Calguns.net

Calguns.net (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/index.php)
-   Permit/License To Carry Training Classes & Experiences (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=212)
-   -   Updated Info Regarding 34 state UT Non-Resident new law (SB 36) (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=403850)

NorCalCCWinstructor 03-02-2011 10:18 PM

Updated Info Regarding 34 state UT Non-Resident new law (SB 36)
 
If signed by the Governor, this law will take effect on 05/11/2011.

I spoke with a top Official this morning at the UT BCI. (my 4th call). He informed me that the person whom I spoke with earlier on the telephone a few times had given me wrong informaion in regards to the way it reads, and the way that it will effect Californians.

He specifically said that the way UT BCI reads this Bill is: that since CA does not recognize UT, this bill will not reflect on Californian's Non-Resident permits.

However, since my first 3 telephone calls to BCI, and the wording on the document that she gave me, it's rather confusing. Especially since I myself, have personally been involved in the introduction, edit and passage of some laws in the past.

I guess the bottom line is - it will be a wait and see approach. I believe that there is some additional fine print (clarifications) needed in this Bill, otherwise I do so see some potential issues, but which can be later resolved with a simple edit and passage of another Bill.

D-Man 03-03-2011 6:04 AM

You need to read the bill. California has no reciprocity with Utah so we are safe because they reworded the bill. This was discussed in depth on here previously. I am not saying people shouldn't get the permit, but we as instructors have to be very careful what we post about.

NorCalCCWinstructor 03-03-2011 9:52 AM

Here's the Bill
 
Thanks D-Man. I have posted a small portion of the ammended Bill which has already passed. Thanks for your input on this, but I posted because I DID read the Bill. It specifically states that a State which has NO reciprocity with UT will be effected. Again, this is the ammended Bill which has already passed both Houses, and is awaiting the Governor's signature. You can view the entire bill from my website. Yes, I have seen it on here many times before, but the Bill speaks for itself. I am simply informing people, as to the true and exact verbiage of this Bill. it's very clear that for future applicants, their state MUST have reciprocity, in order to apply for their permit. This is the Ammended Bill which has passed. If you have any questions, and are a certified UT Instructor, I would recommend calling UT BCI for clarification.

Senator John L. Valentine proposes the following substitute bill:
1 CONCEALED FIREARM ACT AMENDMENTS
2 2011 GENERAL SESSION
3 STATE OF UTAH
4 Chief Sponsor: John L. Valentine
5 House Sponsor: Curtis Oda
6
7 LONG TITLE
8 General Description:
9 This bill amends provisions of the Concealed Firearm Act related to the issuance of
10 concealed firearm permits to nonresidents.
11 Highlighted Provisions:
12 This bill:
13 < requires a nonresident applicant for a concealed firearm permit to hold a current
14 concealed firearm or concealed weapon permit from the applicant's state of
15 residency that recognizes the validity of the Utah permit in that state or has
16 reciprocity with the Utah concealed firearm permit law
; and
17 < requires a nonresident applicant to pay an additional $5 processing fee for the
18 issuance of the permit.

safewaysecurity 03-03-2011 9:54 AM

Its been amended to allow California.

NorCalCCWinstructor 03-03-2011 10:31 AM

Ammendment
 
That's great information. But, I just spoke with UT BCI on the telephone this morning, and they completely disagree. UT BCI may be giving me incorrect information. I sure hope that they are. Have you seen anything official reflecting these changes? The Ammended Bill which I received from UT BCI yesterday does not reflect any ammendments, allowing CA. I would love to see something different. The ammended Bill which I have in my possession was voted about 2 weeks ago. I really hate to start crap on this, and I am not a lawyer, but I know the laws very, very well. . But, visit this website, and you shall see that the changes on the new bill do nothing for CA CCW holders. Again, I want to educate everybody on CalGuns what is "really going on". http://le.utah.gov/~2011/bills/sbillamd/sb0036s01.pdf

Librarian 03-03-2011 11:03 AM

Utah legislation is NOT my area.

But - http://le.utah.gov/~2011/htmdoc/sbillhtm/sb0036s01.htm is the bill page; last status update was Feb 21.

