Zumbo, open letter to US Senate. - Page 2 - XDTalk Forums - Your HS2000/SA-XD Information Source!

XDinNC · 03-30-2007, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tungsten

WTF? Am I the only one here who noticed that? So-called assault weapons and "far more perfectly legal firearms"???

This clown is still painting shades of gray! There's nothing any more sinister or less legal about my AR15 than there is with his scoped .300 Win-Mag "sniper rifle".

I noticed that too. I guess he is lumping my SKS in with the less legal category. Maybe the Nuge needs to pop him upside the head until he gets it right.

jednp · 03-30-2007, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tungsten

WTF? Am I the only one here who noticed that? So-called assault weapons and "far more perfectly legal firearms"???

This clown is still painting shades of gray! There's nothing any more sinister or less legal about my AR15 than there is with his scoped .300 Win-Mag "sniper rifle".

I don't know if he meant it that way or not.. I wonder if he meant that to mean that it would also cover many more legal firearms?

wolfsburg_de · 03-30-2007, 08:47 AM

Yeah, I read that as a quantitative use of "more" rather than a qualitative one.

**newKid** · 03-30-2007, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tungsten

WTF? Am I the only one here who noticed that? So-called assault weapons and "far more perfectly legal firearms"???

This clown is still painting shades of gray! There's nothing any more sinister or less legal about my AR15 than there is with his scoped .300 Win-Mag "sniper rifle".

i took that to mean that many rifles that up to this point have been off the anti-gunners radar (guns that dont look scary) are now also being targeted. Hence meaning that this ban is not really aimed at "evil assault military weapons" but at firearms in general.

i think (and hope) what happened with Zumbo will start to close the gap between those who hunter with remington 700s and those who shoot silhouettes with ARs.

i really think he is doing what he should to make up for the damage he caused.

jednp · 03-30-2007, 08:53 AM

Considering the $hit storm he took from us gun owners over his comments... I hardly doubt that his words to the senate would be meant to say that the AR is less legal than some other firearms. Consider this for a second... he is writing the Senate to basically tell them that he's prepared to be a thorn in their side, standing up against someone reading his words in congress... all over only 2 guns really.. the ak47 and the ar15.. probably the ar15 more so. He's doing so, to defend these guns now.

I highly doubt he would be writing them to say this ban would cover guns that are FAR MORE LEGAL than the ar15 is. So I'm going to take it to simply mean that it means the ban reaches much further than the AR15 or AK47, it goes after other perfectly legal guns as well.

I know that's not how he worded it.. But given the context of what this letter is about, I have a hard time believing he'd be writing the Senate to imply that the very gun that got his a$$ canned, is less legal than his hunting rifle. Also consider the fact that in that letter, he pointed out clearly that he did NOT advocate a ban on these rifles... he just wanted them banned for hunting.. and has since been educated on the matter too.

jednp · 03-30-2007, 08:55 AM

you know what though... what he said... is sort of true... There are many guns that would be affected that are far more perfectly legal than the AR15 is... Obviously there are restrictions on this weapon in certain states, and it is a weapon that is attacked all the time, it's hated. In our politicians eyes.. this gun is "illegal". They always say they only want to get the "illegal' guns off the streets. Well, this ban would take more guns off the streets than just the ones they view as "illegal".

so that could be partially why he worded it like he did.

XDinNC · 03-30-2007, 08:57 AM

Good point, like hi-cap mags being illegal in some states.

**newKid** · 03-30-2007, 08:58 AM

i guess you could say the ban would encompass as of yet "uncontested" firearms.

Noah Mercy · 03-30-2007, 09:40 AM

I've read Zumbass' past "apologies" and suspect he is just trying to get back in the good graces of the firearms community so he can hop back on his gravy train. He still has the mentality that the only legitimate reason to own guns is for "sporting purposes"; a phrase he used in each and every reference to ownership in his "I'm so sorry" letters. He has thus far shown himself to be an elitist prig who turns a blind eye to the fact that his "sniper rifles" are the very next target for the antis.

If he has indeed been educated to the true, less-pleasant implications of- and ultimate reasons for- the Second, great! But until he has completely undone the incredible damage he has wrought, I wouldn't whiz on him if he was on fire.

