‘Guns & Ammo’ Magazine Replaces Dick Metcalf Apologizes for Wavering on 2A

From Jim Bequette, editor, “Guns & Ammo” Magazine:

Guns & Ammo Magazine
Guns & Ammo Magazine

USA --(Ammoland.com)- 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 2014. 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
“Guns & Ammo” Magazine:

17 thoughts on “‘Guns & Ammo’ Magazine Replaces Dick Metcalf Apologizes for Wavering on 2A

  1. I’m not buying it. This column had to be read by at least a few of the staff and management before it was published. The fact that the go-ahead was given means that at least several others need to go besides Metcalf. Even with him gone, I’ll not be buying G&A again, or watch the TV show. This is the ‘Dixie Chicks’ debacle all over again. You can’t just say or print anything without expecting backlash.

  2. I am a Constitutionalist and Navy vet. Also a big fan of Dick M. What he said is on point, too many untrained individuals are arming themselves just because the 2nd Amendment gives us that right with little or no training whatsoever. This creates a very dangerous environment and a gives the Liberals who want to take away our rights more ammo when something bad happens. I will let my current subscription expire to all 4 of the magazines from INTERMEDIA OUTDOORS NETWORK I currently subscribe to expire and not renew. Maybe Jim Bequette should be scrutinized for allowing the article published or abolish the 1st Amendment as well.

  3. True Americans, in this day and age, must be more vigilant. We all know there are those who want to “fundamentally change America”. When the proponents of that change fail, they apologize. In recent days we’ve seen apologies for contrary views on the 2nd Amendment, and the health care system that was foisted on us.

  4. i had a big problem with the justification of infringement on the second Amendment.the writer gave restrictions on the first amendment as examples. but these are flawed arguments. the “yelling fire” in a crowded theater, is a violation of others rights. you can yell fire in an empty theater all you want. also, what if there really is a fire in the theater. the point is that my right does not over rule others rights. agreed. but when my carry of a firearm does not impend your rights, i should have my second amendment rights protected. my rights to carry is not going to harm anybodies else’s rights. this is a good thing the G&A is taking this action, but i do wonder how it got put in in the first place

  5. I own more guns than a small army. I’ve sacrificed both financially, socially, and physically for the 2nd Admendment. The single biggest threat to the 2nd amendment is NOT liberals or anti gunners, we the people who love guns are. When we refuse to store our guns in a secure way, when we feel a private party should be able to buy a gun from another private party without a background check, and then we cry outrage when a child is accidentally killed or a gun is used in a heinous crime we are the problem. We appear ignorant to the general public and the general public is who will vote. Our rights will continue to be infringed until we voice and accept the logical simple fact “Where there are Rights come great Responsibilties. “

  6. Laying the entire blame on Dick Metcalf’s shoulders is a crying shame. That opinion piece didn’t get published in a vacuum. Plenty of folks at G&A had to have seen it and given it a pass before the issue went to print. Clearly it was easy to have Matcalf fall on his sword, given that he was leaving the magazine in a couple of months anyway.

    The apology is nice, but the fact that such an editorial could get through whatever layers of review the magazine has in place speaks volumes for G&A’s commitment to our right to keep and bear arms.

  7. As far as acting in a manner that will ostensibly placate the “Liberals who want to take away our rights” goes, nothing that anyone says or does will diminish the hatred for firearms and gun owners harbored by those who embrace weakness as “security,” and who would force that weakness upon all of us; nor will it discourage them from their craven crusade to transform America into the model of a giant penitentiary. If the Left’s toxic agenda is allowed to be realized, the depraved among our citizenry can feel even more emboldened to beat, rape and murder their fellow “inmates” in a gun-free paradise, similar to the lifestyle enjoyed by those living inside the walls of our Nation’s prisons. I will not surrender so much as a piece of spent brass to mollify the freedom-hating, cowardly, gun-control crowd. To those who fret about untrained individuals buying guns, you can thank the lunatics among our politicians and teachers, along with some parents, who seek to erase from our youth any reference to or knowledge of firearms. If you know nothing about firearms, take an NRA-approved safety course; it’s not rocket science. As far as Guns & Ammo goes, the old saying, “Fool me once shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me,” applies.

  8. Dick Metcalf’s article was right on point. I am a long time CHL holder and no one supports the 2nd Amendment more than I do. I believe that responsible firearms owners should keep weapons away from felons, from the mentally ill; that youth should be taught and trained in the proper use of firearms and then supervised until they are old enough and responsible enough to use them independently. No, I do not support the liberals and their gun grabber mindset with their ridiculous rush to blame guns for every shooting incident that occurs. At the same time, Metcalf raised good points that we need to address and would take ammunition away from the gun grabbers.

