A man comes onto a bus with a gun. Now what?

Lawmaker says just carrying a gun shouldn't be a threat

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Nebsy Ephraim, UT
    Feb. 22, 2013 11:36 a.m.

    Snake. You are wrong. Nothing in the Constitution gives you the right to know anything about that individual. Nor is feeling safe a constitutional right.
    Saying, "I have the right!" Believing, "I have the right!" is great... it's cool. it's awesome. But it does not mean that constitutionally the right exists!
    Free Speech, Press, Assembly, Keep & BEAR Arms, Protection from; quartering, search & seizure, cruel & unusual punishment, due process, trial by jury....
    You DO NOT have a right to know. You DO NOT have a right to 'feel safe'.
    Your country, constitution, citizenship, taxes...none of these provides for a RIGHT to know anything about me or any other individual. Nor does it provide you a RIGHT to clean air or a feeling of safety. If you want to feel safe..... provide for your own safety. Do what is necessary to protect yourself.

  • Nebsy Ephraim, UT
    Feb. 22, 2013 10:56 a.m.

    I'd like to see the discussion address the dichotomy that exists across this nation. Prime example: If I see a couple of teenagers walking down the street in my home town, carrying semi-automatic rifles, I assume they are going hunting or target shooting. I'll probably tell them good luck and to be careful.
    On the other hand, if I am in East L.A. Bostom, Miami, Fairfax.... and I see a couple of teenagers walking down the street.... I have a much different perception of their intentions. Both perceptions are probably accurate.
    It is unfortunate that many who comment have no background to understand the former perspective.

    JOE LIBERTARIAN: I find your language offensive. The fact that you so easily apply 'EVIL' and 'THREATENING' to the conversation.... WHY?
    Those terms are YOUR reaction. I am not EVIL if I carry a gun. Nor am I THREATENING.
    In fact... I'd have to use different language to describe the man who chooses to implement his constitutional rights... How about: 'COURAGEOUS' 'PROUD' 'BRAVE'

  • SLC gal Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 21, 2013 7:41 a.m.

    You go ahead and be scared of the rational individual that has a gun. I'm far more scared of the drunk guy in the row behind him muttering every loud and unintelligible musing that he can think of.

  • Snake Eagle Mountain, UT
    Feb. 20, 2013 3:56 p.m.

    Many of these comments remind me of a similar argument about smoking in public places or on public transportation. People use to say that if you get on a bus or enter a building or area where someone is smoking then get off the bus and wait for the next bus right? Wrong. I have just as much right to breath clean air as the next person. Same thing here. I have just as much right to not know that individual is carrying a gun as he does to carry the gun. It is my right to feel safe. A stranger with a gun on a bus does not make me feel safe in any circumstance. Keep your toys at home locked up where they belong.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Feb. 20, 2013 7:11 a.m.

    re Cernan68
    New York, NY


    A gun like a baseball bat also has a sporting purpose, hunting and target shooting. A gun also has a use of self defense and defense of others.

    Even if this weren't true, it shouldn't matter. Having a gun is protected under our constitution, having a baseball bat isn't.

  • Say What? Bountiful, UT
    Feb. 20, 2013 6:47 a.m.

    I am for the 2nd Ammendment, but people shouldn't be allowed to have guns.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Feb. 20, 2013 6:42 a.m.

    What is scary is that no good people are on the bus with a gun. This means a bad guy with a knife or a baseball bat or even a gun can board the bus and there is no defense.

    Yes I do want permit holders and other good people on the bus to carry guns, assuming they are ready and willing to use them to protect themselves and the other people on the bus.

    Police carry guns every day, and we all feel and we are all safer because of it.

  • Bored to the point of THIS! Ogden, UT
    Feb. 19, 2013 12:15 p.m.

    I think it's great to have a guy with a gun on the bus. That increases my chances of being shot in a public place so I can sue!

    Oh wait, I might die from the wound. Never mind, I'm against it.

