King’s Outdoor World Blog

134 Comments Add your own

• 1. Casey Huxoll  |  February 21st, 2007 at 9:24 am

  I think that everyone needs to give Jim a break. sounds to me like they were sitting around having drinks and talking about this and he didnt think and just wrote what he thought. Is there something wrong with having an opinion. i think all he sponsers need to weigh out everything that he has done good for the hunting community and that it is not fair that they do this to him after one comment that doesnt really matter.
  All he said is that he dislikes a gun.
  Big Freaking Deal. Get over it.

• 2. Rober  |  February 21st, 2007 at 9:40 am

  At the time he said what he believes and should stand by it even if it is wrong.

• 3. CJ  |  February 21st, 2007 at 10:45 am

  That is lame - Zumbo is a well respected outdoorsman and he stated an opinion. When did it become so wrong to have an opinion, is he supposed to be politcally correct all the time? Truthfully as a reader I’d rather hear opinions and make up my own mind on issues versus watered down, politically correct, keep sponsors happy writing. Please, we are all grown-ups and can determine whether we agree or not.

  I love Remington but this is lame, lame, lame. It really makes me doubt whether I should continue buying from a manufacturer that supports the right to bear arms but doesnt support the right to free speech.

• 4. Chad  |  February 21st, 2007 at 1:17 pm

  Open mouth insert foot.

• 5. Casey Huxoll  |  February 21st, 2007 at 4:29 pm

  I agree with you Cj this is completly ridiculous. This kind of makes me mad at remington. Just because the guy has an oppinion and says it doesnt mean that people are going to stop buying remington products over his thought on assault rifles.
  they need to write an appology themselves and explain there thinking on terminating his sponsership.

• 6. tony  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 11:23 am

  Jim Zumbo is the only reason i ever subscribed to outdoor life. I guess i don’t have much reason to continue on with the magazine. The way i see it, outdoor life just sufferd a big loss. Mr. Zumbo should’t have to hard of a time finding work. What a shame to have to suffer a loss from a “wise old man” such as Jim.

• 7. Tim Harris  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 11:41 am

  I with Outdoor Life and Remington on this one. If I were the CEO of Remington I’d have done the same thing. Remington has spent millions promoting 2nd Ammendment rights. Jim Zumbo has the right to express his opinion….he’ll have to express it without sponsorship because Remington has the right to sponsor who wishes. Free speech is not without consequence.

• 8. Ron  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 1:25 pm

  If it were me making a statement like that, after 40 years of influencing readers for so many years, I’d have to be so much more carefull about what I said. Part of me felt “how refreshing that he’s actually giving his own opinion” instead of someone PAYING him to say something good about a product. How unfortunate his opinion was contrary to 2nd ammendment rights. Personally, I got tired of his “better than thou” attitude long ago. I’d actually like to see someone else both younger and funner write in Outdoor Life. Maybe the couple from “The Choice” will encourage more “couples” to go out and experience the great outdoors…
  Just my thoughts…

• 9. Clark  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 2:08 pm

  I agree he has the right to express the ridiculous opinion and statements. He also has to accept the consequences for those opinions. Remington, Cabelas, Hi Mountain Jerky and OLN have svered all ties with him. Mossy Oak has done the same as I am sure some of his smaller sponsors will follow suit. He deserves what he gets. He has ruined his career. To call anyone who uses an AR15 for hunting a terrorist is the real killer in his blog.
  I am sure Mr. Zumbo is a good person but he has no concept of the 2nd amendment or who his real audience has been for the last 25 or so years.

• 10. Gary Surrett  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 2:24 pm

  I am troubled by Mr. Zumbo’s comments but, I think that the actions taken by Outdoor Life and Remington are an over reaction. We in the shooting sports need to remember who the enemy really is. It is not a dedicated hunter/shooter like Mr. Zumbo but the anti-gun whackos like Sarah Brady, Chuck Shumer et. al. I read Mr. Zumbo’s appology and I believe he is sincere. I for one, am not perfect and would hope that people who know me would forgive an admitted mistake and consider the body of my actions.

  Gary Surrett
  NRA Life Member

• 11. Kevin  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 3:40 pm

  I thought this was Jim Zumbo’s opinion. Its just a gun, no matter how you look at it. You have to do something with an AR or AK, so why not hunt. Polictical, yes. Remington, Outdoor Life, etc., have made that perfectly clear. If you are a hunter, you can’t have an opinion. I’m just one, so for what it’s worth. I’m going to miss you guys. Give me a call Jim, we will go huntin’.

• 12. Ted K  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 5:09 pm

  As a hunter and an owner of 2 evil assault weapons, it is encouraging to know that people will be struck with fear just by the sight of my guns. I just hope its the bad guys.
  Sad thing in all this is, that we as gun owners aren’t on the same page with who exactly our enemies are (let alone what their methods are that they use against us). The same people who have their sights set on outlawing on the “evil assault rifle” , won’t even take a breath to rest after they accomplish that, and will instead immediatly begin their campaign for removing Mr. Zumbo;’s “more reasonable, more respectable types of firearms”.
  I cannot believe that someone in the outdoor writer/shooting enthusiast world is so clueless as to the ultimate goals of the anti-gun community.

  He didn’t need to apologize, he neeed to be educated. If he refused that, then he deserves total banishment from our community. I liken this to the flyfishing crowd who by and large support algore and other leftist extremist environmentalists. Thinking and saying they are supportijng politicians who advocate cleaner water supplies and environments, they are duped into supporting the very forces who wish to outlaw fishing itself.
  Its all connected, and their goals are gained incrementally, but make no mistake as to what their ultimate goals are. It is imperitive that we sportsmen, (in the truest sense, not kayakers and trekkers. etc.) do not allign ourselves with those organizations who wish to end our ways of life. And they do.

• 13. Jim Zumbo and Outdoor Lif&hellip  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 7:10 pm

  […] Here is a release just issued by Outdoor Life Editor-in-Chief Todd Smith about the now “official” broken ties with Jim Zumbo. If you are wondering what this is all about, read the post here to get caught up. Outdoor Life And Jim Zumbo Part Ways […]

• 14. P Hughes  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 9:18 pm

  I was saddened to learn the Mr. Zumbo held the opinion he stated in his blog. It is most distressing that we still have people on our community that believe such nonsense. What is more distressing is Mr. Zumbo proved beyond a shadow of a doubt to me that his apology is a false one. There is no way a man with his credentials and his life experience could possibly be unfamiliar with this issue. This very issue has been fully examined and vetted in our community for 15 years now.
  He is sorry? Yes, sorry that he told us his true opinion and will have to live with our response thereto. His false apology changes nothing. Outdoor Life, Remington and Cabelas did the right thing in refusing to support him any further. Mr. Zumbo has the right to opine as he pleases but others do not have to continue to support his endeavors.

• 15. Steve  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 9:41 pm

  I was irritated with Zumbo’s comments, but satisfied with his apology. But where are our priorities? If there was an equal response to every comment the Brady campaign and their Demokrats make against guns, it would prove formidable to them. I hope that everybody that criticized Zumbo has already written their respective State Representatives about their disapproval of the proposed assault weapons ban, as THAT poses a much greater threat to the gun community than the comments of Zumbo ever would. If you haven’t made an effort in this respect also, then you are a hypocrite.

• 16. Brad3000  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 10:08 pm

  This guy is heading for a flamewar… and the McBrady Bunch has
  already picked up on his comments. If he had 2 brain cells to rub together he should have known that this is NOT what the 2A & gun ownership issue needs right now - what an idiot. The damage is done.

  The 2A is NOT about any particular black ugly gun, a pretty wooden stock or whether it can hold 5rds or 20. Its about the lawful owners shooting their sport with their choice and about defense of self, family and country. Hunting is just a sub-set of the bigger picture and I hope the blaise hunters out there wake up and smell the coffee as theres a stom coming and it started on Feb 13th with HR-1022. Once they hand discretion of what a good hunting gun is to the AG everything is on the table. Remember the UK and Australia while pondering the big fiasco of the Canadian Gun Registry.

  This guy has done far more damage than he can comprehend.

  Brad

• 17. Gene Temple  |  February 22nd, 2007 at 11:30 pm

  The actions taken by Outdoor Life and Remington are just plain good business sense. Regardless of where you come down on the issue, this guy ticked off a lot of people and his sponsors will lose business if they don’t lose him.

  As to him - he has a right to his opinion, even if it’s patently wrong, inflammatory, and a stab in the back to many who’ve supported him over the years. Similarly the businesses that supported him have a right to drop him like a rock.

  The Brady Campaign is already quoting his article in their literature. Anyone who reads the original article will recognize that he meant every word. The apology doesn’t even deny that - it basically says that he’s sorry he’s losing his sponsors. Well, that’s why we asked his sponsors to can him - because we and they have that right as well!

• 18. Larry Farrell  |  February 23rd, 2007 at 2:29 am

  Why blast Zumbo for a silly, flannel mouthed, stupid, 1st Amendment Protected Opinion, and not BANKRUPT S&W for it’s traitorous deed?

  Huh?

  MAKES NO SENSE!!

  BOYCOTT S&W!!

  Larry
  Gun Owners of NJ
  908-277-1111

• 19. Bret  |  February 23rd, 2007 at 8:27 am

  Wow, I didn’t realize that I train, actively shoot and own “terrorist” weapons.

• 20. M. J. Way  |  February 23rd, 2007 at 8:48 am

  From what I read, JZ was not advocating doing away with AR and AK style weapons, just making the very valid point that they have no place in the field. Sure, a gun’s a gun no matter what it looks like, but in my humble opinion, short barrels, folding stocks and large capacity magazines are not suitable for hunting game. Sure they will do the job, but if I see some yahoo toteing one in the woods, you can bet I’ll be headed for the truck.

  As hunters dwindle nation wide, it is imperative that we who remain do whatever we can to protect our sport against any untoward imagies that the “Anties” can use against us.

• 21. Donald Canard  |  February 23rd, 2007 at 9:56 am

  So now that this dustup is settling, we ask for dark underlying motivations. What if this wasn’t just a brainfart on Zumbo’s part ? Two alternatives come to my mind:

  1. he was trying to provoke exactly the response he got. Good man. Why would he want to do that ? What purpose is served by producing evidence of how the shooting public feels about our right to bear whatever arms we choose ? This leads to:

  2. the rich comfortable mainstream of the US shooting community (I’m thinking of fellas with $2000 trap guns, you can think of the Lexus-and-canned-hunts crowd) including their representatives within the NRA leadership are having incontinence problems at the prospect of a double-barreled Democratic Congress running amuck and the three witches Feinstein Pelosi and Clinton coming in the night to squeeze their balls while plundering their gun safes.

  Well, don’t worry, men, we’ll protect you. You may be the same kind of spineless riffraff that’s facilitated oppression throughout human history, but you should have the same freedom to exercise your unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness at more than 2500 fps that we do. I hear drycleaning is best for soiled worsted wool, and urine comes out of Italian leather if you dry it quickly, in case you need advice in that area.

  I note that said double-barreled Dem Congress has just emitted its first, easy-to-anticipate yelp in this year’s round of the Great Attempt to Ban Satanic Assault Weapons, HR1022 sponsored by that poor creature Carolyn McCarthy. While the text is not available yet, we do ask ourselves whether the “leadership” of the US shooting community is mustering their usual fortitude and weighing the costs and benefits of reaching some accomodation with the gun banners which let them keep their Sunday toys and get rid of those crazies with milspec weapons who make them kind of nervous anyway. They talk about guns being for overthrowing the established order, but since the leadership is firmly entrenched in the established order, does that mean them, too ? Woo hoo, hold on there we might have to rethink this.

  Was the Zumbo post a float of a position of retrenchment to the redoubt in the face of fearsome Democratic aggression ? We can’t do any better…

  It seems like the mainstream gun culture is greatly concerned with its ability to get it up, as evinced by the number of ads for erectile dysfunction curatives in its publications. Maybe if they were less worried about getting it up and more concerned with identifying a course of appropriate, and principled, action, designed first not to maintain membership headcount and revenue but to protect the firearms-related interests of all US citizens, they might be more effective in dealing with the antigun forces. We’ll be waiting for you to join us if you get to that point, fellas.

• 22. Raymond  |  February 23rd, 2007 at 11:07 am

  Yes, Mr. Zumbo may have made comments that have offended many. He has made an apology. I believe he truly regrets saying what he did and I believe he will do his best to understand the position of these gun owners that choose to hunt with this type of weapon. Does he deserve to be crucified for his opinion? I hardly think so. Wake up people, we’ve all made mistakes. Jim Zumbo is a talented writer, hunter and supporter of our 2nd. amendment. Give me a break. - Give Jim one too…

• 23. Monty  |  February 23rd, 2007 at 2:00 pm

  A sad situation for all involved; there are no winners here. I totally support everyone’s protection under the First, Second, etc. Amendments. However, when a person becomes a “public” figure, an “expert,” a “celebrity,” then they are held to a higher standard than and by the rest of us. Whether that’s right or not is irrelevant; it’s a fact of life that these celebrities must accept when they step into that arena. Their words and actions have far greater power to influence others than people like me. They have a greater obligation to weigh the potential impacts of their words and actions on their constituency, and the results of their inattention to these ramifications should and normally will be severe.

