HB 356 The Utah Connection

[hirundo82]

The Utah bill passed. So, as of May 10, 2011 you will be required to have a valid concealed handgun license from your state of residence before Utah will issue you a non-resident permit.

That's unfortunate for those who are unable to get a permit from their home state--both those like the Texans who are excluded for some reason other than a conviction, and those in states who rarely issue carry permits. Shame on those instructors whose tactics have led to this change.

I forsee Florida's CWP permit program getting a lot more business now.

[Keith B]

The Utah bill passed. So, as of May 10, 2011 you will be required to have a valid concealed handgun license from your state of residence before Utah will issue you a non-resident permit.

That's unfortunate for those who are unable to get a permit from their home state--both those like the Texans who are excluded for some reason other than a conviction, and those in states who rarely issue carry permits. Shame on those instructors whose tactics have led to this change.

I forsee Florida's CWP permit program getting a lot more business now.

I personally see more states moving to not accept non-resident permits. Colorado changed their laws in 2007 to not accept a non-resident license (that is if you are not a resident of the state the license was issued in.) Florida also doesn't honor a non-resident permit, even though they issue them. I personally think we will see this and other measures aimed at preventing non-resident permits from being used/issued if some of those instructors that are out to just make a buck don't stop using deceptive marketing methods and abusing the system.

[Ameer]

Florida also doesn't honor a non-resident permit, even though they issue them. I personally think we will see this and other measures aimed at preventing non-resident permits from being used/issued if some of those instructors that are out to just make a buck don't stop using deceptive marketing methods and abusing the system.

Florida will honor their own non-resident permits but won't honor other states' non-resident permits. They made that change in their law to just make a buck from people in the market for non-resident permits. They go after that target market because it's profitable.

[EconDoc]

The Utah bill to require residents of other states who want a non-resident Utah permit to have their home state's permit, if available, has passed.

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=14767" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A number of other states were/had cancelled their reciprocity with Utah or were considering doing so. I believe that was the impetus of this bill. Utah passed it in order to preserve reciprocity with other states. New Mexico was one that had cancelled reciprocity with Utah.

[WildBill]

The Utah bill to require residents of other states who want a non-resident Utah permit to have their home state's permit, if available, has passed.

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=14767" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A number of other states were/had cancelled their reciprocity with Utah or were considering doing so. I believe that was the impetus of this bill. Utah passed it in order to preserve reciprocity with other states. New Mexico was one that had cancelled reciprocity with Utah.

"Valentine said the bill would give states control over their own residents, help ensure that Utah permits are recognized by potentially jealous states, and help Utahns by ensuring their permits will be recognized more widely."

Potentially jealous states?

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51247 ... t.html.csp#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[EconDoc]

The Utah bill to require residents of other states who want a non-resident Utah permit to have their home state's permit, if available, has passed.

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=14767" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A number of other states were/had cancelled their reciprocity with Utah or were considering doing so. I believe that was the impetus of this bill. Utah passed it in order to preserve reciprocity with other states. New Mexico was one that had cancelled reciprocity with Utah.

"Valentine said the bill would give states control over their own residents, help ensure that Utah permits are recognized by potentially jealous states, and help Utahns by ensuring their permits will be recognized more widely."

Potentially jealous states?

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51247 ... t.html.csp#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jealous because Utah was getting the license revenue instead of the home state?

[BrianSW99]

Since it did pass, I'm hoping they at least get reciprocity with Nevada back since I have family located there. But if I recall, it was stated that was due to not have a shooting requirement for their license, or something like that. If that's the case, I don't see how this will help.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Since it did pass, I'm hoping they at least get reciprocity with Nevada back since I have family located there. But if I recall, it was stated that was due to not have a shooting requirement for their license, or something like that. If that's the case, I don't see how this will help.

I do too and I believe there will be a major push to reestablish reciprocity with Nevada and New Mexico. (We don't need New Mexico.) Those are important states for Utah residents.

Chas.

[Big Tuna]

Shame on those instructors whose tactics have led to this change.

