Brady Campaign Says ‘Thank You’ to Guns & Ammo’s Dick Metcalf


It’s always disappointing when someone who’s ostensibly in the the RKBA camp shoots himself in the foot. So to speak. The bigger problem, though, is that we all get hit with the shrapnel. All you can do when it happens is point out the problem and try to limit the damage. If you’ve been following along lately, you know that the latest self-identified member of the Zumbo/Tsai media hall of shame is Guns & Ammo’s Dick Metcalf. But despite his verbal negligent discharge, there are those who’ve argued that these things are too inside baseball to really matter in the great scheme of things . . .

Metcalf even has a few drinking buddies who’ve tried to rationalize away what he wrote as a refreshing, if poorly worded, attempt to look at “the entire Second Amendment.” Okay then. But the thing about these self-inflicted wounds is they hurt every bit as much as – if not more than – those caused by the enemy. And even worse, as with all NDs, they’re almost invariably preventable. As Dan Rowan might have said, thanks a lot, Dick.   [h/t Bob]


  1. avatar ST says:

    Should we now consider ALL traditional media,firearms oriented included, as enemies of the Constitution?

      1. avatar 24/7 Pro says:

        Also Fudds.

        They are the ones that are hiding among us and slowly draining and destroying us from within. Especially with the whole: “As long as I have my dad’s, Dad’s, DAD’s classic bolt rifle/lever gun/over under/wood stocked pump shotgun. I. Don’t. Care. What. Happens.” (Not a ding to those weapons, just the attitude.)

        The anti-gunners certainly cant hurt us like the Fudds can….

        1. avatar RLC2 says:

          No. Don’t keep branding entire groups of people (hunters, etc) as FUDD’s.
          That’s like saying ALL WOMEN are anti-gun, or ALL Blacks are Democrats.

          That’s self-defeating labeling that’s EXACTLY what the anti’s want us to do, and probably have hired people to troll and sock-puppet sites like this, to encourage the unfortunate tendency of some OCD gun-owners to engage in circular firing squads and flame wars over issues as stupid as which caliber is best for you-name-it.

          Stick to the facts- stick to the person making the statement-
          stick to Guns and Ammo, for example, and mock them with the truth.

          USE the ALINSKY tactics against THEM- not us.

        2. avatar Cliff H says:

          You cannot fight an enemy until you identify that enemy. I’m pretty sure those POTG who like to hunt know who the Fudds are and whether or not they fit in that group. They also know that Fudds are self-serving and short-sighted gun owners who truly believe that THEIR guns and rights to hunting and shooting clay targets will NEVER be infringed.

          Any stereotype is based on some essential truth about the group. Not all blacks identify with black gang-bangers. Not all Jews identify with hard-left liberal Democrats. Not all of us OFWGs are far-right evangelical Christian gun-clinging Republicans. But those who are know that they are and it is just as important is for us to let them know that WE know who they are. They should not be able to hide in the larger group and erode our rights just because we want to use PC speak and not offend anyone.

        3. avatar William Burke says:

          A fool and his guns are eventually parted.

      2. avatar William Burke says:

        Agree, YES. This Fox Mulder “Trust No One” moment brought to you by Dick Metcalf….

        1. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

          Guns&ammo isn’t traditional media unless you define traditional as “comes in a paper version”

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      less. You left off a syllable.

      1. avatar Jay1987 says:

        Ok I’ll fix it.
        That d1ckless c0cksucking yeast infected cumbubble on the ass of humanity. Oh and he’s a sell out.

        1. avatar Notguiltfree says:

          I was going to express a desire that Metcalf and his ilk drown in the kool-aid their pouring but I like your choice of adjectives much better. Go Jay!!!

        2. avatar Bob says:

          I DO NOT like your choice of adjectives. That post contained the most vile language I have read in a long time.

          Clean it up. There are women and children watching.

        3. avatar utdmatt says:

          Just so ya know Bob, that wasn’t an original. Cookies for the person who sources said quote 😉

  2. avatar ShaunL says:

    You know when you get a thank you of any kind from the Brady bunch it’s facepalm time.

