>Obama said it best: what makes sense in the country >may not make sense in the city.

Obama supports widespread handgun bans, such as in Chicago and DC. I'm a libertarian and find bits and pieces that I like in all candidates, but Obama is not what I'm looking for when it comes to gun rights.

The article implied that the UT permit program is profitable and the funds allowed them to *reduce* processing times. I'm not sure why they'd want to 'fix' that.

UT could reduce the number of applications by raising their prices if that's really what they want to do. The money would just go to FL in that case.

Virginia Tech shootings, the D.C. Sniper, 17 gas stations held up a few weeks ago, witness two bank robberies...

I live in Virginia, down the street from the NRA HQ. It's a sick world we live in. We need protection, we need to be armed. All the aforementioned happened within just miles of my residence.

The Anti's will just never get it.

Remember something. You have to follow the laws of whatever state you are visiting. Doesn't matter which state issued your carry permit. If Utah says you can carry on a college campus, but Washington says you cannot, then when in Washington, you cannot carry on campus. Simple.

I live in Illinois and travel frequently into St. Louis, MO. Crime is very high in St. Louis, car jackings, armed robberies, etc. I want to protect myself when in MO. Illinois does not have a conceal carry permit, so I took the 8 hour UT course by a UT licensed instructor in IL. It was a very serious course.

It's a right to be armed should I desire to be. People with these permits are the most law abiding people in the country. When I attend gun shows you see and meet the most polite, pleasant people. These people understand respecting others and demostrate it in their lives.

These type of people respect your rights and as long as you obey the laws of the land, you are free to do as you choose.

Many objects cause deaths, but I would not suggest that we outlaw baseball bats because many women beat their husbands to death with them. Far more people are killed by drunk drivers each year, but to outlaws cars is not the answer either.

It's the judges and the courts that allow people with multiple convictions back on the streets which drives up violent crimes.

Florida has been issuing non-resident licenses longer than Utah has been shall issue. They charge more for their non-resident license; $107 for renewals. What will end up happening if Utah stops issuing non-resident CFPs is that Florida will be getting that revenue. So the question is, do you want your program to get better and more efficient by the additional revenue that can be generated from non-resident UT CFPs or do you want Florida to get that revenue? You have non-resident hunting licenses and non-resident tuition. There is no reason why UT can't continue issuing non-resident CFPs. If issuing UT CFPs is such a burden, then increase the cost for non-residents which is what several States that issue non-resident CCWs do.

If a Utahn holder of a Utah concealed carry weapons permit drives drunk or breaks the nose of his significant other, Utah presumably will pull his permit double quick. If a NY, CA or AK holder of a Utah permit does the same at home, it's unlikely Utah authorities will ever learn about it. The out of state holder of the Utah permit thus has privilege his Utah counterpart does not, and protections built into the Utah law, i.e., revocation of permit for antisocial activity, do not apply. Giving a permit to a non-Utah resident from another state is a bad idea. Colorado has already closed this loophole.

What CO has done is no longer honor non-resident CCWs; an non-resident has to reside in the issuing jurisdiction of their recognized CCW. UT DPS along with all other States need to verify the legal status of a license or permit holder. Once a conviction shows up for DUI, it is visible nationally. If a person is convicted of any act of violence against a significant, they are federally prohibited from owning or touching firearms because of the Lautenberg Amendment to the Gun Control Act of 1968 or 18 USC � 922(g)(9); such persons will fail an FBI NICS check. In fact, if a law enforcement officer is convicted of domestic violence they are suppose to be terminated from their employment as their job requires them to use firearms. Same for military. A domestic violence conviction will get a member of the military at the very least a general discharge under less than honor able conditions or more likely a dishonorable discharge. I suggest you do your due diligence on the subject, NU. Again, FL has been issuing non-resident licenses longer than UT has been shall issue. It's not an issue in the Sunshine State.

I hope that any person of any background or pursuasion (political, religious, etc.) would exercise thier rights in responsibility and not ignorance. Far too many commnets here have clearly not been educated in the matters they address. It is up to each citizen to see to their own educatio nand safety. Review of all elements relating hereto are beneficial, both morally and historically. I pray to never need to draw my weapon in defense; but, I will act with confidence and without hesitattion if I must.

Our background is checked periodically, when and how often is not known. It could be daily, weekly, monthly, etc.

you talk about guns killing people, Guns don't kill people, people kill people. i can lay my gun on the table and tell it to go kill someone is my gun going to get up and go kill someone?"NO" not only that it is our right to have them i don't care what Obama has to say about it, it is our right by law to have them you don't like it the only thing i can tell you is to leave the USA. look at the country that has band guns look what happens you think it's bad now let take the gun away from the people and see what happen then you will have a reason to BITCH