Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Whatever Happened to Jim Zumbo

As far as needing a guide, sorta like JOC.
I liked his articles on elk hunting.
I understand why his dislike for AR-15's and hunting too. My cousins started out with semi-auto 22's. We had single shots. We would end up with the rabbits and squirrels. They'd end up with empty boxes of shells.
As far as fat men go... Hey

My sentiments exactly!!!!!!!!

I knew Jim well for many years before the dumb-ass blog post, and hunted and fished with him a number of times. But have only run into him now and then since then, basically just long enough to say hi. Here's what I know:

He killed plenty of big game animals without a guide before he became "famous" as Outdoor Life's hunting columnist, and still kills some by himself, even though he's older and heavier. He owns hunting horses, which helps, and can hunt elk and mule deer by heading out directly from his house in Wyoming.

The dumb-ass blog post was written at a hotel in a tiny town in Wyoming. He was there with several people, while hunting coyotes. He wrote the stupid blog one evening and showed it to the people he was with, who all said he shouldn't post it. But like many hunters who don't understand the 2nd Amendment, Jim went ahead, appafrently thinking it would just introduce a little interest in his blog. (I stayed in the same hotel a couple years later, while on an "industry" prairie dog shoot, and by coincidence was assigned the notorious "Zumbo Room," where he wrote and e-mailed the blog. After we checked in, my friends searched me for any sort of writing implements. I didnt bring a computer, but they confiscating my pen and notebook, even after I showed them my NRA Life Membership card, because they were afraid the room was haunted.)

He's working in the business again, though not as much as he used to, both because of the dumb-ass blog, and because he is indeed in his late 70's.

Jim's a fun guy to hang with, and most of the people here would enjoy him. But I also understand the anger. It was a really stupid thing to post, especially after he'd been warned by other people not to do it.

Good job John B. Most (but not all) of the folks that I have known over the years had some redeeming qualities. A very few, were only good at setting bad examples.

best wishes,
Jack

Thanks.

I'm actually constantly amazed by the number of hunters who think the 2nd amendment is about hunting guns--just like a lot of nonhunters.

Of course, a bunch of hunters don't belong to the NRA, or any other gun-rights organization. Over 15 million American buy hunting licenses every year, yet the only times NRA membership approaches where it is now, around 4 million, is during periods when some politicians are screaming for "common sense" gun control.

Only 4 million members is still a travesty. It should be at least 3 times that

+1 and I also add Dick Metcalf who wrote his own epitaph.

Thanks M D

I suppose that every one of US have had at least one gaff.

It seems there are those here who NEVER put their foot in their mouth. good grief!!!!!


Jerry

Agreed but

if they'd put the money into the cause

they could DROP the mags.


Jerry

Those are the ones who weren't paying attention in history class on the founding of this nation. And perhaps some of them are of a younger generation when the history classes were "revised".

John,

There you go bringing some knowledge and "reality" (for lack of a better term?) to the campfire.

I'm sure Mr Zumbo would appreciate it, I do.

Regarding the NRA-hunter thing, I'd have to expand that past the hunter population to even just the shooting public, especially those who don't have a membership at a range/club (many of which require it). And especially to the general public (many who don't have a clue about that amendment or any other one!).

I must be weird. I'm one of the few (probably) who joined the NRA before owning a firearm. Hard to explain that to my liberal friends of the day. Well, not so hard to explain, hard to get them to understand maybe.

Again, thanks for part of the "real story".

Geno

Do they even teach "history" anymore? As an optional class even?

Geno

I'm not sure either, but my sister-in-law, who's married to Eileen's younger brother, is in her 50's and a college graduate. The last time they came to visit here in Montana (when they went fishing with us) she went into a semi-rant about "some hunting guns" should be legal, but nothing else. When I firmly (but politely) explained to her the meaning and historical intent of the 2nd amendment she became really offended. They haven't been back since.

