Zumbo's Letter in Response to Sen. Levin's lies

grampster

New member
For your edification.


http://www.theoutdoorwire.com/tow_fi...date=2007-3-30

In February, hunter and outdoorsman Jim Zumbo enraged shooters across the United States with comments appearing his now-discontinued blog on Outdoor Life. Since that fateful blog, Zumbo's professional life has changed - profoundly. A marquee career in hunting has effectively been reduced to nothingness. Television sponsors bolted, contracts were cancelled and a former front-man for hunting found himself the object of hatred and ridicule by shooters who felt betrayed by his comments.

Zumbo hasn't tried to shift the blame to anyone else. In fact, he pledged to go on the offensive to fight HR 1022, the newly introduced and significantly broadened, assault weapons ban.

Last week, Michigan Senator Carl Levin, a staunch opponent of firearms, used Zumbo's remarks to attack firearms owners, reading portions into the Congressional Record. Zumbo has fired back, sending an open letter to the United States Senate that responds to Levin's action and makes it plain that Zumbo isn't letting that action pass.

Last night, Zumbo provided us a copy of his response to Senator Levin. Today, in the sense of fairness, we offer it in its entirety - without comment.

An Open Letter to the United States Senate

Dear Honorable Ladies and Gentlemen:

It recently came to my attention that one of your colleagues, Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, has chosen to attack firearms owners using remarks I wrote in mid-February as his launch pad. As you probably know, Sen. Levin has been making anti-gun speeches every week for the past eight years because of a promise he made to the Economic Club of Detroit in May 1999.

Mr. Levin has an agenda, and he should have spoken to me before using my name in one of his speeches, especially since his remarks were entered into the Congressional Record. I would like my remarks here entered into the Congressional Record as well.

Sen. Levin is only one of 16 members of the Senate to vote against the Vitter Amendment to the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act. This amendment prohibits the confiscation of a privately-owned firearm during an emergency or major disaster when possession of that gun is not prohibited under state or federal law.

Eighty-four senators voted for that amendment, inspired by the egregious confiscation of firearms from the citizens of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina in the summer of 2005. Those seizures, you will recall, led the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association to join in a landmark civil rights lawsuit in federal court that brought the confiscations to an abrupt end.

The taking of private property without warrant or probable cause - even firearms - was considered an outrage by millions of American citizens, and yet Sen. Levin joined 15 of his colleagues in voting against this measure. It is no small wonder that Sen. Levin gets an "F" rating from gun rights organizations. He would have American citizens disarmed and left defenseless at a time when they need their firearms the most, when social order collapses into anarchy and protecting one's self and one's family is not simply a right and responsibility, it becomes a necessity.

That in mind, Sen. Levin must know that almost immediately after I wrote those remarks, I recanted and apologized to the millions of Americans who lawfully and responsibly own, compete with and hunt with semi-automatic rifles. I took a "crash course" on these firearms and visited with my good friend Ted Nugent on his ranch in Texas, where I personally shot an AR-15 and educated myself with these firearms.

Some of us learn from our mistakes, others keep making them. Legislation to which Sen. Levin alluded, HR 1022, would renew the ban on so-called "assault weapons," and dangerously expand it to encompass far more perfectly legal firearms. For the Congress of the United States to even consider such legislation is an affront to every law-abiding firearms owner in this country.

This legislation that Sen. Levin appears to endorse is written so broadly as outlaw not only firearms, but accessories, including a folding stock for a Ruger rifle. As I understand the language of this bill, it could ultimately take away my timeworn and cherished hunting rifles and shotguns - firearms I hope to one day pass on to my grandchildren - as well as millions of identical and similar firearms owned by other American citizens.

It is clear to me that the supporters of this legislation don't want to stop criminals. They want to invent new ones out of people like me, and many of you, and your constituents, friends, neighbors and members of your families. They will do anything they can, go to any extremes they believe necessary, to make it impossible for more and more American citizens to legally own any firearm.

In his final paragraph, Senator Levin misrepresents what I said. I never spoke in favor of a general assault weapons ban. Again, I immediately apologized for my blog statement that was exclusively directed toward hunting and not gun ownership.

I will not allow my name to be associated with this kind of attack on the Second Amendment rights of my fellow citizens.

A few weeks ago, in a letter to Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, I promised to educate my fellow hunters about this insidious legislation "even if I have to visit every hunting camp and climb into every duck blind and deer stand in this country to get it done."

I will amend that to add that I will bring my effort to Capitol Hill if necessary, even if I have to knock on every door and camp in every office of the United States Senate. In promoting this ban, the Hon. Carl Levin does not speak for me, or anybody I know.

Sincerely,
James Zumbo
Cody, Wyoming
__________________
 
Thanks for sharing it Grampster.

