Deseret News | Packing heat, no apologies

Reader comments
Packing heat, no apologies

378 comments | Read story

OU_Gryphon | 6:06 p.m. Oct. 24, 2007

Oh, come on Chuck Schumer, admit that it's really you posting as Anonymous, come clean, yee-haw, rambo, me too, assault is a dirty word, and all the other ridiculous sock puppets.

SGT Jensen | 6:54 p.m. Oct. 24, 2007

If we are paranoid for carrying firearms, then what about the people who follow the prophet and stock up with food storage? Are they paranoid or trying to bring upon the event that requires them to use it? Maybe you should consider a firearm to add to your two year supply of food. Fresh meat sure hits the spot i a time of crisis. hmmmm.. Maybe I need a two year supply of bullets.

ï¿½The time will come that gold will hold no comparison in value to a bushel of wheat.ï¿½ (President Brigham Young)

ï¿½The time will come that wheat will hold no comparison in value to a bushel of bullets.ï¿½ (Sergeant Kevin Jensen)

former victim | 7:39 p.m. Oct. 24, 2007

I have an ex-husband who has stalked me for 15 years. He promised to kill me, my children and any man I marry. The police have been involved many times. I have a peice of paper that "prevents" him from being anywhere near me. I have taken self-defense classes (and all the therapy the Doc says I need). The advice from the police and all who really know the situation... get a gun!

To those who worry I will shoot you for cutting me off on the freeway... be more worried that my car weighs about 5000#s. I want to thank the person who confirmed how polite the freeway would be, here in Utah, if everyone thought their life depended on it.

I have prevented three gang attacks to my family just because I look like I"m "packing"! I have not had to show my weapon to anyone, but if my life depends on it I WILL do all that I legally can do to protect my family.

Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean everyone's not out to get you.
I have an ex to prove it...
No loger a victim!

Comments continue below

SUPERDELL | 10:01 p.m. Oct. 24, 2007

Attention gun owners: When 3 road ragers attack you and your 8 year old daughter, block you in, then follow you cussing and swearing and pick up a lethal weapon threatening to use it and you, the victim, are arrested for merely having a gun which NONE of the 3 bad guys saw but you get charged with 3 different things you didn't do here is what you will do. Make one call to Governor SUPERDELL!!! Then the Mayor of the city will be arrested, the police Chief, charging officer, city prosecutor that attempts to try the case and the judge that allows it into court will all be arrested and thrown in JAIL. You will of course be pardoned and accomodated for your lost time and wages. It is time for a real AMERICAN to be Governor so there can be at least one place on earth where FREEDOM RINGS. Hat's off to those who take piles of crap from others for obeying the law. Vote SUPERDELL and there WILL be libery and JUSTICE for all. It will not be a crime to obey the law on my watch. Those that don't want rights can move elsewhere.

Dave | 10:03 p.m. Oct. 24, 2007

Great article Deseret news. I would have never guessed such an article would have been published, much less done in such a balanced manner. Kudos!
I carry concealed ever since the law was enacted, and I've never had to draw my weapon (thankfully) but should I need to protect myself or family, YOU BET!
You anti-gunners have no idea how many times your in proximity of a CCP and didn't know it. We certainly DO NOT go out looking for trouble as some of you insinuate. The law-abiding legal gun owner is never the problem. It's the criminals!
If you're not comfortable around guns, stay away from them. If you've never shot, I'd dare you to go to a range and get an instructor and try it out. It it a serious challenge to be proficient and accurate and an extremely enjoyable sport, and then if in the very rare situation you may need to defend yourself, spouse, children or family, you'll be prepared and able to do so.
I myself prefer concealed, but that is my own opinion.
An armed society is a polite and SAFE society!

Mike | 10:18 p.m. Oct. 24, 2007

"Those who think they must carry a gun around with them all the time are part of the paranoid personality disorder group that exists today."

Nope. I'm just an individual looking to survive the criminal onslaught that exists. Until you have experienced it directly, it can be hard to imagine others see things more clearly than assumed.

"Essentially afraid of everyone and every thing."

Disallowing crime does not mean abject fear exists. You're assuming much when you take that leap.

"Instead of getting psychotherapy they find their power in being able to do violence."

Stopping violence committed by others is a refusal to be a victim, plain and simple. It is not, in and of itself, violence. It is refusal to meekly accept the ravages of violence. There IS a difference.

"Psychotherapy" sessions? By what standard does someone judge such a thing, merely by another having chosen the most-effective and -concealable choice of defensive weapon available?

Anonymous | 10:33 p.m. Oct. 24, 2007

"... but even I can see the irony in the line: 'There's so many lunatics and crazies out there, you never know when something's going to happen.'"

"I would postulate that the person constantly suspicious of any random stranger being a 'lunatic' or a 'crazy' would be the person most likely to shoot someone unnecessarily."