  I own an AR, and I enjoy hunting coyotes with it. I’m not a terrorist. I’m a military combat veteran and former federal law enforcement officer. I was not offended by “what” he said, but I am extremely distressed by “who” said it. Mr. Zumbo’s unfounded, totally inaccurate remarks deserved prompt and decisive action because his elevated celebrity position gives his opinions extremely wide-ranging impacts.

  Now, I regret the loss of Mr. Zumbo to the sportsman’s and sportswomen’s public community. I do believe he’s honestly sorry for his inappropriate comments, his acceptance of responsibility for the firestorm is most refreshing in this day-and-age of blame shifting, and I think the punishment is a tad excessive. I commend his willingness to learn more about ARs and those of us who own, like, and use them.

  One poster mentioned arrogance. It’s too easy for outdoor writers to fall into a trap that leads to self-aggrandizement; they can become “privileged” and “entitled”. It has bothered me for years that writers have an inherent conflict of interests when they seek and/or accept free products and services from the very industries they promote (hunting & fishing guides, ammunition manufacturers, firearms companies, etc.). We shout outrage about our elected officials accepting freebies from lobbyists, but not much is ever said about the same situation involving outdoor writers. I’m not accusing any writer in particular, but if the shoe fits….

• 24. Jim Walker  |  February 23rd, 2007 at 2:33 pm

  Mr. Zumbo’s comments are just what our new national anti-gun Democratic leadership needs to add fuel to their upcoming avalanche of anti-gun bills. Imagine their joy at reading such an anti-”assault rifle” opinion from a supposed lifelong 2A supporter. Outdoor Life and Remington did the right thing, and I applaud their decision. As for Mr. Zumbo’s apology: I may have read things more phony, but right off I can’t recall when…..

• 25. Mark Spisak  |  February 23rd, 2007 at 4:55 pm

  The antigun and antihunting crowd knows very well that if you can subdivide hunters and shooters into smaller groups they are easier to defeat. Sporting arms versus self preservation arms, deer hunters versus varmint hunters, black powder muzzleloaders verus modern in-line guns, if we are to continue to enjoy both liberties we must all stand together. Remember if they outlaw something, that person must likely won’t be standing there when they come looking at your favorite sport or gun?

• 26. bob  |  February 23rd, 2007 at 7:18 pm

  Maybe Jim Carmicheal can go over and have a talk with him.

• 27. Joe  |  February 24th, 2007 at 4:06 am

  I have used traditional hunting rifles most of my life: from 1972 to 2006. I was one of the “Why would I want to use one of those inaccurate semi-auto military rifles when my trusty one-shot one-kill bolt rifle is perfect?” people. I would have headed for the truck if I saw someone in the woods toting one until I realized, after putting on a scope, that my AR match rifle was more acurrate than any of them. Now I can actuaully get two or more accurate shots at multiple coyotes or pigs.
  Today a friend proved to two old timers that he could accurately hit at 364 yds. (ranged) more than once with an M1A. They did not accept the challenge to try with their bolt guns.

• 28. Bill Graves  |  February 24th, 2007 at 9:32 am

  I am a retired West Point career Special Forces, Ranger, Master Parachutist, etc, Army officer who has served in hot spots around the world for almost three decades, wrapping up my career with a four year stint in Colombia. I started hunting in my home state of Michigan almost four decades ago, but I agree that AK-47s are not hunting rifles. They are weapons of war. Having been on the receiving end of these tools of way, I want to point out that they were designed to be cheap, rugged and easy to maintain. They were also designed to be used on short bursts of automatic fire while moving forward in the assault and not aimed fire. Anyone who sees a need to hunt with an assault weapon - with a 20-30 round mag - should introspectively look at the reason they stepped into the woods with this weapon…good for hunting or as a testosterone booster? If I need 20-30 rounds on a hunt then I need to do some serious range work. Shame on the “politically correct” NRA machine. Jim Zumbo, who can match his outdoors hunting credentials against anyone’s, has been done wrong. Jim, you have many fans who enjoy the quiet of the woods and question the motives of the lobbying “suits” plying the halls of Washington.

• 29. Dave W.  |  February 24th, 2007 at 10:47 am

  Jim Zumbo gave me my first safety lecture on deer hunting and checked in my first buck that is still on my basement wall….way back in 1962 at West Point. Without him, those of us who hunt and shoot will have lost a most valuable ally. Sure he had a “really stupid moment” and “buried his foot in his mouth” but he stood up like a man and admitted it and apologized to us….how many of us would have the guts to do that. In our zeal to torture him I hope we don’t lose sight of the fact that we need Jim Zumbo and all those like him if we’re going to keep our firearms and our way of life.

• 30. Ron Jensen  |  February 24th, 2007 at 5:39 pm

  Unfortunately, Zumbo’s apologies will not be quoted and requouted by the gun grabbers. His original poorly conceived comments will be and are.

  It is amazing to me that he would not have thought of this before it was too late.

• 31. Juan Flores  |  February 24th, 2007 at 9:09 pm

  You have to admit that AK’s are one of the the small arms of choice used by the terrorists. He did not say people who hunted with them were terrorists, but used the word as a descriptive adjective with the weapons. Let’s all be honest about this. I have used a Nazi rifle (K98 Mauser) to hunt. I don’t think that makes me a Nazi. This vociferous response is much ado about nothing. He was taken to the woodshead and has repented. Time to move on.

• 32. CJ145  |  February 24th, 2007 at 10:37 pm

  I have read all of the posts, and have a few things to say. Yes Zumbo was wrong for blogging what he did, however, who hasn’t thought or said something that they later regret. I own an assault rifle, I also own several other firearms as well. I don’t hunt with the assault rifle as it does’t seem fair to have a chance to shoot at game that never even knows you are there. If you need to hunt with an assualt rifle, then you should possibly look into practicing with a single shot to get over the trigger happy inpulses of multiple shots.

  I understand that you may not have it on full auto, but come on, why would you honestly need a 20 round mag for coyotes or prarie dogs?

  As for Zumbo, he has been someone who has stood up for decades when others would not. He believes is our rights to bear arms, and we should support him for stating his oppinions even if we don’t like what he said. How come every time the one person creates a little stink there is this hugeoutcome? If I would have blogged his comments, noone would have cared.

  This just seems far too blown out of proportion, and I will continue to buy Zumbos books and articles as they come available.

• 33. grant  |  February 24th, 2007 at 10:54 pm

  well ive made mistakes before although ive never done them on a national level and with somthing so damaging to so many people. now that the comment has made it into the wrong hands ill have to admit i am a bit worried . an assault rifle isnt my first choice for hunting in most situatuions,but i do enjoy the right to use one if i would like to in which i have done many times. i also respect people that choose them as there first choice of hunting. i accept his apology and forgive him as all should do because we all need to stick together and help him fix his mistake and make sure antis know it was a uneducated opinon, like they have done themselves for for years and we dont support it. for all the thousands of good things hes done its all erased by one bad comment, give him a bit of a break and remember that he has done more for our hunting rights than most. yeah he managed to get his foot far in his mouth this time but how about the many times before. ithink he will be a bit more alert on his comments from now on .

• 34. grant  |  February 24th, 2007 at 10:57 pm

  oh yeah if ted nugent forgives hime and will hunt with him i think we all can as well.

• 35. mike johnson  |  February 25th, 2007 at 10:08 am

  LOOKS LIKE A SERIOUS OVER REACTION BY ALL YOU GIJOES.FOR THE SAKE OF THE TIMES WE LIVE IN AND MAYBE THE IMAGE OF THE YOUNG HUNTERS(NOT SHOOTERS)WE SHOULD PUT OUT A BETTER IMAGE. YOU DONT HAVE TO LOOK LIKE RAMBO OR JACK BAUR TO GO HUNTING. THESE GUNS ARE GREAT GUNS MAYBE KEEP THEM ON THE RANGE NOT THE FIELD.

• 36. Michael J. Trangaris  |  February 25th, 2007 at 12:16 pm

  With all the hoopla over the “gun” issue the focus has become defensive. I think Zumbo is correct. These assault rifles were not intended to be a sportman’s tool. They are for killing human beings; otherwise know as the “enenmy”. The only problem is there is no enemey. There are only fellow americans; at least here in the lower 48, Hawaii and Alaska. The threat of AL Quida is limited even though the Bush administration would have us believe otherwise. I recognize that there are threats but how does that relate to the constitutional guarantee of the right to bear arms. We have forgotten why our founding fathers thought it pertinent and essential to guarantee that right. Many of these “gun toting fanantics” have probably never read the consitution or really studied the beginnings of our nation. Yes, I agree with Zumbo about using assault rifles on prairie dogs, etc.; how rediculous. What is next? Shooting ants with elephant guns.

  Let us get to the heart of the matter. Why do we need guns? The answer is to protect us from the abuse of government. The people have a right to fair and just goverment. When that can not be had by political and diplomatic means we have a right to secure it through revolution; the main premise of the “Declaration of Independence”. So when I think of my right to bear arms I don’t need an assault rifle to shoot woodchucks; but I might need it to shoot some treasonous @@#$$ that might want to abridge my freedoms and exploit me and my loved ones. The thought I have an asault rifle and am willing to use it to insure my freedom will hopefully give the misguided, over ambitious, usurping, ##@$ pause for thought; pause to reconsider the advantages of democracy and the rule of the people, by the people and for the people.

  So Zumbo, sorry you wused out. Sorry you sold out to the great machine of greed and apologized for being right. Saying we do not need assault rifles to kill prarie dogs is dead accurate. Also, it is not saying we don’t have a right to own them. Hopefully, no one will ever test our resolve on the homeland or they will find that the “American Revolutionary Spirit” is alive and well. In the meantime I shoot my rodents with a pellet gun and save the big stuff for real vermin should they show up.

• 37. Shane  |  February 25th, 2007 at 12:20 pm

  Beware of the enemy within….

• 38. Stan  |  February 25th, 2007 at 9:50 pm

  As a NRA member, I am shocked at the lack of compassion. The man was simply stating his opinion on the use of assault rifles for
  hunting. He made a couple of comments that he has apologized for!
  Does he have to shave his head and check into a rehab center to get some forgiveness?

• 39. B. Brown  |  February 25th, 2007 at 10:06 pm

  I noticed some of our blue state gun owners seem to agree with mr. zumbo. Thank God for the mid-west and south.

• 40. Don  |  February 25th, 2007 at 10:17 pm

  I agree with Jim Zumbo- assault rifles should
  not be used for hunting. It sounds to me like
  some kind of political baloney. Everyone is
  entitled to their own opinion without hearing
  from every idiot in the country.

• 41. Kevin  |  February 26th, 2007 at 1:09 am

  Zumbo made the ultimate error. He defied the party line, and he belongs to a party that does not tolerate any dissent.

  The far-right do not tolerate freedom of thought, or differences of opinion. They cannot agree to disagree on anything.

  They are paranoid fascists who think you are either “with them” or “against them”.

  This is what you get when you defy fascists. You get thrown under the wheels of the machine you helped build. Good goin.

• 42. Mike Glaser  |  February 26th, 2007 at 1:22 pm

  To those who choose the unfortunate comments of Jim Zumbo as a platform from which to criticize the NRA, I would like to direct a few comments. I joined the NRA while still a police officer, because I saw the agenda of the Anti-gun Lobby that was afforded advertising space in certain publications geared toward police officers, and because I recognize that the dignity that is inherent to police work comes from a group of men and women who assume a calculated risk to enforce the Law of the Land within the boundaries of the Constitution. A lot of gun owners who bash the NRA do so, not out of a sense of responsibility to the community, as they would have you believe, but simply because rather than standing up to the Anti-Gun Lobby, it is easier to pander to those considerable forces in politics and the media who despise the Second Amendment by somehow implying that the other guy is an extremist but you are “reasonable.” The Anti-gun Lobby looks upon any capitulation to its ill-advised and malignant agenda as weakness, pure and simple. It also seeks to ultimately ban private ownership of all firearms, down to and including muskets, as its “final solution.” I have stated before that I do not choose to hunt, but I will support your right to hunt to the bitter end. For you to denigrate the NRA because you think that it somehow makes you look better to the gun-banners is nothing less than cowardice and folly. Believe it or not, we are currently involved in a civil war in this Nation being waged between people who believe that freedom marks the difference between living and merely existing, and between those who despise freedom as being too dangerous, too dirty, too selfish, too expensive and simply too unfair to be enjoyed by this and future generations. If choosing to live in freedom makes me an extremist, than I will wear the label proudly. There have been a multitude of “extremists” who have gone before me who sacrificed their lives so that you and I and our families might live in liberty. If you in all of your “restraint and reason” feel otherwise, make no mistake about it that, unwittingly or otherwise, you are tyranny’s best friend.

