Saturday, February 24, 2007
Veteran writer Jim Zumbo commented that he thought it was stupid to use an "assault rifle" (sometimes also called "black rifle", since the AR-15, for example is black plastic in many areas). Now, he has lost most of his gigs with magazines and the NRA, and many of the gun enthusiasts are just fine with that. Also, I note that some are now trying to tell Ted Nugent what to do. . . .(not a good idea, mind you!). He has posted apologies and restatements of position from the 67 year old gun writer. . .apparently, Zumbo made his dumbo comments about "terrorist" rifles and now lots of folk think this is "ammunition" for more efforts to abolish certain types of rifles, and pistols.
I think this is "throwing the baby out with the bathwater". We don't need to chew up veteran, 40 year NRA member authors regardless of WHATEVER they may say, and regardless of whether it is in print or on a blog. The author has 1st amendment rights in addition to 2nd amendment rights. And, yes, that doesn't obligate his continued contracts with anybody, but then there is "the spirit of the law" to think about. I would say the spirit of these two amendments to the Constitution are:
Amendment 1- Unfettered political speech is good, PROTECT IT.
Amendment 2 - Private gun ownership is good, PROTECT IT and it will protect you.
There is much I've heard from experts and ordinary men, which agrees with just this set of statements.
Who knows, maybe even some of the more rabid folk on both sides of this issue may learn something. And, that would have come from a political argument playing out on the internet.
Like how happy the MSNBC author must have been (thrilled, I'm sure. . .as were his editors) to find NRA and others chewing up one of their own on nothing more than his comments. That is the essence of this. Of course there is a lot of sensitivity, and most of it pretty justified from the pro AR-15, AK-47 crowd. And I'm pretty sure that 2nd amendment authors DID THINK MILITARY when penning the amendment, after all, they said "MILITIA", right in the very same text.
You see there is nothing fundamentally different about a semi-auto rifle with a large capacity clip, as opposed to a hunting rifle. In fact, there are hunting rifles which can take much the same ammunition as an AR15. The only real functional differences have to do with magazine quantities, and with the "look" of the rifle. Also, pointing out a plain fact: There are hunting weapons which make an AR or an AK look like a pea-shooter. [think high velocity .50 calibre monster, big game hunting rifles. . .would stop a truck. . .most likely!]
Also, if you think about it REAL HARD, you will realize that virtually any long range kill in hunting is essentially identical to SNIPER action. You hide, you perform a kill with the weapon and you usually don't get a second chance. That seems to me to be sniping and hunting, in "ad reductio" form. . .
so, on we go, I can hope we get back together and don't blow anything with this brouhaha.