Utah Guns Forum banner

HBO 350 -

3864 Views 10 Replies 5 Participants Last post by  Jeff Johnson
55 [(h)] (viii) is qualified to purchase and possess a [dangerous weapon and a handgun][between brakets is struck out]
56 firearm pursuant to Section 76-10-503 and federal law.

I had been told that our CFP would allow knives and other weapons, and this was the line where it made it legal. It looks like this would remove that ability...


I am wondering if this is going to be a problem. I never carry anything "Weapon"ish besides my firearm, but don't like the thought of loosing ground.

I don't count a folding knife or letherman tool "Weaponish"
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
In short this doesn't change the ability to conceal a knife.
Thanks Clark,
See, alll the legalease had me confused... Just reading it and seeing what it was removing got me nervous.

USSC's web site says this bill was to require all instructors to be Utah Residents which would sound to me to make it harder for folks in other states to get a Utah CFP. But then I couldn't find that langauge in there. I guess I am wondering if this one is going to be a problem...

I have two major issues with this bill and I am hoping that it is either changed or dies on the floor.

First off Lines 73-74 states:
(d) (i) If a person granted a permit under this part has been charged with a crime of violence in any state, the division shall suspend the permit.
This wording is currently on the law books we need to use this bill to correct this mistake. Here is the problem with this pretty simple looking provision. This states that if a person is CHARGED. The last I knew we were innocent until proven guilty in this country. I have contacted representative Curtis Oda who is sponsoring the bill to ask that he please correct this language.

This is a huge worry to me and exactly the kind of thing I have been speaking of. This looked like a completely harmless provision. However, just think you do something to protect yourself or your family and the state brings charges against you. You will lose your ability to carry a firearm for self protection until you are proven innocent.

Wait doesn't that sound wrong proven innocent. This is why we need a powerful and Non-Compromising lobbyist group to make sure these things do not continue to sneak their way into our law books. This needs to be removed this session. We do not have much time left. If you want to know how to help send me an email and I will update you tomorrow on what we should do next.

Second, this bill wants to adds more provisions to make the process of becoming an instructor even more convoluted. Instructors will now need to purchase an official seal to stamp on certificates? This is ridiculous we are not notaries we are firearm instructors. I hope I can also get Representative Oda to remove this and any other parts making the process more complicated or expensive. BCI has wasted enough money already on our state backgound check system.

I am against Concealed Weapon Permits in the first place. The second amendment of the Constitution does not say I need a permit. That being said, I am a huge advocate of training. I take classes any chance I get and I own a firearm training business. However, I do not believe in compromising on legislation so that it benefits my company. There is a heck of a lot more at stake here.

With the formation of the Utah Firearms Association (UFA) I have decided to start arranging monthly concealed weapons permit class in each of the three main valleys at no cost to the general public. The reason for this is the more concealed weapons permits the larger our group becomes.

If people want to make a donation to the association for the class that is great. As a member of the association members will also have many opportunities to sign up for other firearms classes that will be free for them to attend. As well as special material from local pro gun authors that you can not get for free anywhere else. We will be adding great new benefits all the time.

I am not doing any of this for the money obviously. I am doing it to build a powerful and well funded association that can truly uphold a No-Compromise attitude when it comes to gun rights and make a difference in this state. I don't want to be well known or powerful. I want UFA as a whole to be well known, and its membership heard clearly on capital hill.

We have compromised enough in this state. Legislators feel that it is a game of give and take. That is not the case. Our future membership will support the candidates that support our rights. That is the trade. We have had it so easy in this state that we have gotten too comfortable.

We trust that those who have supported our stance in the past always will. This is just not the case. Please take a stand now and decide enough is enough. It is no longer time just to protect our current rights, it is about getting those rights back that have been taken from us.

Please send me an email if you would be interested in joining the association. Once I have the web page and membership sign up going I will let everyone know. You can become a member by donating a minimum of $1.00 to the association.

The idea is to leave no one out. If that is all you can afford then that is great. If you can afford more to help UFA fight for your rights that will be great. No matter how much you can contribute the important thing is that you join.