• 43. FM  |  February 26th, 2007 at 4:33 pm

  Its sad in this day and age that a person can’t express his thoughts or feelings on a certain matter, what happen to “FREEDOM OF SPEECH”. Mr. Jim Zumbo didn’t attack anyone personally he was attacking a rifle that has no place in the hunting world. So much for Outdoor Life, won’t buy that magizine, PETA will love this and that sucks.

• 44. Steve Sykora  |  February 26th, 2007 at 4:55 pm

  I would like to let you know that I agree with Jim Zumbo’s comments. I’ve dropped my NRA membership, because of there support for automatic weapons. I now will not be buying Outdoor Life!
  I’ve been a hunter all of my life and I don’t believe that automatic weapons, especially assault type weapons, are a needed component for fair chase hunting. If a person wants to own one, I questions their motives. I feel very confident that any semi-auto shotgun or rifle will adequately protect me and my family.
  I certainly agree with the right to own firearms, but I don’t believe that Mr. Zumbo was attacking that right. I believe, as usual, the NRA is blowing the “attack on gun ownership” out of proportion.
  Finally, the demographics in the United States are changing. Hunting and gun ownership are in decline, and supporting the assault weapons ownership will scare many of the non gun owners and non hunters into a position of total ban of gun ownership.

  Thank You,

• 45. C. B. Hall  |  February 26th, 2007 at 7:04 pm

  Hi there to all,

  I have read with much interest at all this back biting, insolent remarks, brainless thinking from people, feeling a need for retaliation.

  I am a Viet Nam era Army Veteran proud of my service to my country at that time. The United States Army trained me as an 11 Bravo infantryman and I am experienced and was trained and qualified on all types of military firearms and munitions of that period.

  First, I am not an active hunter at the present, nor am I an NRA member. I have hunted, enjoyed it, and finally just didn’t have time to devote to it anymore. I am just a joe blow off the side of a NE Tennessee mountain that has nothing wrong with his logic and thinking abilities.

  It could be that because I am not an active member of the “hunting, gun owners, activist community” that I can evaluate this situation from conception to the present in an unbiased and unprejudiced.
  I have no axe to grind, no need or desire to try to destroy a great man (human being), with evidently recognized authority, position, and expertise.
  While I now recognize and see the prominence and effect that Jim Zumbo’s words have when in print, my logic is I, nor most likely Mr. Zumbo realized that this simple opinionated expression(constitutionally guaranteed, i.e like the 2nd Ammendment if I can parallel here sensibly) could or would cause or set off or give the impetus for latent, closet, do gooders to come out of the woodwork and get their fifteen seconds of fame and publication, by making this into a Jim Zumbo Vs. the 2nd ammendment rights of America.
  Oh of course, the businesses (OL, Cabella’s,Gerber,etc) are concerned more with with the bottom line $$$ more than anything or anyone else in their organization and operational philosophy- many decisions made is made without regard to the “human factor” in this, just the money. I personally think and from personal experiences over my career, know this mentality and have been in exactly the same position as Mr. Zumbo is in as a “Man without a Country”.
  It is one thing to be on top of it all one day—AND the next day be relegated to dirt under someone’s feet being trodden over. The blow and affect to the individual that has made a mistake is often overlooked. and all his credentials and accomplishments being a NON decision making factor is incomprehensible to me. Granted guns, gun owners, hunters, whomever the “Brady bunch zealots” all come into the corporate decision making– that has left Mr. Zumbo spinning in the wind, with very few covering “his back”.

  I realize the sentiment is treating this as some type of platform, or issue to make Mr. Zumbo the “whipping boy” for whatever purpose or reason, totally ignoring and leaving out, his contributions and sacrifices he has made over this career to work for, promote, and bring pleasure into the lives of those whom a month ago worshipped him and others of relative same status and position, who have basically given their lives, sacrificed their families, missed alot of domestic family things that life is all about, and lived the glamorous life, we see in his celebrity status. Let me say, yes glamorous and intriguing, but only at the expense of what us regular folks take for granted, our everyday normalcy hum drum lives. You know watching the kids play ball, going into work everyday, a trip to the walmart whenever we need something. Mr. Zumbo has missed our normal peaceful lives and trials, by trying to promote, and do good for hunters and people that recreationally enjoy it. The end result is Mr. Zumbo has enriched and made better the way for the “hunting community” and gun owners by giving his life for our good.
  Now the bottom line is this—Is this really a Jim Zumbo Vs the World, is this a failure to recognize and give credit to someone who has done so much for the “community”, OR is it merely yet another great, famous, credentialed person, with feelings and family and emotions, being done wrong by the very segment of the population that recognized and worshipped him and his works only a couple of weeks ago. Is it a situation for opportunistic people/companies/CEO’s to take advantage of and use for their selfish best interests.

  I personally feel, conscientiousness and ’scruples’ needs to and must come into this. The moral judgments and inflammatory remarks are more divisive than anything contained in Mr. Zumbo’s words he published. The damaging actions of his supposed backers and supporters are understood but in my judgment are only demonstrative of how cheap and expendible the human factor, hard work, sacrifice, and accomplishment factors really are.

  This is the time to rally, to come together and use Mr. Zumbo’s right to express his ideas (again contitutionally guaranteed like the right to bear arms). If he was mistaken, misunderstood, whatever on what he said due to not fully understanding the “black rifle” implications, then let us go forward with him, let us support this great educator of hunting, and give him a chance to continue to discover the applications of these rifles for legitimate hunting applications. Mr. Zumbo I am sure has in other things and areas over his career, has changed 360 on less controversial things, and used it as a means to educate the rest of us. I honestly, truthfully, believe he will do the same thing concerning application of “black rifles”.
  I beg the detractors, the zealots, the very people who created this to re-evaluate their position, their thinking, the benefits of having Mr. Zumbo go forward, pick it ALL back up and use his abilites and notoriety to promote and expand on the use the the “black rifles” he mentioned in his first opinion. I think this will be the beginning for a stronger platform, a stronger united we stand expression, than what has brought about all the ‘changes’ that leaves us where and Mr. Zumbo is now. He now knows and I believe he will make it a obsession to discover, explore, and use his writing abilities and persona to bring us together, reunited even stronger than before. We need to utilize Mr. Zumbo not exile him to obscurity.

  This is the opportune time to show, that an opinion and thinking can be reflected on and changed to support the Constitution guarantees. Taking sides, with unknown people trying to grab 15 lines of fame and pseudo power, with yet another anti Zumbo opinion which may be contrarily used by others to build their case based on the craziness of their non-thinking criticisms used. I feel if people wise up instead of jumping on the condemn Jim Zumbo band wagon, we will see this for what it is and wonder who is orchestrating it—OL, NRA, Brady or are we our own worst enemy by our reactions. Sometimes the most popular reaction and position is not the wisest.
  C.B.H.

• 46. grant  |  February 26th, 2007 at 8:33 pm

  what the heck is wrong with an assault rifle on the hunting field if you can excel with it fine and its not like you can take it with a 30 round clip and go light the s*** out of deer they are varmint hunting!!!!! its illegal in alot of states to hunt big game with them anyway(if they can be switch to fully auto or hold more than i think 5 rds here in utah they are illegal .) there is nothing wrong with an assault style gun in any sense plus they are a lot of fun to plink around with. if you want one for your protection than why not !maybe people feel more secure with them even though a shot gun loaded with buckshot from close range with rip an intruder up worse than a semi auto ar..hey why not outlaw 50 bmgs while your at it since you can shoot 1500 yards with them or why not outlaw bird shot since they can shoot more bbs than an ar can shoot . this is getting out of control this is america and if i want to pop a coyote with my ar-15 because it reloads faster so i have a better chance at killing them with a quicker follow up shot should i happen to miss to keep them away from our calves than so be it. in my opinion if your against any gun your no better than one of those antis trying to steal your favorite hunting rifle. which for some people is a mini 14 or an ak or an ar 15 or what ever you want it to be! why because we live in america . if you don’t like them don’t use them its that simple!!! all it takes is one gun to be banned and the antis gain plenty of power to make other rifles follow the ban. that new hr 1022 law or what ever they call it trying to be introduced will ban a ruger 10/22 which was my first rifle and one of my favorites along with thousands of other people . and i want it to be my childs first as well!

• 47. greg  |  February 27th, 2007 at 8:36 am

  Are you kidding me! Do you people really believe that Jim Zumbo does not support firearms of all kinds or the 2nd amendment just because he wrote that stupid blog. If I got mad at someone every time they spouted an idiotic opinion when they were in a bad mood I would never stop being angry. Make no mistake, the NRA has lost a powerful and important ally with this move.

• 48. Matt J  |  February 27th, 2007 at 4:47 pm

  Although Mr. Zumbo chose and fashioned his words carelessly, it is a complete tragedy! A super nice guy, who has dedicated his life to the promotion of guns and hunting. No where in his article did he propose the ban on ownership. He called for the image of hunting to not be influenced by the negative image (and I agree the “black gun” is a negative image amongst the Joe’s on the street). I believe his view is shared by many more gun owners and hunters than you might imagine. An extreme over reaction by many, and I for one have severed my ties with them.

  I am a life endowment member of the NRA, an am disappointed in their cannibalizing response to this issue. I am Life member of the NAHC, SCI, and many local clubs. I have met Mr. Zumbo, and he did not deserve this violent “death spiral” as he has. I will miss his show, it is the only one where you do not have to be from the south to understand and enjoy. As a western hunter, he is the consummate western hunter.

• 49. bedont  |  February 27th, 2007 at 7:18 pm

  I completley agree with you jim.
  I dont like the idea that AR and AK rifles are being used for hunting.

• 50. Austin Elliott  |  February 28th, 2007 at 3:50 am

  I think this whole thing is being blown way out of proportion, and I think Outdoor Life and Remington should both be ashamed for behaving exactly like their liberal counterparts. All of us in the hunting and shooting world believe in the 2nd Ammendment, but does that mean that anyone who strays from the strict party line should be tarred and feathered? I’ve been hunting and shooting since I was old enough to hold a gun, and I agree essentially with everything Mr. Zumbo said. No self respecting hunter would hunt with an assault rifle, regardless of the game. Anyone who tries to argue that AK’s and AR’s are not assault rifles is as rediculous as those who try to expand the assault rifle family to any weapon that has a magazine and holds more than ten rounds. Assault rifles are not hunting firearms, and when hunters use them, it gives non-hunters ammunition against our sport and our heritage.

• 51. Matt J  |  February 28th, 2007 at 9:04 am

  We as hunters need to figure out how we can preserve Jim Zumbo’s position in the hunting world. He is a hunter first, and I believe his motive was honorable, to preserve the image of hunting. No one alive today has done so much to preserve the honor of big game hunting…with guns. He did not make an anti second amendment statement. FLASH…hunting preferences are not second amendment issues! He caused some folks to take offense, but I believe their response is quite indicative of poor self image…point made.

  Get over it, and work on your image folks, that was IMO the message, not take your guns.

  BTW, I own the “black gun” but I do not hunt it, it was not made to hunt with. I do not hunt with semis anyway, so I do have bias…as you all do and have stated rather viciously.

• 52. Matt J  |  February 28th, 2007 at 9:12 am

  I guess my button is pushed this morning, but I want to make an observation.

  Last night I watched the outdoor channel, and during that time there were a couple gun ads, one by Panther Arms. Even the gun maker does not “advertise” their product as a hunting implement. the add was universally about competition shooting; target, defense games, etc. Hey if you want to use them, OK, but i have yet to see one in the field…wonder why?

  BTW, I turned it off at 7:30 PM…had enough of the “ya’all.”

• 53. c Fiscella  |  March 1st, 2007 at 9:29 pm

  This is long over due. Jim Zumbo is entitled to his opinion but unfortunately he has written divisive and negative columns in the past, that serve not as debate but a bullying attitude. As a younger hunter and avid sportsman I am sick of the in fighting amonst my fellow sportsman. Jim Zumbo is one of the leftovers from that “Old School” mentality that seems to demonize anyone who he disagrees with. We need to stop this “Old School” negative behavior and unite to work things out, or we are finished. The “My way or the highway” attitudes have no place in the sportsman culture anymore. His time has come and gone. It’s time for him to move on. Enjoy retirement. Kudos to OL and Remington. I’m keeping my subscription!

• 54. Jeff  |  March 2nd, 2007 at 4:04 am

  I have read Mr. Zumbo’s articles and books for years. I too had the same opion of AR style rifles until I bought one and outfitted it for long range shooting. I have never had a bolt gun near as good, including Remington. I’m sure if Mr. Zumbo follows through with his plan to hunt with Ted Nudgent that his feelings will change. I know I want to get a .308 to use deer hunting.

  I think that people are over reacting to this. If OL and Remington had let this go Jim would have gotten quite a bit of feedback from AR and AK fans, which I’m sure he could get over and still maybe evn have been able to appreciate a well setup AR after having shot one more.

