Image
File
opinions // no. 18 theotherpress.ca
Dealing with the rapidly
growing interest in guns
>» This new movement could lead to disaster
without proper implementation
Matthew Fraser
Opinions Editor
n my very first article for the Other
Press I wrote about POC and LGBTQ+
individuals being essentially excluded
from the gun rights conversation. I spoke
then about how the negative image of gun
ownership actively pushes the rest of us
out of the conversation and into casualty
from laws written to punish political
opponents. There is a new day dawning
as people increasingly lose trust in the
government and police forces; for some,
the presumptions about state guaranteed
safety are falling away. Now, we are faced
with a new problem: defending great ideas
from their poor implementations.
It has been documented that across
Canada and America, gun purchases
climbed as the COVID-19 outbreak
created a climate of intense fear. Though
it is bittersweet to see people realize that
their safety ultimately resides in their own
hands, the fact that it has been done in
such a panicked manner—where people
do not have access to the necessary
training and practice conducive to safe
gun ownership—is a problem. However,
the political needle (in America) towards
gun ownership will be forced to shift in
the next few years; it will no longer just
be conservatives who see the value in the
Second Amendment. Suddenly, the people
who once supported extreme gun control
measures have been made subjects of
Eski1-Nos
>» Inuit voices invalidated
Timothy Easling
Contributor
cc Gore’ up asa kid, I first caught on
toa football game and Edmonton
Eskimos were playing and I really thought
it was our own team. I felt a sense of
pride,” said Kenneth Ruben, of Paulatuk,
N.W.T. Dominic Angutimarik from
Igloolik, Nunavut, felt similarly about
the Edmonton Eskimos name, conveying
his thoughts originally in Inuktitut: “T
wouldn't want them to change their name
simply because it’s just a title and, in fact,
I feel honoured as an Inuk person to see
the name Eskimos as they probably had
thought that Inuit were capable people
with integrity.”
It’s voices such as these that have been
lost in recent times. In the dash to decry the
sins of the Edmonton Eskimos, the majority
of mainstream media has completely
invalidated the strong feelings of pride
many Inuit associate with the name.
Lorne Kusugak, a Nunavut MLA, has
only fond memories of the Eskimos—first
seeing them on TV in the ‘7os when his
mother, Kukik Kusugak, a well-known
and respected elder in the territory, came
and sat down with him to see what had
these measures in their time of need, be
they mandatory waiting periods or license
approvals. Laws that the people wanted
are now being questioned by the voters
themselves. How much this will influence
the Democratic party is unclear, but they
must change in the face of this new reality.
Over the past few years black gun
ownership in America has drastically
increased. This trend seems to trace back
to the election of Donald Trump, and
Philip Smith, the president of the National
African American Gun Association
agrees. The association has gained 30,000
members since its inception in 2015.
Smith credits this growth to black people
suddenly seeing that the America they live
in is filled with emboldened racists.
This July 4, the Not F*cking Around
Coalition (NFAC) and its founder Grand
Master Jay led a march to Stone Mountain,
Georgia. What attracted attention to the
march was that everyone marching was
African American and armed. Seeing as
it took place in an open-carry state the
sight was not in part unusual, but the
message spread by Grandmaster Jay and
his coalition was. Their willingness to
engage in violence shows that the NFAC is
unapologetic and tailor made for action.
Though I can’t say for certain that all black
gun owners are judged by these actions,
nothing could have hurt the image of black
gun ownership quite like Grand Master
Jay’s gun ignorance and the negligent
discharge by the NFAC at a Breonna Taylor
captured her child’s attention: “I said, ‘’m
watching the Edmonton Eskimos play the
Saskatchewan Roughriders’ Knowing as
much about football as I did, she sat down
and started cheering with me. I asked her,
‘Who are you cheering for?’ and she said,
‘The Eskimos because I am an Eskimo too.”
It’s frustrating that the narrative has
been shaped so as to portray the entire
Inuit people as being against the name
when there are clearly many who have no
issue with, or even like, the name. The
Edmonton Eskimos even released a survey
that found among the western Arctic
community, 78 percent opposed a name
change; in Nunavut, 55 percent opposed
a name change; and in the eastern Arctic
where results identified “little connection
to the team,” 31 percent oppose a name
change. Jackie Jacobson, the MLA for
Nunakput, was “excited” when the team
had initially decided to keep its name a
few months ago. “It’s a good news story.
I’m a full-class Eskimo, that’s how I
consider myself.”
In opposition to the survey, Nunavut
MP Mumilaaq Qaqqaq wrote, “The fact
that there was NO CONSENSUS means
CHANGE THE NAME. I look forward
to hearing from you as the member of
parliament for 25 of 47 Inuit Nunangat
rally.
The continued slow
growth in representation
that the black community
needed in the Second
Amendment fight was
stricken by this. Worse still
is a group that claims to be
made of “highly trained”
shooters that demonstrates
poor muzzle discipline ie
and suffers a negligent
discharge resulting in
injury. This instantaneously transformed
them from an oddity group to dangerous
LARPers. (Grand Master Jay claims that a
member dropped their gun while fainting.
He also claims that the shotgun was an
older model without a safety, explaining
why it went off easily.) You cannot stop
people in a “shared” cause from having
their own opinions, but you can suffer
as their actions reflect on you; I see the
NFAC’s misdeeds hurting black people in
the eyes of those who looking for any new
way to justify their prejudices AND hurting
the legitimate good work of anyone who
fights to correct the misunderstandings
around gun ownership.
Finally, there is the tragic misuse of
firearms for self-defence. The case of Jillian
Wuestenberg, a woman who pulled a gun
during an escalating encounter, was just
one of many examples of fear blending
too closely with aggression. Though the
Wuestenberg’s were being threatened with
communities.” And she pretty much
echoes the narrative in most media: some
of us are offended so change it. But how
is that fair to those who like the name?
To those who find strength in the name?
To those who are happy for a positive
representation? Why is one side of the
argument written off just because the
other feels it should be?
Because this isn’t just about removing
aname. This is about imposing will. This
drowns out any useful debate. If you've
already labelled the other side as racist,
and the general public comes to view that
side as racist, you don’t need to have a
conversation anymore—you ve already
invalidated one side. Without a word of
actual discussion.
