JS-Kit/Echo comments for article at http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2007/02/too-late-zumbo.html (27 comments)

  Tentative mapping of comments to original article, corrections solicited.

jsid-1171897011-551234  PawPaw at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:56:51 +0000

It's sad that Zumbo didn't keep himself knowledgeable about the shooting sports. It's also sad that a respected career was trashed overnight. The weight of the online community made itself felt in a big way at Remington and Outdoor Life, but it feels like a hollow victory. We were betrayed by one of our own.

jsid-1171898076-551236  Saladman at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:14:36 +0000

PawPaw is right, it is sad. In a narrow sense some of the comments posted on his blog went over the top.

I think what was most revealing in both his original post and apology was not any deliberate betrayal of a class of shooters, but elitism leading to contempt. This is a man who would fight to the death for the right to hunt with multi-thousand dollar rifles and shotguns, but is not particularly committed to any general right to own and carry firearms. Such men contributed to the death of arms in Britain, and aren't doing us any favors here.

jsid-1171900270-551241  Kevin Baker at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:51:10 +0000

"In a narrow sense some of the comments posted on his blog went over the top."

Which is the end result of a decades-long slow-motion hate crime against gun owners.

Many of us are sick to death of it.

Their reactions are not helpful, but I can understand them.

jsid-1171906692-551250  geekWithA.45 at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 17:38:12 +0000

The interesting fallout from this is that the Elmer Fuddite faction has been put on notice: "Assault weapon" owners aren't expendable, hunter elitists are.

jsid-1171910968-551252  Will Coffman at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 18:49:28 +0000

Mr. Zumbo travels in circles where he is constantly exposed to the opinions of people who know that the Second Amendment is not about hunting or sport shooting.

He was a damnable traitor among us and he can just go get a job at the New York Times and his first published article will be about how the hunting and shooting sports have been taken over by crazed, right-wing, radical gun nuts.

If police and military can have access to AR-15s or M-4s, then I should have access to the same or whatever weapon I choose. What did the founders intend?

"We established however some, although not all its important principles [speaking of the Constitution]
The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all [yes ALL] cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in al judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
[in a letter to John Cartwright, 1824]

The founders understood that nobody in the government could capriciously and arbitrarily decide that some weapon was "too much" for the average citizen to posess.

This may shock some of you, but I believe that in a truly free society, the general public should have the very same access to the most modern weaponry that the government has.

"Oh my God, did he just say that?"


Otherwise, what is to keep the government from just rounding you up and putting you on cattle cars and shipping you to a remote camp somewhere?

If you start getting upset with the Far-Right-Wing, George W. Bush types, What's to keep them from sending an Apache helicopter with a "hellfire" missle to obliterate your house and everything in it?

Didn't William Arkin of the Washington Post make it clear that our troops are mercenaries who will kill whomever they are paid to kill?

Let's just say you are a radical liberal who is afraid of radical Christians taking over the government. What's going to keep them from rounding you up and exterminating you? Who's going to come to your rescue?

jsid-1171911753-551253  Will Coffman at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:02:33 +0000

As a secondary note . . .

Would you leftist, socialist, types, please, please, please start your revolution to take away our guns.

Please? Pretty Please? With sugar on top? I can't wait. Really I can't.

jsid-1171914951-551256  FabioC. at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:55:51 +0000

Hmmm, Will, if you really want my opinion... from a pragmatic standpoint, the idea that the general populace should have access to weapon system such as missiles, attack helicopters and heavy artillery is nuts. Those aren't standalone systems, but can only exist within an integrated structure providing maintenance, spares, consumables, crews and all that.

Moreover, the potential damage to the society in case of misuse of, say, a MRLS is too big to have it in the hands of some Bubba Barbie.

Ideally, I'd set the bar in the vicinity of a M-2 heavy machinegun.

jsid-1171921080-551262  rosignol at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 21:38:00 +0000

I'd be comfortable with a rule along the lines of "If you can pick it up yourself, you can own one".

However, it is worth remembering that back in ye olde days, private citizens owned cannon, warships, etc. What seems to have changed is the nature of combat- area-effect weapons that strike outside of line-of-sight are a lot more common these days, and I admit I am not particularly comfortable with just anyone having that kind of thing... so make that stuff Class III hardware. ;-)

jsid-1171923264-551265  FabioC. at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:14:24 +0000

rosignol - I think (but I may be wrong) that those citizens owning warships were corsair/privateers fighting for the government of the USA. Not exactly average citizens, I'd say.

A piece of curious news: here in Italy one can buy semiauto rifles built on the AK platform that even fire the 7.62x39 round. Are those assault rifles??

jsid-1171923285-551266  Robert at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:14:45 +0000

It's bad enough having to drag the deadweight baggage of these RKBA freeloaders around, but when these ignorant and arrogant gasbags start DISSING the folks who fight for their rights every day....it's too much dang trouble.

