[bagpiper]

It's not being worked on. The only way to work on it is to get a test case to go to court, unless Shurtleff gives his opinion. The UVU campus (and UofU apparently) feel that they're reading the Uniform Code differently than we are, and obviously they are. They feel they're in the right. MajorNickmo (Nick Moyes) was set and prepped to be a test case, but he has obligations (such as graduating) and a lack of funds (he's a college kid, after all!) so he just decided to not OC and I can't say I blame him.

Respectfully, it is being worked. But by design, some things are slow in this nation. I too am frustrated it has dragged out this long rather than the legislature doing something very draconian to the U to set an example. But realize we have made tremendous progress. Even the U and UVU have fully acknowledged that CC pursuant to a permit is perfectly legal and there is nothing they can do about it. On campus housing policies relative to RKBA are far better than they once were.

If someone wants to be a test case so be it. But I certainly hope that any such person takes into account a couple of very important considerations:

1-How to fund the fight. The U and UVU have, for all intents and purposes, unlimited resources and top notch attorneys to research, prepare, and argue their case. It would be a shame to hand them a precedent setting win simply because someone rushed out to be a test case without adequate resources to mount a proper legal battle.

2-Making sure the test case is "clean", or in other words, doesn't have other distractions. Ideally a test case involves only the issue you care about and doesn't force the judge(s) to ignore or overlook other issues. Make sure the case is ONLY about lawful, open possession of arms on campus; NOT about whether you resisted arrest, disobeyed a lawful order from a cop, disrupted some school activity, are a prohibited person, your permit was expired, etc, etc, etc. This leads directly into...

3-Be aware of the various backdoor ways the U or UVU might press their case without giving you a clear and clean test case. Can they claim you were disrupting an activity rather than charging you with a violation of gun laws directly? Disturbing the peace? Maybe something non-judicial against a student or employee? So on and so forth.

Frankly, anyone considering being a "test case" should spend some serious time with his legal team BEFORE he ever engages in the overt conduct intended to be the test case. He should have allies present who are recording the encounter so there is no question that it is not disruptive, he did not resist arrest, and so on.

That all said, there are two changes to the law that will greatly aid us.

1-We need to remove college campuses from the list of gun free "school zones." Federal law does not include college campuses and there is no reason Utah law should. This removes whatever possible hope the U and UVU have of trying to claim that since a permit is required to legally carry, and the permit is called a "concealed" firearms permit, the gun has to be kept concealed.

2-The latest legal briefs from the U on this topic include a fairly exhaustive list of every statute they think they can use to target OCers without actually going after guns directly. This includes disorderly conduct, disrupting a school activity, and others. Every one of these statutes needs to be clarified to make clear that otherwise lawful conduct (such as OCing) does not, itself, constitute a violation of the law.

The legislature meets in January. And election season has just passed. I sincerely hope everyone here was involved in at least one campaign this last season so that when you call your legislator they know you. Regardless, start calling now. Ask for a few minutes to meet with your legislator between now and the session starting at the end of January. Then make your case about why your legislator should support our cause and the bills that will effect the changes noted above.

Also, consider your message. Asking for every gun law to be repealed tomorrow will probably do less good than asking for 2 or 3 specific, not too radical sounding changes this year. Then next year, ask for 2 or 3 more. Steady, if slow, change in the right direction is a safer, more proven method to gain or regain rights than is revolutionary changes all at once.

Charles

 

[bagpiper]

So you're saying right now that they're working on clarification of the laws to ensure OC is allowed by those with a CFP?

No, "they" are not working on it. "We" are working on it. "We" includes individuals, local and national pro-gun organizations, and pro-RKBA legislators.

"We" have been working the issue for several years including the changes to the Utah law following the U's initial (though I believe improperly ruled) win in court trying to overturn State preemption. Those changes made it very difficult for the Utah Supreme Court to issue any ruling other than a pro-RKBA (and pro-legislative superiority) ruling on the final UoU v Shurtleff decision. Prior to that, "we" forced every State agency including the DWR and school districts to correct rules and regulations that violated State Preemption and individual RKBA.

Along the way "we" have passed parking lot preemption to assure the rights of most private employees to keep a gun in their car even if they park in a company parking lot. We've provided liability protection to property owners who do not ban lawful possession of firearms. We've strengthened the pro-RKBA community by making it easier to introduce youngsters to hunting. And we've managed to beat back every frontal attack on RKBA and almost every back door attempt to limit RKBA through "felony creep".

