Salt Lake Tribune
Weekly Ad Specials
How to pack heat: Concealed-carry instruction for legislators is valuable
This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2005, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Experience is often the best teacher. So it probably is a good thing that the governor and a gaggle of legislators, who are lobbied all the time by people who want to change Utah's gun laws one way or the other, have taken the training to get a concealed-carry permit. At least now they have some idea of what the current law requires.

That the training sessions were arranged by a pro-gun legislator who wants to liberalize Utah's already liberal concealed-carry law is only a concern because it was provided free of charge. Either the state or the students should have paid for the $75 course, or the people who provided it should have registered as lobbyists and disclosed the names of the students.

In any case, the family members of legislators who participated in the course should have paid their own way.

That they apparently did not is another example of how the state's laws that govern gifts to officials and members of their families are often circumvented. The laws should be tightened to prohibit such gifts.

Otherwise, however, there is nothing wrong with Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., Lt. Gov. Gary Herbert, 12 legislators and eight other elected officials taking the course at the invitation of Rep. Curtis Oda. He's a Clearfield Republican who wants to tweak the law to make it even easier for Utahns to carry concealed weapons.

The state's current law allows any applicant over the age of 21 who has not been convicted of a felony, a crime of violence or an offense involving alcohol, illegal drugs or moral turpitude, and who has not been judged mentally incompetent by a court, to get a permit to carry a concealed firearm after first receiving minimal training.

Obviously, the course these officials got came with a point of view. Reportedly, it was thorough, more thorough, in fact, than state law requires. For example, the students got time on a firing range, though the law, incredibly, does not require that.

A state audit in 2001 showed that the quality of concealed-carry instruction varied widely from one instructor to the next, that the system lacked real controls over outside training programs, and that fees were inadequate to fund the program. Not much has changed since, and the fee structure remains the same.

It sounds like the public officials got a class that was an exceptional value. Whether it was a fair representation of concealed-carry training generally, though, is debatable.

FREE GUN CLASSES
Article Tools

 
Affiliates and Partners