« ZUMBOMANIA: David E. Petzal’s take on the Jim Zumbo fiasco | Main | Roll Out the Barrel »

February 23, 2007

This page has been moved to http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nut

If your browser doesn’t redirect you to the new location, please visit The Gun Nut at its new location: www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nut.

ZUMBOMANIA, PART II: David E. Petzal responds to your comments

As has been pointed out by those of you with long memories, I wrote a piece 13 years ago about the then-looming assault rifle ban. The story was unpopular with a lot of people, but nowhere in it did I endorse the ban, as some are claiming. I note that none of you have seen fit to haul up the many, many times I’ve said critical things about Senators Clinton, Schumer, Feinstein, and of course our beloved former President Bubba. But then it seems that most of you who are visiting here don't read this blog, or Field & Stream, or what I've written to defend the Second Amendment over the years.

Here’s some other relevant information: When I wrote it, black guns were not nearly as important a part of shooting as they are now. We can’t afford to sacrifice them, just as we can’t afford to sacrifice .50-caliber rifles (which I wrote about positively a couple of issues ago in a story called “Way Out There”).

In case you’re wondering, I’ve been using black rifles since 1965, when I hunted woodchucks with one of the very first AR-15s sold commercially by Colt. I’ve worked over many a prairie dog town with one AR variant or another, and if Les Baer were to send me one of his rifles (a heavy barrel flattop in .223, please), I would not send it back. I currently own an M1A. I don’t know if that qualifies or not.

Most important, you shouldn’t construe any of this as an apology. It isn’t. But it is the last thing I’m going to say in this space about the Zumbo matter.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b54869e200d834642acc69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference ZUMBOMANIA, PART II: David E. Petzal responds to your comments:

Comments

Dave the Rave

"Gun owners -- all gun owners -- pay a heavy price for having to defend the availability of these weapons. "The American public -- and the gun-owning public; especially the gun-owning public -- would be better off without the hardcore military arms, which puts the average sportsman in a real dilemma".An Uzi or an AKM or an AK-47 should be no more generally available than a Claymore mine or a block of C4 explosive"

Sure sounds like an endorsement to me! My question to you is what part of your own words do you not understand? It doesn't matter when you wrote it, the fact remains that you wrote it because you believed it then just like you believe it now.

And just as an aside, you still do not seem to understand, like your hunting lodge buddy Jim Zumbo, that the second amendment to the constitution has nothing to do with hunting. Hunting is a privilege granted to people by each state, the right to bear arms is a right given by god, and codified in our constitution by men who knew that an unarmed man is a slave.

Jubal

What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many (Mark 5:6-9).

Ralph the Rifleman

You know, I have done, and said, some dumb things in my life. I am of the type that did not take the words said by Dave P., or Jim Z., too personally. It really isn't that unsual to find contradiction in the writer's word, and in the way they live. We need to get past this issue, stop pounding our clinched fists on our chests, and realize Petzal is not the big threat here.GOD help us if Hillary makes it to the Whitehouse!
I wouldn't make any apologies to anyone on this blog either; I may not agree with the author's choice of words, but I would fight for his right to say them!

LabRat

Yeah, I've seen you ripping on the Clintons and the Schumers and the other anti-gun ghouls. That's why I was so damn surprised to hear you opine a prominent gun writer shouldn't suffer any serious career consequences for openly calling for a ban and that the angry, faceless internet ranters would be taken more seriously. (Come ON now.)

But then, now I'm a bit confused. Were you misquoted in the article we're getting your endorsement of a ban from, or do you simply have a lot less integrity than I'd come to believe?

Can't post html here, but the article is linked from here: http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2007/02/writer-of-his-stature.html

Leo Daher

What an arrogant elitist this Petzal is, not to mention his lack of honesty. He makes Zumbo look like a stand-up guy by comparison. Disgusting.

Mark

Amazing! ..And these SA Freaks can’t understand why I refuse to let them speak for me.
I’ve never seen such mean-spirited, hysteria, inaccurate, unreasoning thoughts put in printed word before. These characters give me no comfort “protecting my rights”.

If nothing else this clogged blog showed Outdoor Life shot themselves in the foot by allowing Jim Zumbo to leave their staff. I doubt many of these guys subscribed to the magazine or bought the products advertised. Outdoor Life lost a gifted writer and friend to conservationists.

Field and Stream, you got my bucks for another subscription!!!! At least your writers can use four-syllable words and are genteel!

2Aforever

You're right that most of us don't read F/S. But we buy Remington ammo, Buck knives, Under Armor shirts, Camel Back hydration products, Rocky Boots, It's really going suck doing without my Cabela's long johns but oh well I'll suck it up. Not one company that advertises here gets a dime of my scratch until FS dumps you Mr. Petzal.

the law

"At least your writers can use four-syllable words and are genteel!"


Maybe we just found part of the problem...

PostEvaluator

Mark, you are simply clueless. When the dems decide that its time to confiscate the "sporting purposes" guns, like they did in Australia, you are in for one heck of a rude awakening. No doubt you will continue hiding your head in the sand until the very end.

Dave the Rave

Mark,

They are going to need your money.


Enjoy your Fudd guns while you can, because your guns are next.

Petzal Logic

Dave:

Did you intend to paint a target on yourself, go downrange, deny you endorsed a ban and shout "look at me!!!!! nyah nyah!"

???

Well...you should run for office. You sure know how to lie.

You wrote that anti-gun piece in 1994 with all of it clearly to see and now you say you didn't endorse the ban?

