cjhsa wrote:Joe - I believe Zumbo was referring to "scary looking guns".
Rather than guessing at what Zumbo was talking about, here is the blog entry in question:
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.
(
Source) Clearly, in referring to "AR and AK rifles," he was referring to types of
semi-automatic weapons (the AR-15 and AK-47 types, to be precise), not to some generic "scary looking guns."
Now
ceej, if
you think the AR-15 or the AK-47 are "scary looking guns," then that's fine -- you're entitled to your esthetic opinion. But Zumbo had something far more specific in mind when he talked about "assault rifles," and he wasn't talking about how scary they looked. And he quite clearly was talking about semi-automatics, not automatics.
Now, as to your questions to me:
cjhsa wrote:Do you know the difference?
Sure I do. A semi-automatic weapon is one that uses the energy from firing to eject the empty case and load the next cartridge. An automatic does that as well, but fires multiple rounds with a single pull of the trigger, whereas a semi-automatic fires only a single round per trigger pull.
cjhsa wrote:Do you know that semi-automatics are one of the most popular hunting weapons even if you exclude "scary looking guns"?
No, I did not know that. Thanks for that useless bit of information.
cjhsa wrote:You must have a dog in the fight - disarming people makes them easier to control. Right Joe?
I wouldn't know. I haven't tried to control people, either armed or unarmed.
cjhsa wrote:McTag wrote:cjhsa wrote:McTag wrote:cjhsa wrote:There can be no "some gun control" in the debate. That is a stepping stone for those who want all guns banned. Look at England or Australia or even Canada and decide if those are the kind of rules you wish to live by, because if you don't choose to defend your 2A rights, you will wind up just like them. Unarmed, scared of their own shadow, and hopeful, very hopeful that the police and government will protect them at all times.
This is 100% wrong. There is not one British citizen in 1,000 who would prefer our gun laws to be altered to be like the States.
The USA is held here as an example of how NOT to do it. If you want to know the reason for that, look at the gun crime figures.
The USA gun murder figures are 30 times higher, per capita.
Did you pull that stat out of your arse, as you call it over there? And have your subjects been so thoroughly brainwashed by their own government and school systems that they believe that hogwash? What crime do you think you are preventing? Do you believe criminals simply won't do their jobs any longer? Are you crazy?
(I believe you are). Apparently you are very afraid of something, which you no longer have any defense against. But that fact eludes you...
That is a very rude post, and you are a very unpleasant fellow.
The "stat" was got from the Internet, two minutes before my post.
Get your own figures if you like, they will not be much different.
You might want to check your research.
Also, if you think I'm rude, at least you are paying attention.
let me ask you, what purpose does disarming a law abiding populace serve?
What effect does allowing people to have guns at home have?
Lessee now:
You get Wacos, dozens of innocents needlessly killed
You get wackos shooting at each other because of a traffic incident
You get schoolkids killing schoolkids
You get accidents, fatalities
You forcefeed paranoia in people like McVeigh and cjhsa
You get un-civilisation
On balance, a bad idea. That's why I say we pity USA gun law situation, we don't envy it.
But it makes
The Sopranos more exciting.
Yes we get accidents and fatalities. That is why they are called accidents. It's much more dangerous to drive a car, especially in parts of europe, than to go hunting or to a range. Much more dangerous - not even close!!!!
You seem to love what you are fed by the liberal press. Waco should never have happened and it wouldn't have it we hadn't had a bunch of liberal pricks in the Whitehouse. OMG those people have scary looking guns AND they're religious! Burn them!!
McTag - you're a real hoot. Thanks for providing the laughs.
Just wondering, but in europe can you go to the hardware store and buy an air compressor and a nail gun (without a permit)?
I just get the feeling that American freedom, capitalism, and ingenuity is too much for some euro-lefty types to handle.
cjhsa wrote:Just wondering, but in europe can you go to the hardware store and buy an air compressor and a nail gun (without a permit)?
I just get the feeling that American freedom, capitalism, and ingenuity is too much for some euro-lefty types to handle.
You got it in one! :wink: Stick with that feeling if it pleases you.
UK bans guns, knives, now swords and maybe sci-fi props!!!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1475191.ece
Even my hunting dog got a kick out of this!
This is old news: it's always been illegal here to go about with a blade over 4" long.
That would seem to cover Samurai swords. But they're okay on your wall at home, of course.
When I was young, I used to read American comics and marvel at all the lethal gear anyone can purchase there.
But then I grew up.
It's probably good that you don't live here then. We Americans like guns. We like owning them and we like shooting them. Of course not ALL Americans feel that way, but enough do that it will not change.
