Comments about ‘Utah Legislature: Bill encourages business to allow guns on their premises’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Feb. 26 2010 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Well done!

Responsibility should be on the gun owner, not the business. This is an excellent bill.

Anonymous

I guess I didn't realize that the business were held responsible. From what I just read, I am ok with this change. It should be the gun owners responsibility, as they are the ones who have paid for the permits and stuff.

jigidy

I am really starting to like our state legislature lately. I have lost total confidence in the Federal Government, but the State legislature has been doing things lately to show they care about freedom.

Confused

So the folks who are against government interference are telling business owners what they can and can't allow on their own private property?

Reason

Good bill.

Reason

This is a good bill, and I encourage the legislature to vote for it.

To Confused

From what I understand, the business would still have the option of not allowing legally owned firearms. However, they would be responsible for their patrons' safety if they were injured or killed by a criminal while in the business. By denying their customers the right to self defense, they SHOULD be held responsible. Good Law!

Stu Strickler

Good bill. Concealed carry permit holders should be allowed to have have a firearm in their car anywhere they are allowed to be. *Gun Free Zones* are killing zones!

Stu Strickler

A business that posts signs should be responsible for someone that kills or injures someone that is denied their right to self protection. This law could reduce crime.

Just A Voice

GREAT BILL! This finally places responsibility for safety where it should be: If a business owner does not support a patron's right to self-defense, then they have a responsibility to provide that safety.

Private Property

Confused: A corporation has private property PRIVILEGE given to them by the government. A citizen has the RIGHT to self defense that is not granted by the government, but is protected by the government. Therefore, the government telling a government creation that it must honor a right of the government's creator is not and cannot be considered interference.

Anonymous

Let's see if a week can go by in Utah without a trained Utah gun owner discharging his gun in a public venue.

drmoses

Utah is proving to be a very progressive place. I wish IL(only State with no defensive carry provisions)would enact CCW or open carry. The crooked Poli-Tic-ians can, why can't we?

marine

to anonymous;Let's see if a week can go by where an un-trained,un-licensed criminal gun owner doesn't assault an unarmed citezen via armed robbery ,murder,rape,etc.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments