Oops is now a Guns & Ammo term

Dave Workman has a Seattle Gun Rights Examiner column about a writer fired for his views:

The firearms community is roaring today with news of the downfall of veteran Guns & Ammo writer Dick Metcalf, whose back page column in the December 2013 issue, headlined Let’s Talk Limits, infuriated gun owners.
In an open letter to G&A readers, a penitent editor-in-chief Jim Bequette apologized to readers for Metcalf’s column, in which Metcalf stated: “…way too many gun owners still seem to believe that any regulation of the right to keep and bear arms is an infringement. The fact is, all constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be.”
“Dick Metcalf has had a long and distinguished career as a gunwriter,” Bequette wrote, “but his association with Guns & Ammo has officially ended.”
Outrage reached all the way to the Northwest, where members of the Northwest Firearms forum engaged in a spirited discussion about Metcalf’s remarks. The column also became fodder for the Brady Campaign’s Facebook page, which did not help Metcalf’s situation.
Examiner reached out to Metcalf via email, but he did not respond.
Guns & Ammo’s Facebook page became a verbal slaughterhouse, and even Bequette’s announcement is drawing some blistering criticism. Yet, there was also some defense of the besieged gunwriter.
A man named John Martin wrote: "parts of that editorial were right on, as a six-year veteran of the Army, and avid gun owner, I believe in responsible use and monitoring. What nut job really thinks an average person should own a grenade launcher or a fifty-caliber machine gun? That people who are mentally insane and don't fully interact with reality should have a fully-automatic deadly weapon? The editorial was thought out, responsible, and for a brief moment, made the hardcore gun world actually look reasonable. I cannot believe so many people are embarrassing themselves, and making gun enthusiasts look like a bunch of pouting five year olds. So very disappointed."
Another man stated: "Dick Metcalf said what needed to be said. I've always thought of this magazine as one that promotes responsible gun safety, and that is what Dick Metcalf was advocating. Don't let him go because of people who think anything goes when it comes to guns."
Guns & Ammo has been a leading firearm periodical since it was founded by the late Robert Petersen, who made a fortune in publishing with various publications dealing with cars and the outdoors. Petersen sold his company in 1996, and it has gone through several ownerships since then. He passed away in 2007.
The swiftness of Metcalf’s downfall is reminiscent of what happened to veteran outdoor writer Jim Zumbo a few years back, after very publicly demonizing AR-15 rifles. Zumbo quickly and humbly apologized for his remarks, and did penance by attending a shooting school and going hunting with a semi-auto. That didn’t stop his sudden departure from Outdoor Life, but his career is far from floundering. He remains active today and is a staunch gun rights advocate.
Among the statements that brought out the fury against Metcalf was this: “I firmly believe that all US citizens have the right to bear arms, but I do not believe that they have a right to use them irresponsibly. And I do believe their fellow citizens, by the specific language of the Second Amendment, have an equal right to enact regulatory laws requiring them to undergo adequate training and preparation for the responsibility of bearing arms.”
Comments like that get writers into trouble with gun owners. Many of Metcalf’s critics argue that he has misinterpreted the meaning of “well regulated” in the Second Amendment, yet he essentially describes the current state of affairs for most people who have obtained carry licenses, including the much-prized Utah license, which has a training requirement.
Many, if not most, states that have concealed carry statutes also have some training requirement. Washington may be the rare exception because there is no training requirement, and more than 446,000 citizens have active concealed pistol licenses.
Just for the sake of clarity, perhaps there should be a show of hands: how many readers believe people have a right to use firearms irresponsibly?
Metcalf’s debacle, for it can hardly be described as anything less, is that he, as summed up eloquently by one member at Northwest Firearms, “may be dealing with the reality of the Fudds, moderates, and whatnot in Illinois, etc., but that moderate stance won't get you anywhere in the long run but on the losing side. I’ve seen this too much in the past ten years in multiple areas of politics/philosophy of governance. There are some lines that you cannot compromise on. These anti-gunners/progressives, etc. are people that for them the ends justify the means. They do not fight fair. You cannot compromise with that.”
Indeed not.

Rico says that Metcalf's mistake was publishing his article where he worked; he should've known it would draw fire...