A scan through the 3 Feb 2011 amended version appears to support NorCalCCW.
Quote:

74 (4) (a) In addition to meeting the other qualifications for the issuance of a concealed
75 firearm permit under this section, a nonresident applicant S. who resides in a state that
75a recognizes the validity of the Utah permit or has reciprocity with Utah's concealed firearm
75b permit law .S shall:
76 (i) hold a current concealed firearm or concealed weapon permit issued by the
77 appropriate permitting authority of the nonresident applicant's state of residency S. [ that recognizes
78 the validity of the Utah permit in that state or has reciprocity with Utah's concealed firearm
79 permit law
] .S ; and
What's odd is that it doesn't say anything at all about non-resident applicants who do not hold a CCW from their state of residence, or who hold one from a state without reciprocity with Utah. Are such other nonresident applicants out of luck?

I don't know the Utah Code at all, so I can't tell if that's addressed elsewhere.

NorCalCCWinstructor 03-03-2011 1:56 PM

Yep, you got it right. Non-Resident Applicants must: 1) reside in a state which honors UT reciprocity, AND 2) have a CCW for their own state (with reciprocity). All other states (applicant) without reciprocity will no longer be able to be issued the UT CFP. But, that's only if the bill is signed by the UT Governor. But, it's already passed two stages, and sits on his desk.

There's a cleaner version of this bill at: http://le.utah.gov/~2011/bills/sbillamd/sb0036s01.pdf

NorCalCCWinstructor 03-03-2011 2:01 PM

Also, note that on the very last page, the State of UT realizes that they are going to immediately lose $250k in revenue, with the lack of non-resident applicants, not meeting this criteria. For those of us whom already possess the CFP, they have not enacted a law (yet) to ban us, except for future renewals. No law as of yet, that is. I'm still hoping that the Governor doesnt sign the bill, but what's the chances?

paul0660 03-03-2011 2:06 PM

I don't read Utahan, so are we to assume that, if NCCCI is correct about this interpretation, getting a Utah permit before 5/11 will provide the holder with the usual ability to CCW in Utah and all those other states, and that non-resident holders WON'T be holding worthless plastic cards after that date?

Edit: NorCal instructor answered my question before I asked it, thanks.

NorCalCCWinstructor 03-03-2011 3:21 PM

Paul - Glad to help. We are good until renewal. Hopefully they will realize their revenue loss real soon (if it's signed), and change the law before we renew. They still have rough financial times ahead, as with any other state.

epilepticninja 03-04-2011 10:18 PM

Grand...I sent in my paperwork a few weeks ago. So the permit is only good up to the renewel, then its worthless. Looks like I'll be getting a Florida permit then.

jb7706 03-06-2011 1:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NorCalCCWinstructor (Post 5931216)
Paul - Glad to help. We are good until renewal. Hopefully they will realize their revenue loss real soon (if it's signed), and change the law before we renew. They still have rough financial times ahead, as with any other state.

Perhaps I'm missing something obvious here, but from what I'm reading this is not a big deal. All the change says is that if your home state accepts Utah's permit you must first obtain that permit before you can have a UT permit. CA does not recognize any permit but its own, so no big deal here.

Quote:

(4) (a) In addition to meeting the other qualifications for the issuance of a concealed
75 firearm permit under this section, a nonresident applicant S.[who resides in a state that
75a recognizes the validity of the Utah permit or has reciprocity with Utah's concealed firearm
75b permit law
shall:].S
76 (i) hold a current concealed firearm or concealed weapon permit issued by the
77 appropriate permitting authority of the nonresident applicant's state of residency ÖÖÖººº [that recognizes
78 the validity of the Utah permit in that state or has reciprocity with Utah's concealed firearm
79 permit law] »»»ÖÖÖ

Agent Orange 03-06-2011 3:18 PM

Edit: After reading more carefully now I'm not so sure.

NorCalCCWinstructor 03-06-2011 6:06 PM

The Bill actually translates into this: You must have a CCW in your home state, and your home state must have reciprocity with UT. If your home state does not have reciprocity (ie - CA), you are not eligible to apply for a UT permit, but only if this law is signed by the governor. I dont know how the governor feels about losing 250k per year, so I really don't know what the Gov will do.

Here is a clean copy of the highlighted changes to the previously Bill. This came straight from the UT BCI (that issues the permits). The below link will summarize the bill:

http://le.utah.gov/~2011/bills/sbillamd/sb0036s01.pdf

Agent Orange 03-06-2011 6:50 PM

Confusion reigns. You say BCI told you this? The problem is Utah Senator Valentine's office says different, as does the Utah Shooting Sports Council who worked with him on getting changes made to the bill to specifically exempt those in states that are may/no issue or don't have reciprocity with Utah. Lets hope this gets straightened soon, one way or another.

Edit: I'm now even more sure there's a misunderstanding in your and BCI's reading of this bill but be patient...it'll all work out.