I would postulate that one going around life with one's head in a cloud would be the person most likely to be victimized.

Circumspection is a healthy thing. One cannot know for certain whether the next random, unknown person means good or ill. Being armed is nothing more than straightforward, unvarnished acknowledgement of that simple fact.

Jeff | 10:47 p.m. Oct. 24, 2007

Outlaw, I guess you figured it by now but just to be sure, I was questioning anonymous about the supposed posts. I do not own an assault rifle, but I do own a pre-ban match grade AR-15.

Anonymous, why do you feel it necessary to describe NRA members in the terms you do? How many of them do you know? I am not a member myself but do occasionally send them a check. I certainly do not want a bunch of angry NRA members, I would prefer a bunch of happy NRA members! If NRA members are so violent and trigger happy, and guns are so dangerous, why don't we hear about all of the shootings that **must** be happening at the NRA conventions? Surely if they are as dangerous as you describe every convention would be a massacre! But they're not. Why is that? Could it be that you are wrong about them? And why is it we don't hear about all of the gunfights breaking out in the parking lots of gun shows? Surely if guns are so dangerous, and gun owners so unbalanced, they must be happenning. Or could you just be wrong?

Jeff | 11:10 p.m. Oct. 24, 2007

If the Brady bunch sold a T-shirt that said "Unarmed and proud of it" how many people do you think would see walking around wearing them?

J | 7:32 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I'm recently got my concealed carry permit. I had a conversation with a small group of friends and told them I just got my permit. 2 of the 5 in the group indicated they had theirs already and carry all the time. This conversation happened at church. One of them was my bishop.

With the number of Utah CFP's issued, you absolutely encounter people with guns every time you're in public. Who is more paranoid, the 1 person in 25 that legally carries a gun, or the one who thinks 1 in 25 of the population is an imbalanced, raving madman that is likely to shoot them at any moment.

Doug | 7:51 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Good for all of you it is about time we stand up for our rights.

Anonymous | 8:09 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I love my guns. If anyone tries to take them away, good luck.

Until that fateful day, I and hundreds like me are committed to living peacefully among our fellow citizens, despite how uninformed and silly they may be.

God bless America!

Safe residency | 9:26 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Im glad I live in a place where you don't have to be paranoid about locking your door let alone carrying assault rifles.
God bless America!

packingmama | 9:58 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Anonymous (anti guns), I was referring to you the last comment. Also not every gun owner is a NRA Member.

Anonymous | 11:37 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I just wish they'd post signs at State lines indicating what their gun policy is. That way, it gives people the choice, anti-gun or not, whether they want to live, work or visit there.

I never liked John Wayne.

But speaking of the duke, it's ironic that you can't smoke anywhere, but you can carry a gun.

Anonymous | 12:44 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I don't know about everyone else, but I for one can sleep much easier knowing so many assault rifles are out there just waiting to be used.

I just pray the owners haven't been embracing the policy of preemption that is in vogue today.

dennis | 1:18 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

To the proud owners of all these really nifty machine-guns:
What is it you are afraid of?

Jeff | 1:46 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

If you want to see who is paranoid, prejudiced, and stereotyping,take a look at the post by "anonymous" at 4:09p.m. Oct. 24, 2007 and take out "NRA freaks" and substitute any minority group. How does that read now? Pretty sad I think.

Jeff | 1:55 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Dennis,
I don't own a nifty machine gun yet. Why is it you think that people who own them have to be afraid of something? If you ever have a chance fire one. They can be a lot of fun! Don't knock it until you try it!

Gary | 2:17 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Dennis: To the proud owners of all these really nifty machine-guns:
What is it you are afraid of?

What does fear have to do with it? Maybe we just like to shoot as a sport. Fear has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Anonymous | 3:11 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

To our friends the machine-gun owners.
Ever thought about a quite evening at home?

Anonymous | 4:23 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

To those who live in such mortal fear that they must carry weaponry around with them all day, I'll borrow a well-known saying from the good people of Utah: "If you don't like it here - why don't you just move away?"

kodiak5bears | 5:04 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I see the ant-2nd Amendment types have yet to answer a simple question. I wonder why? To those that think dialing 911 to come and rescue you, I ask, what would you do when a 150lb 4-LEGGED animal attacks you or your significant other? Because in this situation I bet they would want a firearm to defend themselves! You see what changing the "bad guy" to an animal would make it ok??? You see those that LEGALLY CARRY a firearm ARE NOT CRIMINALS! What a concept!

SGT Jensen | 5:34 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

"If you don't like it here - why don't you just move away?"

I love Utah! Why would I move away to a potentially liberal state that doesn't like law abiding citizens that open carry? I prefer to live in a state that still recognizes that we have the right to carry if we want to or not. If you prefer to live in a place where your law abiding neighbors are disarmed, move to Washington D.C.