  9. It was good that they replaced Metcalf but that is what happens when you get weak kneed about the 2’nd ammendment. There is no comprimise & there shouldn’t be. With a commie in the white house we can’t afford someone who isn’t with us 100%

  10. With all due respect, I submit my reaction to this clip which appeared earlier.
    “…too many untrained individuals are arming themselves just because the 2nd Amendment gives us that right with little or no training whatsoever…”

    This begs the response: Who will then appoint themselves the rightful judge of who is or is not properly trained and qualified? A Commisar?

  11. I see some elitist gun owners mumbling in the above comments that some people (untrained, etc.) who should not have guns–this along the same thought line that just got G&A int trouble (take his gun, not mine).

    The only group(s)that should not have guns in our country are convicted or active criminals and left wing anti-constitutional anti-Bill of rights politicians and media types who are also criminals.

    The Second amendment and Bill of Rights is solely about INDIVIDUAL citizen rights and has nothing to do with the collective government.

  12. As Ben Franklin said, “those who give up liberty for security will have (nor deserve) either.”
    Bad or crazy people will always do bad or crazy things. Restricting guns won’t stop them. They will switch to bombs, fire, or other weapons that are easier to use and even more deadly.
    ALL that will EVER be accomplished by more infringements on “that which SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” is to create more helpless victims.
    The average number of deaths in mass shootings where the shooter isn’t stopped until the police arrive is slightly more than 14, but if the shooter encounters armed resistance the average number of deaths drops to 2.5.
    But, our government wants us all disarmed, claiming only the police should have guns because only they are competent to deal with such situations.
    That is absurd and a lie, because, according to federal law enforcement data, you are about 6.5 times MORE likely to be accidentally/mistakenly shot by law enforcement personnel than by the “average citizen” using a gun to stop or prevent a crime? (DESPITE the fact that “average citizens” justifiably kill far more bad guys than the police each year.)
    For example, NYPD officers, shooting at a gunman on the streets of NYC a few months ago, shot 9 innocent bystanders in their zeal to dispatch the bad guy. It happens far more frequently than most people imagine.
    Police training isn’t nearly what it’s cracked up to be (I know – I was a sworn police officer). 
    MANY of us with concealed carry licenses have FAR more training and skill than most police officers. And concealed carry licensees commit virtually NO crimes … Fewer crimes than active duty law enforcement officers.
    Don’t drink the “only government should have guns” kool-aid … Law abiding people who legally carry guns are extraordinarily responsible, careful, and competent. Defensive use of guns against criminals saves at least 65 times more lives each year than criminal misuse of guns takes.
    Then, there are the government crimes. VERY bad, evil, murderous things have ALWAYS happened when only the government and it’s agents had guns (other weapons like swords in past times).
    262 MILLION people were murdered BY THEIR OWN GOVERNMENTS in the 20th century – AFTER they allowed those governments to disarm them. See: http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
    They ALL thought “It can’t happen here” – until they were disarmed and it started, then it was too late. Don’t make the same mistake. Don’t EVER let your government disarm you.
    I saw a movie once where only the military and police had guns … What was the name? “SCHINDLER’S LIST”
    ANYONE who try’s to, or advocates, restricting peoples’ right to self-defense is complicit in their death.

  13. I think in the letters section of the same issue a reader chastised G&A for not commenting on 2nd amendment issues in any article they published in the past year. Looks like when they finally decided to get in gear they really let a stinker get in.
    I agree with Metcalf people should be trained but I disagree that it should required or about how it is acquired. I live in a rural area far removed from training classes and big name instructors but I was taught to shoot at around five years old and have been around firearms for 50+ years. I was taught safety from my Grandfather and Cousin before I was allowed to touch a gun. You don’t need a certificate from a “name” too know how to shoot or how to carry.
    For those who can afford it and have it available great take it but it isn’t necessarily needed nor should there be a requirement that you have to have it.
    It is your responsibility and no one else to make sure you know what you are doing and if you are prepared, if you aren’t it is on you, no one else. Anyone carrying a firearm that does not understand that fact isn’t going to benefit from mandatory training.

  14. Too late for apologies. How can you allow one of your editors to print this diatribe ? NO ONE at G&A noticed that this article was against the very rights that your readers cherish ??? My subscription will end soon, and I will NOT be renewing it. As for the Dick (Metcalf) that wrote this rubbish, maybe you can find employment with sarah brady’s group.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>