  3. avatar Steve says:

    When Recoil did a stupid thing last year, it spread like wildfire, they lost a boat load of sponsors, and the editor went bye-bye.

    Dick has done something FAR worse (instead of saying a gun was too much for civilians, he’s outright condoned further laws to further outlaw other things), yet where’s the sponsors response? Why have I not seen them dropping G&A like crazy? Who are these people, as I need to not give them my money/.

    1. avatar BlinkyPete says:

      Where did he say he endorses outlawing further firearms? It wasn’t in the article we’re all referring to.

      1. avatar Totenglocke says:

        It was heavily implied by saying that rights need to be restricted.

        1. avatar BlinkyPete says:

          I’m not sure if you read the article, but he specifically says he’s talking about requiring training, and uses the new IL law as an example of success. I don’t agree with him – you’d save a lot more lives requiring mandatory training for bicyclists, but I also don’t see this as being as bad as the recoil incident.

        2. avatar Accur81 says:


      2. avatar Chip says:

        He said it right in the article…

        “… I firmly believe that all U.S. citizens have the right to bear arms, but . . .”

        Emphasis mine to answer your question.

        1. avatar Pascal says:

          What’s the difference than with the gun grabbers that say “I believe in the 2nd Amendment, but..”

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      I agree this is worse. How do we put pressure on G&A advertisers, and do it NOW? I’m on board for most reasonable suggestions as to courses of action.

  4. avatar gloomhound says:

    They need to fire his ass.

    Any word from “Guns & Ammo” on this incident?

    1. avatar AlphaGeek says:

      They’ve been silent on the issue thus far, both via the website and their social media channels.

      Every G&A post has a comments thread that focuses on this issue, no matter what the original topic was.

      1. avatar Jim Jones says:

        Wow. Just stopped by their FB page after your comment. You weren’t kidding. They are doing the ostrich head-in-the-sand thing for the moment, but it’s pretty clear that won’t work. Wow.

    2. avatar Ross says:

      Metcalf has committed the unforgivable sin when it comes to the Second Amendment.

    3. avatar rosignol says:

      Pretty sure they’re waiting to see how many cancellations they get.

      1. avatar ValleyForge77 says:

        You can count me in as one cancellation. I’m done with G&A. Until they are done with Dick.

        1. avatar B says:

          I’m done forever with them. What he’s done, and by extension G&A is completely unforgivable. I am nearly frothing angry over this because of that tweet.

    4. avatar ropingdown says:

      Fire his ass? Clinton pal Ron Burkle controls the company that owns G&A. Metcalf was probably just doing what the überboss demanded. He’ll probably get a promotion to Turncoat-in-Chief, with a bonus. Expect G&A to feature Hillary Clinton holding a Brown Bess in coming issues.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        As long as she’s pointing it at herself.

    5. avatar rpres62 says:

      they will…. Job opening at Guns and Ammo.

      I cancelled my subscription.

  5. avatar BlinkyPete says:

    Maybe this is a time to put out an olive branch to the Brady Bunch then.

    “Look guys, I also support gun control – common sense measures we can all agree on. Just not the assault weapons ban, the NFA, the GCA, the Hughes Amendment, magazine bans, gun free zones, universal background checks, may-issue permitting, or generally anything California has ever done. Ever. Other than that, I really think we can find some common ground that will keep our children safe and increase the rate of violent felons dying in lead poisoning incidents.”

    1. avatar Totenglocke says:

      But the Brady Campaign Against Gun Ownership doesn’t WANT criminals to end up dead. They WANT those people out raping and murdering so that they can tell people that if you don’t support their policies (and pay them a hefty sum), the boogeyman will rape and murder your children.

      1. avatar BlinkyPete says:

        My comment was meant to be humorous, like, hey, here’s something we can all agree on!

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      I long to ignore the traitorous shit you spew, but it just doesn’t set right with me to keep my mouth shut about such an egregious insult to the Bill of Rights. Every word you just wrote is so repugnant I’m sliding towards “break something” mode.

