• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Utah right to bear arms enforced in class

The University has no restrictions for the simple reason that the state Supreme Court slapped them down years ago. In one sense, the Chief's concerns are legitimate. Life is so much easier for his officers if they can simply assume that anybody not in uniform with a gun is the bad guy, and open fire without any further consideration. It would also make their lives easier if all the bad guy would wear distinctive uniforms or other means of instant identification. As far as concerns about other people making mistakes in target identification, NYPD studies have shown that police are several times more likely to shoot the wrong people than you and I are. That's nothing against police, just the simple reality that if the only people here with a gun are a uniformed officer, a crazed shooter and me, it's glaringly obvious to me who's who, less so for the officer.

Ken
 
Utah may soon allow open carry on campus...

Proper and indiscreet c.c. shouldn't be a problem at all. Heck, I'm not sure open carry would. There was a student at a Utah university who thought the wording of their laws actually allowed for this and he tried it on campus. I remember hearing about it on the "Gundudes." Someone called the police and the student videotaped the second half of the his discussion with the officer. They interviewed him on ep. 97.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
DaveB said:
The university police chief has legit concerns on training and identification of who is the bad guy with the gun.
Click to expand...
The only "legit" concern they have is whether there are enough armed and capable students and staff around to stop (or better yet, deter) a determined mass-shooter... That should be far more of a concern for everyone than threat determination which is actually quite easy...
 
I don't know whether the issue has been litigated with respect to campus regulations, but open carry is perfectly legal in Utah, with or without a license.

Ken
 
AppleSeeds said:
No, he doesn't.
Click to expand...
I have to respectfully disagree and allow me to explain. I see more legitimate concern with his officer. As Ken said in the NYPD cops are more likely to shoot the wrong person and perhaps that is a concern he doesn't want his officers shooting a 22 year old that just shot the bad guy because he is holding a smoking gun and is so amped up he forget or doesn't know how to respond in that situation. We've seen and heard it before. I have never been in a gun fight and hope I never am but I have played the scenario and verbiage in my head and I can't say I would be at peak performance.

I think he also runs the risk of a student with an "invincibility complex" trying to clear rooms and go after the bad guy. We were all young buck in our 20s and though we could move mountains and stop bullets. At least I did. I would have done something stupid like that. Not now!

I don't agree with his broad statement of officer have constant training with firearms. Maybe in some PDs but not all. No disrespect to LEOs at all just my observation and discussions with some. There are many qualified citizens. We are not obligated to run in to danger.

Gun free zones are shooting galleries so don't get me wrong I am in favor of campus CCW and more of it. I don't want a cop shooting the wrong person and I don't want another campus rampage if a law abiding student or teacher can stop it. So if there are concerns they should work them out.
 
So DaveB, how do they work out those concerns? Reasonable Restrictions? Force people to wear a cape or badge indicating what team they are playing on?

The problem with the heart of your argument is you're apparently willing to trust the authority and seriousness of carrying to law enforcement but you're not willing to trust that same authority and seriousness to your fellow private, free citizens. It's sad.
 
I just posted an article I thought you guys would like.

AppleSeeds let me say it is not my intent to go tit for tat and piss you off (if I have) or anyone else on the forum. You disagreed without any discourse and I thought I should explain my thought for you and others as I did not in my original post. I make no arguments. When it comes to gun ownership and rights I always side with the citizen (non-criminal types).

I tend to look at things from both sides. Perhaps a fault at times. That is why if I were the chief that would be my concern and it would be my problem and not the students. It is legit concerns in my mind. Restricting legal CCW holders would NOT be my choice.

I didn't say the CCW have to work out the concerns nor do I think they should. They are within their rights to CCW on campus and should not be obligated to accommodate the campus police or any other authorities if not required by law, rules, regulations, etc. that would land them in jail.

The heart of my argument (which I am not) is that I think his concern is legit. That is it. Taking a different perspective. Not suggesting restrictions or trust.

But as for trusting authorities, yes and no. Do I trust my private citizens’ yes and no? I have met idiots and outstanding people from both sides.
 
Letting the bad gun continue to shoot innocents until the guys in uniforms arrive to shoot him hardly seems like a reasonable solution to the problem. Maybe if the officers could be trained not to automatically open fire on anybody with a gun until they've determined what's going on, but that would require some real training. But that takes time and money.

