Guns & Ammo editor fired ...

Guns and Ammo editor fired

He always had undertones in his writings He finally made the big mistake of showing how he felt and that he agreed with gun control
I hope that in their wisdom that other hunting and fishing magazines lock him out of any future employment.

I bet he will really turn now , being an advocate of even stricter Gun control. This is the type of hype that the anti gun forces love to prey on.
 
Last edited:
In defense of Jim Zumbo........ first of all, I was ON that bandwagon when it happened. IIRC it was around 9:00PM here on the west coast when he got the sack and by midnite Ted Nugent had him a plane ticket and within DAYS Zumbo was touring the US touting full auto, black guns (and PINK black guns ;) ) and generally chewing crows and spitting the feathers. Jim misspoke, he had to pay a serious penance but he DID NOT dispute Second Amendment Rights in any way shape or form. He just said, in print, that he "didn't like to see military arms in the hunting field," that he was a "Blued steel and wood guy," a traditionalist at heart.

Dick Metcalfe is flat out pissing on my rights. He deserves to be fired.

al
 
Guns and Ammo editor fired

Guns and ammo has had several articles in the past that seemed to agree with some type of limitation or controls
Little slips in articles , That's why I stopped receiving it many years ago. Its mostly about Handguns anyway.
Rifle magazine was my favorite.
 
Guns and Ammo

I guess hes intitled to his opinion but hes not saying it at a coffee shop. He said it in a magazine with gobs of pro 2nd amendment supporters. Was he trying to get fired? I think we should be able to own full auto if your not a felon a have a clean record but Im not writing for a magazine so I wouldn't print my opinion in a magazine where I was hired. Ill just bug you guys. He was even on their TV show a lot. Hope it was worth it.
 
Doug,

I agree with you on the full auto aspect, and you can on certain weapons with the class 3 license procedure. But you have to think back to when this country was founded, the citizens had current and update weapons, same as the military at the time. That should translate to us being able to own an M4/M16 just as easy as the government, along with other small arms. Due to the current state of the population's thinking, that will never happen. Most of which have never shot a gun, including most of our elected officials in DC.

Danny
 
Danny, I agree 100% You re just as dead killed with a shotgun or a full auto but the folks in Washington don't see it that way. Times have changed. When I was a kid you didn't sucker punch somebody or ambush em. Now these physcos shoot innocent people. Wash. wants to let the actions of a few deranged people dictate policy for the masses. I don't know what the answer is but its not more gun control. If they take our guns it will be a car bomb next time. Whether you like black rifles or walnut stocks theres room for everybody. I will get off the soap box, I get fired up on the 2nd amend.
 
+1 RogerT, BEQUETTE RESIGNS

I have to whole heartly agree with Roger T that the Chief Editor Jim Bequette should be fired also as he approved the publishing. Well 'BING' is reporting that Jim B has resigned as he should.
Now who will G&A get to replace them.
I left G&a readership 3 mistakes ago.
Centerfire
 
The Muzzle loader was the Military Weapon of the time and that is what our forefathers said when they wrote the second amendment, I had a guy tell me thats what the second was about Muzzle loading rifles and pistols NOT semi autos and full autos! So I told him that when they wrote the FIRST one they were talking about a two page piece of paper, not satellite communications, and Computers.
So some people like shooting Military rifles some don't if you are not using them for Illegal things what the problem! The Computer has done more damage in its short time than we think about.
Stick by your Guns and GOD were going to need them.

Joe Salt
 
The idea that all our rights are or have been restricted, and that's fine according to Metcalf is hogwash. I believe he mentioned driving and restrictions on us in getting licensed and/or driving. The Constitution says that we have the freedom to travel, but nowhere does it say that a person has the right to own a horse, ride a horse, or own a buggy, wagon, or whatever that could be driven or ridden. Shank's mare boys and girls.

Metcalf has the right to say or think whatever he wants, but equally if he writes something for a shooting magazine that hopes to stay in business that is likely in disagreement with the thoughts of most shooters his employer has the right to as our Brit brethren say, "give him the sack". That the editor took responsibility and resigned as well shows that he may have had a lapse of judgement, but was man enough to cowboy up and take responsibility. Too many people seem to think that taking responsibility for their actions or failure to act is not to be done. A display of no spine is still a display of no spine.

I've had concealed carry permits in two states, WA and Montana. Unless things have changed in WA the requirement for obtaining a CCP was being 21, having a clean record, and the requisite funds. In Montana either a hunter safety certificate or the completion of a concealed carry class is required. Also in Montana a CCP is only required inside a town, city, or mining or logging camp. Outside those areas concealed carry without a permit is perfectly legal, as well as open carry.

Those who believe that we should only be allowed to carry blackpowder muzzleloaders stand with their mouths agape when I ask if they should be restricted to standing on soapboxes and holding forth, or newspapers restricted to hand operated printing presses using replaceable type blocks, etc. Their response if they have one is something intelligent like, "well that's different", but they're back to mouths agape at, "how". I worked with a whole bunch of left wing anti gun/hunting morons who found no problem restricting my rights as long as their rights weren't hindered.
 
stool said:
well actually it is simple...as the state or the class giver, you have certified the shooter is "accurate" 'reasonable'...something.....
and guess who the second party in the law suit is...the one that certified the shooter.....
i know of at least one state that dropped the shooting portion of their requirements for just that reason.
Click to expand...

