Response from the readers / Internet / Public was bad enough, but I would imagine the overwhelming voice of advertisers and industry partners that drove much of that decision…
The initial article was bad. Throwing H&K under the bus was worse (which industry partner would he stomp on next?). The retraction, again stating he was merely passing information, was reprehensible snd should have been vetted before publication.
Harsh? I’m not so sure… Even if it was an unwitting mistake he attacked the fundamental core of our liberty – that a citizen need not justify the want or need of arms legally born – and we can I’ll afford that sentiment or voice among the print, digital, or social media producers in our world.
“Seems kind of harsh punishment for what was probably a one time gaff.”
That “one time Gaffe” would be akin to a cop intentionally running down pedestrians in a crosswalk or a firefighter pouring gasoline on a house and tossing a match: it WAS this guys job to foster further interest in gun ownership and tacticool black guns in particular, and thereby expand the market for his advertisers, not reinforce the “OnlyOnes” and “Because we are H&K, and we hate you, and you suck” memes….
For a gunrag guy to do that, there is something skewed in his core principles….. or maybe he never heard of Zumbo…. kids these days seem to disregard everything that happened in the past, even if it is the very recent past…..
Sorry, no sympathy here. Stupid hurts–it’s supposed to. The pain is how you learn not to be stupid.
You’re supposed to be promoting one of our civil rights. Instead, you fall right into the rhetoric of those who would take them from us, then try to minimize your involvement, and expect us to be all forgiving and make nice at you? Not happening, Sparky. We’ve went through decades of being vilified and marginalized, and we’re just now clawing our way back to the light.
We don’t take this sort of thing lying down, nor should we. Next time–if you get a next time–pay more attention to what you write.