  But now the antis are being drawn to this because of the kneejerk reaction. Hopefully those at Remington and OL have the same kneejerk reaction to the antis when they use this.

• 55. Mark DeFrancisco  |  March 2nd, 2007 at 10:37 am

  Jim Zumbo has been publishing hunting articles for most of all our lives. I cannot rember a time without his professional take on western hunting. I have read his blog now in question.
  As a dedicated hunter of over 35 years, I am appalled at the reaction of Outdoor Life, Remmington, and anyone else who has taken a stand against this legend of American hunting.
  When did the second ammendment superceed the first ammendment of free speech?
  Agree or not with Mr. Zumbo, NO ONE has the right to challenge his integrity and commitment to all hunters.
  And certainly no one has the right to take away his first ammendment rights to speak freely.
  If you disagree, that is YOUR right.
  Mr. Zumbo, I’d hunt with you any time and more hunters support you than condem you.
  Outdoor Life and Remmington should be made to realize that they have stepped on the rights of free speech and pay for their mistake as you write from a more respectful publication soon, and we will all shoot firearms NOT made by Remmington.
  I personally will trash my 870 and 1100!

• 56. c.m.  |  March 2nd, 2007 at 11:01 am

  im not a hunter or a gun owner. i just happened to read about this jim zumbo on a piece of discarded newspaper i was using to pack a box with. i looked up his biography and he’s a remarkably accomplished authority in his field, it really is a shame that his career could literally end over one gun! or really over one word. “terrorist” was obviously the word that got under everyone’s skin. and he maybe shouldnt have used it. but he certainly shouldnt apologize for what he meant to write. he, as a hunter, is preserving the purity of his sport. those who profit from munitions and war are using hunters as pawns to keep making money off of human death all over the world. we all have the right to bear arms to defend ourselves (or our “honor”, depending on how drunk we get) and thats cool, but make no mistake: a gun is a gun is a gun is not true. guns that are designed to take out multiple troops, or rival gang members are not really meant to help you bring home that trophy elk, although they might help. and zumbo just wants to distance himself, and you too, from that sort of thing. if you are a hunter you should be proud of what he’s doing. if you are a gun enthusiast you should stop and think. don’t get your apples caught up with his oranges. he may have offended you, but does it at all affect his authority when it comes to game hunting? you know in your heart the answer is no.

• 57. C.Whitmore  |  March 2nd, 2007 at 3:25 pm

  In the 100 or more blogs that I have read so far, at least 80 percent still do not have a clue as to the real battle that us gun owners are facing in these times. Yes, I agree that Jim slipped in his words. But do all of you really beleive that his is still not on OUR side. You would be a fool to think otherwise.
  As a member of the NRA, who at times I might not agree with them in some of their statements, I will still stand by them. Why? Because we all need to. That is, we all need to stick together in the battle to keep our rights to bear arms.
  We have a image that all of us must maintain, especialy in the eyes of those that would pounce at the opportunity, those eyes being the anti gun lovers.
  I myself own an SKS rifle. or the so called assault weapon. Would I use it for hunting? No! Why? Because I want to make sure that no one sees me using it in the field. Get real everyone! Yes, it can kill game, when used accuratly. And so can the AR-15. I’ve read the letters from those that they have used there .223’s for taking deer. But a real hunter knows in their heart that the puny little 55 grain bullet is not the best choice for taking medium game. Then there are those that want to use the 50-cal bmg for antelope. Are they out of their minds? Have any of you seen the pictures of any of the terrorists that have been shot with one of those rounds. They are turned inside out! A true hunter kills game to eat it. All of it. Not waste it with this caliber of a gun. They are just wanting to see what it does or, what they can accomplish with it.
  Do any of you remember Jack O’Connor? I wish I could hear his words right now! I would tend to believe that he would be disgusted with what he would be reading right now, if he was still with us today. We must all stick together. Through thick and thin. We need to help with our fallen, not stomp him into the ground. I would bet that some of those that are doing the blasting have not even contributed a dime of thier money to the cause. But I would bet you my last dime that Jim has put more of his money where his mouth is than some of you. Think strong my fellow gun owners. Think smart!
  C. Whitmore

• 58. mark  |  March 3rd, 2007 at 7:21 am

  just goes to show you don’t talk about things you know nothing about. I have taken people out shooting that hated all guns.
  Why? because they knew nothing about them.
  I think Jim Z.needs to shoot and see how much fun these
  weapons are to use.

• 59. Neil McMillan  |  March 4th, 2007 at 7:16 pm

  Well Jim I hope you are scanning these.I hope this isn’t your swan song,you have contributed SO MUCH over these many years,If it is your demise Thank-YOU for all those entertaining hours of reading.Those hunting tips that have made many of us better hunters more caring sportsmen and woman.
  Whatever you do whereever you go keep your eyes on the target and beyond!!
  I’ve LOOKED at 15’s and 47’s and not found ANYTHING I want to have to haul through the woods.Maybe to the range not thru the woods.

• 60. Gary Courtney  |  March 4th, 2007 at 7:28 pm

  Once something is said ,you cant take it back! I agree with Remington about this , the very money they were paying Mr. Zumbo and the millions they give to protect our rights conflicted with Zumbos views! A house divided cannot stand!!!

• 61. Griff  |  March 6th, 2007 at 1:13 am

  SHAME ON OL! I can’t believe they cut a guy loose for one “mistake” after that many years of service. Jim there is a bunch of us out here that support you still.

• 62. Dan Shideler  |  March 6th, 2007 at 12:33 pm

  Seems to be some confusion here. First, an assault weapon, properly speaking, is a selective-fire weapon (i.e., capable of both semi-auto and full-auto operation). I have never heard of anyone who advocates hunting with an assault weapon. It’s illegal, anyway. An AR-type semi-auto is no more an assault weapon than a Browning BAR Stalker or a Benelli shotgun is.

  Second, it is not censorship when a company bounces a spokesman for saying something with which it doesn’t agree. It’s a business decision. Censorship can be done only by governments. No one has said Zumbo isn’t entitled to his opinion.

  Some of the AR-type semi-autos are wonderfully accurate. I see nothing wrong with using them for hunting where legal, keeping in mind the relevant magazine and caliber restrictions. I might not trade my Model 70 for one, but there are a few of them I wouldn’t mind having. And no, I’m not a Rambo wannabe. Far from it.

  Zumbo’s comments were probably not well considered, and they certainly could have been stated better. Still, he has done his penance and should be allowed back into the fold.

  One other thing? Those posters who try to extrapolate this situation into a larger conclusion about the president, gun owners in general, or anything else have some serious IQ problems.

• 63. David  |  March 6th, 2007 at 2:32 pm

  I’m just up here in Alaska, I’ve got my rifles and pistols and have done just fine without an ak or ar. I’m also a Vietnam Vet(’68-’69) and have some familiarity with “assault rifles”. I don’t own one. Wouldn’t buy one. What Jim said is right, packing around any of the weapons in that classifications does scare people. They see ak’s and ar’s on the nightly news in the hands of people with ski masks and such whacking off hostages heads. My wife won’t go hunting with me anymore and mostly because she is afraid of these folks. I’m getting to the point that I may quit hunting from anywhere but out my kitchen window for much the same reason, for I see that many of the same people that carry ak’s and such are the ones least likely to have learned how to properly handle a gun. A rifle or pistol has primarily been a “tool” used to provide food or protection. Even though the ak’ etc and all the varied knock offs can be used for both they also do more harm to the cause of “the right to keep and bare arms” then many of you apparently realize. The stuffing of it in the face of the people just supports the anti’s and gives them that much more fuel for their cause. It also disgusts me that the NRA, Remington and Outdoor Life feel it necessary to punish someone who has a belief slightly different than their own $ and have denied him his “freedom of speech” in the process. I don’t find what Jim said offensive, to me it’s a sad commentary that I find to be quite accurate. It also strikes me that the arms manufactures and the NRA and many magazines have made some very large fortunes out of this whole “second amendment” battle, a battle that was mostly opinion in the past. Reality has no right to be expressed when it might cut into the profits and power that have been created by these folks. And that, my friends, is the real bottom line here. $$$$ The millions that have been spent for “gun rights” is taken out of the tax base so we each pay more. It has not a whit to do with our rights. The NRA lost my respect many years ago. Now I have some companies that I will never purchase from again. (As I cut up my former favorite 700 for tent stakes)

• 64. Bruce Bortnem  |  March 6th, 2007 at 8:12 pm

  I don’t agree with what Jim said in his blog. I am personally thinking of getting an AR-15 set up for hunting in .458 SOCOM( about the same as a 45-70 lever action in effect and speed).

  I think the outpouring of anger against Jim is a sign of the war we are in against the mainstream media anti-gun hype and government restrictions of our rights.

  His Opinion was that he didn’t like guns that in the general publics view were associated with terrorists being used for hunting. Typical traditionalist venting there? It is a sign of how much anti-gun hysteria there is out there when a certain type of gun has ‘terrorist’ connotations attached to it. Every gun ever made has probably been used militarily.

  The fact that he is(was?) a highly respected hunting guru gave the anti-gunners alot of ammo. A member of our positive press fed the already rabid anti-gun media a big free juicy steak.

  This would not have been nearly as big of a deal if the government was populated by people who understood that the second amendment is a specific limitation on government to not make laws against the god given right to keep and bear arms.

  Unfortunately there are innumerable bureaucrats out there that are only out for themselves and the greater bureaucratic animal. They pay only lip service to the constitution they swore to uphold and protect. They are fearful of an armed populace.

  The constitution is under constant attack. Our rights are abridged every day. Sportsman around the world have lost their guns. People have lost the means to defend themselves against tyrants.

  One of our own made a serious error. I think I heard him right when I heard a traditionalist worried about the image using guns that are shown on popular TV being connected to “terrorists”. What exactly is a ” terrorist” anyway?

  Hopefully now that He has been chastised for doing it on a very public blog in a very insensitive way he will be somehow able to show how these guns are actually good hunting guns, just like many of the other military-derived guns of previous generations were.

• 65. MPJ tx  |  March 6th, 2007 at 9:48 pm

  I completely agree with Mr Zumbo , on a hog hunt one year this guy brought along one of these rifles and right as the hogs came in this guy cuts loose with that rifle and a 20 round clip and didn`t stop shooting until it was empty he wounded 4 hogs which got away, and ruined our hunt not to mention I was deaf for 2 days. assault rifles have no place in the hunting fields.

• 66. Frank Carbone Jr.  |  March 7th, 2007 at 12:12 am

  Many of the bloggers who’ve vilified Jim Zumbo didn’t have the courage to even state their own name.
  This fiasco would’ve never happened pre-blog when folks had to use their real name.
  I may not agree with every single word Jim used in his blog — but I’ll defend his right to state it.
  If Jim Zumbo can be vilified by anonymous writers just for expressing his opinion then there’ll be many other American writers out there
  who’re going to think twice before they write what’s on their mind — for fear of the “Secret Gestapo.”
  Anyone can agree or disagree with Jim or any other blogger but please be ethical and professional when doing so.
  One thing I’ve noticed is how those who disagree with the way Jim was treated are ethical in their comments — while those who vilified Jim are unethical in their comments.

  In my opinion OL and the others who fired Jim will suffer the consequences by those who remained silent.
  Jim was respected around the world by the many outdoorfolks who grew-up and learned from him.

  If you want to sign the petition in support of Jim Zumbo please go to —

  http://www.petitiononline.com/JZ12550/petition.html

• 67. Jack Zeller  |  March 7th, 2007 at 8:15 pm

  Jim Zumbo was tired. Tired after a long hunt. Well, I too, am tired. I earn a policeman’s salary, and constantly send a bit of that to the NRA, GONH, 2nd Amendment Foundation etc. I constantly write and call my Congressmen, and I do these things in the name of preserving freedom of choice granted us under the Bill of Rights. I do not want to hear Jim Zumbo whine. He has his opinions, and he made them clear. He does NOT support hunting or the shooting sports. He spoke like a neophyte ignoramous, which IS unforgiveable after spending some forty years sucking a good living out of sportsmen. He needs to fade away.

• 68. Edward J. Thomas  |  March 8th, 2007 at 7:48 am

  Why are we willing to take a major contributor to our hunting and outdoor activities, a teacher, a mentor, a great human being and send him into oblivion based on saying something that he already apoligized for? Most of the tempers will subside in a flash, and in a flash, we will have lost the experience and dedication of a great outdoorsman. Ed Thomas, Ringtown, Pa.

• 69. Scott B  |  March 8th, 2007 at 4:02 pm

  Jack are you kidding me!! if ther eis anybody out there that supports hunting and shooting it would be Jim. turn off the sierin and get off your horse and come down to reality that the rest of us live in. if you can say that you have never made a mistake in your job as Jim has well there would be churches named after you. Jim will be missed by all

• 70. mason  |  March 8th, 2007 at 9:29 pm

  jim ur a nice guy and all but ya shouldnt have said that

• 71. Karen D. McMahen-Dix  |  March 9th, 2007 at 10:09 am

  Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water…..

