Arthur Frommer’s Arizona-boycott blog post stirs anger, support
Arthur Frommer, whose travel guidebook series changed the way we see the world, has stirred up a hornet’s nest with his blog post that criticized the state of Arizona and threatened a personal boycott.
Frommer’s pique was prompted by armed protesters outside the Phoenix Convention Center on Aug. 17, when President Obama spoke at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention. One protester, who identified himself only as Chris (pictured above), carried an AR-15 semiautomatic assault rifle and a pistol. Arizona allows firearms to be carried openly.
Frommer, whose groundbreaking guidebook “Europe on $5 a Day” was released in 1957, wrote last week on his blog, “I am shocked beyond measure by reports that . . . nearly a dozen persons, including one with an assault rifle strapped about his shoulders and others with pistols in their hands or holsters, were openly congregating outside a hall at which President Obama was speaking.”
Frommer then wrote, “I will not personally travel in a state where civilians carry loaded weapons onto the sidewalks and as a means of political protest.”
He said he was not advocating that everyone boycott Arizona.
The blog received more than 1,100 comments, many disputing his views.
One respondent, who called himself VacaDuck, wrote, “It’s . . . amazing to see that a respected travel guide writer such as yourself will write off a destination merely because of fear of an inanimate object. Yet you are willing to write guides for such places as China, where political dissent and free speech will lead to your arrest and execution.”
But Frommer also had his supporters.
“He said nothing of the general gun laws, but rather the ability to bring guns to a political rally where their primary function is to intimidate and infringe on others’ most sacred right to free speech,” a respondent named Settembrini wrote. “Anyone who would react to this opinion by telling the declarant to ’stick to travel’ has the same lack of respect for free speech as the gun-carrying intimidators.”
Sherry Henry, director of the Arizona Office of Tourism, said in a statement that it was “unfortunate” that Frommer allowed “his personal and political feelings to become a rallying cry against Arizona tourism.”
Acknowledging that Frommer was entitled to his opinion, Henry also noted that gun-ownership laws had “nothing to do with tourism in Arizona.”
“There are 10 other states that have similar gun laws to Arizona, and to be singled out by Mr. Frommer is unfair and unfortunate,” she said. “Comments like Mr. Frommer’s do not affect gun owners or gun-ownership laws. They affect the housekeepers, restaurant workers, hotel clerks, tour operators and thousands of others at hotels, restaurants and attractions around the state that rely on the tourism industry.”
Henry’s statement also noted that she spoke with Frommer and expressed “disappointment” and “reminded him that the tourism industry in Arizona has supported the Frommer’s publications for years.”
Wiley Publishing, which publishes the guides, on Monday distanced itself from Frommer’s opinion. “We have a great deal of respect for our publishing partner, Arthur Frommer, who is not a Wiley employee,” the statement said. “Mr. Frommer’s posting does not represent an official point of view held by Wiley or the writers and editors who create the Frommer’s Travel Guides. As a company we remain neutral because we respect our rights as individuals to have varying opinions.
“Wiley values the good citizens of Arizona, many of whom are our customers, authors, and partners.”
In response to his detractors, Frommer wrote an essay in which he said the Phoenix police were “cowed” by the gunmen.
“To permit gunmen to converge on a political rally presents a ‘clear and present danger’ of public disorder, violence and death,” he wrote. “It takes only a split second’s pressure on the trigger of an assault weapon to kill dozens of people, and yet the Phoenix police, in a situation fraught with danger and at a fever pitch, marked by inflammatory signs and accusations, stood by timidly while a hothead brandished a loaded assault rifle and eleven others brandished loaded handguns.
“In a phone conversation, I advised the mayor of Phoenix that in light of the apparent policy of the Phoenix police department to do nothing in these situations to protect the visitor, that I personally would not visit Phoenix.”
He said he would change his mind, however, if “his police will disarm gunmen seeking to intimidate persons engaged in political activity.”
Scott Phelps, the director of communications for Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, said in a phone interview Tuesday that the gunman was trying to attract media attention and that Frommer “took the bait.”
“Phoenix is one of the safest cities in the country,” Phelps said. “In fact, the mayor just got back yesterday from D.C. where he was invited by the White House and the Justice Department to talk about best practices of the Phoenix police.
