Posted on 03/05/2007 3:25:49 PM PST by Mini-14
He's not pulling a Hollywood, checking into rehab and ducking responsibility, he's standing up and taking it like a man. We don't have a lot of men out there anymore, so when I see one, I'm ready to cut him some slack.
So long as he walks the walk as well as he talks the talk, I'm going to let him off the hook.
Sounds like Dumbo woke up.
I remember about 10 years ago when either "Shooting Times" or G&A wrote something similar.
OK, so Nuge read him the riot act concerning these rifles???
And this guy is some kind of expert???
What am I missing here?
your post says it well. time will tell I guess.
"I recently took a crash course on these firearms with Ted Nugent, to learn more about them and to educate myself."
Way to go Ted!
So...good Dr...you've never made an error???
Does anyone think that Mr. Zumbo would have agita over this, if he had not been "Zumboed"?
Be that as it may, I think it's time to accept Mr. Zumbo's apology and clear a space for him back at the campfire.
He could be a strong voice for us, if he truly has seen the light.
Just because he is a slow learner doesn't mean he isn't capable of learning. It just took a big enough hammer to pound it in.
God bless Jim Zumbo. No doubt there will still be some pompous, lowbrow "tough guys" who refuse to cut the gentleman a break. Gee, nobody ever makes a mistake.
Actually, hunting is a privilege, and not a right, just like driving a car. The government has total control over both, and grants you the privilege in exchange for paying taxes on it, and conforming to the government's rules.
The Second Amendment is a genuine right that comes from God. The government acknowledges that right as something it will not infringe upon, because it pre-exists the government itself. This particular right enables you to take effective measures to protect your life from criminals and government-gone-bad.
And while I love blued-steel-and-quality-walnut, I still have some weapons stocked in black or OD plastic, for reasons I don't have to explain to anybody. Just remember, when the gun-grabbers spout the "they never would have approved the Second Amendment if they knew then what we know now" BS, that the "American rifle" was the high-velocity, high precision "sniper rifle" of its day that terrorized Redcoats armed with smoothebore muskets.
Looks like his little trip behind the woodshed, and a ruler across the knuckles from Uncle Ted got his mind right.
This is a good thing.
Now that he seems to have figured out that the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting, I'm willing to forgive him.
Maybe over time he can undo some of the damage he did. Maybe over time he can regain the shooting public's trust. But not yet.
The Antis will roast him as a hypocrit at every turn, ignoring how he stands now versus what he said then. They will continue to use what he said as ammo for their agenda.
Zumbo better have rawhide for skin and the patience of Job to carry on. His voice better be loud to rise above the din.
Much better (though at first he still seems fixated on hunting.)
I wonder if he read a certain poist here, or the same posted at the Nugent site (And I also posted on his own blog before it was pulled that he should meet with Gottlieb):
To: bad company
Jim Zumbo's REAL Apology
(hypothetical, but Jim, this is $50k worth of consultant wisdom.)
If my dog digs up my neighbor's flowerbeds, I apologize. But if expect my neighbor to accept my apology, I have to do two more things: I have to take action to fix the underlying problem (maybe a broken fence), and I have to correct the damage I caused (putting in new flowers).
Everyone knows I regret writing with such hostility toward military style rifles. I apologized for that. Twice. But I my apologies failed because they didn't address my underlying problem, or correct the damage I caused.
Yes, I said "my problem." I learned that I have a problem. A black hole of ignorance that needed correction. So I took the advice of a friend, and spoke to Aaron Zelman, founder and President of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. Which seemed like an odd combination until Aaron shared some history with me.
You see, even being an acclaimed firearms "expert" for decades didn't make me an expert in history, the Constitution, and the reason why our patriotic founders gave us a Second Amendment (to affirm our God-given right as free people to secure our freedom against all possible threats, including our own government.)
And sadly, I don't think I was alone, because there are millions of hunters out there who don't vote, or vote for candidates who would destroy the one right that secures liberty for us and for all generations through the ages.
It's not about hunting. Sure back in colonial times, nearly everybody hunted. They had to. But the Bill of Rights didn't protect the right to keep and bear arms for hunting. No, it protected it because it was "necessary to the security of a free State." Freedom. Not recreation, bonding, even putting food on the table. Freedom.
So it really doesn't matter whether an AK-47 knock-off has a "sporting purpose," or is appropriate for hunting. That is the wrong question (which is why my apologizing for getting the wrong answer was so meaningless to those who understand gun rights.) The real question is whether a particular "arm" is useful for defending freedom.
That's what I learned the Supreme Court ruled back in the "Miller case" in the 1930s. (You know, it's funny but sad that the only "Miller case" most hunters know about has a dozen golden cans inside - but I'm going to help change that.) The Miller ruling said that guns could not be banned or heavily taxed if they had some military usefulness.
Do you realize what this means? It means that even machine guns and flamethrowers, even grenades should not be restricted. Of course, they are, but now I'm going to help fight that. But the point is that these things having nothing to do with hunting either (and I don't suggest using a flame thrower on your next duck-hunting trip.)
So now I get it. But I don't think enough other hunters do. And some hunters might even think I was a nut for associating with the machine-gun guys (who happen to be among the most prosperous, successful, law-abiding segment of our society). But I'd rather be unpopular than wrong (I was wrong for far too many years while I was popular to care any more.)
So I have "fixed the fence." I have cured my ignorance.
Now, I need to correct the damage. It turns out that there are anti-gun (anti-hunting, anti-liberty, anti-rights) organizations out there who are using MY WORDS to try to take away YOUR RIGHTS! When I learned that, I was heartbroken, feeling like a traitor to the nation I love. I could not walk away from that damage, so I will do all I can to fight for your gun rights.
So, I will be offering at no charge to write articles and columns for any gun magazine who will print my words on what hunters need to learn about our right to keep and bear arms. I will speak out at schools and clubs on why the second amendment matters far more than tagging a big buck.
I will work with the leaders for gun rights (JPFO, GOA, NRA, and many state organizations) on their political efforts to restore our gun rights.
And I will educate myself as a citizen about the other Constitutional rights we enjoy, so that I can be vigilant on all fronts.
So this is not the end, this is the beginning of a new chapter for me.
And I guess when it comes down to it, what I have just written isn't even an apology, because I have simply told you what I have done, how I have changed, and what I am going to do. You can forgive me if you wish, but I don't need your forgiveness.
What I need is your help. Help with a hunt far more important than any I have ever attempted. A hunt to restore and protect our liberties.
--Jim Zumbo
107 posted on 02/22/2007 12:52:58 PM PST by Beelzebubba (Your FRiendly FReeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
That there are a large number of folks that have the same mindset as Mr. Zumbo had a couple of weeks ago.
'Go ahead and ban the evil looking firearms if that's what it will take for you to leave my legitimate hunting firearms alone'
Who could be a better person to point out the errors related to that type of attitude, to those that think that way, than a person that has been respected by that community, for a looooong time, that has been persuaded to see the absolute wrong headedness related to that attitude?
He has made a real apology, and taken the first step toward fulfilling it.
I have taken the first step to forgiving him.
I just hope he can reach out to all those hunters and remind them to VOTE.
Note, link to above post is
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1789308/posts?page=107#107
In order to help put this guys remarks in context, I had friends who were for gun ownership, who believed in the 2nd amendment but when asked(by me) about so called assault rifles they had this to say: "Oh, it is imperitive that people own firearms but not those awful looking military weapons!" They really believed this crap, so I can understand Zum boy believing he might have been correct when he made his original statement. However, whether he really had an epiphany moment or not remains to be seen. I will trust him for now.
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.