Why are you so afraid of everything? Guns and knives are human tools - no different than construction equipment. Which was my point above. Apparently you "grow up" by giving up your rights and succombing to liberal thought. Can you buy an air compressor or not? I doubt you can without some sort of govt permit. And the dog laughs harder.
Joe:
February 28, 2007
Mr. Alan Gottlieb, Chairman
Citizens Committee for the
Right to Keep and Bear Arms
12500 N.E. Tenth Place
Bellevue, WA 98005
Dear Alan:
They say that hindsight is always 20-20. In my case, hindsight has been a hard teacher, like the father teaching the son a lesson about life in the wood shed.
I was wrong when I recently suggested that wildlife agencies should ban semiautomatic firearms I erroneously called "assault rifles" for hunting. I insulted legions of my fellow gun owners in the process by calling them "terrorist rifles." I can never apologize enough for having worn blinders when I should have been wearing bifocals.
But unlike those who would destroy the Second Amendment right to own a firearm - any firearm - I have learned from my embarrassing mistake. My error should not be used, as it has been in recent days by our common enemies, in an effort to dangerously erode our right to keep and bear arms.
I would hope instead to use this spotlight to address my hunting fraternity, many of whom shared my erroneous position. I am a hunter and like many others I had the wrong picture in mind. I associated these firearms with military action, and saw not hunting as I have known it, not the killing of a varmint, but the elimination of the entire colony. Nothing could be further from the truth, but I know from whence it comes. This ridiculous image, formed in the blink of an eye, exerts and unconscious effect on all decisions that follow. In seeking to protect our hunting rights by guarding how we are seen in the public eye, I lost sight of the larger picture; missed the forest for the trees.
My own lack of experience was no excuse for ignoring the fact that millions of Americans - people who would share a campfire or the shelter of their tent, and who have hurt nobody - own, hunt with and competitively shoot or collect the kinds of firearms I so easily dismissed.
I recently took a "crash course" on these firearms with Ted Nugent, to learn more about them and to educate myself. In the process, I learned about the very real threat that faces all American gun owners.
I've studied up on legislation now in Congress that would renew and dangerously expand a ban on many types of firearms. The bill, HR 1022 sponsored by New York Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, is written so broadly that it would outlaw numerous firearms and accessories, including a folding stock for a Ruger rifle. I understand that some of the language could ultimately take away my timeworn and cherished hunting rifles and shotguns as well as those of all American hunters.
The extremist supporters of HR 1022 don't want to stop criminals. They want to invent new ones out of people like you and me with the simple stroke of a pen. They will do anything they can to make it impossible for more and more American citizens to legally own any firearm.
Realizing that what I wrote catered to this insidious attack on fellow gun owners has, one might say, "awakened a sleeping giant within me, and filled him with a terrible resolve."
I made a mistake. But those who would use my remarks to further their despicable political agenda have made a bigger one. I hope to become their worst nightmare. I admit I was wrong. They insist they are right.
Enclosed, you will find a check that is intended to be used to fight and defeat HR 1022. I also hope it inspires other gun owners to "do as I do, not as I say."
I'm putting my money where my mouth should have been, and where my heart and soul have always been. I know the Second Amendment isn't about hunting and never has been. My blunder was in thinking that by working to protect precious hunting rights I was doing enough. I promise it will never happen again.
I don't know what lies over the horizon for me. I am not ready for the rocking chair.
I'm going to devote every ounce of my energy to this battle. I will remind my fellow hunters that we are first, gun owners. Whether we like it or not, our former apathy and prejudices may place that which we love, hunting, in jeopardy. I will educate fellow outdoorsmen who mistakenly think like I talked, even if I have to visit every hunting camp and climb into every duck blind and deer stand in this country to get it done. I was wrong, and I'm going to make it right.
Sincerely,
Jim Zumbo
I'm afraid of heights, but I don't think they should ban ladders.
More for Joe:
Ted, I'm still at the sportsmen's show, it ends tomorrow, and am able to write a little in my booth. Am giving the absolutist message in my seminars -- people are seeing the light. But lemme tell you what you already know. A LOT of people said I was right all along and I shouldn't have apologized. That's the danger, that's the problem. A WHOLE lot of education needs to go on. When these people tell me that, I give them my new hard core spiel about HR1022 and how it will take away their favorite hunting guns. They say, NO ****, and I've won a convert. How sweet it is.
Funny thing, my best customer all week is a guy who went to my seminar. Bought a bunch of books and he owns an AR-15! Good fun things are happening.
I'm doing my best setting up a schedule of what I need to do to make it right with the blackgun folks. My BloodBrothers. I DO want to do what's right.
The big current effort is my letter to the Second Amendment Foundation, with a copy to Wayne LaPierre. I'll forward the letter to you tomorrow.