“Phoenix police were being completely professional. . . . The guy was just trying to make a political point through a media stunt. He honestly didn’t break any laws. This was the police department protecting the safety of the community, which was never at risk. Again, there were a thousand people there expressing their opinions legally and lawfully and . . . one guy who wanted to get on TV and he did. Phoenix protected everyone’s rights.”
The Arizona Republic newspaper on Tuesday said, “Of course, if he were to stop traveling to states where people have guns, his next travel book would be ‘Arthur Frommer’s Kitchen on $5 a Day.”
— Catharine Hamm, Los Angeles Times Travel editor
Photo: A man carries a rifle at a protest rally Aug. 17 in Phoenix, where President Obama spoke. Credit: Jack Kurtz / Arizona Republic
12 Comments on “Arthur Frommer’s Arizona-boycott blog post stirs anger, support”
Leave a Comment
If you are under 13 years of age you may read this blog, but you may not participate. Here's the full legal spiel.
Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this blog until the author has approved them.
All fields are required
Advertisement
SUBSCRIBE TO THIS BLOG
Click the logo below to subscribe to news from this blog:
Or add this feed to your favorite RSS reader:
more
Or add this feed to your favorite RSS reader:
more
Advertisement
August 26th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
First, I must point out that I have doubts about the mental state of anyone who gets so worked up at the mere sight of a firearm. I would advise them to stay away from gunshows.
The original author wrote: “It takes only a split second’s pressure on the trigger of an assault weapon to kill dozens of people, and yet the Phoenix police, in a situation fraught with danger and at a fever pitch, marked by inflammatory signs and accusations, stood by timidly while a hothead brandished a loaded assault rifle and eleven others brandished loaded handguns.”
The news articles I have read stated that the weapon in question was an AR15. Most of the articles assumed that the weapon was loaded, but no information was given on how or if that assumtion was verified. In addition, the mere posession of a firearm does not constitute “brandishing” of same, and if any of the protestors had “brandished” a weapon, the law enforcement on the scene would have reacted quite differently.
An AR15 is a semi-auto rifle, not an assault weapon, although it does look like one. As a consequence it cannot kill dozens of people with a split second’s pressure on the trigger.
If, however, the reports were incorrect, and the man identified as “Chris” was in fact carrying an M16, an NFA class 3 fully automatic firearm, capable of the spray fire the author was hyperventilating about, then I can assure you that “Chris” was one of the most “background checked” people on this planet, having passed an FBI investigation that many FBI agents, and most assuredly the President and quite a few of his cabinet would fail.
August 26th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
As long as it is within the law I believe every American has the right - Constitutional or otherwise to free speech and to bear arms. What I hold dear is my freedoms of individual choice as an American. Whether someone agrees with Arthur Frommer’s views or my views is someone’s individual choice. I personally made a decision to not spend one penny in Texas when I was moving from the West coast to Maine. I was absolutely perturbed at the re-election of George Bush in 2004. This was my personal decision and action. Should I have vilified all of Texas? I suppose not, but because a majority of Texans chose to re-elect that imbecile (in my view) I exercised my personal choice and vindication. I was running on fumes when I crossed the state line into Oklahoma but I smiled gleefully. Yes Oklahoma voted for the worst President ever too, but they didn’t raise the village idiot, were equally almost forgiveably uninformed about the calamity that lay ahead (as I predicted), and I sure wasn’t going to push my car to the nearest “blue” state.
August 26th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Geez, it is not an “assault rifle”!! How long has the Times covered this topic? You think you could get it right once and a while.
August 26th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
STAY AWAY FROM THIS TRAVEL GUIDE.
August 26th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
I don’t see how the embellished remarks of this one man had gotten by without closer scrutiny? If I said that you could get 12 elevators by pushing one button in Europe you might have told me I was wrong only one will come just like America. So I will tell Mr. Frommers that pulling a trigger on that rifle will get you one bullet no matter hard you pull it. Just like it is all over America. Being scared of an inanimate object like that is as silly as being afraid of one of the protest sign that were also there. Nobody was being intimidated by this guy with his gun if he had he would have been arrested. He carried in a open an non ready position the whole time. If anyone was scared of this guy it was a mental failing of their own making. It must be hard to learn new things sometimes. It must be harder to talk about things with authority when you know nothing about it. Notice how I haven’t given you any advice on traveling even though I have heard about it in passing many times.
