Jim Zumbo

[California Joe]

This guy is supposed to be a big deal hunter guy and heavily sponsored by a lot of major companies and I've heard of him mostly because of a Traditional muzzleloader site I look in on that hates him because he disparages real muzzleloaders in favor of those inline abominations quite a bit....But he really stepped on his **** with this one.....What a f*cking jackass.

He made a statement on his blog site condemning people hunting with or shooting SKS or AK or AR15 style weapons. The 2nd Amendment groups really took umbrage with his comments and started hitting his site and Outdoor World and Remington's web sites heavy. From what I hear, Remington announced on the 19th that they were terminating Mr. Zumbo. Now Hawaii Jerkey Co. and Mossy Oak have dropped Zumbo as a sponsor, and Cabelas is currently reviewing contractual obligations and commitments regarding their sponsorship of the Jim Zumbo Outdoors television show.

Here's what he wrote......"Assault Rifles For Hunters?

As I write this, I'm hunting coyotes in southeastern Wyoming with Eddie Stevenson, PR Manager for Remington Arms, Greg Dennison, who is senior research engineer for Remington, and several writers. We're testing Remington's brand new .17 cal Spitfire bullet on coyotes.

I must be living in a vacuum. The guides on our hunt tell me that the use of AR and AK rifles have a rapidly growing following among hunters, especially prairie dog hunters. I had no clue. Only once in my life have I ever seen anyone using one of these firearms.

I call them "assault" rifles, which may upset some people. Excuse me, maybe I'm a traditionalist, but I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity. I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles. They tell me that some companies are producing assault rifles that are "tackdrivers."

Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern. I've always been comfortable with the statement that hunters don't use assault rifles. We've always been proud of our "sporting firearms."

This really has me concerned. As hunters, we don't need the image of walking around the woods carrying one of these weapons. To most of the public, an assault rifle is a terrifying thing. Let's divorce ourselves from them. I say game departments should ban them from the praries and woods."

[Limeyfellow]

He really taken a hammering. Deserved it too. Just a shame he going to drag down all his employees in the process.

[Laconian]

Jackass! I hope he winds up filing for unemployment

[scrybe]

Wow, well I used to respect him.

[California Joe]

It is just so arrogant and ill informed for a guy who should be very familiar with the industry....Pretty amazing. Whether you hunt with them or not is really beside the point.....

[Thor]

Over here the National Hunters Association itself proposed similar changes in the arms regulations. It was they who suggested that only firearms exclusively designed for hunting should be deemed legitimate for hunting. Nothing to do with characteristics, all about looks.

The average age among it's members is probably 60+ which might explain the retardedness.

[Hollis]

He is not a traditionalist, he is a idiot, playing right into the hands of the anti-gun idiots. So he thinks he can define what's what.......... what a idiot (a better word would work)

He is clueless about the tactics being used against pro gun users, even modern usage of the name "assualt weapon" was pushed by the anti-gun lobby to conjure up a nasty made in hell murdering machine that no decent human would ever have a need for or own.

he probably is dating cindy sheehan

[Roaming East]

he probably is dating cindy sheehan

Not enough bengay in the world for that....

[noname]

From the sound of it he has lost a few sponsors. Remmington, Cabelas, etc to name a few. I also believe outdoor channel dropped him as well. Maybe he can get disability for his dimentia? Can we coin a new term now? I would hate to be zumboed like that. Or did you see that guy zumbo himself like that? Actually I think getting munsoned is funnier.

[Rakki]

Classic case of "If I sell someone out maybe they'll leave me alone."

Newsflash: As far as anti-gun people are concerned, if it shoots bullets and kill things they want it banned, be it for the hunting of animals or man.

[Seraphim]

Yeah I skimmed that article the other day. Not wasting my time on this guy.

[punchinout]

yea, he screwed himself royally.


