PDA

View Full Version : Jim Zumbo



tomoshenko
04-03-2007, 05:36 AM
In February, hunter and outdoorsman Jim Zumbo enraged shooters across the United States with comments appearing his now-discontinued blog on Outdoor Life. Since that fateful blog, Zumbo's professional life has changed - profoundly. A marquee career in hunting has effectively been reduced to nothingness. Television sponsors bolted, contracts were cancelled and a former front-man for hunting found himself the object of hatred and ridicule by shooters who felt betrayed by his comments.

Zumbo hasn't tried to shift the blame to anyone else. In fact, he pledged to go on the offensive to fight HR 1022, the newly introduced and significantly broadened, assault weapons ban.

Last week, Michigan Senator Carl Levin, a staunch opponent of firearms, used Zumbo's remarks to attack firearms owners, reading portions into the Congressional Record. Zumbo has fired back, sending an open letter to the United States Senate that responds to Levin's action and makes it plain that Zumbo isn't letting that action pass.

Last night, Zumbo provided us a copy of his response to Senator Levin. Today, in the sense of fairness, we offer it in its entirety - without comment.

An Open Letter to the United States Senate

Dear Honorable Ladies and Gentlemen:

It recently came to my attention that one of your colleagues, Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, has chosen to attack firearms owners using remarks I wrote in mid-February as his launch pad. As you probably know, Sen. Levin has been making anti-gun speeches every week for the past eight years because of a promise he made to the Economic Club of Detroit in May 1999.

Mr. Levin has an agenda, and he should have spoken to me before using my name in one of his speeches, especially since his remarks were entered into the Congressional Record. I would like my remarks here entered into the Congressional Record as well.

Sen. Levin is only one of 16 members of the Senate to vote against the Vitter Amendment to the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act. This amendment prohibits the confiscation of a privately-owned firearm during an emergency or major disaster when possession of that gun is not prohibited under state or federal law.

Eighty-four senators voted for that amendment, inspired by the egregious confiscation of firearms from the citizens of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina in the summer of 2005. Those seizures, you will recall, led the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association to join in a landmark civil rights lawsuit in federal court that brought the confiscations to an abrupt end.

The taking of private property without warrant or probable cause - even firearms - was considered an outrage by millions of American citizens, and yet Sen. Levin joined 15 of his colleagues in voting against this measure. It is no small wonder that Sen. Levin gets an "F" rating from gun rights organizations. He would have American citizens disarmed and left defenseless at a time when they need their firearms the most, when social order collapses into anarchy and protecting one's self and one's family is not simply a right and responsibility, it becomes a necessity.

That in mind, Sen. Levin must know that almost immediately after I wrote those remarks, I recanted and apologized to the millions of Americans who lawfully and responsibly own, compete with and hunt with semi-automatic rifles. I took a "crash course" on these firearms and visited with my good friend Ted Nugent on his ranch in Texas, where I personally shot an AR-15 and educated myself with these firearms.

Some of us learn from our mistakes, others keep making them. Legislation to which Sen. Levin alluded, HR 1022, would renew the ban on so-called "assault weapons," and dangerously expand it to encompass far more perfectly legal firearms. For the Congress of the United States to even consider such legislation is an affront to every law-abiding firearms owner in this country.

This legislation that Sen. Levin appears to endorse is written so broadly as outlaw not only firearms, but accessories, including a folding stock for a Ruger rifle. As I understand the language of this bill, it could ultimately take away my timeworn and cherished hunting rifles and shotguns - firearms I hope to one day pass on to my grandchildren - as well as millions of identical and similar firearms owned by other American citizens.

It is clear to me that the supporters of this legislation don't want to stop criminals. They want to invent new ones out of people like me, and many of you, and your constituents, friends, neighbors and members of your families. They will do anything they can, go to any extremes they believe necessary, to make it impossible for more and more American citizens to legally own any firearm.

In his final paragraph, Senator Levin misrepresents what I said. I never spoke in favor of a general assault weapons ban. Again, I immediately apologized for my blog statement that was exclusively directed toward hunting and not gun ownership.

I will not allow my name to be associated with this kind of attack on the Second Amendment rights of my fellow citizens.

A few weeks ago, in a letter to Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, I promised to educate my fellow hunters about this insidious legislation "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 will amend that to add that I will bring my effort to Capitol Hill if necessary, even if I have to knock on every door and camp in every office of the United States Senate. In promoting this ban, the Hon. Carl Levin does not speak for me, or anybody I know.

Sincerely,
James Zumbo
Cody, Wyoming

hunter_la5
04-03-2007, 06:50 AM
I heard about this a few days ago. while I am still mad at him for saying those words in the first place and giving ammo to the anti's, it is great to see that he is working so hard to repair the damage that is being done and that he is now becoming a strong 2nd ammendment rights activist.

jlpskydive
04-03-2007, 07:00 AM
Good for Jim, he may get his reputation back yet. Lets see how far he will push it to do so. I'm willing to forgive and forget as long as he makes good on his promises.

cimmaronkid
04-03-2007, 10:31 AM
I can see that he is trying to make up for his foot-in-mouth blog. I am glad to see him back in the fight as he is too good of a man to loose, especially when we need more like him.

k98k792
04-03-2007, 10:32 AM
This sort of thing is why I thought he should not of been thrown under the bus in the first place. He made a mistake,but seemed to me to be the sort of man that would atone for it.

