Guns & Ammo Editor fires Dick Metcalf, resigns, after anti-gun rights column

posted at 8:31 am on November 9, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

When the December issue of Guns & Ammo (which I still haven’t got my hands on) came out, readers were apparently met with something of a surprise. Long time gun rights activist Dick Metcalf had penned an editorial for their Backstop column which launched into a discussion of the need for more gun regulation. We don’t have the full column at hand, but the folks at The Free Patriot republished a few of the salient portions.

“I bring this up,” he wrote, “because way too many gun owners still believe that any regulation of the right to keep and bear arms is an infringement. The fact is that all Constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be.” Facepalm moment anyone? Now that Metcalf is no longer in a fit mental capacity to be left alone, someone should send Adult Protective services over for a welfare check.

“Many argue that any regulation at all is, by definition, an infringement. If that were true, then the authors of the Second Amendment themselves, should not have specified “well-regulated.”

I won’t include more, as it pretty much goes downhill from there, parroting some of the time worn arguments constantly put forward by those opposed to gun ownership who seek to twist the Constitution to their own ends. The response from the readers was instant and pretty much unanimous. In response, G&A editor Jim Bequette took immediate action.

As editor of “Guns & Ammo,” I owe each and every reader a personal apology. No excuses, no backtracking.

Dick Metcalf’s “Backstop” column in the December issue has aroused unprecedented controversy. Readers are hopping mad about it, and some are questioning “Guns & Ammo”’s commitment to the Second Amendment. I understand why…

Dick Metcalf has had a long and distinguished career as a gunwriter, but his association with “Guns & Ammo” has officially ended.

Jim’s actions were not limited to Metcalf, though. He seemed to adopt a policy of saying that a housecleaning was in order and it needed to start at the top.

I made a mistake by publishing the column. I thought it would generate a healthy exchange of ideas on gun rights. I miscalculated, pure and simple. I was wrong, and I ask your forgiveness.

Plans were already in place for a new editor to take the reins of “Guns & Ammo” on January 1. However, these recent events have convinced me that I should advance that schedule immediately.

Your new “Guns & Ammo” editor will be Eric R. Poole, who has so effectively been running our special interest publications, such as “Book of the AR-15” and “TRIGGER.” You will be hearing much more about this talented editor soon.

Metcalf took to the pages of another forum to attempt to “explain” what he was trying to do, but that wasn’t going over very well either.

How do I feel about that? Disappointed. If a respected editor can be forced to resign and a controversial writer’s voice be shut down by a one-sided social-media and internet outcry, virtually overnight, simply because they dared to open a discussion or ask questions about a politically sensitive issue . . . then I fear for the future of our industry, and for our Cause. Do not 2nd Amendment adherents also believe in Freedom of Speech? Do Americans now fear open and honest discussion of different opinions about important Constitutional issues? Do voices from cyberspace now control how and why business decisions are made?

Metcalf’s response to his termination is, I’m sad to say, every bit as misguided as the original column. There isn’t a single person I’ve seen who is questioning his First Amendment rights. But he seems to be forgetting that the First Amendment is in place to protect him from retribution by his government to his exercise of free speech. There’s nothing in the Bill of Rights which assures him a fat paycheck or a position at a respected publication if he decides to go entirely off the ranch and start questioning the fundamental principles of the readership it serves.

This entire exercise was a sad affair to watch from start to finish. Let’s hope that with the swift and decisive action by the directors at Guns & Ammo, this little chapter of the publication’s history can be brought to a close and they can move on.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

One week later, Jazz is all over the “news”.

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 8:33 AM

Where’s my checkbook?
 
- Mayor Bloomberg

rogerb on November 9, 2013 at 8:37 AM

Old news. Where was this last week?

Ace ODale on November 9, 2013 at 8:38 AM

I’m just anxiously awaiting another Chris Christie story /

mobydutch on November 9, 2013 at 8:46 AM

…so is he a Democrat?

KOOLAID2 on November 9, 2013 at 8:47 AM

I just got a new Mossberg 500 12 gauge combo shotgun for this year’s hunting season in Michigan. Any suggestions on the best type of rounds to use for deer?
Also, they are permitting wolf hunts this year. Same type of rounds or should I use the 30-06?

mechkiller_k on November 9, 2013 at 8:47 AM

Do not 2nd Amendment adherents also believe in Freedom of Speech?

2nd amendment adherents also believe in the… 2nd amendment.

A column like that might be appropriate to publish in U.S. News & World Report, but Guns & Ammo? Why not just have the Cato Institute talk about the need to dismantle liberty or Focus on the Family talk about the necessity of abortion? Why not have Planned Parenthood talk about how abortion is murder, or Greenpeace discuss how the environment is really a secondary issue?

Certain organizations and publications exist to serve a particular cohort, and to advance those causes dear to them — not to oppose them and spit in the faces of their followers.

Stoic Patriot on November 9, 2013 at 8:54 AM

The news that G&A fired Metcalf came out Wednesday not last week. So cool your jets, “late news” whiners.

