Source Interlink Media (SIM) today announced it had accepted the resignation of Recoil editor Jerry Tsai. Mr. Tsai will leave Recoil effective immediately.

SIM, a leading men’s interest media company, will continue to publish Recoil, a gun lifestyle magazine that has to date proven to be a highly popular new title in the firearms sector.

“SIM gives its editors a lot of freedom in terms of how they run their brands,” said Chris Argentieri, President of Source Interlink Media. “In this particular case, however, mistakes have been made, and Mr. Tsai is stepping down.

“There should be absolutely no misunderstanding that Recoil is fully supportive of, and committed to, Second Amendment rights,” Mr. Argentieri added.

Mr. Argentieri also announced Joe Galloway, Associate Publisher, 5.0 Mustang & Super Fords, Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords, has been suspended until further notice.

SIM is actively seeking a new editor for Recoil, and looks forward to improving its approach to responsibly delivering engaging gun enthusiast content with the next issue and beyond.

41 Responses to Statement from RECOIL on Jerry Tsai’s Resignation

  1. Job opening for a pro gun person and maybe one for a car guy.

    Job opening for a pro gun guy and maybe one for a car guy. Farago could fill both shoes at once.

  2. The publisher forgot to add that they were for it before they were against it. I mean, that worked so well for John Kerry, didn’t it?

        • And do you honestly think Romney wouldn’t? That’s the problem – we’re in a lose-lose situation here with two incredibly anti-gun, pro-big government bastards competing to see who gets to butt rape us for the next four years.

        • To believe that if we don’t want to vote for Romney that we must vote for Obama is a sign that the progressives have done an excellent job at brainwashing people into blieving that only two choices exist in November. The Neo-Cons push this as hard and as often as they can. “If you don’t vote for Romney, we’ll get Obama.” They actually talked me into voting for McCain in 2008 with a similar line. I voted for their special candidate and we still ended up with Obama. “A vote for anyone other than Romney is a vote for Obama.” The candidate I choose to vote for is who my vote is for. My vote for that candidate is not a vote for Obama. It seems that many voters will vote for Romney as a vote against Obama. Voting against a candidate is, in my opinion, the truly wasted vote. People should vote for the candiate that best fits their belief structure and let the chips fall where they may. If we continue to vote for the cadidate that the party says we must, we will continue to get the same large government that both parties want. If we continue to vote for the candidate who spends the most money, we’ll continue to get candidates who are able to spend large amounts of money to buy the vote. If we decide to vote for the candidate who promises to continue to pay for the handout programs that we like then will continue to get handouts untill we no longer have an economy that can steal enough from those who pay to give to those who don’t If we decide to grow a set and vote for the candidate who understands the Constituiton and Freedom, we may actually get a government that understands the Consitution and Freedom. Alas, we’d rather lick the sweaty sack of government and pretend we are getting fresh water than to actually put in the work to find fresh water.

  3. hmmm, another editor suspended? Maybe he was the one who was supposed to review Jerry’s work and let it “slip through”?

  4. ENOUGH already about how you and you and yes, you also, tarred and feathered someone for disagreeing with you and exercising his first amendment right to free speech.

    • First Amendment protects freedom of speech from Government oppression. Nothing about protection from pissing off your readers, and having them contact your sponsors, who make your accounting department piss themselves when half of their ad revenue is gone, who tell the big boys at corporate that someone dun screwed up, and who in turn is fired to try to salvage any hope of making a buck.

    • Tsai lost his job, not for exercising hia right to free speech, but for insulting the very people his employers were trying to sell magazines to.
      A free market does not suffer the stupid.

      • A free market does not suffer the stupid.

        I tried that with Chrysler and GM – the government just stole my money and gave it to them anyway.

    • Theodore – as you’re obviously opposed to the second amendment and think that it shall be infringed, might I request on behalf of everyone here that you please go find another site to post anti-gun comments on?

      Thanks, nice talking with you.

    • And I will do the same to any cancerous rights-hating bigot that uses the “sporting” argument.

      Good riddance.

    • As stated here by many others, the people who disagreed with Jerry Tsai – and stated their intention to spend their money with a magazine that supported THEIR Second amendment rights – were exercising their right to free speech and their right to the free choice of where to spend their money.

      Your complaint sounds a lot like the whining of the Dixie Chicks when country-western fans decided to stop buying their music after the Chickiepoos insulted President Bush – to an audience in Europe. Yes, the Dixie Chicks and Mr. Tsai have a right to freely express their opinons. And the buyers of their products have a right to disagree with those opinions, to express that disagreement, and to take their money elsewhere. Just like the leftists protesting at Chik-Fil-A over the traditional marriage support of the owner.

      Bottom line for the publishers of RECOIL: if nothing else, they should have fired the guy for blatant stupidity.

  5. I believe Tsai “tarred and feathered” himself.

    He made comments that obviously upset the gun community and advertisers. His statements regarding “sporting purposes” mirror those of the Brady Center and thus set-off a firestorm within the community. This firestorm included many advertisers who immediately pulled support of the magazine, something that’s detrimental to the viability of the business.

    When Tsai was confronted with the reality of the situation his response was not to apologize but instead to point fingers at a major advertiser, H&K USA. He claimed his anti-gun views weren’t his own but those of H&K. He claimed he was merely reporting on their comments. This action prompted H&K to issue their own press release saying they made no such comments and they fully support civilian ownership of their firearms. To be honest, he’s lucky H&K isn’t taking him to court for that stunt.

    If you want to feel sorry for someone, feel sorry for all the folks behind the scenes at RECOIL that could have lost their jobs for his irresponsible actions should the magazine fail because of them.