  I have been a hunter/shooter for over forty years and a Zumbo fan for as long as I can remember. Still have my NRA medals from the sixties….

  As a former AR owner (pre-ban model) I also disagree with his comments, but must add that I sold mine because it was grossly inaccurate , poorly balanced and awkward to handle. Prairie dogs died laughing at me - not from being shot.

  All the sponsors fleeing ship do themselves a huge disservice, not to mention the loss to readers and TV show viewers. The lead-in alone to Jim’s hunting show is almost enough to convert a non-hunter. There are few shows that capture the essence of why we hunt - the road, not the destination - like Zumbos. Most try to sell you the “essence” - in a bottle, a high fence, etc., etc……

  All these sponsors have acted in haste and should, themselves retract their actions before they lose the support of those of us spending our money for their products.

  Jim - if you are left with too much free time now - come go shed hunting with some other baby-boomers down by Laramie Peak. You are always welcome.

  K. D. McMahen, WYO, USA

• 72. SCott GRiff  |  March 10th, 2007 at 1:19 am

  JIm is just stating facts that truely separate (hunting) from (shooting).They are both considered sports,were one is more of a hobby then a pastime.I am not condeming these guns but stating that they really dont belong to a hunter.Its foolish to walk around chassing deer with an assult rifle.We must come to grips with this crazyness.

• 73. Outdoor Writer Dave Langston  |  March 10th, 2007 at 12:13 pm

  I have been an outdoor writer in Idaho for 17 years. This I have to say to you Jim, “I support you in every way, even though the majority seems to disagree with your comments or personal feelings, you do have the right to voice your opinion”.

  You have been one of the many positive influences in my advancement in the outdoor industry and will always be. I met you and Grits Gresham in the 1980’s at the Harrisburg, PA show and you talked a young teen into the best decision of his young life. Thank you for showing me the true meaning of OUTDOORSMAN. I will treasure that moment for the rest of my life.

  I have “STUCK MY FOOT IN MY MOUTH” many times and this is the nature of the beast I have found.

  At this moment I am under attack by PETA and IDAHOWOLVES.ORG for the comments I recently made on the wolf situation in Idaho. But, I still firmly stand my ground.

  Check it out at

  http://www.pocatelloshops.com/blogs/outdoors.php

  for a look at how us outdoor writers are constantly stepping into the fire for supporting the rights of Outdoorsman!

  Good luck and drop me an email Jim at

  westernstatessportsman@msn.com

• 74. Joe  |  March 11th, 2007 at 3:58 am

  Take what Jim said with a grain of salt. He will have fun doing something new with an AR.
  It is hard to believe that there are so many folks against using AR’s or AK’s for hunting but OK the use of 742’s and BAR’s. Neither, the AK or the AR, is a pretty rifle but they can sure be efficiently used for hunting. I am in Texas where we are lucky to have no number of rounds restrictions.
  The point that needs to be made though is that ban this and ban that activists need to be banned.
  …at least I know what I’m doing…

• 75. Dan McCormack  |  March 11th, 2007 at 6:49 pm

  I consider Jim Zumbo a friend and have never met the man, I have been reading his works for 30 years and realize he has earned the right to make a mistake, and besides even if it is not a mistake this is America and the freedom of speech is just as much a part of the bill of rights as the right to bear arms. I own an “assault” rifle, but would never take it hunting, only to the range, if someone chooses to hunt with theirs, so be it. I really think that gun owners, hunters, etc. should give Jim a break!! he apologized wholeheartedly, it is not right to ruin his life, drag his name through the mud or whatever just because they do not agree with the man. WHat more can he do? he has lost everything over this, and that is not fair, I think that man is entitled to make a mistake and should be forgiven for it..like it is said, let he who live in glass house cast the fisrt stone……

• 76. Travis Rooks  |  March 12th, 2007 at 1:36 pm

  To Outdoorlife: you have made a mistake, I guess I’ll drop you like you did Mr Zumbo. And To Remington Arms: you have upset millions of remington gun owners, maybe we should can you as well.

• 77. spec  |  March 12th, 2007 at 10:42 pm

  Wake up hunters! Wake up NRA! Wake up all target shooters!

  Jim is exactly right. There is no true use for a military-style firearm in the field. Period. While cable tv permeates every household in America, exposing virtually everyone to everything, what do bored housewifes, metrosexual males and gun haters everywhere see while channel surfing? Some bearded gomer in camo, sitting in a camo blind, drawing a bead on Bambi with a sniper’s rifle. But at least it’s a gun like dad or granpa had, not one they see daily on the News at 6.

  Those guns–automatic, military weapons–are seen daily being used in an unpopular (hated?) war, by men similarly dressed and armed as hunters. The message is clear to these people that these guns are evil–they kill people. They kill civilians, they kill women and children, they kill the young men we went to school and church with a few months ago. What better way to turn those for gun control against hunters and shooters than to have daily doses of these weapons of death shown to them multiple times per day? And now those who are pro gun want to show them how these military weapons can kill Bambi, or, for heavens sake, the family dog (coyotes)?

  Wake up! If you want to keep the spotlight off gun control, do your hunting with true sporting arms, in a sportsman-like way. Use your ARs at the shooting range, but keep the image of hunters in the tradition of LLBean, etc, not Iraq.

  Remember, in America, image is everything. Jim is right as rain on this one.

• 78. Tim Smith  |  March 13th, 2007 at 8:40 pm

  I agree with JIm I am tired of being lumped in with the can shooters and paper killers. They try to sway you there way by telling you your guns are next. I have yet to turn on CNN and see anybody robbing a bank with a 12 gauge deer gun. How many gang bangers are picked up with a muzzleloader used for deer hunting .our guns are for hunting those serve one purpose that is to kill humans. Hence the reason our military uses the M16 the twin of the AR15

• 79. Bob from Helena  |  March 14th, 2007 at 8:41 pm

  Mr Zumbo made a commit that most of us hunters agree on one thing these guns have no place in the hunt they are fun to shoot as far as targets go but I would not take them hunting.I don’t own and most likely never will but I will never stop a person from owning one if he choses to My daughter owns one and shoots it all the time and enjoys it She does not hunt just target. Mr Zumbo said he was sorry Get with the program OUTDOOR LIFE No wonder I don’t by your magazine.

• 80. MPJ tx  |  March 19th, 2007 at 9:46 am

  I truly believe that OUTDOOR LIFE and everyone else who agrees with them in doing what they did to Mr Zumbo , have shot themselves in the foot, its going to come back and sting them.I was going to buy me new Remington rifle but I have changed my mind, I think I`ll spend my money on a different firearms company who doesn`t go along with this stupidity.

• 81. jay wheeler  |  March 20th, 2007 at 9:41 pm

  DEAR JINZUMBO
  I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I HAVE USED MY AR15 HB FOR
  HUNTING ROCK CHUCKS FOR OVER 10 YEARS…
  ONE SHOT ONE KILL..IT MAY TAKE ME OVER AN HOUR TO GO THROUGH 10 ROUNDS ONE SHOT AT A TIME..
  JAY W

• 82. Bart W.  |  March 23rd, 2007 at 8:07 pm

  I didn’t agree with what Mr Zumbo said. However, the reactions of many, and OL in particular, were excessive. That kind of “bunker mentality” reflects poorly on other gun enthusiaists who value all freedoms.

• 83. Richard Hoon  |  March 24th, 2007 at 3:18 pm

  Jim was right in the Hunting context,the 2nd Amendment and the killing of animals are two very separate human conflicts.With Hunting ethics becoming a center piece for respectable human behavior towards game animals using Fair Chase methods as role models while in the field gives the whole hunting experience a life time of memories.

  Pointer.Buddies taking out 500 doggies with assault weapons,firing 10,000 rounds into the village OR Buddies taking out 50 doggies with 100 rounds.

  I guess Jimmy grew up with rubber band shooters and tart guns,maybe even a good single shot Remington 22.

  Without Jimmy Z ,OL just won’t be same.

• 84. fnbrowning  |  March 27th, 2007 at 1:39 am

  To all you pro-zumbo, anti-Remington, Fuddgunners:

  So you “purists” think you can ostracize one element of the shooting community an make a clean getaway?

  Contrary to what Tim Smith posted on March 13th, 2007, shotguns HAVE been used in crime, and it was a shotgun crime that got a huge gun ban passed in England, or have you conveniently forgot?

  And when all of us “evil black rifle” owners have been vilified and outlawed, how long before the antis come for the redoubtable Remington 700 series bolt action, calling it a “sniper rifle?”

  The latest gun ban proposed (H.R. 1022 ) includes All semi-automatic shotguns. (E.g., Remington, Winchester, Beretta and Benelli, used for hunting, sport shooting, and self-defense. H.R. 1022 would ban them because they have “any characteristic that can function as a grip,” and would also ban their main component, called the “receiver.”)

  - All detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles-including, for example, the ubiquitous Ruger 10/22 .22 rimfire-because they have “any characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also the Remington 740 series.

  Divide & conquer is the name of the gun-ban game. However, you shotgun & black powder purists would have us hung to save your skins.

  For all of you Zumbo supporters who hate us “black rifle” owners, I’ve pharaphrased the 2nd Amendment just as you would have it:

  “A well regulated duckhunter, being necessary to the security of absolutely nothing, the right of the people to keep and bear double barrel Fuddguns, shall not be infringed”

• 85. Steve Phipps  |  March 27th, 2007 at 10:46 pm

  Jim Zumbo doesnt owe any an apology,Its about time someone had the guts to say what he did.Iam tired of the nra selling this” your either for us or against us crap. All I ever get from them is letters asking for a donation to fight some assault weapons ban.Your opinion doesnt count just your money. , When I go to gun shows more and more you see these bald headed tatooed on their neck camaflaged ston cold wannabes selling assault weapons. They act like they just got back from active duty an won the war all by themselves.Jim was fighting for or rights long before most of them were ever born.If the nras and the gun makers have know chosen to eat there own, then the antihunters have won.I have climbed many a mountain chasing big game and I never saw anyone up there stupid enough to bring an M16 along

• 86. Ron  |  March 28th, 2007 at 12:06 pm

  Jim Zumbo certainly DOES own an apology.

  On March 20, 2007 — In a speech to the Economic Club of Detroit in May 1999, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., committed to speak on the issue of gun control and he quoted Zumbo. Zumbo’s ill-fated remarks will continue to to be quoted and lauded up and down the anti’s side of the gun control fight.

  Both Zumbo AND Steve in post 85 ought to own up to their bigotry against people that aren’t like them and they don’t understand.

  Steve in post 85 claims to have >>”climbed many a mountain chasing big game”>”bald headed tatooed on their neck camaflaged ston cold wannabes”

• 87. JIMMY L. LOUISIANA  |  March 28th, 2007 at 12:32 pm

  PEOPLE WAKE UP.JIM DID NOT JUST FALL OFF A BANANA BOAT.IF SOME OF YOU THINKS HE,S WRONG YOUR A SICK PUPPY.I,LL NEVER BUY ANOTHER O.L.MAG. OR REMINGTON.”SORRY”

• 88. R. Thomas Funk  |  April 4th, 2007 at 8:30 am

  As it has been pointed out, comments from celebrities are often used as media fodder; held up as the gospel by one side or the other as a revelation supporting this opinion or that.

  Unfortunately, Mr. Zumbo’s comments did not lend any support to the pro-gun camp; they instead fueled the opposition. As we are all well aware, the pro-gun side seldom has access to the mainstream media to present our side in any arguement, and I noticed that Mr. Zumbo’s comments reversing his earlier “slip-o’-the-tongue” never made it into the press or political speeches.

• 89. Marius  |  April 7th, 2007 at 11:04 am

  I feel a bit sad for Jim Zumbo but he gets what he deserves in my opinion. I rarely hunt but own several different rifles which are designed with hunting in mind. I also own a MAK 90, does this make me a terrorist? Seeing how I am a SW Asia vet and worked for KBR supporting the US military in Iraq in 2004 I doubt it. Jim made an ignorant comment which I believe represents his true opinion. No apology can change my mind yet still I would gladly risk my life again to defend his right to make such a statement. AS for his career and his sponsors dumping him I applaud them for doing so. Jim Zumbo is no different than Sarah Brady, they both think “know what is best” for the rest of us.

• 90. Rich Fletcher  |  April 12th, 2007 at 3:26 pm

  The military style rifles I’m aquainted with are poor substitutes for traditional hunting rifles. I think Jim Zumbo’s comments were reasonable and probably valid. It’s unfortunate that anti gun factions have succeded in creating paranoia among gun owners, but that’s the world we live in. A place where individuals are disposible.

