Utah Guns Forum banner

Constitutional Carry (again)

30K views 128 replies 20 participants last post by  Karl 
#1 ·
http://fox13now.com/2016/09/30/utah-lawmaker-opens-constitutional-carry-bill/
SALT LAKE CITY - A state lawmaker is defending his decision to open a so-called "constitutional carry" bill in the Utah State Legislature.

Rep. Lee Perry, R-Perry, said in a statement that he is doing it at the request of constituents who support the Second Amendment. Perry, whose day job is a Utah Highway Patrol trooper, insisted that he is not running the bill on behalf of law enforcement (which has raised concerns about such bills in the past).

"I recently opened a bill file that would allow law-abiding citizens to carry a concealed gun without a permit and not be considered a criminal action. I'm sponsoring this legislation because I have constituents that believe this is a Second Amendment right. Eleven other states have passed similar laws including Wyoming, Idaho and Arizona," Perry said in his statement.
Here's hoping Herbert won't try to block this one.

ETA: Here's the 2017 bill:

http://le.utah.gov/~2017/bills/static/HB0112.html
 
#3 ·
manithree said:
http://fox13now.com/2016/09/30/utah-lawmaker-opens-constitutional-carry-bill/
SALT LAKE CITY - A state lawmaker is defending his decision to open a so-called "constitutional carry" bill in the Utah State Legislature.

Rep. Lee Perry, R-Perry, said in a statement that he is doing it at the request of constituents who support the Second Amendment. Perry, whose day job is a Utah Highway Patrol trooper, insisted that he is not running the bill on behalf of law enforcement (which has raised concerns about such bills in the past).

"I recently opened a bill file that would allow law-abiding citizens to carry a concealed gun without a permit and not be considered a criminal action. I'm sponsoring this legislation because I have constituents that believe this is a Second Amendment right. Eleven other states have passed similar laws including Wyoming, Idaho and Arizona," Perry said in his statement.
Here's hoping Herbert won't try to block this one.
He veto'd it once, and suffered no real harm career wise from doing so. What incentive would he have to let it pass this time, assuming the legislature manages to send it his way ?
 
#4 ·
gravedancer said:
He veto'd it once, and suffered no real harm career wise from doing so. What incentive would he have to let it pass this time, assuming the legislature manages to send it his way ?
Like I said before, JJ's challenge finally got him to change his mind on common core. Constitutional carry was a smaller issue, but one that Mr. Johnson touted. It would appear that losing at the convention at least made him think for a minute.
 
#5 ·
In addition to the convention loss, there is also the issue of additional States passing Constitution Carry in the last two years.

Ten or so years ago when Rep. Thompson first introduced Constitutional carry we'd have been the first State in the union after Vermont to do it. It would have been ground breaking. To do so after Alaska would have made us the first urbanized State to do so. To do so after Arizona would have still had Utah on the pioneering edge.

But with 11 or 12 States now offering some form of permit-free carry, and with several States moving to Constitutional Carry since the veto two years ago, we're now talking something that starts to look mainstream rather than radical.

Utah is a conservative society in the true meaning of conservative: we are resistant to radical changes. We have lead out on several important aspects of RKBA the last 20 years. Certain other aspects will be easier for us as we follow someone else's lead.

The key is the legislature. Let your legislators know this is important to you. There will be plenty of folks calling them claiming "I own guns, I'm an NRA member, I have a permit and there is no need to make this change." Make sure your voice is heard politely, but firmly.

This is not a major change to Utah law. This doesn't allow people without permits to carry into schools. We've spent 20+ years proving that law-abiding citizens do not create a hazard when they carry guns in public. The 2nd amendment is not a 2nd-class right and we shouldn't need a permit just to put a coat over our holstered gun as we go to the range.

There are still a few weeks left to volunteer a little time to help legislative candidates with their re-election. A couple of hours on a Saturday morning walking a neighborhood for an imperfect, but decent, legislative candidate makes your views that much more important to him come February.

Charles
 
#6 ·
Can someone tell me if this change to the law would change the utah legally loaded part of the law?
If not, I don't believe this is really consitutional carry. Or am I wrong? The statement that said " just because it gets covered with a jacket should not make someone a criminal" makes me wonder. Just what it will be. I looked yesterday but couldn't find the bill.