  • Cernan68 New York, NY
    Feb. 19, 2013 12:04 p.m.

    Re:"How about a teenager carrying a baseball bat?"

    That's an illogical analogy. Any object can be used to harm someone. But, unlike a gun, a baseball has a purpose other than hurting & killing. It's purpose is to play baseball.
    A gun, on the other hand, has one purpose: hurting or killing. A person carrying a gun plans to either use it to hurt someone (if he thinks someone is trying to hurt him, even if he is mistaken) or plans to use it to improve his ability to hurt or kill someone by practicing at a gun shooting club. Sometimes there's a reason to carry a gun for the purpose of hurting or killing someone. For example, law enforcement or military personnel. Not the case in this article.

    While not all gun owners are psychotic gun killers, all gun killers are gun owners (or gun possessors if they "borrowed" the gun from a family member's draw or if they stole the gun). A person can't be a gun killer without a gun so, if no one on the bus has a gun, then there won't be any gun killers on the bus.

  • Cernan68 New York, NY
    Feb. 19, 2013 11:53 a.m.

    Re: "Does a person carrying a gun have a right to get on a crowded bus, or a train, even if other passengers are nervous about a stranger with a gun in the wake of violent shootings that have claimed the lives of children and adults?"

    Absolutely not. Guns kill people so he should not risk endangering the passengers on the bus by bringing a gun onto the bus. If he needs to travel with a gun (e.g., he's in danger from someone, or uses guns for "fun" and is on his way to a gun shooting club), then he should drive his own car or pay for some private transportation. He has no right to endanger others. Did you know that in some states it's not legal for a police officer to carry his firearm on public transportation. For that reason, law enforcement officers can take a tax deduction for using their car to get to work.

  • Harley Rider Small Town, CT
    Feb. 19, 2013 11:11 a.m.

    RE Truth Seeker : Here’s the facts for you about Israel and Their Guns - FYI W/Post is unworthy as an American Fact News Source –

    When the PLO and others started attacking Israel’s schools – The parents , teachers , nurses etc became trained and armed and carried . Their schools became known as ‘Heavily Armed Zones ‘

    The Police involved the citizens in a voluntary civil guard project ‘Mishmar Esrachi,’ which even has its own sniper teams. The Army’s Youth Group program, ‘Gadna’, trains 15 to 16-year-old kids in gun safety and guard procedures and the older high-school boys get involved with the Mishmar Esrachi.

    The Israel’s have learned how to keep their schools safe – On going Gun Safety and Training is key
    The Swiss have the safest schools anywhere , and they also have On going Gun Safety and Training

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    Feb. 18, 2013 5:48 p.m.

    Re: Moabmom

    This article has nothing to do with the Boy Scouts. Adhering to DesNews' guidelines, I have no intention of starting such a discussion with you on it. So, aside from your obfuscation of my point, do you have any reason to believe that what I said is so egregious that it required a snarky response?

  • aminahyaquin GALLIPOLIS FERRY, WV
    Feb. 18, 2013 3:40 p.m.

    I think it is a great law. It may desensitize people to being fearful about ordinary citizens carrying guns. Cops carry guns as do security guards and detectives. To me the point is, as someone has pointed out we do not have a clue what criminals are carrying. I am very comfortable with guns in the hands of good guy citizens, whether econcealed or open carry.

  • Truthseeker2 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
    Feb. 18, 2013 2:38 p.m.

    Israel or Switzerland you say?

    "In Israel, they’re very limited in who is able to own a gun. There are only a few tens of thousands of legal guns in Israel, and the only people allowed to own them legally live in the settlements, do business in the settlements, or are in professions at risk of violence.

    In Israel, it used to be that all soldiers would take the guns home with them. Now they have to leave them on base. Over the years they’ve done this — it began, I think, in 2006 — there’s been a 60 percent decrease in suicide on weekends among IDS soldiers.

