Utah Legislator proposes allowing concealed firearms without a license

[Blind_Io]

How about this: allow concealed carry within the state, but offer a CFP card with a shooting requirement for those who want to carry in states with reciprocity.

 

[TC]

As someone living in a state that just passed this sort of law, it really makes no difference. We have always been open carry. You can buy a gun without registering it and wear it on your hip, all without breaking any laws, assuming you're not underage and/or a felon. I know people who would do that just to show off. Just so they had a weapon showing on their person, for all to see. But I doubt it caused any additional violence. Criminals never follow gun laws anyway. And from what I've heard, police have a worse track record for shooting at a suspect, missing, and hitting an innocent bystander than private citizens. Of course, shooting at suspects is a small part of being an officer.

Still, every single time a pro-gun law is passed, people say the streets will run red with the blood of the innocent. Every single time. And they're always wrong. As a species, we're not programed to be suicidal.

 

[ViperVX]

If you purchase a firearm from a dealer, you're supposed to get a background check anyway. Problem is that the system doesn't work for shit.

Oh, and private sellers aren't allowed to access it. Isn't that cute?

Why would anyone, for the sake of doing away with routine procedures and barriers, aimed at cutting "the irresponsible" away from firearms, accept the hike in %chance to get killed or seriously injured. Here's how I see this: "The speed limit that half of the drivers weren't submitting to in the first place was abolished, still allowing people to drive cars built around Nascar-alike unbreakable solid frames, in collision with which airbags no longer help neither the driver of the 'Nascar', nor the other driver".

I can't speak for people with a century long gun-owning tradition, but if some1 gave me the right to just buy one, on some pretty bad day I would've produced some dead bodies, probably including my own. (Let alone the fact that I can't aim at all, with Ak-74, pistols or even air-rifles).

 

[Spectre]

Who is 'they'? Where are you seeing promotion like what you're describing?

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...sg=AFQjCNHThtfyZ71x-6gZuVUflIstDUtykA&cad=rja

See page 9 for 'blood in the streets' quote.

Also: Time Magazine

Also see this report of the campaigning the Brady Bunch did against the Florida Stand Your Ground law:

The Brady Campaign brochure notes that lethal force could well be used in "a dispute over belongings in a public place such as a beach."

Strange, but that sort of thing never seems to materialize. Or, at least, no more than it did before such laws were passed, and often in fewer numbers afterwards.

Also, direct quote from here:

"They said the streets would run red with blood," said Larimer County Sheriff Jim Alderden, recalling opponents of the new law that made it easier for citizens to qualify for a concealed-carry permit. "Some legislators felt that people would use this as an excuse to shoot people. But people just want to protect themselves and their families."

Also, here:

In the last year or two, Texas, Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, and a number of other states have relaxed their restrictions on the carrying of concealed handguns by civilians. When the late returns come in, these changes may yet save the instrumentality theory from the dustbin, but the early returns are not encouraging. ``I'm detecting that I'm eating a lot of crow on this issue,'' Harris County District Attorney John Holmes recently professed. Holmes's jurisdiction, the third most populous county in the United States, includes Houston. Holmes was one of many who predicted that ``blood would run in the streets'' when the Texas concealed-carry law came into effect 14 months ago. It hasn't happened. In fact, with 112,000 new concealed-carry permits issued, there have been all of 57 ``incidents'' recorded among licensees, mostly, according to The Texas Lawyer, involving possessing while intoxicated or failing to conceal the weapon. Eating crow is ``not necessarily something I like to do,'' Holmes told The Texas Lawyer, ``but I'm doing it on this.''

So, pretty much every time the restrictions are loosened, there's predictions of "blood in the streets" - and none of them ever come true.

Why would anyone, for the sake of doing away with routine procedures and barriers, aimed at cutting "the irresponsible" away from firearms, accept the hike in %chance to get killed or seriously injured. Here's how I see this: "The speed limit that half of the drivers weren't submitting to in the first place was abolished, still allowing people to drive cars built around Nascar-alike unbreakable solid frames, in collision with which airbags no longer help neither the driver of the 'Nascar', nor the other driver".

