Editorial: Concealed carry

Editorial: Concealed carry

There are 481 comments on the Salt Lake Tribune story from Aug 16, 2011, titled Editorial: Concealed carry. In it, Salt Lake Tribune reports that:

Utah does not require an applicant for a permit to carry a concealed weapon to demonstrate he can fire a gun safely.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Salt Lake Tribune.

“Eat me. I'm a Danish.”

Since: Dec 10

Las Cruces, New Mexico

#22 Aug 16, 2011
I dont have a problem with a concealed carry permit. It allows me to carry a concealed weapon and not a gangbanger. A cop has never taken issue with my weapon and that was his choice. But if there was no permit, then any thug could be caught in posession of a firearm and the police could not do anything about it unless he was violating some other law.

I dont feel my rights have been infringed upon in any way and have been very happy with the New Mexico law. If someone was trying to hide a gun the cops could take action. And after the concealed carry permit it allowed law abiding citizens a chance to carry concealed. I think it allows a certain amount of control and I dont see where it infringes on my rights to protect myself with my firearm at all.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#23 Aug 16, 2011
nope wrote:
<quoted text>
he is just another nut with a gun. Perhaps much more like you than me, assuming you feel put upon because there are other people who feel differently.
I suppose your point is that nuts should not only have access to guns, but should be able to buy an arsenal and carry them anywhere.
I disagree.
Sorry, but it's a well known fact that Jared was one of yours. A kindred spirit to you, one might say.

More often than not, it's armed, law-abiding citizens who stop leftists with weapons from carrying out their nefarious deeds.

Thank God for the second amendment!

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#24 Aug 17, 2011
Sol Rebl wrote:
I dont have a problem with a concealed carry permit. It allows me to carry a concealed weapon and not a gangbanger. A cop has never taken issue with my weapon and that was his choice. But if there was no permit, then any thug could be caught in posession of a firearm and the police could not do anything about it unless he was violating some other law.
I dont feel my rights have been infringed upon in any way and have been very happy with the New Mexico law. If someone was trying to hide a gun the cops could take action. And after the concealed carry permit it allowed law abiding citizens a chance to carry concealed. I think it allows a certain amount of control and I dont see where it infringes on my rights to protect myself with my firearm at all.
People like you should not be allowed any rights, just because.

New Mexico's gun laws are in name only. Your State thinks it can regulate rights.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#25 Aug 17, 2011
nope wrote:
<quoted text>
he is just another nut with a gun. Perhaps much more like you than me, assuming you feel put upon because there are other people who feel differently.
I suppose your point is that nuts should not only have access to guns, but should be able to buy an arsenal and carry them anywhere.
I disagree.
And you're just another nut with a computer and internet access.

Before your access expires, how do you propose to stop the next Loughner who decides to strangle the next Gifford ? Men don't require or need a gun to kill people. They can do it with their arms and hands.
It is

Santa Fe, NM

#26 Aug 17, 2011
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>

!
established fact that he was a nut who was able to get a gun too easily. He is one of "yours" and a an example of the results of your extremist views that there should be no restrictions.
Obviously

Santa Fe, NM

#27 Aug 17, 2011
Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>And you're just another nut with a computer and internet access.
Before your access expires, how do you propose to stop the next Loughner who decides to strangle the next Gifford ? Men don't require or need a gun to kill people. They can do it with their arms and hands.
your 2nd amendment hero jared would not have gotten very far his assasination attempts with his bare hands. Luckily his equipment failed.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#28 Aug 17, 2011
It is wrote:
<quoted text>
established fact that he was a nut who was able to get a gun too easily. He is one of "yours" and a an example of the results of your extremist views that there should be no restrictions.
You are lying again.

Leftist nuts such as you, with weapons, have wreaked havoc on law abiding society throughout history.

If leftists don't use guns, they use knives, if they don't use knives, they use explosives, if they don't use explosives, they use clubs, if they don't use clubs, they use rocks.

The problem is not the weapons, which are quite benign on their own. The problem is the mental deficiencies recognized in the violent tendencies of leftists.

Nope

Santa Fe, NM

#29 Aug 17, 2011
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
a nut is a nut. A nut with a gun is more dangerous than one without one. You think he should be free to have a gun, just like you do. Your extreme veiws are based on an ideolgical purity test. My moderate veiws are based on rationality.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#30 Aug 17, 2011
Nope wrote:
<quoted text>
a nut is a nut. A nut with a gun is more dangerous than one without one. You think he should be free to have a gun, just like you do. Your extreme veiws are based on an ideolgical purity test. My moderate veiws are based on rationality.
Bwaaaahaaahaaaa! I almost blew coffee all over my keyboard I was laughing so hard.

I haven't witnessed a moderate view from you yet. Thanks for the laugh, though!

You can ignore the fact that the most destructive actions, particularly against political leaders, is beget by leftists. But that doesn't change the fact.