Ken
 
DaveB said:
I have to respectfully disagree and allow me to explain. I see more legitimate concern with his officer. As Ken said in the NYPD cops are more likely to shoot the wrong person and perhaps that is a concern he doesn't want his officers shooting a 22 year old that just shot the bad guy because he is holding a smoking gun and is so amped up he forget or doesn't know how to respond in that situation. We've seen and heard it before. I have never been in a gun fight and hope I never am but I have played the scenario and verbiage in my head and I can't say I would be at peak performance.

I think he also runs the risk of a student with an "invincibility complex" trying to clear rooms and go after the bad guy. We were all young buck in our 20s and though we could move mountains and stop bullets. At least I did. I would have done something stupid like that. Not now!

I don't agree with his broad statement of officer have constant training with firearms. Maybe in some PDs but not all. No disrespect to LEOs at all just my observation and discussions with some. There are many qualified citizens. We are not obligated to run in to danger.

Gun free zones are shooting galleries so don't get me wrong I am in favor of campus CCW and more of it. I don't want a cop shooting the wrong person and I don't want another campus rampage if a law abiding student or teacher can stop it. So if there are concerns they should work them out.
Click to expand...

How does CCW instead of Open Carry prevent the student from still having a gun in his had just after shooting the BG?
 
DaveB said:
I have to respectfully disagree and allow me to explain. I see more legitimate concern with his officer. As Ken said in the NYPD cops are more likely to shoot the wrong person and perhaps that is a concern he doesn't want his officers shooting a 22 year old that just shot the bad guy because he is holding a smoking gun and is so amped up he forget or doesn't know how to respond in that situation. We've seen and heard it before. I have never been in a gun fight and hope I never am but I have played the scenario and verbiage in my head and I can't say I would be at peak performance.

I think he also runs the risk of a student with an "invincibility complex" trying to clear rooms and go after the bad guy. We were all young buck in our 20s and though we could move mountains and stop bullets. At least I did. I would have done something stupid like that. Not now!

I don't agree with his broad statement of officer have constant training with firearms. Maybe in some PDs but not all. No disrespect to LEOs at all just my observation and discussions with some. There are many qualified citizens. We are not obligated to run in to danger.

Gun free zones are shooting galleries so don't get me wrong I am in favor of campus CCW and more of it. I don't want a cop shooting the wrong person and I don't want another campus rampage if a law abiding student or teacher can stop it. So if there are concerns they should work them out.
Click to expand...

How does CCW instead of Open Carry prevent the student from still having a gun in his had just after shooting the BG?

Ooops Double post
 
DaveB said:
I just posted an article I thought you guys would like.

AppleSeeds let me say it is not my intent to go tit for tat and piss you off (if I have) or anyone else on the forum. You disagreed without any discourse and I thought I should explain my thought for you and others as I did not in my original post. I make no arguments. When it comes to gun ownership and rights I always side with the citizen (non-criminal types).

I tend to look at things from both sides. Perhaps a fault at times. That is why if I were the chief that would be my concern and it would be my problem and not the students. It is legit concerns in my mind. Restricting legal CCW holders would NOT be my choice.

I didn't say the CCW have to work out the concerns nor do I think they should. They are within their rights to CCW on campus and should not be obligated to accommodate the campus police or any other authorities if not required by law, rules, regulations, etc. that would land them in jail.

The heart of my argument (which I am not) is that I think his concern is legit. That is it. Taking a different perspective. Not suggesting restrictions or trust.

But as for trusting authorities, yes and no. Do I trust my private citizens’ yes and no? I have met idiots and outstanding people from both sides.
Click to expand...

The thing is, once the dust settles, what the school CLEO thinks is irrelevant, it doesn't really matter, as its his concerns vs someone's rights, and rights should win.

What do you think would happen in a typical active shooter incident anyways with the campus PD.... my money is "Secure the perimeter and wait for reinforcements" . This happened at Columbine, and also happened at VT. All the guys with the guns just waited outside until long after the gunfire stopped. Nobody charged into the building to see what was going on. The risk of them shooting a good guy was essentially ZERO.

I can see his concern but frankly why is it any different from the concern a LEO in any other city or town or whatever might have?

The only way to mitigate these concerns is training, or if he wants, he can write a memo or a letter to people carrying guns on campus.... regardless, it's his problem, not anyone else's.