That’s why it’s so upsetting to see
so many Inuit lose a symbol of strength
without even a struggle. Many of their
voices ignored—those who defend their
viewpoint labelled as racist. Isn’t it the
least bit curious how all the papers ran the
survey and the results, yet only ever had
quotes to support the side opposed to the
name? How is it that a survey that resulted
in no consensus... was frequently reported
upon as if there were a consensus?
Duane Smith, chair of the Inuvialuit
Regional Corporation (IRC), was clear
Illustration by Athena Little
physical harm, the moment Jillian stepped
out of her car and pulled out her gun she
needlessly escalated the situation. I support
armed self defence but I must admit
when things go wrong. There are certain
responsibilities that come with firearm
ownership and there must bea higher
level of discipline practiced by anyone
exercising their right to own a firearm.
There is a duty to try every measure to
retreat and deescalate a situation before
using a firearm—it should only be seen as a
last resort.
There are great principles
underlying the idea of gun ownership,
but the movement is only as good as the
people practicing it. With something
as contentious as the civilian right to
own lethal force, every misuse will
have consequences whether it is the
misapplication of the law or of the weapons
themselves. If chaos rabidly descends on
America, the mistakes may soon outweigh
the good that has been done.
about the organization’s stance: “The
Inuvialuit Regional Corporation does
not take exception to the term Eskimo
as it is not derogatory in any way. It was
developed by a First Nations group to
describe a group of Inuit they were aware
of.” The IRC is the body responsible for
achieving the goals and interests outlined
in the Inuvialuit Final Agreement signed
in 1984—“the first comprehensive land
claim agreement signed north of the 6oth
parallel and only the second in Canada at
that time.”
The CFL is not a major sports
league. If you aren't a fan, you likely won't
encounter much, if any, of its advertising,
teams, games, news, etc. A great many of
those who have spoken out against the
name are not sports fans. The change has
minimal impact for them. On the other
side of the coin are those who watch
football, love the team, and have a special
place for the name in their hearts. In the
decision to drop the name, have those
against it really won anything? Will it
change anything in their life? Will they
ever think about it again? The only losers
in this game are the unfortunate Inuit who
looked for and found value in one of their
only contemporary representations.
Dealing with the rapidly
growing interest in guns
>» This new movement could lead to disaster
without proper implementation
Matthew Fraser
Opinions Editor
n my very first article for the Other
Press I wrote about POC and LGBTQ+
individuals being essentially excluded
from the gun rights conversation. I spoke
then about how the negative image of gun
ownership actively pushes the rest of us
out of the conversation and into casualty
from laws written to punish political
opponents. There is a new day dawning
as people increasingly lose trust in the
government and police forces; for some,
the presumptions about state guaranteed
safety are falling away. Now, we are faced
with a new problem: defending great ideas
from their poor implementations.
It has been documented that across
Canada and America, gun purchases
climbed as the COVID-19 outbreak
created a climate of intense fear. Though
it is bittersweet to see people realize that
their safety ultimately resides in their own
hands, the fact that it has been done in
such a panicked manner—where people
do not have access to the necessary
training and practice conducive to safe
gun ownership—is a problem. However,
the political needle (in America) towards
gun ownership will be forced to shift in
the next few years; it will no longer just
be conservatives who see the value in the
Second Amendment. Suddenly, the people
who once supported extreme gun control
measures have been made subjects of
Eski1-Nos
>» Inuit voices invalidated
Timothy Easling
Contributor
cc Gore’ up asa kid, I first caught on
toa football game and Edmonton
Eskimos were playing and I really thought
it was our own team. I felt a sense of
pride,” said Kenneth Ruben, of Paulatuk,
N.W.T. Dominic Angutimarik from
Igloolik, Nunavut, felt similarly about
the Edmonton Eskimos name, conveying
his thoughts originally in Inuktitut: “T
wouldn't want them to change their name
simply because it’s just a title and, in fact,
I feel honoured as an Inuk person to see
the name Eskimos as they probably had
thought that Inuit were capable people
with integrity.”
It’s voices such as these that have been
lost in recent times. In the dash to decry the
sins of the Edmonton Eskimos, the majority
of mainstream media has completely
invalidated the strong feelings of pride
many Inuit associate with the name.
Lorne Kusugak, a Nunavut MLA, has
only fond memories of the Eskimos—first
seeing them on TV in the ‘7os when his
mother, Kukik Kusugak, a well-known
and respected elder in the territory, came
and sat down with him to see what had
these measures in their time of need, be
they mandatory waiting periods or license
approvals. Laws that the people wanted
are now being questioned by the voters
themselves. How much this will influence
the Democratic party is unclear, but they
must change in the face of this new reality.
Over the past few years black gun
ownership in America has drastically
increased. This trend seems to trace back
to the election of Donald Trump, and
Philip Smith, the president of the National
African American Gun Association
agrees. The association has gained 30,000
members since its inception in 2015.
Smith credits this growth to black people
suddenly seeing that the America they live
in is filled with emboldened racists.
This July 4, the Not F*cking Around
Coalition (NFAC) and its founder Grand
Master Jay led a march to Stone Mountain,
Georgia. What attracted attention to the
march was that everyone marching was
African American and armed. Seeing as
it took place in an open-carry state the
sight was not in part unusual, but the
message spread by Grandmaster Jay and
his coalition was. Their willingness to
engage in violence shows that the NFAC is
unapologetic and tailor made for action.
Though I can’t say for certain that all black
gun owners are judged by these actions,
nothing could have hurt the image of black
gun ownership quite like Grand Master
Jay’s gun ignorance and the negligent
discharge by the NFAC at a Breonna Taylor
captured her child’s attention: “I said, ‘’m
watching the Edmonton Eskimos play the
Saskatchewan Roughriders’ Knowing as
much about football as I did, she sat down
and started cheering with me. I asked her,
‘Who are you cheering for?’ and she said,
‘The Eskimos because I am an Eskimo too.”
It’s frustrating that the narrative has
been shaped so as to portray the entire
Inuit people as being against the name
when there are clearly many who have no
issue with, or even like, the name. The
Edmonton Eskimos even released a survey
that found among the western Arctic
community, 78 percent opposed a name
change; in Nunavut, 55 percent opposed
a name change; and in the eastern Arctic
where results identified “little connection
to the team,” 31 percent oppose a name
change. Jackie Jacobson, the MLA for
Nunakput, was “excited” when the team
had initially decided to keep its name a
few months ago. “It’s a good news story.
I’m a full-class Eskimo, that’s how I
consider myself.”
In opposition to the survey, Nunavut
MP Mumilaaq Qaqqaq wrote, “The fact
that there was NO CONSENSUS means
CHANGE THE NAME. I look forward
to hearing from you as the member of
parliament for 25 of 47 Inuit Nunangat
rally.
The continued slow
growth in representation
that the black community
needed in the Second
Amendment fight was
stricken by this. Worse still
is a group that claims to be
made of “highly trained”
shooters that demonstrates
poor muzzle discipline ie
and suffers a negligent
discharge resulting in
injury. This instantaneously transformed
them from an oddity group to dangerous
LARPers. (Grand Master Jay claims that a
member dropped their gun while fainting.
He also claims that the shotgun was an
older model without a safety, explaining
why it went off easily.) You cannot stop
people in a “shared” cause from having
their own opinions, but you can suffer
as their actions reflect on you; I see the
NFAC’s misdeeds hurting black people in
the eyes of those who looking for any new
way to justify their prejudices AND hurting
the legitimate good work of anyone who
fights to correct the misunderstandings
around gun ownership.
Finally, there is the tragic misuse of
firearms for self-defence. The case of Jillian
Wuestenberg, a woman who pulled a gun
during an escalating encounter, was just
one of many examples of fear blending
too closely with aggression. Though the
Wuestenberg’s were being threatened with
communities.” And she pretty much
echoes the narrative in most media: some
of us are offended so change it. But how
is that fair to those who like the name?
To those who find strength in the name?
To those who are happy for a positive
representation? Why is one side of the
argument written off just because the
other feels it should be?
Because this isn’t just about removing
aname. This is about imposing will. This
drowns out any useful debate. If you've
already labelled the other side as racist,
and the general public comes to view that
side as racist, you don’t need to have a
conversation anymore—you ve already
invalidated one side. Without a word of
actual discussion.
That’s why it’s so upsetting to see
so many Inuit lose a symbol of strength
without even a struggle. Many of their
voices ignored—those who defend their
viewpoint labelled as racist. Isn’t it the
least bit curious how all the papers ran the
survey and the results, yet only ever had
quotes to support the side opposed to the
name? How is it that a survey that resulted
in no consensus... was frequently reported
upon as if there were a consensus?
Duane Smith, chair of the Inuvialuit
Regional Corporation (IRC), was clear
Illustration by Athena Little
physical harm, the moment Jillian stepped
out of her car and pulled out her gun she
needlessly escalated the situation. I support
armed self defence but I must admit
when things go wrong. There are certain
responsibilities that come with firearm
ownership and there must bea higher
level of discipline practiced by anyone
exercising their right to own a firearm.
There is a duty to try every measure to
retreat and deescalate a situation before
using a firearm—it should only be seen as a
last resort.
There are great principles
underlying the idea of gun ownership,
but the movement is only as good as the
people practicing it. With something
as contentious as the civilian right to
own lethal force, every misuse will
have consequences whether it is the
misapplication of the law or of the weapons
themselves. If chaos rabidly descends on
America, the mistakes may soon outweigh
the good that has been done.
about the organization’s stance: “The
Inuvialuit Regional Corporation does
not take exception to the term Eskimo
as it is not derogatory in any way. It was
developed by a First Nations group to
describe a group of Inuit they were aware
of.” The IRC is the body responsible for
achieving the goals and interests outlined
in the Inuvialuit Final Agreement signed
in 1984—“the first comprehensive land
claim agreement signed north of the 6oth
parallel and only the second in Canada at
that time.”
The CFL is not a major sports
league. If you aren't a fan, you likely won't
encounter much, if any, of its advertising,
teams, games, news, etc. A great many of
those who have spoken out against the
name are not sports fans. The change has
minimal impact for them. On the other
side of the coin are those who watch
football, love the team, and have a special
place for the name in their hearts. In the
decision to drop the name, have those
against it really won anything? Will it
change anything in their life? Will they
ever think about it again? The only losers
in this game are the unfortunate Inuit who
looked for and found value in one of their
only contemporary representations.
Edited Text
opinions // no. 18 theotherpress.ca
Dealing with the rapidly
growing interest in guns
>» This new movement could lead to disaster
without proper implementation
Matthew Fraser
Opinions Editor
n my very first article for the Other
Press I wrote about POC and LGBTQ+
individuals being essentially excluded
from the gun rights conversation. I spoke
then about how the negative image of gun
ownership actively pushes the rest of us
out of the conversation and into casualty
from laws written to punish political
opponents. There is a new day dawning
as people increasingly lose trust in the
government and police forces; for some,
the presumptions about state guaranteed
safety are falling away. Now, we are faced
with a new problem: defending great ideas
from their poor implementations.
It has been documented that across
Canada and America, gun purchases
climbed as the COVID-19 outbreak
created a climate of intense fear. Though
it is bittersweet to see people realize that
their safety ultimately resides in their own
hands, the fact that it has been done in
such a panicked manner—where people
do not have access to the necessary
training and practice conducive to safe
gun ownership—is a problem. However,
the political needle (in America) towards
gun ownership will be forced to shift in
the next few years; it will no longer just
be conservatives who see the value in the
Second Amendment. Suddenly, the people
who once supported extreme gun control
measures have been made subjects of
Eski1-Nos
>» Inuit voices invalidated
Timothy Easling
Contributor
cc Gore’ up asa kid, I first caught on
toa football game and Edmonton
Eskimos were playing and I really thought
it was our own team. I felt a sense of
pride,” said Kenneth Ruben, of Paulatuk,
N.W.T. Dominic Angutimarik from
Igloolik, Nunavut, felt similarly about
the Edmonton Eskimos name, conveying
his thoughts originally in Inuktitut: “T
wouldn't want them to change their name
simply because it’s just a title and, in fact,
I feel honoured as an Inuk person to see
the name Eskimos as they probably had
thought that Inuit were capable people
with integrity.”
It’s voices such as these that have been
lost in recent times. In the dash to decry the
sins of the Edmonton Eskimos, the majority
of mainstream media has completely
invalidated the strong feelings of pride
many Inuit associate with the name.
