Salt Lake police chief meets with Obama to talk gun control


Return To Article
  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 2, 2013 10:13 a.m.

    Good point. Good guys can become bad guys by pulling a trigger. Then if highcapacity magazine, they can take our many people in less than a minute as they have been doing.

  • Jonathan Eddy Payson, UT
    Jan. 31, 2013 9:23 p.m.

    Salt Lake City's police chief says he wants to find a way to have "reasonable, responsible gun ownership."

    I have found the way. It's called law abiding citizens. Law abiding citizens are just as reasonable and responsible as Salt Lake City police officers.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Jan. 30, 2013 12:05 p.m.

    Living up to your name, aren’t you? The first two comments did NOT say BO was calling for taking away all guns.

    Everyone who does not think like you is paranoid and in need of mental health care. Ah, the intolerance of the left rears its ugly head.

  • Turtles Run Missouri City, TX
    Jan. 30, 2013 12:00 p.m.

    "Everyone should be able to own any and all firearms they want. Swift and sure and sever punishment for misuse and criminal activity with them should be the norm."

    There are limits to all our rights. The SCOTUS has ruled many that gun control laws are constitutional. Universal background checks and a 10 round limit to ammo magazines do not infringe on your right to bear arms and helps to stop mass shootings.

    Most of use rather live in a society that is proactive in finding solutions instead of having to react to emergencies.

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Jan. 30, 2013 11:25 a.m.

    Just being a police chief does not make you correct. Many of the police I know would love to infringe on the freedoms of citizens because they think it would make their jobs easier. Constitutional rights are not the concern of many police, frankly they view the constitution as an impedement in a lot of cases.

    And of course there is no "middle ground" on this subject chief. I'd certainly like to know what it is that you thinks constitutes the "middle"? My guess is that you consider the "middle" to be pushing a gun ban as far as you can possibly push it without a complete and total repeal of the 2nd amendment, although you'd still prefer the end of the 2nd amendment.

    It would be nice if you'd be honest about what you really want but you won't be. If you were people would push back harder and that would make yours, and obama's, incremental approach to a gun ban harder to start implementing.

  • Star Bright Salt Lake City, Ut
    Jan. 30, 2013 10:34 a.m.

    Burbank is a product of a left wing mayor and this is what we get in SLC. As Sherrif Clarke, mentioned above said, "when the intruder is at your door 911 is of no use!" "Defend yourself and call 911."
    BTW, the killer at Fort (?) is claiming his rights have been violated because he was told to shave his beard. Didn't have one before he murdered all our soldiers, but now he wants a beard.
    Trolly Square shooter was a muslim from bosnia - so was that a terrorist attack. Think so!

  • Dektol Powell, OH
    Jan. 30, 2013 9:56 a.m.

    Everyone should be able to own any and all firearms they want. Swift and sure and sever punishment for misuse and criminal activity with them should be the norm.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Jan. 30, 2013 8:51 a.m.

    Reasonable solutions, why not? We’ve already compromised away many of our constitutional rights.

    The unrestricted right to abortion (a warped concoction by the Warren court) trumps the rights of religious employers according to Obamacare.

    The dems are always pushing the “fairness doctrine” so they can control talk radio the same way they do most other media outlets despite the free press guarantees.

    TSA’s stripper visions violate our 4 amendment rights to protection from unreasonable searches and the 14th amendment’s equal protection clause because not everyone is subjected to stripper visions.

    Affirmative action also trumps the equal protection requirements of the 14th amendment.

    Dems forced a civil war to protect slavery, thus eviscerating the 10th amendment.

    So why not compromise away second amendment rights?

    What’s next?

    Reduce our military spending by compromising the third amendment and housing soldiers in nearby private homes.

    Make the 5th amendment rights applicable only to misdemeanors since we clearly need protection from felons.

    No more trial by jury, think how much we’ll save – so what for the 7th?

    The 13th? Shall we compromise there, too?

  • justamacguy Manti, UT
    Jan. 30, 2013 8:13 a.m.

    Not all mass killers result in suicide. I have heard not talk about the penalty for committing mass shootings or for that matter about using any weapon, and I do mean any tool, not just firearms, to commit an assault. I don't care how full the prisons are a mandatory 15 years with now allowable parole would be a good start. Get violators off our streets. Make the names of all aggravated crimes public. I find it apprehensible that some poor teenager who get caught making out in the back seat of a car with a younger teen gets the rest of their life ruined by being published as a sex offender, yet a person who commits an aggravated assault can move in next door to me and their records are protected from any citizens knowledge. Before we start removing firearms from our streets, lets try removing criminals. Permanently!

  • JJL Eugene, OR
    Jan. 30, 2013 12:32 a.m.

    Any discussion with the President about gun control must begin and end with a discussion of the US Constitution, particularily the 2nd, 9th, 10th and 14th Amendments. Perhaps the SLC Police Chief and the President should brush up on their Consitution (and English and Colonial common law history).

    They can start by reading "Gun Control and the Constitution: Sources and Explorations on the Second Amendment" edited by Robert Cottrol.

    The plain langauge (text) of the 2nd Amendment is unambiguous when put in historical context:

    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

    "Regulated" means "trained".

    "Militia" means male citizens between 16 and 60 years of age charged with a duty to provide for the common defence (as opposed to a standing army or the National Guard.

    "People" in the context of the Bill of Rights meant individuals not states. When the Bill of Rights spoke of individual rights it refers to "the people". When it spoke of the states it said so.

    The right to keep and bear arms is personal; it is not a collective right.

  • Ett Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 11:10 p.m.

    Chief Burbank is just another political shill. Have traffic violations gone down in Salt Lake City? All robbery is illegal, yet we've seen a rash of bank and credit union robberies. What's been done about it? One arrest. Yet, Chief Burbank has something to say in support of the President from his preferred political party. Imagine that... The police are not here for deterrence. They handle enforcement, not protection. Last year. An armed citizen stopped a man with a knife outside the downtown Smith's, who had attacked two people. In my home town, a bar fight that had spilled onto the streets found a lone Police Officer surrounded by an angry mob, without backup coming anytime soon. Three of my fellow Corrections Officers had just returned from a day of target shooting noticed the disturbance. They retrieved their shotguns from the trunk of the car and approached the officer's location. When in place, chambered rounds in their shotguns, while one of them shouted, "Do you need help Officer?" The crowd noticed the Officers behind them and they left without incident. The proposed laws hinder law-abiding people, period.

  • county mom Monroe, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 9:47 p.m.

    I was saying we do not want to have people that have not committed a crime arrested, ever.
    Not for the clothes they wear or their weird looks.
    The National Guard walk around dressed like soldiers. They are, we don't have them arrested.
    A bunch of teenagers walk into Walmart dressed like soldiers going to play paintball in the hills.
    Blackpowder hunters walk into Subway Sandwich to get lunch, they are in cammo, duckhunters, bowhunters, etc....
    They may even have a gun on them!!!
    People please think what you are saying. We NEVER EVER want to arrest or even harrass people who have not committed a crime just because they are wearing cammo!
    By the way, the last 4 mass shooters were wearing all black.
    Should we arresst every person wearing black? That is suspicious?

  • the old switcharoo mesa, AZ
    Jan. 29, 2013 9:10 p.m.

    January 16th .. The National Parent Teachers Organization said today it was pleased with many of President Obama’s new proposals to improve school security but that his call for more armed guards at schools “comes as a disappointment.”

    Obama spelled out a series of steps to help make schools safer for students, including hiring as many as 1,000 more school resource officers and counselors.

    It was Biden that said he thought it would be a mistake. But you will hear what you want.

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 8:11 p.m.

    The way to look at all the politicians who are currently in office is to consider them to be gangsters. It's not hard to do.... You know, like the song 'imagine, it's easy if you try.
    For instance, Al Capone in Chicago's gangster era.
    Would you want Al Capone and his gang to be the only one's allowed to have firearms? Remember the tommyguns?
    No, you would not. You would feel like you were at the mercy of the merciless.
    Therefore you do not want politicians in office to be the only one's who are allowed by law to defend themselves with firearms.

