Bogley

[JamisJockey]

Brian in SLC wrote: JamisJockey wrote: Ah, upon further review, I realized its Channel 5 KSL...they are very anti gun, and their editorial blood-on-the-streets-style rants during the UoU gun debate proved it.

I seem to recall that editorial as well. But, some of their coverage up on campus seemed to address both sides reasonably well.

Its pretty interesting, given their ownership. Wonder if Huntsman(s) are anti gun? That'd make sense then. Huge influence, I'd think. Not to mention the guns in church issue too, I suppose.

Morality police at KSL won't even air SNL...

-Brian in SLC

KSL had an editorial about that, too....I think they said that the church gun issue didn't go far enough in thier opinion....
:roll:

[Sombeech]

Maura Carabello wrote: She says what happened to Taylor is the best possible outcome, but not always the norm.

She's right. He could be dead now.

So, just that everybody understands, Taylor's situation is not the norm! Some people ACTUALLY get shot when they are being robbed.

[Brian in SLC]

JamisJockey wrote: But you can get a DL if you have a restraining order, assault charge, etc etc.....you cannot get a CFP with those types of charges. For a DL to be revoked you've gotta have a driving conviction.....to get a CFP revoked it doesn't even have to be linked to the CFP itself.

Debatable on some level to be sure. To me, it makes sense you shouldn't be carrying concealed for those issues. So, would be "linked" in terms of causal effect, methinks.

Quote: The DMV doesn't run your driving record against a national database on a regular basis....get too many tickets in another state and it might not even show up.....BCI runs CFP holders against the NICS and state records almost daily, and everytime you purchase a firearm, to see if you've committed any revokable (sp?) offenses.....

Really? They run CCW folks through near daily? Wow. Seems like their keeping close track (probably required for some legal reason?). Must have an easy to run database.

My put is from what I'd consider a kind of garden variety law abider. My contact with johnny law is pretty much just driving related. I suspect (hope?) the bulk of the public is the same way. Most of us, ahem, break a few traffic laws now and again. I'm guessing most of us don't have to deal with assault, domestic violence, and/or other issues of moral turpitude. Folks that do, IMHO, shouldn't be carrying concealed.

A run throught the comments on the KSL site is semi amusing.

What's also kind of interesting to me, is the reciprocal agreements between certain states. Utah has one with Colorado, but, not with Nevada. Seems weird. And, given how strict California is with their CCW, you'd think every state in the nation would honor theirs.

Wonder what percentage of folks get their CCW revoked in California. Anyone see that data? Be interesting to compare to Utah. I think around 500k folks have a CWL in California. Have a friend that has one. Really tough process to get one. And, his major complaint, when you do, its only applicable to one firearm.

Cheers,

-Brian in SLC

[JamisJockey]

Brian in SLC wrote:
Debatable on some level to be sure. To me, it makes sense you shouldn't be carrying concealed for those issues. So, would be "linked" in terms of causal effect, methinks.

My point is the reversal.....A CFP will be revoked for any domestic violence charge, conviction, any felonies, and some other items, many that aren't directly related to the CFP itself. The DL would only be pulled for violations directly related to driving itself, IE moving violations, DUI, etc. Apples and Oranges to compare the two.

The database is computerized, and I'd imagine the numbers of CFP holders in Utah is considerably less than the DL holders.


Quote: What's also kind of interesting to me, is the reciprocal agreements between certain states. Utah has one with Colorado, but, not with Nevada. Seems weird. And, given how strict California is with their CCW, you'd think every state in the nation would honor theirs.

There are a couple reasons for this. Some states require that a CFP issued in another state meet or exceed thier own training requirements. Some states won't issue reciprocity on states that don't recognize thiers.
I belive the problem with Nevada (And CA) that most states have is that they issue county-by-county, and its not technically a state-wide CFP.

[Brian in SLC]

JamisJockey wrote: My point is the reversal.....A CFP will be revoked for any domestic violence charge, conviction, any felonies, and some other items, many that aren't directly related to the CFP itself. The DL would only be pulled for violations directly related to driving itself, IE moving violations, DUI, etc. Apples and Oranges to compare the two.

Kinda maybe sorta.

You can get your DL pulled for things not directly related to driving. Ie, medical, mental. Of course, if you can't see, you probably shouldn't be driving....

I think still apples to apples, but, maybe golden delicicious to macintosh.

They both have a process that is kinda similar (you apply, meet min. criteria...etc...). They both have the same purpose.

Its interesting that you don't really have to take a written test, or, show proficiency with a firearm to get a CFP. Some of the better instructors probably require some such, but, some don't. Huge variation in how folks get their CFP in Utah. Versus DL which is pretty consistant.

Interesting...: http://www.bci.utah.gov/CFP/TRANGUIDELINES.pdf

Anyhoo...fun stuff.

-Brian in SLC