    Israel rejects 40 percent of its applications for a gun, the highest rate of rejection in the world.

    The second thing is that there’s this widespread misunderstanding that Israel and Switzerland promote gun ownership. They don’t. Ten years ago, when Israel had the outbreak of violence, there was an expansion of gun ownership, but only to people above a certain rank in the military. There was no sense that having ordinary citizens [carry guns] would make anything safer."
    (Washington Post)

  • Moabmom Moab, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 1:17 p.m.

    @ Claudio said "Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should." Does that apply to gays trying to force the Boy Scouts to change? As for Dabakis statement about "war bullets", good grief! Fear monger much? You can take the liberal, social justice activist out of St. Petersberg, but you can't take the St.Petersburg, out of the liberal, social justice activist (not even by letting him on the basketball team)

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Feb. 18, 2013 12:53 p.m.

    Man gets on bus brandishing a gun, I get off. Now. I encourage others to do the same.

  • Bruce A. Frank San Jose, CA
    Feb. 18, 2013 12:45 p.m.

    I lived in SLC over 30 years ago when CCW permits did not exist. Open carry was the rule whether on your person or in a vehicle. Concealed carry was looked upon as somehow "sneaky" and if you were hiding a firearm, you were up to no good. But, even then, a person on the streets of SLC with a "shootin' iron" strapped to his hip might get stopped by police for disturbing the peace (but only if uncooperative with requests to put the gun away).

    Years before while growing up in SC I have fond memories of fellow students in grammar school bringing their Christmas present shotguns to school for show and tell, on the school bus. Principal would meet them at the door and offer to keep it safe until show and tell time in their class. He'd bring it down to the class and give it to the student to tell about then take the next few minutes to, using the student's shotgun, teach gun safety. The shotgun was delivered back to the student when he was getting on the school bus to go home.

    Don't allow the loss of our heritage.

  • James1105 BOAZ, AL
    Feb. 18, 2013 12:29 p.m.

    Uh, let's see. A man walks on a crowded bus with a holstered gun on his side. Oh, the horrors. Until, that is, someone asks and finds out he is a plain clothes police officer, or FBI agent, or ATF agent, etc. Whew, that makes one feel much better, right? Now, they have the added protection of someone with a gun in case some terrorist steps on the bus to cause others harm.

    Oh, but wait! What if he is just a good guy exercising his open carry rights? One should feel scared because a plain clothes person is on the bus with a holstered gun? One could also sigh in relief that someone is on board who could shoot a terrorist if one were to come on board and start shooting.

    One can live in fear, or one can live feeling better protected. It is all in one's point of view.

  • Allen Salt Lake valley, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 12:29 p.m.

    We have a conflict of rights. People have a right to be on public transportation without fear. People have a right to carry guns in public transportation. What is the solution to this conflict? I don't know, but I expect that both parties will have to yield some of their rights. People who are fearful of others can get off and take another bus. People who want to carry open on public transportation can recognize that open carry makes people fearful, and they can choose to close carry on public transportation. As long as people, on both sides of the issue, insist on 100% of their rights and that all changes should be by the other persons, we will never have a satisfactory solution to this problem.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 11:22 a.m.

    @one old man and FT
    I didn't say free speech and gun ownership should be unrestricted. I'm saying, when someone comes around wanting to add new restrictions, many of us are as reluctant to give ground with the Second Amendment as we are with the First.

    I've never voted away anyone's basic rights. Not sure what you're referring to there.

    You may have misread my meaning. Sarcasm doesn't always translate well into print.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 11:12 a.m.

