Quantcast

Letter: Concealed firearms should be for protection only

Published January 1, 2014 1:01 am

This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2014, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

It seems that most of the criticism about citizens carrying firearms stems from an assumption that such individuals are using guns in an adversarial way, pursuing the enemy in a combat situation.

I recall that as a new recruit for the Salt Lake City Police Department, I was given a pistol and advised by the training officer that this was provided for my protection. I was told that as an officer I could be assigned to situations where I would possibly be required to defend myself against an adversary much stronger and bigger than myself. As a last resort, the firearm was meant as a means of survival.

I would hope all carry-permit holders would feel that this is the reason they have a firearm — for their own protection and to protect others who may be at risk.

For those who depict carry-permit holders as prowlers out looking for a target or a situation to justify the use of a firearm, I wish they would rethink their logic.

Harry W. Patrick

Salt Lake City

USER COMMENTS
Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
comments powered by Disqus