Jim Zumbo wasted his career in a hurry!

[Corporal Punishment]

He said he should of went to bed early instead of posting on his Blog,YEP I agree!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17307316/

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."

[brett]

Well from the looks of it he has made a very bad mistake and will probably being paying for it for the rest of his life...

I would say it is right for him to get highly criticised for him saying that.  I don't personally have a "military style gun," but I don't see a problem with using them for hunting.  I mean come on it is just a different style of gun. 

Then, he had to take it to far by calling them "terrorist guns."

That is almost like saying muzzle loaders are nothing more than red coat guns.  I know it is not quite the same, but still. 

It is funny(not like ha ha funny, but like hey that's interesting funny that something a person of his fame can say something that anybody else would have been simply argued to the point and his career basically goes down the drain by him saying that.

All I will say is think before you talk.

[Corporal Punishment]

It is funny(not like ha ha funny, but like hey that's interesting funny that something a person of his fame can say something that anybody else would have been simply argued to the point and his career basically goes down the drain by him saying that.

All I will say is think before you talk.

It is kinda funny.I just cant imagine typing a few paragraphs on a computer one night and wake and see your whole lifes work went down the drain while you were sleeping!

And he will be asking that quote the rest of his life "What was I thinking"...

I have seen that he contacted Ted Nugent about the situation and he was going to shoot the assault rifles with him.Ted better not be associated with that kind of Drama,or you can stick his career in the but also IMO.

[brett]

One thing is for sure, he will regret that decision for the rest of his life.

[archbishop]

yeah, it was definitly a dumb move for him to say, but i think what he was refering to when he said it was all the videos on the internet, etc.. about guys standing 3/4-1 mile away and nailing praqrie dogs and woodchucks with a .50 cal. and blowing them to little pieces and popping them 10' into the air and all the negative/anti-hunter people coming down on it but him opening his mouth and agreeing with the antis is whats going to kill his career

[OTIS]

I don't think any less of a person who has the guts to speak his mind.  I believe those types of rifles do give sportsmen a bad name.  The vast majority of people who do not hunt have no idea that these are just a different style of rifle.  They see similar guns plastered across their TV screens every night for hours on end during the news, and their always associated with bad news, war, etc...

[slt]

I don't think any less of a person who has the guts to speak his mind.  I believe those types of rifles do give sportsmen a bad name.  The vast majority of people who do not hunt have no idea that these are just a different style of rifle.  They see similar guns plastered across their TV screens every night for hours on end during the news, and their always associated with bad news, war, etc...

I'm with you OTIS. It's still America, He's entitled to his opinion and I can't help but agree with him

[fly-in]

I really liked reading what Jim wrote in Outdoor life, I don't get the magazine anymore. I do think it is going to far saying terrorist guns, and like its been said "another style of gun", (maybe you'll hate this) but it seems to me that those are "shooter guns" and not a "hunter gun", its more about the style of gun your shooting then about the hunt. But if it has a place in hunting it would be varmite shooting.

[roscoe]

I think its all a bunch of crap! "democracy"

[bear87]

We are all entitled to our own opinion. I think a person ought to be able to use any type of firearm that they like. If you want to use a "Terrorist gun" or a "blackpowder gun" what business is it of anyone else's. I was always a fan of Zumbo but now I hope I never hear another thing about him. bear87

[Tom Leitz]

I agree with Zumbo.  As hunters, we need to pick out battles. 

[tughillmcd]

    We do need to pick our battles. Our battles should be for the Second Amendment. People find sport in different ways. If you choose to hunt with a traditional gun good for you. If someone wants to shoot woodchucks with an AR15, 50 cal, AK47 I say more power to them. If you choose to let any gun style be sacrificed to keep your "traditional guns", your traditional guns will be easier targets for the anti's once the "terrorist guns" are gone.

    There is safety in numbers, and the people that shoot these so called "terrorist guns" do a lot to help everyone protect their right to keep all guns. Every gun owner should be protecting everyones right to legally own and shoot the guns of their choice for any legal sporting purpose.

    The gun is not a "terrorist gun" unless it is used for terrorist purposes. The people that have branded them as such are the liberal anti gun media that wants to take them all eventually. If you believe they are not protected by the Second Amendment because they didn't exist back then and our fore fathers couldn't have envisioned them , then we will all be shooting muzzle loading flintlocks soon. The metallic cartridge didn't appear until the time of the American Civil War so could they have envisioned that either? Should the Second Amendment protect any modern centerfire gun? Ben Franklin said "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety". Not protecting all gun owner rights is giving up Essential Liberty to buy Temporary Safety for the remainder of our rights.

[bear87]

    We do need to pick our battles. Our battles should be for the Second Amendment. People find sport in different ways. If you choose to hunt with a traditional gun good for you. If someone wants to shoot woodchucks with an AR15, 50 cal, AK47 I say more power to them. If you choose to let any gun style be sacrificed to keep your "traditional guns", your traditional guns will be easier targets for the anti's once the "terrorist guns" are gone.

    There is safety in numbers, and the people that shoot these so called "terrorist guns" do a lot to help everyone protect their right to keep all guns. Every gun owner should be protecting everyones right to legally own and shoot the guns of their choice for any legal sporting purpose.

    The gun is not a "terrorist gun" unless it is used for terrorist purposes. The people that have branded them as such are the liberal anti gun media that wants to take them all eventually. If you believe they are not protected by the Second Amendment because they didn't exist back then and our fore fathers couldn't have envisioned them , then we will all be shooting muzzle loading flintlocks soon. The metallic cartridge didn't appear until the time of the American Civil War so could they have envisioned that either? Should the Second Amendment protect any modern centerfire gun? Ben Franklin said "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety". Not protecting all gun owner rights is giving up Essential Liberty to buy Temporary Safety for the remainder of our rights.

I could not have said it any better myself. bear87

[roscoe]

    We do need to pick our battles. Our battles should be for the Second Amendment. People find sport in different ways. If you choose to hunt with a traditional gun good for you. If someone wants to shoot woodchucks with an AR15, 50 cal, AK47 I say more power to them. If you choose to let any gun style be sacrificed to keep your "traditional guns", your traditional guns will be easier targets for the anti's once the "terrorist guns" are gone.

    There is safety in numbers, and the people that shoot these so called "terrorist guns" do a lot to help everyone protect their right to keep all guns. Every gun owner should be protecting everyones right to legally own and shoot the guns of their choice for any legal sporting purpose.

    The gun is not a "terrorist gun" unless it is used for terrorist purposes. The people that have branded them as such are the liberal anti gun media that wants to take them all eventually. If you believe they are not protected by the Second Amendment because they didn't exist back then and our fore fathers couldn't have envisioned them , then we will all be shooting muzzle loading flintlocks soon. The metallic cartridge didn't appear until the time of the American Civil War so could they have envisioned that either? Should the Second Amendment protect any modern centerfire gun? Ben Franklin said "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety". Not protecting all gun owner rights is giving up Essential Liberty to buy Temporary Safety for the remainder of our rights.

I don't think that I've ever heard it explained any better or simpler than that Bud.Kudos!