I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles.

pppfff, if i had one of these/ could afford one only thing i'd "Terrorize" would be coyotes and other assorted varmints. issue a fatwa against all the coyotes in washington.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/punchinout18/pcwvms24-9ss.jpg

[Herrmannek]

This was great show. Watched it from first minutes(I read a blog of the guy who reads the blog of other guy who reads blog of the zumbo guy). This guy was obviously suicidal... But I'm not sorry for him... In this world nothing is free, even freedom of speech...

[maw]

what a fcuker.

ar's are great for coyote and varmint. i was at a gun shop recently picking up some stuff and this gent came in and asked about a hunting rifle. so this older sales man behind the counted pulls out a dakota 76 and starts giving him the pitch. to help you visualize the scenario, the sales man is mid fifties and has a bulging mid-section probably 40 pounds overweight. there's no way he'd make it up a ridge humping after a ****g horn or even an elk. and just to fill out the imagery the fat batsard was wearing the entire safari get up, the hunting equivalent of a walt. anyway, the customer asks about the viability of a semi auto and walt almost flips. after the blood pressure came down he dismissed semi's because they're not reliable enough and too inaccurate...

i wanted to chime in but it wasn't my place. after the mosquito i consider the most dangerous (ie most prolific killer of men) animal to be the two legged predator. for killing said predator all of the militaries in the world issue semi auto's. if semi's weren't reliable they'd find something else. regarding accuracy, i've fired semi's that were consistent .3 moa guns so wtf. imho, the only downside to hunting with a semi is all the extra weight of the gas system. sorry for the pseudo rant but it gives you an insight into the mindset.

[Sabre]

I don't know why this bloke started to call ARs/AKs etc 'terrorist rifles' (despite the fact that virtually every terrorist in the world either has been or is using an AK variant...might have had something to do with it), surely he could have seen how lacking in 'politik' that statement was.

Beyond that faux pas however, I can fully understand where he's coming from. You don't really need a high rate of fire for deer shooting. Deer don't need supressing, nor do deer shoot back.

If people insist that assault rifles are great for hunting, then surely they just mean the round is fine. If so, then why bother with the assault rifle? Surely a hunting rifle is best designed for the job.

I have an assault rifle, it was given to me and I'm only supposed to use it on Taliban. The rounds I use in it are designed for humans and are legally cleared under the Geneva Convention. A hunting rifle is not legally cleared for shooting Taliban, nor is it suitable. The two weapons have different purposes.

I intend to get myself a rifle when I settle down a bit, but even if I could own an AR, I'd still just want a nice hunting rifle. Why the need for an assault rifle? There is none. Why not go out hunting with a barret .50 or a GPMG? Horses for courses in my opinion.

[Geezah]

^ I'm not sure that I know anyone that uses an Assault Rifle to hunt, after all we are talking a select fire/automatic fire military rifle aren't we when we say Assault Rifle?
Semi-automatic rifles that have a cosmetic resemblance to a military rifle, now that I can understand.

Anyway, all that said, looks like the Brady Bunch have a new poster child for their cause............

[California Joe]

I agree with Sabre that you don't "need" one of those rifles for hunting, I use an old Savage 99 lever action or a flint longrifle, but I was simply amazed at the fact that this guy dismissed so much of the gun owning public that a lot of his sponsors rely on. Surely he has heard of the Camp Perry type target matches where ARs are being used a great deal these days, surely he should know that a tuned up semi auto would make an excellent prairie dog or coyote gun...

Personally I like single shot actions and beautiful wood on a hunting rifle and one of these days I'll spend a bunch on a good one. But I'm also in the process of building an AK just for the hell of it cause I can.

[Ghetto Defendant]

The .22 rimfire kills more people in America than anything else. I guess my Ruger 10/22 is a "terrorist" weapon, too, Eh, Zumbo?

[Hollis]

Cali, the thing is defining the use for another person by this so called "you don't need". Heck clubs and rocks were all caveman used, heck lets go retro all the way back. Hunting rifles generally have been some passed military variant that made it's way into the hands of a new generation for a hunting rifle.