See less See more
HB 350

In speaking with many instructors and members of US-DIN, there has been 1 overwhelming question. Why should Utah taxpayers subsidize, with resident taxes, non resident instructors to teach non resident applicants?

Why should BCI have to stand idly by when many of these same non resident Utah CCW instructor’s run diploma mills thereby devaluing our fantastic permit in the eyes of other states?

The answer is; obviously they shouldn’t have to.

I have been asked to address this and include language in an existing bill that the Honorable Curt Oda has sponsored. In addition we have worked with Charles Hardy who gave great insight on the language as well as the folks at BCI.

We are the only state that allows this type and degree of credentials and instruction by non-residents let alone letting non-residents teach in any other state. While at the same time having no monitoring of their compliance with Utah’s requirements

No taxes are paid by these other instructors,

Some are just signing up to become instructors for a $5.00 1-time fee so they don’t have to pay for their own instruction. They then sign their own application.

Some out of state (and a few in state) instructors are signing off without giving any instruction.

This bill does not limit the permit system in any way. It in no way touches the content or requirements of instruction.

The reality is that unless we initiate some degree of control over the instructors it may in fact be done for us with farther reaching effects that than those imposed on just instructor’s. For instance BCI and many others still want to see a live fire aspect to the instruction as well as renewal courses for applicants.

In addition we face he real prospect of loosing recognition and or reciprocity with other states unless we show that we are in fact doing something to monitor instructors.

The renewal classes taught should be taught at least 1 if not 2 times per year. This can be amended in the bill.

The notary public type stamp is for control of those who teach and to monitor their credential expiration dates.

In the end it will go a long way to effectively curtail the opportunistic instructors and belay the pattern of abuse among some of the Utah instructor’s

The Bill’s Sponsor, The Honorable Curt Oda has decided to remove the language that would limit instructor credentials to Utah Residents only. Whereas I would like to have retained that language in the bill I believe we can work with it.

I have arranged for some our instructors to speak in favor of the bill when it appears before the house committee this week.

I have also looked at some suggestions proffered by John Spangler of USSC and find them to be appropriate and would suggest to the sponsor they be added to the 1st substitute.

John’s suggestions are as follows;

Line 114- specify what type of NRA certification(s) are needed, or make it deliberately very encompassing- there are many vastly different certifications, some very easy to get, others very difficult. (Home Firearms Safety, marksmanship instructor, coach, RBTAV, etc).

Line 133- add "successfully" before completing

Lines 137-149 Does the term "seal" have a specific meaning? I assume you are wanting an ink stamp with the specified information, not a raised embossed type seal.

Lines 158-159- change to read

[(14)] (13) In providing instruction and issuing a permit under this part, the concealed firearms instructor and licensing authority is are not vicariously liable for damages caused by the permit holder.


W. Clark Aposhian
See less See more

I know your post took a lot of time! Thank you very much. That was what I wanted to understand about this bill.

I truly understand the need to get control over the instructors. Some of them are very diligent in covering everything that is needed and some probably have been sloppy. I feel my instructor was careful to cover everything. As I have gone through the laws since, I remember him touching on each of them, and his being a friend of my brother, he didn’t let me get away with anything. :wink:

The concern I have would be the out of state instructors. I agree we need to better controls, but if we limit it to state residents only, then our permit would become almost a resident only permit with only those who could come to Utah to take a class or the lucky few who could catch a class from a traveling instructor being able to get it. Maybe I don’t fully understand the ramifications of it all.

I must say that the laws have changed in the last four years that I have had my permit. If someone doesn’t keep up on them they are going to have some problems, but that’s another thread! Or maybe it isn’t. Instructors really need to make sure they are keeping up on the changes. I remember just a few months ago when someone on Packing cited the old 60 day limitation on out of state permit recognition.

That’s the value of this type of forum. Without the discussions we have, it would be very hard to keep track on the changes in the laws! They are not covered properly by the media for sure, and as I said before, the legalese got me lost when reviewing this bill.
See less See more

I consider you a great friend to firearm owners in this state. I also have a lot of respect for everything you have done to protect those rights. However, sometimes I feel that you help to push through legislation just to please your friends at BCI.