Keep him ostracised until he has done his time and proven he is a reformed gun owner (and not a demigod pundit who can pass judgement on people based on his personal opinions) who realizes what is at stake. When the antis see how hard we come down on one of our own, they may begin to see the "sleeping giant" that ought not to be poked much more.

My $.02

**Fennellco** · 03-31-2007, 06:05 AM

I'm just suprised that theres no mention of anything on his website http://www.jimzumbo.com/index.html I mean if he was pursuing this Damage Control matter the way he said he was, I would think there would be something referencing this matter- Just my thought on it-

03-30-2007, 08:47 AM	#13
wolfsburg_de XDTalk 500 Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: SE PA Posts: 645	Yeah, I read that as a quantitative use of "more" rather than a qualitative one. __________________ -Andy 1 X .177" , 2 X 0.224" , 2 X 0.308" , 2 X 0.355", 1 X 0.729" The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned - PA Constitution

03-30-2007, 09:40 AM	#19
Noah Mercy XDTalk 100 Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Sheridan, Wyoming Posts: 276	I've read Zumbass' past "apologies" and suspect he is just trying to get back in the good graces of the firearms community so he can hop back on his gravy train. He still has the mentality that the only legitimate reason to own guns is for "sporting purposes"; a phrase he used in each and every reference to ownership in his "I'm so sorry" letters. He has thus far shown himself to be an elitist prig who turns a blind eye to the fact that his "sniper rifles" are the very next target for the antis. If he has indeed been educated to the true, less-pleasant implications of- and ultimate reasons for- the Second, great! But until he has completely undone the incredible damage he has wrought, I wouldn't whiz on him if he was on fire. Keep him ostracised until he has done his time and proven he is a reformed gun owner (and not a demigod pundit who can pass judgement on people based on his personal opinions) who realizes what is at stake. When the antis see how hard we come down on one of our own, they may begin to see the "sleeping giant" that ought not to be poked much more. My $.02 __________________ I may be fat, hairy, and ugly...BUT AT LEAST I SMELL BAD!

03-31-2007, 06:05 AM	#20
Fennellco XDTalk 100 Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 464	I'm just suprised that theres no mention of anything on his website http://www.jimzumbo.com/index.html I mean if he was pursuing this Damage Control matter the way he said he was, I would think there would be something referencing this matter- Just my thought on it- __________________ CFR's Publication for the North American Union http://www.cfr.org/publication/8104/ Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. - Henry Lewis Mencken, 1880 - 1956

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-30-2007, 08:53 AM	#15
jednp XDTalk 4K Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Omaha, NE Posts: 4,691	Considering the $hit storm he took from us gun owners over his comments... I hardly doubt that his words to the senate would be meant to say that the AR is less legal than some other firearms. Consider this for a second... he is writing the Senate to basically tell them that he's prepared to be a thorn in their side, standing up against someone reading his words in congress... all over only 2 guns really.. the ak47 and the ar15.. probably the ar15 more so. He's doing so, to defend these guns now. I highly doubt he would be writing them to say this ban would cover guns that are FAR MORE LEGAL than the ar15 is. So I'm going to take it to simply mean that it means the ban reaches much further than the AR15 or AK47, it goes after other perfectly legal guns as well. I know that's not how he worded it.. But given the context of what this letter is about, I have a hard time believing he'd be writing the Senate to imply that the very gun that got his a$$ canned, is less legal than his hunting rifle. Also consider the fact that in that letter, he pointed out clearly that he did NOT advocate a ban on these rifles... he just wanted them banned for hunting.. and has since been educated on the matter too.

03-30-2007, 08:55 AM	#16
jednp XDTalk 4K Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Omaha, NE Posts: 4,691	you know what though... what he said... is sort of true... There are many guns that would be affected that are far more perfectly legal than the AR15 is... Obviously there are restrictions on this weapon in certain states, and it is a weapon that is attacked all the time, it's hated. In our politicians eyes.. this gun is "illegal". They always say they only want to get the "illegal' guns off the streets. Well, this ban would take more guns off the streets than just the ones they view as "illegal". so that could be partially why he worded it like he did.

03-30-2007, 08:57 AM	#17
XDinNC XDTalk 1K Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,120	Good point, like hi-cap mags being illegal in some states.