UT: Utah axes gun-permit requirement

Discussion of other state's CHL's & reciprocity

Moderators: carlson1, Keith B

User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 4792
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: UT: Utah axes gun-permit requirement

#16

Post by ScottDLS »

powerboatr wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:09 pm constitutional carry is great
i just like knowing folks i see carrying have had some sort of look see at their past criminal behavior if there was some.

when i see folks open carrying i at least know now they are less likely to go bat crap crazy, not NEVER, just less likely


plus for law enforcement

i know police like knowing if the person they just stopped has a license or not as it takes the level of danger down a notch as he or she approaches a vehicle.

they already are under attack like never before. It drives me nuts that our Highway patrol are patrolling as one man cars. we have lots of state highways that are dark and isolated unlike most city areas with local police.

limited government is always good, as i have said many times before. But i like a balance to protect everyone as best we can without crunching rights
How does the requirement to have a license let you know that someone you see carrying has had a background check and has a license?

How does a police officer know that someone they just stopped has a license or not? That requires an assumption that the person driving is the one the car is registered to and that they have a Texas license.

How do you know that people you see open carrying a handgun aren't going to go bat crap crazy because a license is required for such (open carry that is, not going bat crazy)? It seems someone willing to (illegally) go bat crap crazy also wouldn't mind illegally carrying.
Last edited by ScottDLS on Thu Feb 11, 2021 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"
User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 4792
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: UT: Utah axes gun-permit requirement

#17

Post by ScottDLS »

"Constitutional carry" is just a supposedly clever name for legal permitless carry. Vermont had had it for over 50 years. Oklahoma has it, Utah has it now, Wyoming, etc., etc. It took 9 years after Florida started a broad trend to shall issue for Texas to come around. There were quite a few states that had it before we did. It's not particularly high on my wish list for the Legislature to address, but I am definitely in favor of it.
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"

powerboatr
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1181
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:53 pm
Location: North East Texas

Re: UT: Utah axes gun-permit requirement

#18

Post by powerboatr »

ScottDLS wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 5:11 pm
powerboatr wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:09 pm constitutional carry is great
i just like knowing folks i see carrying have had some sort of look see at their past criminal behavior if there was some.

when i see folks open carrying i at least know now they are less likely to go bat crap crazy, not NEVER, just less likely


plus for law enforcement

i know police like knowing if the person they just stopped has a license or not as it takes the level of danger down a notch as he or she approaches a vehicle.

they already are under attack like never before. It drives me nuts that our Highway patrol are patrolling as one man cars. we have lots of state highways that are dark and isolated unlike most city areas with local police.

limited government is always good, as i have said many times before. But i like a balance to protect everyone as best we can without crunching rights
How does the requirement to have a license let you know that someone you see carrying has had a background check and has a license?

How does a police officer know that someone they just stopped has a license or not? That requires an assumption that the person driving is the one the car is registered to and that they have a Texas license.

How do you know that people you see open carrying a handgun aren't going to go bat crap crazy because a license is required for such (open carry that is, not going bat crazy)? It seems someone willing to (illegally) go bat crap crazy also wouldn't mind illegally carrying.
actually police know in texas as soon as they run your tags, the dl numbers assigned to person/s comes up, along with if your are a chl or ltc. I know this first hand from past exp. yes the driver may not be the registered owner and yes they still approach with caution. there is no right answer, only mitigating risks if possible.
my view is if the license was granted, at least there was a background check by dps. again personal exp. they do go back at least 7 years, i got a call and had to explain the issue, on my 2nd renewal.. and yes we have no idea if a person is going to snap and start doing bad things . but imo if a back ground was done, that maybe this person is less prone to go postal or they find a reason or issue that maybe this person needs a 2nd look. not a definite, just an observation, it may or may not be true.
again limited government is best, but i also look at the leos that are charged with doing a real tough job. I know there are some that are not fit, but most are. so imo, any thing that gives them a warmer fuzzy as it where as they walk to your car, then i am for it....again in a limited sense.

as i have said and beat up my commissioners, police riding alone are targets. We are rural and have a huge county with lots of dark back roads and help being 20 minutes or longer away, if a stop goes wrong. its funny they send two or more to a Domestic call, but stop cars with just one all hours and places.
Proud to have served for over 22 Years in the U.S. Navy
User avatar

Flightmare
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 2794
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:00 pm
Location: Plano, TX

Re: UT: Utah axes gun-permit requirement

#19

Post by Flightmare »

powerboatr wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 6:38 pm
ScottDLS wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 5:11 pm
powerboatr wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:09 pm constitutional carry is great
i just like knowing folks i see carrying have had some sort of look see at their past criminal behavior if there was some.

when i see folks open carrying i at least know now they are less likely to go bat crap crazy, not NEVER, just less likely


plus for law enforcement

i know police like knowing if the person they just stopped has a license or not as it takes the level of danger down a notch as he or she approaches a vehicle.

they already are under attack like never before. It drives me nuts that our Highway patrol are patrolling as one man cars. we have lots of state highways that are dark and isolated unlike most city areas with local police.

limited government is always good, as i have said many times before. But i like a balance to protect everyone as best we can without crunching rights
How does the requirement to have a license let you know that someone you see carrying has had a background check and has a license?

