Best Hunting Magazine

Field and Stream FIRED Zumbo, so how are they anti black gun? Sounds to me like they were taking the EBR side of things on that issue with Zumbo.

I get F&S and outdoor life, sometimes they are good and sometimes they are average...
 
David Petzal, editor of Field and Stream came out against black guns in 1994 saying, Quote: "The American public -- and the gun-owning public; especially the gun-owning public -- would be better off without the hardcore military arms, which puts the average sportsman in a real dilemma". An Uzi or an AKM or an AK-47 should be no more generally available than a Claymore mine or a block of C4 explosive."

Here's more.... http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=257553&highlight=field+stream
 
One guy? And 1994? Sorry, but I'm not gonna blast an entire group of editors, columnists and feature writers over one guy. That's no better than quitting TFL over some idiot's racist flaming in L&P that was resurrected from 1999.

Art
 
Art Eatman said:
One guy? And 1994? Sorry, but I'm not gonna blast an entire group of editors, columnists and feature writers over one guy.
Click to expand...

This one guy was and still is the executive editor, 1994 was the pivotal year the Brady Bill (AWB) came to life that set the model for many liberal states to enact similar legislation. Recently Petzal has continued to make insulting comments comparing Zumbo boycotters to metal patients and calling them "Yahoo's". Although the Zumbo issue has been beat to death, I think the actions of these "yahoo's" in the long run will do more good to strengthen 2nd Amendment resolve than efforts of Field & Stream.

Everyone is free to make their own conclusions about Field & Stream....this is just my small way of letting them them know, I think their executive editor crossed the line and will not receive my financial support.
 
Better to write the publisher, able to say, "As a long-time subscriber, I must protest this wilful divisiveness within the firearms community." Etc., etc. You don't change people's minds by going away and sulking. First communicate; then, follow with a further communication about the action of cancelling a subscription.

One snail-mail letter is seen to represent the views of around 300 people. Same view is held by the advertisers as well as the publishers.

Silence makes no change.

Art
 
+1 on FFG. I also like Deer and Deer Hunting because they actually publish scholarly articles based on good science along with the "how to's" and whatnot.
It is specific to whitetails and has an eastern focus though.
 
Art Eatman said:
Better to write the publisher, able to say, "As a long-time subscriber, I must protest this wilful divisiveness within the firearms community." Etc., etc. You don't change people's minds by going away and sulking. First communicate; then, follow with a further communication about the action of cancelling a subscription.

One snail-mail letter is seen to represent the views of around 300 people. Same view is held by the advertisers as well as the publishers.

Silence makes no change.

Art
Click to expand...

Art, not sure if your comments are directed at me or not...if not no problem, sometimes it's hard to interpet internet intent. If it was for me, I have not been a long time subscriber and by no means sulking. Not my intent for the topic to head this direction, merely responding to your questions.

While I agree writing to the editor and publisher informs them of customer disapproval and has a place, withholding financial support for their product does the same thing and more.

Like many TV/Radio news outlets, news papers, and/or magazines....they exist to make money. Alienating your market is bad business.....doesn't matter if you're CBS, FOX News, or Field & Stream. As a consumer I choose to support publications that are in line with my beliefs. David Petzal drew the rath of the NRA and gun community down on himself in 1994....comments like his are never forgotten. While no apology ever came from Petzal, supporting his publication would be tantamount to supporting his beliefs.Message is plain and simple, if you want my money....don't attack the second amendment.
 
Aw, just sort of an "in general..." comment on how to affect a behavior or a policy.

I don't subscribe to S.A, so Petersen Publishing doesn't know I exist. I might get some effect by writing advertisers, but as a non-subscriber I'm rather unimportant to Petersen.

Non sequitur: I don't like IRS, but I definitely read their publications. :D

Art
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top