    Gun owners always try to equate guns and gun rights to something else, as you did with car ownership. They're not the same. If a gun owner has a safe and a gun lock there would be no or few accidents. So many gun owners think storing guns in a closet, a cabinet, under the bed or in a drawer is adequate. So often the gun falls into a troubled person (e.g. Newtown) or youth's hands (every day) and tragedy occurs. We say that's too bad, it was an accident or unavoidable. That's simply not true. It was careless, reckless and irresponsible. If you want to own a gun society should expect zero tolerance if that gun falls into the wrong hands or is used irresponsibilty. The constitutional right for a person to own a gun should not endanger societies right to be safe from it. I'm tired of idiot, irresponsible gun owners and the damage they do to society. If you want to own a gun society should be safe from it's irresponsible use.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Feb. 18, 2013 11:05 a.m.

    "Guns are not "bad" and there is no need to fear them. "

    You are absolutely correct Clinton.

    I have no fear of guns. It is those who are untrained, careless or mentally unequipped to carry them that scare me.

    Here is a blurb from just last month
    "Accidental shootings at gun shows in North Carolina, Indiana and Ohio left five people injured Saturday"

    3 separate instances of accidental shootings at GUN shows no less.

    And you think that I should not be concerned on a moving bus or train?

    Too many people do not take the ownership and handling of firearms seriously enough.
    THAT is why I dont want to be around people I dont know carrying guns.

  • Clinton Draper, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 10:51 a.m.

    @FT Does your suggestion honestly seem reasonable to you? If your car is involved in an accident and somebody dies, should you spend a mandatory 10 years in prison and lose your ability to ever get a license or own a car again?

    @JoeBlow Yes, you should get used to it. Guns are not "bad" and there is no need to fear them. Respect them, yes. Fear them, no. What you should fear is the brainwashing by those who wish to take your guns from you in the name of "safety." Look how well that worked out for the Jews in and around Germany.

  • Clinton Draper, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 10:43 a.m.

    @Nate You do have the right not to be made nervous. That's what the exit door on the bus is for. You have every right in the world to not feel nervous. What you don't have the right to do is force somebody else, who is acting within their rights, to accommodate your sensitivities.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 10:28 a.m.

    The are restrictions to "free speech". You can't yell fire in a movie theater. You can't scream profanities in a public setting. We can put restrictions on free speech just as we can put restrictions of gun ownership. It's easier to get a gun than it is a driver's license. That's stupid. We can be a safer, more civilized society by putting restrictions on guns. Let's start by deciding what citizens should be able to own guns and punish those who are careless or harmful with their use. I have no problem with a responsible person owning an assault weapon. But if that weapon is used in a crime, the owner should be jailed for manslaughter. Why do we accept that accidents happen when it comes to guns? I believe that the constitution enables an American to own a gun and I also believe society has the right to severly punish you if you are irresponsible by excercising that right. Zero tolerance with severe penalities will decrease casual ownership.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 10:17 a.m.

    Nate says: "These are basic rights we're talking about."

    --- Hypocrisy at it's finest. Didn't you conservatives vote away some "basic rights" of people you don't care for? Don't cry when your own rights are infringed when you're willing to infringe upon the rights of others.

    Additionally, what about the "basic right" of a mother to feel safe when she's out with her children? I promise you, some nut carrying a gun on a bus or train I was on would certainly NOT make me feel safe; quite the opposite in fact.

  • Harley Rider Small Town, CT
    Feb. 18, 2013 9:54 a.m.

    Gun Safety needs to be taught in our schools - educate the kids on gun safety . People who conceal carry have saved thousands and thousands of peoples lives thru-out America. Of course this fact is never brought into the National Media for the Sheep to see.

    How to stop almost All of the School Shootings -
    1) Return all schools to be run totally at the local level - get the Feds OUT!
    2) Make sure that when a school is locked - No one Can Enter without an Armed -Teacher , School Administrator, or School Employee present - preferably at least 2 being present.
    3) Bring back the gun safety classes starting in elementary and continue thru high school - The Swiss do this the Israeli's do this - with great success
    4) Encourage and Reward school employees who wish to be trained in gun safety & carry.
    5) Get the kids off of these horrible Psychotropic Meds - the use of these drugs is totally out of control and has been proven to be the main reason behind All of the school shootings
    6) Secure the schools with high security locks , doors and windows that don't break

  • GiuseppeG Murray, Utah
    Feb. 18, 2013 9:53 a.m.