Thanks
 
#7 ·
The bill has not been formally published, it's still in a protected status so the text is not widely available. So exactly what it contains is yet unknown and even then preliminary text is often changed during the legislative process. At this point I would expect it to stick to the "Utah Unloaded" rule just to make it easier to pass.
 
#9 ·
Some of our good friends who are teachers carry concealed in their classrooms. How would constitutional carry affect them (if they chose not to renew their CFP's). I thought Federal law banning firearms in schools was only overridden if a person had a concealed carry permit. Am I wrong?
 
#10 ·
UtahRSO said:
Some of our good friends who are teachers carry concealed in their classrooms. How would constitutional carry affect them (if they chose not to renew their CFP's). I thought Federal law banning firearms in schools was only overridden if a person had a concealed carry permit. Am I wrong?
If I remember correctly the Federal law allows provisions to obey state law which is why ccw holders are able to carry on school grounds - because state law permits this. If I a incorrect someone correct me. IANAL
 
#11 ·
As it currently stands they should still get and maintain their permits. Some states have tried to write blanket permissions into their laws but that has not been tested in regards to the GFSZ act requiring specific permission. The Feds may accept it, or they may not, and if not then the courts may or may not.

If not it's a felony and you lose your right to keep and bear arms for good. Thus it behooves anyone wanting to carry into a school in a constitutional carry state to have a permit.

I also am not a Lawyer, but find this one aspect of the Const carry movement that is very concerning. We simply don't know if the feds will accept a state const carry law as permission to enter a GFSZ with a gun.

The federal law requires the individual to have permission from the state, they accept carry permits as such permission. Will they accept a const carry law as a blanket permission?
 
#12 ·
DaKnife said:
I also am not a Lawyer, but find this one aspect of the Const carry movement that is very concerning. We simply don't know if the feds will accept a state const carry law as permission to enter a GFSZ with a gun.
I don't really see anything to be concerned about. We haven't even seen the latest bill yet. But since it's been vetoed twice, I suspect it will be an incremental step in the right direction, not a daring middle finger to fedzilla.

If the alleged bill modifies the Utah GFSZ law, or the section that exempts CFP holders from it, then we'll know it intends blanket permission. If not, it's permits as usual. Based on my memory of the previous bills and the current (and very likely next) governor, the latter seems much more likely.
 
#13 ·
Cinhil said:
UtahRSO said:
Some of our good friends who are teachers carry concealed in their classrooms. How would constitutional carry affect them (if they chose not to renew their CFP's). I thought Federal law banning firearms in schools was only overridden if a person had a concealed carry permit. Am I wrong?
If I remember correctly the Federal law allows provisions to obey state law which is why ccw holders are able to carry on school grounds - because state law permits this. If I a incorrect someone correct me. IANAL
I think it is more than obey state law. The exemption states

18USC922(q)(2)(B)(ii)if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;
To me that means you need an actual license, and that before you receive it the state must verify that you qualify. You won't find me offering to be a test case.
 
#14 ·
UtahRSO said:
Some of our good friends who are teachers carry concealed in their classrooms. How would constitutional carry affect them (if they chose not to renew their CFP's). I thought Federal law banning firearms in schools was only overridden if a person had a concealed carry permit. Am I wrong?
This bill will (most likely) have no effect on teachers or anyone else who carries in a school. They will still need to maintain a Utah permit.

Prior bills to allow permit free or constitutional carry have not altered the permit system in Utah. They have just made the permit optional in places other than school zones. I expect this bill will do likewise. But I haven't seen the text yet and so can't say for sure.

Charles
 
#15 ·
bagpiper said:
UtahRSO said:
Some of our good friends who are teachers carry concealed in their classrooms. How would constitutional carry affect them (if they chose not to renew their CFP's). I thought Federal law banning firearms in schools was only overridden if a person had a concealed carry permit. Am I wrong?
This bill will (most likely) have no effect on teachers or anyone else who carries in a school. They will still need to maintain a Utah permit.

Prior bills to allow permit free or constitutional carry have not altered the permit system in Utah. They have just made the permit optional in places other than school zones. I expect this bill will do likewise. But I haven't seen the text yet and so can't say for sure.