And yeah, as is typical, Metcalfs response is to play the victim and further attempt to muddy the issue.

You can talk about how our rights are currently regulated and whether that’s a good thing or not. But to justify those regulations and endorse further regulation using the same tired ‘logic of the anti-gun Left belies someone who is either monumentally stupid on the issue, has nothing more than a superficial understanding of the .constitution and its true intent or has been seduced by the dark side as it were.

If he gets picked up by some Lefty publication or need outlet somewhere, we’ll know the true heart of the man.

catmman on November 9, 2013 at 8:56 AM

One week later, Jazz is all over the “news”.

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 8:33 AM

Hey, Liar. How are you?

smoothsailing on November 9, 2013 at 8:56 AM

“Many argue that any regulation at all is, by definition, an infringement. If that were true, then the authors of the Second Amendment themselves, should not have specified “well-regulated.”

I’ve never read Metcalf’s columns, but if the above is a guide to his mental capacity, he’s a simpleton.

Dusty on November 9, 2013 at 8:58 AM

A shame all the way around. I really liked Metcalf and the late J. Guthrie on Modern Rifle Adventures – it was a show that detailed the many uses of the AR-15 platform BTW. Lost among almost all of the arguments in favor of additional gun regulations is the notion that those advocating for said regs intend to regulate gun ownership out of existence – they say so explicitly. Hence, the firewall reaction from those 2A advocates that know full well what the left intends to do and they react accordingly.

I find it ironic that he starred on a show that detailed a firearm platform that now, due to the passage of laws from said “progressives”, make the possession of the very thing that he was paid to advertise, illegal.

volnation on November 9, 2013 at 8:58 AM

Cry baby wants it both ways my BIG Fat paycheck and my Big Fat finger in your eye. Not to worry Eric Holder and the gang will be right on it, there’s a crime here somewhere cause someone is sad….

nowhiners on November 9, 2013 at 8:59 AM

The Mental Health Parity clause of KevorkianCare will benefit him.

hillsoftx on November 9, 2013 at 9:00 AM

“I bring this up,” he wrote, “because way too many gun owners still believe that any regulation of the right to keep and bear arms is an infringement. The fact is that all Constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be.”

Metcalf should understand that his first amendment right was being “regulated” should shouldn’t have a problem with being fired. Better to be regulated by a citizen then the government.

huan on November 9, 2013 at 9:02 AM

There isn’t a single person I’ve seen who is questioning his First Amendment rights.

You dumbass. You do have the right to yell “FIRE!” in a crowded theater. You don’t have the right to be immune from your actions. Or of the consequences of your words.

In other words, your First Amendment rights end on someone else’s publication.

Or Hot Air Comments.

Or Facebook pages.

Lanceman on November 9, 2013 at 9:05 AM

I thought that apology was about as contrite as one could possibly be. A resignation seems unnecessary.

We on the right are more forgiving than that left, which casts out apostates mercilessly.

commodore on November 9, 2013 at 9:12 AM

Self-inflicted wound.

Sherman1864 on November 9, 2013 at 9:14 AM

How are you?

smoothsailing on November 9, 2013 at 8:56 AM

What up, Socon?

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 9:16 AM

And once again it also appears someone is reading “well-regulated” in today’s language. That is not the same meaning as it was when the 2nd Amendment was penned.

Imrahil on November 9, 2013 at 9:16 AM

The fact is that all Constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be.

No douchebag, they haven’t; and no they don’t. This blowhard has no idea how the Bill of Rights came to be, or why they are in the Constitution.

What would this moron think our ‘rights’ would be if the Bill of Rights wasn’t in the Constitution? Would citizens still be able to bear arms, or have free speech? Yes, we would.

The Bill of Rights was only put in to curb fears from certain states that the federal government would infringe on rights that they already enjoyed just for being alive. The enumerated rights that are in the Constitution are not all encompassing.

I think HuffPo has an opening for a gun-grabbing writer on their site. Why doesn’t he go over there and write in that echo-chamber where he will be welcomed with open arms with lilies and tea.

Patriot Vet on November 9, 2013 at 9:17 AM

Do not 2nd Amendment adherents also believe in Freedom of Speech?

Not when the 1st Amendment is repeatedly abused by gun control zealots. If the freedom of speech was as regulated as the 2nd amendment, most of the left would have to purchase permits, be taxed for every word they speak or write, and made to register and have a background check each time they exercised that right.

This guy’s innocent article is nothing but another chip-chipping away at the 2nd amendment working in conjunction with the gun control crowd.

Too bad MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN don’t fire and/or resign when they abuse their freedom of speech rights by lying and slandering.

iamsaved on November 9, 2013 at 9:20 AM

Hey guess who is going to be on all the Sunday talk shows? And probably has a contracts in the works with NBC as their multichannel gun expert.

Cindy Munford on November 9, 2013 at 9:20 AM

What up, Socon?

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 9:16 AM

I’ll take socon over liar any day. In fact, I’ll wear it as a badge of honor.

