Who would agree that UT CFP law needs to change...
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Who would agree that UT CFP law needs to change...

  1. #1

    Who would agree that UT CFP law needs to change...

    I want to post the same thing here that I posted in the Utah concealed forum and compare the responses. I don't mind admitting if I am wrong and am willing to learn from others..... as long as your response isn't ".45 nuff said"


    "Who would agree that UT CFP law needs to change to no longer recognize concealed permits issued by California and Nevada?

    Yes, there are other states that don't recoginize Utahs permit holders but in my opinion those two states are the most blatant. California will never recoginize UT permits and Nevada is apparently not going to reverse what they did two years ago. We've tried to make progress by recognizing theirs first, but now I think it's time to treat them the same as they treat us.

    If you disagree please explain why, i would like to hear what you think.

    If enough people agree maybe we can figure out how to make this happen."

  2.   
  3. #2
    I don't think the gun carrying people should be the one's that are punished by what their simple minded gov't has done. You know the folks with carry permits are not the one's who voted on this idiotic lack of reciprocity so why make it their problem?

    If you feel that strongly about the decisions made in other states, work with folks from that state to try and get them to appeal to their representatives to change the law.

    You can't fight this fire with fire without the wrong people getting burned.

    My 2 cents.

    Kk

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kalifornia & Idaho
    Posts
    1,052
    Why do you want to punish law abiding citizens who have done what they could to meet carry laws even though they are unconstitional? These are people who have gone to significant effort and expense to jump through the hoops of idiot states.

    What you should be doing is working to get the National recognition of all CCW's no matter what state.
    Maybejim

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member CRPA
    Life Member SASS

    What you say isn't as important as what the other person hears

  5. #4
    Utah should not restrict the rights of anybody to carry a firearm. Neither should any other state. Don't punish the citizen for what the government does or does not do.

    If Utah doesn't accept California or Nevada permits, who is going to suffer? The governments of CA or NV? Nope. The only person who will suffer is Joe Citizen.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Carlin, NV
    Posts
    209
    Blog Entries
    2
    As a Nevada resident, I feel obliged to inform you that an organization known as the NSCA voted to remove UT from our reciprocity agreement. The good residents had nothing to do with the decision. As a resident of Elko County, I can tell you that I travel into UT a great deal for shopping, religious reasons, and family. Yes, I am Mormon. Yes, I carry and am prepaired to use it to stop a threat. Yes, it does agree with my reliion. A family, the proclamation to the world states that I am supposed to preside over my family affairs, provide for my family, and PROTECT my family. Removing my ability to carry concealed (as I chose to) would be akin to violating both 1st and 2nd amendment rights. Personally I think NV needs to change our state laws to allow for ANY other states CCW to be valid. I know it wont happen, to many are afraid of guns in Vegas and Reno\Carson to allow that to happen.

    I can understand your frustrations, we here in Nevada have to deal with this group on almost all our gun laws. It seems state legislature listens more to the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association than their own constituents, and pisses most of the state off. Unfortunately, that does not include Washoe or Clark counties. This whole non UT permit stems over the simple fact you do not have to show proficiency to obtain your permit. Freaking stupid if you ask me, this unvoted for "association" has obtained the power to tell us who's permit will be honored or not. I guess in 2013 I will have to fire up Nevada Shooters to see if we cant get the legislature to change their minds about who they let tell us who's permit will be honored.
    My way is not better, it is just mine, your way is not better, it is just yours.
    Carry what your comfortable with, there is no "Supergun" Carry how your comfortable, open or concealed, so you have it with you when you need it

  7. #6
    I have a question for you Danieljoe1. I recall another reason why the UT permit was no longer recognized was that the NV permit required the registration of the firearm that would be carried and that only the firearm that was registered could be legally carried. I remember it being called a back door attempt at gun registration. Is that correct?

    I didn't see this issue from both sides, and initially I thought that the fact that UT allows NV and CA permit holders to obtain a non resident permit as being sufficient and fair. I now know that many people disagree. I think it is more unfair for NV permit holders. I will tell you that it chaffs my hide that Diane Feinstein can use her CA permit to carry in UT. I only use her as an example because according to my phone the post about her and her permit is the most popular on this site.

  8. #7
    I Disagree on the basis that we as United States need to become United. The people who carry a Utah CFP are law abiding citizens. For California and Nevada to Turn there Noses up at us yet expect special treatment is nothing short of crazy. We should in reality treat them the in the same manner, but truefully what has that always led to? There simply needs to be time to set down for a discusion to find out if we can handle this like adults.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by grmerrill View Post
    I have a question for you Danieljoe1. I recall another reason why the UT permit was no longer recognized was that the NV permit required the registration of the firearm that would be carried and that only the firearm that was registered could be legally carried. I remember it being called a back door attempt at gun registration. Is that correct?

    I didn't see this issue from both sides, and initially I thought that the fact that UT allows NV and CA permit holders to obtain a non resident permit as being sufficient and fair. I now know that many people disagree. I think it is more unfair for NV permit holders. I will tell you that it chaffs my hide that Diane Feinstein can use her CA permit to carry in UT. I only use her as an example because according to my phone the post about her and her permit is the most popular on this site.
    Nevada doesn't register firearms, only Clark County. NV CFP's used to only permit semis to be carried that you qualified for at the range, but the law was changed. I don't think any other state had the same requirement. The reason most people believe that Nevada won't accept Utah permits is money. You get a Utah permit, and it is good in a lot of states. Nevada's permit isn't so a lot of people bypassed Nevada, and got the Utah permit. That wasn't good for Nevada, so they changed the law.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Honolulu, HI & Salt Lake City, UT
    Posts
    2,797
    Looks like you're getting similar responses as you did at UCC. No reason to punish law abiding citizens simply because the lawmakers of their home state made a stupid decision.
    "A few well placed shots with a .22LR is a lot better than a bunch of solid misses with a .44 mag!" Glock Armorer, NRA Chief RSO, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Muzzleloading Rifle, Muzzleloading Shotgun, and Home Firearm Safety Training Counselor

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kalifornia & Idaho
    Posts
    1,052
    Quote Originally Posted by grmerrill View Post
    I have a question for you Danieljoe1. I recall another reason why the UT permit was no longer recognized was that the NV permit required the registration of the firearm that would be carried and that only the firearm that was registered could be legally carried. I remember it being called a back door attempt at gun registration. Is that correct?

    I didn't see this issue from both sides, and initially I thought that the fact that UT allows NV and CA permit holders to obtain a non resident permit as being sufficient and fair. I now know that many people disagree. I think it is more unfair for NV permit holders. I will tell you that it chaffs my hide that Diane Feinstein can use her CA permit to carry in UT. I only use her as an example because according to my phone the post about her and her permit is the most popular on this site.
    Nevada recognizes Arizona which does not require the carry weapons to be listed on the permit. The reason I heard that Nevada stopped recognizing Utah is that Utah doesn't require a shooting test, just a class. Of course Kalifornia requires a shooting test on each weapon to be carried and a class every 2 years (in addition to a 15 hour or so initial class) and Nevada won't recognize Kalifornia.
    Maybejim

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member CRPA
    Life Member SASS

    What you say isn't as important as what the other person hears

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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