      Long story short: STFU

      1. avatar Gyufygy says:

        Sarcasm, mofo, do you speak it?

      2. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

        Burke to whom is that comment directed?

  6. avatar imrambi says:

    I’m waiting to hear his reasoning on Guntalk as he will be a guest:

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Robert, Matt in FL, are you guys gonna call in? PLEASE?

      1. avatar Matt in FL says:

        I appreciate the vote of confidence, but my weekend is locked up starting early Friday morning. I had already gone looking to make sure I can get the podcast so I can at least hear it after the fact.

  7. avatar NYC2AZ says:

    Win, win for the Brady Bunch. They get to use him as propaganda and watch G&A go under. The VA gov race however, shows their negative impact and weakness to the DNC. They’ll have a hard time shaking that image for a while.

    1. avatar gloomhound says:

      They are just going to go with their guy won, and you know what he did.

      He ran as anti-gun and he won, now what does that tell you about Virginia.

      1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

        Yes, he did. And their paid propagandists in the media will run with it. But, the ones who do the stratigic planning for the party have already taken notice. They are starting to try and distance their key political players for 2016 away from gun control. People will of course forget and we will go through this again (and again, and again), but for now, they may claim victory, but they are quietly pulling back. How long will it last? If they don’t get a message sent to them in 2014, probably not very long.

  8. avatar AlphaGeek says:

    There’s no way to spin this. Fsck that guy. It’s torches-and-pitchforks time.

    Let him go on the Brady roadshow if he needs a job.

    1. avatar RLC2 says:

      Normally I’d be all about reasonable debate, but we see how that works with the anti’s. Its not reasonable, its pure knife-fight, Alinskyite lies, deception, ends-justify-the-means morality, in spite of the public’s support for the right of self-defense.

      Metcalf should know better. I never spent a dime on paper gun rags, but for sure now I never will, and anything I see online about Guns and Ammo goes in the same general category I keep Cheap As Dirt, Recoil, and Dicks: “Not shopping there”.

      I hope the advertising managers for various products and services targeting the people who have the money to spend $2000 or more per year on sporting hobbies like hunting, recreational shooting, and adult toys in general are taking notes.

      PS: anyone see where Amazon will now share revenues with non-profits if you designate them for purchases – NRA and SAF are supposedly on the list. I use a credit card where all my points go to Wounded Warriors. I’d do same at Amazon if TTAG could get on it…its not THAT hard to become a non-profit, if you avoid words like Tea-Party, so the IRS in Cincinnatti doesn’t target you…:)

      1. avatar EagleScout87 says:

        Never spending a dime on gun rags isn’t the answer, spending on the gun rags that are stuanch 2A supporters is the answer.

    2. avatar ropingdown says:

      Metcalf will still have a job. They’re just changing the masthead to “Guns & Ammo?”

      Hillary will be quoting Guns & Ammo throughout the next presidential election cycle, “I just think Americans should know that even Guns & Ammo, that notoriously pro-gun magazine, supports increased regulation of what it considers the gun ‘privilege.’ “

    3. avatar William Burke says:


  9. avatar Billy says:

    G&A’s “likes” on Facebook were @ 399,000 this weekend when this story broke and people started angrily posting on their wall. I expected to see their “likes” go down, as happened with Cheaper Than Dirt (I’ll never forget or forgive those bastards!), but oddly enough, their likes have jumped over 20,000…Also, it’s Wednesday, and NO response yet from G&A…Recoil was a small time job, G&A is established. They’re big enough that I’m afraid to say that I really don’t think anything will happen here. Instead of firing Metcalf (don’t give him a chance to resign comfortably…fire his dumbass!) He’ll probably write an “Explanation” piece, take a slap on the wrists and G&A will continue on… People are stupid and forget easily. How else do you explain Obama’s re-election?

    1. avatar AlphaGeek says:

      Their likes are up because that’s the key to being able to communicate with them via comments, messages and wall posts. “Like”, in this case, just means “connect”.

      1. avatar Billy says:

        I don’t “like” them and I’m able to post on their wall. Then again, I’m posting from a PC. Might be different from a mobile.