  • MapleDon Springville, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 6:35 p.m.

    Shock me! Burbank is about as tough as a cotton ball on teflon.

  • fangflyer LAKE WALES, FL
    Jan. 29, 2013 6:31 p.m.

    When the Sheriff of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, David Clarke, does a Public Service Announcement and asks the people of his county to "get in the game" and learn to protect themselves by taking a firearms safety training course, he is telling people the truth.

    The police can't protect you from a violent criminal; you, as a citizen need to protect yourself and family until the police arrive; that is the total truth and I salute him for his courage and honesty.

    I live in Florida, and every citizen is encouraged by the County Sheriff's to be capable of protecting themselves. An armed, responsible citizenry is the best deterrent to crime of any type.

  • Kodebri Clearfield, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 4:56 p.m.

    Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank is notorius for being an Obama yes man. He proved that with his stance on immigration reform, and his involvment with the Utah Compact. He says that police can't do anything till someone is shot and dead, but that is false. Police can stop suspicious people, and question them. He has also said in this article that nobody is coming to take away guns, but that they are just talking about future access to certain firearms which is still an infringement, and a violation of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. Just like with immigration, Barack Obama, and Chris Burbank have it all wrong. They are both confused with the differences between everyone's best interest, and individual rights. Just like Chief Burbank is confused about the difference between "probable cause", and "reasonable suspicion". Limited access to firearms is just the beginning of the path to confiscation. Imposing personal beliefs, and opinions over the U.S. Constitution and on to the people is not the change that people, or this nation needs, or wants.

  • MajMarine Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 4:38 p.m.

    county mom:
    "It is not the man walking around dressed like a soldier with a gun that is the threat."

    Yes, it may very well be. If he is indeed a soldier, and is off-post walking around carrying a gun, then the likelihood of his being at least of some concern is genuine. If he is not a soldier and is dressed that way carrying a gun, then he, too, is of concern. Dressed like a soldier in public and carrying a gun (or two) is a pattern of behavior that calls into question 'why?'. Dressed and armed like that is not being "a little different".

    Look--no one is saying he can't do it. But I, for one, want to know his intentions. I am a strong 2A advocate and supporter, but I am not going to turn a blind eye to everyone around me that is carrying a gun.

    Am I paranoid? Don't think so. But, just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that aren't really after you. :)

  • funny_guy Vacaville, CA
    Jan. 29, 2013 4:18 p.m.

    Obama and anti-gun advocates should insist that existing gun laws are enforced instead of coming up with new laws intended to restrict "law-abiding" citizens. Don't believe a word that comes out of Obama's mouth. His real aim is to institute a National Database so he can compensate guns.

  • county mom Monroe, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 4:12 p.m.

    Actually, NO ONE should ever be arrested for wearing a certain kind of clothing,(unless they are nude) nore should they be arrested for NOT breaking the law!!!

    Are you people actually reading what you are writing? Irony Guy?

    Are you willing to give up the right to dress as you wish?

    People are so willing to give up their rights when they preceive someone else is a little different.
    It is not the man walking around dressed like a soldier with a gun that is the threat.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 4:01 p.m.

    If Chief Burbank would do his job and enforce immigration laws, he would have saved a number of lives in Utah alone.

    Burbank is like most big city police chiefs- politicians first and elitists who distrust "We The People."

    I think that Utah's Sheriffs are much closer to being right, and they have spoken out firmly AGAINST Obama's schemes.

    None of the various gun control schemes Burbank and his pals are pushing have ever worked. Let's focus on controlling crazy people instead of disarming law abiding citizens.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 3:52 p.m.

    @old switcheroo,

    barack doesn't support having armed guards or teachers in schools.


    And yes, it hurts liberals

  • MajMarine Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 3:50 p.m.

    "That person was carrying a firearm legally, there was nothing our police officers could have done until he shoots and kills his first victim."

    How did you know he was carrying legally? And you mean to say you've never approached an open carry person and engaged in conversation with them? From what I hear, police do it fairly regularly.