• 91. martin  |  April 13th, 2007 at 11:13 am

  in my opinion I feel both camps acted a bit too quick it looks like on not thinking (Jim) and the other reacting(remmington) all my back ground is with the standard issue stuff which is accurate for its job but not for hunting I am not fanilar with civilian versions but have many friend who use them with accyracy and are quite happy with them. Hey as long as your hitting where ya aim who are we to judge what a person ehticaly hunts with.

• 92. Tim Jones  |  April 17th, 2007 at 5:34 pm

  Impossible to forget the attitude expressed by Zumbo both in public and in person. Jim Zumbo represents everything I like about hunting. I could never turn my back on such a person. I can’t imagine any hunter or gun enthusiast thinking he has “changed his ways!?” NO, hunting is more than his way of life, it is what defines Jim Zumbo. How can anyone think otherwise? If all the supporters that pulled the plug think they are “protecting” their investment, what has all this division caused? Those that point their finger and say “I told you so” never had anything to say anyway. Good hunting Jim! Peace will be with you in the woods.

• 93. Art Hutson  |  April 18th, 2007 at 7:44 am

  With all the enemies we already have with the anti-gunners we sure don’t need un- inrformed friends such as Mr. Zumbo. This guy is a gunwriter for decades? No matter what the gun is, we stand united,sir, or we will be taken down. The Second Amendment is a Right not a privalige given to us by our elected representatives.

• 94. Douglas B. Egenolf  |  April 18th, 2007 at 8:22 am

  I never get mad if someone shows up at the grocery store in a black corvette. If that is what they choose to drive, so be it. we do not need anymore negative comments towards guns that do no harm. I love my AR. You can do anything with it. It is a wonderful little rifle…:)

• 95. Brent  |  April 18th, 2007 at 1:38 pm

  Seriously, what gun industry is he coming from? Never seen an AR15 used as varmint rifle? Come-on! Some of these writers are guys that sit behind a desk and tell stories of canned or guided hunts without concept of who the audience is. I agree with his sponsors, I would not want my name attached to his comments about gun toting americans regarded as terrorists. Everybody wake up! This dude got what he deserved. In his statements he proves that he is just as uneducated as the people trying to ban our guns. Forgiveness is noble, but taking responsibility for your foolish acts is couregeous. He’ll be alright and I’m darn sure he is much more educated. He just had to learn a lesson the hard way like many of us do.

• 96. Jere Harrison  |  April 18th, 2007 at 9:56 pm

  It really is sad that his career would come to an end this way. His opinion got to a lot of folks and encouraged us to regulate a firearm based on its appearance and perceived suitability.
  We just got finished with the clinton era “assualt weapon” ban and a lot of folks are sensitive to that kind of RHETORIC.
  What about a highly specialized, high powered, super long range “SNIPER’S RIFLE” like the kind that he hunts with? His opinion was recently re-calibrated at great personal cost but being an highly public agent of the 2nd ammendment can have its risks.
  His opinion was fired from the public spotlight and I am pleased.

  Note to Jim Zumbo:
  This too will pass…..It just requires time and humility.

• 97. Bodie Owens  |  April 19th, 2007 at 8:48 am

  I have been reading Jims work for 40 years the stories he has told the adventures he has taken us on since I was a kid and enjoyed each and every one, he is a man of dignity and should be treated as such.
  His comments/opinions are his own just as his stories however I do NOT AGREE with them
  I own an AR style RRA a great hunting rifle for coyotes, ground hogs and more, in rough country they cant be beat, but in the mass media world we live in your words can make you or break you just ask Don Imus Jim you will be missed

• 98. Major Brick Loomis U.S. Army  |  April 20th, 2007 at 1:10 pm

  Dear Jim Zumbo,
  To say that my group of soldiers, officers, shooters, hunters, friends, and I were angry at you for your fallacious and irresponsible comments concerning the weapons that we bet our lives on every day can not be conveyed in our actual words of anger in this civil forum. To say you became our enemy would be a monumental understatement of the past two millenniums!!! You became a traitor in our book!!!
  Like Judas that was once Jesus Christ’s most beloved, like Benedict Arnold who was once George Washington most trusted Lieutenants, and you, who we thought to be our champion of our 2nd Amendment Rights, and hunting guru betrayed us all with your ignorance and hypocrisy!!! You became the enemy!!! You became the terrorist!!! You Betrayed America!!!!!
  Like Judas and Benedict Arnold you have a very very long “row to hoe” to ever get back into our good graces. I have read your apologies, but the damage has already been done. You can not un-ring the bell you rung, and the un-American, communist, and anti-gun scum are running with your words and using them against us to destroy our Constitutional Rights!!!
  To redeem yourself in our eyes and GOD’s eyes you MUST become the Charlton Heston, Tom Sellick, Audey Murphy, General George S. Patton and President Ronald Regan fighting for our GOD given, 2nd Amendment, and Constitutional Rights!!! You must become our “champion of champions” and fight for our Rights!!!
  I hope you have learned through this “mega monumental mistake” that the 2nd Amendment dictates the most important Right, that being the Right to protect our lives, our families, our properties, our communities, our states, and our country. The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting, target shooting, gun collecting or any other miss-construed or communist, liberal traitor’s interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. To give up any our GOD given or Constitutional Rights is the beginning or the end to all our RIGHTS!!!
  I, you, or any good citizen have the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to own ANY WEAPON that we can afford and properly safeguard in order to protect ourselves, our families, et al, PERIOD!!!! BUT!!! The communists, socialist, fascists, liberals, “demoRATS” (misspelled by design) have taken that GOD given and Constitutional Right and have perverted it, diluted it, to the point that we, as a country, as a society, now really do believe that we can not own, carry, or use any weapon we chose to protect ourselves, our families, et al.
  Our GOD given and Constitutional Rights are NON-NEGOTIABLE. Our RIGHTS do not end at the rivers edge, the city limits, the state line, the chapel door, court house steps, or in any school in America!!!! Who said we can not protect ourselves from terrorist, criminals, or any scum that would do us harm anywhere in this Great Country!!!! It is, and was the communists, socialists, fascists, liberals, and demoRATS that have taken, and are now taking, our RIGHTS to protect ourselves!!!! These communist liberal pukes would have all of us defenseless and die at the hands of terrorists, criminals, and a dictatorial oppressive government!!! CASE IN POINT!!!! Not one un-Constitutional, anti-American, RIGHTS restricting, Gun grabbing, traitorous law has ever been proposed or passed by a Patriotic, America Loving, GOD loving, Conservative Republican!!!
  Oh yah, did I tell you that I, like Ronald Reagan, was a liberal democrat for over 30 years but when the liberals and demoRATS attacked my Gun RIGHTS they betrayed me and America!!! And, I, like Ronald Reagan, left the demoRAT party. Or as Ronald Regan so eloquently put: “I did not leave the democrat party, the democrat party left me!!!!”
  And you Jim Zumbo must become our Champion to defeat these traitorous un-American, SCUM sucking liberal maggots!!!
  GOD Bless America!!!
  Respectfully, Major Brick Loomis, U.S. Army, majorbrick@aol.com
  P.S. All special capitalizations, punctuations, and misspelling are by design and for emphasis. MBLUSA

• 99. Erik Northey  |  April 22nd, 2007 at 7:42 pm

  To Mr. Zumbo . I hope this is a wake up call to yourself and others in the firearm industry. Some of us shooters and hunters are not afforded the luxury of having remington firearms supply us with highly priced model 700’s to take us on private guided hunts too sway are blue collar paycheck. I love to shoot, that being said the AR-15 platform in 5.56 or .223 cartridge is a very economical round to shoot . I do not see the reason to spend extra money on a new rifle and scope to keep myself from being a terrorist to you personally. My home state of Florida requires anyone one shooting a centerfire semi-automatic firearm to use no more than a five round magazine, when hunting which most manufacturers of AR rifels produce. Plus the AR platform allows you switch upper recievers to different calibers, wether it pistol or rifle. And also even allows me to protect my loved ones, pets, livestock and myself in the home. If it is becuase my Bushmaster Varmiter allows me to make sub-minute shots to humanely harvest game, that should be commended, not personally bashed. Whats next to insult your personal preferance, the M1A or Garrand. They too are used in military combat. And if that is the case, why dont you just curse Mauser bolt action, it to was a weapon of war, or would that not slide with big green or Ruger. The AR-15 is a fine gun which can fasillate many a responsibilities of which hunting is but just one of them . It served my father for three tours in Viet Nam, and my cusion in Iraq. I think it shold be allowedI to harvest game here in America and defend the second admendment also. So please understand that you really did personally attack loyal law abiding citizens that happened to grow up in a age where advancements in manufacturing allows us the ability to use such “tools” at our educated discression.

• 100. Matt J  |  April 24th, 2007 at 7:45 am

  For the record, I tend to agree that the image of assault weapons in the field for hunting is a bad one, and more “Show” than go for those who need a little boost in the ego department.

  Mr. Zumbo, if you are reading this string, I for one appreciate your contributions over the years. Having apologized for ill chosen words, well I can get over it, as I would rather watch your show than any currently on the outdoor channel.

• 101. R. Pollard  |  April 26th, 2007 at 2:30 pm

  I guess I should turn in my badge and uniforms since I now carry a “terrorist” rifle in order to keep the streets safe. You offended me and my brother and sister police officers by stating that the weapons we use are weapons used by terrorist. Shame on you sir.

• 102. CB Bently  |  April 26th, 2007 at 8:11 pm

  Do not outcast Mr. Zumbo, as you will see, we’re playing into the hands of all anti-gun advocates. Jim is one of our own, let’s embrace him and help him along the way. What would you want if you were to stumble, should we kick you while your down. Let’s not let one of the greatest writers, hunters, and shooting enthusiasts slip from our fingers as we’ll all regret it someday. Let’s help build him up, stronger, smarter, and better than ever. Jim merely expressed a sudden thought, opinion, nothing more, nothing less. We don’t have to agree with his comments, but we’re all still on the same team.

• 103. ruger 06  |  May 1st, 2007 at 9:43 pm

  I have read a lot of the previous posts, and I do agree that a Mr. Zumbo made a mistake and acted like a man and apologized. I mean, what other choice did he have? To put it in perspective, this is a man who’s worth tens of millions of dollars if not much more. He made his millions writing stories about the outdoors, and made that money selling stories and TV shows to an audience that is almost totally pro-gun. He is not apologizing because he believes
  he made a mistake, he is apologizing because he wants to retain the money and power structure that he built over that last 30 years. I really don’t care how tired he was. The fact that he was tired brought out the truth. In 30 years of writing, Zumbo has had lucrative career garnished with opportunities that the common working man will never get a chance at. All that money and power went to his head, and he forgot one thing that none of us should never forget: Gun ownership is a right, hunting is a privilege.

• 104. Al  |  May 4th, 2007 at 11:55 am

  I was aware of Mr. Zumbo’s blogging and apology when it happened, but wasn’t aware of his resignation as OL hunting editor. I agree with his view of those type arms in the hunting field. I have hunted since the early 1950’s. About 20 years ago I stopped hunting on public lands, and became very selective of hunting party members, due to people with semiautomatic arms, both rifle and shotguns, shooting without making sure of their target. I also have never had a reason for a 30 round magazine while hunting. I own several firearms, some I wouldn’t carry in the field.

• 105. Leon Walters  |  May 7th, 2007 at 3:42 pm

  I agree with Zumbo’s view on semi- automatic weapons. Too bad he was forced into an apology. Use of AK-47’s and the like can only give our hunting adversaries more ammuntion. Furthermore, why does a “sportsman” need such a weapon. Shouldn’t we all strive for the one shot kill and not rely on several quick shots, hoping for a hit? I killed my first bull elk in 1952 and have hunted Idaho and Montana since.

• 106. Chris  |  May 7th, 2007 at 9:46 pm

  How many of you agreeing with Zumbo’s comments own a pistol? A semi-automatic rifle of any kind? A semi-automatic shotgun? A black gun? A short gun? A gun with a 10 round clip? A gun that has synthetic parts?
  Be careful what your definition of a “bad” gun is! If my gun goes, yours is next!
  I just traded a Remington 700 VSSF for a Rock River Arms A-4 Varmint. The diiference between the two of them to me? Not so much; afterall they are both .223 caliber varmint guns that are a heck of a lot of fun to shoot. Me, a terrorist? Well, perhaps the little orange stickers I shoot at think so .

• 107. gregg  |  May 11th, 2007 at 5:23 pm

  kudos to Jim! I have always enjoyed his articles and seminars…………..but I can certainly do without outdoor life (just a big billboard these days). and remington for that matter.

  the hard fact is there are divisions in gun circles…………….we should be talking about fair chase hunting and not hobby guns

• 108. I Soldier  |  May 12th, 2007 at 10:31 pm

  By mid-2007, we have about a million Iraq War veterans in the United States. Their numbers are growing. We are lucky that many of these soldiers have become experts in urban and open land warfare. They represent an enormously valuable human resource of experience when we go back to fighting Muslims seriously, which will eventually come because these people are not going to quit until we make them quit.