        1. avatar AlphaGeek says:

          Fair enough. However, it also means you won’t see their posts in your feed, which gives folks ample opportunity to engage and express their displeasure.

          I don’t make the rules, this is just how people do stuff on FB.

    2. avatar Jeep says:

      I have subscribed to G&A for a number of years, but did not have them “Liked” on Facebook. I clicked on Like only to find out how they are going to respond, it had no affect on how I actually feel about them. I will probably end up cancelling my subscription, but still want to know where they stand as a magazine. I have a feeling many people did/feel the same thing.

    3. avatar RLC2 says:

      Don’t mistake data from FAKEBOOK as reality-based. They have admitted that as many as 60% of the accounts are fictional or anonymous and anyone can go click a “like” – remember Cass Sunstein has been tapped to fund a Nudge team to do exactly that…

      reminds me of that funny commercial about the Encyclopedia printer, who calls his guy overseas, in response to the baby hitting a button on the Ipad on the floor…

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Farcebook and Gargle are data-gathering arms of the NSA. And that’s not an exaggeration in the slightest.

    4. avatar EagleScout87 says:

      The anti’s are on social media too, I can see it going up.

  10. avatar Muleskinner says:

    When one can write an article that clearly muddies the water between a inalienable right (2A) and a privilege (driving a vehicle) it is time for the author to find another line work. Either the author has deliberately kept himself ignorant or he is being paid off by the anti-gun crowd. Either way I will no long buy Guns & Ammo and I will seriously entertain not purchasing from any manufacture who advertises in that rag.

    1. avatar William Burke says:


    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      As a professional driver I feel a need to comment here. As our society is currently constituted it is for most people a vital REQUIREMENT that they be able to drive in the course of their work, commute and most other aspects of their life. And the roads are full of people who can just barely, with luck and some help from other, more attentive, drivers, accomplish that task on a day to day basis.

      I am pointing this out because while people like to point to right to drive as a “privilege” granted to you by the government, at what point does that government privilege interfere with your other rights as a citizen to live your life and earn a living? What about the precedent that they can set the standards for minimum competency, the mechanics of your vehicle, what kind of fuel you can or cannot use and force you to buy insurance? Do you even know how much of the cost of every gallon of fuel you buy goes to the government in taxes? (Hint, it is larger than the amount of profit the oil company makes by a rather large margin.)

      So, you are perfectly happy to relinquish to the government the authority to totally control your NEED to drive as though it were a government privilege, not a right to earn a living and travel freely. Will you be satisfied when the government decides to ban internal combustion engines and you are required to take either public transportation or work within walking/bicycle distance of you home? Giving government any degree of power is like feeding Gremlins, except its is ALWAYS after midnight somewhere. If you give them authority they WILL find some way to abuse that authority.

      So the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a right that the government cannot infringe (really?). Driving is a privilege that they could take away tomorrow by mandating minimum fuel economy standards or just raising taxes per gallon to levels the average person could not possibly afford. So, what if they manage to find a way to deny your “privilege” to drive based on gun ownership? Don’t say it can’t happen, they’ve done slicker things. And they could certainly argue that such regulations do not deny your Second Amendment rights.

      Talk amongst yourselves.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Are you serious? Mandated public transportation would be absolutely HORRIBLE for tax revenues!

      2. avatar Nate says:

        +1000 – we need to stop referring to the right to travel using a method of our choice as a privilege. See the 9A and the common law right of locomotion. A right to travel on foot or horseback is the same as the anti’s saying the 2A only covers muskets.

  11. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    With this press release, G&A now has a decision to make. From external signs, they’re about to choose… poorly.

    1. avatar ropingdown says:

      I don’t expect Ron Burckle, the owner, considers the choice poor. He definitely got his money’s worth out of Bill. Hillary can only be more of the same, or better, for him

  12. avatar racer88 says:

    Maybe G&A can survive on subscriptions from Brady Campaign supporters?

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      The Brady Bunch and the readers and subscribers who only read the gun articles and “reviews”. Doctors and dentists who subscribe just to toss it in the waiting room. Assorted ostriches who believe there’s no connection between guns and politics. A sizable number of people.