Charles
^^^^What he said...... There will still be a Utah permit and will still be required for school carry and depending on the average maybe even for loaded carry (I'd love to see Utah unloaded go bye as it is a joke). It really would simply let those who already open carry without a permit throw on a jacket without becoming a felon. It really would not affect much of anything else except Utah's standing as as a FREE state.
 
#16 ·
Poll: Utahns oppose carrying concealed gun without permit

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=42320083&nid=1070

Polls can be manipulated fairly easily, but with 75% opposed to constitutional carry, it sounds like we have a lot of persuading of friends and neighbors to do.
 
#17 ·
MichaelD said:
Poll: Utahns oppose carrying concealed gun without permit

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=42320083&nid=1070

Polls can be manipulated fairly easily, but with 75% opposed to constitutional carry, it sounds like we have a lot of persuading of friends and neighbors to do.
I wonder who they asked. There is a poll at the end of the story you posted, and it says 71% agrees there should be carry without a permit.



Sent from iSnurd
 
#18 ·
Just for reference, here's UtahPolicy.Com's article: Utahns Overwhelmingly Oppose 'Constitutional Carry'

Personal Note: 818 people polled. As one commenter points out, that's a pretty small sample size. I had been under the impression that a poll had to have a MINIMUM of 2000 responses to be statistically valid.
 
#19 ·
D-FIN said:
bagpiper said:
UtahRSO said:
Some of our good friends who are teachers carry concealed in their classrooms. How would constitutional carry affect them (if they chose not to renew their CFP's). I thought Federal law banning firearms in schools was only overridden if a person had a concealed carry permit. Am I wrong?
This bill will (most likely) have no effect on teachers or anyone else who carries in a school. They will still need to maintain a Utah permit.

Prior bills to allow permit free or constitutional carry have not altered the permit system in Utah. They have just made the permit optional in places other than school zones. I expect this bill will do likewise. But I haven't seen the text yet and so can't say for sure.

Charles
^^^^What he said...... There will still be a Utah permit and will still be required for school carry and depending on the average maybe even for loaded carry (I'd love to see Utah unloaded go bye as it is a joke). It really would simply let those who already open carry without a permit throw on a jacket without becoming a felon. It really would not affect much of anything else except Utah's standing as as a FREE state.
Why do you say that 'Utah unloaded' is a joke? In my opinion it is the only definition that makes sense? Many other definitions basically call an otherwise unloaded firearm loaded if there is ammo nearby. That to me is ridiculous.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
#20 ·
:agree:
With one caveat, the miss-understandings out there about "Utah Unloaded" have led to opencarry.org's map that claims Utah requires a permit to open carry. And everybody loves to share that map thus leading to many thinking that Utah requires a permit to OC. I explained it and convinced Open Carry Texas (OCT) to use an altered map but the opencarry.org map is the one most people see.
 
#21 ·
DaKnife said:
:agree:
With one caveat, the miss-understandings out there about "Utah Unloaded" have led to opencarry.org's map that claims Utah requires a permit to open carry. And everybody loves to share that map thus leading to many thinking that Utah requires a permit to OC. I explained it and convinced Open Carry Texas (OCT) to use an altered map but the opencarry.org map is the one most people see.
I'm personally not concerned with what opencarry.org thinks. Reality is more important.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
#22 ·
DaKnife said:
:agree:
With one caveat, the miss-understandings out there about "Utah Unloaded" have led to opencarry.org's map that claims Utah requires a permit to open carry. And everybody loves to share that map thus leading to many thinking that Utah requires a permit to OC. I explained it and convinced Open Carry Texas (OCT) to use an altered map but the opencarry.org map is the one most people see.
Bear in mind that OCDO has various errors. And remember, it is owned and moderated by a coupmebif guys from Virginia. So Virginia gets listed as "Gold Star" open carry and the state law section claims state preemption of all gun laws. However, in the forums I recently learned that a couple if the more liberal cities have certain exemptions to State preemption. Most notable, these cities have local ordinances banning the carrying of firearms with threaded barrels that can accept supressors.

So if check the map, and read the State law pages, you think you are good to go. But if you get caught in a couple of cities carrying a firearm with a threaded barrel you are going to be facing a violation of local law.

Nobody who runs OCDO seems much interested in fixing that, or the errors on the Utah page. Fortunatwly, the errors on the Utah page make Utah look more restrictive than we really are. So while maybe some folks don't do all they really, legally could, at least nobody inadvertently violates Utah law based on outdated or otherwise inaccurate data on that site.

Utah's definition of loaded is great. We want to keep it.

We just need to eliminate the ban on carrying a loaded firearm without a permit. Probably a year or two out on that one.

Charles
 
#23 ·
http://le.utah.gov/~2017/bills/static/HB0112.html

Well, there's the bill. I haven't read it yet, and probably won't get a chance to read it tonight.

Still hoping.

ETA: Ok, it only took 5 minutes. I'm not sure about the middle set of changes, but it seems very minimal. It adds business owners to the list of not liable, even if they allow the carrier on their business premises.

I'm not sure what the changes in 76-10-505 mean (/me scratches head).

76-10-523 looks to be the real change:
(4) Subsection 76-10-504(1) does not apply to a person 21 years of age or older who may lawfully possess a firearm.
76-10-504(1) is the law that makes carrying a concealed, accessible firearm illegal.
 
#24 ·
When my buddy in Phoenix (old friend from high school daze) found out his local AZ constitutional carry did not help him in other states with reciprocity with AZ, he finally got his local CFP as well. That's the main problem with local constitutional carry laws -- they don't help you in other states.

I suppose constitutional carry is unpopular in most places except a few states that have it because most voters want people who are going to carry weapons to have some kind of background check and training.

The Utah class is only 4 hours long, nobody fails it, and it mostly talks to you about laws regarding deadly force.

My CFP cost me about $100 total and took only 40 days to arrive in the mail from the time I went to the BCI to get the fingerprints and fill out the forms.

With the Utah CFP you have reciprocity with the following western states: Wash State, Idaho, Montana, Colorado, Nevada, and Arizona. Not Oregon, California, or NM unfortunately. I have not looked into getting an OR or NM permit -- I have no reason to ever go there. Calif is currently communist and issues very few permits, and you need an extraordinary justification to carry in Calif -- you handle money or prescription drugs or guns for a range, etc. The 3 people I know in Calif who have a CFP have one of those 3 reasons.

In Utah the CFP allows you to carry concealed, of course, and also loaded and chambered. The loaded and chambered applies to open carry as well.

Carrying UN-loaded is a joke anywhere. Anyone seeing your firearm can jump you and wrestle it away from you. If you have never wrestled in high school or college in your life you have no idea how hard it is to wrestle, and how easy it would be for a wrestler to get your gun away from you. That's why unloaded is a joke.

The permit like a drivers' license lasts 5 years, and the renewal is only about $10 bucks. It is well worth it.
 
#25 ·
manithree said:
ETA: Ok, it only took 5 minutes. I'm not sure about the middle set of changes, but it seems very minimal. It adds business owners to the list of not liable, even if they allow the carrier on their business premises.
I see three changes.

Of interest to us is the change that makes it legal for a person who is at least 21 years old and not prohibited form possessing a gun to legally carry a handgun concealed under the same conditions he may legally OC, without a permit: Namely, that the gun is "Utah unloaded" and not in an off limits location or a location off limits except with a permit. The code governing concealed carry is getting messy. But the end result is a small step in the right direction.

The other material change provides civil and criminal immunity to a business owner who allows someone with a permit to carry his gun into the business. Notice that explicit immunity does not attach if the business owner doesn't permit guns. The idea here is two fold:

1-Provide a small, non-coercive incentive for business owners to allow legally carried guns into their business.
2-To make clear that this bill is not hostile to our permits.

The final change seems to be some small "housekeeping" (probably added by leg research) to clarify that non-residents without permits, but relying on 76-10-523 for a safe journey, don't get to keep a loaded long-gun in the car. I'll double check on this. It seems unnecessary, but not harmful. But I'm always a little leery.

Finally, the sponsor of the bill is no small deal. Lee Perry's day job is a Utah Peace Officer. This bill is not done at the behest of his employer. But he comes with real street cred to most of the police agencies in Utah. This should help minimize opposition to the bill from the one group most likely to get the ear of conservative legislators: Cops. Lee will freely tell you he was opposed to Permit-free Car Carry when we ran that a few years back, but that it has had zero effect on officer safety, public safety, or anything else. His sponsorship of this bill is a big deal.