If that were true, driving school instructors could be sued if they pass a student who subsequently causes a car accident.

Is the state medical board that certifies a doctor liable if he commits malpractice?

Is there a single case where a court has found a gun safety or concealed carry training program instructor liable if a former student causes an accident or commits a crime?

I don't think so.
 
It isn't necessary to put a tag on a car, have insurance or have a driver's license until you operate the car on public roads. You can drive drunk if you want around a farm or any private property with no government restrictions other than the legal responsibility for the consequences of your actions.

vicvanb said:
So what is so bad about one of Metcalf's main points, that he supported 2 days of training for concealed carry permit applicants?
Click to expand...

Once you accept that it is okay for the government to place terms, how do you insure that the terms remain reasonable? What is to stop an anti-gun legislature from changing the terms to something so onerous that they are really backdoor gun bans?
 
Last edited:
Ultimately it is the Supreme Court that protects our constitutional rights, which is why it is so important that we elect leaders that make wise decisions as to who to appoint to it.

The other issue that looms over the continuance of our gun rights is the balance between those who grow up shooting, and those who lack that experience. It is a lot easier to demonize equipment if your audience has no experience with it, and has been convinced that they have no use for it.

That is one one of the main reasons that I got involved in helping to run a local range a few decades back. We enlarged and refined the facilities, and grew the staff and membership, as well as allowing the maximum number of different kinds of competition that the site could support. There were CMP matches, and various jr. shooter oriented programs, as well as cooperation with and provision for military and police training, all of this on land that was not furnished or supported by any government revenue. Ultimately the internal politics burned me out, but not before a lot got done. I took my turn. Have you?

I very much enjoy the idea of competition shooting in all of its myriad of forms, but the thing that gladdens my hart the most is seeing parents and grandparents patiently teaching their children and grandchildren how to be safe, responsible, and skilled shooters, and in my opinion, if we get so wrapped up in playing with our toys, that we forget to pass on what we know to the next generation, that generational loss will ultimately doom the free exercise of our constitutional right to bear arms. It will become a vestige of the past, technically there, but effectively regulated out of existence. All we have to do is look at the laws in some of our large cities, to see what the future may be.
 
Larry Elliott said:
The idea that all our rights are or have been restricted, and that's fine according to Metcalf is hogwash. I believe he mentioned driving and restrictions on us in getting licensed and/or driving. The Constitution says that we have the freedom to travel, but nowhere does it say that a person has the right to own a horse, ride a horse, or own a buggy, wagon, or whatever that could be driven or ridden. Shank's mare boys and girls.

Metcalf has the right to say or think whatever he wants, but equally if he writes something for a shooting magazine that hopes to stay in business that is likely in disagreement with the thoughts of most shooters his employer has the right to as our Brit brethren say, "give him the sack". That the editor took responsibility and resigned as well shows that he may have had a lapse of judgement, but was man enough to cowboy up and take responsibility. Too many people seem to think that taking responsibility for their actions or failure to act is not to be done. A display of no spine is still a display of no spine.

I've had concealed carry permits in two states, WA and Montana. Unless things have changed in WA the requirement for obtaining a CCP was being 21, having a clean record, and the requisite funds. In Montana either a hunter safety certificate or the completion of a concealed carry class is required. Also in Montana a CCP is only required inside a town, city, or mining or logging camp. Outside those areas concealed carry without a permit is perfectly legal, as well as open carry.

Those who believe that we should only be allowed to carry blackpowder muzzleloaders stand with their mouths agape when I ask if they should be restricted to standing on soapboxes and holding forth, or newspapers restricted to hand operated printing presses using replaceable type blocks, etc. Their response if they have one is something intelligent like, "well that's different", but they're back to mouths agape at, "how". I worked with a whole bunch of left wing anti gun/hunting morons who found no problem restricting my rights as long as their rights weren't hindered.
Click to expand...



Great post Larry!
 
So why was Metcalf fired

And not Bequette also? Didn't Bequette read and publish Metcalf? He is sorry? Bull! He is as guilty as Metcalf!! Greg
 
alinwa said:
In defense of Jim Zumbo........ first of all, I was ON that bandwagon when it happened. IIRC it was around 9:00PM here on the west coast when he got the sack and by midnite Ted Nugent had him a plane ticket and within DAYS Zumbo was touring the US touting full auto, black guns (and PINK black guns ;) ) and generally chewing crows and spitting the feathers. Jim misspoke, he had to pay a serious penance but he DID NOT dispute Second Amendment Rights in any way shape or form. He just said, in print, that he "didn't like to see military arms in the hunting field," that he was a "Blued steel and wood guy," a traditionalist at heart.

Dick Metcalfe is flat out pissing on my rights. He deserves to be fired.

al
Click to expand...

Wow, that's not good. We can't prefer pretty wood against polished and blued steel over the utilitarian look of the AR types without trouble?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top