Article: Former Guns & Ammo columnist speaks out on becoming 'a pariah'

“The fact is, all constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be,” Metcalf wrote in what turned out to be his final column for the magazine.

“Freedom of speech is regulated. You cannot falsely and deliberating shout, ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater. Freedom of religion is regulated. A church cannot practice human sacrifice. Freedom of assembly is regulated.”
Click to expand...
What an ass! the 2nd is already regulated, you can't go around shooting people just because they piss you off.
 
Metcalf erred but part of the blame has to rest on the editor who approved the article in the first place. Since G&A was going for a new editor and a make over, this provided plenty of free publicity for the magazine, and controversy too. Metcalf may have been knowingly or unknowingly been sacrificed as a marketing ploy. If that isn't the case G&A seriously misjudged their readership which is a bad thing in an era where print journalism is dying.
 
“Compromise is a bad word these days,” Dick Metcalf, 67, told The New York Times of what he believes is the unyielding, give-no-ground ethos adopted by Second Amendment supporters in the U.S. today
Click to expand...

As a "longtime writer on firearms and U.S. gun culture", he should have known that.
 
Now, Metcalf says he is treated as a pariah by the industry in which he once thrived. The Times writes that when people ask the disenfranchised journalist of his plans, he exhibits a photograph taken shortly after InterMedia -- which owns Guns & Ammon -- fired him. The image shows him holding a gun, along with a sign reading, “Will Hunt For Food.”
Click to expand...

I'm sure the Huff Post has a spot for him.
 
Dick needs to FOAD. It's not about compromise, some things like pregnancy can't be "a little of". Too much ground have been given up already, way too much regulation and capricious control. He should talk to Joe about getting a job in some commie shithole.
 
Boo ****ing hoo. Exactly how much compromise is he willing to give? We already have 34, '68, '86 on top of state laws.

Too much compromise has already occurred.
 
In a normal world we might be able to "compromise" - but we're faced with a bunch of people who want to COMPLETELY eliminate gun ownership by civilians - and we have the eyes of MILLIONS of dead people from the pages of history staring back at us who gave up their physical and mental capabilities of self defense, so the correct answer these days should be " no compromise".

We've already compromised enough. If you look back at what sorts of self defense rights the American people had 100 years ago - and what they have today, it's plainly clear that compromising gets us absolutely nowhere.

Dick needs to stop being a dick and pay attention.
 
Last edited:
“Compromise is a bad word these days,” Dick Metcalf, 67, told The New York Times of what he believes is the unyielding, give-no-ground ethos adopted by Second Amendment supporters in the U.S. today
Click to expand...

It is not compromise when one side is the only one giving anything up. We supporters of the second ammendment have been given nothing, we have only been taken from. That is not compromise.
 
Lip said:
Dropped my subscription the moment I read the column.
Click to expand...

Same here.

Following Metcalf's dismissal, Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, told FoxNews.com Metcalf “absolutely did not” deserve to lose his post.

“If he suggested a ban on all guns, then I would understand that reaction,” Watts said. “But to say a fair exchange of ideas on how to stem the deaths and murders in this country because of gun violence is an act of heresy just reeks of no tolerance.”
Click to expand...

She got that right. There's a sizable population of peaceable gun owners who aren't going to sit back and take it on the chin. Nope, we're not going to tolerate any of it.
 

Definition of Compromise:

com·pro·mise ˈkɑm·prəˌmɑɪz

An agreement between two sides who have different opinions, in which each side gives up something it had wanted:

Example:
NY gun owners engaged in a compromise with Governor Cuomo that limited them to 7-round magazines.
 
compromise with the left is a game of inches until there is nothing left to compromise about.
 
Personally would be happy to compromise on gun laws, I think there is be a happy medium on all the issues. The problem is that the other side has no idea what the hell they are talking about so their medium and ours are worlds apart.
 
The compromise started when the 2nd was a full pie (mmmm pie), then we gave half, then another half again, then half again - we can't even get National Reciprocity when we have 1/8 pie (mmmm pie) left.

Is this compromise?

Coming up on renewal of Guns and Ammo (Feb) - haven't done it, don't think I will.
 
I'll compromise.

I'll agree that you can pass a law that any criminals convicted of committing a crime with a gun get a life sentence with no parole, and in return, you do away with the Chief's discretion to add restrictions.

How's that sound?
 
swatgig said:
I'll compromise.

I'll agree that you can pass a law that any criminals convicted of committing a crime with a gun get a life sentence with no parole, and in return, you do away with the Chief's discretion to add restrictions.

How's that sound?
Click to expand...

Bad. Do you know how many crimes are on the book? What does "commiting a crime with a gun" mean? If I drive 30 (IIRC) mph over the speed limit it's a misdemeanor. If I'm carrying my gun with me at the time, does that mean I committed a crime with a gun?

Don't give these people an inch.
 
swatgig said:
Using a gun to commit a crime(Assault, Battery, Robbery, Murder, Kidnapping, Rape).

Not shoplifting with a .22 in your pocket.
Click to expand...

How is using a gun during a crime any worse than a knife or baseball bat? You don't want to demonize guns further. A crime is a crime. Address it based on its severity not something a person had on them.
 
The Times writes that when people ask the disenfranchised journalist of his plans...
Click to expand...

Can someone help me understand where he was 'disenfranchised' ? I mean - he can still vote, he's just not employed by 'Guns & Ammo' any longer...

Like with Compromise & Common Sense, words need to mean something. The useless hyperbole passed off as journalism should not be tolerated by subscribers.
 

Similar threads

Article: Veterans Day 2017
Replies
5
Views
541
Len-2A Training
Len-2A Training
Article: California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill on Saturday that guarantees that t
Replies
17
Views
1K
Shootist
S
Article: 7 Mistakes Coyote Hunters Make
Replies
1
Views
471
Kevin_NH
Kevin_NH
Article: Paul Ryan Ignoring National Reciprocity for 43rd Consecutive Week
Replies
6
Views
1K
weldingmachine
W
Article: ABC News: Firearm Confiscation Orders Part of Solution to Mass Public Attack
Replies
20
Views
2K
Lucus
Lucus
Back
Top Bottom