Jim Zumbo is clearly making ammends for his error and I am glad that he is actively involved in the HR 1022 bill. We need all the help we can get.
 
He needs to do something. Right now he couldn't get a job involving shooting unless its as a target, his sponserers has gone and left him pretty much broke, so its either work at the local walmart or do stuff like this to try and get his old job back.
 
and dangerously expand it to encompass far more perfectly legal firearms
Which firearms are less legal?
As I understand the language of this bill, it could ultimately take away my timeworn and cherished hunting rifles and shotguns
"Please, take everyone else's first!"
The taking of private property without warrant or probable cause - even firearms
... to me, "even" implies that firearms are a different category than other property.

I think he still has a ways to go, he obviously thinks hunting is still the only valid reason to have firearms....

This was good, tho'...
It is clear to me that the supporters of this legislation don't want to stop criminals. They want to invent new ones out of people like me, and many of you, and your constituents, friends, neighbors and members of your families. They will do anything they can, go to any extremes they believe necessary, to make it impossible for more and more American citizens to legally own any firearm.

He is trying to soothe his wounds, self inflicted and otherwise. It will leave a scar. I hope his efforts do help in defeating 1022.
 
:rolleyes:

Some people just aren't ever satisfied, are they?

All things considered, I'd say the guy is doing a fine job trying to make amends for his situation, whether it be for employment or the "greater good" of ownership. Either way, it works for you and I.

And, in the end, probably him. Maybe he'll rekindle his career as an activist for shooting overall, and would that really be so bad?

Well, I guess to some of us, eh?
 
Hoorah for Mr. Zumbo's letter

My personal thanks to Mr. Zumbo and likely accompaning million of other's for his words to Levin. Mr. Zumbo, you are forgiven..........
 
Some people just aren't ever satisfied
I'd say I'm somewhat satisfied.
Mr. Zumbo, you are forgiven..........
Forgiven? Sure, not forgotten.

and dangerously expand it to encompass far more perfectly legal firearms

Which firearms are less legal?

Actually, I go back on this observation, reading it again, I see he meant the opposite of fewer, not less. So it is a valid remark.

I guess I'm still a little bitter about how this controversy started and I am glad that he is making an effort.
 
"Mr. Zumbo, you are forgiven.........."

I'm not sure I would go quite that far, but I must say that the letter is a splendid, articulate statement. I hope that it also is read into the record.

Tim
 
Didn't work for me either. I googled theoutdoorwire.com and found the home page. I had to subscribe and won't get first e mail till tomorrow. So, I hope the letter is valid. Maybe I'll know tomorrow.
 
This is what Zumbo needs to be doing. He can make all the apearences and speaches he wants with the Nuge but it's preaching to the choir as only shooters are watching the show. To correct the damage he did in his blog he needs to do exactly what he outlined in his letter. Only then will the shooting community welcome him back.

All in all, I think the letter is a great start and some people need to stop being so nit-picky.

LK
 
Go Zumbo

My initial reaction to all of this was... if bloggers and message forums didn't sh!t themselves after the Zumbo blog, nothing, absolutely nothing would have happened. Antis certainly don't read hunter mags. It would have gone unnoticed. Hell, I didn't even know who Jim Zumbo was, at least not until I saw his name and statements in every other gun-related forum.

We should admit it. By exposing and ostracizing Zumbo in such a harsh, harsh manner, we gave the antis ample fodder. Our own ranks apparently hate each other, and we seem so quick to judge and execute one of our own.... almost like we're a bunch of trigger-happy fanatical yokels just itchin' to wage standoffs against the BATF. The antis are united. We should be, likewise.

I neither support nor condone what Zumbo said. I don't think any of us do. But the way we handled him was definitely unreasonable. I won't forget, but I certainly forgave a long long time ago.

The NRA seriously needs to reinstate his membership and status.
 
By exposing and ostracizing Zumbo we forced him to educate and enlighten himself and marginalized any future use of his misbegotten statements. Had nothing been said his words would certainly have turned up in the dreck of the left anyway, because they love it when we appear to be divided in our ranks, and there would have been no way to effectively rebut them. Now, those words are easily turned by their writer himself, with a unified force backing him up.

Meanwhile, I won't say Zumbo is forgiven, but I am certainly impressed by his actions since he stuck his virtual foot in his mouth. There's definitely more to him than I thought.
 
I'll not forgive or forget Zumbo. It's easy to recant on your death bed...

As a hunter, gun owner and public figure, I don't understand how he could make those remakes and not understand that there would be repercussions. He did not make a mistake, he fed the Brady gun control crowd with enough ammo (sorry about that) that they'll continue to use his quotes or mis-quotes for years to come.
 