Lorne Kusugak, a Nunavut MLA, has
only fond memories of the Eskimos—first
seeing them on TV in the ‘7os when his
mother, Kukik Kusugak, a well-known
and respected elder in the territory, came
and sat down with him to see what had
these measures in their time of need, be
they mandatory waiting periods or license
approvals. Laws that the people wanted
are now being questioned by the voters
themselves. How much this will influence
the Democratic party is unclear, but they
must change in the face of this new reality.
Over the past few years black gun
ownership in America has drastically
increased. This trend seems to trace back
to the election of Donald Trump, and
Philip Smith, the president of the National
African American Gun Association
agrees. The association has gained 30,000
members since its inception in 2015.
Smith credits this growth to black people
suddenly seeing that the America they live
in is filled with emboldened racists.
This July 4, the Not F*cking Around
Coalition (NFAC) and its founder Grand
Master Jay led a march to Stone Mountain,
Georgia. What attracted attention to the
march was that everyone marching was
African American and armed. Seeing as
it took place in an open-carry state the
sight was not in part unusual, but the
message spread by Grandmaster Jay and
his coalition was. Their willingness to
engage in violence shows that the NFAC is
unapologetic and tailor made for action.
Though I can’t say for certain that all black
gun owners are judged by these actions,
nothing could have hurt the image of black
gun ownership quite like Grand Master
Jay’s gun ignorance and the negligent
discharge by the NFAC at a Breonna Taylor
captured her child’s attention: “I said, ‘’m
watching the Edmonton Eskimos play the
Saskatchewan Roughriders’ Knowing as
much about football as I did, she sat down
and started cheering with me. I asked her,
‘Who are you cheering for?’ and she said,
‘The Eskimos because I am an Eskimo too.”
It’s frustrating that the narrative has
been shaped so as to portray the entire
Inuit people as being against the name
when there are clearly many who have no
issue with, or even like, the name. The
Edmonton Eskimos even released a survey
that found among the western Arctic
community, 78 percent opposed a name
change; in Nunavut, 55 percent opposed
a name change; and in the eastern Arctic
where results identified “little connection
to the team,” 31 percent oppose a name
change. Jackie Jacobson, the MLA for
Nunakput, was “excited” when the team
had initially decided to keep its name a
few months ago. “It’s a good news story.
I’m a full-class Eskimo, that’s how I
consider myself.”
In opposition to the survey, Nunavut
MP Mumilaaq Qaqqaq wrote, “The fact
that there was NO CONSENSUS means
CHANGE THE NAME. I look forward
to hearing from you as the member of
parliament for 25 of 47 Inuit Nunangat
rally.
The continued slow
growth in representation
that the black community
needed in the Second
Amendment fight was
stricken by this. Worse still
is a group that claims to be
made of “highly trained”
shooters that demonstrates
poor muzzle discipline ie
and suffers a negligent
discharge resulting in
injury. This instantaneously transformed
them from an oddity group to dangerous
LARPers. (Grand Master Jay claims that a
member dropped their gun while fainting.
He also claims that the shotgun was an
older model without a safety, explaining
why it went off easily.) You cannot stop
people in a “shared” cause from having
their own opinions, but you can suffer
as their actions reflect on you; I see the
NFAC’s misdeeds hurting black people in
the eyes of those who looking for any new
way to justify their prejudices AND hurting
the legitimate good work of anyone who
fights to correct the misunderstandings
around gun ownership.
Finally, there is the tragic misuse of
firearms for self-defence. The case of Jillian
Wuestenberg, a woman who pulled a gun
during an escalating encounter, was just
one of many examples of fear blending
too closely with aggression. Though the
Wuestenberg’s were being threatened with
communities.” And she pretty much
echoes the narrative in most media: some
of us are offended so change it. But how
is that fair to those who like the name?
To those who find strength in the name?
To those who are happy for a positive
representation? Why is one side of the
argument written off just because the
other feels it should be?
Because this isn’t just about removing
aname. This is about imposing will. This
drowns out any useful debate. If you've
already labelled the other side as racist,
and the general public comes to view that
side as racist, you don’t need to have a
conversation anymore—you ve already
invalidated one side. Without a word of
actual discussion.
That’s why it’s so upsetting to see
so many Inuit lose a symbol of strength
without even a struggle. Many of their
voices ignored—those who defend their
viewpoint labelled as racist. Isn’t it the
least bit curious how all the papers ran the
survey and the results, yet only ever had
quotes to support the side opposed to the
name? How is it that a survey that resulted
in no consensus... was frequently reported
upon as if there were a consensus?
Duane Smith, chair of the Inuvialuit
Regional Corporation (IRC), was clear
Illustration by Athena Little
physical harm, the moment Jillian stepped
out of her car and pulled out her gun she
needlessly escalated the situation. I support
armed self defence but I must admit
when things go wrong. There are certain
responsibilities that come with firearm
ownership and there must bea higher
level of discipline practiced by anyone
exercising their right to own a firearm.
There is a duty to try every measure to
retreat and deescalate a situation before
using a firearm—it should only be seen as a
last resort.
There are great principles
underlying the idea of gun ownership,
but the movement is only as good as the
people practicing it. With something
as contentious as the civilian right to
own lethal force, every misuse will
have consequences whether it is the
misapplication of the law or of the weapons
themselves. If chaos rabidly descends on
America, the mistakes may soon outweigh
the good that has been done.
about the organization’s stance: “The
Inuvialuit Regional Corporation does
not take exception to the term Eskimo
as it is not derogatory in any way. It was
developed by a First Nations group to
describe a group of Inuit they were aware
of.” The IRC is the body responsible for
achieving the goals and interests outlined
in the Inuvialuit Final Agreement signed
in 1984—“the first comprehensive land
claim agreement signed north of the 6oth
parallel and only the second in Canada at
that time.”
The CFL is not a major sports
league. If you aren't a fan, you likely won't
encounter much, if any, of its advertising,
teams, games, news, etc. A great many of
those who have spoken out against the
name are not sports fans. The change has
minimal impact for them. On the other
side of the coin are those who watch
football, love the team, and have a special
place for the name in their hearts. In the
decision to drop the name, have those
against it really won anything? Will it
change anything in their life? Will they
ever think about it again? The only losers
in this game are the unfortunate Inuit who
looked for and found value in one of their
only contemporary representations.