  13. avatar Erasmus says:

    And I’ve kissed Guns & Ammo goodbye. This is too serious an issue. It’s not a game for fools to play lightly with….

  14. avatar Ralph says:

    I don’t see the issue. Dickless Metcalf is a fudd. Fudds don’t give two sh1ts about 2A. As long as they can shoot their ducks, clay pigeons, deer or the occasional pheasant-hunting buddy, we can all go to hell. When the fudds ran the NRA, they were collaborators. They still are.

    1. avatar dwb says:

      help me out with this one. Is your plan to alienate and insult some gun owners in a quest for purity, branding them as inferior because they hunt, instigating a circular firing squad, driving them into the arms of the progressives and the Brady campaign; Or is your plan to gently persuade them that the Brady campaign plans to leave no gun unturned, including the type of shotgun used in the Navy yard Shooting, and that members of the left like PETA have no problem banning hunting as a side effect of banning guns, in the hope that the People of the Gun are stronger when we stick together?

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        No, it’s my “plan” to call a spade a spade.

        With friends like that, who needs enemies?

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          I agree, Ralph. The fact of the matter is, one had best not keep back-stabbers around the house; they have a penchant for stabbing people in the back.

        2. avatar dwb says:

          then stick to insulting a particular person, not an entire class of people.

      2. avatar William Burke says:

        First of all, to whom are you addressing the questions?

  15. avatar Chris Dumm says:

    Metcalf really kicked the puck into his own net with this one, and the shocking thing is that his statement is so detailed that it can’t ever be considered a slip of the tongue. Metcalf has branded himself an ‘Elmer Fudd’ gun owner, who only wants citizens to be allowed to possess *his* favorite kinds of guns.

    As many have pointed out, G&A is a much bigger publication than Recoil was last summer when that particular defecation hit the oscillation. This will certainly hurt their image and eventually their bottom line.

    I personally ‘dropped’ G&A decades ago, when I noticed that even the most inaccurate and unreliable guns always got enthusiastically positive reviews.

    Every unnecessary and expensive new cartridge would get several pages of mandatory manufacturer fellatio, whether it was the anemic .32 H&R “Magnum” or the untested (and almost unusable) .357 Maximum or the utterly redundant .45 GAP, whose namesake pistols are now useless curiosities. (If you happen to be one of the literally dozens of fans of any of these calibers, tell us why and maybe we’ll write a post about them.)

    But a lot of readers weren’t as discerning as I was, and some of them kept buying G&A and reading glowing reviews of the (unfixably dangerous) Vector CP-1 or (completely stupid) electrically-ignited Remington rifle ammunition.

    As compromised as they were when it came to providing honest information to readers, G&A was at least wholeheartedly pro-gun back then, however, which made them worth something.

    Now they’re not.

    1. avatar Rydak says:

      Well spoken and right on point. BTW, Anyone here a response from G&A yet? (I’m late to this game as I don’t sub them anymore either)

    2. avatar ragnar_d says:

      “I personally ‘dropped’ G&A decades ago, when I noticed that even the most inaccurate and unreliable guns always got enthusiastically positive reviews.”

      Same here. I really got tired of the BS reviews. “This gun functioned flawlessly for 100 rounds after a 200 round break-in!” Spare me.

      I think this one summed up most of my opinions on the gun rags:

  16. avatar TJ says:

    The 2nd Amendment just took a Dick in the A$$

  17. avatar dwb says:

    sigh. with friends like these who needs the zombie apocalypse.

  18. avatar Taylor Tx says:

    Guns and Ammo for Guns and Ammo Control

    1. avatar RLC2 says:

      Good one. That’s how I will remember them too.

      but you left out the little “tm”.

  19. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    What this Metcalf fails to understand is I can operate a car without insurance or a license on private property. I can own whatever car I want (can afford) and drive wherever I want as long as I stay off of the public roads. There is no constitutional protection a to drive my car on public roads. Until I leave my private property I can do whatever I want with my car. I can remove emissions, take out the seatbelts and airbags etc or drive as fast as I want. Of course property size will limit me, not the government.

