Hebert vetoed the concealed weapons amendment bill. No Constitutional Carry in Utah
- Thread starter Herzog
- Start date
ChestonScout
opinions are like Jeeps..
- Location
- Clinton, Ut
Not surprised.
What do you think about this Shane?
What do you think about this Shane?
Clutch
Registered User
- Location
- Salt Lake City
I'm glad he did and not surprised. He is right, if the current law ain't broke, don't fix it or make it worse.
JL Rockies
Binders Fulla Expo
- Location
- Draper
Hebert vetoed the concealed weapons amendment bill. No Constitutional Carry in
The current law that says the current law can apply? You're right... doesn't seem broken at all.
The current law that says the current law can apply? You're right... doesn't seem broken at all.
I'm kind of indifferent... it only hurts law abiding people to not have it. The "crazies" or non-law abiding people are going to carry a gun regardless of what the law says.
But also - it's easy to get a permit and it's good to have the permit too, especially when confronted by a LEO.
And on another note - some people (law abiding) just don't want to be on any kind of gov't record in order to be able to have the tools to defend themselves. And I agree. Why should anybody be documented that wants to protect themselves? By not allowing Constitutional Carry, you are either disarming these people or making them "criminals" over something they have a natural right to do. I do have friends who are in this category. Never committed a crime in their lives, don't want to be documented. They should be allowed under the law to carry concealed.
Our generation seems to think it's "guilty until proven innocent". But I blame the media for that one.
But also - it's easy to get a permit and it's good to have the permit too, especially when confronted by a LEO.
And on another note - some people (law abiding) just don't want to be on any kind of gov't record in order to be able to have the tools to defend themselves. And I agree. Why should anybody be documented that wants to protect themselves? By not allowing Constitutional Carry, you are either disarming these people or making them "criminals" over something they have a natural right to do. I do have friends who are in this category. Never committed a crime in their lives, don't want to be documented. They should be allowed under the law to carry concealed.
Our generation seems to think it's "guilty until proven innocent". But I blame the media for that one.
I haven't been following this very closely, but I thought I saw something where if he vetoed it there were enough yes votes in the house/senate to override his veto. Assuming nobody changes their vote of course.
As dead simple as it is to get a concealed permit here, I don't think constitutional carry is necessary. However, the Libertarian in me asks why any person legally allowed to own a handgun should not be allowed to carry it, concealed or not, and the answer is "no reason". I have my CFP, but I still support constitutional carry. Gun control issues like this one on affect law abiding citizens.
As dead simple as it is to get a concealed permit here, I don't think constitutional carry is necessary. However, the Libertarian in me asks why any person legally allowed to own a handgun should not be allowed to carry it, concealed or not, and the answer is "no reason". I have my CFP, but I still support constitutional carry. Gun control issues like this one on affect law abiding citizens.
'03_RUBI
Active Member
- Location
- West Jordan
I thought HB76 was kind of useless anyways. All it did was add to the current open carry law saying you could conceal your UNLOADED weapon without a permit. To carry a LOADED firearm a permit will still be needed.
Herbert Explains his decision on HB76: http://www.utah.gov/governor/docs/3.22.13GovernorExplainsHB76Veto.pdf (PDF)
- Location
- Never Far From Nowhere
Generally speaking, I felt that this was a knee-jerk reaction bill to the recent shootings around the country. In some states the reaction has been to ban guns, here it was to create a Constitutional Carry bill. It wasn't well thought out and it wasn't needed.
Unless I misunderstand - in this context unloaded = full magazine, but nothing chambered. ie - ok to be concealed, just rack the slide and pull the trigger.
- Location
- Grantsville, Utah
If this law went through the way it was written, I think it would have generated a fair amount of people getting charged because they misunderstood constitutional carry versus CFP. I can totally see some well meaning citizens without CFP's carrying concealed near a school, getting caught, and charged.
If we really want Constitutional Carry, it should take the place of the current CFP program. Having it be sorta kinda like CFP, but different in a few critical ways will cause confusion and end up with ignorant but we'll meaning people in jail.
We already have trouble in the state with some LEO's who don't know the firearms laws.
If we really want Constitutional Carry, it should take the place of the current CFP program. Having it be sorta kinda like CFP, but different in a few critical ways will cause confusion and end up with ignorant but we'll meaning people in jail.
We already have trouble in the state with some LEO's who don't know the firearms laws.
I believe this bill was introduced last year as well. It just got more momentum this time and came out of committee quite differently than it went in.
'03_RUBI
Active Member
- Location
- West Jordan
This is a whole other thread in it's self
http://www.rme4x4.com/showthread.php?94986-Carry-with-chambered-round&
jentzschman
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Sandy, Utah
I would have much rather had HB114 pass then this bill. Just my feelings
I agree with 99% of this. I don't think it should ever replace the current CFP program, I do think the current CFP program should be reworked though. I do agree that the way it was introduced would have caused a lot of problems. However, ignorance is no excuse for the law. If you're too dumb to know the law, then you deserve everything you get.
- Location
- Grantsville, Utah
And sometimes the ignorant one is a LEO, which can be a big problem.
JL Rockies
Binders Fulla Expo
- Location
- Draper
Hebert vetoed the concealed weapons amendment bill. No Constitutional Carry in
They will challenge the veto.
They will challenge the veto.
I'm somewhat indifferent to this veto as well, however, I still think Herbert is chicken-shit. I knew he'd never sign this Bill, as he doesn't have it in him to offend a group of Democrats. I find it pathetic that Herbert tossed LEO under the bus as a whole by claiming that he had heard them loud and clear that this Bill would somehow raise the level of danger to their job... I call bullshit on this, as LEO should assume that everyone they come in contact with is armed - simply for their own safety; treat everyone with respect, but have a plan to take them down/out at the same time. To claim that Constitutional Carry somehow creates a heightened level of danger is absurd, as the criminal element and sick individuals who want to harm will find a way to arm themselves with whatever means they need to carry out their plans.
JL Rockies
Binders Fulla Expo
- Location
- Draper
Hebert vetoed the concealed weapons amendment bill. No Constitutional Carry in
Werd
Werd