The firearms community already knows the s#!tstorm Dick Metcalf stirred with his Bloombergian “reasonable” gun law comments in Guns & Ammo. Here, I laid out my objections — not just from the standpoint of gun owner seeking to maintain a civil right that even the head of INTERPOL recently acknowledged...but from that standpoint of accepting infringement of any right making it easier for politicians and activists to excuse any infringement of any right, be it speech, guns, probable cause, or privacy to pick away at your natural rights. (As they have since the beginning of time.)
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.
1) Metcalf lost his job. I’m not crying. 2) Bequette took a quasi-honorable move in stepping down as G&A‘s editor, but I say quasi because he was headed out the door anyway. It’s easy to throw an apology out as you run for the exit. Still, it satisfied me, and I thought it was a stand up move. 3) Subscribers to InterMedia Outdoors’s products — the 17 magazines and the viewers of The Sportsman’s Channel — need to be vigilant for this kind of nonsense in the future. That a publisher of a magazine allegedly dedicated to the Second Amendment went Bloomberg tells me the owners are on board with the gun-grabbers’ agenda.
Outside of the firearm community, there’s already the usual blather from the Progressive blogs about how “gun nuts” overreacted, but that’s because they either fail to note, or actively wish, the erosion of liberty that constant “reasonable” restrictions play. For the busybody, the activist, the would-be aristocrat politician, no amount of “reasonable” infringement is enough. There’s always something more to disapprove of, hate, or want to control.