What do you think?
Rate this book
Citizen-Protectors: The Everyday Politics of Guns in an Age of Decline
From gang- and drug-related shootings to mass shootings in schools, shopping centers, and movie theatres, reports of gun crimes fill the headlines of newspapers and nightly news programs. At the same time, a different kind of headline has captured public attention: a steady surge in pro-gun sentiment among Americans. In Citizen-Protectors, Jennifer Carlson offers a compelling portrait of gun carriers, shedding light on Americans' complex relationship with guns. Delving headlong into the world of guns, Carlson participated in firearms training classes, attending pro-gun events, and carried a firearm herself. Through these experiences, she explores the role guns play in the lives of Americans who carry them and shows how, against a backdrop of economic insecurity and social instability, gun carrying becomes a means of being a good citizen. A much-needed counterpoint to the rhetorical battles over gun control, Citizen-Protectors is a captivating and revealing look at gun culture in America, and a must-read for anyone with a stake in this heated debate.
248 pages, Hardcover
First published March 29, 2015
27 people are currently reading
520 people want to read
About the author
Jennifer Carlson
11 books10 followersJennifer Dawn Carlson is associate professor of sociology as well as government and public policy at the University of Arizona. She is the author of Citizen-Protectors: The Everyday Politics of Guns in an Age of Decline. Her writing has appeared in such publications as the Los Angeles Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post. She lives in Tucson, Arizona.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
December 19, 2016
This excellent book deals with psychology. Psychology driven by emotion rules us with reason a distant second. We may think we are reasoning but almost always we are rationalizing what our emotion wants us to do.
The perception of personal power and worth are by definition psychological. To set the stage for a review of this book, let me tell you about my own psychology regarding weapons and power.
Power is enticing to humans, to men in more obvious way than to women. Power can be experienced in various ways but at root, and most beguiling to men, is raw physical power. Because weapons are tools that greatly increase physical power, they are doubly enticing. Anyone can be powerful with a gun, no need for body building.
When at times I have held a metal pipe or a long wooden rod in my hand, I find an almost overwhelming desire to hold up the pipe like a baton, or suspend the long wooden rod above my shoulder like a javelin, though I have never used any weapon like these. There is a feel to them, a desire to balance them in the hand, to strike something with the pipe or throw the rod at a target that is instinctual and strong.
A gun is a far more powerful tool that is deliberately designed to at least injure if not kill. It is comfortable in the hand, hefty, easy to use, provides a very satisfying loud noise and recoil when fired and tears up a target some distance away - the perfect tool of personal power projection leaving the shooter untouched and ready to fire again. A man cannot hold a gun without an emotional response.
Why, then, am I not a gun owner?
I feel power in my intelligence and the ability to project that power through speech. This power is superior to physical power because it does no physical damage to others, is available without the need of any tool to enhance it (though the Internet helps!) and it is a personal characteristic that in the way I express myself is mine alone. I can influence one or more people without in any way harming them, frightening them or even being present with them. That is how I experience my own power.
The feelings I experience when holding a weapon, or weapon-like object, though physically stimulating, are immediately followed by a smile at myself when I realize how pathetic I would be with a weapon in my hand compared to a thought in my mind expressed through speech. It elates me that I am able to have personal power through intelligence rather than force, but unfortunately this mode of personal power projection is not a common experience. I can't claim education helped me achieve the power I have. It has far more to do with the home I was brought up in with parents who valued the use of reason, the world of books and in particular the power of speech. This kind of environment is, I'm sorry to say, rare in America. Now the book review can begin.
As the title reports, America is in an age of decline. Industry has moved overseas, unions have a shadow of the power they once held, wages have been stagnant for decades, there is little job security and few jobs with benefits that guarantee a secure financial future. For the majority, work provides a large part of self worth that gives peace of mind. The rug has been pulled out from under people and they are anxious. Anxiety and fear are closely related. As they become deeper, the need to find any kind of security becomes desperate as one wonders - who am I?
A gun is the most basic security object, a last resort when personal power has been reduced to the point that one feels vulnerable to an external world over which one has little to no influence, the situation of the working class American male in the 21st century, the people in Jennifer Carlson's study conducted in southeastern Michigan (Detroit/Flint area). She interviewed mostly males, both black and white.
She found that carrying a gun does more than provide physical security, it gives the person a sense of self-worth by allowing men to think of themselves as citizen protectors looking out not just for their own safety but also protecting others around them, ready to intervene when a "bad guy" attempts something. Though crime statistics show a steady decrease over the last couple of decades, there has been increasing interest in carrying a gun, so something beyond crime prevention is going on.