Dealing with the rapidly
growing interest in guns
>» This new movement could lead to disaster
without proper implementation
Matthew Fraser
Opinions Editor
n my very first article for the Other
Press I wrote about POC and LGBTQ+
individuals being essentially excluded
from the gun rights conversation. I spoke
then about how the negative image of gun
ownership actively pushes the rest of us
out of the conversation and into casualty
from laws written to punish political
opponents. There is a new day dawning
as people increasingly lose trust in the
government and police forces; for some,
the presumptions about state guaranteed
safety are falling away. Now, we are faced
with a new problem: defending great ideas
from their poor implementations.
It has been documented that across
Canada and America, gun purchases
climbed as the COVID-19 outbreak
created a climate of intense fear. Though
it is bittersweet to see people realize that
their safety ultimately resides in their own
hands, the fact that it has been done in
such a panicked manner—where people
do not have access to the necessary
training and practice conducive to safe
gun ownership—is a problem. However,
the political needle (in America) towards
gun ownership will be forced to shift in
the next few years; it will no longer just
be conservatives who see the value in the
Second Amendment. Suddenly, the people
who once supported extreme gun control
measures have been made subjects of
Eski1-Nos
>» Inuit voices invalidated
Timothy Easling
Contributor
cc Gore’ up asa kid, I first caught on
toa football game and Edmonton
Eskimos were playing and I really thought
it was our own team. I felt a sense of
pride,” said Kenneth Ruben, of Paulatuk,
N.W.T. Dominic Angutimarik from
Igloolik, Nunavut, felt similarly about
the Edmonton Eskimos name, conveying
his thoughts originally in Inuktitut: “T
wouldn't want them to change their name
simply because it’s just a title and, in fact,
I feel honoured as an Inuk person to see
the name Eskimos as they probably had
thought that Inuit were capable people
with integrity.”
It’s voices such as these that have been
lost in recent times. In the dash to decry the
sins of the Edmonton Eskimos, the majority
of mainstream media has completely
invalidated the strong feelings of pride
many Inuit associate with the name.
Lorne Kusugak, a Nunavut MLA, has
only fond memories of the Eskimos—first
seeing them on TV in the ‘7os when his
mother, Kukik Kusugak, a well-known
and respected elder in the territory, came
and sat down with him to see what had
these measures in their time of need, be
they mandatory waiting periods or license
approvals. Laws that the people wanted
are now being questioned by the voters
themselves. How much this will influence
the Democratic party is unclear, but they
must change in the face of this new reality.
Over the past few years black gun
ownership in America has drastically
increased. This trend seems to trace back
to the election of Donald Trump, and
Philip Smith, the president of the National
African American Gun Association
agrees. The association has gained 30,000
members since its inception in 2015.
Smith credits this growth to black people
suddenly seeing that the America they live
in is filled with emboldened racists.
This July 4, the Not F*cking Around
Coalition (NFAC) and its founder Grand
Master Jay led a march to Stone Mountain,
Georgia. What attracted attention to the
march was that everyone marching was
African American and armed. Seeing as
it took place in an open-carry state the
sight was not in part unusual, but the
message spread by Grandmaster Jay and
his coalition was. Their willingness to
engage in violence shows that the NFAC is
unapologetic and tailor made for action.
Though I can’t say for certain that all black
gun owners are judged by these actions,
nothing could have hurt the image of black
gun ownership quite like Grand Master
Jay’s gun ignorance and the negligent
discharge by the NFAC at a Breonna Taylor
captured her child’s attention: “I said, ‘’m
watching the Edmonton Eskimos play the
Saskatchewan Roughriders’ Knowing as
much about football as I did, she sat down
and started cheering with me. I asked her,
‘Who are you cheering for?’ and she said,
‘The Eskimos because I am an Eskimo too.”
It’s frustrating that the narrative has
been shaped so as to portray the entire
Inuit people as being against the name
when there are clearly many who have no
issue with, or even like, the name. The
Edmonton Eskimos even released a survey
that found among the western Arctic
community, 78 percent opposed a name
change; in Nunavut, 55 percent opposed
a name change; and in the eastern Arctic
where results identified “little connection
to the team,” 31 percent oppose a name
change. Jackie Jacobson, the MLA for
Nunakput, was “excited” when the team
had initially decided to keep its name a
few months ago. “It’s a good news story.
I’m a full-class Eskimo, that’s how I
consider myself.”
In opposition to the survey, Nunavut
MP Mumilaaq Qaqqaq wrote, “The fact
that there was NO CONSENSUS means
CHANGE THE NAME. I look forward
to hearing from you as the member of
parliament for 25 of 47 Inuit Nunangat
rally.
The continued slow
growth in representation
that the black community
needed in the Second
Amendment fight was
stricken by this. Worse still
is a group that claims to be
made of “highly trained”
shooters that demonstrates
poor muzzle discipline ie
and suffers a negligent
discharge resulting in
injury. This instantaneously transformed
them from an oddity group to dangerous
LARPers. (Grand Master Jay claims that a
member dropped their gun while fainting.
He also claims that the shotgun was an
older model without a safety, explaining
why it went off easily.) You cannot stop
people in a “shared” cause from having
their own opinions, but you can suffer
as their actions reflect on you; I see the
NFAC’s misdeeds hurting black people in
the eyes of those who looking for any new
way to justify their prejudices AND hurting
the legitimate good work of anyone who
fights to correct the misunderstandings
around gun ownership.
Finally, there is the tragic misuse of
firearms for self-defence. The case of Jillian
Wuestenberg, a woman who pulled a gun
during an escalating encounter, was just
one of many examples of fear blending
too closely with aggression. Though the
Wuestenberg’s were being threatened with
communities.” And she pretty much
echoes the narrative in most media: some
of us are offended so change it. But how
is that fair to those who like the name?
To those who find strength in the name?
To those who are happy for a positive
representation? Why is one side of the
argument written off just because the
other feels it should be?
Because this isn’t just about removing
aname. This is about imposing will. This
drowns out any useful debate. If you've
already labelled the other side as racist,
and the general public comes to view that
side as racist, you don’t need to have a
conversation anymore—you ve already
invalidated one side. Without a word of
actual discussion.
