HB 260; Permit-free concealed carry IE Constitutional Carry

Rep. Curt Oda has introduced HB 260, Concealed Firearm Permit Amendments.

The bill has the effect of removing criminal penalties for carrying a firearm concealed without holding a permit to carry, so long as the gun remains "Utah unloaded" (for semi-autos, no round in the chamber, but fully charged magazine may be inserted) and is not carried into an off limits location (including schools). This would extend our current "Israeli-style" Open Carry law to allow the firearm to be carried discretely.

This is the same bill the Gov. Herbert vetoed last year.

BRIEF and POLITE letters or phone calls to Gov. Herbert's office asking him to support this bill would be helpful. He can be reached at:

The Office of Governor Gary R. Herbert
350 North State Street, Suite 200
PO Box 142220
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-2220
 Phone: 801-538-1000
 Toll Free: 800-705-2464

If those outside Utah would like to assist, they might mention how such a law would positively influence their decision to make Utah a tourist or business destination.

Charles Hardy
GOUtah!

KSL has article on HB 260

KSL has a report on this bill today. It is about as fair as one can expect from the media on any pro-gun bill.

Comments are running in favor of the RKBA so far.

Check out the article on KSL (no registration required to read articles).

Charles

utbagpiper said:

Rep. Curt Oda has introduced HB 260, Concealed Firearm Permit Amendments.

The bill has the effect of removing criminal penalties for carrying a firearm concealed without holding a permit to carry, so long as the gun remains "Utah unloaded" (for semi-autos, no round in the chamber, but fully charged magazine may be inserted) and is not carried into an off limits location (including schools). This would extend our current "Israeli-style" Open Carry law to allow the firearm to be carried discretely.

This is the same bill the Gov. Herbert vetoed last year.

BRIEF and POLITE letters or phone calls to Gov. Herbert's office asking him to support this bill would be helpful. He can be reached at:

The Office of Governor Gary R. Herbert
350 North State Street, Suite 200
PO Box 142220
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-2220
 Phone: 801-538-1000
 Toll Free: 800-705-2464

If those outside Utah would like to assist, they might mention how such a law would positively influence their decision to make Utah a tourist or business destination.

Charles Hardy
GOUtah!

Click to expand...

What's the point of Utah unloaded?

Are the cops allowed to stop you to make sure you are in compliance with the stupid regulation?

ron73440 said:

What's the point of Utah unloaded?

Are the cops allowed to stop you to make sure you are in compliance with the stupid regulation?

Click to expand...

I dunno, but we can carry a loaded gun in NC without permit. But some claim Utah is so free, and an example of a bastion of liberty. Sorry but I am not seeing it. I think if a person wants to carry a unloaded gun it should be their choice, not the government.

ron73440 said:

What's the point of Utah unloaded?

Click to expand...

It probably made some legislators less nervous 50 or 100 years ago and we are still working to eliminate the requirement for a gun not to be fully loaded without a permit. On your own property we are good. In your own car handguns can be fully loaded without a permit; long guns must be unloaded unless one has a permit. While hunting one can conceal without a permit.

For walking around in public generally, we believe we can more easily eliminate the ban on permit-free concealed carry first and then get fully loaded later, than if we were to focus on fully loaded permit-free OC first and then try to get permit-free CC later.

In most cases where a gun has to be legally not loaded in Utah, Utah-unloaded does have the advantage that the gun is more readily useable than if you couldn't have any rounds in it at all. But really, this is one of the last vestiges of bad gun laws left on our books from before the days of increasing respect for our RKBA. It is why we are working to chip away at it a bit at a time as we can get passed in our legislature and our governor to sign. The media has opposed us most certainly will continue to oppose us every step of the way.

ron73440 said:

Are the cops allowed to stop you to make sure you are in compliance with the stupid regulation?

Click to expand...

