A journalist at the Daily Utah Chronicle decided to opine on the event a few months ago in which a teaching assistant decreed that armed students had to stand in a segregated “Second Amendment Zone.” That student was relieved of responsibilities; however, there are some Utahans who think she had a point:
“Our response to gun violence has become a toxic routine — shock, mourning, occasional vows to change, and then, after the dust has barely settled, we return to an untenable status quo. The graduate student was willing to address Utah’s toxic gun culture directly, beyond the whiplash of the news cycle. Their methods were confrontational, but it is past time to be brutally honest about our cultural obsession with guns. An educational setting is a perfect opportunity to examine and challenge existing paradigms. Installing a “second amendment zone” was extreme and unnecessary, but so are Utah’s current concealed carry laws. Our legislators need to protect their constituents by enacting common-sense gun legislation. If they refuse to do their jobs, I suggest sending them to a 3×3 taped square on the Senate floor.” (Josh Petersen, A ‘Second Amendment Zone’ is Ridiculous. So are Concealed Carry Laws., The Daily Utah Chronicle)
Mr. Petersen also called Utah gun laws “remarkably loose” (even though concealed carry requires a permit) and said the aforementioned TA’s “willingness to question and confront Utah’s gun culture is sorely needed.”
and said the aforementioned TA’s “willingness to harass and abuse Utah’s gun culture is sorely needed.”
Fixed it for her.
They insist on pushing their way of life on everybody else and yet we’re the “toxic” ones? If they don’t like how things are done here, there are three other English-speaking countries that have strict gun control and big government. Go there instead of demanding that we change to suit your mood.
Every civilan disarmament proponent has a healthy dose of totalitarianism,there is only one way their way as a free Republic should bend to their will or Not.
Agreed. i would gladly trade places with the numb skulls that want gun control. biggest part of the problem of ANY level of control by govt in any area of life but especially arms is that it has a nasty tendency to bite the public in the ass hard.
The only thing ‘toxic’ about our ‘gun culture’ is the toxic insistence of some that others be stripped of their right to self defense.
Exactly. And well said. Gun controllers by and large are people who are strongly discontented with everyday American society. Collectively they are experiencing a social psychological dilemma with guns becoming a handy symbol of their disquiet. At other times the same kinds of unhappy people might be campaigning against porn, speed limits . . . or plastic straws.
Don’t forget Christianity.
I was going to go with “lead exposure.” Maybe solvents? Or Creedmoor jokes, but those are more like “intoxicating” than toxic when taken in moderation. 😉
You must be thinking of 9mm or possibly .223, or Chuck Norris jokes. Moderation hides under its bedsheets when a 6.5 Creedmoor joke appears. 🙂
The best way to deal with this journalist and her newspaper is for gun owners to show up at her home and or business carrying signs and if possible open carrying firearms. And then she can address the issue of whether or not gun owners have First Amendment rights just as a newspaper does???
And you can also invite her to a local NRA dinner. If I was in Utah I would do both.
Well that’s my suggestion Utah Gun Owners what say you?
Better yet, pass out leaflets with the names, addresses, phone numbers and email addresses of these journalists and state that you will not find guns on their premises or persons.
Make it easy for criminals to “ply their trade”–journalists first.
Turnabout is indeed “fair play”.
I wouldn’t be so sure if they actually have no guns. Plenty of hypocrite libs and rinos have AR15s and evil stuff tucked away.
For these people and the circles they keep, fake victim status is the highest form of self actualization. Sometimes real victims wander in to those circles thinking they will be in good company only to realize that they will be shunted to the side in the service of the fake victim narrative….. All that being said, going to this woman’s house and open carry protesting would transform her in to Christlike fake victim in those circles. There are Represetatives in Congress who would invite her to speak at hearings and high priced dinners. She would start writing cover stories in national and international publications about how she’s a victim of the NRA and toxic American gun culture. Her career as a professional fake victim would be made. You would be doing her a favor.
It still sometimes amazes me just how threatened these people are by regular people legally practicing their right to keep and bear arms. Freedom is “toxic” to these people.
why is this journo in Utah? Noit good enough to get a job in the anti-gun market he really wants?