Shame on people who try to blame this on Utah instructors.

You can blame the legislators in potentially jealous states for inspiring the Utah law. The Utah legislators were very clear. The bill sponsor came right out and said they were motivated by losing reciprocity with Nevada and other states.

[Griz44]

Wow, I was out for a couple of days and things have really jumped around here.
It's going to take a day or two to get caught up on all the information that has developed.
At this point in time, most of the conversaton has been about the Utah situation, does anyone have knowledge of other States (in respect to association with Texas)that have policies similiar to the now changed Utah law that is being discussed?

[Charles L. Cotton]

Shame on those instructors whose tactics have led to this change.

Shame on people who try to blame this on Utah instructors.

You can blame the legislators in potentially jealous states for inspiring the Utah law. The Utah legislators were very clear. The bill sponsor came right out and said they were motivated by losing reciprocity with Nevada and other states.

They lost reciprocity because Utah Instructors were doing the same irresponsible advertising in Nevada and New Mexico. They thumbed their noses at their home states' requirements, just as they have in Texas. The excuse given by Nevada and New Mexico was the lack of a shooting requirement in the Utah law. The real reason was the advertising.

So there's no shame on putting the blame right where it belongs -- irresponsible advertising by Utah Instructors in Texas.

Chas.

[Griz44]

Quote from srothstein

Or maybe because I could not afford $140 for a license plus another $125 for the class.

This argument I have heard before, way too many times. There is still a cost for the class from any state, as there is also a cost for any other states license, but for the record, let's assume they are HALF PRICE.

140.00 (license) + 125.00 (class) is 265.00 for a 5 year period = 53.00 per year and you save half of that by getting another states license = 26.50 in savings (per year). If you go practive twice a year and shoot 100 rounds, then you have spent more than that much on just ammunition, even if it was cheap surplus stuff. How much did you pay for your gun? The cost of a license and the class from ANY state would seem very miniscule compared to the cost of ownership and practice. I run through 400-800 rounds a month on most months. The practice part IMHO is absolutely necessary for anyone who decides to carry.

I really do not care how much training they have or if they can hit the broad side of a barn.

Uh, wow, just wow, These are the kind of folks that frighten me, and one of the reasons I do carry.

From a pure 2A standpoint, you are right, the law would be totally blind as to the qualifications of the individual who carries, but as stated before, we just are not there yet.

[Cobra Medic]

"Valentine said the bill would give states control over their own residents, help ensure that Utah permits are recognized by potentially jealous states, and help Utahns by ensuring their permits will be recognized more widely."

Potentially jealous states?

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51247 ... t.html.csp#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jealous because Utah was getting the license revenue instead of the home state?

If you don't like the word "jealous" you can call it greed or Avarice. Maybe throw in some other Deadly Sins like Pride and Envy, if the love of money doesn't cover it all. Any way I look at it, Lon Burnam and his Nevada counterparts are not motivated by the Cardinal Virtues when they infringe on the right of people to bear arms.

[WildBill]

"Valentine said the bill would give states control over their own residents, help ensure that Utah permits are recognized by potentially jealous states, and help Utahns by ensuring their permits will be recognized more widely."

Potentially jealous states?

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51247 ... t.html.csp#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jealous because Utah was getting the license revenue instead of the home state?

If you don't like the word "jealous" you can call it greed or Avarice. Maybe throw in some other Deadly Sins like Pride and Envy, if the love of money doesn't cover it all. Any way I look at it, Lon Burnam and his Nevada counterparts are not motivated by the Cardinal Virtues when they infringe on the right of people to bear arms.

It just struck me as funny. I have heard people called jealous, greedy, prideful, envious, but never a state.

[Liberty]

From a pure 2A standpoint, you are right, the law would be totally blind as to the qualifications of the individual who carries, but as stated before, we just are not there yet.

While I understand that you and many others aren't ready. some of us are ready. I just consider it the cost freedom. The freedom and right to defend ourselves and family is more important than than the unproven fears of those who would deny our rights. I don't remember any conditions mentioned in the 2nd amendment