    @oldman because those psyche evals and training cops take are infallible like that psycho in California and those NY cops who shot 8 innocent bystanders showed, right?

  • Wanderer West Jordan, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    Such persons may think they have the "right" to blatantly flaunt their so-called gun rights, but they will never be able to allay the public's heightened concerns, suspicions and worries as to the intentions of the gun-toting fool.

  • casual observer Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 9:30 a.m.

    Easy question. Get off the bus.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 9:25 a.m.

    Allen, the answer to both your questions is NO.

    But don't be afraid.

    If he decides to start shooting, you probably won't suffer more than in instant of intense pain before everything goes black and you will have no more problems -- ever.

    Just think of it as a fast track to the Celestial Kingdom.

  • Allen Salt Lake valley, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 9:16 a.m.

    I'm just wondering. Does Utah law require training for open carry like it does for closed carry? Background checks?

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 9:09 a.m.

    But Dwyane, when a cop gets on a bus I can be pretty sure he has been thoroughly screened and well trained.

    Can I assume that when you get on a bus with your manhood displayed in an open holster?

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 9:04 a.m.

    So Nate, if I come down to Pleasant Grove and set up a big screen on the public sidewalk in front of your home and start showing porn movies for you and all your neighbors to enjoy, you'll have no objection because I'm simply exercising my First Amendment rights?

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 8:51 a.m.

    Does a street preacher have a right to preach on the sidewalk adjacent to Temple Square if what he is sayin is objectionable to others? It is called the Constitution.

  • justamacguy Manti, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 8:46 a.m.

    Glad they aren't bringing up big knives. Cause I carry one of them all the time.

  • EDM Castle Valley, Utah
    Feb. 18, 2013 8:44 a.m.

    If I see someone on a bus with a gun, I'm going to call the police no matter what.

  • Allen Salt Lake valley, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 8:15 a.m.

    I understand reasons why people want to close carry weapons, and I support that right, but I don't understand why people want to open carry. When I was a kid, I carried my 22 through town and across runways at the local airport to get to my dad's farm to hunt jack rabbits. Nobody was fearful when they saw me. But it's different today. People today are fearful when they see guns carried by non-police and non-military.

    I think laws must be interpreted in the context of today not yesterday. Some people do and will feel uneasy when they see guns in public places. Those feelings are to be expected and must be considered when we establish laws for the 21st century. The thing I think is reasonable is to have open carry in our homes and vehicles but closed carry in public places.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 8:13 a.m.

    @FT "Currently, we treat the right to own a gun too casually."

    Imagine someone saying, "Currently, we treat the right to free speech too casually," and calling for tougher regulations. This is how anti-gun stuff comes across to some of us. These are basic rights we're talking about.

  • bblackmoor Troy, VA
    Feb. 18, 2013 8:08 a.m.

    “You would have to take steps to put somebody’s safety at risk,” he explained. “Merely open carrying a weapon doesn’t even come close to the level of disorderly conduct.”

    Well, duh. It's sad that anyone needs to be told this.

  • Joshua Steimle Draper, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 8:08 a.m.

    This question is an invention of government, and the proper solution is to remove government from the equation. If all transportation were private, there would be no issue. The owners of any transportation service could institute whatever rules they wanted to for those choosing to use those transportation services. Get rid of public transportation and you get rid of this question, not to mention a money-losing boondoggle of a "service".

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 7:32 a.m.

    A man comes on to a bus with a gun. So what? He's scared. He lives his life in constant fear and insecurity. He or one of his family members are 22 times more likely to be killed with that gun he carries. Currently, we treat the right to own a gun too casually. The only thing I would like to see are tougher gun laws. Starting with, if a gun you owned is used in ANY crime or accidental death you spend a mandatory 10 years in prison and can no longer own a fire arm again. It's not guns that kill people but the ignorance and insecurities of people who use them or own them. As a country we need to stress the incredible responsibilty that comes from the decision to own a gun.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Feb. 18, 2013 6:41 a.m.