How does a police officer know that someone they just stopped has a license or not? That requires an assumption that the person driving is the one the car is registered to and that they have a Texas license.

How do you know that people you see open carrying a handgun aren't going to go bat crap crazy because a license is required for such (open carry that is, not going bat crazy)? It seems someone willing to (illegally) go bat crap crazy also wouldn't mind illegally carrying.
actually police know in texas as soon as they run your tags, the dl numbers assigned to person/s comes up, along with if your are a chl or ltc. I know this first hand from past exp. yes the driver may not be the registered owner and yes they still approach with caution. there is no right answer, only mitigating risks if possible.
my view is if the license was granted, at least there was a background check by dps. again personal exp. they do go back at least 7 years, i got a call and had to explain the issue, on my 2nd renewal.. and yes we have no idea if a person is going to snap and start doing bad things . but imo if a back ground was done, that maybe this person is less prone to go postal or they find a reason or issue that maybe this person needs a 2nd look. not a definite, just an observation, it may or may not be true.
again limited government is best, but i also look at the leos that are charged with doing a real tough job. I know there are some that are not fit, but most are. so imo, any thing that gives them a warmer fuzzy as it where as they walk to your car, then i am for it....again in a limited sense.

as i have said and beat up my commissioners, police riding alone are targets. We are rural and have a huge county with lots of dark back roads and help being 20 minutes or longer away, if a stop goes wrong. its funny they send two or more to a Domestic call, but stop cars with just one all hours and places.
I think the point ScottDLS was trying to make is that the person MAY be carrying under the authority of the MPA in Texas, which allows anyone who can possess a handgun to have it concealed in their vehicle without the need for a LTC.
Deplorable lunatic since 2016
User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 4792
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: UT: Utah axes gun-permit requirement

#20

Post by ScottDLS »

powerboatr wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 6:38 pm

actually police know in texas as soon as they run your tags, the dl numbers assigned to person/s comes up, along with if your are a chl or ltc. I know this first hand from past exp. yes the driver may not be the registered owner and yes they still approach with caution. there is no right answer, only mitigating risks if possible.
my view is if the license was granted, at least there was a background check by dps. again personal exp. they do go back at least 7 years, i got a call and had to explain the issue, on my 2nd renewal.. and yes we have no idea if a person is going to snap and start doing bad things . but imo if a back ground was done, that maybe this person is less prone to go postal or they find a reason or issue that maybe this person needs a 2nd look. not a definite, just an observation, it may or may not be true.
again limited government is best, but i also look at the leos that are charged with doing a real tough job. I know there are some that are not fit, but most are. so imo, any thing that gives them a warmer fuzzy as it where as they walk to your car, then i am for it....again in a limited sense.

as i have said and beat up my commissioners, police riding alone are targets. We are rural and have a huge county with lots of dark back roads and help being 20 minutes or longer away, if a stop goes wrong. its funny they send two or more to a Domestic call, but stop cars with just one all hours and places.
yes the driver may not be the registered owner and yes they still approach with caution.
Then how does running the tags help? There's no assurance that the person driving the vehicle is the registered owner who has a LTC. In fact if they aren't (e.g. they stole the car from the LTC) there'd more chance the car has a bad guy AND a weapon (that the LTC may have left in car).
my view is if the license was granted, at least there was a background check by dps.
So how does that make you (or a cop) safer from a bad guy carrying a gun? If the bad guy is going to do you harm with a gun, do you think they'll care if they're carrying illegally?
any thing that gives them a warmer fuzzy as it where as they walk to your car, then i am for it
The fact that the owner of a car has a LTC shouldn't cause a cop to proceed with any less caution in a traffic stop because he has no idea who is driving said car.
as i have said and beat up my commissioners, police riding alone are targets.
How are they any less of a target because some people have LTC's, when they have no way of knowing in advance who is driving the car, as well as the fact that the vast majority of Texans don't have a LTC.

I fail to see how requiring a license to carry a handgun makes anyone safer.
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"
Post Reply

Return to “Other States”