Every feature (excluding such as bayonet lug) is on some "hunting" rifle. Auto loading, box magazine, stock/adjustable,etc. Surplus military rifles have provide millions of hunting rifles. 03s stock or sporterized, same with Mosin, K98s etc........ when those rifles were new they were standard issue to militaries around the world, so what to say a AK, SKS, AR is not tomorrows hunting rifle.


Guys get out of the military, as with generations before them, their service rifles is their friend, they know it, and want to use it as hunting rifle. Who has the right to tell this new generation they can not do what generation before them did.

When the constitution was written, civilians had full access to everything the military had without any paper work, restrictions, or special stamps, that is no longer the case to day.

Hunting regulations define limits to rifles being used for hunting, SKS, AK, AR, M1 garands, M1 Carbines, M1A1, L1A1 all can meet those requirements and be used for hunting, WHY NOT?.

The the other thing anti-gun folks want to do, is define hunting for the hunter. No sport hunting for need only?

Heck how many of us really NEED to hunt. Isn't there a Safeway you can meat at near you, are you that broke, the food bank can nor provide your need and you still have to hunt?.......

At what point to we tell other, stop defining what other people can do can not do, own or not own based solely on our own ignorance and bias'.

Every fire arm is a assault weapon if it is used to assault another person, so are fists, rocks, cars, etc................

Do we really need it?........... according to celibates and aesthetics we don't........... But I am not going to set in a plant, being the plant, naked, hungry, cold while contemplating the cosmos for my entire life time. So I need........ As for Celibates, if god did not provide those cute hippy chicks, and me with need to get laid we would never have practice doing the last tango in Paris so much. :hug:

[California Joe]

I agree Hollis. There are probably more hunting rifles in existence that started out as '03 Springfields or Mausers (assault rifles) than have ever been factory made as such.

One thing that cracks me up, is how he calls himself a traditionalist but frequently expounds the virtues of the "inline" muzzleloader, because of sponsorship, at the expense of, IMO, one of the most beautiful and effectively accurate weapons ever created, the longrifle.

[maw]

I can fully understand where he's coming from. You don't really need a high rate of fire for deer shooting. Deer don't need supressing, nor do deer shoot back.

disclaimer: i ground hunt/stalk with a bolt gun or depending on the terrain a shotgun so for me weight is a factor.

i can see the benefit of a fast follow up shot, mind you we're not talking spray and pray. sometimes a fast follow up shot can be merciful. in my book shot placement is EVERYTHING, but sometimes the laws governing the universe get the better of you. so although i have no need for a semi auto hunting rifle i leave the choice up to the hunter and don't judge them, the only thing that matters is results.

an area that a can totally see using an accurized ar type rifle for is varmint hunting, specifically praire dogs. out west i've seen dog towns with literally hundreds of the furry bastids running around. imho, a fast shooting self loading rifle in either .223 or .22-250 would be an asset in that role.

[Geezah]

The last few days have been an educational experience, to say the least. My ill-conceived inflammatory blog, as all of you now know, set off a firestorm that, I’m told, has never before been equaled. I’m not proud of that.
Let me say this at the outset. My words here are from the heart, and all mine. No one can censor me, and I answer to no one but myself. And I have no one to blame but myself. Outdoor Life, a magazine that I worked for full-time as Hunting Editor for almost 30 years, fired me yesterday. My TV show was cancelled yesterday. Many of my sponsors have issued statements on their website to sever all relationships. This may cause many of you to do backflips and dance in the streets, but, of course, I’m not laughing, nor am I looking for sympathy. I don’t want a pity party.

They say hindsight is golden. Looking back, I can’t believe I said the words “ban” and “terrorist” in the context that I did. I don’t know what I was thinking when I wrote that. I can explain this as sheer ignorance and an irresponsible use of words. What I’ve learned over the last few days has enlightened and amazed me. As a guy who hunts 200 days a year, does seminars on hunting, wrote for six hunting magazines, had a hunting TV show, and wrote 20 books on hunting, how could I have been so ignorant and out of touch with reality in the world of hunting and shooting?

