OK to pack heat at U., says Utah's high court

[Car Knocker]

UPDATE

U of U Temporarily Lifts Ban on Concealed Weapons
September 18th, 2006 @ 9:33pm
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- The University of Utah said Monday it will temporarily suspend enforcing the school's gun ban and hopes to work out an agreement with lawmakers to keep weapons off campus and still comply with state law.

University President Michael K. Young sent an e-mail to faculty, staff and students saying the school will ask for a stay in its federal court case to keep guns off campus. School officials will meet with state leaders, hoping to reach a compromise on the state law that was upheld by the Utah Supreme Court.

"I'm very appreciative that they decided to go that route," Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff said Monday night from Washington, D.C., where he was attending a meeting.

Shurtleff hopes the university and state lawmakers can come up with a resolution and keep the matter from further court wrangling. The case has gone on for four years and could go longer if a resolution can't be reached.

"This allows them some time to go to the Legislature and see if they can get some changes in state law to satisfy some of their concerns," Shurtleff said. "If they feel like they haven't had satisfaction, this gives them the opportunity to pursue the matter further in federal court."

The Utah Supreme Court ruled Sept. 8 that the weapons ban runs counter to Utah law, which prevents state and local agencies from restricting possession or use of firearms on public or private property.

The university sued Shurtleff, first in U.S. District Court in 2002 and then in 3rd District Court in 2003, after he said the law applied to the school. The federal court told the university to get the state issues resolved in 3rd District Court first and then return to federal court.

With last week's state decision, Young said the school will hold off on pursuing further federal action while trying to work out an agreement with the state.

"We have agreed, with the Attorney General's office, to suspend temporarily enforcement of our policy regarding firearms on campus and modify our practices to comply with state law," Young said in the e-mail.

State law prohibits firearms on school property, unless the weapon holder has a permit.

The Legislature amended the law in 2004 to specifically include "state institutions of higher learning," among other things.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=501263

 

[Gray Peterson]

Does the University really think that they will get the State Legislature to write them an exemption?

Cold day in hell that will happen. After two years of flat out ignoring the 2004 amendment to state law, I don't see the State Legislature doing them any favors.

Since Utah is a licensed open carry state, I would suggest that pro-RKBA students at the University start open carrying.

 

[Gray Peterson]

I would love to see some kids openly carrying, but I think its a pipe-dream (as state law requires that only a permit holder may carry on campus, and a permit holders weapon must be completely concealed at all times or risk being arrested for brandishing).

This is absolutely false. You cannot be arrested for brandishing for open carry of a loaded handgun in Utah. You can be charged with a crime of carrying a loaded handgun on your person if you do not have a CFP from the Utah BCI. This is not Texas or Oklahoma.

 

[island]

Our belief is that it is incumbent on us to keep students as safe as possible, where free and open dialogue can occur, without threat of physical harm of any sort.

Yeah, like the federal government up here kept the kids at Dawson in Montreal safe by eliminating their ability to defend themselves and their classmates.

 

[Gray Peterson]

Medula, you're flat out wrong. OpenCarry.org identifies Utah as a licensed open carry state. The Utah BCI has stated that open carry of a loaded pistol is legal with a concealed firearm permit.

 

[Ben Shepherd]

While you are withinh the letter of the law in Utah by open carrying with your CCW permit:

THIS DOESN'T MEAN YOU WON'T BE CUFFED AND STUFFED IF YOU DO SO!!! Depends on your juristictions disposition toward the practice. Salt Lake City? Don't push it.

Where I live? You'll get looks, but usually no trouble.

Will you beat a brandishing charge in court?
Yes.

Will you have to pay a good lawyer alot of your money to do so?
Yes, again.

Pick your RKBA battles carefully.

 

[Ben Shepherd]

One more note:

"legally" unloaded open carry is OK here. But my above advice applies.

The legal defintion of loaded?
More than two mechanical actions away from firing.

 

[Gray Peterson]

I hope I am wrong... But personal experience says I am right..

Instead of saying "personal experience", why don't you actually speak up on what makes you think so. Were you illegally arrested? Were you detained? Did some cop scare you into submission on the open carry issue?

Tell us the story, Medula.

 

[Gray Peterson]

crossposted to OpenCarry.org

A few things to add:

Unlicensed Israeli carry on the University of Utah is illegal per:

76-10-505.5

Schools are defined by:

76-3-202.3

Just an FYI to anyone. Please treat Utah as a licensed open carry state if you intend to carry openly at all. The 76-10-505.5 do not differentiate concealed or open, loaded or not loaded, it flat out says that carrying a firearm is illegal in a schools, on the grounds of schools, and 1000 feet from such buildings and grounds of schools, which is defined as everything from pre-schools and daycare centers to post secondary institutions unless you're covered by one of the exceptions, which include having a Concealed Firearm License among other provisions.