Uh, what? That made no sense.

 

[ViperVX]

Why would anyone, for the sake of doing away with routine procedures and barriers, aimed at cutting "the irresponsible" away from firearms, accept the hike in %chance to get killed or seriously injured. Here's how I see this: "The speed limit that half of the drivers weren't submitting to in the first place was abolished, still allowing people to drive cars built around Nascar-alike unbreakable solid frames, in collision with which airbags no longer help neither the driver of the 'Nascar', nor the other driver".

Uh, what? That made no sense.

Makes perfect sense to me. The gun owner - an owner of a 'Nascar' frame car, in collision with which, no matter what you drive, airbags don't work. Driving without the speed limit - a right to carry a concealed weapon, an ability only given to specialists (police, special services) and the ones who've proven they can cope with high speed driving, while not endangering or confusing anybody else.

Two ways I can see the "gun" laws work (as an ex-assistant DA from a country where, if guns are allowed, the population will halve by the end of the week).

1. No-limit no-paper trail purchase, but you're not allowed to discharge or carry it outside of your property, be it land, apartment or a car (boat, plane).
2. No-limit purchase, mandatory registration and physical, while the penalty for all 'Death caused by' cases, excluding self defense, is automatically the chair, including accidental discharge or a capital crime committed with your gun by another individual (if stolen, - chair for both, unless reported to the proper authorities upon discovery).

 

[Spectre]

Makes perfect sense to me. The gun owner - an owner of a 'Nascar' frame car, in collision with which, no matter what you drive, airbags don't work. Driving without the speed limit - a right to carry a concealed weapon, an ability only given to specialists (police, special services) and the ones who've proven they can cope with high speed driving, while not endangering or confusing anybody else.

Here's two ways I can see the "gun" laws work (as an ex-assistant DA from a country where, if guns are allowed, the population will halve by the end of the week).

1. No-limit no-paper trail purchase, but you're not allowed to discharge or carry it outside of your property, be it land, apartment or a car (boat, plane).
2. No-limit purchase, but mandatory registration and physical, while the penalty for all 'Death caused by' cases, excluding self defense, is automatically the chair, including accidental discharge or a capital crime committed with your stolen gun by another individual (in this case chair for both, unless the gun was reported stolen by the owner).

In the case of #1, that's pretty much a flat out ban - and is thus unconstitutional - as you would be unable to transport it for service, purchase and transport it home, or even move it from one residence to the other. This is what the Supreme Court shot down (in part) in the recent decisions against Washington DC and Chicago.

As for number 2, I agree that death should be the automatic penalty for any firearm (or any other unjustified) homicide. In Texas, it often is. Mandatory registration is bad because it often has some pretty ugly outcomes. Just ask the Jews how well registration worked out - and in California, registration has already lead to confiscation, in the case of the 'scary looking SKS'. In fact, in no cases has a gun registry ever helped to solve a crime. The Canadians were on the verge of taking their long gun registry down because it hadn't solved any crimes and was consuming ridiculous amounts of money to set up and maintain.

As for owner responsibility in the case of a stolen firearm - well, that's not as clear cut as you might think. Unless you go and masturbate over your firearm collection on a nightly basis (I don't.) you might not notice that a firearm is missing for a while. Put it in terms of cars - if you go to sleep, and someone steals your car to murder someone with it, should you be responsible for what that person did while you were asleep and didn't know your car was missing?

 

[ViperVX]

As for owner responsibility in the case of a stolen firearm - well, that's not as clear cut as you might think. Unless you go and masturbate over your firearm collection on a nightly basis (I don't.) you might not notice that a firearm is missing for a while. Put it in terms of cars - if you go to sleep, and someone steals your car to murder someone with it, should you be responsible for what that person did while you were asleep and didn't know your car was missing?

