Comments on: Guns & Ammo Editor Fired for Undercutting Second Amendment

By: Steve J.

Steve J. — Sun, 10 Nov 2013 21:30:17 +0000

Metcalf has every right to his ignorant opinion and we have the right to not spend our money supporting him and his ignorance.

That it even showed up in G&A is shocking to all of us who understand what is going on now.

Personally, I’m not going to ever buy another G&A product until they prove that Metcalf was an anomaly.

Those who would be our masters are engaged in destroying ALL of the US constitution and we have no room for any ignorance in our so called “institutions”.

Metcalf and EVERYONE who OKed it should be slapped down hard.

They can always get a job bashing gun “nuts” on one of the alphabet stations.

Which is imo, where they belong.

By: Gary Eliseo

Gary Eliseo — Fri, 08 Nov 2013 21:26:39 +0000

Those of us who appreciate that our inalienable rights dont come from man understand that whenever men (or governments) get involved in tweaking those rights (despite their good intentions) our rights get abridged, when it comes to our natural rights there is no compromise that will ever improve them, to us the real extremists are those who would try to separate us from our birthright, fierarms ownership is arlready heavily restricted, it’s an insult to honorable men that the only thing keeping them from becoming criminals is legislation. As for Mr Metcalf, he freely exercised his first amendment right as did the readership of G&A, his termination was the decision of his boss, employment is not a Contitutional right

By: Earl

Earl — Fri, 08 Nov 2013 20:23:01 +0000

It was an opinion piece, that while contrary to mainstream, was not unreasonable in its construction.

The reaction to it shows a distinct lack of maturity and that is concerning.

No doubt the customers can respond anyway they see fit, and no wonder the other side of the gun issue debate believes we all need regulation.

How can you expect them not to believe that they have to control the immature and unreasonable, particularly if they are armed?

If we cannot dialog about the issues amongst ourselves, we are certainty not equipped to be creditable in the wider context.

By: acpchuck

acpchuck — Fri, 08 Nov 2013 14:02:45 +0000

Problem is when a gun writer makes statements like Metcalf’s then the anti gun forces take it and run with it saying even gun owners support more restrictions.

Same thing happened with Jim Zumbo and the article he wrote a few years saying that semi auto rifles were the tools of terrorist.

More recently there was an article in Recoil magazine where the author state that a certain type of gun should only be possessed by law enforcement.

In both of these situations there was an immediate, very negative response that resulted in the authors being fired and a significant impact to the publications they wrote for.

Metcalf can have any opinion he wants as is his right. And customers of a publication have the same right to voice their opinions. The fact that customers”vote” with their pocket book means those publications have to make a business decision on how to respond. Odds are if Guns and Ammo hadn’t fired him, they would have lost a lot of advertisement revenue.

Metcalf has contributed a lot in the past to the shooting industry but that certainly doesn’t excuse what he wrote and he has to live with those consequences.

By: Julio

Julio — Fri, 08 Nov 2013 09:03:56 +0000

A feeding frenzy is a nasty thing. It should be unnecessary and unacceptable to howl down and hound out anyone who utters a view you disagree with, regardless of whether they reside within your own ranks or not. Worse, it reeks of extremism and desperation. We pride ourselves on being responsible citizens -self-regulating if you will- and rightly defend our ownership of firearms on the basis of our self-discipline and the ability it gives us to defend ourselves and others. The lynch-mob reaction that has led to Metcalf’s sacking and Bequette’s abject self-abasement belies that identity and as such does our cause no good at all. I am ashamed at it.

By: jon lennon

jon lennon — Fri, 08 Nov 2013 04:49:56 +0000

I never figured that Dick Metcalf would falter like this.He is a shooter,hunter ,fisherman,backpacker,pistol shooter,what in the world was he thinking.His mind seemed to me like taking a firearms course was his intent after maligning our constitution like that. If George Washington was alive he would accuse him of being a traitor to the united states period.It is a sad day to see his career end with such shame and ignorance.I think he was mesmorized by the sandy hook syndrome.I think it was set in motion to tear our whole constitution apart for one madman who has affected a huge chunk of our population in a negative way towards gun owners in general.

By: Hack

Hack — Fri, 08 Nov 2013 03:50:27 +0000

Earl, I think your missing the point, in the context of the constitution regulated means trained, not regulated by laws. The second part, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, is pretty darn clear.

If you don’t want to get hot and bothered over the infringement of our freedoms, fine, but they are being eroded every day and it is about time people noticed instead of sitting by.

Metcalf should have known his readership, Guns & Ammo was correct in canning him. If his opinion of the 2nd Amendment is the same as that of liberals, he should go work for the NY Times. He can express his first amendment right there all he wants.

By: Earl

Earl — Fri, 08 Nov 2013 02:53:58 +0000

Take a breath and read the article.

To be regulated as a civilian would imply being bound by laws and regulations…

To be regulated as a member of a militia would imply the same.

Is the right to bear arms as a civilian not subject to any discipline?

Consider the issue of freedom that the rabid and emotional bring to this debate… does that not extend to those having a considered and logical contribution to the understanding of this issue….?

Or does freedom only extend to those who agree with you?

If we are going to be talking about being short-sighted, don’t only stand half way back when you consider the issues…

By: Gary Eliseo

Gary Eliseo — Fri, 08 Nov 2013 01:03:47 +0000

Ben,
when they classify your hunting rig a “sniper rifle” and come after it you’ll be belly aching too.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 07 Nov 2013 23:04:31 +0000

I remember when Tom Gresham made the statement about people not needing to own AR type rifles. They wanted to lynch him too, and rightly so. But I still hate to see someones job and career take a beating over their opinion, even though it is so short sighted.