Why do you think yo need to salt threads with fake comments and outright lies?

smoothsailing on November 9, 2013 at 9:26 AM

Hey Dick! Don’t let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya on your way out.

Bmore on November 9, 2013 at 9:27 AM

My question is why did Dick Metcalf write this article, and why did Jim Bequette allow it to be published?

One wonders if the Obama administration is offering bribes cash incentives to people in the gun industry to push gun reform, like the bribes cash incentives they are offering Hollywood to produce propaganda for Obamacare.

Ordinary American on November 9, 2013 at 9:27 AM

Stoic Patriot on November 9, 2013 at 8:54 AM

Pretty much my thoughts. He can have any opinion he wants, but I don’t buy gun magazines to read that perspective. I get enough of that in the MSM almost daily.

deepdiver on November 9, 2013 at 9:29 AM

I thought that apology was about as contrite as one could possibly be. A resignation seems unnecessary.

We on the right are more forgiving than that left, which casts out apostates mercilessly.

commodore on November 9, 2013 at 9:12 AM

What? Did you see his follow up whine on another forum? The guy took a paycheck and from the readers of the publication and then told them he didn’t agree with anything they stood for. How can you expect to keep your job when you think your boss is nuts and say it out loud?

Vince on November 9, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Dimwit thinks “well regulated” refers to government control rather than training and drilling.

As a longtime subscriber to G&A I fired off (heh) a scathing email to them which questioned their collective sanity, obviously I wasn’t alone.

Bishop on November 9, 2013 at 9:30 AM

This guy’s innocent article is nothing but another chip-chipping away at the 2nd amendment working in conjunction with the gun control crowd.

That’s how they roll. In 10 years there won’t be a 2nd Amendment, functionally speaking. And the GOP, if they still exist, will be quietly defuding any candidates who try to make it an issue. Because, you know, only moderates win elections.

rrpjr on November 9, 2013 at 9:33 AM

Maybe Metcalf can apply to be an Obamacare navigator…Y’know to pay the bills

workingclass artist on November 9, 2013 at 9:33 AM

I didn’t read the articles, so I’m not exactly sure, but I do believe I saw something a while back about liberal publishing house buying gun magazines. If that’s true, this could well be the result of that purchase.

bflat879 on November 9, 2013 at 9:36 AM

I’ll take socon liar any day. In fact, I’ll wear it as a badge of honor.

smoothsailing on November 9, 2013 at 9:26 AM

Is there something you would like to say or are you just in a righteous rage?

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 9:37 AM

How can you expect to keep your job when you think your boss is nuts and say it out loud?

Vince on November 9, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Metcalf, the writer, deserves to be fired, but his editor, Jim Bequette, resigned because of his error in printing the article. But he was planning on stepping aside in two months, so it’s not like he punished himself.

Flange on November 9, 2013 at 9:38 AM

I thought that apology was about as contrite as one could possibly be. A resignation seems unnecessary.

We on the right are more forgiving than that left, which casts out apostates mercilessly.

commodore on November 9, 2013 at 9:12 AM

Bequette was resigning in 2 months anyway, it’s a cheap publicity face saver for the magazine. He just understands public relations better than Metcalf, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Bequette is being ‘creative’ about the reasoning for his actions.

Fenris on November 9, 2013 at 9:39 AM

There are unorganized and organized militia. The former is everyone in the state, for some.

Missouri

August 28, 2013
Organized and unorganized militia.
41.070. 1. The militia of the state is divided into two classes, the organized militia and the unorganized militia.

2. The organized militia shall consist of the following:

(1) Such elements of the land and air forces of the National Guard of the United States as are allocated to the state by the President or the Secretary of Army or Air, and accepted by the state, hereinafter to be known as the National Guard and the Air National Guard;

(2) Such elements of the reserve naval forces of the United States as are allocated to the state by the President or the Secretary of the Navy, and accepted by the state, hereinafter called the naval militia; and the

(3) Missouri reserve military force, when organized.

3. The unorganized militia shall consist of all persons liable to serve in the militia but not commissioned or enlisted in the organized militia.

South Carolina

SECTION 1. Article 1, Chapter 1, Title 25 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

“Section 25-1-80. (A) Pursuant to the provisions of Section 25-1-60, an able-bodied citizen of this State who is over seventeen years of age and can legally purchase a firearm is deemed a member of the South Carolina Unorganized Militia, unless he is already a member of the National Guard or the organized militia not in National Guard service.

(B) The unorganized militia will be under the supervision of the Governor, as Commander-in-Chief, and the Adjutant General and shall be regulated through the actions of the General Assembly.

(C) The powers and duties of the South Carolina Unorganized Militia include:

(1) The militia may be ordered to active duty pursuant to the provisions of Section 25-1-1890.

(2) A militia member, at his own expense, shall have the right to possess and keep all arms that could be legally acquired or possessed by a South Carolina citizen as of December 31, 2012. This includes shouldered rifles and shotguns, handguns, clips, magazines, and all components.
(3) The unorganized militia may not fall under any law or regulation or jurisdiction of any person or entity outside of South Carolina.

(4) A member may resign at any time from the unorganized militia, at which time he will resume his civilian status.”

South Carolina is regulated by their assembly; and is everyone over 17. Suck on that sissy! Also, there is an unorganized militia for the entire US.

US Code – Section 311: Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are –
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Militia Act of 1903

FIFTY‐SEVENTH CONGRESS. SESS. II. CH. 195,196. 1903.
January 21,1903.
[Public, No. 3.]
CHAP. 196.‐ An Act To promote the efficiency of the militia, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
That the militia shall consist of every able‐bodied male citizen of the respective States, Territories, and the District
of Columbia, and every able‐bodied male of foreign birth who has declared his intention to become a citizen, who
is more than eighteen and less than forty‐five years of age, and into two classes‐the organized militia, to be known
as the National Guard of the State, Territory, or District of Columbia, or by such other designations as may be given
them by the laws of the respective States or Territories, and the remainder to be known as the Reserve Militia.

The stupid is strong with this one.

Patriot Vet on November 9, 2013 at 9:42 AM

Jaxx

sartana on November 9, 2013 at 9:46 AM

I have watched “Guns and Ammo” for many years and have always enjoyed Metcalf’s role as a gun loving informer of new products and techniques. I would assume that he was a true believer in the 2nd Amendment and had read and evaluated all of the pros and cons of both sides on it’s meaning. But after reading his article I can only think that he has never read any of the history of the evolution of the writing of the 2nd and has formed his opinions from listening to the alphabet news outlets. In most arenas that is called fraud. He was taking money from an organization that he appeared to represent, including their ideology, that he clearly did not. This is not a case of his stating his own opinion. It is a case of outright fraud. His dismissal is justified by his deceptive and thoughtless actions.

inspectorudy on November 9, 2013 at 9:48 AM

Dick wasn’t fired by the Government.

If you want to see what Government censorship looks like, Katie Pavlich has some to show you.

ATF to Whistleblower: You Can Publish Your Book After We do Some Redactions

mad saint jack on November 9, 2013 at 9:50 AM

I just got a new Mossberg 500 12 gauge combo shotgun for this year’s hunting season in Michigan. Any suggestions on the best type of rounds to use for deer?
Also, they are permitting wolf hunts this year. Same type of rounds or should I use the 30-06?
mechkiller_k on November 9, 2013 at 8:47 AM

The Mossberg. Semi-automatic or pump? And how many shells will it hold?

Ach. NEVER hunt deer with a shotgun.

Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 9:56 AM

Much respect for Jim Bequette for resigning (even if he was already going out the door) over his goss mistake. He showed how real leadership takes responsibility for what they did. The buck stops with him.

It would be as if Sebelius fired a couple people over the 404Care rollout and then resigned herself.

BigGator5 on November 9, 2013 at 9:56 AM

Bequette has demonstrate what it means to “take responsibility.” The morons in FedGov think it just means taking the blame rather than suffering the consequences of that blame.

Quartermaster on November 9, 2013 at 9:58 AM

I thought well regulated meant every able bodied male over around 12 years old had to have a boom stick, 10 lbs of powder, and 20 lbs of lead?

Yea,, I’m pretty sure after fighting the war that’s what they meant. They were hip on rights, not rules. Charter of negative liberties.(for gubmint)

wolly4321 on November 9, 2013 at 10:06 AM

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 9:37 AM

Panther, you ignorant fool.

22044 on November 9, 2013 at 10:09 AM

Hey Bmore. Add Panther to your list of posters who never have anything substantive to add to these discussions.

22044 on November 9, 2013 at 10:10 AM

Yeah, ‘well regulated’ has nothing to do with ‘regulation’ in terms of laws, but in terms of training and preparedness.

Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:11 AM

I just got a new Mossberg 500 12 gauge combo shotgun for this year’s hunting season in Michigan. Any suggestions on the best type of rounds to use for deer?
Also, they are permitting wolf hunts this year. Same type of rounds or should I use the 30-06?

mechkiller_k on November 9, 2013 at 8:47 AM

Oh, and… what? I don’t think shotguns are the proper choice for deer hunting, but I readily admit, I’m not a big hunter.

Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:12 AM

Ach. NEVER hunt deer with a shotgun.

Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 9:56 AM

Several states don’t allow you to hunt deer with any firearm except shotguns.

Oldnuke on November 9, 2013 at 10:12 AM

Panther, you ignorant fool.

22044 on November 9, 2013 at 10:09 AM

Hey Bmore. Add Panther to your list of posters who never have anything substantive to add to these discussions.

22044 on November 9, 2013 at 10:10 AM

Irony.

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Ach. NEVER hunt deer with a shotgun. Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 9:56 Am

In some places you have to.

If they still make them, brennake rifled slugs work well. Out to about 75 yds. Get slide bushings for the mossberg. They make a lot of noise,, rattle otherwise.

Killed quite a few with mine in shotgun only Harford Co. MD.

wolly4321 on November 9, 2013 at 10:13 AM

We on the right are more forgiving than that left, which casts out apostates mercilessly.

commodore on November 9, 2013 at 9:12 AM

Um, that’s precisely opposite. On the right, people take responsibility for their actions, and resign. On the left, they’re apostates are not cast out – they are embraced and protected.

Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:15 AM

Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 9:56 AM

blockquote>Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:12 AM

I don’t hunt anymore and never did hunt deer but these folks would appear to disagree with you.

Oldnuke on November 9, 2013 at 10:16 AM

What up, Socon?

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 9:16 AM

Ah, thread-jacking. Aren’t there some ‘regulations’ around here about that?

Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Hot Air should also be talking about the EPA shutting down the last lead smelting plant in the US. If you wondered why the government was buying up all the ammo in sight, now you know.

Socratease on November 9, 2013 at 10:18 AM

I don’t hunt anymore and never did hunt deer but these folks would appear to disagree with you.

Oldnuke on November 9, 2013 at 10:16 AM

Cool, learn something new every day. Like I said, I’m not ‘in the know’ with regards to deer hunting – thanks for the info!

Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:19 AM

Um, that’s precisely opposite. On the right, people take responsibility for their actions, and resign. On the left, they’re apostates are not cast out – they are embraced and protected.

Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:15 AM

I agree with you here. People on the right are required to take responsibility for their actions. It’s one of our principles. Duke Cunningham sitting in a jail cell comes to mind. So does Obama sitting in the oval office. A study in opposites.

Oldnuke on November 9, 2013 at 10:19 AM

The Bill of Rights was only put in to curb fears from certain states that the federal government would infringe on rights that they already enjoyed just for being alive.

Patriot Vet on November 9, 2013 at 9:17 AM

Where on Earth would they ever get that idea? Crazy tea party nutters……..

GWB on November 9, 2013 at 10:20 AM

Hot Air should also be talking about the EPA shutting down the last lead smelting plant in the US. If you wondered why the government was buying up all the ammo in sight, now you know.

Socratease on November 9, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Hmm, hoarding and restricted supply to begin again shortly, I guess.

Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:20 AM

Get slide bushings for the mossberg. They make a lot of noise,, rattle otherwise.

wolly4321 on November 9, 2013 at 10:13 AM

This. Good advice.

Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:21 AM

I wonder why they invented Buckshot?

wolly4321 on November 9, 2013 at 10:22 AM

thanks for the info!

Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:19 AM

No problem. The only way I knew that was from listening to my grandfather and uncle talk about it before going hunting. We had tons of deer where I grew up but no one in my immediate family liked venison so we never bothered.

Oldnuke on November 9, 2013 at 10:22 AM

Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 9:56 AM

The 500, by definition, is a pump.

GWB on November 9, 2013 at 10:22 AM

Ah, thread-jacking. Aren’t there some ‘regulations’ around here about that?

Midas on November 9, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Apparently, sequence of events and time stamps confuse you:

Hey, Liar. How are you?

smoothsailing on November 9, 2013 at 8:56 AM

What up, Socon?

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 9:16 AM

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 10:24 AM

Where on Earth would they ever get that idea? Crazy tea party nutters……..

GWB on November 9, 2013 at 10:20 AM

Yep, George Mason is my favorite “Founding Father”.

Oldnuke on November 9, 2013 at 10:25 AM

Maybe someone was holding a gun to his head.

SouthernGent on November 9, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Metcalf had a good gig, and he blew it. The angel that was supposed to whisper in his ear, “Heh, Dick, it’s an effin’ gun magazine!” must have been on break.

claudius on November 9, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Nothing wrong with shotguns for deer, the only problem is the boundaries. In Minnesota there are wide swaths in the southern part of the state where ONLY shotguns are allowed.

Bishop on November 9, 2013 at 10:28 AM

The angel that was supposed to whisper in his ear, “Heh, Dick, it’s an effin’ gun magazine!” must have been on break.

claudius on November 9, 2013 at 10:26 AM

That was probably the same angel that was supposed to be taking care of the Dixie Chicks. He seems to take a lot of breaks. Must be a liberal angel.

Oldnuke on November 9, 2013 at 10:29 AM

And if you hunt in some of the thick stuff I walk through you will want a shotgun just to get the projectile to punch through the brush without being deflected off course. Having a scoped 30-06 is a waste of time and effort if you don’t even see the deer until they’re 40 yards away.

Bishop on November 9, 2013 at 10:31 AM

Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 9:56 AM
The 500, by definition, is a pump.
GWB on November 9, 2013 at 10:22 AM

So what was the semi I was looking at at a gun show in Middletown, NY last weekend? It was a Mossberg, of that I am certain. 515, maybe?

Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 10:33 AM

Do not 2nd Amendment adherents also believe in Freedom of Speech? Do Americans now fear open and honest discussion of different opinions about important Constitutional issues? Do voices from cyberspace now control how and why business decisions are made?

So, you’d be OK with Joe Biden providing expert home defense recommendations to the readers of Guns & Ammo?

You need more than just an opinion to talk about gun use or gun law issues in a publication that strives to be authoritative in that field of knowledge. If you still don’t understand that then you should think seriously about a career change.

Socratease on November 9, 2013 at 10:33 AM

Oldnuke on November 9, 2013 at 10:16 AM

Shot my first buck with a bolt action 12 gauge with a slug. What a mess. Never again.

Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 10:36 AM

The fact is that all Constitutional rights are regulated

He fails to understand the most basic of principles…

Gun rights are not granted by the Constitution but are considered Natural Rights or God’s Law. The Second Amendment protects that natural right from the government not “grants” it to the citizens. The failure of education in this country regarding the Constitution and Bill of Rights is scary. This idiot shouldn’t be allowed to shine shoes with the depth of his knowledge.

trs on November 9, 2013 at 10:44 AM

shot my first buck with a bolt action 12 gauge with a slug. What a mess. Never again. Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 10:36 Am

As yucky as cutting around his arse, slitting his belly
open, ripping out his guts, reaching up and slitting his windpipe from the inside?

Actually that’s my favorite part. Because I know I’m having fresh tenderloin for dinner.

wolly4321 on November 9, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Apparently Metcalf used to be a good guy? If so, I wonder what went wrong.

22044 on November 9, 2013 at 10:49 AM

There are many, many books dedicated to the origin and meaning of the second amendment. Like the present country of Switzerland every man once was expected to be armed, every man knew how to shoot, men were proud of their shooting ability and taught their children.

Where do people think the arms came from for the battles of Bunker Hill and Lexington and Concord? With the exception of captured British weapons none of them were government guns.

Contra Dick Metcalf’s opinion, from Tuesday’s elections:
“Nearly 10 percent of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun group Mayors Against Illegal Guns retired from their job or were sacked in Tuesday’s elections, including the organization’s two leaders: Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino.

Some 95 key members of the group that targets and criticizes lawmakers backed by the National Rifle Association are losing their title of “mayor.” According to an election review of Bloomberg’s membership list of about 1,000, three quit the group, 69 retired from their jobs, and 23 were rejected by voters.”

Bloomberg’s Independence USA PAC can claim a victory in its campaign and advertising against Virginia gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli,(but) a review of all NRA-endorsed candidates in the state show that the mayor had virtually no impact.

For example, of the 67 NRA-endorsed candidates for the Virginia House of Delegates, 65 won their election on Tuesday.

What’s more, after the 2011 legislative elections in Virginia, there were 63 states delegates rated an “A” by the NRA and that number grew to 65 on Tuesday.”

Viator on November 9, 2013 at 11:01 AM

Great write-up. Didn’t know that Metcalf tried to whine his way to clarity in another forum. As for the 1st Amendment defense, he’s just the latest ass-wipe to get that exactly wrong … it must be very difficult for stupid people to understand, like the 2nd Amendment.

Those founders … a Foundational Writing for Dummies class would have really helped them.

Jaibones on November 9, 2013 at 11:01 AM

Ach. NEVER hunt deer with a shotgun.
 
Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 9:56 AM

 
Several states don’t allow you to hunt deer with any firearm except shotguns.
 
Oldnuke on November 9, 2013 at 10:12 AM

 
00 Hotair points to the first person who can tell everyone why it’s called buckshot.

rogerb on November 9, 2013 at 11:05 AM

The battle to protect our rights never ends.

Never. Ends.

Meremortal on November 9, 2013 at 11:09 AM

Panther on November 9, 2013 at 9:16 AM

Troll.

Was that a threat?

You’re effing hilarious.

CWchangedhisNicagain on November 9, 2013 at 11:12 AM

Leftist operations are always a one-way street.

A column like that might be appropriate to publish in U.S. News & World Report, but Guns & Ammo? Why not just have the Cato Institute talk about the need to dismantle liberty or Focus on the Family talk about the necessity of abortion? Why not have Planned Parenthood talk about how abortion is murder, or Greenpeace discuss how the environment is really a secondary issue?

Certain organizations and publications exist to serve a particular cohort, and to advance those causes dear to them — not to oppose them and spit in the faces of their followers.

Stoic Patriot on November 9, 2013 at 8:54 AM

One is reminded of the Universities declaring that their Christian student organizations are required to admit non-Christians to their clubs, and even allow them to advance to leadership positions (how??), but are defensively protective of the “rights” of black or Muslim organizations to maintain their exclusivity.

The MSA reflects a prime characteristic of militant Islamic groups: a refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of secular society and personal spirituality. The MSA’s Starters Guide contains an open call to Islamicize campus politics:

It should be the long-term goal of every MSA to Islamicize the politics of their respective university … the politicization of the MSA means to make the MSA more of a force on internal campus politics. The MSA needs to be a more “In-your-face” association.[13]

All of this, the guide explains, results from the MSA’s duty “to bring morality back into the campus” and to convince students to practice Islam “as a complete way of life.”

In the process, the MSA preaches a creed of “special treatment” and “self-segregation” that sounds reminiscent of, and may actually borrow from, Afro-centric campus politics of the 1990s. Demanding that universities be more “Muslim-friendly,” the MSA’s newly established National Religious Accommodations Task Force (RATF) directs local MSA chapters to insist that universities provide separate housing and meals for Muslims only.[14]

AesopFan on November 9, 2013 at 11:14 AM

wolly4321 on November 9, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Well, you got me there.

Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 11:18 AM

“If a respected editor can be forced to resign and a controversial writer’s voice be shut down by a one-sided social-media and internet outcry, virtually overnight, simply because they dared to open a discussion or ask questions about a politically sensitive issue . . . then I fear for the future of our industry”

Uhm, excuse me, but any publication reflects the agenda of the publisher, period. I don’t care if you read Guns & Ammo or a local newspaper. The publication reflects the agenda of the publisher and it always has going back to Ben Franklin.

“I thought it would generate a healthy exchange of ideas on gun rights. I miscalculated, pure and simple. ”

I take that to mean “Metcalf convinced me this would be a good thing and get the lefties off our backs by making it look like we had someone on staff sympathetic to their cause and were actually discussing their point of view but the wave of cancellations from subscribers and the butt chewing I got from the publisher knocked some sense into me and crap rolls downhill”.

crosspatch on November 9, 2013 at 11:20 AM

Not to be too nit picky but I think its important to note that rights are regulated to prevent another individuals rights from being infringed.
Most gun regulations sole purpose is to infringe on the gun owners rights and have no protective purpose whatsoever.

MHatch on November 9, 2013 at 11:22 AM

00 Hotair points to the first person who can tell everyone why it’s called buckshot.

rogerb on November 9, 2013 at 11:05 AM

Because the Indians (Choctaw, I believe) invented shotguns and the accompanying ammunition while wearing buckskins, and younger male Indians were known as bucks. When the tribes fought each other those who had been shot would cry out “Buck! Shot!” and the nomenclature was born.

Man, I have to explain EVERYTHING around here.

Bishop on November 9, 2013 at 11:30 AM

I love how the guy that says:

The fact is that all Constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be.”

Follows up with:

Do not 2nd Amendment adherents also believe in Freedom of Speech?

Sound like someone just got burned by a scorching hot irony.

Maddie on November 9, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Do voices from cyberspace now control how and why business decisions are made?

Yes.

21st century, champ. Welcome to it.

thirtyandseven on November 9, 2013 at 12:02 PM

…so is he a Democrat?

KOOLAID2 on November 9, 2013 at 8:47 AM

Well he’s their new hero, so they’ll offer him a nice, soft place to land. There are few who can withstand the attention and affection the left pours on those who leave the conservative reservation. Chances are, he’ll be the left’s go-to guy for the “conservative viewpoint” on “the need” for “common sense” gun control going forward. And he’ll say whatever his new friends tell him to say. But mostly he’ll say “gun nuts,” “wackos,” “intolerance,” and “for the children.”

Rational Thought on November 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Why is it the picture accompanying this story shows a man with his finger on the trigger, but when I do that in the gun shop to see if I need a larger backstrap I get smacked upside the head for being a careless idiot?

Maddie on November 9, 2013 at 12:18 PM

A few points:

He’s far more correct about the meaning of “well-regulated” than the Free Patriot guys are. It does not merely mean, as they posit, “being in proper working order” but also (as they stoop to using in their own language) “following regulations”.

The militia is the citizen military arm of local government, comprising all able bodied men, as many laws during the era attest. What one had to do as a militia member was to maintain one’s personal weaponry (normally a long arm) in good order, and have a sufficient supply of ammunition and gunpowder to fire the weapon repeatedly in battle. One also was required to show up and participate in at least yearly drills, performed under the direction of experienced officers.

All of this is embodied in Geo. Washington’s admonition to William Livingston (Governor of New Jersey and a Framer):

“Your first object should be a well regulated Militia Law; the People, put under good Officers, would behave in quite another Manner; and not only render real Service as Soldiers, but would protect, instead of distressing, the Inhabitants. What I would wish to have particularly insisted upon, in the New Law, should be, that every Man, capable of bearing Arms, should be obliged to turn out, and not buy off his Service by a trifling fine. We want Men, and not Money.”

Now, if looking at the militia model, we have that certain weapons of the militia were not under private ownership — cannon and such larger weapons. They were kept in an armory owned by the community. Few, if any, were kept by private individuals — except in the case of naval vessels, for privateering — using letters of marque issued by Congress.

Indeed, the Constitution restricts war making powers to our Government, and the concept of the privateer has passed into history since they are inherently unregulated by the Government.

That said, the Supreme Court has already ruled that the Militia clause has no bearing on the basic right of a person to keep and bear personal firearms.

The restrictions that the Court has placed on such weapons is that any weaponry which is used by the police for their personal defense is available to any private citizen.

Now, if anyone wants to possess a nuke or their own personal USS Enterprise, feel free to try, but I doubt that the Government will allow same, and I doubt that the text of the 2nd Amendment will be an adequate defense before the Court.

unclesmrgol on November 9, 2013 at 12:27 PM

My interpretation of this incident is that Dick Metcalf is your typical statist with a traditionalist bent boomer. He’s from Illinois. He wouldn’t really mind it if everything but a revolver, shotgun, and bolt action were banned. As long as he could go hunt and take his 16 hour class for a permit, he’d be ok with it.