No doubt……guess he couldn’t get a job in NYC, CA, or HI. Those places should be his idea of paradise.
He wouldn’t say anything to a California/NYC audience that we don’t already hear all the time. In Utah he’s subversive and edgy. In California he would be unemployed.
It’s a student newspaper. Even in Utah the students are just to the right of Marx.
Not true, I got both of my degrees at the University of Utah and was also an opinion columnist for the Daily Utah Chronicle. Conservative Utes are probably outnumbered but there are still plenty of them. As a columnist I took up a number of conservative causes but defending the Second Amendment was probably my specialty.
I love the second comment under the story (Joseph Aurelius).
Awfully whiny for LDS land…is the leftcoast moving in?!?
Left coast has been moving in for 10+ years.
California is over populated so some have moved there.
I left in 2011 and the California influence was getting bad.
I keep telling people. You can’t run away from CA. Look at what’s happening in Washington, Oregon, Nevada and Utah, to name a few.
Running from CA is supporting tyranny. To make the BOR the law of the land once again CA must be defeated.
HEY! That’s my line! ….. keep saying it until it gets old! It needs to be known. California is toxic and if WE don’t fight them here and now and forever, YOU will be fighting them in Montana, Wyoming, etc in the near future. When you move, they win. They want an uncontested hegemony in this state so they can branch out and spread their poisonous ideological roots to other places.
I very rarely find anti-gun people in Utah even in business settings. Been living here for 15 plus years and non Mormon. But the Californians have been invading. Mostly, they sell the house they inherited from their parents. Buy one in cash in Utah and still have a few hundred grand stashed away. Or they are tech people coming in with Adobe and others who expanded out here.
But the overall population from my experience is pro-gun. They just tend to be very low key. Being diplomatic and non confrontational seems to be a cultural thing here.
But the academia here is very leftist. I’ve seen student groups that are openly communists for 10 plus years. Mainly rebelling against mommy and daddy. Here they are good boys and girls, are conservative and religious. Or they are the extreme opposite to prove something. Very little inbetween.
Regardless, views like the journalist and the associate professor are not even a large minority. I work at a tech company with 1000+ employees and we have annual shooting events.
utah & other gun “journalists” put it where the moon does not shine, useless commie t**ts
When was the last time there was an actual school shooting in Utah?
Oh that’s right: Utah teachers can carry so there hasn’t been a school shooting in Utah. But yeah, that’s totally toxic all right.
Yeah and we have no permit open carry, no right to inform officers, can carry in schools if you have a cc and have legitimate business there… We disprove many of the blood in the streets arguments. But but but, don’t ya know we need more gun laws! Yes that’s the solution in search of a problem.
Is Mr Peterson aware that ccw carriers are the most lawful group of people in the country? Including the police. Did he bother to open a web browser to check? I actually know the answer to these questions so don’t bother responding, I just tire of the emotion driven drivel that passes for reporting nowadays. These hypocritical morons are the reason this country has no moral compass, yet somehow they have the stones to blame me and you for their troubles. I miss the rugged individualism and “toxic masculinity” (is that a thing?) that made this country the greatest nation on the planet post WWII. These nanny state whiney bitches make me want to puke.
Utah’s toxic gun culture?
Utah’s homicide rate(2016): 2.4/100k
California’s homicide rate (2016): 4.9/100k
When the left talks about a “toxic gun culture”, they mean private gun ownership, full stop. They’re not talking about the antisocial things people do with guns, or the cultures that accept and promote those things.
Exactly, it is gun owners they find toxic. They act like they care about homicide but, as you point out, virtually no one is getting killed in Utah. It is us that they hate.
I think he’s confusing Utah with Chicago.
It’s easy to see how he could confuse the two /sarc
This is an example of how myopic liberals can be. He lives in a state with a whole lot of guns and very little gun crime, and blames the “gun culture.”
Meanwhile, liberals in cities with the worst violent crime rates and the most restrictive gun laws complain that the laws aren’t strong enough.