Ted Nugent was man enough to give him a chance to do so. The same people that wanted Zumbos head,went after Nugent for it. He is proving harder for them to "get".

iocane
04-03-2007, 10:38 AM
Zumbo has to make his amends. That doesn't mean it should be easy for him. Making amends should be hard so it builds character.

okie shooter
04-03-2007, 11:38 AM
Glad to see he made the effort to stop his words from being the new poster child for the antis. Better than some who say they are hunters thus you can infer they are pro gun too(hmmmm cough cough)

rustypirate
04-03-2007, 01:07 PM
Well, this sort of action from someone who got slapped by much if the gun community for his thoughtless words goes far to convincing me that he has rethought his position on gun control, and realized that they are not just after OUR gusn, but ALL guns.

I would also like to hope that we now have an ambassidor to the somewhat exclusive hunting elite crowd. Someone that is known and respected in their circles and is able to express to them what we have been trying to get across for many years.

Sometimes it takes making a mistake and getting shoved around for it to get someone to see the light and understand another's point of view.

SteelCore
04-03-2007, 01:18 PM
First, he still hasn't apologised, and second he is still just worried about his 'huntin guns' as evidenced by this statement:

"As I understand the language of this bill, it could ultimately take away my timeworn and cherished hunting rifles and shotguns - firearms I hope to one day pass on to my grandchildren - as well as millions of identical and similar firearms owned by other American citizens."

Where was he when the clinton ban went thru the first time? When it didn't include his "hunting rifles and shotguns?" and he donesn't mention "timeworn parts kits" or "Brand new main battle rifles"

So big deal that he shot Ted's AR, he stil don't get that the 2nd AINT ABOUT HUNTING!

:rantoff:

rustypirate
04-03-2007, 01:25 PM
Oh, I agree, he does not get that at all.

But he maybe now understands that the anti-gun crowd aint just after SOME guns, but will not stop until ALL guns are gone.

Hopefully he gets the point that it is an all-or-nothing proposition and not one that he and his hunting friends can hide behind by sacrificing the military gun collectors.

okie shooter
04-03-2007, 01:55 PM
Where was he when the clinton ban went thru the first time? When it didn't include his "hunting rifles and shotguns?" and he donesn't mention "timeworn parts kits" or "Brand new main battle rifles"



Steelcore, I remember when the first bill hit, it was a interesting thing that no matter what, they kept tossing things into the bill(assault rifles and then magazine capicity, ect), which I think was orginally presented as just requireing backround checks for handguns(I think the antis smelled blood that it was going to pass no matter what, at least they got the instacheck to replace waiting peirods).

At least he is trying hard to make sure that his name is not assoicated with this bill.

Jacobite
04-03-2007, 05:24 PM
The way I see it his screw up cost him his lively hood. Anyone would back peddle and try to make amens in his situation. Untill he actually proves he understand he is still on my black list. Hey O.J. said he was going to find the real killer also.

Rampager
04-03-2007, 05:53 PM
I'm glad he says he's onboard with us now, but I still think he got what he deserved. You can't spit in someone's face and then try to make amends later. Maybe in the years to come he can win some respect back, but for now actions speak louder than words.

I'm hoping that maybe he will help us bridge to the hunting crowd :lovefest: ...we'll just have to wait and see.

MID
04-03-2007, 07:04 PM
The lefties time line Grand Ideal.
MAchine guns, cheap pistols ( saterday night specials), foreign made assault weapons, All assault weapons, Any semi that holds more then ten rounds. All semi's, All weapons that hold more then one round, then all weapon that use preloaded cartriges, All rear loading weapons, then weapons with a percussion cap, Finally all weapon that use expanding gas, form burning of a porpellent.

Thats what they are realy shooting for.


Ps i am off to go buy some more ammo.

I hope i dont get pulled over. Cause any body with more then 50 rounds at any one time is a bad guy.

bullseye
04-03-2007, 10:15 PM
I hope i dont get pulled over. Cause any body with more then 50 rounds at any one time is a bad guy.

Oh sh!t, I carry 4 17rd mags with me for my 9mm when I'm out. Guess I'm a bad guy and a terrorist. :(

SteelCore
04-04-2007, 09:26 AM
I hope I don't get pulled over going to the range...I usually have about 160-200 loaded into 8-10 Thermolds for the CETME, another 200rnds on stripper clips for the SKS, about 145 rounds for the mosins in pouches and strippers.

And hey, pull me and my buds over coming back from a gunshow, and I'm sure I've got 'T3RR0R15T' amounts of ammo in there. :roll: Last gunshow we came back with 2 aks, 3K rounds of 762x39, 880rnds 762x54R, 500rnds 9mm, 200rnds .45. Tat just proves I stil live in a FREE COUNTRY, and that's all.

"But he maybe now understands that the anti-gun crowd aint just after SOME guns, but will not stop until ALL guns are gone.
Hopefully he gets the point that it is an all-or-nothing proposition and not one that he and his hunting friends can hide behind by sacrificing the military gun collectors."

-->Well, maybe and hopefully don't give me warm fuzzies on the issue here, but maybe/hopefully yer right. :)