JB it is sad that people make the gun argument about hunting arms ...I grew up in the South East part of Pa. think Washington's Crossing of Delware River area. School trips included A LOT of Revolutionary War Sites. I am 45 years old. My nieces only learned about the same things in the same schools because of my brother and I taking them to those same sites. They are in their 20's now.
Even the hunting crowd takes the arms debate to be about hunting guns.
The Second amendment is about protecting freedoms from tyranny,foreign or domestic.
We as a country have no problem gutting other countries we see as bad( IRAQ, LIBYA, GERMANY, JAPAN...ETC) but are too blind to see that it could and is happening here.

I remember Jim Zumbo's articles as interesting and somewhat informative, but when a man pees on his fans shoes he should expect a back lash. His one blog was career ender and he should have put his personal feelings aside on that one!

The biggest problem I have with the NRA is they put the money into mailers and phone calls to members asking for more money.

It is unfortunate in the fund-raising world that by spending $4 on mailers and phone calls, the result is $5 incoming, for a net gain of $1, that wouldn't be there at all without the wasteful expenditure of the $4.

Also, I am told that one can opt out of those fund-raising mailers, though I haven't done it myself.

NRA is the only organization between what we have and what Hitlery would have for us.
When I lived down south there were those that thought NRA was equivalent to the KKK. The NRA isn't made up of perfect people any more than any section of society, including writers.
Many of you are upset because he felt AR-15's were not sporting rifles. I know people that feel the same about center fire rifles and indeed percussion black powder. The flint lock to them is the only true hunting rifle.
We all have history which has formed our opinions. The thing about Zumbo was that he was too popular and well respected. What he said was not that bad if he wasn't in the spotlight.
From my look at hunting over a few decades, I hated seeing game shot at long distances and lost and too many game blown apart with high velocity bullets designed for 1,000 feet per second slower.
My generation is passing, bullets are 500% better, rifles are better and game is changing. To me shooting pigs is something brand new.
Shooting at pigs with an AR-10 in no way offends me and I'd bet the same would be for Zumbo.
Spraying a mountainside with a semi-auto rifle with a 30 round magazine shooting at deer or elk or other big game animal offends me. Having a AR-10 and AR-15 is a right and I'm putting money down to defend that right. Not for me, but for my grandchildren.

This is Zumbo's statement. Having no use for a gun can fit many personal preferences, but calling them "terrorist" guns is inexcusable.

"call them “assault” rifles, which may upset some people. Excuse me, maybe I’m a traditionalist, but I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity. I’ll go so far as to call them “terrorist” rifles. They tell me that some companies are producing assault rifles that are “tackdrivers.”

Great posts by Mule Deer about Jim Zumbo and also about the Second Amendment.

I met Jim Zumbo only once and he seemed to me like a nice guy who knew a good deal about hunting. But the post about AR-15's was really stupid. His viewpoint was not uncommon among some hunters at the time, although with the rising popularity of AR-15's and other semi-automatics I think that pattern has changed a bit.

These hunters didn't understand the origins and meaning of the Second Amendment and they had little exposure to firearms outside the context of hunting. My late uncle, a rancher who loved to hunt, at one point quit the NRA because he thought they shouldn't support the right of people to own "assault rifles". As I recall, Craig Boddington has said that he came late to the understanding that we need to protect our right to own semi-automatic firearms, which is interesting considering his military background.

There's no doubt that the Second Amendment is about protecting citizens from tyranny and has very little to do with hunting. Like all organizations, the NRA is imperfect, but it's the best defense we have against having our rights abridged and our guns confiscated. That's why I'm a Life Member. The Second Amendment Foundation is equally important because of all the legal work they do. Without them we'd have no Heller or McDonald SCOTUS decisions.

Shrapnel - Yeah, he said that 8 years ago when this tactical obsession was less common than it is now. I still kind of roll my eyes when I go to the range and 9 out of 10 shooters have black rifles. Times change but older people change with them only reluctantly.