So, what some of you are saying, is that nothing Zumbo does will achieve any measure of atonement in your eyes?

I have read a lot of comments about this, elsewhere. It seems there are two mind-sets: Those who will never forgive, and those who will (for various reasons).

There are those of us who will cheer Zumbo on, if for no other reason than to help close the divide between the various gun owning factions. We are our own worst enemy.

It is way past the time for us gun owners to stand together, as a united front. Just as Zumbo became the icon that showed the rift, he can be the catalyst that closes the divide.

The one thing that has always worked for the gun-control crowd, is that despite their individual goals, they stand, as a united front, against us. Meanwhile we bicker amongst ourselves. Squabbling over what firearms are legitimate. Over which sport is legitimate. Over the proper use of firearms. Even over the meaning of the Second Amendment.

They win, because we are splintered.

As I said, when this whole fiasco broke, Jim Zumbo can be a force for us. It matters not what his current reasons for this about-face may be. The fact is that he has started to do what he said he would do.

In the letter above, Mr. Zumbo has taken the fight, our fight, directly to the Congress. While people like us may be ignored, celebrities are not. Zumbo is still a celebrity whose voice will be heard.

This story is gaining some momentem. The Chattanoogan has picked up on it and reproduced the letter in its entirety. Then there is this piece from the March 20 edition of Gun Week, via Buckeye Firearms Association. It's being picked up by blogs all over the country. Including many of the hunting blogs.

Having said that, this is more a political issue. Off to L&P we go....
 
I will amend that to add that I will bring my effort to Capitol Hill if necessary, even if I have to knock on every door and camp in every office of the United States Senate. In promoting this ban, the Hon. Carl Levin does not speak for me, or anybody I know.

Above is his last statement & I like it.
Leven does not speak for a lot of folks that Mr Zumbo does not know either.
 
Amen...

Antipitas.

The "Zumbo Affair" may yet turn out to the positive for us. Mr. Zumbo, probably without really thinking about it, used what has become coded language for gun banners.

"You don't need an AR-15 to hunt deer." or whatever variant he actually used. I don't have the quote handy. This has been anti-gunner codespeak for "therefore you shouldn't be allowed to own one." I doubt that's what Mr. Zumbo meant to say, but maybe it was, and his thinking has changed.

The original controversy came up on DKos, where I'm quite active. I used it as an opportunity to lay down some facts. You might be surprised to learn that the average internet leftie didn't know that "assault weapons" are significantly less powerful than common hunting rifles. But, based on the reactions to my information, most of which were of the "gee, I didn't know that..." variety, I'm assuming that this was the case. I passed around some factual information, and I think I changed a few minds, and got some others to think a bit harder about this subject.

There is a significant fear reaction to such firearms on the part of the non-shooter. It's not rational, but it exists, and it drives both policy and the acceptance of policy. Knowledge trumps fear, in most cases. Don't scorn these people, or assume that they hate your freedom. Educate them. If you can, take them shooting. A back-to-back (shoulder-to-shoulder?) comparison of an AR-15 and a .30-06 Remchester should drive the point (or butt) home pretty clearly.

And, of course, the strict construction of what Mr. Zumbo said is, in fact, true. An AR-15 is a poor choice for a deer rifle, because the .223 is a poor choice for a big-game caliber... except in the hands of an expert rifleman and hunter. And even such a man will likely lose more game than he would with a bigger gun.

(Ducks roaring flames)

Take the same firearm in .308, and it's another matter, of course.

For what little it's worth, I personally have no desire to own either an AR or and AK. I think the two of them are in close competition for "ugliest gun ever made." But I don't think that is sufficient reason for telling someone else that they can't own one... although I question their aesthetic sense. ;)

(Really ducking flames now...)

In any case, Mr. Zumbo has clearly learned from his error, and is attempting to atone for it. Whether that was motivated by the blowback from his original comments, I don't know, and neither does anyone else here. But does that really matter?

He's shown himself well with this letter.

--Shannon
 
Last edited:
Everyone can screw up once, even monumentally. With his latest efforts, Jim Zumbo is doing more for our 2A rights than any number of loudmouth Internet keyboard heroes, and for that alone, I'd buy him a beer.

It takes a big man to publically fess up to screwing the pooch, and an equally big man (or woman) to extend a hand in forgiveness and let bygones be bygones. I'm not quite ready yet to take walks in the spring rain with Zumbo, but he has taken very decisive steps towards redemption.
 
I hope Mr Zimbo comes out OK in the end as I think he make a major mistake and regrets it sincerely. In the future he will hopefully be a valuable gun rights advocate.
Any one can and does make mistakes. His was worse than some because of his position but I betcha all of us at one time or another has written something here in this forum we regret. I know I have.
 
Back
Top