-Mike
 
Sibb, It doesn't. I used CCW as an example. I know they are not interchangeable and both have advantages and disadvantages. I am used to CCW so that's what I used.

If open is the only option I support that. If both are available, you pick. I like concealed.
 
DaveB said:
I just posted an article I thought you guys would like.

AppleSeeds let me say it is not my intent to go tit for tat and piss you off (if I have) or anyone else on the forum. You disagreed without any discourse and I thought I should explain my thought for you and others as I did not in my original post. I make no arguments. When it comes to gun ownership and rights I always side with the citizen (non-criminal types).

I tend to look at things from both sides. Perhaps a fault at times. That is why if I were the chief that would be my concern and it would be my problem and not the students. It is legit concerns in my mind. Restricting legal CCW holders would NOT be my choice.

I didn't say the CCW have to work out the concerns nor do I think they should. They are within their rights to CCW on campus and should not be obligated to accommodate the campus police or any other authorities if not required by law, rules, regulations, etc. that would land them in jail.

The heart of my argument (which I am not) is that I think his concern is legit. That is it. Taking a different perspective. Not suggesting restrictions or trust.

But as for trusting authorities, yes and no. Do I trust my private citizens’ yes and no? I have met idiots and outstanding people from both sides.
Click to expand...

If a nut case bursts through the door and starts firing in my classroom, it is my right to defend myself and others by eliminating the threat. Period.

There is no legitimate reason that anyone has to make me think otherwise.
 
drgrant said:
What do you think would happen in a typical active shooter incident anyways with the campus PD.... my money is "Secure the perimeter and wait for reinforcements" . This happened at Columbine, and also happened at VT. All the guys with the guns just waited outside until long after the gunfire stopped. Nobody charged into the building to see what was going on. The risk of them shooting a good guy was essentially ZERO.
Click to expand...

From what I learned from a LEO instructor in a modern defensive pistol course (through Suarez International), the "wait outside and call for reinforcements" doctrine went out the window after VT. Current police training for active shooters is to stop the threat as soon as possible, recognizing that there is a VERY limited time frame to stop an active shooter.

The advice given was that if you are CCW'ing during an active shooter situation and you have a gun drawn, you may very well be shot by police if you have a gun in your hand. This was not an argument against defending oneself, but it was something to keep in mind if one has to egress from a building with an active shooter.

***This only came from one current LEO, so other LEO's may have a different opinion on current training.***
 
nhams said:
The advice given was that if you are CCW'ing during an active shooter situation and you have a gun drawn, you may very well be shot by police if you have a gun in your hand. This was not an argument against defending oneself, but it was something to keep in mind if one has to egress from a building with an active shooter.

***This only came from one current LEO, so other LEO's may have a different opinion on current training.***
Click to expand...

I'll take my chances
 
cja1987 said:
Thats not a concern AT ALL since neither he nor his dept/officers will get there IN TIME to do anything!!!



Really? Even having lived in Utah for a year, to the best I can gather the LEO types there are no more "shooters" than the LEO types in MA and train about as much. With a few exceptions of course.



Who the hell knows until it happens??? My answer would be "about as good as any of his officers" because, more than likely, we have each faced an active shooter scenario the exact same number of times, ZERO.

We are not talking about a kid being some rambo and actively running around trying to pursue/stop a shooter, we are talking about individuals having the option to save their own lives and those of the people immediately around them.



Kind of a small minded statement!

Because I'm 23 I'm excused from any stupid behavior? I'm automatically "young and dumb" and that explains any actions I take or prescribes the exact actions I will take in some scenario? Firearms owners and especially those that carry need to be at a certain level of maturity whether they are 18 or 40. This "young and dumb" BS is silly talk. What age group fights our wars? College kids are not young, if they act like idiots its because they were raised as such, not because they are young. Before the liberalization of our society, kids had long since "grown up" by the time they were 18.

Back on topic. This is often a point of contention with some but the armed citizen is NOT generally geared to actively go after an attacker. Its one thing if the shooter walks into the room you are in or you get a good opportunity from your position of cover/concealment but its quite another to "play SWAT". Our load outs are DEFENSIVE. The mistaken identity on the part of the PD is a potential problem BUT these types of encounters happen so quickly that its not likely to matter much. As I said in the beginning, odds are the cops are not even there yet, these things happen in seconds. Even if they are there, you are likely in a position of cover; if you get a shot, you kill the guy and the job is done. We are not talking about waving guns around here or holding people at gunpoint or anything like that.