That or they thought it would generate extra traffic for the magazine. Or maybe they wanted to burn Guns & Ammo/the Publishers over some sour grapes. Who knows. I don’t care as anyone following this issue should have figured out that you can’t compromise with the anti-gunners.

oryguncon on November 9, 2013 at 12:27 PM

In some places you have to.

If they still make them, brennake rifled slugs work well. Out to about 75 yds. Get slide bushings for the mossberg. They make a lot of noise,, rattle otherwise.

Killed quite a few with mine in shotgun only Harford Co. MD.

wolly4321 on November 9, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Actually, slugs are accurate out to about 400 yards. But I doubt that they’d be effective stoppers on a deer much past 200.

And, Brenneke is still putting out slugs. (In fact, they have a number of types; one of which is an “engine stopper” for police [but not restricted to them] which is a great barrier penetrator.)

Solaratov on November 9, 2013 at 12:33 PM

Bah, guns.com is backing Metcalf…

http://www.guns.com/2013/11/08/guns-ammo-wrong-fire-editor-dick-metcalf-editorial-2a-limitations-video/

They cite Scalia in comments on Fox news and the Heller decision.

oryguncon on November 9, 2013 at 12:38 PM

Laws “regulating” the First Amendment rights of the People are written to provide a means to punish individuals for the reckless or unlawful exercise of their free speech rights.

Laws “regulating” the Second Amendment rights of the citizenry are, for the most part, written to prevent that right from being exercised in any fashion, whether responsibly or lawlessly.

Prohibiting the ownership of firearms by peaceable citizens are not the same as laws prohibiting the use of handguns in the commission of armed robbery.

The next time someone tries to tell you that slander and libel laws are comparable to laws seeking to prevent private ownership of guns, you have my permission to mock them mercilessly.

Bruce MacMahon on November 9, 2013 at 12:39 PM

Ach. NEVER hunt deer with a shotgun.
 
Cleombrotus on November 9, 2013 at 9:56 Am

 
Killed quite a few with mine in shotgun only Harford Co. MD.
 
wolly4321 on November 9, 2013 at 10:13 AM

 
My go-to meat getter as a boy was a Savage 24 (.22 and .410 on same rifle) with rifled slugs out to about 40 or 50 yards. Probably could’ve gone out to 75, but I wasn’t comfortable with the distance.
 
We had lots of noisy streams near our house and you could easily get within range by walking in the water to sneak up on them. Extremely cold, especially on those mornings you’d inevitably slip, but extremely effective.
 
Rabbit, squirrel, deer, raccoon, dove (a horrible dove round), and anything else that was in season was taken with that gun. My brother and I saved up to buy it together and shared it until we were grown.
 
God I miss those days.

rogerb on November 9, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Do not 2nd Amendment adherents also believe in Freedom of Speech? Do Americans now fear open and honest discussion of different opinions about important Constitutional issues? Do voices from cyberspace now control how and why business decisions are made?

I see this kind of talk so often. People are just dumb. The government didn’t fire him from his job and he wasn’t arrested. Freedom of speech protects you from government not private companies you work for.

The Notorious G.O.P on November 9, 2013 at 1:35 PM

So who got to him–NSA, FBI, ATFE, IRS–or all of the above?

stukinIL4now on November 9, 2013 at 1:40 PM

Plans were already in place for a new editor to take the reins of “Guns & Ammo” on January 1. However, these recent events have convinced me that I should advance that schedule immediately.

Predictably, ‘lame ducks’ tend to show their true colors or effort to ‘feather’ their legacy. If only our elected representatives exercised the same integrity as Mr. Bequette.

socalcon on November 9, 2013 at 2:03 PM

He.s to use a concept from Ace of Spades, one of the minor intelligentsia, the minor gentry or the petite bourgeoisie …like most writers he’s not REALLY one of the elite/ruling class, but he apes them….

He believe YOUR rights need to be “regulated” as do our betters…the difference is he believes that as one of the minor nobility/petite bourgeoisie that he will keep HIS rights…

So, what he is saying, is the PEASANTS need to understand that firearms need to be regulated, and in so doing he curries favour with his social betters, by limiting the peasants and putting them into their place, whilst trying to assure his rights by showing his loyalty.

Bottom-Line: this was directed to you Helots…YOU need to have your rights restricted, only Spartans may possess weapons…He thinks he’s one of the Spartans, so this regulation is not going to apply to him.

JFKY on November 9, 2013 at 2:09 PM

Metcalf’s response to his termination is, I’m sad to say, every bit as misguided as the original column. There isn’t a single person I’ve seen who is questioning his First Amendment rights. But he seems to be forgetting that the First Amendment is in place to protect him from retribution by his government to his exercise of free speech.

Sad to say/Misguided? You’re too kind. He’s either stupid or had a break from reality.

socalcon on November 9, 2013 at 2:11 PM

Comment pages: 1 2