    Now the antis will say if you take your gun outside of your residence it should be regulated also just like a car! You should be required to get a license and only carry so many bullets or whatever the flavor of the week is. Not so fast! The 2A protects my right to bear arms. If I can’t leave my house while bearing arms then my right to bear arms is being infringed. If my weapon is limited in its ability to protect myself then it is an infringement. If I can have my guns taken by the local LEOs on a whim (think MA) then that is an infringement.

    Opening up the can of worms of gun regulation would eventually lead to what would become a defacto ban. Rules would “allow” people to keep and bear arms but the limitations would be so severe that essentially it would be impossible to bear a firearm on your person without extensive bureaucracy. Firearms effectiveness would be reduced through magazine capacity limits and feature bans. I think our founding fathers understood human behavior well and that is why they placed the “Shall not be infringed”. It was clear to the framers that weasels will distort and manipulate words any chance they get. They have even been successful at manipulating the second amendment for many people in the U.S..

    More gun laws will not solve crime. In fact, good people will be abused by new gun laws because they are the low hanging fruit. Good people have something to lose, criminals don’t and prosecutors know this. Good people will do their best to follow the laws and for most gun owners they will never commit a violent crime.

  20. avatar William Burke says:

    Metcalf didn’t “shoot himself in the foot”. Where do you GET crap like that? He shot US in the foot, and that “shrapnel” nonsense is of no use.

    Metcalfe doesn’t feel the pain of his betrayal; WE DO.

    Benedict Metcalf needs to be tarred and feathered, and all that comes after it.

  21. avatar TJ says:

    Anyone who is willing to give that much ammunition to the Anti’s is without a doubt an enemy of the gun

  22. Anybody remember this from earlier in the year? Major Obama bundler and anti-gun Huffington Post writer buying up all the gun rags. You haven’t heard from G&A because they’ve been turned into a cancer.

    Know your enemy.

  23. avatar ensitue says:

    Rule #1 in retaining your RTK&BAs:
    Don’t be a Dick
    And just for giggles research the owners/Publishers of ALL Gun/H&B rags
    They are virtually All east coast Leftys

  24. avatar Clay says:

    Brady says thanks. Guns and Ammo says “get the f**k out”

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      I see your original source and raise you our post about it (citing that original source, of course).

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      Despite the reservations, we can still raise a glass in toast to the turn of events, I think. Right?


  25. avatar MacBeth51 says:

    He may have shot himself in the foot, but he shot the rest of us in the back

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Well put.

  26. What Mr Metcalf did was tacitly agree with how things are done in his home state of Illinois, or Ill Annoy, which is the best way to pronounce that state’s name. There are many many great folks from that state who are balanced, rational and don”t buy the Chicago/Springfield BS as it has come out of the barrel bung.

    Judging from what I have see of Mr Metcalf on the television program G and A, and from his prior writings, I was stunned and repulsed by his highly incorrect interpretation of the 2nd Amend. He fails to recognized that at the time of the writing of the Constitution, the mere ownership of what the Brits would have deemed ‘well-regulated’ was enough to go to jail. He fails also to note that, as with the Rangers, who were fielded irregulars, the Colonial defintion of ‘well-regulated’ meant maintained in good working order, ready for use and trained in that use. The Militia were commoners, irregulars, not government regulated and apportioned troops. By his interpretation of the right, the 2nd Amen was more as privilege, subject to approval by government at some level.

    The Constitution was about Natural Law, and God given not governement granted privileges. Mr Metcalf missed this entirely. Which is the greater point: his state views gun ownership as a malleable and regulated privilege. Mr Metcalf sees righrs as all being infringed, and that is also part of the problem: he is used to regulation and has grown accustomed to the bridle and bit.

    Mr Metcalf needed to go,and is gone as of the latest I read. God riddance. Now he can join other celebrity posers with guns: John Kerry and AlGore.

  27. avatar niceguns says:

    Well I guess the enemy among us has just been identified.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email