August 27th, 2009 at 5:33 am
So, not only does Frommer advocate government blatantly breaking the law and violating the rights of law abiding citizens, not only does he not understand the laws of his own home state, which are very similar to Arizona’s in this respect, not only does he not understand the difference between an illegal machine gun and a legal semi-automatic rifle that looks scary to him, he doesn’t even understand a very basic and simple term in the English language.
Frommer used the term “Brandishing” to describe people lawfully bearing slung and/or holstered firearms. I don’t think that word means what he thinks it means.
Either that or he’s just lying.
When a person has to blatantly mischaracterize the actions of the people he’s criticizing in order to make his point…perhaps he should rethink whether the point is valid.
I also enjoyed the commenters who defended Frommers “free speech” rights to condemn Arizona, but then immediately denied that same right of free speech to those who expressed the opinion that Frommer should “stick to travel”. Hypocrisy rears its ugly head.
Rights are funny that way…they even apply to those with whom you disagree…like gun rights proponents.
Notably, none of Frommer’s critics opinined that it should be ILLEGAL for Frommer to express his constitutionally protected political opinion, only that, in their opinion, Frommer was unqualified on the subject upon which he spoke. Frommer was the one advocating the unconstitutional governmental suppression of political expression (and yes, the bearing of arms in this case was clearly an expression of a political viewpoint), not because of any actual harm done…there was none…but because of his own fear and prejudices.
Bigotry…Frommer is thy name.
August 27th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Why in God’s name were these guns brought to this event? For publicity. Unfortunately they got both the kind they wanted and some they did not. Too bad. I have travelled all over this beautiful country, espcially the southwest, but Arizona has never been one of my favorites. I know, you won’t miss me. Fine. Blue states have much to offer!
August 28th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
The right to “bear” arms is part of our right of freedom. We do not solely depend upon the government to grantee our rights we ourselves grantee those rights and one way is the right to bear arms. I lived twenty years in a country that forbade private ownership of firearms. It was and is much more lawless than this country. It is healthy for the establishment to have some fear of its constituents . It keeps them on their toes,
August 31st, 2009 at 12:55 pm
One need only read through the comments on this thread to figure it out. Gun zealosts are angry, hostile, short-tempered wierdos who can’t even type a comment without sounding a little bit unhinged. And the “how could anyone be scared of an inanimate object” talking point is rich. I’ll bet Ronald Reagan wasn’t scared of the inanimate object brandished by the nut who shot him in 1980, nor was JFK frightened by the inanimate object brandished by the psycho who killed him. And both John Hinckley and Lee Harvey Oswald were just exercising their Second Amendment rights to carry, right fellas?
September 1st, 2009 at 8:00 am
Jreid…odd, but i read through these comments and did not pick up the angry, hostile, short-tempered weirdo vibe you received…maybe you are some type of written word clairvoyant, able to sense a person’s true nature just by seeing a single letter that they type…As for my family and this hostility you speak of– my wife has a concealed weapons permit (as do I, as will my daughters when they are 21). Do you know why? To give us a chance when something bad happens, if it ever happens. Or to prevent something bad happening to someone else when we are present. In your fairytale world no one needs guns and only “weirdos” have them…in the real world there are very bad men and women. We can’t be with our loved ones every second of the day and while politicians and the rich can have their bodyguards full-time, we don’t have that luxury. I think in your world you don’t believe we have that luxury or right. That’s silly, irresponsible and when a bad guy confronts you, I have a belief you will thank the person who took the time to get background checked, spent the money for the permit, took the time to train to use their weapon, and are courageous enough to step in and come to your aid. Maybe not, maybe you will shoo them away and take care of business chuck norris style. Or maybe no one will be there to help you and the cops show up in time to make a nice chalk line figure.
September 8th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Hooray for you Mr. Frommer. I’ve been a fan of you as a person and your travel philosophy since your first book came out. I live in Arizona, belong to a womens’ shooting group and I think the lot of them should have been hauled off to jail for trying to intimidate people at a public political meeting. I now believe that it will take repeal of the 2d amendment in order that the majority of voters (whose gun control wishes are consistently ignored because the NRA has sufficient legislators terrified)) will experience a national, rational gun possession and control policy that will stop the kind of insane behavior you objected to in Phoenix.
September 17th, 2009 at 9:57 pm
We fully support you, Arthur Frommer, in your boycott of Arizona. We know friends in Tucson who have invited us to visit them, but with the open-carry environment there, we shall not go. Thank you for standing up to the gun lobby.