Carlson digs deeply into the thinking of the men she interviews. She looks at the problematic nature of person A walking around with a deadly weapon placing himself alone in position to judge who is a bad guy, while at the same expecting others to somehow always judge person A as a good guy. Imagine everyone being a non-uniformed policeman looking for bad guys when there is no way to know who is an undercover policeman. Imagine also that not only must appearances of others be judged, so must their behavior and every move they make. All of this being done without the training that police receive and, if NRA recommendations are followed, with everybody carrying a gun. Isn't more than a little caution advised in the everyone-armed situation NRA sees as such a simple unquestionably good thing? Carlson gives an example of how it went wrong for one gun carrier in an encounter at a gas station that left him charged with "brandishing" his weapon. Fortunately there were no shots fired.
Carlson gets a permit to carry a gun and attends the NRA sanctioned training courses that most states require before a permit is issued. She find the courses provide only very basic weapons handling experience, target shooting, without any training in how to deal with the likely scenarios one might experience on the street where the unexpected is almost certain to be the most likely. The courses also play up fear, asking students to imagine terrifying situations such as a family member being held by a gunman or a daughter being threatened with rape, in order to get the student into an emotional state that will allow him to see himself as morally in the right when armed. The dangers of seeing a threat where the only evidence is a stranger being of a different race is not mentioned. In short, the training is more of a "get comfortable with a gun" course than it is a preparation for the risks of carrying a gun. I kept thinking there is way too much based on movies rather than reality in these courses.
The change in state laws regarding guns are examined and Carlson relates the reactions by men to her wearing a gun. She participates in a demo of gun-carriers at a police station and goes deeply into the views gun-carriers have of the police.
I was disappointed that the author did not go into the attitudes of women carrying guns. Since there were only eleven women she interviewed (compared to 75 men), she probably thought she didn't have enough data to make a presentation on the subject. I suspect that most women carry guns purely as physical personal protection without the psychological issues that men experience which provide the meat of the book. She does mention that a standing joke in the gun training courses is that the only women who come are dragged there by their husbands.
I have had several conversations with advocates of gun-carry online, a couple of them very extensive. My first challenge was to keep the conversation civil, the people I spoke with were far too ready to start calling me names and denouncing me instead of sticking to the subject. I did not rise to the bait and managed to calm them down, but the testiness accords with the insecurity felt by the men interviewed in this book.
Citizen-Protectors is easily five stars, a quick read, no wasted words, solid information based on thorough research and immersion in the area of study. I was surprised that Carlson was only in her twenties when she did the research.
The perception of personal power and worth are by definition psychological. To set the stage for a review of this book, let me tell you about my own psychology regarding weapons and power.
Power is enticing to humans, to men in more obvious way than to women. Power can be experienced in various ways but at root, and most beguiling to men, is raw physical power. Because weapons are tools that greatly increase physical power, they are doubly enticing. Anyone can be powerful with a gun, no need for body building.
When at times I have held a metal pipe or a long wooden rod in my hand, I find an almost overwhelming desire to hold up the pipe like a baton, or suspend the long wooden rod above my shoulder like a javelin, though I have never used any weapon like these. There is a feel to them, a desire to balance them in the hand, to strike something with the pipe or throw the rod at a target that is instinctual and strong.
A gun is a far more powerful tool that is deliberately designed to at least injure if not kill. It is comfortable in the hand, hefty, easy to use, provides a very satisfying loud noise and recoil when fired and tears up a target some distance away - the perfect tool of personal power projection leaving the shooter untouched and ready to fire again. A man cannot hold a gun without an emotional response.
Why, then, am I not a gun owner?
I feel power in my intelligence and the ability to project that power through speech. This power is superior to physical power because it does no physical damage to others, is available without the need of any tool to enhance it (though the Internet helps!) and it is a personal characteristic that in the way I express myself is mine alone. I can influence one or more people without in any way harming them, frightening them or even being present with them. That is how I experience my own power.
The feelings I experience when holding a weapon, or weapon-like object, though physically stimulating, are immediately followed by a smile at myself when I realize how pathetic I would be with a weapon in my hand compared to a thought in my mind expressed through speech. It elates me that I am able to have personal power through intelligence rather than force, but unfortunately this mode of personal power projection is not a common experience. I can't claim education helped me achieve the power I have. It has far more to do with the home I was brought up in with parents who valued the use of reason, the world of books and in particular the power of speech. This kind of environment is, I'm sorry to say, rare in America. Now the book review can begin.
