Utah has one of the lowest homicide rates in the country, so I was surprised to see a columnist with the University of Utah's independent student newspaper recently argue that the state is in desperate need of new gun control laws. According to the FBI, Utah's homicide rate in 2023 was just 2.18 per 100,000 people, about half the national homicide rate of 5.5 per 100K. Yet, according to columnist Matthew Timka, things have never been as bad as they are at the moment.

Gun violence is the worst it has ever been. Miraculously, more people own guns than ever, debunking the common argument that more guns make us safer.  

In 2023, Utah saw 418 people die behind the barrel of a gun, and 195 more were wounded. This ranks the state comfortably at 46th in the nation for gun violence. This represents a 12% increase compared to what the state observed in 2012.  

Despite Timpa's claims, the truth is that "gun violence" is once again declining across most of the country, at least according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report, which estimates an 11.6% decline in murder and non-negligent manslaughter cases last year, along with smaller decreases in aggravated assaults and robberies. And while Timpa is correct in noting that the total number of gun-involved deaths in Utah is 12% higher than what it was in 2012, he conveniently leaves out the fact that Utah's population has grown by 19% over the past decade. In 2012, the state was home to about 2.85 million people. Last year the estimated population was 3.41 million. The raw number of gun-involved deaths (which include both homicide and suicide) may have increased over the years, but it's actually dropped considerably on a per capita basis. 

Timpa's column suffers from several other fundamental flaws, including boldly asserting that gun owners' opinions "are given to them directly from the gun lobby". Apparently we're unable to think for ourselves, or to draw our own conclusions about the ineffectiveness or illegality of various restrictions on our right to keep and bear arms. Timpa even trotted out that tired talking point that those of us opposed to more gun control laws are turning a "blind eye to fellow citizens who have lost their lives."

Gun owners are quick to categorize themselves as being entirely opposed to any form of gun control. It doesn’t have to be this way. Utah fails to meet even the most practical laws regarding gun control, none of which entail forcibly taking anybody’s gun. Background checks, barring those with violent offenses from carrying firearms and required training for gun purchases are all simple solutions proven to help curb gun violence.

The majority of gun owners would hardly be affected by these laws. At worst, it may create a minor inconvenience for those who have proven their ability to own a firearm safely. My question to gun owners is this: is a small sacrifice too much to ask if it has the potential to save somebody’s life? Your child’s life? 

Timpa seems to believe that no Second Amendment supporter has ever lost a friend or loved one to "gun violence". If we had, then we'd automatically support the "nuanced" gun control laws he's calling for. The truth is that many of us have experienced the pain and heartache of losing a loved one to murder or homicide. We just don't believe that gun bans, "universal background checks" or requiring someone to pass a test before they can exercise a fundamental civil right is constitutional, much less necessary to reduce gun-involved deaths.

From 1991 to 2020, violent crime and homicides in the United States plunged by about 50%, to the lowest levels recorded in half a century. Even when Washington, D.C.'s ban on handguns was thrown out by the Supreme Court in 2008, the District's homicide rate continued to decline, which is pretty strong evidence that legal gun owners aren't driving violent crime in our nation's capital. 

The same is true of Chicago, which had nearly 900 homicides when it instituted its own handgun ban in the early 1980s. That ban did nothing to reduce violent crime or murders, which peaked in 1992 at 939 homicides before steadily dropping throughout the rest of the decade and into the 2000s. In 2009, the year before Chicago's handgun ban was struck down by the Supreme Court in the McDonald decision, the city recorded 461 homicides. Five years after the ban went away, there were 411 homicides reported. 

Though murders have increased in Chicago over the past decade, the homicide rate is still well below what it was during the era of the handgun ban. Timpa's assertion that more guns result in more "gun violence" is demonstrably false, but he's far from the first ant-gunner to make that claim, and I'm sure he won't be the last.