The only mistake he made was his miscalculation in the response. He thought he was advocating the popular side of the arguement and when he found out the contrary he jumped sides.......the classic flip-flop!!!!
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Zumbo Responds to Sen. Carl Levin
- Thread starter Thor67
- Start date
The only mistake he made was his miscalculation in the response. He thought he was advocating the popular side of the arguement and when he found out the contrary he jumped sides.......the classic flip-flop!!!!
kevin9
NES Member
sksguns, I just don't see the malice and malfeasance in Mr. Zumbo's actions that you apparently do. It appears to me that he made a very stupid statement reflecting his misinformed opinion at the time, but his opinion has since sincerely changed and he now understands that he was wrong and is attempting to make amends. Without evidence to the contrary, I take his subsequent actions at face value, as contrition not dissimulation. Thus I am willing to forgive.
And to answer your question "Yes", if the evidence was such that they were truly repentant.
And to answer your question "Yes", if the evidence was such that they were truly repentant.
You may not think so and that is your right. But it seems like there are those among us who would.
I usually wait and give someone enough rope. If they truly are a dope, then they eventually wind up hanging themself. I'll give most people (depending on what the infraction is) a 2nd chance. After that if they prove me wrong, then I'll crap on them.
jkelly
Shooting at the big range in heaven
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2005
- Messages
- 2,060
- Likes
- 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkelly
I don’t think that not forgiving Zumbo for his transgression against the 2nd Amendment equates to banishing everyone for any mistake and to suggest as much is ludicrous. And of course the rest of your argument is then moot.
Respectfully,
jkelly
I think you are the only person who has tied the act of not forgiving Zumbo for his transgression, to banishing everyone else who ever made a mistake. And to tie these two thoughts together as a defense for Mr. Zumbo is ridiculous.
In fact not forgiving Zumbo doesn’t even necessarily include banishing Zumbo himself. It simply means that he is not forgiven for his transgression, one act one response.
Any other feeling toward Zumbo, from someone who does not forgive him, would be in addition to not forgiving him.
But not forgiving him and wanting him banished is not mutually inclusive-meaning that one act does not necessarily beget the other.
Respectfully,
jkelly
Originally Posted by jkelly
I don’t think that not forgiving Zumbo for his transgression against the 2nd Amendment equates to banishing everyone for any mistake and to suggest as much is ludicrous. And of course the rest of your argument is then moot.
Respectfully,
jkelly
I think you are the only person who has tied the act of not forgiving Zumbo for his transgression, to banishing everyone else who ever made a mistake. And to tie these two thoughts together as a defense for Mr. Zumbo is ridiculous.
In fact not forgiving Zumbo doesn’t even necessarily include banishing Zumbo himself. It simply means that he is not forgiven for his transgression, one act one response.
Any other feeling toward Zumbo, from someone who does not forgive him, would be in addition to not forgiving him.
But not forgiving him and wanting him banished is not mutually inclusive-meaning that one act does not necessarily beget the other.
Respectfully,
jkelly
I wasn't comparing the two for their subject matter. I just felt that SKSGUNS, who will not forgive Zumbo, might also not 'forgive' S&W. This was giving me a way to find out a little more about how SKSGUNS thinks.
As far as the former it was to demonstrate the more negative aspects of the continued mindless and one-dimensional condemnation of Zumbo and the potential downside of continuing such behavior to it's irrational end.
As far as the latter, you are the only person who has mistaken my comment for a defense of Zumbo.
Thank you for your comments.
Yes, cause everyone knows that badmouthing someone (which is what
zumbo effectively did) is on the same moral wrongness plane as
RAPE is.
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
IMO he said what he said at the time because he had an opinion which was
based on being ignorant and misinformed. I believe he said what he
said because he didn't know any better. Ignorance breeds contempt.
A lot of people (even among gun owners) have no bleeping clue
about how onerous gun laws are, or what those rights mean to many
people. I don't see why everyone is stuck on some sort of a
conspiracy theory with his guy. If I was to persecute antis I've
converted because they said something stupid before I showed them the
other side I don't think that would help us any. We can't make
forward progress with any of them if we don't forgive them for their prior
transgressions at one point or another.