As the title reports, America is in an age of decline. Industry has moved overseas, unions have a shadow of the power they once held, wages have been stagnant for decades, there is little job security and few jobs with benefits that guarantee a secure financial future. For the majority, work provides a large part of self worth that gives peace of mind. The rug has been pulled out from under people and they are anxious. Anxiety and fear are closely related. As they become deeper, the need to find any kind of security becomes desperate as one wonders - who am I?
A gun is the most basic security object, a last resort when personal power has been reduced to the point that one feels vulnerable to an external world over which one has little to no influence, the situation of the working class American male in the 21st century, the people in Jennifer Carlson's study conducted in southeastern Michigan (Detroit/Flint area). She interviewed mostly males, both black and white.
She found that carrying a gun does more than provide physical security, it gives the person a sense of self-worth by allowing men to think of themselves as citizen protectors looking out not just for their own safety but also protecting others around them, ready to intervene when a "bad guy" attempts something. Though crime statistics show a steady decrease over the last couple of decades, there has been increasing interest in carrying a gun, so something beyond crime prevention is going on.
Carlson digs deeply into the thinking of the men she interviews. She looks at the problematic nature of person A walking around with a deadly weapon placing himself alone in position to judge who is a bad guy, while at the same expecting others to somehow always judge person A as a good guy. Imagine everyone being a non-uniformed policeman looking for bad guys when there is no way to know who is an undercover policeman. Imagine also that not only must appearances of others be judged, so must their behavior and every move they make. All of this being done without the training that police receive and, if NRA recommendations are followed, with everybody carrying a gun. Isn't more than a little caution advised in the everyone-armed situation NRA sees as such a simple unquestionably good thing? Carlson gives an example of how it went wrong for one gun carrier in an encounter at a gas station that left him charged with "brandishing" his weapon. Fortunately there were no shots fired.
Carlson gets a permit to carry a gun and attends the NRA sanctioned training courses that most states require before a permit is issued. She find the courses provide only very basic weapons handling experience, target shooting, without any training in how to deal with the likely scenarios one might experience on the street where the unexpected is almost certain to be the most likely. The courses also play up fear, asking students to imagine terrifying situations such as a family member being held by a gunman or a daughter being threatened with rape, in order to get the student into an emotional state that will allow him to see himself as morally in the right when armed. The dangers of seeing a threat where the only evidence is a stranger being of a different race is not mentioned. In short, the training is more of a "get comfortable with a gun" course than it is a preparation for the risks of carrying a gun. I kept thinking there is way too much based on movies rather than reality in these courses.
The change in state laws regarding guns are examined and Carlson relates the reactions by men to her wearing a gun. She participates in a demo of gun-carriers at a police station and goes deeply into the views gun-carriers have of the police.
I was disappointed that the author did not go into the attitudes of women carrying guns. Since there were only eleven women she interviewed (compared to 75 men), she probably thought she didn't have enough data to make a presentation on the subject. I suspect that most women carry guns purely as physical personal protection without the psychological issues that men experience which provide the meat of the book. She does mention that a standing joke in the gun training courses is that the only women who come are dragged there by their husbands.
I have had several conversations with advocates of gun-carry online, a couple of them very extensive. My first challenge was to keep the conversation civil, the people I spoke with were far too ready to start calling me names and denouncing me instead of sticking to the subject. I did not rise to the bait and managed to calm them down, but the testiness accords with the insecurity felt by the men interviewed in this book.
Citizen-Protectors is easily five stars, a quick read, no wasted words, solid information based on thorough research and immersion in the area of study. I was surprised that Carlson was only in her twenties when she did the research.
April 9, 2016
I've been trying to read things that challenge and expand my views this year, and this book really fit the bill. While it's a bit dry, as any academic study is, it's very well organized and engagingly written. Carlson is able to set her own viewpoint aside to explore the politics of concealed and open carry throughout the country, though most of the study is focused in Michigan. I am probably a bit biased after living in Ann Arbor briefly, but I think that it's a fascinating representation of our country at large.
Whatever side of the gun control/gun rights debate you fall on, this is a worthwhile read to better understand the perspectives of those who choose to carry guns. It's a deep, complex study, and brings up many issues surrounding economic decline, gender, and the politics of gun carry that I would never have considered without this book. I only wish that Carlson would translate it into the language of popular literature so that this information could be more widely shared with the general public.