Presumably, they would be allowed to stop and check compliance with this law just as they would compliance with any other law. But remember, that with a permit one may carry either openly or discretely, fully loaded in Utah. In practice, officers here rarely bother those who are OCing a firearm in a holster whether carried openly or discretely. Having eliminated the 1000 foot exclusion zone from our State gun free school zone law, there is no need under State law to have a permit to carry near a school, and I'm not aware of local cops often enforcing federal laws against an otherwise law-abiding person; so no real need for them to check for a permit unless you are actually on school grounds.

In [url-http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/carry/Lund-v-Salt_Lake_City-2008-12-04.pdf]SLC v Lund[/url] (December 2008, post Heller but before McDonald) the US District Court of the District of Utah a nice little footnote in its decision:

footnote 9 said:

By itself, mere possession of a firearm in public is not unlawful and may well represent the exercise of a
fundamental constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, §
6 of the Utah Constitution (recognizing the “individual right of the people to keep and bear arms for security and defense
of self, family, others, property, or the state, as well as for other lawful purposes,” subject to the power of the Legislature
to define the “lawful use of arms.”). See District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783, 2799 (2008) (“There seems to
us no doubt, on the basis of both text and history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and
bear arms.”); see also Utah Code Ann. §§ 76-10-500 to 530 (2003 & Supp. 2008) (Utah Firearms Act). In Utah, the
carrying of a concealed weapon on one’s person in public is a matter of State licensing and regulation, and is routinely
permitted pursuant to the applicable State statute. See Utah Code Ann. §§ 53-5-701 to 711 (Supp. 2008). The legislature
has explicitly denied local governmental entities such as Salt Lake City the power to limit or restrict possession of a
firearm on public property: “Unless specifically authorized by the Legislature by statute, a local authority or state entity may not enact, establish, or enforce any ordinance, regulation, rule, or policy pertaining to firearms that in any way
inhibits or restricts the possession or use of firearms on either public or private property.” Utah Code Ann. § 53-5a-102
(Supp. 2008); see University of Utah v. Shurtleff, 2006 UT 51, ¶ 11, 144 P.3d 1109, 1113 (observing that the enactment
of § 53-5a-102 in 2004 “dramatically altered the legal landscape, rendering it clear that Utah’s firearms statutes are
universally applicable”). The legislature has authorized municipalities only to “regulate and prevent the discharge of
firearms, rockets, powder, fireworks or any other dangerous or combustible material.” Utah Code Ann. § 10-8-47 (2007).

As articulated by the Utah Legislature, public policy in this State may fairly be read to condone and even
encourage gun ownership and the lawful possession and carrying of firearms in public places. Salt Lake City’s asserted
governmental interest in its police officers’ response to a report of a “man with a gun” in a public park cannot be weighed
in isolation from this oft-emphasized public policy. In that context, there may well be more individual constitutional
rights at stake than the Fourth Amendment freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures.

Click to expand...

(emphasis added)

This is moving us in the direction that possession of a firearm, visible or otherwise, would not, or itself, be PC nor RAS to make a stop to check on anything. We are not fully there yet.

Charles

ron73440 said:

What's the point of Utah unloaded?...

Click to expand...

It was safe for single-action revolvers a hundred years ago, so the ignorami think it's normal. I can't believe it hasn't been a priority of educated lawmakers to do away with it.

utbagpiper said:

...Presumably, they would be allowed to stop and check compliance with this law just as they would compliance with any other law...

Click to expand...

Huh?

It's okay, presumably, to stop people and make sure they are in compliance with laws? What happened to stopping people only when you could tell that they were breaking a law?

WalkingWolf said:

I dunno, but we can carry a loaded gun in NC without permit. But some claim Utah is so free, and an example of a bastion of liberty. Sorry but I am not seeing it.

Click to expand...

We are not at the head of the pack for permit free carry and I've always freely admitted that.

For those who will accept a permit to carry as an interim, practical solution until we can achieve full respect for our RKBA, Utah in total has some of the best self-defense laws in the nation.

This includes protecting the right of school teachers, college students, and other adults to protect themselves while at school/college and to be protected from anti-gun employment, enrollment, housing, or conduct policies. It includes protecting private employees from anti-gun employment policies that would reach into their private cars. Utah prevents local governments, agencies, and authorities from passing any gun laws at all except for allowing incorporated cities to ban discharge. Utah's self defense laws protect a person's legal ability to carry a self-defense firearm while hunting, even if the gun cannot be used for taking of game on that hunt. We have strong defense of habitation laws including rebuttable but strong protections against both civil suits and criminal prosecution. We do not give force of law to anti-gun policies at private businesses, and there are no extra restrictions on carry a gun into a bar or even imbibing while carrying. You may not be intoxicated while carrying, but it is your choice if you want to have a drink or two while carrying.

Bear in mind that I am among those who believes that "full respect for RKBA" includes the individual choice to carry a firearm either openly OR concealed. Those who do not recognize this full protection for RKBA, might want to limit their criticism of State laws moving toward full recognition.

We will be more productive if we work to advance good laws in each State rather than looking for chances to bash, unproductively, on where any given State is lacking.

WalkingWolf said:

I think if a person wants to carry a unloaded gun it should be their choice, not the government.

Click to expand...

I agree.

I also think that if a person wants to carry a gun visibly, that should be his/her choice, not the government's. I believe the 2nd amendment to the federal constitution and Article 1, Section 6 of the Utah State constitution, protect the individual right to peacefully carry a gun as the person sees fit: visibly or discreetly.

I do not believe any permit should be required to carry a firearm, fully loaded either visibly or concealed. And in Utah we are making progress each year to move us close to that goal. If someone wants to make a contest of it, or simply have an honest and productive exchange of what tactics might be effective to advance legal recognition of our RKBA and self-defense rights, I will happily put Utah's record the last 25 years up against any State in the nation. I am very proud of the areas where Utah has lead out including preventing school districts and colleges from banning guns. Those areas that seem most likely to be targets for mass shootings are certainly among the last places where law abiding citizens should be left defenseless.

Having said that, I'm also very grateful for those States leading out on Constitutional (permit-free) carry including Alaska, Arizona, Wyoming, Arkansas, and those States now working on legislation to this end. It is often easier to follow where another State has tread than to have to break fresh trail ourselves.

So again, we would all do well to see where other States exceed our own for proper recognition of RKBA, and then seek to emulate those areas. Utah needs to eliminate this requirement for permit-free carry to be "Utah unloaded". A lot of States would do well to emulate Utah in dramatically reducing legally enforced gun free zones.

Charles

MAC702 said:

It's okay, presumably, to stop people and make sure they are in compliance with laws? What happened to stopping people only when you could tell that they were breaking a law?

Click to expand...

If an officer sees a gun in a school, presumably he'd be allowed to check for the legally required permit.

When it comes to automobiles, we don't allow cops to just stop random drivers to make sure their have the required permits. But I'm not aware of any law that states that. Rather, we have court rulings that have set limits on officers stopping drivers.

Likewise, we don't have any laws that prevent officers from stopping people with guns. Court rulings will define this if and as officers go too far. To the extent officers don't go too far, nobody will take them to court or make appeals on that basis and such rulings won't exist. As I noted, we have a very good note in one recent ruling.

I write not of how I'd like things to be, but of how they are.

Do other States have laws specifically limiting when officers may stop to check the legality of a firearm? If so, I'd love to see the language so we can pursue something similar here in Utah. If not, is the situation in your State materially different than I describe here?

Charles

MAC702 said:

It was safe for single-action revolvers a hundred years ago,

Click to expand...

Probably a reasonable guess of the origins of the law.

MAC702 said:

so the ignorami think it's normal.

Click to expand...

More a matter of inertia than anyone thinking it is "normal". It is simply the status quo.

MAC702 said:

I can't believe it hasn't been a priority of educated lawmakers to do away with it.

Click to expand...

Our pro-RKBA legislators, gun owners, and groups have had higher priorities. We had hoped this was the year to do away with that requirement (while also maintaining the benefit of a gun being legally unloaded while still having a full magazine in it) this year. But, best laid plans and all that. So we're taking a smaller step to get something new (permit free concealed carry) this year.

Our goals have been to advance statutory respect for RKBA without giving up anything we already had. Our end goal is to have perfect, statutory respect for RKBA. Along the way, we have viewed practical improvements as just as beneficial as purely principled improvements. And we've never opposed a bill that would have done good things for RKBA no matter who proposed or sponsored it. None of the pro-RKBA groups in Utah that are active in working to make improvements have suffered from "Not Invented Here" syndrome.

Charles

utbagpiper said:

...Likewise, we don't have any laws that prevent officers from...

Click to expand...

Laws prevent the citizenry, not the government.
Laws authorize government.

People can do anything a law does not prevent.
The government can't do anything unless a law authorizes it.

MAC702 said:

Laws prevent the citizenry, not the government.
Laws authorize government.

People can do anything a law does not prevent.
The government can't do anything unless a law authorizes it.

Click to expand...

I agree. How does that work in practice work where you live?

Officers are allowed to make certain stops based on PC and RAS. I may not like the currently existing rules, but I'm writing of things as they are (as best I understand them), not of how I'd like them to be. I do so recognizing that while I can't give legal advice and won't be held liable if someone makes a stupid legal decision based on what he reads on the internet, I feel a certain moral mandate not to tell people things that may not be true in practice.

If you carry a gun can/will an officer stop you to check to see whether you have a permit or whether the gun is fully loaded? He might. Plan accordingly.

Again, is it different where you live?

I'd really prefer to keep this thread focused on passing this bill that does a little bit of good while not doing any harm. If you wish to discuss Utah's gun laws generally, I'll happily join you in another thread if you'd like to go start that.

Charles

I've open carried loaded in just about every State out west except CA (duh) Oregon (don't go there) and Utah (don't have a valid permit). I could never get my head around that open carry unloaded concept and just didn't carry there.

Wisconsin was late to the party, but got it mostly right, finally. In my research and attempt to be legal as I traveled, it became apparent that most states did some things right and other things not so well. It also became clear that it was almost an impossible task to keep track of it all. Unloaded open carry without a permit always seemed to be out there on an island of stupidity to me. Sorry, the way I see it. BTW, we've had open carry no permit loaded since 1848, tho trying to exercise it might have been stressful!


Permit required open carry creates so many unneeded issues as to almost make it not worth it in my opinion. It looks to me if you need a permit to do it, then the law would be justified to ask to see it. I don't agree, but the way I see it. No permit required, you can ask all the questions you want, I don't have to answer. Similar to our 1000 foot school zone still in place but ok with a state issued CC permit. So, if you are standing 15 feet off school property and open carry, you would need a permit for that. My read, but I have gotten different opinions from everyone I ask. The only thing for sure is that it it is all way more complicated than it should be!

Also, what in the sam hill is "Israeli style open carry"?

utbagpiper said:

If an officer sees a gun in a school, presumably he'd be allowed to check for the legally required permit.

When it comes to automobiles, we don't allow cops to just stop random drivers to make sure their have the required permits. But I'm not aware of any law that states that. Rather, we have court rulings that have set limits on officers stopping drivers.

Likewise, we don't have any laws that prevent officers from stopping people with guns. Court rulings will define this if and as officers go too far. To the extent officers don't go too far, nobody will take them to court or make appeals on that basis and such rulings won't exist. As I noted, we have a very good note in one recent ruling.

I write not of how I'd like things to be, but of how they are.

Do other States have laws specifically limiting when officers may stop to check the legality of a firearm? If so, I'd love to see the language so we can pursue something similar here in Utah. If not, is the situation in your State materially different than I describe here?

Charles

Click to expand...

US V Black But we don't have the same district court as you.

Wstar425 said:

Unloaded open carry without a permit always seemed to be out there on an island of stupidity to me. Sorry, the way I see it. BTW, we've had open carry no permit loaded since 1848, tho trying to exercise it might have been stressful!

Click to expand...