That’s why it’s so upsetting to see
so many Inuit lose a symbol of strength
without even a struggle. Many of their
voices ignored—those who defend their
viewpoint labelled as racist. Isn’t it the
least bit curious how all the papers ran the
survey and the results, yet only ever had
quotes to support the side opposed to the
name? How is it that a survey that resulted
in no consensus... was frequently reported
upon as if there were a consensus?
Duane Smith, chair of the Inuvialuit
Regional Corporation (IRC), was clear
Illustration by Athena Little
physical harm, the moment Jillian stepped
out of her car and pulled out her gun she
needlessly escalated the situation. I support
armed self defence but I must admit
when things go wrong. There are certain
responsibilities that come with firearm
ownership and there must bea higher
level of discipline practiced by anyone
exercising their right to own a firearm.
There is a duty to try every measure to
retreat and deescalate a situation before
using a firearm—it should only be seen as a
last resort.
There are great principles
underlying the idea of gun ownership,
but the movement is only as good as the
people practicing it. With something
as contentious as the civilian right to
own lethal force, every misuse will
have consequences whether it is the
misapplication of the law or of the weapons
themselves. If chaos rabidly descends on
America, the mistakes may soon outweigh
the good that has been done.
about the organization’s stance: “The
Inuvialuit Regional Corporation does
not take exception to the term Eskimo
as it is not derogatory in any way. It was
developed by a First Nations group to
describe a group of Inuit they were aware
of.” The IRC is the body responsible for
achieving the goals and interests outlined
in the Inuvialuit Final Agreement signed
in 1984—“the first comprehensive land
claim agreement signed north of the 6oth
parallel and only the second in Canada at
that time.”
The CFL is not a major sports
league. If you aren't a fan, you likely won't
encounter much, if any, of its advertising,
teams, games, news, etc. A great many of
those who have spoken out against the
name are not sports fans. The change has
minimal impact for them. On the other
side of the coin are those who watch
football, love the team, and have a special
place for the name in their hearts. In the
decision to drop the name, have those
against it really won anything? Will it
change anything in their life? Will they
ever think about it again? The only losers
in this game are the unfortunate Inuit who
looked for and found value in one of their
only contemporary representations.
Dealing with the rapidly
growing interest in guns
>» This new movement could lead to disaster
without proper implementation
Matthew Fraser
Opinions Editor
n my very first article for the Other
Press I wrote about POC and LGBTQ+
individuals being essentially excluded
from the gun rights conversation. I spoke
then about how the negative image of gun
ownership actively pushes the rest of us
out of the conversation and into casualty
from laws written to punish political
opponents. There is a new day dawning
as people increasingly lose trust in the
government and police forces; for some,
the presumptions about state guaranteed
safety are falling away. Now, we are faced
with a new problem: defending great ideas
from their poor implementations.
It has been documented that across
Canada and America, gun purchases
climbed as the COVID-19 outbreak
created a climate of intense fear. Though
it is bittersweet to see people realize that
their safety ultimately resides in their own
hands, the fact that it has been done in
such a panicked manner—where people
do not have access to the necessary
training and practice conducive to safe
gun ownership—is a problem. However,
the political needle (in America) towards
gun ownership will be forced to shift in
the next few years; it will no longer just
be conservatives who see the value in the
Second Amendment. Suddenly, the people
who once supported extreme gun control
measures have been made subjects of
Eski1-Nos
>» Inuit voices invalidated
Timothy Easling
Contributor
cc Gore’ up asa kid, I first caught on
toa football game and Edmonton
Eskimos were playing and I really thought
it was our own team. I felt a sense of
pride,” said Kenneth Ruben, of Paulatuk,
N.W.T. Dominic Angutimarik from
Igloolik, Nunavut, felt similarly about
the Edmonton Eskimos name, conveying
his thoughts originally in Inuktitut: “T
wouldn't want them to change their name
simply because it’s just a title and, in fact,
I feel honoured as an Inuk person to see
the name Eskimos as they probably had
thought that Inuit were capable people
with integrity.”
It’s voices such as these that have been
lost in recent times. In the dash to decry the
sins of the Edmonton Eskimos, the majority
of mainstream media has completely
invalidated the strong feelings of pride
many Inuit associate with the name.
Lorne Kusugak, a Nunavut MLA, has
only fond memories of the Eskimos—first
seeing them on TV in the ‘7os when his
mother, Kukik Kusugak, a well-known
and respected elder in the territory, came
and sat down with him to see what had
these measures in their time of need, be
they mandatory waiting periods or license
approvals. Laws that the people wanted
are now being questioned by the voters
themselves. How much this will influence
the Democratic party is unclear, but they
must change in the face of this new reality.
Over the past few years black gun
ownership in America has drastically
increased. This trend seems to trace back
to the election of Donald Trump, and
Philip Smith, the president of the National
African American Gun Association
agrees. The association has gained 30,000
members since its inception in 2015.
Smith credits this growth to black people
suddenly seeing that the America they live
in is filled with emboldened racists.
This July 4, the Not F*cking Around
Coalition (NFAC) and its founder Grand
Master Jay led a march to Stone Mountain,
Georgia. What attracted attention to the
march was that everyone marching was
African American and armed. Seeing as
it took place in an open-carry state the
sight was not in part unusual, but the
message spread by Grandmaster Jay and
his coalition was. Their willingness to
engage in violence shows that the NFAC is
unapologetic and tailor made for action.
Though I can’t say for certain that all black
gun owners are judged by these actions,
nothing could have hurt the image of black
gun ownership quite like Grand Master
Jay’s gun ignorance and the negligent
discharge by the NFAC at a Breonna Taylor
captured her child’s attention: “I said, ‘’m
watching the Edmonton Eskimos play the
Saskatchewan Roughriders’ Knowing as
much about football as I did, she sat down
and started cheering with me. I asked her,
‘Who are you cheering for?’ and she said,
‘The Eskimos because I am an Eskimo too.”
It’s frustrating that the narrative has
been shaped so as to portray the entire
Inuit people as being against the name
when there are clearly many who have no
issue with, or even like, the name. The
Edmonton Eskimos even released a survey
that found among the western Arctic
community, 78 percent opposed a name
change; in Nunavut, 55 percent opposed
a name change; and in the eastern Arctic
where results identified “little connection
to the team,” 31 percent oppose a name
change. Jackie Jacobson, the MLA for
Nunakput, was “excited” when the team
had initially decided to keep its name a
few months ago. “It’s a good news story.