    Lastly, this has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment. Tsai can be as anti-gun as he wants and scream it from the roof tops, the 1st Amendment protects this. However, once he speaks for someone else or for an entity such as a business there are no protections preventing him from suffering the consequences of those statements. That includes losing his job, being sued for slander/libel, etc.

  6. RECOIL is what happens when people who aren’t in touch with the relevant community attempt to publish a magazine. From what I’ve heard, most of the founders of the magazine were big into Airsoft and decided to step up to real firearms. If true, that’s the equivalent of someone who likes Call of Duty publishing a weapons and tactics magazine that is intended to be used by real people…

    The fact that the whole “sporting purpose” thing slipped through editing and review tells me all I need to know about their magazine. It’s published by people who know how to take good photos, but who have a total lack of appreciation when it comes to the history of gun bans, the incremental nature of regulations, and who suffer from a total lack of understanding of how our Constitutional system works (i.e. I do not need to demonstrate a need to exercise a right. The right’s existence is all the need that is required).

      • I enjoy stickman’s pictures. Please give some clarification to your statement. Are you saying stickman, a LEO, agrees with Tsai’s comments? Maybe I should ask stickman, and I probably will afterward, but your comment leaves much to the imagination since there isn’t much context.

  7. I suspect he hasn’t left SIM. He’s probably transferred to another group or might take on another role at RECOIL. His letter only says that he has “stepped down” from the position of editor of RECOIL Magazine.

    • Im guessing youre right. I think the.only reason it took until thursday to annoumce was that he and they were trying to figure out where he was gonna be working once all this blows over.
      Hope he knows more about cars than he does about gun politics.

  8. Maybe SIM can hire Sylvestor Stalone or that Stone woman or the Dixie Chicks to write an Op-Ed about how Rockin-Hard-Core-Flag Waving-Pro-American, Recoil Mag actually is and how us Mouth Breathers are violating SIMs Civil Rights

  9. The man said he didn’t think the average person should have a fully-automatic sub-machine gun. Is that really such a liberal, gun control loving statement?

    • Ted, does it not occur to you that giving us orders will not accomplish your objective? Or do you live in an alternate fantasy reality where you’re an important personage? Either way I reject your commands and your evaluation of the situation.

  10. The really crappy part of this is that this whole PR mess was created by YOU guys (whether it’s cause was justifiable or not), and now thanks to you pretty soon even the average person will hear through the grapevine that “even gun magazines are for gun control”. Crappy eh?

    Just wait until this makes the MSN or Yahoo frontpage… You guys are lucky it’s not a slow news week due to the worldwide protests. Remember that if this was never blown out of proportion like it was by the community, it wouldn’t have even mattered because no one would have heard about it. Now it’s out there and can’t be taken back.

    This was a BAD week for every gun enthusiast, gun magazine and gun maker/aftermarket parts company who depend on our Second Amendment rights for their livelyhood.

    This is not Recoil’s nor Jerry’s fault. It’s YOUR fault. Do you really think Recoil or Jerry were in any way, shape or form against the Second Amendment? Why the hell would they be? They love guns, they love shooting and they’re certainly aware of our freedoms and the importance of our Second Amendment. Perhaps they had taken it slightly for granted, which is NEVER acceptable, but certainly they didn’t make their statements maliciously or with an agenda against us. It was a mistake–a dumb one–but you the community are even dumber for jumping on it and making this fiasco out of this.

    Hopefully Recoil comes around successfully and continues being awesome and ends up growing into a huge sensation that introduces the love of guns, defense and respect for the Second Amendment to many new people that would have otherwise not happened, weren’t for this incident. That would be the best case scenario and I dearly hope that will be the case.

    Have a good weekend.

    • James, I fail to see how Jerry’s saying that people (civilians) should be denied certain firearms because said fa’s are not designed for sporting purposes, makes him in any way, shape or form, FOR the 2A.

      Since his being pro 2A seems to be a critical part of your argument, that makes the rest of your post as convincing as Jerry’s “apology #1”.

      Frankly, I think that you and Mr. Tsai share the same misconception that being a gun-loving enthusiast is the same thing as being a 2A supporter. Pardon me for pointing out that being capable of exercising or enjoying a right, does not make one a defender of it.

    • Why would you blame those who are sticking up for their rights? That’s like going to jail for hitting your spouse and blaming them for calling the cops. Jerry made a mistake and then didn’t own up to it, that is on him and no one else.

      • No, Jerry was dealing with fools and not sensible people. I love and own guns and I also believe that some types should not be owned by the general public. Jerry learned the hard way that you can’t have a rational conversation with 2a “defenders”. If you ask most people they’ll agree that certain guns should not be available to the public. Its simple common sense unless you wear 2a blinders .

        I liked Recoil but know that they’ve folded to the retards I’m out. The only slightly original gun mag will now become yet another fear spreading $5 catalog designed to appease the knuckle dragging mouth breathers.

        • Interesting. It’s obvious you don’t see that if the argument can be made that ‘some’ firearms shouldn’t be owned by the public that it isn’t much of a stretch to say that ‘no’ firearms should be owned by the public. The reasoning is the same since a gun is a gun. That one gun operates by pulling a trigger and another operates by manually cycling a bolt makes little difference. FLAME DELETED

    • It’s called personal accountability. Tsai was held accountable by his readers for what he published. If readers didn’t do this, and his published statements would have stood without objection. IMO that is much worse than this ‘PR mess’ as you call it.

      Later down the road, you’d have anti 2A people pointing to the article as proof that the ‘sporting purposes’ standard is a legitimate one. Shining a light on this and voicing objection to it now is what should be done. People need to be vigilant when their rights are being challenged or intruded upon.

Leave a Reply

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