 

[Gray Peterson]

I was detained while visiting my daughter (I am a LEO from Nebraska).

And you weren't given any sort of professional courtesy whatsoever? I find that hard to believe. There was no reason at all to be detained. Why didn't you file an official complaint against the cop? Why didn't you sue his agency? Oh, right, that thin blue line.

I had to jump through hoops that would confuse the average CCW citizen...

Then confuse me, Medula. If you were carrying under LEOSA, you know as well as I do that LEOSA only applies to the carrying of a CONCEALED firearm. If you want to open carry in the state of Utah, you must have a Utah license or a license from any other state to do so, unless Utah happens to exempt out of state law enforcement officers by it's own laws against carrying of a loaded firearm on the street. Reading through the Utah statute, it appears that you were exempt from it under the peace officers provision in 76-10-523.

You were the one who chose to not fight the issue for reasons that I will discuss later in this post. Don't ask me to do the same thing.

Don't risk the crap, and keep your piece concealed.

It is not my fault that you feel the need to "protect yourself" by carrying concealed. Don't ask me to do the same thing, or anyone else for that matter.

BTW Lonnie, I find that "legal" and "appropriate" are two completely differently things... Even while LEO...

You only feel that concealed only is appriopriate only because you won't fight. If you feel that fighting too hard will cost you your job as a LEO in Nebraska, then that's your professional problem. Since I am not restrained like you in the sense that I'm not a cop, in that I will file official complaints, lawsuits, and so on, if a cop enforces a law that doesn't exist, or detains me or someone else in my presence without cause.

Lemme give this as an example:

Man arrested for completely legal activity

Machiafava files lawsuit against Gonzales, LA PD in federal court

More lawsuits like this are in the future. I am tired of law enforcement officers hiding behind the excuse of "I didn't know the entirety of the law". When we as private citizens tell that to law enforcement officers when we are arrested for something we don't know is illegal, we are told "it's your responsibility to know the law", and we are told them by the judges who can sentence us on a felony conviction that can cause us to lose our firearms rights.

Tell me, why can't we ask the same thing of law enforcement officers? When you have the power to ruin someone's life, arrest them, cuff them, and stuff them, then they had better start learning everything that they enforce, or don't enforce them at all.

If that's unacceptable to LAW ENFORCEMENT officers, to actually follow the law and enforce the law and not enforce their OPINION or their FEELINGS on what the law is or what it should be, then they should turn in their badges and resign their commissions before they do something stupid that will cause a lot of personal liability and financial ruin upon themselves, before they do it to a law abiding citizen excercising their rights.

 

[Gray Peterson]

I had a discussion with a Deputy Chief of the BCI in regards to the Concealed Firearms Licensing Statute. There were two reasons why I contacted them:

1. In regards to Utah Statute 76-10-1507, whether or not CFL holders were actually exempt from that particular statute, and if they aren't, is only concealed firearm carry covered (a la Virginia Restaurant Carry)

2. Whether or not the Concealed Firearm Statute imposes a duty or requirement to conceal the firearm that you are carrying.

He couldn't get me an answer to the first question yet. The second question was answered in the negative. There is no duty for Concealed Firearm Licensees to carry their firearm concealed. He did note that I may have more police contacts, and that he questioned my reason for wanting to open carry. I told him that's more of a philosophical and tactical question and not a legal one, and that there are two diametrically opposed camps. He understood.

The answer is: Open Carry is legal with a Concealed Firearm License. I have asked BCI to update the website with this information. They are considering the request.

 

[Prince Yamato]

I seriously hope that the ruling allowing CCW on campuses spreads like a wildfire around the country.

 

[Gray Peterson]

But I don't see why you feel the need to attack me personally in such a hostile way.

How is asking you to not give out wrong information a personal attack?

 

[Gray Peterson]

Now I may be taking things a littel out of context, or even a little personal, but having read many of your previous posts, I "feel" justified in making the assumption that you have an axe to grind with LEO's... Do you have a story you would like to tell?

I have an axe to grind with law enforcement officers who do not know the laws that they're "enforcing" on the population, and then have the unmitigated gall to say "ignorance is no excuse".

