I do still feel that Zumbo was taken down from within – his sponsors cater to all firearm camps and there is much overlap between hunters and shooters.

Zumbo himself has been quick to acknowledge shooters of all kinds are one brotherhood – and I have much respect for the man now he has started to make ammends.

And as such, I still believe that is one of the main differences between his case and Imus. Imus’ action was never seen as a strike against friends. Just part of his schtick as a shock jock.

Also, the people who went after Zumbo weren’t “his constituency,” not really. The Zumbo incident underscored the pre-existing hunter vs. shooter divisions that already existed.

Imus was removed by people outside of his constituency. This was more like a coup.

Imus is therefore the much more insidious action, as it represents the removal of freedom of speech rights from an opponent, not a representative.