But I was. I really can’t explain it, maybe because I just summarily dismissed the firearms in question in my mind when I saw them in magazines and catalogs. I saw one “black” firearm in a hunting camp in all my 50 years of hunting, and I shot one last year off a boat when fishing in Alaska. To tell the truth, it was fun and I enjoyed it immensely, but I never considered one for use in hunting. I have to tell you that I have had a revelation. I’m learning that many of my pals own AR-15’s and similar firearms and indeed use them for hunting. I was totally unaware that they were being used for legitimate hunting purposes. That is the absolute truth.

My biggest regret is not the financial impact of all this. I’m almost 67 and retirement is an option. The dreadful impact here is that I inadvertently struck a spear into the hearts of the people I love most…America’s gun owners. And, even though this huge cadre of dedicated people have succeeded in stripping me of my career, I hold no grudges. I will continue to stand as firm on pro hunting as I’ve ever done. But what’s different now is that I’ll do all I can to educate others who are, or were, as ignorant as I was about “black” rifles and the controversy that surrounds them. My promise to you is that I’ll learn all I can about these firearms, and by the time this week is out, I’ll order one. The NUGE has invited me to hunt with him using AR-15’s, and I’m eager to go, and learn. I’ll do all I can to spread the word.

I understand that many of you will not accept this apology, believing that the damage has been done and there’s no way to repair it. You have that right. But let me say this. I mentioned this above, and I’ll repeat it. I’m willing to seize this opportunity to educate hunters and shooters who shared my ignorance. If you’re willing to allow me to do that, we can indeed, in my mind, form a stronger bond within our ranks. Maybe in a roundabout way we can bring something good out of this.

Jim Zumbo

Link (http://nugeboard.tednugent.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/286904.html)

Just goes to show the strength of the firearm owning community in the US.

[California Joe]

It's too bad it doesn't work the same way in Washington isn't it. :) Talk about a rapid reaction force.....

[scrybe]

No joke, CJ. I think Zumbo got every bit of what he deserved. I can't imagine how someone so involved in the hunting and firearm industry could be so ignorant. It's inexcusable.

[gaijinsamurai]

I just read a Washington Post article which basically redicules the NRA and "assault rifle" owners for ruining Zumbo's life.

As an owner of one of these so-called "terrorist rifles", who's rights are now under direct attack by congress, I've got no sympathy for the guy.

The anti-gun crowd are trying to play "divide and conquer" by pitting hunters and owners of military-style weapons against each other.

[onefast93z28]

I don't know why he said what he said, I've heard he was a little buzzed when he wrote that blog, but he did take back his what he said and took up an offer to go hunting with an Ar15 and said he was going to buy one very soon. In my eyes that's good enough. The fact that some people are still pileing on makes all gun owners look bad.

The anti's are indeed playing divide and conquer, so we can't fall into that trap. If Mr. Zumbo was smart, he would become one of the loudest voices against a new AWB.

[Hollis]

I don't know why he said what he said, I've heard he was a little buzzed when he wrote that blog, but he did take back his what he said and took up an offer to go hunting with an Ar15 and said he was going to buy one very soon. In my eyes that's good enough. The fact that some people are still pileing on makes all gun owners look bad.

The anti's are indeed playing divide and conquer, so we can't fall into that trap. If Mr. Zumbo was smart, he would become one of the loudest voices against a new AWB.


Onefast, Yes, the link to his apology, is from a forum. To some what he did may be unforgivable, to the majority their feelings were similar to you. We all stumble, what is important is what we do after we stumble. I guess we can all second guess his motivations for the apology, I don't know. He definitely screwed the pooch with his original comment, made him look like a empty shirt.