There are too many LEO's in that column, and they scare me with their stupidity, arrogance, and ignorance. There are simply TOO many Sheriff Buford T. Justice's, Roscoe P. Coltrane's and Eric Cartman's out there on patrol.

Until every single one of those officers are eliminated from every police force in this country, there will be continual conflicts with law abiding citizens.

Philadelphia PD Open Carry Hostilitity

Open Carry in Michigan, Incorrect Information constantly given out by LEO's and other local authorities

 

[Gray Peterson]

Medula,

Coltrane, Justice, and Cartman were in there for the recognition factor. I've lost count of how many bad cops there are. I don't even know who Rapheal Perez is, however most people who've watched TV at all in the last 30 years know who Coltrane, Justice and Cartman are. I actually rarely watch TV anymore.

All that I ask for is a law enforcement to know the law and not detain, arrest, or otherwise harass open carriers just for open carrying if it's legal in their jurisdiction. Is that too much to ask? You state that "we're under more scrutiny than you ever imagine". Good. I'm glad that you are under more scrutiny, as you should be. You are paid to be LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. You are not paid to editorialize your opinions as law on citizens on the street.

A good professional cop, when making contact with an open carrier, may come up to them, may ask them a few questions, and if it's required in their jurisdiction, ask for their handgun license (if it's required by state law to open carry, like Georgia or Indiana, Minnesota and Iowa, etc). Then they should be on their way with no editorializing. At the most, he might say "You know, that may not be so tactically sound, but it's your right under state law, though I'd recommend retention training". That's just a statement of opinion, and recognizes open carry's legality, and in fact if an open carrier hasn't had the training, it's a good piece of advice.

A bad cop takes their gun out and tells the open carrier to get on the ground with hands behind their head. Or manhandles them in suprise (mvpel in New Hampshire, anyone?), or start getting all intimidating and threatening and saying "that's illegal" or "your concealed license requires you to conceal", etc and demand you conceal under threat of arrest, even if it's legal to carry openly (Washington, Philadelphia PA, Oregon, Omaha even with their open carry licenses, I've practically lost count of how many places have this problem). Oh, makes the comment "Only we know how to open carry right, leave that to the professionals".

It's not just open carry of pistols, either. In California, for example, there's so much "cop mythology" about their knife laws that stuff like "if you carry a knife with a blade longer than the palm of one's hand, it's a criminal offense and I can arrest you" is flat out not true, especially since palms are of different size on each and every person and if that was an actual law, would have been thrown out as unconstitutionally vague. Ask Jim March for the lowdown on that, he has literally dozens of stories similar to that across the entire state, and I'm sure California isn't the only state, especially if that state responded to the gang panic in the 1950's.

It's ridiculous. The question to you, and the question to any person who keeps saying "Keep it concealed and you won't be bothered by the cops": Why should I have to keep my handgun concealed? Forget the tactical arguments, forget the "you'll get thrown out of stores and businesses" stuff. Those are private businesses and I can simply refuse to give my business to them, boycott them, and start spreading the word.

I'm talking about when a cop, who if I attempt to evade him he can arrest me on a probable cause, and as someone is paid by the taxpayers, overreaches on his power and starts using his authority, illegally, to INTIMIDATE, HARASS, and THREATEN a law abiding citizen excercising a free choice.

Quoting from the Pennnsylvania Supreme Court Case of Commonwealth v. Hawkins:

"Since it is not illegal to carry a licensed gun in Pennsylvania, it is difficult to see where this shocking idea originates, notwithstanding the Commonwealth's fanciful and histrionic references to maniacs who may spray schoolyards with gunfire and assassins of public figures who may otherwise go undetected. Even if the Constitution of Pennsylvania would permit such invasive police activity as the Commonwealth proposes -- which it does not -- such activity seems more likely to endanger than to protect the public. Unnecessary police intervention, by definition, produces the possibility of conflict where none need exist.

Being a native of Arizona makes me question any law enforcement officer who demands me to conceal if it's legal in the jurisdiction I live or visit. Being a gay man makes me even less likely to want to keep my firearm ownership "in the closet". I don't have to tell you that the gay community in general and law enforcement enjoys a rather cool relationship. There was a time when even where there was no sodomy laws or anything of the sort (after the 1970's rolled around and many states repealed their laws), there were still arrests for "disturbing the peace" made because a gay couple decided to hold their hands, or identify themselves as gay if asked, because that's "disturbing someone's peace to know that".

As for your question: Have I ever been wrong? Yes. However, when I make a wrong choice, it usually affects just myself. When a LEO makes the wrong decision on the job and arrests someone for a law that doesn't exist, that LEO infringes on that person's liberty and freedom, and that should be a terminatible offense.