  Generally, soldiers have found our M16 superior to the AK47. Some AKs are of good quality but most are effective out to about 100 meters. On the other hand, most M16 based rifles are pretty good out to 400 meters. (Unfortunately, they don’t always make good kills at long range and enemy are seen to survive several hits.)

  Army leaders committed us to the 5.56 mm round a long time ago. Years of experience has improved it greatly. The early problems with M16s in Vietnam caused by soldiers failing to clean their rifles, are long forgotten. In fact, the best AK rifles made in Russia are produced in the 5.56 caliber because Russians experts recognize the superiority of the 5.56 round over the .30 cal short.

  In Iraq, a number of our soldiers have been able to get their hands on up graded M14 rifles and they like them. Those who have used them in combat have learned that a well trained American soldier armed with a .30 cal M14 rifle has a significant advantage over his poorly trained enemy without body armor and equipped with a sloppy poor quality AK47. Because the M60 machine gun, either mounted, or in the hands of an infantryman, is the ultimate firefight winner in eyeball to eyeball combat, there are quite a few of them in the field. This makes 7.62 ammo plentiful for the M14.

  We have a lot of AK rifles in the United States and a cult following due to the ubiquitous parts market and the simplicity of assembling one from said parts. Sadly, I am willing to bet most AKs in the US are without the proper automatic weapons permits. Don’t accuse me of being anti gun if I point out that people who own machine guns without the proper papers are not very smart. Yes, there is a debate as to whether it ought to be legal for machine guns to circulate freely through the gun owning community, but right now, machine guns are illegal without the proper paperwork.

  Soldiers who have been in real firefights in Iraq laugh at people in the United States who think that a bunch of rednecks with no body armor and privately owned assault rifles could ward off a modern invading army. Sorry to inform you, a modern army equipped with armor and no moral constraints as to killing civilians would mop up any bunch of civilian woodsmen in no time flat. By the time the Muslim Army assembles on our shores, they will be equipped with plenty of poison gas to evacuate American cities. After they get through with the first city using that stuff, everyone will realize they mean business. Very few will hesitate to bow before Mecca. Folks, we are not living in 1776. People ought to understand this fact, and start supporting our military because it offers the United States the only practical means of survival in the face of the Muslim Religious Revival currently sweeping this planet.

  In case anyone missed it, the Israelis did not do well against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Guess what? They never got the soldiers back who had been captured by Hezbollah. Imagine what those guys must be going through right now, if they are still alive. A lot of people in Israel are doing some serious rethinking about how dangerous a Muslim army can be to their tiny democracy. It is a big time threat. The Muslim enemy has an unlimited supply of money from oil revenues. They can buy good equipment, including any weapon, nuclear bombs, any journalist, and apparently any congressmen, even a former Marine.

  If American shooters are smart, they will forget about AK47 rifles. Americans should own nothing less than an M16 style rifle, and preferably a good .30 cal rifle that uses common ammo. Basically, I agree with Zumbo. Unless you own something like a top quality Russian made AK, your AK is not much of a rifle, and thankfully so, because this is the rifle of our enemy.

• 109. E .N.  |  May 18th, 2007 at 9:40 pm

  I,m not sure why the ar-15 affends the hunting establishment. Most states require that 5 round magazines to be the legal capacity on public land when using semi automatic rifles. Marlin 336 leveraction capicity 6-7 determined by barrel length, oh can’t forget there 26″ barrelled 45/70 that only holds 9. Don’t leave out Winchesters model 94, there also 6 to 7 rounds for rifle and 10 to 12 for pistol. But that is okay becuase the firearm is not black, even though these weapons were brought about during civil war times for military use and highly prized for there high capacity the term terrosist didnt excist so know need to make a stand. The Ruger Mark 1, 2, and 3 that many small game hunters use hold ten rounds of rimfire ammo is acceptable, butt funny how it is Black and designed to look like a German Luger, you know them guys from WW2 sometimes called Nazi’s. Butt I guess that is still no reason to bring it up they only tried to take many of americans lives. Also dont forget the German Mauser bolt action rifle, it too started off as a infintry rifle to kill your grandfather, Butt seeing that Remington, Ruger, Winchester, Savage and other hunting rifle manufactures tend too like the reliability of the military rifle action you tend not to make it a issue Jim, you should though Iv’e see them making them with Black synthetic stocks with detachable magazines perfect for turning any American civilian into “terrosist snipers” excuse me I mean hunters. Should we bring up Revolvers, Smith and Wesson 686 plus holds 7 just as the Tuarus Tracker Hunting Revolver 7 too. They are centifire metallic cartriges in .357 mag, butt are satin stainless steal so the Terrorist Black identification coloring does not make them to be public endangering. The Winchester model 12 Trench pump action shotgun was used by American Infantry in the World Wars and on point in Vietnam, but there too was no muslim conspiracy around so I guess it is completely okay to shoot Deer, Turkey, Hog, Waterfowl, and even Small Game with them as long as it is not Black synthetic. So even as irritating my simple message may seem to be , it is only being put out there for you America to remember that almost every sporting firearm used in the field started out as a weapon of war. Labeling law abiding civilians as Terrorist to make a un- educated assumption is not needed. So I say thankyou too John Moses Browning, Mr. Garrand, and Eugene Stoener to help us garuntee the 1st and 2nd Admendments, good or bad, Terrorist or Hunter.

• 110. S.Lawyer  |  May 31st, 2007 at 7:34 pm

  I wonder if anyone who has posted an opinion on this and any other forum would do so if there was a possibility that their whole life was at stake. I am in law enforcement and have both a shotgun and “assault” rifle in my car. I also have been a hunter since I was old enough to chase lizards. I have enjoyed reading Zumbo since I used to ride my bicycle to the public library.(when was the last time the public library had outdoor magazines?) I feel if you disagree with what a writer says, you should write him or voice your disagreement in some other way. We take a huge risk when we over react to someone we don’t agree with. I personally believe we should all be allowed to own any gun we want. That being said, I wouldnt use a chainsaw to slice my steak or would I personally hunt with an assault weapon.I also wouldn’t clear a building with my bolt action 30 06. Bottom line, if you don’t agree, fine, but you don’t throw away a man’s whole carrer and life for an opinion. I will voice my opinion by not purchasing any remington products or renewing my subscription to Outdoor Life. GOOD LUCK JIM !!!

• 111. Jay  |  June 25th, 2007 at 8:51 am

  Jim has definitely accomplished a couple of things, he has us divided on a subject and has given the anti gunners more ammo to use against us. AR’s are terrorist weapons? Ban AR’s and AK’s from the woods and prairies? I cant say all, but our magazines are only allowed to hold 4 rounds when we hunt. It doesn’t matter whether it’s your favorite Browning autoloader or an AR. He made a huge mistake, no amount of hunting with Ted are going to fix. I don’t believe that someone as involved in our industry should get a pass after those comments.
  Now we have to come together, without Jim, and fix this mess he has made.

• 112. Joe  |  July 4th, 2007 at 7:50 pm

  I am sorry but I have to agree with Jim even though many will not. The ARs & AKs are military weapons. Weapons are used to kill humans. Yes you can use them for other purposes but they just really are not hunting guns. My Ruger M77 is a gun used for sport which I happen to call hunting. It can be a weapon and like a baseball bat can be turned into something it is not. (Yes I know it is modeled after military arms of the past but that is not its primary function today).

  Seems to me that many of Jim’s former sponsers & readers are being too politically correct. I guess they do not support Jim’s right to express his freedom of speech! But I do!

• 113. Brian Drane  |  July 6th, 2007 at 4:58 pm

  Jim, if you ever read this post, I just want you to know that I am sorry all of this happened. It is unfortunate to say the least. I have empathy for you, as you are entitled to your own thoughts. I respect you deeply as a fellow outdoorsman. Thank you for all of your wonderful years of service and devotion to a sport you love!

• 114. DWIGHT SCOGGINS  |  July 7th, 2007 at 10:37 pm

  I’m afraid I lost respect for JZ after his head over heels reversal of opinion due to corporate duress. And after all that desparate effort to appease the gods, just to be kicked to the curb, dropped like a bad habit by the magazine, and find disfavor amoungst the NRA gentry….why, that is the real storyline here. The thoughts rendered were not attacks on the 2nd Amendment, but rather on our brothers-in-arms choice of firearms in pursuit of game. Image portrayl not withstanding, at some point serious, open, and honest debate is needed concerning the sportmanship traditionally valued by hunters as opposed to the continual technilogical advances available. We owe it to the game we pursue to collectively reach some decisions among ourselves. If not, then i fear the face the anti’s place before the general public for us will be one that is by design meant to arouse negative emotion. If the pages of a hunting magazine’s artitcles, ed ops, and letters to sections, cannot be used as a forum for such discussion and thought provoking deliberation of this important subject,…..then where I ask? Perhaps we are to leave it to the marketplace to decide just how far and in what direction we are to be taken. After all, as we have witnessed, “Money talks and everything else walks”.

• 115. JG  |  September 7th, 2007 at 8:29 am

  I think some people at remington need to seriously think about
  what they just did terminating a sponsorship of a well respected member of the hunting community for more than 30 yrs?

• 116. G. Werner  |  October 5th, 2007 at 8:46 pm

  I believe Zumbo just restated the sporting world’s own beliefs. Whenever the sporting publications lists the top ten hunting rifles the list usually includes 7-8 bolt actions, 1-2 BAR type semi-automatic, and one lever action rifle. Nowhere do you see an AR or AK type on that list………..Want to bet an AR doesn’t appear on the next list? I’m betting it will, if for no other reason than to justify the crucifiction of Zumbo and to legitimize the AR as a hunting rifle.

• 117. Christine  |  October 8th, 2007 at 3:31 pm

  Look at this logically. JZ stated an opinion - one man’s opinion. The logical result could have been a nice logical discussion by people either agreeing or disagreeing to the opinion itself, and the reasons why. Those comments could have benefitted and intrigued everyone concerned (including Remington, including Outdoor Life, including the on-the-fence people following the discussion. Instead, you have all these up in arms (so to speak) “yahoos”, etc. WHINING about what he said and whether he should have said it, whether this or that should have happened. It takes away from the “sporting” and logical discussion of the issue that should have followed. Since when is expressing an opinion a reason to completely disrupt life and liberty?

• 118. Jack Zeller  |  October 16th, 2007 at 6:49 am

  What is really unforgiveable was the utter ignorance expressed by Zumbo. For a career man of the field, how could he not have known or respected the fact that AR’s and clones make up some of the most accurate varmint rifles out there? And while he had every right to attempt a nexsus between terrorists and AR-15’s he had NO right to expect Remington, Outdoor Life or anyone else to pay him for such ‘honest’ opinion. He has done much harm to the entire (including hunting) firearms arena, and the price he has paid is what he deserves. I can forgive him, but he needs to stay gone. There are plenty of other writers/hunters out there just as good. Go Remington!

• 119. Bob Creekmore  |  October 16th, 2007 at 6:22 pm

  Jim Zumbo made a serious mistake and looking over it just adds fuel to the anti firearm crowd.Ar 15 rifles are accurate and powerful rifles capable of easily makeing one shot kills on deer sized game especialy in the larger calibers.Jim Zumbo is going to have to live with this dabacle and we as a group of hunters and shooters I believe should and probably will forgive this unfortunate statement but I do not think we should forget maybe next time he will have no use for pistols or auto rifles in general outdoor writers need not tell others what is suitable to hunt with keep negative firearm comments and blogs to yourself.

• 120. James Seller  |  October 23rd, 2007 at 7:05 pm

  Remington, Gerber, Outdoor Life etc…they all did the right thing. Yes..one has their own opinions but when it contradicts what these companies believe in…they have every right to distance themselves from such ignorance. The apology only came when he saw how it hurt him in the pocket.. The apology is not sincere. I support any company that would not affiliate themselves with such people.

• 121. Larry A. Powles  |  November 29th, 2007 at 10:44 am

  I am a Retired Military man & Disabled Vet. I gave my country 23 years of my life to help defend our right to speech among other rights we so dearly love like the BIG one, Freedom of Choice! I just read through 120 comments by other readers concerning Mr. Jim Zumbos’ comments on the AR & AK rifles. In these 120 comments, some were negetive towards Mr. Zumbo & some positive. If I am not mistaken, ALL of them are personal opinions correct? How is it then, that we as hunter’s, outdoor’s men, and generally American people who take our 2nd Ammendment seriously have the right to express ourselves and at the same time, criticise another American for doing the same thing? We all make mistakes, but it takes a bigger person to admit their mistake & learn from it.
  Mr. Zumbo, you made a mistake, admitted it & have made the choise to learn from it. My hat’s off to you Sir.

• 122. cecil d. borboa  |  November 30th, 2007 at 7:07 pm

  Jim: I’m 70 years old. I have learned that expierence comes from events in our lives good and bad. If we repeat our bad events, then we have learned nothing. I do not apoligize for your unfortante actions, however after following you for a number of years I consider you a man of great worth to the hunting & gun community. I for one find it noble and humble to be able to apologize for ones mistakes. Far too many of us falter in this endeavor. Best of Luck in the future.