Jeff | 6:04 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Anonymous,
I imagine anyone that is in such mortal fear that they *must* carry weapons would move if they could. I also imagine that everyone else who simply *chooses* to carry a weapon are probably quite happy where they are. And I guess anyone who is so deathly afraid of being around people that are armed could just move to New York City, Washington D.C. or Chicago. They have very strict weapons laws there, I am sure they would feel a lot safer in any of those cities.

move away... | 8:22 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I like it here just fine, thank you. I don't believe you can move away from all danger. Do you?

I don't have a machine gun, nor would I want one.

What do you say to those who really need to protect themselves and their families from real danger? It is good to see that many here are safe, but what about the ones who are not? Have you not read the newspapers about the violent crimes with innocent victims? If my life is being threatened by a criminal with a gun, do I not have the right to use equal force to defend myself and my family?

I think we are safer here because of the many armed individuals. Criminals are lazy and would prefer easy targets not armed citizens.

glock27mark | 9:18 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

better to have it and not need it that to need it and not haveit.

Chris | 5:24 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

"Twice as many children are killed playing football in school than are murdered by guns. That's right. Despite what media coverage might seem to indicate, there are more deaths related to high school football than guns. In the last three years, twice as many football players died from hits to the head, heat stroke, etc. as compared with students who were murdered by firearms during that same time period." Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law,
"More children will die in a car, drown in a pool, or choke on food than they will by firearms. Children are at a 2,000 percent greater risk from the car in their driveway, than they are by the gun in their parents' closet. Children are almost 7 times more likely to drown than to be shot, and they are 130 percent more likely to die from choking on their dinner." from National Safety Council, Injury Facts

Chris | 5:27 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

As many as 561 times a day, women use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault. "about 205,000 women use guns every year to protect themselves against sexual abuse."
Guns are used 2. 5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2. 5 million times every year or about 6,850 times a day. The overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off the attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker. Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law,
Armed citizens kill more crooks than do the police. Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606)25. And readers of Newsweek learned that "only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The error rate' for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high." George F. Will, "Are We a Nation of Cowards'?," Newsweek

Chris | 5:29 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

We are human beings like you. I work every day to save lives fighting cancer. My life is devoted to saving lives. I have a deep abiding love for God my Country My family and You my fellow citizens. At gun clubs or ranges you will meet people like yourself intelligent polite carrying compassionate who understand the grave reasonability we have taken on to assure our own safety and that of our fellow citizens. If you are concerned please come down to your local range and meet us. You won't find a nicer group of people. Who knows you may run into your pastor. For those of you that condem and judge us, God forbid the day ever comes that you or a loved one are in harms way. But if that day comes I pray one of us that you judge so harshly are there to protect you. It happens. It happens 2.5 million times a year

Anonymous | 5:44 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

I hear a bunch of gunslingin', trigger-happy Rambo wannabes who have been reading way too many Jack Clancy novels and Soldier of Fortune magazines.
Wake up ... it's time for 5th Grade.

Ahhhhh! | 7:58 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

To Mr. move away:
Actually I moved from SLC to a small mountain town in the High Sierras of oh-so wonderfully liberal California. I couldn't stand the red-necked attitude of Utah anymore.
There is an ordinance that criminalizes the firing of a gun not to mention bans on hunting. We have Mexican people here too and nobody worries about locking their cars or homes. Everyone gets along.
Red-necked attitudes are frowned upon and there is a sense of community that I haven't felt in years.
Heaven! Absolute Heaven!

utoc-45-44 | 8:15 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

Anonymous...

It's Fair to say that We Agree to Disagree, and that's what I Love about This Country.

We have OUR RIGHTS.

You want to be able under to Constitution to Exercise YOUR 1st Amendment Right, YOUR Freedom of Expression, but YOU tell me that I don't have the RIGHT to Exercise the 2nd Amendment Right to Protect.

The 2nd was used in the Civil War to Protect the 1st....

Study the Civil War and THEN we can talk.

It'sad to say...I am MORE American than You Anonymous and I am not even a Citizen yet. I have my Citizen Appointment Dec 11 and I CANNOT wait til "I Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands,one Nation under God, ndivisible, ith Liberty and Justice for all".

utoc-45-44 | 8:35 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

The American Creed

I believe in the United States of America as a Government of the People, by the People, for the People; whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; A democracy in a republic, a sovereign Nation of many Sovereign States; a perfect Union, one and inseparable; established upon those principles of Freedom, Equality, Justice, and Humanity for which American Patriots sacrificed their Lives and Fortunes.
I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to Love it; to Support its Constitution; to obey its laws; to Respect its Flag; and to defend it against all enemies.

utoc-45-44 | 8:43 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

"The Bill of Rights 1689 is largely a statement of certain positive* rights that its authors considered that citizens and/or residents of a constitutional monarchy ought to have. It asserts the Subject's right to petition the Monarch and the Subject's right to bear arms for defence."
"Within the philosophy of human rights, some philosophers and political scientists make a distinction between negative and positive* rights."
"if 'A' has a negative right against 'B' then 'B' must refrain from acting in a way that would prevent 'A' from doing 'x'. If 'A' has a positive right against 'B', then 'B' must assist 'A' to do 'x' if 'A' is not able to do 'x' without that assistance. For example, a negative right to life would require others to refrain from killing a person. A positive right to life would require others act to save the life of someone who would otherwise die."
"Negative rights may be used to justify political rights such as freedom of speech..."