Wow! Which planet do you live on...must be uranius. Cause you reek of a lying shit.

tom

Maybe next week this crap will slow down.

Dave, Keep up the good work. I don't think you have to explain your comments; I was able to read them and understand what you were saying.

To ALL others: 99% of the people who participated in the blog in the past few days need to read some of Dave's previous blogs in the past. Since you are not smart enough to figure it out, Dave has a satirist sense of humor. That's what makes his blog a fun read.

And on another note (to the rude commentary’s) this is a hunting and fishing blog not an All about me stump speech platform (get your own blog).

Dave, do you still shoot the gun that you wrote about in the Nosler book (.223 by Kenny Jarret) If you don’t and Les Baer sends you one of his, I would gladly shoot it with you. 

MattWV

Oh I'm sure Cabela's is just going to be REELING from the loss of revenue caused by all this, as is Field & Stream. If you fellows put the same amount of energy towards fighting legislation as you do towards getting writers fired you could have overturned every firearm law currently in effect, California included.

Dan

Mark,
Nice post, now let's see some backup on your mouth runnin or are you to "genteel" to play with the grownups who use stright forward language to express themselves.How bought some of that "inaccurate,unreasoning thought" you speak of to start!

DEVGRU

Unfortunately, you did not really set things write with your second blog entry, did you? You are either a supporter of the Second Amendment or you are not. Your blog today says that you are a Second Amendment supporter, yet clearly this stands in contradiction to what you wrote in 1994, which clearly calls for a ban of all SEMI AUTOMATIC weapons that to a civilian LOOK like their FULL AUTOMATIC military counterparts. So which Petzal is the true Petzal? Please clarify this for us in the next blog, if you possess the intestinal fortidude to do so. Also, if you will, please show me where in the Second Amendment the distinction exists between Hunting Rifles and Self Defense Rifles. The 1994 Petzal appears to believe said distinction exists. Be advised that you are under a very large microscope, so speak the truth.

NGO

Tom,

We continue to work at defending our 2nd amendment rights, without throwing other gun owners of the back of the wagon.

This is just some internal house cleaning of some traitors.

Calm yourself down and go back to getting in your 20 shots this year.

J. Nemeth

Didn't endorse the ban!? What does this mean:

For at some point we must face the fact that an Uzi or an AKM or an Ak-47 should no more be generally available than a Claymore mine or a block of C4 explosive. It is time for these guns to be limited to people with Treasury Department licenses, just as with fully automatic arms. I doubt if anyone would suffer much without assault weapons. Surely, we will suffer with them.

You may claim to supprt the 2nd. But with comments like these it'll take a lot more than platitudes to convice me of your sincerity. Zumbo at least was just a dumbass your comments are those of a traitor.

I like this one:

Amazing! ..And these SA Freaks can’t understand why I refuse to let them speak for me.

Guess what. I am no longer supporting pro-hunting legislation. And I don't need you hunter freaks speaking for me on gun issues. You are self serving and do little for the 2nd Amendment. You will gladly sell us out for your own sake.

Dumbo Zumbo

Field & Stream wants your opinion on David Petzal

----------------------------------

Actually Field & Stream doesn't want to hear from us. But, they have been nice enough to publish their customer service telephone number of 1-800-289-0639.

I called this number and asked for Amanda McNally in the Media Relations Department to discuss David Petzal's references to us as "mental patients". The customer service agent refused to provide the information, and instead told me to go look at the F&S web site so I could send an e-mail to the web master. I let her know that people have already been e-mailing Amanda and that she is not responding. I then let her know that I would publish F&S' telephone number and that Amanda can't hide forever behind customer service agents.

Folks, Field & Stream is owned by Time Inc, yes "Time Magazine" in New York City as you can see here: http://whois.domaintools.com/fieldandstream.com

Please give them a call and then press "0" three or four times to get through to their customer service. Let the customer service agent know that you want to talk to Amanda McNally terminating David Petzal. If you want to send her another e-mail, here's the address: [email protected]

Don

"When I wrote it, black guns were not nearly as important a part of shooting as they are now."

So it is ok to allow a ban if the guns are not an "important" part of the shooting world?

Krusty0369

MattWV-wether any of the FS advertisers pressure FS to clean up their act or not is irrelivant. The point is that the EBR demographic among the shooting sports community is growing at about twice the rate that the dyed in wool hunting community is declining. We are the future of shooting sports in this country. Until this whole zumbo thing cropped up I have never seen a single negative post in a black rifle blog aimed at the traditional hunting crowd. Would that it have been the same in return. You're right that this portion will blow over on the dyed in wool sites. People tend to vent their spleen when they get stabbed in the back. We'll all continue what we've always done which is performing the heavy lifting in the RKBA debate. What you should do as a dyed in wool guy is demand a little discipline and accountability from your leadership. If an editor would have tossed the offensive '94 article back at Mr. P when it was submitted and said "we're not printing this tripe" he'd be fine today.


They weren't important? Maybe somebody should've let the U.S. Military know.

Scott G

OH BOY.... Now you've done it. Good Luck Mr Petzal.

John

Hunter freaks? That's comical coming from a member of a group who spends vast sums of money to dress and act like the warriors they will never be. I served my country proudly and frankly I'm tired of all of you weekend warriors running around in cammies because you were too big of cowards to join when you had the chance. Also I own and love "black" rifles too so don't count me as nothing but a "fudd".




Our Blogs

Categories



Syndicate