Leftism breeds nutcases, and nutcases get weapons and use them again people they don't like. Simple as that.

The case can be made that in order to reduce violence against political leaders, one must reduce the instance of leftist ideology.

At the same time, gun ownership prevents crime in numbers exponentially higher than the crime caused. Net gain. Thanks to the wisdom of the founding fathers. Check any honest poll, and the American people resoundingly agree.
bob

Carlsbad, NM

#31 Aug 17, 2011
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
You can ignore the fact that the most destructive actions, particularly against political leaders, is beget by leftists. But that doesn't change the fact.
The case can be made that in order to reduce violence against political leaders, one must reduce the instance of leftist ideology.
you should thank us. someone needs to kill them. you right wingers just start goose steepin with 'em. remember.
Your

Santa Fe, NM

#32 Aug 17, 2011
Cary L Nickel wrote:
Laws which make concealed carry of firearms illegal are already an infringement of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.(As are any laws which restrict firearm ownership).
statement.

That includes your buddy Jared whose only defining attribute is that he is a nut with a gun and used it.

Case closed
Your

Santa Fe, NM

#33 Aug 17, 2011
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
Bwaaaahaaahaaaa! I almost blew coffee all over my keyboard I was laughing so hard.I haven't witnessed a moderate view from you yet. Thanks for the laugh, though!
.
imagined reality is a sign of mental disturbance on your part. As is innappropriate laughter.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#34 Aug 17, 2011
Your wrote:
<quoted text>
statement.
That includes your buddy Jared whose only defining attribute is that he is a nut with a gun and used it.
Case closed
Nope. His defining attribute was that he is a left-wing nut such as yourself.

And apparently you are on a first name basis with him.

Not surprising in the least. I'm sure you know many more just like him..if you aren't one yourself.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#35 Aug 17, 2011
Your wrote:
<quoted text>
imagined reality is a sign of mental disturbance on your part. As is innappropriate laughter.
Laughing at you, and at people who think like you, is ALWAYS appropriate.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36 Aug 17, 2011
bob wrote:
<quoted text> you should thank us. someone needs to kill them. you right wingers just start goose steepin with 'em. remember.
I believe you mean exactly what you say. Please direct your question at the Santa Fe lib..I'm sure you will find a sympathetic audience there.

You do not find one with me.

Interesting, though, that you believe Gabrielle Giffords to be a "goose stepin'" right winger.
Local 71

Calgary, Canada

#37 Aug 17, 2011
bob wrote:
<quoted text> you should thank us.
"Us"..........you know how to comfort a "red" heart comrade.
bob

Carlsbad, NM

#38 Aug 17, 2011
tim mcvey, right winger
h.hoover, right winger
hitler, right winger
j.mccarthy,right winger
r,reagan, bushes, right wingers all. and thier tyranny was only held in check by the left

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#39 Aug 17, 2011
#27
Obviously wrote:
your 2nd amendment hero jared would not have gotten very far his assasination attempts with his bare hands. Luckily his equipment failed.
3,000 were killed on 9/11 without guns. McVeigh killed a few hundred without guns. Dahmer and Gacy killed over fifty without guns (they used their bare hands).

Loughner could have easily strangled Gifford in public in front of others.

Men don't need guns to kill women, but women need guns to kill attacking men.
Another

Santa Fe, NM

#40 Aug 17, 2011
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
pack of lies.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#41 Aug 17, 2011
Nope wrote:
a nut is a nut. A nut with a gun is more dangerous than one without one.
A true nut won't be capable of using a gun. As many of you antigun nuts will say, "guns require training, only the pigs and the military are capable of using them."
Nope wrote:
a nut is a nut. A nut with a gun is more dangerous than one without one. You think he should be free to have a gun, just like you do.
The problem is not the nuts with guns, the problem is the nuts without guns (Gabby Gifford). Nuts like you think you can walk the jungle unarmed. Nuts like you think the grizzlies won't attack.
Nope wrote:
Your extreme veiws are based on an ideolgical purity test. My moderate veiws are based on rationality.
The antigun crusader ignores facts, logic, and sound reasoning. They base their decisions on their emotions. Regardless of the facts or the evidence, they FEEL no person should have a weapon for self defense.

If a gunless solution were the correct solution then the military should leave their guns at home.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Utah Government Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News NEA president: Don't punish teachers with test ... (Oct '14) May '15 Bob 9
News Couples celebrate one-year anniversary of same-... (Dec '14) May '15 goldstone report 4
News Vietnam vet surprised over reason for license-p... Apr '15 Abrahammock Relig... 34
News Obama holding off on Utah land grab Apr '15 barefoot2626 5
News Gay rights law signed in Utah Mar '15 Belle Sexton 5
News 5. 2nd hearing on wood burning ban brings mixed... (Jan '15) Feb '15 Sneaky Pete 2
News UTAH IMMIGRANT LIST: Utah Latinos call on state... (Jul '10) Jan '15 OLDNINERFAN 111
More from around the web