As with all issues there are degrees of participation and tactics being employed to help shift a person view. I was amazed that he got sucked into the most obvious trap. People believe they can dictate to others what is or is not acceptable, appropriate to own, or use. If any Item is not use to comment a offense against another person or cause harm, who cares who owns it or uses it.

So I use a front stuffer, or breech loader, or auto loader to hunt with. So I hunt for trophy or for meat. Hunting is regulated by professional who know about the game population and what it takes to keep that population viable and healthy. I am not a trophy hunter, but thinning the heard is a important part of maintaining a viable and healthy heard.......... Trophy hunting is regulated for specific for that reason. But "Holier than Thous" out there will condemn one sport and and support another, they fall into the anti-gun trap when they do.

If I want to shoot a Ma Deuce for fun, and causes no harm, what business is it to anyone else if I own one?

I earned the money, I paid for the product, so when does another person's expenditure becomes the business of another. Liberal's mentality believes we are all children and needed to be protected from ourselves. They need to manage our money for us, manage our time, insure that we do not harm ourselves or others by control what ever we own. The Liberal's mentality wants to shape government as if it was the parent of all of us, to remove the fact the government serves the people, not the other way around, that is a government of the people, for the people and by the people. The people are not children of the government and needs to baby sat by the govenment.

[LaoSexMachine]

WP: Gun remark kills outdoorsman's career
Criticism of hunters who use assault rifles puts writer’s career in jeopardy
By Blaine Harden
The Washington Post
Updated: 11:22 p.m. CT Feb 23, 2007