    When a man walked around the University Mall in Orem in 2011 carrying a rifle and a pistol, the police received several 911 calls.

    The guy, however did not break any laws as Utah is an Open Carry State.

    I sincerely hope that the answer is NOT that we should just "get used to it".

    OCoug states that he could get off and take the next one. True. What if the next one has 3 people sitting there with rifles?

    Is this the society we want to live in? Is this what you want your kids to grow up around?

    Isn't this the way it was in the wild west?

    Don't some common altercations become deaths simply because someone carried a gun?

    Trevon Martin would have gotten into a fight, rather than a morgue had guns not been involved.

    Yes, I am for people owning guns.

    But do we really want more people, carrying more guns, in more places?

    Feb. 18, 2013 6:25 a.m.

    "Does a person carrying a gun have a right to get on a crowded bus, or a train"

    No, that is not a right explicitly stated in the constitution. You do not have a right to public transport. As for the gun issue, I spent eight years in the army and 18 months in Baghdad. My biggest concern would be accidental/negligent discharges. I've seen it with soldiers. It happens with police. It will certainly happen with untrained civilians playing Rambo.

  • RockOn Spanish Fork, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 6:10 a.m.

    Why do politicians like Dubakis say "I'm for the 2nd Amendment" and then begin qualifying that statement immediately. Using terms like "war bullets"... what are they? Is there a difference between a 40 caliber bullet that is loaded into a automatic weapon vs. one in a single shot vs. a semi-automatic... NOOOO! And others like him now try to use the inflamed words "people killers" for an AR-15, as if a shot gun, hand gun, bow and arrow don't kill people. Why do people continue to elect Dubakis and others of his ilk? Parse words, slide in meanings when there isn't anything, play a wolf in sheep's clothing just to deceive.

    To all Dubakis type people: Have the courage to either support the 2nd Amendment as written or vote to change it. They won't do anything in the open, just in the shadows because they know most Americans are reasonable and believe the 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting rights, but the rights of the hunted.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Feb. 18, 2013 6:06 a.m.

    "As long as the individual isn't exhibiting offensive or violent behavior then they certainly do have the right. "

    Unfortunately, by the time we see the "violent behavior", it could be too late.

    Rock writes "I feel safer when good people with a concealed carry permit are around.
    What really scares me is uneducated people with the right to vote."

    Dont forget. Those same "uneducated people with the right to vote" also could be carrying a gun.

    I agree. I know some people that make me feel safer knowing that they are carrying.
    I also know some that I dont want to be around because I know that they are carrying.

    Getting a CCP requires very little effort and NO shooting of the gun in most states, Utah included.
    Why are people so opposed to more firearm training?

  • Joe_Libertarian San DIego, CA
    Feb. 18, 2013 5:58 a.m.

    Evil begets evil. Displaying threatening behavior leads to threatening behavior. Threatening behavior leads to violence.

    Just remember, open carry laws do nothing to help (deaths from guns in Utah about the same as California, about 9.7 per 100k)... but it certainly makes for a nasty, threatening world.

  • BroJoseph Ogden, UT
    Feb. 18, 2013 12:54 a.m.

    How can you tell if the person is a lawful gunowner? Or how can you tell if he is a mental case about to commit a crime? Do they ask them for papers?

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Feb. 18, 2013 12:50 a.m.

    When the Black Panthers started carrying their guns around in Oakland, California in the late 1960s, it inspired a new wave of gun control laws.

    There was an incident with a traffic stop. Huey Newton and Bobby Seale were sitting in a car, lightly armed.