Liberals have an uncanny way of insulating themselves from the truth.
The kid is a junior English and Psych major. He’s a child.
Unfortunately a lot of “adult” journalists show no better reasoning ability than this college student!
A junior in college would on average be between 20 and 21 years old. Not a child by a long stretch.
I heartily welcome actually examining and challenging the factual basis of paradigms rather than “examining” paradigms based on emotion and some utopian ideal.
And does the author also desire to challenge the civilian disarmament paradigm?
Are we talking about real, tangible, and verifiable protection? Or are we talking about facilitating feelings and moving toward some nebulous utopia?
This line of reasoning (i.e. legislation will make us safer) is the go to argument from the civil disarmament crowd and yet they never support it with any meaningful analysis. I don’t know to what extent they truly believe that there is some “common sense” legislation that will reduce the (already low) rates of criminal firearm use and to what extent they are just using that and similar phrases to sell their ideas to the uninformed.
I do know that when someone says to me that, “we have to do something to stop the gun violence epidemic”, and I point out that there is no such ‘epidemic’ (and by that I mean that 11,000/330×10^6 is not a big number) and then further question them about exactly what they would do and how it would be done, they never actually have any solutions. Sure, they spout additional talking points, (ban this, ban that, more background checks, etc.) but they seldom if ever have sufficient grasp of the actual scope and nature of gun related crime and of existing gun laws to carry on even a basic conversation about what, if any, new legislation would be effective and how it would be implemented.
The problem is that tons of people form their positions based solely on emotion and their notion of utopia. In other words the world is full of people who have the psychological development of a three year-old child.
Needless to say, it can be extremely difficult reasoning with a three year-old child. In fact it can be downright impossible to reason with a three year-old child.
I think you are right about that. I must admit that I do find it exasperating. I can understand that with respect to guns and crime and violence in general that people have visceral reactions but, I’m dismayed that people still fail to see that in order to have a meaningful public debate and come to effective policy solutions that informed, dispassionate discourse is necessary. This, of course, applies to arenas other than guns but even on comparatively trivial topics people seem to be losing the ability to engage in rational discussion. (I’m reminded of a city council debate about parking in my local area a couple of years ago that was so filled with hyperbole and wild assumptions about human behavior that I could make no connection between what some people said and the world I actually live in but, that is way off topic.)
More to your point about the murder rate with firearms in the U.S.A.:
About 80% of those murders are the result of criminals attacking other criminals, almost all of whom are already “prohibited persons” who cannot legally purchase nor possess firearms. And since those actors are criminals who are already violating myriad laws, there is no evidence and no reason to believe that additional laws will reduce the murder rate among hardened criminals with or without firearms.
The HUGE implication to that FACT:
Subtract criminal activity and about 2,000 people without any significant criminal record will “snap” and use a firearm to murder someone annually in the U.S. That is exceedingly low compared to the 100s of thousands of times that people use firearms in righteous self-defense annually.
Exactly why I attack the premise that we have a “gun violence epidemic” when discussing (or trying to discuss) these issues with the other side. I think that this premise goes unchallenged far too often. Even with people who are pro-gun they often concede that, yes, we must do something about all the gun violence/crime. Really, must we? Personally I think that an increasing percentage of the responsible and law abiding regularly carrying a gun would do more to limit what criminal gun use there is than any other policy proposal I’ve heard.
This “we must do something” type of premise really grates at me. Why? I ask that they show me the scope of the problem, show me what we must do, show me *How* it will work – crickets.
How does one apply pressure, on the portion of the population involved in a type of crime, that reduces criminal activity by implementing policies that effect the portion of the population not involved in crime all while the criminal population only represents a tiny fraction of the total population? To me advocating for such an approach is akin to advocating tearing down one’s house to get rid of the little leak in the roof.
lawyers/politicians will do anything to keep themselves in business/office
He should start by trying to get rid of the first amendment first, then go after the second…😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
Hate speech and the violation of human and civil rights cannot be tolerated in a free society. This so called journalist needs a long term in prison for his crimes.
Do your research on colleges before sending your child to one. They are indoctrination camps for the most part.
Guns DO NOT have rights!
Human Beings have rights ! We need to change our vocabulary to reflect those facts. We have an inherent natural right to life that government can neither grant, infringe upon, or deny. Corallary to that is the inherent right to defend outlives and those of other innocents. Guns are the best tools yet made to actively resist both governmental tyranny and defend life and limb from criminal threats. Therefore, the right to own and carry guns is a natural human right. The 2d Amendment OBLIGATES government to to protect and enforce this human right that pre-exists government.
We need to start expressing ourselves in these terms to win over those on the fence.
Clearly, an individual who is educated beyond his intelligence. I coined a term for them as a 9 or 10 year old child well over 50 years ago, “grocery store person” meaning someone that might have a bunch of college degrees after their name but who are common sense wise so stupid that if they were locked up alone in a grocery store for a week, they would starve to death.
I call them “emptylectuals”.
Or sexual intellectuals( f$&kin know-it-all)
The author mentions a “toxic gun culture” without actually defining it of course.
For several years now my standard practice is that I am armed 99% of the time that I am not in bed. My youngest child has always known this and never really thought about it nor said anything one way or the other. Then, at 10 years old my youngest child said, out of the blue, “I am glad that you have your gun with you — I know that you can actually protect me if something bad happens.” And the way that my child said those words made it apparent that this conferred a profound sense of peace and security.
Every day: I wake up, put on my clothes, strap on my handgun, and go about the business of my day. And every day, that handgun just sits in that holster. I don’t show it off to anyone. I don’t advertise it. I don’t display it. I don’t take it out and wave it around — even when people insult me, take my parking space, or cut me off in traffic.
I have only drawn my handgun three times while going about my business: all three times were when the neighbor’s psychotic German shepherds (who have already rushed out and bit someone) were at large and came charging at me in attack mode. And all three of those times I put my handgun back in its holster without ever having fired a shot.
I am apparently an example of the so-called “toxic gun culture” that the author was mentioning. What exactly about that is “toxic”, I have no idea.
Ironically, though, the author may be right in a sense:
Our gun culture helps other people see the incredible value of being armed which, of course, motivates them to arm up as well. And that, of course, erodes support for civilian disarmament, which is truly toxic if you are the one pushing for civilian disarmament.
The attachment by ‘journalists’ of an adjective with negative connotations to an otherwise neutral term as a means to sway the reader/viewer has become so pervasive that it is difficult to find a counter example of unbiased reportage. Frustratingly, it seems to have the desired effect on a large proportion of the populace. (I recognize that the article in question is an op/ed and, therefore, not necessarily intended to be unbiased but the observation is still notable.)
Exactly. Owning and carrying a firearm gives an extra peace of mind and it will not change the behavior of a normal law abiding citizen in any negative way. Quite the contrary, it makes you more aware of your surroundings, it makes you avoid certain places of nuisance. As much as we love shooting paper at the range most of us are not trying to get into a situation where you have to shoot someone. The overwhelming majority of armed Americans are responsible people. The nutjobs, thugs, and Manchurian candidates will always find ways to get a firearm, or anything else that can be used as a weapon. We have a mental illness, substance abuse, and bad parenting problem more than we ever had a gun problem.
How many criminal shootings have occurred in Idaho or Montana? A huge percentage of the population is armed in these states. People live a simpler, happier life than city rats on the East coast, Chicago, or CA. You have less gang bangers, and less nutjobs who only need a spark to turn into mass shooters. I am in FL and the state is turning into a nightmare in the populated areas. Too many people, traffic is horrible, more tensions between locals and seasonal residents, and unaffordable housing for many Floridians…Now they want more gun control on top of it! Why are these idiots here? Once FL has the same stupid laws and taxes as their home state are they going to move again and go ruin someone’s else life?
It’s always the same logic with these people. They don’t like it, they disagree, they don’t see a need so it must be banned or at least restricted, and it’s never enough you give them an inch they’ll demand a foot!