Look at the stats, the time scales on which defensive pistols are used are seconds to 1 or 2 min, start to finish. Compare to police response times. Let me know what comes first.
Click to expand...

Outstandingly argued
 
simply stating that people are safer when civilians carry guns does not make the threat of a confused police officer go away.
law enforcement shooting a ccw-carrier who is responding to an active shooter is a legitimate concern, the question is what do you do to resolve it? do you restrict people's rights, or develop and implement training for law enforcement?
the first would be totally ineffective, but the second would be damn expensive, and require an open-mindedness in techniques tried. i think we can guess at what will be the more popular solution.
 
Jose said:
I'll take my chances
Click to expand...

I would too in certain circumstances. But if you are running out of a building during an active shooter situation with your firearm in hand, don't expect the cops to ask you to drop it before they shoot you. This is just something to keep in mind, not a directive to ignore rational self defense.
 
Batbox said:
simply stating that people are safer when civilians carry guns does not make the threat of a confused police officer go away.
law enforcement shooting a ccw-carrier who is responding to an active shooter is a legitimate concern, the question is what do you do to resolve it? do you restrict people's rights, or develop and implement training for law enforcement?
the first would be totally ineffective, but the second would be damn expensive, and require an open-mindedness in techniques tried. i think we can guess at what will be the more popular solution.
Click to expand...
how frequent does that happen? I think I stand a better chance of getting shot during a no knock warrant than I do by having the police come upon and active shooter scenario where both myself and the gunman are still alive
 
nhams said:
But if you are running out of a building during an active shooter situation with your firearm in hand.
Click to expand...
Why do people keep coming up with the most idiotic of rationalizations on this topic?

If you are running out of a building during an active shooter situation, HOLSTER YOUR GD GUN!!!!!

If you are running around looking for the shooter, KEEP YOUR GD PISTOL CONCEALED UNTIL YOU HAVE A VISUAL ON THE SHOOTER.

Some of you make me laugh.....
 
Jose said:
Why do people keep coming up with the most idiotic of rationalizations on this topic?

If you are running out of a building during an active shooter situation, HOLSTER YOUR GD GUN!!!!!

If you are running around looking for the shooter, KEEP YOUR GD PISTOL CONCEALED UNTIL YOU HAVE A VISUAL ON THE SHOOTER.

Some of you make me laugh.....
Click to expand...

Maybe I misunderstood your reply of "I will take my chances" when I wrote "if you are CCW'ing during an active shooter situation and you have a gun drawn, you may very well be shot by police if you have a gun in your hand". Everything is now clear based on your most recent post.

You make me laugh also!
 
nhams said:
Maybe I misunderstood your reply of "I will take my chances" when I wrote "if you are CCW'ing during an active shooter situation and you have a gun drawn, you may very well be shot by police if you have a gun in your hand". Everything is now clear based on your most recent post.

You make me laugh also!
Click to expand...

Taking chances doesn't mean taking stupid chances.
 
nhams said:
I recall a guest on this board named "Jose" reviewing a Suarez CRG course a while ago, so if it was you I am guessing that you have your act together. Just making sure...
Click to expand...

That was me.

But one does not need to train with anyone to realize some things that should be common sense.

Running out the door with a pistol in hand? Holster it first.

Running around a building with a pistol in hand? Holster it or at least carry it in a very discreet manner.....
 
law enforcement shooting a ccw-carrier who is responding to an active shooter is a legitimate concern,
Click to expand...

The same argument could be made to explain why out of uniform off duty officers should not be allowed to carry. It would be a good start for the chief to order all of his officers to be unarmed whenever off duty and out of uniform so that their safety may be enhanced by removing the chance a police officer will mistake them for a criminal in a shooting situation.
 

Similar threads

  • Locked
Hawaii State Supreme Court Rules No Right to Bear Arms
Replies
2
Views
381
Admin
Admin
NPR Podcast: throughline: The Right To Bear Arms
Replies
9
Views
652
s&w3913
S
Pennsylvania Court Upholds Right of Young People to Carry Guns in Public
Replies
6
Views
208
Coyote33
Coyote33
Fudds gotta fudd. No AR class in Maine.
Replies
6
Views
468
rogersmithiii
R
Bear Creek Arsenal
2
Replies
31
Views
823
greencobra
greencobra
Back
Top Bottom