-Mike
what has happened is what I and I believe most on here knew would happen. Some wingnut politician or anti gun person would take Zumbo's statement and try to use it against us. That has happened. Yes Zumbo responded. He has credit for that. But he also has credit for starting this whole thing.
This isn't the end of his first blog and he will have to defend himself against it for many years to come. He's done great damage no matter how contrite he is.
Personally I don't care what firearm is use din what crime. The criminal should pay the price for breaking the law. But that's not the way it is in our society. Everyone needs to get to a "root" cause. The root they believe is military style firearms. Now you get a guy like Zumbo saying the same thing as the Brady camp how do you undo that????
I fear a lot more damage to our rights is coming and I believe he will be the one to thank for it no matter how many apologies or acts of contrition.
This isn't the end of his first blog and he will have to defend himself against it for many years to come. He's done great damage no matter how contrite he is.
Personally I don't care what firearm is use din what crime. The criminal should pay the price for breaking the law. But that's not the way it is in our society. Everyone needs to get to a "root" cause. The root they believe is military style firearms. Now you get a guy like Zumbo saying the same thing as the Brady camp how do you undo that????
I fear a lot more damage to our rights is coming and I believe he will be the one to thank for it no matter how many apologies or acts of contrition.
Yes, cause everyone knows that badmouthing someone (which is what
zumbo effectively did) is on the same moral wrongness plane as
RAPE is.
I'll agree with you that it's not on the same wrongness plane as rape. But its still an attack on styles of firearms that I cherrish. So I tend to take that personally because even though he didn't call me by name he spoke ill against a group of people of which I happen to be part of. The terrorist reference was over the top. And that's how he depicted us to the nation.
So let him work to right his wrong. I have no issue with that. If it helps change the face of people who like the kinds of firearms that I like then so be it. I'll gladly take it. But in my opinion he owes it to all owners of legal military style firearms. And if he pulls it off he'll not have one ounce of respect or gratitude from me. Once he's done he can drift into an abyss of anonymity as I could care less to ever hear his name again.
kevin9
NES Member
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. To basically say that someone can NEVER atone for what they have said is so depressingly harsh and angry to me that I just cannot understand it, and frankly have no desire to.
It appears we do agree on one thing.
Thank you for replying.
jkelly
Shooting at the big range in heaven
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2005
- Messages
- 2,060
- Likes
- 93
I don’t think the continuing the condemnation of Mr. Zumbo will result in the end of the RKBA as it’s not the condemnation of the transgression that will hurt the RKBA but rather the transgression itself.
If the argument repeats itself until only two defenders of the RKBA are left then there were only two people who believed in the RKBA to begin with. That is if everybody but two people speak out against the RKBA as Mr. Zumbo did then the RKBA is dead anyway. Your demonstrations argument is weak.
Making a statement that attacks the continued condemnation of Mr. Zumbo, as you have above, is certainly a defense of Mr. Zumbo. Attempting to discredit the argument or the individual who makes the argument against Mr. Zumbo as righteous, mindless, one-dimensional and irrational, is definitely a defense of Mr. Zumbo. You can’t attack his enemies and not suggest your attack does not help defend him.
But I am surprised to hear that you actually know that no one else took your comment as a defense of Mr. Zumbo. You do know that don’t you? You weren’t just BSing right?
Thank YOU for your comments.
jkelly
![[laugh2]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/014.gif "Laugh at above [laugh2]")
Same here, and I can understand the feeling... but frankly I'm more
pissed at people in political power that go around telling lies about the
guns I own, than some little known writer. (Lets face it.. outside
the hunting community, everyone else is going "who the hell is jim
zumbo?" Zumbo has FAR less effect on RKBA issues than a lot of
legislative types that actually have real power. We have f***wits
like jarrett barrios out there that are paid by our tax dollars going around
trumpeting about how good it is to take people's rights away.
To put things in perspective.... Zumbo is/was a hemmroid; the pols
are the gdmn' BUBONIC PLAGUE all over again in comparison, when it
comes to inertia WRT gun control.