I’m a full-class Eskimo, that’s how I
consider myself.”
In opposition to the survey, Nunavut
MP Mumilaaq Qaqqaq wrote, “The fact
that there was NO CONSENSUS means
CHANGE THE NAME. I look forward
to hearing from you as the member of
parliament for 25 of 47 Inuit Nunangat
rally.
The continued slow
growth in representation
that the black community
needed in the Second
Amendment fight was
stricken by this. Worse still
is a group that claims to be
made of “highly trained”
shooters that demonstrates
poor muzzle discipline ie
and suffers a negligent
discharge resulting in
injury. This instantaneously transformed
them from an oddity group to dangerous
LARPers. (Grand Master Jay claims that a
member dropped their gun while fainting.
He also claims that the shotgun was an
older model without a safety, explaining
why it went off easily.) You cannot stop
people in a “shared” cause from having
their own opinions, but you can suffer
as their actions reflect on you; I see the
NFAC’s misdeeds hurting black people in
the eyes of those who looking for any new
way to justify their prejudices AND hurting
the legitimate good work of anyone who
fights to correct the misunderstandings
around gun ownership.
Finally, there is the tragic misuse of
firearms for self-defence. The case of Jillian
Wuestenberg, a woman who pulled a gun
during an escalating encounter, was just
one of many examples of fear blending
too closely with aggression. Though the
Wuestenberg’s were being threatened with
communities.” And she pretty much
echoes the narrative in most media: some
of us are offended so change it. But how
is that fair to those who like the name?
To those who find strength in the name?
To those who are happy for a positive
representation? Why is one side of the
argument written off just because the
other feels it should be?
Because this isn’t just about removing
aname. This is about imposing will. This
drowns out any useful debate. If you've
already labelled the other side as racist,
and the general public comes to view that
side as racist, you don’t need to have a
conversation anymore—you ve already
invalidated one side. Without a word of
actual discussion.
That’s why it’s so upsetting to see
so many Inuit lose a symbol of strength
without even a struggle. Many of their
voices ignored—those who defend their
viewpoint labelled as racist. Isn’t it the
least bit curious how all the papers ran the
survey and the results, yet only ever had
quotes to support the side opposed to the
name? How is it that a survey that resulted
in no consensus... was frequently reported
upon as if there were a consensus?
Duane Smith, chair of the Inuvialuit
Regional Corporation (IRC), was clear
Illustration by Athena Little
physical harm, the moment Jillian stepped
out of her car and pulled out her gun she
needlessly escalated the situation. I support
armed self defence but I must admit
when things go wrong. There are certain
responsibilities that come with firearm
ownership and there must bea higher
level of discipline practiced by anyone
exercising their right to own a firearm.
There is a duty to try every measure to
retreat and deescalate a situation before
using a firearm—it should only be seen as a
last resort.
There are great principles
underlying the idea of gun ownership,
but the movement is only as good as the
people practicing it. With something
as contentious as the civilian right to
own lethal force, every misuse will
have consequences whether it is the
misapplication of the law or of the weapons
themselves. If chaos rabidly descends on
America, the mistakes may soon outweigh
the good that has been done.
about the organization’s stance: “The
Inuvialuit Regional Corporation does
not take exception to the term Eskimo
as it is not derogatory in any way. It was
developed by a First Nations group to
describe a group of Inuit they were aware
of.” The IRC is the body responsible for
achieving the goals and interests outlined
in the Inuvialuit Final Agreement signed
in 1984—“the first comprehensive land
claim agreement signed north of the 6oth
parallel and only the second in Canada at
that time.”
The CFL is not a major sports
league. If you aren't a fan, you likely won't
encounter much, if any, of its advertising,
teams, games, news, etc. A great many of
those who have spoken out against the
name are not sports fans. The change has
minimal impact for them. On the other
side of the coin are those who watch
football, love the team, and have a special
place for the name in their hearts. In the
decision to drop the name, have those
against it really won anything? Will it
change anything in their life? Will they
ever think about it again? The only losers
in this game are the unfortunate Inuit who
looked for and found value in one of their
only contemporary representations.
Dealing with the rapidly
growing interest in guns
>» This new movement could lead to disaster
without proper implementation
Matthew Fraser
Opinions Editor
n my very first article for the Other
Press I wrote about POC and LGBTQ+
individuals being essentially excluded
from the gun rights conversation. I spoke
then about how the negative image of gun
ownership actively pushes the rest of us
out of the conversation and into casualty
from laws written to punish political
opponents. There is a new day dawning
as people increasingly lose trust in the
government and police forces; for some,
the presumptions about state guaranteed
safety are falling away. Now, we are faced
with a new problem: defending great ideas
from their poor implementations.
It has been documented that across
Canada and America, gun purchases
climbed as the COVID-19 outbreak
created a climate of intense fear. Though
it is bittersweet to see people realize that
their safety ultimately resides in their own
hands, the fact that it has been done in
such a panicked manner—where people
do not have access to the necessary
training and practice conducive to safe
gun ownership—is a problem. However,
the political needle (in America) towards
gun ownership will be forced to shift in
the next few years; it will no longer just
be conservatives who see the value in the
Second Amendment. Suddenly, the people
who once supported extreme gun control
measures have been made subjects of
Eski1-Nos
>» Inuit voices invalidated
Timothy Easling
Contributor
cc Gore’ up asa kid, I first caught on
toa football game and Edmonton
Eskimos were playing and I really thought
it was our own team. I felt a sense of
pride,” said Kenneth Ruben, of Paulatuk,
N.W.T. Dominic Angutimarik from
Igloolik, Nunavut, felt similarly about
the Edmonton Eskimos name, conveying
his thoughts originally in Inuktitut: “T
wouldn't want them to change their name
simply because it’s just a title and, in fact,
I feel honoured as an Inuk person to see
the name Eskimos as they probably had
thought that Inuit were capable people
with integrity.”
It’s voices such as these that have been
lost in recent times. In the dash to decry the
sins of the Edmonton Eskimos, the majority
of mainstream media has completely
invalidated the strong feelings of pride
many Inuit associate with the name.
