A few Arizona public officials including the Mayor of Phoenix and the Director of State Tourism are upset to learn that Arthur Frommer of the famous Frommer’s Travel Guides has decided not to recommend Arizona as a travel destination due to its laws permitting the carrying of visible firearms. This statewide right was recently on display thanks to a dozen people attending various rallies outside the Phoenix Convention Center as President Obama addressed the Convention of Veterans of Foreign Wars.
Perhaps the Arizona State Legislature never thought about out-of-state tourists when it expanded its gun laws under the 2nd Amendment. Arizona is not the only state that has such open firearms laws but due to recent nationally and internationally televised coverage, many more people know where Arizona stands on this constitutional issue, and how some residents are prone to act.
Mr. Frommer and other travel guides and agents can make whatever recommendations they believe are in the best interests of their readers and clients. Arizonans cannot compel people to visit their state if they feel the least bit intimidated, threatened or unsafe. Certainly Arizona does not rank among the world’s danger spots such as Iraq, North Korea, Nigeria, or even parts of Mexico, but public perceptions are important considerations when people decide where to travel.
If tourism to Arizona drops off significantly due to outsiders’ fears of its gun laws and itchy-finger residents, it may force the State government and private enterprises to focus on developing new and sustainable alternative businesses so Arizona’s economy is not so heavily dependent upon tourism. Alternately, Arizona could market to certain outsiders that might wish to visit the state because they could carry their guns around in public. Those visitors might only partially offset the business lost from others who choose not to visit Arizona.
I learned how to fire rifles and pistols when I was young and growing up in Ohio. I have gone hunting and target shooting with friends and acquaintances in the past in Ohio, Michigan and upstate New York. I was taught all about gun safety, locks, and ensuring that I always knew where other people were located when I fired any weapon. It may be worthwhile to encourage every American to fully understand guns and their proper use and storage, whether they own one or not. Some gun owners have little or no firearms training and then too many preventable injuries and deaths occur among their friends and families due to their ignorance and lack of adequate safety instruction.
For the past 3 years, I have lived in Arizona. I do not own any firearm because there are children in my household and I have not seen the need for one when driving, walking, bicycling or taking public transit anywhere around Phoenix or elsewhere in the state. I am not engaged in any business enterprises that could necessitate having a gun for self-protection. Guns can be as dangerous as automobiles if in the wrong hands. Such a reality should justify similar licensing requirements for gun use and ownership as we have long expected for all drivers and car owners.
I see no need to debate the 2nd Amendment and its protections as recently clarified by the U.S. Supreme Court. However, the exercise of every right or freedom comes with equally important public responsibilities to our fellow citizens.
Perhaps if I lived in a dangerous neighborhood and had to walk around at night where I feared an attack from a criminal, I might consider openly carrying a gun. Of course if the criminal sneaks up and shoots me first, my gun would be rather useless. Alternately, if I shoot first and discover later that I shot an unarmed person who was not a criminal, then I could face serious criminal charges. I was never trained in gun-fighting or hand-to-hand self-defense, and neither are most gun owners. I simply avoid bad neighborhoods at night unless I am passing through in a vehicle.
I would not bring any firearm (loaded or unloaded) to a place of public assembly in broad daylight where there are already plenty of police to keep order. I would not be afraid of dropping it and having it misfire and thereby injuring someone or causing a small riot. However, I would be more concerned that someone might try to take it while I was distracted or jostled by the crowd and then it would be fired at the gathering or later used in some crime. It is unwise to wrestle over a gun with another person while innocent bystanders are around.
There is no denying that a person who openly carries a gun appears rather intimidating to those who are unarmed. That is where the police get some of their obvious and needed authority over citizens and criminals. But the police are trained in the proper use of guns in very limited situations and must continuously maintain their firearms skills for the protection of the general public. I have no desire to intimidate others by a show of force. I do not fear the vast majority of my fellow citizens, regardless of their political, economic, social or religious views.
I do not need to brandish a firearm in public to appear more macho, menacing or impressive compared to other people without guns. The vast majority of people in civilized societies are governed by overriding basic tenants of ethics and morality that we do not intentionally hurt or intimidate others, particularly in our public places and in our private transactions.
Why would someone need to carry a gun, either concealed or out in the open, where little or no threat of injury, assault or crime exists in most of our public places?
The standard responses “because I can” or “you never know what could happen” or “I’m protecting my freedoms from the government” are wholly inadequate from any logical, legal, rational or safety standpoint.
The last response is purely delusional.
A likely justification for openly carrying a gun at a public gathering could be “I’m compensating for a small male private part” but that would also be an “inadequate” rationale. Mr. Frommer and I should ask a question of these attention-craving narcissists milling among other citizens who are peaceably expressing their 1st Amendment rights. “In light of your significant responsibilities to the rest of the general public, please explain your purpose in waiving those guns?”