Posted on 11/06/2013 10:14:11 PM PST by Neil E. Wright
Back in the 1970s, Petersen also bought my favorite magazine, TRUE MAGAZINE. He sold it not long after to someone who then turned it into a porno rag and it died the death.
I think that I am older than Metcalf, but maybe his thinking is not as clear as it was in past years?
FLASH: Dick Metcalf axed from Guns & Ammo
November 6, 2013
Dick Metcalf, a long-time gun writer and editor of Guns & Ammo magazine, was unceremoniously fired today.
His termination comes on the heels of his column in the latest issue of that gun mag, in which he discusses his approval of further regulations of Second Amendment Rights.
“I believe in the Second Amendment but–” he wrote. That’s a classic anti-gun line.
“I believe in the Second Amendment but I don’t think anyone should have a handgun, or a black gun or a semi-automatic, or a full capacity magazine or, or, or” the anti-gunners always say.
In Metcalf’s case, he says he doesn’t feel Illinois’ new 16-hour training requirement is an improper infringement on the right to keep and bear arms.
Boy was he wrong.
Dead wrong.
http://www.gunssavelife.com/?p=9922
I enjoy the segments on GUNS & AMMO T.V. And saw Metcalf in a segment yesterday. I will continue to watch the programs, but will now view Metcalf differently in those segments.
http://www.thesportsmanchannel.com/programming/descriptions/description.php?ID=207
Unless something changes I will not renew my subscription to the magazine.
All true. Crispy is not your friend.
I’m a longtime subscriber and an even longer reader, going all the way back to when I was in elementary school in the early 1960s. I literally gained practice in what became an obsession with reading when I read the “YOUR POLICE” articles in those magazines. They also influenced me to become a law enforcement officer after my time as an army officer. After leaving that I became a social studies teacher and have been ever since. 24 years as an educator now. Herein lies the reason for my letter regarding Mr. Metcalf’s analysis of the Second Amendment.
As an educator, I specialize in the American Revolution and military history. There’s a flaw in the reasoning regarding the wording of the Amendment. When the talk concerns the term “WELL REGULATED” it doesn’t refer to academics or the rule of law. Far from it. It is a term of MILITARY LOGISTICS. It refers to having “like" weapons, with like ammunition for interchangeability on the battlefield, just like a military organization. Likewise, the anti-gunners who rant stating that the meaning of a militia means “NATIONAL GUARD,” an organization that wasn’t even created until the first world war, are just as wrong. Had the Founding Fathers been talking about a “national guard” when they wrote the Amendment, they’d have been referring to the TORIES loyal to King George! Somehow, I don’t think that was the intention. Do you?
I don’t really know what I’m going to do about my subscription to your normally outstanding publication. Maybe I just won’t renew. You know RECOIL magazine suffered a gaffe like this recently. They had to scramble to recover. I hope you reconsider and do something similar to that. The fact that the Brady Bunch is gleeful and has linked to the editorial should tell you that you’re standing in the “dog’s business.”
Mr. Metcalf advocated a more strict system of licensing, believing quite naively that the antis would agree and not make that process so difficult as to be detrimental. But that would be exactly their plan. I have been an NRA Firearms Instructor and competition shooter for 25 years. I could design a course that SEAL TEAM 6 or DELTA would find difficult to pass, let alone Joe Six-pack, the average shooter.
Dick Metcalf Response to His Firing from Guns & Ammo
Via John Richardson, I saw that Dick Metcalf published a response to all the turmoil he created with his recent gun control column in Guns & Ammo. I applaud Jim Shepherd for giving him the space to do it since I think we can learn quite a bit from his response. I’ll start with the easy and obvious parts that had me rolling my eyes.
Read at:
http://www.pagunblog.com/2013/11/08/dick-metcalf-response-to-his-firing-from-guns-ammo/
Jim Bequette is weaseling words.
Metcalfs response is specious.
He compares criminals to law abiding citizens.
Not only does Metcalf compare the rights of criminals to those of law abiding citizens, but he believes that honest men must therefore abide by unconstitutional laws, laws that no FREE man can live by without becoming a criminal.
He avoids any reference to natural law.
No wonder they named him Dick.
Ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.