    They refused to give up their firearms. Huey Newton had gone to law school for a short time and had learned that in California it was lawful for him to be carrying loaded weapons, as long as he carried them openly. In fact, the most dramatic incident was when the Black Panthers, 30 of them showed up at the California State Capitol, armed with loaded rifles, pistols and shotgun and marched right into the legislative chamber while it was in session. In fact, they were debating a gun control law, and the Panthers were there not to do violence, but to protest this gun control law.

    This episode freaked out conservative politicians, including Governor (Reagan) of California, who could not for the life of him imagine a situation where a lawful American would want to carry a loaded weapon in public.
    (Adam Winkler in an interview with Bob Garfield)

  • OCoug Ogden, UT
    Feb. 17, 2013 11:34 p.m.

    As long as the individual isn't exhibiting offensive or violent behavior then they certainly do have the right. Would I feel comfortable with a stranger carrying a gun on a bus? Probably not, but I could get off and take the next one. That's my right.

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    Feb. 17, 2013 10:58 p.m.

    Do they have a right? Yes. Does that mean they should do it? Nope. It's like mom always said, "Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should."

  • LVIS Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 17, 2013 10:32 p.m.

    Well, the world has certainly turned. When I was a teenager in northern California in the late 60's, we could get on public bus carrying our .22 rifles, ride the bus to Hayward High School, and go shooting at their indoor range. No one said one word. Try that in California today.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Feb. 17, 2013 10:24 p.m.

    We have a right not to be made nervous? James Madison must have accidentally left that one out.

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    Feb. 17, 2013 10:07 p.m.

    I feel safer when good people with a concealed carry permit are around.
    What really scares me is uneducated people with the right to vote.

    People who work for a living should live in fear of those who vote for a living.

  • Clydesdale Tooele, UT
    Feb. 17, 2013 10:04 p.m.

    If you are a gun owner/supporter I encourage you to read the bill. Don't take the media's word that this is good for gun owners. Read the bill.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Feb. 17, 2013 9:34 p.m.

    The more people open carry--the easier it will be for those who want to commit mayhem to hide in plain sight. Law-abiding citizens can only carry guns without ammo. But how can one tell from the outside if a gun is loaded or not?

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    Feb. 17, 2013 9:32 p.m.

    @ DN 2

    "Bad guys carry and conceal guns and commit crimes regardless of all the laws, so you are only talking about hassling law abiding citizens."

    So you can tell immediately just by looking at the person whether or not they are a law abiding citizen being hassled or if they are a bad guy that is about to commit a crime, huh? You certainly have powers the ordinary person doesn't possess.

  • GaryW Hurricane, UT
    Feb. 17, 2013 8:49 p.m.

    Again the liberal elite uses buzzwords rather than common sense. Assault weapon? As if it hasn't been clarified enough that no such thing exists. Wearing camo clothes is threatening? War bullets? Come on.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    Feb. 17, 2013 8:48 p.m.

    How about teenagers carrying baseball bats? That might scare some people, will they be ejected for disorderly conduct?

    This law is necessary as some agencies (led by the chronically anti-gun rights University of Utah) have taken to using disorderly conduct statutes as an excuse to hassle law abiding and well behaving people carrying legal self defense weapons. In addition they have imaginatively interpreted the Concealed Carry law so claim permit holder MUST hide their guns, even if it is only momentarily exposed when getting something off a shelf. Ironically, they used to argue that "honest people wear guns in the open, not hide them" and would try to arrest someone for concealing a weapon if a jacket momentarily concealed it.

    Well done, Rep. Paul Ray, for running this bill. Those opposed refuse to accept the proof that their hypothetical fears about permit holders have been totally wrong, ever since 1995.

    It is time to ignore the nay-sayers with their emotional arguments, and look at the actual facts. Pass the bill now!

    Bad guys carry and conceal guns and commit crimes regardless of all the laws, so you are only talking about hassling law abiding citizens. That's wrong!

    Feb. 17, 2013 7:46 p.m.

    Simple answer is yes they do!