|
|
Post by twomoons on Nov 7, 2013 13:46:29 GMT -5
I see Dick Metcalf got his mammary in the wringer for expressing his opinion. I wonder if he too will have to kiss Ted nugent's behind to get back to work. The worst part of the whole thing is that if you read to the bottom line all he said was that he thought 16 hours of mandatory training for CCW holders was reasonable (heres the dirty word) gun control.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmarriott on Nov 7, 2013 17:40:41 GMT -5
The editor also resign after firing Metcalf. I wonder if he even read the op ed piece.
Lately gun mag (peterson's ) need a school teacher to spell and proofread the articals and 40% of the stuff is reprints of classic stuff.
Internet killed the magazine stAr. I do get guns and ammo, fur fish and game. Gun digest and the NRA things.
I did not like the new style and guns and ammo with the weird type colors and size. Personal taste is all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Purebred Redneck on Nov 7, 2013 23:38:06 GMT -5
The problem is magazines (and organizations) like Guns and Ammo are made to pander to the fringe. When you deal with people who are so blindly passionate (that's the nicest I'm going to get) about that one topic, any little thing sets them off. This isn't Outdoor Life and Field & Stream where there would have been a little less flak. G&A really only has 1 thing going for it. And when you throw a wrench into your one trick pony, that is a problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack on Nov 8, 2013 8:02:04 GMT -5
I haven't read the article, so I will have to be careful about commenting. Haven't read G&A in a long time.
I guess in some places, you can't have opinions that don't toe the company line.
I, too, wonder why the editor allowed Metcalf's article to be printed, if it so violated the magazine's rules.
An idle thought off the top of my head: seems to me I've seen Metcalf's byline around for a long time. I wonder if he's about to retire, and didn't care who he might have irritated.
|
|