Yes, unless measures were taken to prevent such event, - proper storage, safety-nets, same applies to the car, both should 'scream' responsibility.

 

[Spectre]

Yes, unless measures were taken to prevent such event, - proper storage, safety-nets, same applies to the car, both should 'scream' responsibility.

So, you want to ban on-street parking and mandate secured garages for all car owners along with wheel boots and steering wheel locks, right? That's the same thing as requiring a safe, requiring a tether cable lock and a trigger lock.

And cars, statistically, kill more people than private firearms. In fact, eating at McDonalds (heart disease) kills more people than private firearms. Should we also require locks and security on forks and spoons? Or, since you're Russian, perhaps all the vodka (leading killer of men in Russia, last I looked) should be locked up under high security in police stations lest the populace accidentally drink it and die of liver failure?

 

[TC]

What about other possible weapons? Knives, forks, other silverware. Baseball bats, large sticks in your front yard, rocks laying around your property. Your tool shed would need to be a bunker with a security system, what with all the tools, chemicals, and various other blunt objects in there.

 

[Spectre]

What about other possible weapons? Knifes, forks, other silverware. Baseball bats, large sticks in your front yard, rocks laying around your property. Your tool shed would need to be a bunker with a security system, what with all the tools, chemicals, and various other blunt objects in there.

You wouldn't have a tool shed, as it would then be an "arsenal" and illegal under other legislation passed by the same folks.

And let's not even get started on the fun things you can make out of stuff in a gardener's shed or what most people keep under their sinks.

 

[ViperVX]

So, you want to ban on-street parking and mandate secured garages for all car owners along with wheel boots and steering wheel locks, right? That's the same thing as requiring a safe, requiring a tether cable lock and a trigger lock.

And cars, statistically, kill more people than private firearms. In fact, eating at McDonalds (heart disease) kills more people than private firearms. Should we also require locks and security on forks and spoons?

No to parking ban, but yes for wheel boots, locks, distance shut-downs and tracking, as well as advanced driving exams. It's not at all expensive, doesn't require any extra skills, comes with most modern cars. It's a win-win-win, it protects your property, displays responsibility and allows for a quick (or even automated) response in a crisis. As for guns, control should be even more strict, since the the purpose of the device is quite different and straightforward.

Your objective as a member of a community is to not inflict harm to others, which is what every single law is for. A private personal life should stay private and personal, including the food.

 

[Spectre]

No to parking ban, but yes for wheel boots, locks, distance shut-downs and tracking, as well as advanced driving exams. It's not at all expensive, doesn't require any extra skills, comes with most modern cars. It's a win-win-win, it protects your property, displays responsibility and allows for a quick (or even automated) action to report the stolen vehicle and prevent possible harm

Then why doesn't any country on the world require this? Not even Japan or Germany do.

Also, I think your community member goals are a little off, else you need to explain gangs or the mafia.

 

[TC]

Come on Spectre, imagine how long you could live in a paradise like this:

https://pic.armedcats.net/t/to/tomcat/2010/10/10/padded20room5.jpg

 

[Spectre]

Yeah, I think I'll pass - even if that's what the safety-first nuts want to do to the world.

 

[Dogbert]

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CBUQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.colorado.edu%2Fcspv%2Fpublications%2Fpapers%2FCSPV-011.pdf&rct=j&q=Violence%20Prevention%20Center%20%22blood%20in%20the%20streets%22&ei=CTaxTOnwM4OClAeVlIWhCw&usg=AFQjCNHThtfyZ71x-6gZuVUflIstDUtykA&cad=rja

See page 9 for 'blood in the streets' quote.

Also: Time Magazine

Also see this report of the campaigning the Brady Bunch did against the Florida Stand Your Ground law:

Two things on this:

1. I read both the report, and the Time Magazine article... and I'm actually a little upset that I wasted so much time trying to find the evidence you're citing. Hell, I even found better sources to what you're talking about by googling "blood in the streets gun".