We continue to work on the very boring and arcane--but important--issues like exactly how fees for permits are approved, where the money from permits goes, and how it gets used.

We've managed to maintain the integrity of our permit system in terms of recognition in other States (for the most part) even as some who should be our friends and allies have made life hard on us for their own short term financial benefit. (Think fly-by-night or "online" Utah CCW courses or deliberately encouraging people not to get a home State permit but to instead get only a Utah permit.)

And "we" have several pro-RKBA bills planned for this next legislative session which starts the day after MLK day, January 2011. So "we" continue to do what we've been doing since before I was even a part of "we" and "we" managed to win non-discriminatory, shall issue without giving up any permitted locations. Since that win in about '95 the only locations we've lost have been private homes and houses of worship that take proactive measures to post/give notice. We've kept and even expanded schools. We've kept bars and restaurants that serve alcohol. Nobody even mentions libraries, public parks, hospitals, or large gatherings anymore. Private businesses don't get any special "gun laws" to allow them to ban guns. It is, at most, a civil matter or possibly a trespassing issue if they don't want your gun in their store. Talk to those in other States, even shall issue States if you don't fully understand what a big deal all this is. We will continue to fight the good fight, to win what we can this year and come back next year for what remains. We'll push for and win modest, reasonable increases in RKBA and when the sky doesn't fall and the roads don't flow with blood we'll be back to make another, modest, reasonable change.

The question becomes what are you doing to improve this? Are you subscribed to the GOUtah! email alerts? Are you a member of the USSC and receiving their alerts? Do you know you State representative and State senator? More importantly, do they know you and respect your views or at least your ability to influence the next legislative election? Are you a delegate to your (or perhaps your State legislators') political party? Have you called or even better, met with, your State legislators to discuss this or other RKBA issues?

Rep. Sandstrom has publicly indicated he will run a bill to allow "Constitutional Carry" (aka Alaska or Arizona carry) where a permit is available to those who want or need it for recognition in other States or to legally carry in school zones, but said permit is not required to carry a usable, loaded gun, in public either openly or concealed. Have you prepped your legislator to support this bill?

As other pro-gun bills are introduced, including those that will bolster and clarify the legality of OCing on college campuses, will you have the relationship with your legislators so that your call or visit or note sent into the legislative chamber will carry the appropriate weight? It is not my place to publicly disclose what other bills are being drafted. The timing for that kind of disclosure is usually calculated on the part of sponsors to maximize the odds of success. But several bills are in the works. None of them will give us everything we want. Each will be a modest and important win and set the stage for additional wins in the near future.

JoeSparky gives me some kind credit. The reality is, "we" have the ear of legislators because "we" can affect the results of elections. We are also honest when we provide legislators with information. And we are civil and mature even in disagreement. And we avoid sounding too radical most of the time. We eschew civil disobedience or disturbance.

If you, or anyone else, happens to live in a district represented by a hopelessly anti-RKBA legislator, don't give up even if he has a lock on your district for as long as he wants it. Adopt a pro-gun or even fence sitting legislator from another district. Work on campaigns for him/her to some reasonable degree. Visit on a semi-regular basis. Accept honest disagreement on less important issues when those arise. But build a relationship.

At the end of they day, good ideas are important. But don't underestimate the value of working relationships either. I sincerely hope everyone on this list is subscribed to at least one--if not multiple--of the local, pro-gun email alerts that are available, that everyone dedicates a few hours during the session to making phone calls, that everyone here takes a few hours during election season to put up yard signs, serve as a delegate, and otherwise be actively and visibly involved in legislative campaigns. Many of those who gave us shall issue are not as young as they once were. A lot of work went into that. I've been privileged to be a part of preserving and even expanding upon that in the face of some pretty big challenges including Columbine and gun owner apathy when Bush won the White House.

We need to all ask ourselves what we are doing, personally, to make sure that we do our part to pass on even better laws for RKBA to the next generation. OCing and otherwise publicly exercising our rights is a part of what we need to do. Networking here is helpful. Court battles are possible, but are risky and expensive. Legislative action to make sure the laws on the books are good is really crucial. And for too many, it gets short shift, especially when it comes to donating a little time or money to help decent (not perfect, but decent) men get elected and to then maintaining those relationships to help them stand firm in the face of severe pressure from the media, from squishy colleagues, from executive branch agencies, and from anti-RKBA lobbyists and organizations.

Charles