Most gun grabbers and socialists are mentally ill, depressed, and they do not want you to have a good life. They are unhappy people. They are unable to form their own opinion without the last rant from politicians or hollyweird celebs, and athletes. You can prove them “gun control” does not work, criminals cannotcare less about laws and regulations, you can get firearms in the hood without showing an ID or passing a background check…it doesn’t matter!
I insist that you stop liking things I don’t like!
(for those with broken detectors, that was sarcasm)
Appears to me there is a whole lot of self-proclaimed potentates, closet authoritarians, and tassel- loafer tyrants that need to go to prison, or frog- marched to the gulliotine!
“Let them eat CAKE!”
hope it is yellow cake you want them to eat 🙂
I am trying to post the following comment to this article on the Chronicle’s website:
“This was outrageous conduct on the part of this TA, no matter which side of the issue he or she was on. “Weapons Policy” is not a relevant issue to the content of this course. And even if it were the instructor has no right to mock bully and demean those who take an opposing view. If he or she feels so strongly about gun control I suggest they address this issue with somebody who is not a captive audience and dependent on them for a grade. I challenge this graduate student to a debate on the issue at a place and time mutually convenient for the two of us!”
“And it came to pass that we again began to establish the kingdom and we again began to possess the land in peace. And I caused that there should be weapons of war made of every kind, that thereby I might have weapons for my people against the time the Lamanites should come up again to war against my people. And I set guards round about the land, that the Lamanites might not come upon us again unawares and destroy us; and thus I did guard my people and my flocks, and keep them from falling into the hands of our enemies.”
The daily what? Never heard of it… Guess I’m not Utah’n enough. I can’t stand any of Utah’s “news” outlets. They all suck. KSL is extremely anti- Trump, guns, getting government out of marriage, etc. And the same goes for the Tribune and I’d assume the deseret rag is identical to the Tribune since the trib bought the deseret.
Hey daily d-bags… Stay off my lawn and out of my business!
i agree with them on the govt getting out of marriage. A marriage License is just another tax. It is also another control. No the govt should get out of pretty much most aspects of our lives and get on with its job of simply organizing protecting the borders. Even this they do a piss poor job of doing yet they inveigle themselves in more and more aspects of our lives. If a proposed law violates the constitution in any way those who wrote it and put it forward should have serious consequences to face
“a toxic routine — shock, mourning, occasional vows to change…”
Who vowed to change? NON-gun owners may *want* change. But law-abiding gun owners are quite right in not changing anything, nor wanting to, in order that these people might “feel” somehow safer.
WE didn’t break the law. Why should our rights be infringed upon based on the lawless acts of another individual?
What rights are people like the writer giving up? Someone else abuses their 1st amendment rights, so they gonna give up theirs?
“But law-abiding gun owners are quite right in not changing anything, nor wanting to, in order that these people might “feel” somehow safer.”
These people are never going to “feel” safe as evidenced by the fact that the writer of the article is in Utah where he *is* already safe. If he doesn’t feel safe now, nothing can be done for him.
Utah is a mostly MORMON population state.
Most MORMONS are avid preppers.
Most MORMONS will do anything to protect their preps, up to and including violence.
I’ve never met a MORMON (and I’ve met a LOT)who is pro gun control.
Most MORMONS carry, all of the time, ESPECIALLY during church services.
My point: This journalist doesn’t even come close to representing the beliefs of the population of Utah. js…..
actually i can think of something that “could be done” for him to make him feel safer. Put him in a padded and sound proofed cell for the rest of his life. That, unless we just refused to feed him, would cost the tax payer though and taxes are already way way beyond the pale.
The only toxic epidemic we have is the one that has infected the minds of these utopians. Because they blast out salacious articles for every gun incident the typical mindset of the uninformed is that the streets are virtual war zones filled with shootings. Such is the case for the human cesspools like Chicago, Detroit, NYC, NOLA, LA that have ineffective draconian gun control laws, but not the nation in general.
I’m a long time Utah resident and had to look up what the “The Daily Utah Chronicle” is. It’s a campus paper for the university where the incident happened.