Lorne Kusugak, a Nunavut MLA, has
only fond memories of the Eskimos—first
seeing them on TV in the ‘7os when his
mother, Kukik Kusugak, a well-known
and respected elder in the territory, came
and sat down with him to see what had
these measures in their time of need, be
they mandatory waiting periods or license
approvals. Laws that the people wanted
are now being questioned by the voters
themselves. How much this will influence
the Democratic party is unclear, but they
must change in the face of this new reality.
Over the past few years black gun
ownership in America has drastically
increased. This trend seems to trace back
to the election of Donald Trump, and
Philip Smith, the president of the National
African American Gun Association
agrees. The association has gained 30,000
members since its inception in 2015.
Smith credits this growth to black people
suddenly seeing that the America they live
in is filled with emboldened racists.
This July 4, the Not F*cking Around
Coalition (NFAC) and its founder Grand
Master Jay led a march to Stone Mountain,
Georgia. What attracted attention to the
march was that everyone marching was
African American and armed. Seeing as
it took place in an open-carry state the
sight was not in part unusual, but the
message spread by Grandmaster Jay and
his coalition was. Their willingness to
engage in violence shows that the NFAC is
unapologetic and tailor made for action.
Though I can’t say for certain that all black
gun owners are judged by these actions,
nothing could have hurt the image of black
gun ownership quite like Grand Master
Jay’s gun ignorance and the negligent
discharge by the NFAC at a Breonna Taylor
captured her child’s attention: “I said, ‘’m
watching the Edmonton Eskimos play the
Saskatchewan Roughriders’ Knowing as
much about football as I did, she sat down
and started cheering with me. I asked her,
‘Who are you cheering for?’ and she said,
‘The Eskimos because I am an Eskimo too.”
It’s frustrating that the narrative has
been shaped so as to portray the entire
Inuit people as being against the name
when there are clearly many who have no
issue with, or even like, the name. The
Edmonton Eskimos even released a survey
that found among the western Arctic
community, 78 percent opposed a name
change; in Nunavut, 55 percent opposed
a name change; and in the eastern Arctic
where results identified “little connection
to the team,” 31 percent oppose a name
change. Jackie Jacobson, the MLA for
Nunakput, was “excited” when the team
had initially decided to keep its name a
few months ago. “It’s a good news story.
I’m a full-class Eskimo, that’s how I
consider myself.”
In opposition to the survey, Nunavut
MP Mumilaaq Qaqqaq wrote, “The fact
that there was NO CONSENSUS means
CHANGE THE NAME. I look forward
to hearing from you as the member of
parliament for 25 of 47 Inuit Nunangat
rally.
The continued slow
growth in representation
that the black community
needed in the Second
Amendment fight was
stricken by this. Worse still
is a group that claims to be
made of “highly trained”
shooters that demonstrates
poor muzzle discipline ie
and suffers a negligent
discharge resulting in
injury. This instantaneously transformed
them from an oddity group to dangerous
LARPers. (Grand Master Jay claims that a
member dropped their gun while fainting.
He also claims that the shotgun was an
older model without a safety, explaining
why it went off easily.) You cannot stop
people in a “shared” cause from having
their own opinions, but you can suffer
as their actions reflect on you; I see the
NFAC’s misdeeds hurting black people in
the eyes of those who looking for any new
way to justify their prejudices AND hurting
the legitimate good work of anyone who
fights to correct the misunderstandings
around gun ownership.
Finally, there is the tragic misuse of
firearms for self-defence. The case of Jillian
Wuestenberg, a woman who pulled a gun
during an escalating encounter, was just
one of many examples of fear blending
too closely with aggression. Though the
Wuestenberg’s were being threatened with
communities.” And she pretty much
echoes the narrative in most media: some
of us are offended so change it. But how
is that fair to those who like the name?
To those who find strength in the name?
To those who are happy for a positive
representation? Why is one side of the
argument written off just because the
other feels it should be?
Because this isn’t just about removing
aname. This is about imposing will. This
drowns out any useful debate. If you've
already labelled the other side as racist,
and the general public comes to view that
side as racist, you don’t need to have a
conversation anymore—you ve already
invalidated one side. Without a word of
actual discussion.
That’s why it’s so upsetting to see
so many Inuit lose a symbol of strength
without even a struggle. Many of their
voices ignored—those who defend their
viewpoint labelled as racist. Isn’t it the
least bit curious how all the papers ran the
survey and the results, yet only ever had
quotes to support the side opposed to the
name? How is it that a survey that resulted
in no consensus... was frequently reported
upon as if there were a consensus?
Duane Smith, chair of the Inuvialuit
Regional Corporation (IRC), was clear
Illustration by Athena Little
physical harm, the moment Jillian stepped
out of her car and pulled out her gun she
needlessly escalated the situation. I support
armed self defence but I must admit
when things go wrong. There are certain
responsibilities that come with firearm
ownership and there must bea higher
level of discipline practiced by anyone
exercising their right to own a firearm.
There is a duty to try every measure to
retreat and deescalate a situation before
using a firearm—it should only be seen as a
last resort.
There are great principles
underlying the idea of gun ownership,
but the movement is only as good as the
people practicing it. With something
as contentious as the civilian right to
own lethal force, every misuse will
have consequences whether it is the
misapplication of the law or of the weapons
themselves. If chaos rabidly descends on
America, the mistakes may soon outweigh
the good that has been done.
about the organization’s stance: “The
Inuvialuit Regional Corporation does
not take exception to the term Eskimo
as it is not derogatory in any way. It was
developed by a First Nations group to
describe a group of Inuit they were aware
of.” The IRC is the body responsible for
achieving the goals and interests outlined
in the Inuvialuit Final Agreement signed
in 1984—“the first comprehensive land
claim agreement signed north of the 6oth
parallel and only the second in Canada at
that time.”
The CFL is not a major sports
league. If you aren't a fan, you likely won't
encounter much, if any, of its advertising,
teams, games, news, etc. A great many of
those who have spoken out against the
name are not sports fans. The change has
minimal impact for them. On the other
side of the coin are those who watch
football, love the team, and have a special
place for the name in their hearts. In the
decision to drop the name, have those
against it really won anything? Will it
change anything in their life? Will they
ever think about it again? The only losers
in this game are the unfortunate Inuit who
looked for and found value in one of their
only contemporary representations.