This isn't full up constitutional carry as the gun has to remain Utah Unloaded for those carrying sans permit. But it is a small step in the right direction that we think we can get this year.

Utah is "conservative" in the true sense of that word in that we tend not to like large changes all at once. If we can get this change, we can evaluate it for a couple of years and then make the case for whatever additional changes then make sense.

Charles
 
#26 ·
Karl said:
When my buddy in Phoenix (old friend from high school daze) found out his local AZ constitutional carry did not help him in other states with reciprocity with AZ, he finally got his local CFP as well. That's the main problem with local constitutional carry laws -- they don't help you in other states.

I suppose constitutional carry is unpopular in most places except a few states that have it because most voters want people who are going to carry weapons to have some kind of background check and training.
There are now a full dozen States (almost 25% of all States in the Union) with some form of permit-free concealed carry now. Legislation is pending in one more that I know of as we "speak". And now Utah.

We are making progress a little at a time, State-by-State. When Florida went non-discriminatory issue of carry permits in the early 90s, those permits did nothing to help outside Florida. Today, a Florida or Utah permit is recognized in over 30 States (some 36 for a Utah permit held by a Utah resident, a couple fewer if it is held by a non-Utah-resident).

We are also doing our part to set the national norm, which can help influence SCOTUS decisions. If you look at the SCOTUS decision in which the court outlawed executions for those who committed otherwise capital offenses while still minors, the court explicitly cited the number of States that already had such a ban in place as part of determining what is or isn't permissible under the prohibition on "cruel and unusual" punishments.

Perhaps most importantly, we are doing what we can do to properly recognize the RKBA as it should be. We would not tolerate permits--no matter how easy to obtain--in order to publish or read a newspaper, to preach a sermon or attend church, to access a lawyer if accused of a crime, nor to be secure in our papers, persons, and effects.

Karl said:
Carrying UN-loaded is a joke anywhere. Anyone seeing your firearm can jump you and wrestle it away from you. If you have never wrestled in high school or college in your life you have no idea how hard it is to wrestle, and how easy it would be for a wrestler to get your gun away from you. That's why unloaded is a joke.
Utah-unloaded only requires that the chamber be empty on a semi-auto. (It is a tad more complicated for a revolver depending on whether it is single or double action, etc).

A full magazine, but with an empty chamber is known as "Utah unloaded". It is also known as "Israeli Carry" because the Israeli military is known for carrying this way. But they are hardly alone. From the linked article:

Chamber empty carry was the dominant method of carry for military, police, and civilians for most of the 20th Century. Toward the end of the century the rise of double-action autoloaders and the influence of Jeff Cooper's Modern Technique made significant inroads, although chamber empty is still the dominant method of carry worldwide.
If one carries concealed, how would anyone know to jump you and grab your gun? Most who OC choose a retention holster to make it difficult for others to grab the gun.

In either case, good situational awareness is crucial. A loaded gun, in a retention holster, concealed so the bad guy doesn't know it is there, is still of very little benefit if the bad guy sneaks up on you and hits you over the head with a tire iron. This is the common argument the gun haters make against carrying of defensive arms by private citizens.

Our response has always been that a gun is one tool, not a talisman. Situational awareness is always critical and itself, can help ward off many attacks that might occur if a target looks soft or easy. Without situational awareness, carry a gun is not much good and can even be a liability. With good situational awareness, a gun becomes a great benefit, one more option for those cases where it makes sense.

I think all here will agree that under current laws and culture both in Utah and nationwide, for most of us, obtaining and maintaining a Utah permit makes a lot of sense for the foreseeable future. But we also desire to advance statutory recognition of our right to own and carry firearms (including to buy, sell, trade, gift, manufacture, modify, etc) to where those rights are truly co-equal with all other constitutionally enumerated rights. This bill is a small, but crucial step in that direction.

It is good to have you back in Utah. While you were away, there was some history transpire that might be worth catching up on before making too firm of pronouncements about what is or isn't a good idea legislatively. :D I look forward to having your help as we work together to protect and advance our RKBA.

Charles
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top