SEATTLE - Modern hunters rarely become more famous than Jim Zumbo. A mustachioed, barrel-chested outdoors entrepreneur who lives in a log cabin near Yellowstone National Park, he has spent much of his life writing for prominent outdoors magazines, delivering lectures across the country and starring in cable TV shows about big-game hunting in the West.
Zumbo's fame, however, has turned to black-bordered infamy within America's gun culture -- and his multimedia success has come undone. It all happened in the past week, after he publicly criticized the use of military-style assault rifles by hunters, especially those gunning for prairie dogs.
"Excuse me, maybe I'm a traditionalist, but I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity," Zumbo wrote in his blog on the Outdoor Life Web site. The Feb. 16 posting has since been taken down. "As hunters, we don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them. . . . I'll go so far as to call them 'terrorist' rifles."
Squarely in the crosshairs
The reaction -- from tens of thousands of owners of assault rifles across the country, from media and manufacturers rooted in the gun business, and from the National Rifle Association -- has been swift, severe and unforgiving. Despite a profuse public apology and a vow to go hunting soon with an assault weapon, Zumbo's career appears to be over.
His top-rated weekly TV program on the Outdoor Channel, his longtime career with Outdoor Life magazine and his corporate ties to the biggest names in gunmaking, including Remington Arms Co., have been terminated or are on the ropes.
The NRA on Thursday pointed to the collapse of Zumbo's career as an example of what can happen to anyone, including a "fellow gun owner," who challenges the right of Americans to own or hunt with assault-style firearms.
From his home near Cody, Wyo., Zumbo declined repeated telephone requests for comment. He is a 40-year NRA member and has appeared with NRA officials in 70 cities, according to his Web site.
Shot across Congress’ bow
In announcing that it was suspending its professional ties with Zumbo, the NRA -- a well-financed gun lobby that for decades has fought attempts to regulate assault weapons -- noted that the new Congress should pay careful attention to the outdoors writer's fate.
"Our folks fully understand that their rights are at stake," the NRA statement said. It warned that the "grassroots" passion that brought down Zumbo shows that millions of people would "resist with an immense singular political will any attempts to create a new ban on semi-automatic firearms."
Some outdoors writers drew a different lesson from Zumbo's horrible week.
"This shows the zealousness of gun owners to the point of actual foolishness," said Pat Wray, a freelance outdoors writer in Corvallis, Ore., and author of "A Chukar Hunter's Companion."
Wray said that what happened to Zumbo is a case study in how the NRA has trained members to attack their perceived enemies without mercy.
"For so many years, Zumbo has been a voice for these people -- for hunting and for guns -- and they just turned on him in an instant," Wray said. "He apologized all over himself, and it didn't do any good."
Circling the wagons
Zumbo's fall highlights a fundamental concern of the NRA and many champions of military-style firearms, according to people who follow the organization closely. They do not want American gun owners to make a distinction between assault weapons and traditional hunting guns such as shotguns and rifles. If they did, a rift could emerge between hunters, who tend to have the most money for political contributions to gun rights causes, and assault-weapon owners, who tend to have lots of passion but less cash.
The NRA appeared to be saying as much in its statement Thursday, when it emphasized that the Zumbo affair shows there is "no chance" that a "divide and conquer propaganda strategy" could ever succeed.
"Jim Zumbo Outdoors" was not broadcast as scheduled last week on the Outdoor Channel and will not air next week, said Mike Hiles, a spokesman for the channel. He said sponsors have requested that they be removed from the program. The show "will be in hiatus for an undetermined period of time," he said.
Zumbo's long career at Outdoor Life, which is owned by Time Inc., also came to a sudden end in the past week. Zumbo was hunting editor of the magazine, which is the nation's second-largest outdoors publication. He wrote his first story for Outdoor Life in 1962.
‘Living in very delicate times’
The magazine's editor in chief, Todd W. Smith, said that Zumbo submitted his resignation after hearing of the large number of readers (about 6,000, at last count) who had sent e-mails demanding his dismissal. Smith dismissed as "conjecture" a question about whether Zumbo would have been fired had he not resigned.
"Jim is a good guy, and I feel bad about this unfortunate situation," Smith said. "We are living in very delicate times. For someone to call these firearms 'terrorist' rifles, that is a flash-point word. You are painting a bunch of enthusiasts with the word. They don't like being called terrorists."
When he wrote his now-notorious blog entry, Zumbo was on a coyote hunt in Wyoming sponsored by Remington, a detail he noted in the entry.
That mention -- as it bounced around in recent days among a number of assault-weapon Web sites -- triggered a call for a boycott of Remington products.
That prompted Remington to issue a news release, saying that it has "severed all sponsorship ties with Mr. Zumbo effective immediately."
Remington chief executive Tommy Millner issued a personal appeal to gun owners who might be thinking about boycotting the company's products: "Rest assured that Remington not only does not support [Zumbo's] view, we totally disagree," Millner said. "I have no explanation for his perspective. I proudly own AR's and support everyone's right to do so!"
Zumbo, in his public apology, said that when he wrote the blog entry that criticized assault rifles, he was at the end of a long day's hunt.
"I was tired and exhausted," he wrote, "and I should have gone to bed early."


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17307316/?GT1=9033

[mohica]

The post immediately above should be a lesson to us all. The author of the article uses the anti-2nd Amendment crowd's term "assualt" rifle profusely. As long as that is driven into the general publics mind, that is what the semi auto rifles become. No one in the pro 2nd community should use that term.

I also see some posters using the word "need" as they agree you don't "need" an AR15 or whatever to go hunting. I believe that is a grave error also as need is irrelevant. "Right" is the word that should be substituted. Don't fall into the trap of analogy when determining what someone should or shouldn't have. For example, a 200mph Ferrari. It is my right to have one. Same with firearms regardless of cosmetic features or appearance.

I have no simpathy for Dumbo. If he is that stupid, he shouldn't be allowed to own a weapon. Let me say, those things he said are what he believes otherwise he probably wouldn't have said them. I don't believe he can blame it on "I was drunk". I have no sympathy, he deserves what he got, and I hope he never works in the industry again. Shameful.

[gaijinsamurai]

I agree, Mohica.
It sounds like he really regrets what he wrote, but the damage has been done. Now, it looks like the gun-grabbers are trying to make a martyr out of him.
For him to have wrote what he did shows a lot about his way of thinking, and perhaps his true beliefs when it comes to personal liberties.