Anonymous | 9:14 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

You've got to find a hobby, utoc-45-44.

Scathing remarks! | 9:21 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

To anonymous at 5:44 a.m.
Do your parents know you are up that early using the computer?
If you are an adult and still in the 5th grade then I am grateful you do NOT use a gun!
Most of the gun owners I know, are well trained and educated. We are NOT gun slinging red-necks like many unqualified and uneducated bigots seem to indicate. Just because someone uses their constitutional right to be armed, doesnï¿½t mean they are uneducated. It states that they are educated. I am certain that individualsï¿½ abilities and levels of responsibilities concerning the use and care of their guns vary. Law abiding citizens have the right to be armed.
Some of us also use our right to free speech... that ability also varies. Some of us are better able to convey concepts and attest to arguments more eloquently than some "unarmed" others.

Dave | 9:52 a.m. Oct. 26, 2007

I think it's you, Anonymous, who needs to find their own hobby and stop criticizing others for exercising their Constitutional and God-given rights. We don't criticize you for exercising your right to free speech, why don't you allow us the same courtesy?

dennis | 12:01 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

It seems to me, one of those God-given rights is expressing how certain types that obsess about guns, the right to own them, the right to shoot them, and the right to shoot other people ... make me a tad nervous.

dennis | 12:10 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

Ahem, it seems to me you are most certainly criticizing (anonymous') criticism, Dave.
Unless I've missed something.

Jeff | 12:14 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

Anonymous,
In reference to your post of 9:14 a.m.
Wonderful answer! Again you dazzle us with your blinding intellect. We are in awe!

thomas | 12:41 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

Pardon me Jeff, but I think you are doing the same dazzling and blinding thing.
And who is this "we" you are referring to?

KO | 12:52 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

Just more evidence that Utah is made up of "a peculiar people." (direct quote from Gordon B. Hinckley)

Dimensio | 1:03 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

"It seems to me, one of those God-given rights is expressing how certain types that obsess about guns, the right to own them, the right to shoot them, and the right to shoot other people"

One of these things is not like the others...

Michael | 1:14 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

As Thomas Jefferson said "In all your travels let your gun be your constant companion." I am happy to see these folks enjoying their 2nd Ammendment rights. Often those that are foolishly anti-gun change their tune after becoming a victim of a crime finding out that dialing 911 does not work as well as advertised. Those open carry folks make me proud to be an American.

Guns R Us | 2:30 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

The NRA has declined in power over the last decade, and its once-potent lobbyists have come out on the losing end of key legislative battles like the Brady Bill, causing many members to bring their lifelong subconscious fears to the fore.

"If the gun-control lobby wants my rod, they'll have to yank it from my dead body," said Pocatello-area bar-owner Joseph Greer, cradling a tell-tale snub-nosed revolver.

Little boy part II | 2:43 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

"Timothy is a shining example to gun-owning families everywhere," Cummings' mother Suzanne told reporters. "I am proud that my boy has followed in the footsteps of the many thousands of patriotic children who have already demonstrated their commitment of the U.S. Constitution in this same way."

JVB | 2:44 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

Has anyone else noticed how many of the anti-gun posters are angry, dismissive, sarcastic and just downright rude? The pro posters for the most part are straightforward, reasonably tolerant of dissent and polite. I wonder why there is such a clear disparity? Think about the possible reasons for this.

utoc-45-44 | 2:48 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

The Massachusetts court in Ford v. Town of Grafion held the city was not liable. The court order that was supposed to restrain James and protect Catherine did not amount to an ï¿½assurance of safety or assistanceï¿½ from the police department. According to the court, when the police advised Catherine ï¿½to get a gun for protection,ï¿½ that was a warning to her that the police were unable to assure her safety or protect her. Because she got no assurances of safety from the police, she had no legal right to rely on the police to protect her. Case dismissed.

Confused? | 3:09 p.m. Oct. 26, 2007

On the one hand, Thomas Jefferson wrote that slavery was a "great political and moral evil"
On the other hand, Jefferson personally owned hundreds of slaves, some of whom he sold to pay off debts. Perhaps this "Founding Father" was just as confused about being an American as some of these pro-machine gun posters.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.