    If there is 'nothing you could have done' when you saw an individual in full body armor carrying a .223, 2 pistols, and 1,000 rounds of ammunition, then we've got a serious training problem with the SLC police dept. Because, really, people walk around like that all day.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Jan. 29, 2013 3:43 p.m.


    It is legal in UT to openly carry (unloaded)firearms except:

    Any secure area in which firearms are prohibited and notice of the prohibition is posted
    A secure area of an airport
    Any courthouse, churches if posted, mental health facility or correctional facility that may provide by rule that no firearm may be transported, sold, given, or possessed upon the facility. At least one notice shall be prominently displayed at each entrance to a secure area in which a dangerous weapon, firearm, or explosive is restricted.

    Concealed carry requires a permit.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 3:18 p.m.

    Reasonable rules will be enacted. Don't jump on the the barricades yet, guns over everything advocates.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Jan. 29, 2013 3:15 p.m.

    In Utah, what's a policeman to do when confronted by a person in full military kit and carrying an arsenal? The guy is "within his rights" so an officer can do nothing until the guy kills somebody. That's absurd. We need to make that kind of behavior ILLEGAL so the police can draw down on and arrest this guy and protect the public.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 3:11 p.m.

    My last should read. "Killers will find a way. Whether they use a weapon or overdose on pills to abort a baby."

    The other interesting thing with our current regime. They have no qualms with Colorado and Washington legalizing pot. They have no problem that children will have legal access to this substance. Children where it is proven to have a higher effect to their brains and causes more issues in their development.

    So, it's okay to ruin childrens minds. And since we're going to allow more kids to become nutcakes, then the smart thing to do is to make sure they can only get assault rifles with ten round clips in them?

    Why is no one in the media questioning this regime?

  • the old switcharoo mesa, AZ
    Jan. 29, 2013 2:59 p.m.

    When did Obama call for a ban on all guns? He didn't. So the first two comments here aren't based in reality.

    Open the ears.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 2:55 p.m.

    I can think of recent police shootings in Taylorsville and in Salt Lake City. The one at Taylorsville the guy had a knife and was shot by police. The other one in SLC around 900 East the woman had a BB gun and was shot by police.

    I haven't heard of too many cases where an assault rifle has been used. Recent bank robberies a note was used, even the trolley square shooting he had a shotgun and maybe some handguns.

    Anyone else recall what the trolley shooter had?

    The point is, disarming honest law abiding citizens and stripping them of their rights is not going to stop this madness. Right now clubs and knives are the top murder weapon. If you could save just one life as Biden preached to us then it's worth it. Then why not go after clubs and knives?

    Jumping over to abortions, if you could just save one of those innocent unborn defenseless babies, then it would be worth it. Right? Make abortions illegal. The proponents preach back that women will find another way that's harmful to them.

    Same with killers. They'll find a way to do it.

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 2:51 p.m.

    Hey Burbank, everyone that I know that has guns practices "reasonable, responsible gun ownership." So your audience with the Pres didn't do anything for you or us.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 2:46 p.m.

    Chief Burbank is a good choice for Obama's planning on gun control.
    When it comes to Occupiers or illegal aliens Burbank can ignore existing law in the interest of political expediency.
    So when it comes to our right to bear arms he'd be able to suspend the law as a means to an end.

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 2:37 p.m.

    Did Burbank mention to the President that the Trolley Square mass shooter was stopped by an armed carry citizen?.. ?

    And did he say that if all the victims had been armed like the one who finally stopped the shooter, that there would may have been only one victim considering that the next potential 'victim' would be shooting back and not just 'hiding'?...?

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2013 2:27 p.m.

    If barack doesnt think kids need protection by a responsible gun owner at schools, why doesn't he be the first to show that, asking the secret service to not carry weapons as they protect his girls.

    Or does barack really think only his kids are potential targets.

    What if a parent of a Sandy Hook child had felt months ago the school needed an armed guard at the school? Are we to assume barack would have told that parent their kid was not a target?