Whatever side of the gun control/gun rights debate you fall on, this is a worthwhile read to better understand the perspectives of those who choose to carry guns. It's a deep, complex study, and brings up many issues surrounding economic decline, gender, and the politics of gun carry that I would never have considered without this book. I only wish that Carlson would translate it into the language of popular literature so that this information could be more widely shared with the general public.
November 6, 2017
Not a book about whether guns are bad or good; it's a book about why guns are bought, having to do with senses of masculinity, vulnerability and - dum-de-dum-dum - loss of status. It's gun as political experience rather than gun as a tool of mayhem. Written by a sociologist.
January 27, 2019
"I've tried to do the impossible: write an illuminating but apolitical book about guns," researcher Carlson says in the final chapter. This she did do. Covering different individuals from different racial backgrounds, Carlson tries to uncover the meaning of civilian ownership of guns for those who carry. This is where she comes up with her hypothesis of "the citizen protectors."
There are some issues that plague Carlson's sociological work. Her study, qualitative in nature, lacks strong reliability and validity when it comes to the methods used. Carlson only looks at a small subsection of gun owners, those living in the Metro Detroit area. Of these people, she interviews 33 white and 11 black gun owners. Of those she interviews, two were involved in interactions resulting in the use of their guns: one justified, and one unjustified. Between Carlson's personal bias and the corresponding bias in selecting her "sample" of subjects, the information presented does little to add to the national conversation. Interviewing people who have concealed carry licenses as a result of being victimized, in a Northern metro state, is a lot different experience from someone living in the Deep South.
To Carlson's credit, she has demonstrated just how difficult it is for one to be objective when writing about a subject one has strong opinions about. In this, she recognizes the individual gun owners reasons for carrying and how their reasons do not make up the national debate of guns. In moving forward, Carlson laments the failure of the debate to address the reasons people use guns, and she hopes that the future will make guns irrelevant. Unfortunately, Carlson doesn't show nor give us a way to make guns irrelevant in the future. Instead, her study appears to show how the relevancy for firearms is here to stay.
There are some issues that plague Carlson's sociological work. Her study, qualitative in nature, lacks strong reliability and validity when it comes to the methods used. Carlson only looks at a small subsection of gun owners, those living in the Metro Detroit area. Of these people, she interviews 33 white and 11 black gun owners. Of those she interviews, two were involved in interactions resulting in the use of their guns: one justified, and one unjustified. Between Carlson's personal bias and the corresponding bias in selecting her "sample" of subjects, the information presented does little to add to the national conversation. Interviewing people who have concealed carry licenses as a result of being victimized, in a Northern metro state, is a lot different experience from someone living in the Deep South.
To Carlson's credit, she has demonstrated just how difficult it is for one to be objective when writing about a subject one has strong opinions about. In this, she recognizes the individual gun owners reasons for carrying and how their reasons do not make up the national debate of guns. In moving forward, Carlson laments the failure of the debate to address the reasons people use guns, and she hopes that the future will make guns irrelevant. Unfortunately, Carlson doesn't show nor give us a way to make guns irrelevant in the future. Instead, her study appears to show how the relevancy for firearms is here to stay.
March 20, 2018
Jennifer Carlson examines how guns are viewed as solutions to the problems that they are supposed to solve. She addresses how the guns address social, economic, and physical insecurities.
March 17, 2021
The author obviously did a great deal of research to produce the book. Much of the information contained is interesting and increases the reader's understanding of the issues. I do think her conclusions are a bit off. The author did not seem to appreciate the fact that shooting can be just plain fun. I think she overemphasizes the masculinity enhancing aspect. Marksmanship is a skill within the reach of just about everyone.
The author simply glossed over the growing number of women who are taking up handgun shooting. I see more and more ladies at the range by themselves without husbands or boyfriends. The gun store I patronize also has women behind the counter.
Carlson does note that gun owners see themselves as ordinary, run-of-the-mill people but I'm sure she entirely believes that. Nonetheless, the book is informative and worth reading.
The author simply glossed over the growing number of women who are taking up handgun shooting. I see more and more ladies at the range by themselves without husbands or boyfriends. The gun store I patronize also has women behind the counter.
Carlson does note that gun owners see themselves as ordinary, run-of-the-mill people but I'm sure she entirely believes that. Nonetheless, the book is informative and worth reading.
December 11, 2019
It doesn't matter what side of the gun control debate you are on. You need to read this book to understand that this isn't about the 2nd Amendment.
Carlson articulates the personal side to fun ownership - and the cultural context surrounding it - in ways accessible to the academic and lay reader alike. Her analysis is thoughtful and well situated within the research on the topic. This book adds so much to the conversation. Just read it.
