

 

[Kaylee]

I dunno.. it does show that these ain't the ol' days... the whole affair arose and effectively ended over a weekend. That's a pretty hefty response, and an absolutely amazing response time.

Most of all though, it really puts a boot to the notion that a pol can get away with "I'm for the second amendment, I remember hunting with my dad.... "

Remember that EBRs have been selling pretty briskly ever since the ban. Heck, aren't ARs along still doing on the order of 100K a year? Even allowing for folks getting multiples, that's a fair amount. Add in everyone buying AKs, SKSs, pistols with so-called "high capacity" magazines.. I'd say we're easily adding a quarter to half a million people every year that would get pretty darned steamed if the gov't decided AWB II was a good idea and they could no longer get replacement parts or magazines.

At the same time, the number of people hunting is declining, isn't it?

Neither of those demographic shifts are something a pol would do well to ignore.

 

[Outlaws]

Yes, it does show the power of the internet, but this Zumbo thing is still a relatively minor thing in the grand scheme of things, not something large enough yet to make a politician take notice or even think twice.

 

[Trebor]

Yes, it does show the power of the internet, but this Zumbo thing is still a relatively minor thing in the grand scheme of things, not something large enough yet to make a politician take notice or even think twice.

I wouldn't be so sure of that. More and more people are getting their news from the net now instead of the MSM. In many ways, the outpouring as a result of this blog was the equivilant of say 20,000 letters to the editor. That's enough for anyone to notice, once they know where to look to gauge public opinon.

Also, do you realize how quick this all happened? The original blog was just posted last Friday, the furor really started on Saturday night and now, just a few days later, the original blog is gone, Zumbo has lost several sponsors, and his career will never be the same. That's a much quicker cycle than if this would have played out in the traditional media.

This still could be, and likely will be, picked up by more "traditional" media outlets as well. Expect to see some coverage of this in the gun rags, and they'll probably be some commentary on this as an example of the power of "new media" on some more general interest publications. Even without the gun angle, this was a big deal for the web. Add the gun angle back in, and this is likely to get some play.

 

[nico]

It's truly not a pretty picture, but may observers say it accurately reflects a widening gap between "traditional" and "non-traditional" shooting enthusiasts.

I'm not sure if I buy that. Take a look at the forums at accurate reloading or 24hour campfire; a lot more hunters "get it" than a lot of non-hunting gun owners would like to give them credit for.

I think it has a lot to do with the fact that "traditional" and "non-traditional" enthusiasts are the same people. It seems like fewer people are buying guns as a tool for hunting, and more people are getting into hunting because they like shooting. Personally, I started shooting with the plan of eventually hunting, but I had been shooting for over 5 years the first time I went hunting (I'm 23 and have been shooting since I was 14). I own a semi-auto pistol (CZ75), semi shotgun (SX2), bolt action rifle (M77), two semi rifles (AR and SKS), and a muzzleloader. I'm not sure what kind of "shooting enthusiast" that makes me, but I can't think of any possible gun ban that wouldn't directly affect me.

cliff notes: a larger proportion of hunters are also recreational shooters than in the past. The idea of "traditional" vs. "non-traditional" shooters seems like a false dichotomy.

btw, somebody needs to tell the author that "fudd" was around long before Zumbo nailed the label to his forehead.

 

[Jim March]

Zumbo's career in gunwriting needs to come to a crashing halt. That may not be "nice", it may not be "fair", but it is absolutely necessary.

Otherwise future attempts to split us will be tried until they succeed.

---

On a purely technical level Zumbo was dead wrong. Heavy-barreled "varmint grade" ARs are shipping that can keep up with most bolt-guns. We've also got oddities like the .50 Beowulf that really would make a dandy deer rifle:

http://gunblast.com/50Beowulf.htm

http://gunblast.com/Alex_Overwatch.htm

It's a dead certainty he hasn't kept up with these developments.

 

[Travis Lee]

For the willfully obtuse among us, Zumbo did his utmost to create a divide between "traditional" shooters and those who shoot military style firearms.

Zumbo defamed us, calling us terrorists, and called for Game departments to ban our firearms from the fields and woods.

Zumbo likes to shoot prairie dogs, and coyotes for no more reason than for the sake of killing. Personally, I can't see the merit of killing critters except for food or self defense.

He uses firearms which 100 years ago WERE state of the art military weapons.

And he has the nerve to call people who mostly put holes in paper, "terrorists".

His words are already being used as a weapon against us by the Brady Bunch.

He called for us to be cast out of the shooting community, and as it turns out, our dollars have more weight, in his world of free guns, ammunition, and hunting jaunts.

He wants nothing to do with "our kind"? We only gave him what he demanded. The wailing I hear sounds so much like "don't leave me" from a woman who attacks you when you were sleeping, gets you arrested for domestic violence, and you still have a restraining order and a date with a judge. Cry me a river!

For those who complain that he has the right of free speech....

His speech is not free, his writing is paid for by Outdoor Life, he was a paid spokesman for Remington, and had a plurality of sponsorship deals.

Almost every such sponsorship contract can be voided by his actions OR HIS SPEECH. Even without our input, insulting a major part of Remington's customer base could have gotten his contract cancelled.

