Came late to the discussion, but here's my 2 cents...
Firstly, I feel bad that Zumbo made such a blatent comment. I did enjoy reading his columns and articles over the years, especially about elk hunting. Again, the free speech aspect comes up, but as many have pointed out, it's not a protection from people's reactions, just from the government locking you up for critisizing it...
Ah, but like some comments made by Mr. Ruger before his passing, it seems that one's own preference for a type of equipment got expanded into a belief about what other people should be allowed to use... The longbow/compoundbow/crossbow debate and the fracas involving dogs and deer hunting also come to mind.
I'm dissapointed he didn't see the inherent problem about publishing such comments, or how people in the shooting community would react.
Or especially the fact that his own preferred equipment, a bolt-action scope-sighted high-power rifle is "A Sniper Rifle" and the weapon of a political assassin in the minds of the same people who oppose ownership of so-called "assault rifles". JFK, Martin Luther King, and the Texas Tower Sniper are all still vivid images in the minds of the gun-control crowd and the TV watchers they appeal to... not to mention the Beltway Sniper...
Divide and conquer was a very effective strategy that let Julius Ceasar conquer the known world of his time. I'm surprised that Jim Zumbo didn't see that aspect of it as well.
