That helps to explain why, during the fiscal year that ended June 30, some 44,043 out-of-state residents received Utah permits. By comparison, only 17,315 Utahns did. That means that 72 percent of the permits issued that year went to people who live in other states.
There's nothing surprising there. I've pointed out numerous times what a shabby business this is, yet the pro-gun voices continue to claim moral high ground.
The article provided a rare insight into the revocation process, which has been much discussed.
The agency checks databases of Utah criminal records daily and national computer databases quarterly. It revokes permits of those who no longer qualify. The revocation rate is about 1 percent.
Even this is not without its ambiguity, is that 1% per year or 1% total for all time? In either case, with 250,000 total and 2,500 revocations we've got a slightly more believable situation than John Lott presented about Florida.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
> Some pro-gun folks in Utah don't like it.
ReplyDeletePerson who authored this peice is not pro-gun. Proof: "...license this privilege".
Article also claims the permit law is a burden on BCI and risk to the State... but only supports this with raw numbers of permit holders, who in actuality are providing revenue for BCI, and the state's risk is irrelevent via Sovereign Immunity (the same legal concept misapplied to Police Officers by Laci's pet.)
> we've got a slightly more believable situation than John Lott presented about Florida.
... and by a factor of ten, more believable than the less-than-famous 10%. But still incorrect. The resident revocation rate was published back in March:
> "Last year, Utah revoked 409 concealed-carry licenses, less than 0.2 percent of the total. More than half the revocations were for permit holders who had alcohol-related issues or a protective order lodged against them."
Congress should just make any concealed carry license valid in all 50 states like car registrations and marriages. Then you guys wouldn't have to pee yourselves so much about non-resident permits as they would no longer be necessary.
ReplyDeleteSorry VD, but cops are protected by both Soverign Immunity and Qualified immunity.
ReplyDeleteAs a private citizen, you are not.
Laci
http://www.articlesnatch.com/Article/Soverign-Immunity---Limited-Rights-To-Sue-The-Government/413280
http://www.textfiles.com/law/mar90_6.law
Sorry Laci, but those links both support my assertion.
ReplyDeleteGovernment agencies: sovereign.
Government agents: qualified.
I thought attention to details like these are what snobbish lawyers distinguish themselves from those who are neither law students nor toy dogs.
Odd choice of sources too, I would at least have found some distinquished law library, not a random article site that seemingly plagarized text from a lawyer's web page.
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/qualified_immunity
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/sovereign_immunity