He really called for fish and game depts to BAN ARs from public lands...

Well, good luck in your next job, Jimbo. I hope the plumbing channel or the Ft Worth Light and Shopper Thrift Pages is a fun place to work!

jsid-1171923773-551270  thirdpower at Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:22:53 +0000

and his blog has been taken down:


jsid-1171930732-551275  Will Coffman at Tue, 20 Feb 2007 00:18:52 +0000

To Fabio C.

I think I want your opinion like a puss filled carbuncle in my rectum.

There was a time in this country when private businessmen outfitted ships with cannons and crews to go out and raid ships and settlements of those who were enemies of this country. They were called "Privateers." I don't have the time nor would I waste the energy trying to explain such obvious historical facts for you. Look it up.

The X prize was won by Burt Rutan who proved that sub orbital space flight could be accomplished by private enterprize for far less expense and in a manner that showed government is NOT the best way to get the job done.

But again, the central point is FREEDOM. And the thing that frustrates me so, is the concept that people like you think that people who's only real talent is getting elected to office or landing a government job are more qualified to handle large mechanisms that can obliterate large amounts of people.
Can you say "Waco, TX." I knew that you could.

First of all, Joe Blo Sixpack or Bubba Barbie isn't going come up with the money to purchase an M1A1 Abrams tank. Or a squadron of F14 Tomcats. Right now there are dozens of F14s sitting in mothballs in Iran because they can't purchase the maintenance parts from the U.S.

Joe Sixpack is spending his weekly income going in to debt on a shiny new pick up, a bass rig and watching "professional" wrestling and NASCAR. He may have a nice "deer" rifle that he uses once or twice a year. I hardly think he can solve the firing solution on a Howitzer "for effect."

And if you are angry right now, because of what I just said, you are exactly why I just said it, and if you are laughing right now, I don't need to explain a thing.

So let's stop the childish crap about what the average citizen should be allowed to buy.

Let's talk in realistic terms.

I should have every right to buy a Kevlar helmet and body armor. If I want to spend my money on it, so be it.

I should be able to buy hand grenades, including smoke rounds and flash bangs.

I should be able to buy night vision and infrared optical gear.(yeah, I know, I can do that much)

Once again, and try to actually let this sink in: when are you going to get the point that the Second Amendment is all about FREEDOM. That there is not supposed to be an all powerful government that can just bust down your door and put you in shackles and ship you off to a gulag somewhere?

People like Fabio will only be kept free by people like me who are willing to fight and die to keep him so.

Enjoy your sleep, Fabio.

So, no Fabio, save that lame crap for someone who hasn't really thought this thing through.

jsid-1171935349-551277  Kevin Baker at Tue, 20 Feb 2007 01:35:49 +0000


I. Fabio lives in Italy. Check your assumptions.

II. A number of your fellow citizens - including a lot of gun owners - are uncomfortable with the idea of just any Tom, Dick, or Will being able to walk in to Wal*Mart and plunking down cash for some Claymores, det cord, a fifth of Jack Black and a 24-pack of Keystone Light.

III. "Joe Sixpack" may not be able to afford a 155mm Howitzer, but I'd imagine that Bill Gates could equip and arm a sizeable force. Perhaps Northrop could have sold him on the F-20? That would make the next time the Justice Department started investigating him for monopolization real interesting.

IV. Abuse one of my commenters like that again, and I'll ban your IP address. Keep it civil. Period.

jsid-1171942398-551283  Scott Crawford at Tue, 20 Feb 2007 03:33:18 +0000

As it happens, I just received a solicitation from Outdoor Life to subscribe to their magazine. Any reservations I may have had before are now moot; I threw it away.

BTW, Kevin, I seem to have sent you my email just as you were posting your update on Mr. Zumbo's apology. I apologize for wasting your time.

In any case, Mr. Zumbo's problems appear to be just beginning; ours (i.e. gun owners') continue.

jsid-1171948038-551285  Captain Holly at Tue, 20 Feb 2007 05:07:18 +0000

A piece of curious news: here in Italy one can buy semiauto rifles built on the AK platform that even fire the 7.62x39 round. Are those assault rifles??

Technically, no, because they're not full-auto.

Legally, no, at least as far as US federal law is concerned. Although the anti-gunners are trying to change that (albeit somewhat half-heartedly) as we speak.

In states like California, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts and a couple others AK's and their clones are verboten. But everywhere else in the US, they're okay. For now.

jsid-1171961435-551287  FabioC. at Tue, 20 Feb 2007 08:50:35 +0000

I'm willing to let the ad-hominem pass.