• 123. Ron Kruger  |  January 1st, 2008 at 9:59 am

  I first saw a display of assault-style rifles at the SHOT Show during the 1980s and was filled with a sickening sense that the arms industry was hastening their own demise by trying to expand their markets beyond hunters and target shooters. Such military style weapons appeal not to hunters or target shooters, but to an element of the population with questionable motives and desires.
  I saw them then, and see them now, as the biggest assault (pun intended) upon or Second Amendment rights and the best ammunition (pun intended) gun control advocates have ever received.
  I believe most conscientious hunters and target shooters feel this way, but they are afraid to voice their views for fear of political repercussions from special interests.
  I applaud Jim Zumbo for his brave comments on this issue, but I am dissapointed he did not stand his ground. Shame on Outdoor Life and Remington for not supporting him and for caving to political pressures from short-sighted or greedy interests.
  Where do we draw the line: surface-to-air missles for squirrel hunting?

• 124. sean stepanoff  |  January 1st, 2008 at 10:38 pm

  I THINK THAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO CHILL OUT ABOUT ZUMBOS’ COMMENTS. THIS GUY HAS DONE MORE FOR HUNTING THAT JUST ABOUT ANYONE I KNOW. TO HAND HIM FROM THE TALLEST TREE IS A BIT IDIOTIC. I HAVE READ SOME OF THE COMMENTS ON THE NET AND SOME OF THEM SICKENED ME. I UNDERSTAND THE SERIOUSNESS OF OUR GUN RIGHTS SITUATION IN THIS COUNTRY. I’M AN NRA MEMBER AND AVID GUN SHOOTER AND OWNER. AT THE FIRST SIGN OF ONE OF OUR OWN MAKING AN HONEST MISTAKE, WE BURN HIM AT THE STAKE. WHAT DOES THIS TELL OUR ENEMIES? IT SAYS WE HAVE NO REAL LOYALTY TOWARDS OUR OWN AND ARE NOT AS COHESIVE AS WE APPEAR. LETS ALL TAKE A BREATH AND LOOK AT THE CIRCUMSTANCES. DON’T POLLVOLT OVER MOUSE TERDS.

• 125. Ryan Acree  |  January 2nd, 2008 at 12:35 am

  I am deeply sadden to hear that Zumbo has made such a ignorant comment. I have followed him since I was a child. I am and hopefully will always be an AR owner. But I hate the public perception of the weapon. Now we have someone like Zumbo make negative comments about a weapon that he himself admits he knows nothing about, he has just unknowingly given the anti-gun nuts the best ammo they have had in years. I do not believe that Zumbo’s apology is (was) sincere. I believe that he is sorry that his comments got him in so much trouble, but not that is not his true belief. Unfortunately this is the opinion of my people his age which is very unfortunate. I have many (older) people look at me like I am crazy when they see my camo and scoped AR just because they are ignorate to the gun.

  I just watched the Zumbo/Nugent show where Zumbo tries to make up for his blunder by shooting an AR. This also does not seem sincere to me. Sorry.

  P.S.
  Also while I’m at it Jim, todays professional hunter do not hunt in blue jeans and black cowboy hats so while you are trying to salvage your career you might want to hit up your remaining sponsors for some pants and a hat. IMO.

  Ryan Acree
  NRA Life Member (and proud)

• 126. JB  |  January 4th, 2008 at 1:54 pm

  I have just learned of Jim Zumbos comments last year having seen his “comeback” show on The Outdoor Channel. I did not until recently recieve this channel on Direct TV so I had never seen his show. I had heard of him and read his articles in OL magazine. i was shocked to learn he had made such statements. What shocked me the most is that someone who obviously is commited to the cause could fall for such nonsenseical logic.

  Lets get something straight our 2nd amendment rights have nothing to do with Hunting. This is the trick of the Anti’s to divide the community. They grab any firearm they can under the notion that “it has no real hunting value”. Thats right it does not because I do not own it to hunt. I own it to defend myself and my family from all enemies foreign and domestic. No where in the 2nd does it say “hunting weapons” in fact it specifically implies Military style weapons. The Hunting and Shooting community can have this internal debate about what calibers are good for what purpose but to have this hit the public at large is bad for 2nd amendment rights in general. Hunters need to wise up are see that they are not the only gun owners out there.

• 127. Matthew Silveira  |  January 6th, 2008 at 2:20 pm

  I have hunted my whole life in California.The comments originally made by Mr. Zumbo are indeed correct in my opinion. The use of assualt type weapons have no buisness being used in the sport of hunting. And yes im a firm believer in out of my cold dead hands. For target shooting yes, but as weapon for fair chase never.

• 128. steve thompson  |  January 15th, 2008 at 1:12 am

  the second amendment is and was never intented for the exclusive use for sportsmen or dedicated target shooters ,rather it was instituded to guarantee all our other rights.I also disagree with tactical weapons on any game, thats my right by the first amendment.Was Jim wrong for stating his opinion? NO way, granted hind sight tells us it could have been worded differently, I sure hope i can always use the right words all the time; but like JIM i’m human.I’ll never meet mr, Zumbo but when i;m around a campfire i’ll think of his cooking recipes and after a long day in the outdoors perhaps after a few drinks , we might find something else we don’t agree on. WHY not we are only humans . good luck JIM 6phunter

• 129. Paul A. Gantt II  |  February 25th, 2008 at 2:29 pm

  Poor Mr. Steve Thompson. (See comment number 128.)

  Since he disagrees with tactical weapons on any game I guess he won’t be hunting with any semi-automatic rifle that functions the same as the tactical weapon, the M-1 Garand.

  I guess he also won’t be hunting with any bolt action tactical weapon that functions the same as the tactical weapon, the Springfield 1903-A3.

  I guess he also won’t be hunting with any lever action tactical weapon that functions the same as the tactical weapon, the Spencer Repeating Rifle.

  I guess he also won’t be hunting with any tactical weapon that functions the same as the tactical weapon, the 1861 Springfield.

  I guess he also won’t be hunting with any tactical weapon that functions the same as the tactical weapon, the Cross Bow.

  I guess he also won’t be hunting with any tactical weapon that functions the same as the tactical weapon, the Long Bow.

  I guess he won’t be hunting with any tactical weapon that functions the same as the tactical weapon, the Spear.

  I guess he won’t be hunting with any tactical weapon that functions the same as the tactical weapon, the Sword.

  I guess he won’t be hunting with any tactical weapon that functions the same as the tactical weapon, the Knife.

  I guess he won’t be hunting with any tactical weapon that functions the same as the tactical weapon, the Slingshot.

  I guess he won’t be hunting with any tactical weapon that functions the same as the tactical weapons of the hands of the Ninja Warrior.

  If Mr. Thompson will check history he will see that each of these “Tactical Weapons” that I listed have all been used by armies at some time or other.

  We all use “Tactical Weapons” to hunt with. Just choose your era of history.

  And for the record, I am a member of, P.E.T.A. (People Eating Tasty Animals). I love the idea of killing animals and eating them. I’m not real picky either. I don’t care if it flies, crawls, or swims. In the words of “Uncle Ted” Nugent, “Just Kill it and Grill it.” As always obey game laws and enjoy the harvest.

  No offense meant Mr. Thompson. Just watch what you say.
  Someone may take you to task on it some day.

  Have a nice day, sitting at home instead of hunting.

  Paul A. Gantt II

• 130. ALAN E NELSON  |  March 8th, 2008 at 9:55 am

  JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS, REMINGTON IS 500 % CORRECT ON SEVERING TIES WITH ZUMBO,I AM GOING TO WRITE THE SPORTS SHOW AND TELL THEM TO TELL JIM GOODBYE. YES, I AGREE EVERYONE HAS AN OPINION BUT THE ANTI’S CAN AND WILL USE THIS. THEY DO NOT PLAY FAir and we do not need zumbo siding in with their views, we cannot do that. I CANT BELIEVE ANYONE IS UPHOLDING HIM, IT IS KIND OF LIKE SAYING SOMEONE IS A LITTLE PREGNANT, THEY EITHER ARE OR THEY ARENT. ZUMBO IS WITH US OR AGAINST US, GO REMINGTON, I AM GOING OUT AND BUY A NEW REMINGTON AND I DO NOT NEED A GUN, ALAN NELSON

• 131. Al Norby  |  August 21st, 2008 at 9:14 pm

  Gee wizz, Zumbo said somthing somebody did not like and Remington and O.L. cut the ties for fear of loosing a couple of pennies. I Am 72 yrs. old and been hunting for 63 or 64 yrs.I don’t like Military looking weapons for hunting either,but where has Jim zumbro been, living in a vaccum the last 50 yrs. He reminds me of all these well informed politicians from DC, that don’t know up from sikkem. Wake up Zumbro and go out by your self and try to kill something. Have you ever shot some thing without some guide saying ,”over there thats a good one, shoot it!” Open your eyes man and try living in the real world for a change. To be as uninformed as you seem to be must be very embarassing. I think you lost it about 20 yrs ago but thats just my personal thinking.

• 132. Nicholas Fitzgerald  |  April 11th, 2009 at 12:14 pm

  You gotta love Jim. He’s an honest guy and has done more for hunting as well as our troops than most people. This is nothing more than a case of mistaken identity. Jim, an assault rifle is, by definition, fully automatic. You won’t find those out on the prairie shooting coyotes or anything else. Second, a terrorist is not a rifle, it’s a person. I have one of those rifles, and though I don’t use it for hunting, I would definitely use as an anti-terrorist role. All in all, it was a mistake born of a simple lack of information. I say give the guy a break.

• 133. Bob  |  June 5th, 2009 at 10:24 am

  I consider myself an old timer too since I got my start hunting and fishing in rural northern Pennsylvania back in the late 50s. Back then, the only long guns I knew of had wood stocks. Maybe that’s why I’m a traditionalist and would no sooner hunt with a “black gun” as jump off a cliff. But if guys want to hunt with them, or do whatever, I guess to each his own.

  That said, going to the range is one thing, but I maintain they look absurd in the woods, and I’ll stick to that opinion. (And I have shot others’ ARs at the range, and enjoyed it - I always have fun shooting).

  “Back in the day,” I lived and breathed to hunt (and fish), poured over the gun section in the Sears catalog, and read every outdoor magazine I got my hands on, including Outdoor Life to which I had a subscription for years and years. And I always bought Remington ammo. I had so little money back then I used to buy my ammo by the shell (shotgun) because the local gun shops and Western Auto in the small town I grew up in would gladly break boxes and sell it that way. I still have a Rem 870 Wingmaster I bought more recently (35 years ago now if you consider that more recently) that I’ve maintained in mint condition.

  I’m an adamant and life-long supporter of the Second Amendment. I also happen to be an adamant, life-long supporter of the First Amendment.

  Maybe it’s because I happen to have some of the same views of black guns as Zumbo, but I can’t agree with some of the vilification I’ve heard and read about, on this blog and others where some of it has been far worse - much of it is way over the top and my in opinion, some of it is pretty sick stuff. The man is a life-long Second Amendment guy who has supported our interests and he’s entitled to his opinion.

  I totally disagree with Outdoor Life and Remington. We have our Constitution, ten Amendments comprising our Bill of Rights, and 17 additional Amendments, and it would appear they only concern themselves with one single amendment. To me, that’s un-American. I will never so much as read Outdoor Life again much less buy it, nor will I ever buy Remington products - and I am right this moment planning on acquiring several rifles and another shotgun or two as I begin to prepare for my retirement activities. Remington would have been on the list of possibilities until this. As for my mint Wingmaster, it will be unused until I sell it.

• 134. Jon  |  November 2nd, 2009 at 10:16 am

  As much as I respect Jim Zumbo, he made a huge mistake. Sometimes, we get set in our ways, and it’s hard to except change. In his mind, a traditional hunting rife has a wood stock and a bolt or lever action. Things change, even if we don’t think it’s for the better. We have all made this type of mistake, or we will as we get older. The AR-15 is a great sporting rife and we be accepted for just that. The new generation of hunters and shooters will give it it’s due. Remington and Outdoor Life had to do what they did..it’s a business and they have to keep customers. Some opions suggested that “it’s just a gun” and they are correct. But, if they get one gun banned, what’s stopping them from moving on to the next. In this day and age, you have to roll with the flow. And the flow is a trend towards AR sporting rifles. He has a right to his opion, but you can’t bite the hand that feeds you, and I don’t mean his paycheck from just Outdoor Life and Remington, but the entire 2nd Amendment. Without those freedoms, we don’t know who Jim Zumbo is………………

Leave a Comment

Comment Post Guidelines

1. If you include swear words/vulgar language, your comment will be deleted
2. If you attack somebody personally, your comment will also be deleted
3. If you have something beneficial to add, please carry on...Thanks!
NOTE: All Comments are moderated and must be approved before being posted

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed