Guns & Ammo magazine, time to cancel....

[DeepseekerADS]

Guns & Ammo Supports Gun Control

Guns & Ammo Supports Gun Control | The Truth About Guns

Click here to download a pdf of Guns & Ammo‘s column Let’s Talk Limits.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp...y-Dick-Metcalf-of-Guns-Ammo-December-2013.pdf

Technical Editor Dick Metcalf [above] penned the editorial for the December issue. Metcalf, a writer whose technical knowledge (or lack thereof) has earned him brickbats before, bases his editorial on a distinction between “infringement” and “regulation.” “I bring this up,” Metcalf writes, “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.” That, dear reader, is a major WTF moment. One of many . . .

Metcalf’s dietribe [sic] turns to the antis’ favorite justification for infringing on our natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms: you “Can’t yell ‘FIRE!’ in a crowded theater.” Yes. Yes you can. It’s just that you’re legally responsible for what happens next. And what happens next in Metcalf’s editorial is bizarre—especially for an article that appears in a gun magazine:

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.”

You’re kidding, right? Metcalf doesn’t know that “well-regulated” is “referring to the property of something being in proper working order“? That it has nothing to do with government regulation? No way!

Way. Sure Metcalf’s bone-headed, uninformed, patently obvious misinterpretation of the Second Amendment’s introductory clause isn’t as bad as the antis’ assertion that the 2A only applies to Americans in a militia, but it’s the next worst thing. Coming from a gun guy, a man who trumpets the fact that he co-wrote The Firearm Owners Protection Act and taught college seminars on Constitutional law, well, I’m speechless.

Too bad Metcalf isn’t. Once again, he turns to the antis’ well-worn fundamentally flawed pro-regulation arguments to advocate gun control. He deploys ye olde auto analogy to defend state-issued carry permits against readers who believe that Second Amendment is the only authority they need to bear arms.

I wondered whether those same people believed that just anybody should be able to buy a vehicle and take it out on public roadways without any kind of driver’s training, test or license.

I understand that driving a car is not a right protected by the Constitution, but to me the basic principle is the same. I firmly believe that all U.S. citizens have the right to bear arms, but . . .

I’m going to stop there. Anyone who says “I believe in the Second Amendment but–” does not believe in the Second Amendment. They are not friends, they are not frenemies, they are enemies of The People of the Gun.

More than that, whether or not these nominal gun rights supporters (e.g., President Obama, Senator Charles Schumer) “believe” in the Second Amendment is irrelevant. As stated above, the right to keep and bear arms is a natural right, stemming from our natural right of self-defense. It doesn’t require belief, faith or political justification.

Equally, the right to keep and bear arms is a civil right. Wikipedia defines the term thusly:

Civil and political rights are a class of rights that protect individuals’ freedom from unwarranted infringement by governments and private organizations, and ensure one’s ability to participate in the civil and political life of the state without discrimination or repression.

Civil rights include the ensuring of peoples’ physical and mental integrity, life and safety; protection from discrimination on grounds such as race, gender, national origin, color, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, or disability; and individual rights such as privacy, the freedoms of thought and conscience, speech and expression, religion, the press, assembly and movement.

I have a major issue with the word “unwarranted” (wikipedia won’t let me delete it). But the point is made: Americans have a civil right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by . . . wait for it . . . the Constitution. Specifically, the Second Amendment. This despite the fact that . . .

Civil and political rights need not be codified to be protected, although most democracies worldwide do have formal written guarantees of civil and political rights. Civil rights are considered to be natural rights. Thomas Jefferson wrote in his A Summary View of the Rights of British America that “a free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”

So civil means natural, and natural means inviolable. Except by people who support their violation. People like Dick Metcalf, who ends his pro-gun control polemic by asserting that Illinois’ new carry law—mandating that citizens must complete 16 hours of training to “earn” the right to bear arms— is not “infringement in and of itself.”

“But that’s just me . . .” Metcalf closes. Yes it is. And I believe that anyone who supports a gun magazine that prints this kind of anti-gun agitprop is supporting the diminution and destruction of our gun rights. Or is that just me?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Treasure_Hunter]

I would cancel and send them email on why you canceled. Tell them the money you saved from canceling will go to an organization that supports our 2nd amendment right unabridged....