First off you never commented on the worst part of this bill which is line 73 where this bill says that a person is guilty before they have had a fair trial before a jury of their piers.

As far as loosing are right to carry in other states, oh well. I know I just made jaws drop. This is not a job of the state. Instead of spending your time trying to kiss the butts of every states leaders. Lets help No-Compromise organization such as Gun Owners of America (GOA) to make federal legislation that will force states to recognize our permit.

Right now there is federal legislation H.R. 1243 that would establish a national right to concealed carry for (1) persons with concealed carry licenses, and (2) persons from states like Vermont and Alaska which allow concealed carry without licenses.

Lets spend our time fighting to get our rights back not giving up some rights to get others. This is crazy they are our rights. We do not have to bargain with them. We need to demand that our elected officials protect our constitutional rights. If they refuse to do so then we need to get them out of office as quick as humanly possible.

Once again as I said above I really do respect all that you have done. I would love to work beside you instead of against you. However, you need to understand I refuse to sit back and watch my rights traded away as if they were bargaining chips. THEY ARE RIGHTS! not privileges.
See less See more

Please call Representative Curtis Oda immediately and request that he use this bill to change the current wording of this legislation by changing the wording of line 73-74 of his House Bill HB0350 from:

73 (d) (i) If a person granted a permit under this part has been charged with a crime of
74 violence in any state, the division shall suspend the permit.


73 (d) (i) If a person granted a permit under this part has been charged with convicted of a crime of
74 violence in any state, the division shall suspend the permit.

Here is his contact information:

Representative: Curtis Oda
District: 14
Home Phone: 801-773-9796
Cell Phone: 801-898-6875

Please be respectful to representative Oda he is a very strong Pro Gun legislater I believe he was misguided on this bill.

Post edited 2/17/2006 to make wording more clear.
See less See more
I agree with you Tom. These are rights we are talking about. In that breath if they can't pass a Vermont or Alaska style carry law then they should at least do away with the "Permit" and make it a license. After all Permit has negative connotations to me. It means that the big brother is simply giving you permission to do something which they can strip that permission at their whim. I don't like it on bit. No more making concessions its time for law abiding firearms owners to stand up and demand their constitutional rights.
I just got of the phone with Mr. Clark Aposhian who pointed out to me that my post directed towards him and the one regarding HB0350 had some convoluted messages in it. First off lines 73-74 that I have been fighting to get them to change. These are existing legislation. They were not introduced in this bill and I understand how someone could take my comments to mean they were new.

However, This bill does do some house cleaning therefor I wanted to see the language changed from charged to convicted. Clark explained doing so would cause the loss of certain other rights we have. I still am in support of changing the language. Then fighting to get our rights back that we would lose.

I am hoping that this bill is just not heard at this point so that we have an opportunity to work with other groups such as USDIN to form a bill that will accomplish the needed housekeeping tasks without making the process of becoming or being a instructor more difficult.

I believe it is also important to tell everyone something that Clark made me aware of,. USDIN was at the forefront fighting for a bill that would lower the level of instruction needed when obtaining a concealed weapons permit. For this I applaud them. It takes a lot of integrity to fight for a bill that may hurt there bottom line as instructors.

As a personal note I would like to make a public apology for making comments about Clark just trying to make his friends at BCI happy. This comment was found to be offensive by him and for that I apologize. It is my hope that Utah Firearms Association can fight together and peacefully with the other pro-gun lobbyist groups in the state.

That being said I still refuse to put friendship or partnerships first to change the No-Compromise view of this organization. I hope that those fighting with us will hold to the same level of integrity that we want gun owners in this state to know UFA for.
See less See more
Clark is certainly one of the good guys in this state, and on our forum. Thomas is also one of the good guys in this state, and I'm glad he has provided this excellent forum for our cause.

We can have differences of opinion on tactics and specific issues. However, all pro-gun people and organizations must work together well, or we weaken our cause.

"We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."
Benjamin Franklin
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.