I'm working on my new absolutist piece for TX F&G now. Jim
I really think you and your Brady crew need to quote more Zumbo at your AWB hearings!!!!
I have a 6" and 8" chef's knife, an 8" cleaver, a 10" slicer and 10' fillet knife. I can go to any store that carries kitchen stuff and buy them. Target. Macy's. Just about any butcher or grocer.
But in the UK you cannot. Apparently you prepare your food with your bare hands like the naked chef.
(I'll admit I did find Jamie Oliver entertaining but his travels around England to get ingredients turned my stomach - europe really doesn't get the refrigeration thing - gross).
cjhsa wrote:I really think you and your Brady crew need to quote more Zumbo at your AWB hearings!!!!
Zumbo's apology has no bearing on your erroneous interpretation of his original blog entry. When he first mentioned "assault rifles" he meant semi-automatics, and his apology doesn't alter that. Indeed, his apology makes it clear that he equated semi-automatics with "assault rifles."
You were wrong when you said that Zumbo was talking about "scary looking guns" in his initial blog entry. Posting his subsequent apologies does nothing to correct your error, it only highlights it.
You know, I don't think they should ban all cars. Sometimes people need cars. Farmers for example. But what they should do is ban any car that can go over 75 miles per hour (the maximum posted speed limit in America). There is no need to ever go above the speed limit, you'd be breaking the law. So any car that can go over the maximum national speed limit should be banned. The faster you go the more likely you are to die, and it's not even as rare as 'assault rifle' deaths. There have been far too many accidents involving high speed and children. The penalty for speeding should be 10 years in prison and a forfeit of your right to drive, FOR LIFE. And just putting a limiter on the speedometer isn't going to be enough becuase I'm sure they'll be plenty of conversion kits around to get around the speedometer's limiter.
This exact same argument has been made in regards to 'assult rifle' ownership; I wonder if it will be taken up as fervently as the anti-gun position has been.
I hope you all can see that this position is ludricris and it's not the tool that should be blamed but the lawbreaker.
cjhsa wrote:I can go to any store that carries kitchen stuff and buy them. Target. Macy's. Just about any butcher or grocer.
But in the UK you cannot. Apparently you prepare your food with your bare hands like the naked chef.
I don't know what fairy tales you read but this must have been a very funny one.
Articles with blades or points and offensive weapons
Offence of having article with blade or point in public place.
Criminal Justice Act
joefromchicago wrote:cjhsa wrote:I really think you and your Brady crew need to quote more Zumbo at your AWB hearings!!!!
Zumbo's apology has no bearing on your erroneous interpretation of his original blog entry. When he first mentioned "assault rifles" he meant semi-automatics, and his apology doesn't alter that. Indeed, his apology makes it clear that he equated semi-automatics with "assault rifles."
You were wrong when you said that Zumbo was talking about "scary looking guns" in his initial blog entry. Posting his subsequent apologies does nothing to correct your error, it only highlights it.
What exactly are you smoking? You are a walking fallacy. Jim Zumbo, a lifelong hunter and outdoorsman, most certainly wasn't talking about anything BUT scary looking guns. And he fucked that up.
Walter, that "criminal justice act" is just that - justice for criminals - and a crime against law abiding citizens. Again, thanks for the laugh and making all of us over here even more proud to be Americans.
You can buy any kitchen knife you want in the UK.
Yoou should perhaps read a quote before you laugh about it.
On the other: if it is your personal experience that YOU can't buy kitchen knives in the UK .... what was the verdict again, you said?
Ask McTag. I wouldn't set foot in that hellhole.
cjhsa wrote:joefromchicago wrote:cjhsa wrote:I really think you and your Brady crew need to quote more Zumbo at your AWB hearings!!!!
Zumbo's apology has no bearing on your erroneous interpretation of his original blog entry. When he first mentioned "assault rifles" he meant semi-automatics, and his apology doesn't alter that. Indeed, his apology makes it clear that he equated semi-automatics with "assault rifles."
You were wrong when you said that Zumbo was talking about "scary looking guns" in his initial blog entry. Posting his subsequent apologies does nothing to correct your error, it only highlights it.
What exactly are you smoking? You are a walking fallacy. Jim Zumbo, a lifelong hunter and outdoorsman, most certainly wasn't talking about anything BUT scary looking guns. And he **** that up.
It's hilarious. You're just like the PC police, except you only get up in arms when someone threatens your precious rifles.
Zumbo has the right to voice his opinion that
honest and real hunters don't need such things. He's a purist. And he doesn't believe all the terrorism bullsh*t that is peddled by the right and lapped up so easily by gun nuts.
Cycloptichorn