Carlson articulates the personal side to fun ownership - and the cultural context surrounding it - in ways accessible to the academic and lay reader alike. Her analysis is thoughtful and well situated within the research on the topic. This book adds so much to the conversation. Just read it.
April 25, 2020
Well researched and engaging. I'm not certain I was convinced that gun carriers are doing so to reassert masculinity, which seemed to me to be the central theme running throughout the book.
It's also entirely possible that I missed the point.
I do think she accomplished at least one of her goals, making a review of gun carriers apolitical.
It's also entirely possible that I missed the point.
I do think she accomplished at least one of her goals, making a review of gun carriers apolitical.
November 10, 2025
Fun to read an anthro style book! Great insights into the nuances of gun ownership and the attitudes and culture surrounding this. Some of the connections to theory felt a bit forced, and in this way I feel she could have more eloquently weaved her observations with theoretical arguments. But overall a very engaging read with interesting observations.
March 13, 2024
for school
April 30, 2016
This isn’t the book for sharpening your gun rights versus gun control debate. And that’s a good thing.
This book is a refreshing look at guns in America in a completely different and thought proven way. Her premise is the post industrialized economy has led to males from all races and socioeconomic backgrounds embracing gun ownership to reclaim their masculine role in the family and society. Instead of debating whether we have too many guns in America, the author interviews a cross section of men and women who discuss the role guns play in their lives.
To the author’s credit, she dives into this gun culture by not only taking a concealed carry class, but getting her permit and open carrying a firearm also. She deserves a lot of credit for participating in the gun culture to this degree. By carrying a firearm, her research moved from just being an observer to an active member of the community she is researching. I found her comments on how it felt to be an open carry female to provide authentic insights that complemented the other gun stories.
What is undeniable is that we are in a world where jobs have left the US but the people have remained behind. This has led to higher crime and higher unemployment. The author attempts, successfully, to explain the socioeconomic factors that have led to rise in crime and the attempts by some members of society to reclaim their sense of provider and protector in a post industrial economy that has disenfranchised a great many people.
This book is a refreshing look at guns in America in a completely different and thought proven way. Her premise is the post industrialized economy has led to males from all races and socioeconomic backgrounds embracing gun ownership to reclaim their masculine role in the family and society. Instead of debating whether we have too many guns in America, the author interviews a cross section of men and women who discuss the role guns play in their lives.
To the author’s credit, she dives into this gun culture by not only taking a concealed carry class, but getting her permit and open carrying a firearm also. She deserves a lot of credit for participating in the gun culture to this degree. By carrying a firearm, her research moved from just being an observer to an active member of the community she is researching. I found her comments on how it felt to be an open carry female to provide authentic insights that complemented the other gun stories.
What is undeniable is that we are in a world where jobs have left the US but the people have remained behind. This has led to higher crime and higher unemployment. The author attempts, successfully, to explain the socioeconomic factors that have led to rise in crime and the attempts by some members of society to reclaim their sense of provider and protector in a post industrial economy that has disenfranchised a great many people.
November 22, 2015
"Scholarship on masculinity and guns tends to focus on the feelings and fantasies of domination, authority, and control that men may accrue from the guns they own and carry. While this scholarship hits a critical nerve within the gendered politics of guns...it misses the broader socioeconomic context in which guns become appealing and, with it, the multiple roles that guns can serve for their owners and carriers. On the whole, I found that gun politics is deeply gendered not because it is dominated by men who celebrate violent masculinity, but because it provides a way for men to embrace protectionist masculinity.... This is a subtle, but crucial, distinction for understanding how guns become normalized and celebrated and the broader work that guns do for men negotiating their positions in a climate of socioeconomic decline."
October 1, 2015
This book is not necessarily going to entertain you, but it provides critical insight into the minds of people like me who own and sometimes carry firearms. Granted, this book is more about those on the "right-wing gun-nut" side of the spectrum (I fall on the pro-gun-control liberal side), but I would highly recommend this to anyone who wants to understand gun carry culture. Extraordinarily well-researched and well written. A must-read.
Read
February 15, 2018I read this some time ago, but as I recall, the book described the perception of guns in the context of areas of urban and rural America suffering decline and made the argument that in a warped way of thinking, they filled a hole left by loss of economic status. I think my impression was that this was a partial but incomplete explanation.
Read
November 2, 2018It was a very interesting book that covers all aspects that play a role of open gun carry, gun control laws, gun violence/crime, masculinity and others issues
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews