Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: SLC Code: NO Loaded Firearms on Streets

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    800

    Post imported post

    Have any of you seen this:

    11.48.040 Carrying loaded firearm prohibited.

    A. Carrying Loaded Firearm in Vehicle or on Street. It is unlawful for any person to carry a loaded firearm in a vehicle or on any public street within the corporate limits of the city.

    B. Definition. A firearm is deemed to be loaded when:

    1. There is an unexpended cartridge, shell or projectile in the firing position;
    2. Revolvers and pistols shall also be deemed loaded when the unexpended cartridge, shell or projectile is in a position that the manual operation of any mechanism once would cause the unexpended cartridge, shell or projectile to be fired;
    3. A muzzle-loading firearm shall be deemed to be loaded when it is capped or primed and has a powder charge and ball or shot in the barrel or cylinders. (Ord. 19-95 § 1, 1995; prior code § 32-6-6.1)
    Has anyone inquired with the city as to whether they would try to enforce this illegal code?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    431

    Post imported post

    What in THE crap? Where did you find this?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    800

    Post imported post

    Just surfing the SLC Code for airgun resrictions. This is pretty much the same as the State Law, but it omits the critical "Unless otherwise permitted by law" clause.

    Put on your letter-writing hats folks! They have to include the exemption for permit holders!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    431

    Post imported post

    Well if this is only SLC code, then you could just hit 'em with the good 'ol Uniform Code law.

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Cottonwood Heights, Utah, USA
    Posts
    545

    Post imported post

    I brought up a similar thread about SL County having illegal ordinances on the books. I'm in the process of preparing remarks to go to the county council meeting and ask that it be removed...


  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    800

    Post imported post

    We really need to find a one-armed 18-20 year old to lead the charge to eliminate the whole "Utah Unloaded" thing altogether. He can't get a CFP, he can't quickly rack the slide, so should he be denied the right to self defense?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    800

    Post imported post

    jaredbelch wrote:
    I brought up a similar thread about SL County having illegal ordinances on the books. I'm in the process of preparing remarks to go to the county council meeting and ask that it be removed...
    I am moving to SLC from Sandy this month, I will go to a council meeting and bring this up.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Cottonwood Heights, Utah, USA
    Posts
    545

    Post imported post

    ScottyT wrote:
    jaredbelch wrote:
    I brought up a similar thread about SL County having illegal ordinances on the books. I'm in the process of preparing remarks to go to the county council meeting and ask that it be removed...
    I am moving to SLC from Sandy this month, I will go to a council meeting and bring this up.
    And RapidDave is right, it falls under preemption. Even if they did have an exemption for permit holders, they aren't allowed to make rules or laws or ordinances relating to firearms.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,221

    Post imported post

    ScottyT wrote:
    We really need to find a one-armed 18-20 year old to lead the charge to eliminate the whole "Utah Unloaded" thing altogether. He can't get a CFP, he can't quickly rack the slide, so should he be denied the right to self defense?
    Following that logic - one could say that that one armed 18-20 is deemed unfit to handle a firearm. Not solely to the fact that he can't operate it properly, but what about maintaining that weapon, Loading the magazines, loading the mags into the gun, being able to lock it in truck or even thusly having the ablility to OC/CC in his car at all. Drive + defending himself at some point? how? no. i think this man is a perfect candidate for a bodyguard.

    Are enlisted men discriminated against for having bad eye sight? THEY aren't allowed to fly F-16s... NOT b/c they don't have the RIGHT, but b/c they are deemed unfit to operate.


  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    431

    Post imported post

    ProtectedBy9mm wrote:
    Following that logic - one could say that that one armed 18-20 is deemed unfit to handle a firearm. Not solely to the fact that he can't operate it properly, but what about maintaining that weapon, Loading the magazines, loading the mags into the gun, ....
    Good point, I never thought about that. Hopefully 17 rounds will be enough.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,221

    Post imported post

    xRapidDavex wrote:
    ProtectedBy9mm wrote:
    Following that logic - one could say that that one armed 18-20 is deemed unfit to handle a firearm. Not solely to the fact that he can't operate it properly, but what about maintaining that weapon, Loading the magazines, loading the mags into the gun, ....
    Good point, I never thought about that. Hopefully 17 rounds will be enough.
    Lol - ya. Just playing both sides of the logic-fence. I understand what your saying though in the previous post.

  12. #12
    State Researcher Kevin Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Santaquin, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,313

    Post imported post

    ProtectedBy9mm wrote:
    ScottyT wrote:
    We really need to find a one-armed 18-20 year old to lead the charge to eliminate the whole "Utah Unloaded" thing altogether. He can't get a CFP, he can't quickly rack the slide, so should he be denied the right to self defense? He needs a double action revolver!
    Following that logic - one could say that that one armed 18-20 is deemed unfit to handle a firearm. Not solely to the fact that he can't operate it properly, but what about maintaining that weapon, Loading the magazines, loading the mags into the gun, being able to lock it in truck or even thusly having the ablility to OC/CC in his car at all. Drive + defending himself at some point? how? no. i think this man is a perfect candidate for a bodyguard.

    Are enlisted men discriminated against for having bad eye sight? THEY aren't allowed to fly F-16s... NOT b/c they don't have the RIGHT, but b/c they are deemed unfit to operate.

    The argument has been made before that the blind should not be excluded from receiving a concealed firearm permit.

    Remember ...shall not be infringed!



    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." Robert A. Heinlein

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,221

    Post imported post

    SGT Jensen wrote:
    ProtectedBy9mm wrote:
    ScottyT wrote:
    We really need to find a one-armed 18-20 year old to lead the charge to eliminate the whole "Utah Unloaded" thing altogether. He can't get a CFP, he can't quickly rack the slide, so should he be denied the right to self defense? He needs a double action revolver!
    Following that logic - one could say that that one armed 18-20 is deemed unfit to handle a firearm. Not solely to the fact that he can't operate it properly, but what about maintaining that weapon, Loading the magazines, loading the mags into the gun, being able to lock it in truck or even thusly having the ablility to OC/CC in his car at all. Drive + defending himself at some point? how? no. i think this man is a perfect candidate for a bodyguard.

    Are enlisted men discriminated against for having bad eye sight? THEY aren't allowed to fly F-16s... NOT b/c they don't have the RIGHT, but b/c they are deemed unfit to operate.

    The argument has been made before that the blind should not be excluded from receiving a concealed firearm permit.

    Remember ...shall not be infringed!


    Can't argue with that.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Bountiful, Utah, USA
    Posts
    119

    Post imported post

    With training one armed operators should be quite capable.

    Let us know if there is going to be a group showing at the city counsel meeting.:celebrate

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •