Waiting for the Other Shoe to Fall

I think you have hit the nail on the head! I think there were conversations on that very same topic during the hunt and Mr. Zumbo took it to his blog. Once it hit the World Wide Web and the fire storm started the big dogs at Remington went into damage control and used Zumbo and the scape goat.

Don’t get me wrong, I do not agree with his statement, but I think he should have used some common sense before posting that blog.

Goes to show how fast thing “get around” once they hit the web.

Sponsorship is all about the financial bottom line for big companies. Other than that sponsors do not care a dime about their Pro-Staff, they are like a commodity.

Did the Remington bosses know Jim Zumbo’s stance? I do not know. And if so they might have respected his opinion. The way I see it Jim Zumbo might be a traditionalist. Just like traditional bowhunters don’t like compound bows and crossbows, he might not like AR and AK rifles. I have not read his original post, but see that in your quote the words assault and terrorist are but in quotes, this could suggest that Zumbo meant is sarcastic not literal. Even so with the recent hoopla about terrorism it is not a wise thing to do. But then again in the past I have heard and read of professional bowhunters referring to crossbows in the very same manner and nobody raised an eyebrow. All in all I do not think for a minute that Jim voiced any second Amendment views, it was made into a anti second Amendment case by others.

I do think that Jim Zumbo came out wrong and if he had left the words “assault” and “terrorist” out nobody would have bothered. As it is this case has been blown well out of all proportions and made into something that I just cannot see knowing Jim’s long standing support of hunting and firearm ownership.

-Othmar Vohringer-

I know when I’m out hunting with the guys lots of things get discussed. My reading of his post, which by the way is completely gone including google cache which I’ve never seen disappear before, it was a topic on the hunt that a PR man from Remington was on. I guess I’m one of the few that finds this point a bit odd. If it was a “second amendment issue” ( which I don’t think it is) why wouldn’t the PR man set Jim straight? I believe that until the dust got stirred in cyber space Remington didn’t see it as a big deal either. Speculation on my part but I think it’s a more reasonable then to think Jim just wrote this blog post without talking to anyone.

Othmar,

I agree that if Zumbo had phrased it differently, it would have been a difference of opinion, rather than an outrage.

Is there *anyone* in the firearms community who watched the idiotic 1994 passage of the so-called “Assault Weapons” ban who is not sensitive to slinging terms like “assault rifle” around ? You have to have a major cranial vapor-lock to not recognize the mine-field in using that term casually (and incorrectly, by the by).

Or you have to be one of the elitist “my brown rifle is good but your black rifle is evil” elitists at heart. In which case, take a hike! As much fun as you may find hunting, the 2nd amendment ain’t about shooting ducks.

And as you point out, using the word “terrorist” in almost any connection to firearms is grabbing the jar of nitroglycerin and shaking it violently. You can do it, but don’t be surprised at the results.

I give high marks to Remington, however, in severing ties with the PR disaster quickly. Whatever their private opinions might be, their public stance is well in keeping with a defense of the 2nd amendment. Absent a “smoking gun” memo proving it’s only CYA after the fact, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt. They heard it, did a double-take, and say “oh, my God! Let’s get out of here!”

[...] is there and every year more and more blogs spring up about hunting and fishing. I think after the Zumbo mess last year( Outdoor Life Writer & Spokesman for a number of outdoor companies including [...]