Even More Zumbo!

Are you sick of this yet?

I know, I know, it's just one guy. It's just one isolated story. For some reason, I'm continually drawn to it. Maybe it's because I originally became interested in firearm issues because I saw it as a perfect microcosm of the rest of the political climate in our United States. Now this Zumbo story is a perfect microcosm of the politics of firearms.

Anyway, I ran across another excellent example of anti-gun drivel that accuses the pro-gun side of obscuring facts and playing on emotion when only the opposite is true:

NRA is a Force for Destruction

By DAN K. THOMASSON
Thursday, March 01, 2007

... the victories by the forces of destruction over those of common sense and responsibility are too numerous to count. This is a land where the right to traffic in firearms, no matter how dangerous to law and order, is protected by constitutional language designed for a militia carrying muskets and enforced by a self-appointed virulent lobby called the National Rifle Association. It purports to represent the nation's sports shooters, but in reality is the arm of the manufacturers and importers who profit handsomely from the carnage.

That's rough language, but to emphasize just how unforgiving are those who subscribe to the NRA's opposition to any restraints no matter the threat to the public welfare, one should consider the case of Jim Zumbo.

Until a few days ago, Zumbo was a revered figure in hunting circles, probably the best-known sports rifleman in America. Hunting and non-hunting enthusiasts alike avidly watched his television shows and read his columns about big-game treks and the wonders of the outdoors. Then Zumbo foolishly ventured the opinion that semiautomatic assault weapons really had no place in hunting. Moreover, he committed the sin (unforgivable in the eyes of the NRA and its members) of linking these weapons with the "T" word...

His career was as shattered as though hit by a hail of bullets fired from an AK47. Within a relatively few hours, his column was canceled and his cable TV show eliminated. All this occurred despite a profuse apology from an obviously desperate Zumbo.

Would it be out of place here to suggest that this swift and unrelenting attack by the NRA on one of its own proves conclusively that Zumbo was right in suggesting that terrorism is not unknown to the gun lobby? After all, the NRA has been terrorizing its political opponents for decades, winning battle after battle by playing on the paranoia of its followers. As a result, the lobby has managed to foster a national armory of privately owned firearms that exceeds some 300 million, enough for every man, woman and child in America...

Awesome. What a fact-filled piece of journalism. The NRA didn't get Zumbo fired as a sponsor for Remington. The NRA didn't force him to quit his TV show. Those things occurred within a few hours of when he published his now infamous article. Thanks to the power of the internet, thousands and thousands of individuals heard about Mr. Zumbo and contacted those companies on their own. Does this journalist really think that the evil, billionaire, NRA mafia hitmen personally called 6000 people in the first few minutes after Zumbo zumboed himself?

Next let's re-visit this gem:

"is protected by constitutional language designed for a militia carrying muskets"

I get really sick of hearing this "argument". First, let's remember why the 2nd Amendment was written. Saying that government can infringe upon the Second Amendment because the authors of the Bill of Rights were talking about muskets is like saying that the "right to free speech" protected by the First Amendment only extends to the use of quills and not word processors.