But I stand by my position: regardless of the cost, certain weapons are better suited to armies rather than private citizens. End of story.

This is a pragmatic solution, not an idealistic one: I realize it is necessary to make a compromise.

Privateers were private citizens, but they operated under governmental authorization through letters of marque and reprisal - and I'd resurrect the use of privateers in this war. But it is hardly relevant to the topic being discussed here.

jsid-1171978878-551292  Will Coffman at Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:41:18 +0000


I was wrong. I could have stated it in a much more genteel fashion. I was a jerk.

I have been righteously chastized by you and I acknowledge it.

I should not let my passion get the best of me.

My apologies to all the people who come here to read and post.

jsid-1171985632-551297  Kevin Baker at Tue, 20 Feb 2007 15:33:52 +0000

Note to Jim Zumbo:

THAT'S how you write an apology.

jsid-1172009332-551311  Swen Swenson at Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:08:52 +0000

By the rude bridge that arched the flood,
Their flag to April's breeze unfurled;
Here once the embattled farmers stood;
And fired the shot heard round the world.

-- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Thus was the Revolutionary War commenced, when those Concord farmers stood against the British come to seize their cannons.

jsid-1172012911-551313  HerrMorgenholz at Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:08:31 +0000

Mossy Oak Camo has dumped him, too


jsid-1172041091-551329  matt d at Wed, 21 Feb 2007 06:58:11 +0000

Since nobody serious really belives private citizens should be able to own, say, nuclear weapons, pretty much everyone should be able to agree that a line's got to be drawn somewhere.

Someone, maybe Kim du Toit, suggested drawing the line at any firearm suitable for use by an individual rifleman in the infantry.

So M16, full-auto AK, etc., would all fine with just a NICS check.

Belt fed machine guns, SAW, and up would remain class III (or equivalent, with background check, etc.).

I could probably get behind that.

jsid-1172070187-551336  DJ at Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:03:07 +0000

Ole' Jim's show was still on the Outdoor Channel last night (02/20/07). I can't help but wonder how much longer that will last.

jsid-1172071000-551337  Kevin Baker at Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:16:40 +0000

I wondered about that. Someone at AR15.com said it had been yanked in his market. Since Remington is the primary sponsor, I'd imagine that after the contractual agreement expires, that's it.

jsid-1172078961-551345  DirtCrashr at Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:29:21 +0000

It's funny, I've read in numerous places that back in the old days, during the Depression etc., when guys bought old military bolt-actions and sporterized them for hunting they were looked-down on by "real" hunters and the hunting Establishment...

jsid-1172158305-551384  DJ at Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:31:45 +0000

Kevin, I saw his show on the Outdoor Channel via Dish Network. Beats me how such contractual arrangements are set up.

jsid-1172164909-551396  markm at Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:21:49 +0000

"rosignol - I think (but I may be wrong) that those citizens owning warships were corsair/privateers fighting for the government of the USA." Fabio, you're half-right. Privately-owned and legally operated ships rigged out as full warships were nearly always privateers, operating under a license from some government. However, it was common for plain merchant ships to be armed for self-defense with weapons up to cannon, right up through WWII. These were mainly in case of pirates; they were often effective because most pirates couldn't gain possession of a real warship, and many had nothing but a rowboat with which they tried to sneak up and board their victim. However, in WWI and II, there were freighters that successfully fought off or even sank submarines, not to mention airplanes.

From what I hear about pirates operating from speedboats off Indonesia, it might be a good idea to go back to lightly arming merchantmen...

"A piece of curious news: here in Italy one can buy semiauto rifles built on the AK platform that even fire the 7.62x39 round. Are those assault rifles??" What's curious about that? The AK platform is a reliable and inexpensive action, and with it modified for semi-auto only it's been reasonably popular in this country for a long time. The 7.62x39 round is similar in bullet weight, muzzle velocity, and ballistics to the venerable American .30-30 round, which has been a popular hunting round since it's introduction in the 1890's (for game up to deer, and not at too long of range). It wouldn't be my first choice, but when you're on a limited budget the AK47 or SKS (the original 7.62x39 semi-auto weapon) can be good choices.

jsid-1172183266-551415  FabioC. at Thu, 22 Feb 2007 22:27:46 +0000


I said "curious" in this context; also to point out that even in country with tight gun control as Italy certain distinctions are not made. I don't think that real AKs (semiauto) are banned here; one can be bought with the same license and paperwork required for the finest .308 hunting rifle. Or take a short trip to Switzerland, walk into a gun store...

I agree that armed merchant ships remain useful in quite a few cases. Still, I see a big difference between armed ships and someone keeping a 105mm howitzer in the backyard.

 Note: All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost; references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
 If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>