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[Peyton Manning]

tell them the money you save will buy ammo

 

[Nickleanddime]

I've been tired of guns and ammo for many years bow. They've went to political and to preachy. It's all assault rifles and NRA crap. Same with field and stream and outdoor life. Their lyhe same magazine owned by the same company. The ads are the same, the articles everything. All these magazines are suppose to be "tips and informative" tools but they are just a scam. If you want local stuff subscribe to your state wildlife mag or to a state hunting mag like ohio game and fish. But for your state. It's like books anymore, every book is just a pre cursor to the next one or tied to a web page. Same with papers they print yesterday's news. I love print but its getting off their purpose, to inform. Not to just make money. With everything for free you would ever need to know, why buy a 20 dollar a year subscription that runs the same articles every year.

 

[XLTer]

For G&A to even allow an article with that view point to be printed in the magazine speaks volumes . In these times , we ( Pro 2nd Amendment ) patriots need to be very selective in who we support and ( who we DO NOT ) , let them know why . There is NO middle ground with this current administration . Our God given Rights should NEVER be up for debate . Politics be dambed !!!!!!!

 

[GMD52]

I stopped reading G@A when Elmer Keith stopped being Ex. Editor, and passed. They, and any of the other gun mags have failed to meet the education and information needs of the gun owning public. Join the NRA, and read the American Rifleman........gary

 

[DeepseekerADS]

'Guns & Ammo' Apologizes, Fires Editor for Arguing to Restrict 2nd Amendment Rights

A little late! Their real views have jumped out of the bag.....

'Guns & Ammo' Apologizes, Fires Editor for Arguing to Restrict 2nd Amendment Rights

by AWR Hawkins 7 Nov 2013, 6:54 AM PDT

On November 5, Breitbart News reported on an editorial in which Guns & Ammo editor Dick Metcalf argued that all constitutional rights need to be be regulated, including the 2nd Amendment.

On November 7, Metcalf was fired, and Guns & Ammo Magazine has apologized to readers for the things that he wrote.

Gun & Ammo editor Jim Bequette issued a statement apologizing to readers for the article and announcing that Metcalf's "association with 'Guns & Ammo' has officially ended." The full text of the statement can be read below:

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.

Let me be clear: Our commitment to the Second Amendment is unwavering. It has been so since the beginning. Historically, our tradition in supporting the Second Amendment has been unflinching. No strings attached. It is no accident that when others in the gun culture counseled compromise in the past, hard-core thinkers such as Harlon Carter, Don Kates and Neal Knox found a place and a voice in these pages. When large firearms advocacy groups were going soft in the 1970s, they were prodded in the right direction, away from the pages of “Guns & Ammo.”

In publishing Metcalf’s column, I was untrue to that tradition, and for that I apologize. His views do not represent mine — nor, most important, “Guns & Ammo”’s. It is very clear to me that they don’t reflect the views of our readership either.

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

I once again offer my personal apology. I understand what our valued readers want. I understand what you believe in when it comes to gun rights, and I believe the same thing.

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.

“Guns & Ammo” will never fail to vigorously lead the struggle for our Second Amendment rights, and with vigorous young editorial leadership such as Eric’s, it will be done even better in the future.

Respectfully,

Jim Bequette

 

[GMD52]

One has to wonder what G@A would have done if no-one raised the question of Metcafts editorial? He may have been the Editor, but Mags. and other periodicals go before a board , and publisher before printing.....sould like they are apologizing, but the fact remains that several people other that one editor, even if he was chief, dropped the ball......I still refuse to purchase it, and will into the future......Gary

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I posted on their facebook page my subscription funds for next year has been donated to NRA.......

 

[packerbacker]

They are now apologizing and asking for forgiveness.

 

[DeepseekerADS]

They are now apologizing and asking for forgiveness.

So very decent of them.....

Obama's apologizing for the health insurance cancellations too, so very decent and truthful of him....