 

[Gray Peterson]

And what precisely did you mean when you said "terminatable offense?" If you mean that one should be shot for "infringing upon your rights" then you are as bad, no worse, than the LEO's you purpose to hate. Since when did the deprovation of movement and rights for a short time equate to murder?

Medula, When I mean terminatible, that means "fireable", as in kicked off the force. I don't see how you can equate terminatable with being shot.

This is a forum for debate. The gay part was explaining my reasoning for not tolerating law enforcement abuse under any circumstances.

I must apologize for saying "that thin blue line" and "I find that hard to believe". I can admit fault at least as far as those are concerned. That was wrong of me to even present the implication that you lied. You reacted in kind, understandibly, which I would if you were in my position. I didn't take the high road.

I, however, will not apologize for my comments to bad law enforcement officers (thus the references to the TV characters), that they need to stop editorializing (on the street in uniform, mind you, not just posting an opinion on a web board) and stop being abusive towards open carriers in general. I certainly don't currently view you as a one of the "Bad ones" unless I do find out that you're hassling legal open carriers. You and I just have a different opinion on whether or not open carry is a good idea. Which is fine.

What set off the whole situation is where you stated, with absolute certainty, that open carry was illegal in Utah because of your detainment while visiting your daughter. You were stating this as absolute fact, and I proved that you were wrong. Many states allow open carry, and some states require that you have a license in order to open carry.

Utah, Minnesota, Iowa, and Indiana come to mind From your perspective of "people who demanded concealed carry, they should keep their weapons concealed". When I was in Arizona, open carry was accepted and very common despite concealed carry's illegality. I moved to Florida and concealed carry was shall-issue for two years. Open carry is illegal, however there are moves in that state to change that situation next year.

The spectrum for personal protection isn't just "concealed carry", IMHO. Though much hay was made in Nebraska about concealed carry (Which just passed this year), after years of trying to get it passed. In Nebraska, from what I've read of the law, Nebraska CHP holders now no longer have to worry about their handguns being clearly visible from the outside if they want to carry in their car. This is a case where open carriers benefit from the new CHP law.

There are certain times where only concealed carry is appropriate in personal situations. However, that choice of appropriateness should only be made by the person carrying. In Washington, I need a CPL in order to carry a loaded handgun in a car. Given this reality, I must get a CPL. However that law does not impose a duty on me to conceal while carrying.

I don't see open carriers openly attacking a person's choice to conceal their firearm. They may make their comments about "excercise your rights or it may be taken away from you", however that's usually the extent of it. However, you see a lot of the reverse, with the concealed only all the time crowd calling open carriers "attention-whores", "show-offs", "wanna-be cops", and so on. Just food for thought. Then again, it's only in the last few years that open carriers have started asserting their rights, started organizing together (VCDL, Texas Citizens Defense League, and so on), so I believe that within a few years, all of the shall-issue CCW states that prohibit open carry will at least allow licensed open carry, or no license required).

Moving on,

Despite your opinion, you honestly have absolutely no idea how I'd react if I was confronted by a law enforcement officer while open carrying. All you're relying on is my annoyance at law enforcement officers not knowing firearms law on this forum. Despite the hyperbole saying that I hate ALL law enforcement officers, which is not true, the fact is that I dislike the law enforcement officers who have a "when in doubt, enforce your will" mindset instead of making sure that the law backs up their actions.

I do have a personality that's intense and focused. I focus that in writing, whether it be here, on OpenCarry.org, or writing to law enforcement agencies advisories in regards to calls for service to open carriers in public.

I've been taught to ALWAYS follow a law enforcement officers instructions, always speak politely, always have your proper documentation, and do NOT argue with law enforcement. Never argue with cops on the roadside, because it will only get your ass kicked by them. Politely ask for a supervisor if the law enforcement officer refuses to acknowledge the legality, and if he refuses, simply take it up later on down the line in a complaint. That is the extent of what I would do if you or any other law enforcement officer were to make contact with me officially (though I don't think I'll be travelling through Omaha anytime soon).

If we do ever happen to encounter each other (a policy conference, a gun rights policy convention, perhaps), I certainly wouldn't mind having coffee, or favorite drink of choice. If you're ever in Seattle area, look me up.

EDIT: I just realized that we're majorly straying off the subject of the original post. Perhaps this should be addressed to a different thread in the future? We're both sniping at each other in an improper forum. I hope that we can debate without personal attacks on each other in the future, and debate the tactics, legalities, and so on.