I agree with that.... but so aren't people like John Rosenthal going on
TV, pretending to be gun owners, and asking for more gun
control. If that shit ain't over the top, I don't know what is. IMO people
like him are far worse than Zumbo is... any day of the week.. because
they're intentionally creating subterfuge and deception for the purpose of
furthering their agenda... whereas zumbo just acted like an idiot by making
some inflammatory statements- statements which were so "over the top"
that they would not retain a lot of credibility even if he was famous.
Depicted us to the nation? I think you're giving Zumbo a little too much
credit on that one. While he might be some prominent TV/media figure
inside of the hunting realm, I doubt his recognition goes much beyond
that. Hell, I didn't even know who he was until this whole incident
happened. I regularly shoot with two guys that hunt quite frequently and
while names get dropped (or they talk about stuff on TV) I never heard
his name mentioned.... once. It's quite likely that by a demographic,
more of "us" (eg, shooting enthusiasts) know about his transgression than
the general public does. (The times wrote some whiney op ed piece
about how we suffocated him, but if you ask the average joe who jim
zumbo is, they're basically going to go "WTF? Who's that?")
And further, Levin could have used any turncoat for his little swan
song routine.... I'm sure AHSA would have been more than happy to
provide a similar statement from John Rosenthal or that guy that's on their
BOD that "defected" from the NRA. And even if they had nobody, they'd
simply make shit up... they've been known to to that before. Hell the
entire anti gun lobby is based on making shit up. That was exemplified
by things like the 2000 MMM march, where only about 20K showed up but
the management kept yapping about 750,000 people... too bad 700,000+
didn't actually exist. I guess what I'm getting at is they don't need
real people to make noise.
I think you're seriously overestimating the amount of impact that
zumbo had... a bunch of you act like he had some sort of huge pro-gun
credibility, like as if he was Charlton Heston supporting gun control or something. Not even close.
The irony in all of this is despite his poorly worded tirade, the net effect
inside the community is likely to be more positive than negative... EG- this
incident has drawn attention to the fact that not everyone who owns/uses
guns is going to be pro gun.. and it also might have the side effect of
awakening some people who just didn't know any better.
So, if he did something positive for us (even however small) you're still
going to retain that grudge? That's a hell of a grudge to keep.
To each their own I guess... I just happen to believe that there are
people who are far more worthy of perpetual condemnation for their anti-gun
crap than zumbo is. Zumbo is a flash in the pan outside the community,
nothing more.
And with that, these fries are DONE.
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
-Mike
Last edited:
Same here, and I can understand the feeling... but frankly I'm more
pissed at people in political power that go around telling lies about the
guns I own, than some little known writer. (Lets face it.. outside
the hunting community, everyone else is going "who the hell is jim
zumbo?" Zumbo has FAR less effect on RKBA issues than a lot of
legislative types that actually have real power. We have f***wits
like jarrett barrios out there that are paid by our tax dollars going around
trumpeting about how good it is to take people's rights away.
To put things in perspective.... Zumbo is/was a hemmroid; the pols
are the gdmn' BUBONIC PLAGUE all over again in comparison, when it
comes to inertia WRT gun control.
I agree with that.... but so aren't people like John Rosenthal going on
TV, pretending to be gun owners, and asking for more gun
control. If that shit ain't over the top, I don't know what is. IMO people
like him are far worse than Zumbo is... any day of the week.. because
they're intentionally creating subterfuge and deception for the purpose of
furthering their agenda... whereas zumbo just acted like an idiot by making
some inflammatory statements- statements which were so "over the top"
that they would not retain a lot of credibility even if he was famous.
Depicted us to the nation? I think you're giving Zumbo a little too much
credit on that one. While he might be some prominent TV/media figure
inside of the hunting realm, I doubt his recognition goes much beyond
that. Hell, I didn't even know who he was until this whole incident
happened. I regularly shoot with two guys that hunt quite frequently and
while names get dropped (or they talk about stuff on TV) I never heard
his name mentioned.... once. It's quite likely that by a demographic,
more of "us" (eg, shooting enthusiasts) know about his transgression than
the general public does. (The times wrote some whiney op ed piece
about how we suffocated him, but if you ask the average joe who jim
zumbo is, they're basically going to go "WTF? Who's that?")
And further, Levin could have used any turncoat for his little swan
song routine.... I'm sure AHSA would have been more than happy to
provide a similar statement from John Rosenthal or that guy that's on their
BOD that "defected" from the NRA. And even if they had nobody, they'd
simply make shit up... they've been known to to that before. Hell the
entire anti gun lobby is based on making shit up. That was exemplified
by things like the 2000 MMM march, where only about 20K showed up but
the management kept yapping about 750,000 people... too bad 700,000+
didn't actually exist. I guess what I'm getting at is they don't need
real people to make noise.
I think you're seriously overestimating the amount of impact that
zumbo had... a bunch of you act like he had some sort of huge pro-gun
credibility, like as if he was Charlton Heston supporting gun control or something. Not even close.
The irony in all of this is despite his poorly worded tirade, the net effect
inside the community is likely to be more positive than negative... EG- this
incident has drawn attention to the fact that not everyone who owns/uses
guns is going to be pro gun.. and it also might have the side effect of
awakening some people who just didn't know any better.
So, if he did something positive for us (even however small) you're still
going to retain that grudge? That's a hell of a grudge to keep.
To each their own I guess... I just happen to believe that there are
people who are far more worthy of perpetual condemnation for their anti-gun
crap than zumbo is. Zumbo is a flash in the pan outside the community,
nothing more.
And with that, these fries are DONE.
-Mike
EXCELLENT Post!!!!!!!!
I suppose I'll waste my grudge energy on someone with more zip that's against our hobby.
![[grin]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/041.gif "Grin [grin]")
+1 for your post.
In respect to that... I think a lot of pro-RKBA people are overestimating our victory on Zumbos fall from grace.
We had tens of thousands of outraged gun owners dog-piling on one old hunter/author of little to no importance. The guy was toast right from the get go (compare it to say a professional football team taking on some Pop Warner players and then the pros go around slapping each other on the back and bragging how they kicked ass).
If we can repeat that against a real adversary... like a Sarah Brady, Dianne Feinstein or Jarret Barrios, then we'll have accomplished something beneficial
that we can crow about.
If anything, I think one of the most important things gun owners should have learned from this is just how powerful and useful a tool the Internet can be
in getting the word out.
In respect to that... I think a lot of pro-RKBA people are overestimating our victory on Zumbos fall from grace.
We had tens of thousands of outraged gun owners dog-piling on one old hunter/author of little to no importance. The guy was toast right from the get go (compare it to say a professional football team taking on some Pop Warner players and then the pros go around slapping each other on the back and bragging how they kicked ass).
If we can repeat that against a real adversary... like a Sarah Brady, Dianne Feinstein or Jarret Barrios, then we'll have accomplished something beneficial
that we can crow about.
If anything, I think one of the most important things gun owners should have learned from this is just how powerful and useful a tool the Internet can be
in getting the word out.
sksguns
to say this
Zumbo did NOT start this whole thing; this whole thing has been going on for decades. Zumbo took the ammo the Senator was trying to use away from the Senator. Zumbo did NOT give it to him, the Senator took it because he can not offer a firm defense of his own views. It doesn't make Zumbo guilty of a damn thing. People will always take what we say and try and twist it. That is not new.
He said, she said, who cares? What does the Senator say that is his own words, anything?
All this talk about Zumbo is starting to sound like the media with Anna Nichole Smith, who gives a damn? Trying to make a mountain out of an Ant hill is hardly worthy of the effort and lacks in substance.
Challenging a man's integrity over a few words said in ignorance is not a good premise either.
This sounds so much like the Rape Trial at Duke. There wasn't a rape, there isn't a rape and maybe if rape is said enough times, Rape will appear.
loginname
I agree with this comment you made
to say this
Is the same as saying WINCHESTER OR ANY FIREARM MANUFACTURER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE GUNS USED IN CRIMES.
Zumbo did NOT start this whole thing; this whole thing has been going on for decades. Zumbo took the ammo the Senator was trying to use away from the Senator. Zumbo did NOT give it to him, the Senator took it because he can not offer a firm defense of his own views. It doesn't make Zumbo guilty of a damn thing. People will always take what we say and try and twist it. That is not new.
He said, she said, who cares? What does the Senator say that is his own words, anything?
All this talk about Zumbo is starting to sound like the media with Anna Nichole Smith, who gives a damn? Trying to make a mountain out of an Ant hill is hardly worthy of the effort and lacks in substance.
Challenging a man's integrity over a few words said in ignorance is not a good premise either.
This sounds so much like the Rape Trial at Duke. There wasn't a rape, there isn't a rape and maybe if rape is said enough times, Rape will appear.
loginname
I agree with this comment you made
This energy focused on Zumbo should be refocused at someone who didn't make a ignorant statement but someone who is really 100 percent ANTI GUN.
Last edited:
jkelly
Shooting at the big range in heaven
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2005
- Messages
- 2,060
- Likes
- 93
Perhaps you meant:
“Is the same as saying WINCHESTER OR ANY FIREARM MANUFACTURER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE [CRIMES COMMITTED (or the results of those crimes) USING THIER GUNS].”
Which is very much different then the meaning of what actually you said.
I don’t think that a rational reading of sksguns statement above would include blaming Zumbo for anything that was started “decades ago”. With out knowing I would guess that by “this whole thing” sksguns meant starting with the Zumbo statement.
sksguns opinion as stated above appears to be an accurate appraisal of what was both expected by some and what has actually happened.
jkelly
Jkelly
Are you an Interpreter, Translator or an English Teacher??
I find myself to be a very Rational person and a fairly decent reader and I do not agree with your conclusion based on the premise of the statement.
Sorry if my post went over your head.
Are you an Interpreter, Translator or an English Teacher??
I find myself to be a very Rational person and a fairly decent reader and I do not agree with your conclusion based on the premise of the statement.
Sorry if my post went over your head.
Last edited:
jkelly
Shooting at the big range in heaven
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2005
- Messages
- 2,060
- Likes
- 93
Your statement says (in part) “…WINCHESTER OR ANY FIREARM MANUFACTURER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE GUNS USED IN CRIMES”.
That part of your statement does not say that the Manufacturer is responsible for the ACTIONS of others or the RESULTS of other’s actions which is what I think you intended. If you meant that the manufacturer is responsible for the quality or workmanship of the gun used in a crime then I’m mistaken in your intent.
Simply said, your statement says the manufacture is responsible for the “Gun” not the “Action” taken with the gun. You may think other wise.
jkelly
jkelly is right, the statement says that the manufacturer is responsible for the guns existing, which is of course true in every way since they made them. I think wingwiper you meant to say that its the same as saying the manufacturer is responsible for the actions of those wielding the firearm.
-Tom
-Tom
Everyone knows what was meant.
The way I said it was the way I meant it and Yes! I see you can take it more than one way. I find rather obvious the way it was meant. People blame the manufacturer for the Guns. If the guns weren't made they feel there would be no crimes.
Now you all have steered the thread from the topic to correcting grammar of a poster. I am surprised my buddy Martlet hasn't jumped in yet. I am surprised jkelly wanted to even post a remark to me, Why he would want to waste his time with someone who is ignorant is beyond me... Time to move on. Horse is dead.
The way I said it was the way I meant it and Yes! I see you can take it more than one way. I find rather obvious the way it was meant. People blame the manufacturer for the Guns. If the guns weren't made they feel there would be no crimes.
Now you all have steered the thread from the topic to correcting grammar of a poster. I am surprised my buddy Martlet hasn't jumped in yet. I am surprised jkelly wanted to even post a remark to me, Why he would want to waste his time with someone who is ignorant is beyond me... Time to move on. Horse is dead.
Be glad he is just correcting your grammar. You really know when you have gotten to jkelly when he accuses you of lying.
Sorry to catch you lying Frosty. You've been fun!
True jkelly,
Just meant this latest crap since he posted his blog and all the negative attention associated with his comments. I didn't mean to imply nor did I think I was referencing and blaming Zumbo for decades of useless gun control laws and attacks on the second ammendment. I have no idea where wingwiper got that but maybe I wasn't very specific in my misguided disgust with Zumbo.
Just his blog, Levin's remarks and Zumbo's response to those remark.
drgrant talked some sense to me a few posts back. I'm feeling much better now. Thank you....
Last edited:
Similar threads