As Mac noted, I would suspect the requirement to have the gun "Utah unloaded" originated with the safe way to carry a single action handgun that wasn't drop safe. It certainly is nothing anyone here sat down and designed into law in any recent times. But we start from where we are, not from where we want to be.

Two items:

1-So long as the federal GFSZ incudes the 1000' exclusion zone, full compliance with federal law requires a permit for most practical purposes in an urban environment. Clearly, we need to fix this.

2-Utah was on the leading edge of recognizing all permits issued nationwide. So if you have a permit from anywhere in the nation, you are good to go for fully loaded and/or concealed carry so far as Utah State law goes. (Again, we need to repeal that federal GFSZ law.)

Wstar425 said:

Permit required open carry creates so many unneeded issues as to almost make it not worth it in my opinion.

Click to expand...

I don't believe any permit should be needed either to OC or carry discretely. But, starting from where we were, the non-discriminatory (shall issue) permit was a huge step forward that has allowed a lot of Utahns the practical ability to legally carry effective self-defense while we continue making progress.

We lost our RKBA a bit at a time, we have been regaining it a bit at a time.

Wstar425 said:

Also, what in the sam hill is "Israeli style open carry"?

Click to expand...

Just nomenclature. My understanding is that the Israeli Defensive Forces do not carry one in the chamber but are trained to draw and rack the slide in one motion. So "Utah-unloaded" == "Israeli-carry".

All the best.

Charles

WalkingWolf said:

US V Black But we don't have the same district court as you.

Click to expand...

Good decision. While not technically binding in the 10th circuit, it certainly has some precedence value.

Thank you.

Charles

Got ya, thanks for the answers.

Although WI has open carry loaded without a permit, their conceal carry license is not accepted in as many states as would be wished. I suspect it has something to do with the requirements, one being if you had Hunter Safety at any time in your life, that qualifies as the needed training. I did NOT have hunter safety, grandfathered in due to age, but both my kids did. I sat in on much of the first one and there was no handling, nor even mention of a handgun. Only rifle and shotgun. My wife and I took the Basic NRA Pistol course, right at our house where we could shoot on our own property. We had two people in our class, got the intensive course, it was actually pretty cool.

The other thing is both Iowa and Minnesota require a permit to OC. Iowa accepts a WI permit, but MN does not. Too complicated. I think I have this right. Used to live out western WI should have gotten my MN while I was there, but never did.

I live in Illinois. We have to have a FOID card in order to own, buy firearms and ammo. You also have to get a conceal and carry permit on top of that. If Illinois trust me to buy firearms and ammo why don't they trust me to carry? Sounds like you good law bidding citizens of Utah are heading down the right road. I hope it spreads to Illinois.

blank2125 said:

I live in Illinois. We have to have a FOID card in order to own, buy firearms and ammo. You also have to get a conceal and carry permit on top of that. If Illinois trust me to buy firearms and ammo why don't they trust me to carry? Sounds like you good law bidding citizens of Utah are heading down the right road. I hope it spreads to Illinois.

Click to expand...

Illinois had their chance to be a bastion of gun liberty. It was blown by two supposed gun rights organizations, one from Il. the other national. Illinois needs to shun icky those organizations for their fear mongering and their loyalty to P4P. It will be lifetimes, if not never for Illinois now to get actual RKBA, probably never if Billary is elected.

Google Mossad draw or modified Mossad draw.

More laws to nullify existing laws...

If a new law is desired be sure that the law addresses a act accomplished while using a gun, not a condition of being while possessing a gun.

Unlawful use of weapons--exceptions--penalties.

571.030. 1. A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly:

(5) Has a firearm or projectile weapon readily capable of lethal use on his or her person, while he or she is intoxicated, and handles or otherwise uses such firearm or projectile weapon in either a negligent or unlawful manner or discharges such firearm or projectile weapon unless acting in self-defense;

Click to expand...

This used to stop right after "while intoxicated." This is a example of holding to account for acts while using a gun, not being this or that while possessing a gun.

In fact, the last part about SD is redundant. If you are justified to shoot a perp while sober you would obviously be justified while in your cups.