Monday, January 06, 2014


Dick Metcalf (bless his heart) is whining about double-crossing us.  Yeah, really.  You remember Dick?  He used to write for Guns and Ammo magazine, and got handed the pink slip in November.  Fox News reports that he's feeling a little bit banished.
Metcalf, a longtime writer on firearms and U.S. gun culture, saw his association with Guns & Ammo terminated in November -- he also had a T.V. show co-produced by the magazine -- after he wrote a column titled, “Let’s Talk Limits: Do certain firearm regulations really constitute infringement?”
Yeah, well, when you write about increased firearm regulations in this time of a massive push for regulation, you're liable to feel a little backlash.

The New York Times covers it too.
His experience sheds light on the close-knit world of gun journalism, where editors and reporters say there is little room for nuance in the debate over gun laws. Moderate voices that might broaden the discussion from within are silenced. When writers stray from the party line promoting an absolutist view of an unfettered right to bear arms, their publications — often under pressure from advertisers — excommunicate them.
“We are locked in a struggle with powerful forces in this country who will do anything to destroy the Second Amendment,” said Richard Venola, a former editor of Guns & Ammo. “The time for ceding some rational points is gone.”
They're all "whaa-whaa" about the thought that one senior writer would get handed his papers for suggesting that gun rights aren't absolute.  We know that they're not absolute, we're painfully aware that gun rights aren't absolute, but then we come to the crux of the matter.
“Compromise is a bad word these days,” he said. “People think it means giving up your principles.” 
Oh, please, Dick.  You know better than that.  In a compromise, I give a little and you give a little and we come to a working agreement.  Then it's over, and we get on with our lives.  We live within the agreement and it never again becomes an issue.  Tell me what the other side of the argument is willing to cede, Dick, and maybe we can talk about compromise.  However, my side giving up things, over and over again, isn't compromise, it's incrementalism.  If Metcalf is too stupid to understand that, he's too stupid to write for a magazine that I'll read.

You want to compromise, Metcalf?  What are you willing to give up?


Anonymous said...

I never cared for him before his dismissal. He used to be the biggest advocate that a 357 mag handgun was the perfect choice for deer. I think he wrote for effect regardless of whether his ideas had merit and it got the best of him when it came to gun rights.


Old NFO said...

Screw him... He dug that hole, and deserves to be IN it...

Jester said...

I decided to not post right away (I guess my fingers were a bit stiff from the sub zero with out wind chill global warming/climate change/acid rain/global cooling/please let use fleece you for money. I also wanted to not fire off on this one after I had a day's introspection.

The problem I think is that Dick is much like the limousine Republicans and Liberals that have already fostered upon us these gun laws/compromises that have not done anything. I seem to remember there was someone not long ago that said something to the effect of disparaging using an AR 15 class of rifle for hunting. What got him fired was the same sort of attitude. These are the guys that sit in their homes, occasionally (Once a year perhaps?) taking their fine over unders, side by sides, finely etched and polished bolt actions and chrome plated revolvers out as they decide they want to for a photo op or a fine afternoon's skeet shooting and since, that is all they want/decide they need that's what should be for all. You don't need anything else in their eyes so all the compromise, all the laws that currently don't take that away from them don't matter to them. (I would even say the bulk of them would he glad to hand everything over to a bunker for their one photo op since they can request their firearms in writing once a year that's not totally taking them away but I digress...)

This is not to be confused with the Glock vs 1911, the AR vs AK clone arguments about what is better. This is people that see themselves, Dick being one of them deciding what is appropriate for them and what does not offend their sensibilities while they profess to support what we want and largely pay for them to write about/write laws about. (In the case of our congress critters.)
What he is upset about is the fact the "Common" sorts of folks were upset with what he felt we should all follow suit with. His attitude was only released as a trial balloon sort of thing. Make no mistake folks, those people remain in our midst. There is no foe greater than those that pretend to be allied with us.

precision270 said...

It seems to me, good ole Dick is willing to give up his moderately well paid position at Guns and Ammo in exchange for selling his soul to get a much better paid, much more cushy / more benefitted job with the Brady Campaign or other gun banner outfit. You know, an outfit that will be more accommodating to his view of his own self importance and have him attend all the right parties.

There Sir is the kind of compromise that I predict from Dick.