We Still Need Hunters

Michael Bane asks where we go from here as the new masters of the shooting community. My answer is we need to reach out to the hunters, because, while we’re big enough to get the industry to pay attention to us, we still need hunters because of their numbers, the amount of money spent that crosses over to ours, and the generally positive image the public has of hunting.

The black rifle shooting community has made itself known as a force, and we should be happy about that, but it’s time to reach out to hunters and outdoor writers and make sure they understand how the makeup of the shooting sports is changing, and how that affects our respective issues.

Jim Zumbo grew up in a world where more people hunted, and the idea of someone coming after his deer rifle was absurd. That world is gone. One only has to look at what’s happened in states like New Jersey, Massachusetts and California to see that if you like things that go boom, whether you like shooting deer or paper with them, the anti-gun people are coming after you. That might seem far away in Wyoming, but look at this:

Caroline alleges that a gun ban in Washington D.C. has unarmed its law abiding citizens but allowed its criminal to remain armed. The result is a high rate of criminal activity in DC. The answer to that is that no ban will be effective unless it is national in scope and is diligently enforced.

And in virtually all of these hostile jurisdictions, they came after black rifles first, then went after other things. Oh sure, you might get to keep your deer rifle for a while, but they’ll keep making it harder, more burdensome, and more expensive, until most people give up the hobby, leaving us with so little political power, that it won’t be hard to convince legislators to come for that eventually too, or outlaw hunting. Don’t think we’re just paranoid extremists with delusional fantasies, and that it can’t happen, because it’s happened elsewhere.

So what do we do? This is where I’ll suggest some heresy; that we start with Jim Zumbo. He has tremendous reach within the hunting community, and if he can be brought back from the dark side, he could be really useful for outreach to hunters. So I’ll put a challenge out there to Jim: help us spread the message to hunters on the importance of working to preserve our second amendment rights, and I mean everyone’s, whether you shoot an AR-15 at paper or a Winchester at a deer, an AR-15 at varmint, or keep a Glock in the nightstand for self-defense; tell hunters of the importance of this struggle, because both our futures depend on helping each other out with our respective issues. We don’t have the numbers to stand alone. Do that, Jim, and I’ll happily forgive and forget, and I think a lot of other people will too.

5 thoughts on “We Still Need Hunters”

  1. Good-grief, it doesn’t work here it, doesn’t work there, it doesn’t work anywhere – so the response is make it National? They are truly insane.

    As for Zumbalistico, I’ve read numerous times about back when guys first started putting old milsurp bolt actions into hunting stocks – first post WWI with M1917’s and old 1898 Krags and such, and later post-WWII with 03A3’s – those guys were looked-down upon by “real hunters” and the Hunting Establishment, and those bolt-actions were considered unsuitable, unwieldy, and innaccurate… Sheesh, what I hate about boomers (still think Z is one) is their generational narcissism and refusal to acknowledge History and learn from it.

  2. I agree we still need hunters. So do the game species for health of the populace, for that matter.

    We don’t need sell-outs or stupid hunters. Zumbo is one or the other, there is no third option, such as “I didn’t understand.” After 42 years if he didn’t understand he either was willing to throw us under the bus to protect his narrow interests or he is stupid. Either way I don’t want him on my side. I only want those I can trust. Zumbo will never be able to meet that spec.

  3. I understood your position, I just don’t believe a man that has spent 42 years as a professional in the field can be that ignorant of the subject. If he can, it can only be because truth and facts do not interest him. I could never trust him.

    Perhaps I am harsher than most on this, but I have a lot of experience that tells me mine is the way to bet. Don’t get me wrong, if he truly is just ignorant and truly recovers from it, I will not begrudge anything he does or achieves for himself subsequent to such awakening. However, I still will nover place anything I value at his disposal including my trust. I just can’t find my way to faith in a man over the period of days , weeks or months when almost half a century left him far less than he should have been. Miracles happen, I just don’t believe he will be one.

Comments are closed.