He can keep saying and writing any bigoted spew he likes, but Remington doesn't have to pay for it, and I don't have to buy products of corporations which will.

I think that the only outfit likely to pay for his writings now will be the Brady Campaign. And they are welcome to him.

As I recall he is on the board of the NRA? Let's get him out of there.

A poster previously stated that we are in a WAR with the antis. The Antis are at war with US whether we choose to engage or not.


--Travis--

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

I agree with ceetee.

I've never been hunting, never read outdoor life, and never heard of Jim Zumbo before this incident. But it seems like an awful shame to permanently ostracize someone for having misguided views. Wouldn't a stern but kind rebuke be more helpful to us all? Wouldn't teaching and showing him and others like him the right way be more productive than tossing him out on his ### and slamming the door shut? From what I gather, he has a long history of supporting hunters and gun enthusiasts. Should we let all of the experience and knowledge go to waste because he was dead wrong on one thing?

 

[Outlaws]

I've never been hunting, never read outdoor life, and never heard of Jim Zumbo before this incident. But it seems like an awful shame to permanently ostracize someone for having misguided views. Wouldn't a stern but kind rebuke be more helpful to us all? Wouldn't teaching and showing him and others like him the right way be more productive than tossing him out on his ### and slamming the door shut? From what I gather, he has a long history of supporting hunters and gun enthusiasts. Should we let all of the experience and knowledge go to waste because he was dead wrong on one thing?

Yes.

At a time when all shooters should be united, hunters and non-hunters alike, issues like this can only give the gun-banners more power. We shooters may yet have the opportunity to welcome people like Zumbo back into the fold (as may be). If given that opportunity, we should jump on it. If we don't hang together, surely we shall hang separately...

Or he could just hang us first (like he did) and then he can be the one who gets hanged seperately all by him lonesome self.

 

[JWarren]

He may have gotten that if he had given a REAL appology that indicated that he misrepresented his views and specifically addressed the insults we were forced to indure-- which include a call for legislation, identifying us with terrorists, etc.

Instead, he said his feet hurt and he wrote in haste.

This sounds more like he accidently told what he REALLY thought. Drunk people often tell the truth, too. If that is his beliefs, we don't need him, and I CAN'T trust him. Perhaps one day, with the appropriate actions and statements on his part, I might have reconsidered-- in time. Trust was lost, and trust would have to be regained in ANY situation like this. He hasn't indicated that he has any change in his beliefs, and therefore we would be absolute fools to blindly let this pass.

Everyone calling for us to wrap our arms around him and nurture him into understanding need to understand that he has never specifically addressed the points that anger us. He has never specifically retracted or renounced ANY of this assertions. That smacks of either extreme arrogance or an "I'm sorry I got caught for saying what I believe."

Either way, its bad for him.

Listen.... I'm not heartless. I was willing to believe that the man didn't realilze WHAT exactly he was saying. I was also willing to believe that he probably didn't know what he should be doing to address this community. I was willing to talk to him about it.

I won't go into the details, but I arranged through a close friend of his to have all my phone numbers on Zumbo's desk. I offered to talk to him about what he could do in this situation. I've got my masters in Public Relations with an emphasis in Crisis and Issues Management. I offered to counsel him confidentially and free of charge. I know for a fact that he recieved my offer. My phone didn't ring.

My conscience is clean that I reached out to offer help to a person that I completely was offended by. If he is not addressing this, it is by his own choice, and he lives with the consequences of those choices.

His silence at this point may be a result of legal or PR counsel (although I'd fire any PR person that is telling him to lay low if I were he.) It may be OL forcing him to remain quiet to let this blow over. It can be any number of things. It may well be that he's decided that he will stand by his comments and therefore has abandoned us.

We know that his apology wasn't a real retraction.


John

 

[Can'thavenuthingood]

Well, since he is an NRA board member, I have to wonder how much influence he had over the years IRT other members and the strategic thinking or actions by the NRA.
What was compromised away?
What was minimized?
What was given up to the anti gun entities in order to save a favorite gun?

Did he have any affect on NRA policies?

To say what he did or write it and edit and send for publishing is from years of experience and working within and supporting the NRA. Yet he couldn't keep up with what was going in the rifle world?

I think harm has been done through the years of his kind of thinking within the NRA.

Just my opinion, its been a long day and I'm tired.

Vick

 

[bsf]

I have no problem throwing Mr. Zumbo under the bus. I feel no sympathy for his loss of contracts & reputation. Hunters need to get with the program, if they have not already. I hope this serves as a wake up call to other hunters who are anti-2A. I do not worry about this incident fracturing support for the RKBA. I get tired of being stabbed in the back by anti-RKBA hunters.

This post has been edited for inaccuracies. Mr. Zumbo in not on the NRA Board of Directors. I assumed he was based on previous posts: stupid me. I could not find verification early this morning, but I just found a list in my August American Rifleman magazine. I apologize.

 

[localFFL]

I would like to see him removed from the NRA Board of Directors

Um say WHAT? This anti gun crusader (and now liar) is on the NRA board of freaking DIRECTORS?

By the way, why is it so hard to find a LIST of the NRA board of directors? I just spent 20 minutes searching nra websites and google and couldn't find a complete list. Don't respond to this question, I feel a new thread coming on.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

So one blog post is all it takes to make one a crusader? wow.