At no point did the PDF you linked go into any detail about gun control or gun laws whatsoever, and the "blood in the streets" quote was a throwaway line in an introductory paragraph. And the Time Magazine article is about Mafia violence being romanticized... which, again, never went into detail about gun control or gun laws.

Why did you want anyone to read those sources, and furthermore, how in the world do you think those sources support your position?

2. I still haven't seen any sources to back up the claims you've been making.

Yes, it's only been a week, but people of your position were claiming that there would be dozens of people accidentally shot in that same time period.

I am, however, justified in using the lack of evidence of anything happening in one week in refuting the theory that loosening firearms controls would 'instantly' cause 'Dodge City' in the streets.

Who is claiming there would be dozens of people accidentally shot shot in a week? Who, besides the Brady Bunch, is saying that there would be 'Dodge City in the streets'?

 

[narf]

So, you want to ban on-street parking and mandate secured garages for all car owners along with wheel boots and steering wheel locks, right? That's the same thing as requiring a safe, requiring a tether cable lock and a trigger lock.

You're being silly. Leaving a firearm and ammo in the open would be the same as leaving an unlocked car on the street with keys in the ignition. If your car gets stolen that way you're at least partially responsible. If your 12yo kid drives off with it you are at least partially responsible for the damage he does on his drive. Locking your car and taking the keys with you provides a significant safety boost with no significant effort. This is the same as having a safe for your firearms, or similar means of securing them. The silliness you mention like wheel clamps would be like locking your safe with the firearm inside in another safe - yes, the safety does improve, but the effort also increases massively.

In short, locking away your firearm equals proper use of your car keys. Failure to do either will leave you at least partially responsible. No need to be silly and ban on-street parking.

 

[jmsprovan]

can someone slaughter a bear and send me its arms via fedex, i want in on this

 

[Blind_Io]

You're being silly. Leaving a firearm and ammo in the open would be the same as leaving an unlocked car on the street with keys in the ignition. If your car gets stolen that way you're at least partially responsible. If your 12yo kid drives off with it you are at least partially responsible for the damage he does on his drive. Locking your car and taking the keys with you provides a significant safety boost with no significant effort. This is the same as having a safe for your firearms, or similar means of securing them. The silliness you mention like wheel clamps would be like locking your safe with the firearm inside in another safe - yes, the safety does improve, but the effort also increases massively.

In short, locking away your firearm equals proper use of your car keys. Failure to do either will leave you at least partially responsible. No need to be silly and ban on-street parking.

I'm against laws mandating this for one very important reason:

Holy shit, someone just kicked in the door to my apartment and he has a knife! Just a moment while I
a) go to my closet
b) 23 right
c) 4 left
d) 10 right
e) get my pistol
f) load my pistol
g) shoot intruder

OR

a) Draw, fire.

Of course parents with kids in the house need to keep the guns where kids can't get to them, but since I don't have kids I should be able to keep my gun on my bedside table, on the stand next to the door, in my desk, or in a kitchen cabinet if I want.

 

[narf]

Get a decent apartment door? :lol:



"Draw, fire" implies carrying it on/near you - or, in car terms, having the keys in the ignition while you are in the driver's seat. Nothing wrong with that assuming that there actually can be anything right about gun ownership in the first place.



About your scenario... "Holy shit, someone just kicked in the door to my apartment and he has a gun! Just a moment while I draw..." Drawing your gun makes the baddie pull the trigger. Not drawing a gun may just leave you without cash and jewelry.

 

[TC]

About your scenario... "Holy shit, someone just kicked in the door to my apartment and he has a gun! Just a moment while I draw..." Drawing your gun makes the baddie pull the trigger. Not drawing a gun may just leave you without cash and jewelry.

Maybe, maybe not, but at least you have a choice. Rather than curling into the fetal position and hope/pray that all they do is steal your cash and jewelery. Cause god forbid you actually stand up for yourself against wrongdoing.