NorCalCCWinstructor 03-06-2011 9:17 PM

Yes, UT BCI told me this. Maybe I spoke with somebody who wasn't very knowledgeable. I had already planned on calling them again tomorrow, just to be sure (for my 4th call).... I initially posted this after calling UT BCI, but only after a few people from CalGuns appeared in some of my other classes, with questions regarding this. When I phoned her, She specifically told me what the "newest changes" to the bill reflect, and gave me this most recent link to clarify it. Like I said, the info she gave me and the "newest" revisions of the bill match what she said. But, I will take it one step even further tomorrow, and go to the highest level that I can get. I will keep everybody posted. I intend to clarify with more than just BCI. Thanks so much for the post!!

CCWUSA 03-08-2011 9:51 PM

Norcal,

I had some of the very same concerns with the original wording of this bill. We discussed this on CalGuns last month in great detail....

Here's the bottom line result for CA Residents:

(4) (a) In addition to meeting the other qualifications for the issuance of a concealed firearm permit under this section, a nonresident applicant who resides in a state that recognizes the validity of the Utah permit or has reciprocity with Utah's concealed firearm permit law shall: (i) hold a current concealed firearm or concealed weapon permit issued by the appropriate permitting authority of the nonresident applicant's state of residency

So the fix is in, and we have nothing to worry about. This amendment passed the Senate 28-0. This now applies to only those who LIVE in a free state that has a reciprocity agreement with Utah.

For those (of us) who live in the USSR of Kaliphorhniah, or other states (where the Constitution is void or prohibited by law), you can still get your permit from Utah.

I talked with Rep. Oda, and he (and Valentine) had no problem with putting in this fix so we can continue to renew, and others could get their Utah permit. Even if you live in a shall issue state, but that state doesn't have a reciprocity agreement, you can get your Utah permit.

This bill affects ONLY THOSE who live in states that have reciprocity agreements with Utah. The bill is like saying "HAY, those who live in shall issue states that have reciprocity agreements need to get a permit from your own state before getting one from Utah".

I hope this clears this up.

Erik.


http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=388197

NorCalCCWinstructor 03-09-2011 8:02 AM

Erik,

Yes, and thank you so much. This clears it up. When I was speaking with somebody at BCI, she wasn't too clear, and gave me wrong information. But, 4 calls later, I got it cleared up as well. Thanks for your help on this!

winnre 03-09-2011 12:58 PM

So basically if CA gets reciprocity with Utah then all those who do not have CA permits are SOL.

edlacy 03-09-2011 1:34 PM

I don't understand why everybody wants the Utah permit to begin with.
If you have California, Florida and Nevada, you're covered for everything west of the Mississippi except for Colorado, Oregon and Hawaii.

If you don't have California, you don't lose any of those mentioned above.

Take a look here, click on the states you have permits in and see where you're good for.

http://www.usacarry.com/concealed_ca...city_maps.html

NorCalCCWinstructor 03-09-2011 4:27 PM

Yes, but I sure don't see CA having reciprocity anytime soon. That's much later down the road, but only if we ever get the elected representatives in office that respect our 2nd ammendment, and share our same views.

CCWUSA 03-09-2011 8:54 PM

I have to agree, Kalifornia is unlikely to ever have reciprocity.

However, HR 822 Could make all the difference in the world...

112th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 822

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 18, 2011

Mr. STEARNS (for himself and Mr. SHULER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011′.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds the following:

(1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States protects the fundamental right of an individual to keep and bear arms, including for purposes of individual self-defense.

(2) The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized this right in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, and in the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago, has recognized that the right is protected against State infringement by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(3) The Congress has the power to pass legislation to protect against infringement of all rights protected under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(4) The right to bear arms includes the right to carry arms for self-defense and the defense of others.

(5) The Congress has enacted legislation of national scope authorizing the carrying of concealed firearms by qualified active and retired law enforcement officers.

(6) Forty-eight States provide by statute for the issuance to individuals of permits to carry concealed firearms, or allow the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes without the need for a permit.

(7) The overwhelming majority of individuals who exercise the right to carry firearms in their own States and other States have proven to be law-abiding, and such carrying has been demonstrated to provide crime prevention or crime resistance benefits for the licensees and for others.

(8) The Congress finds that preventing the lawful carrying of firearms by individuals who are traveling outside their home State interferes with the constitutional right of interstate travel, and harms interstate commerce.

(9) Among the purposes of this Act is the protection of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to a citizen of the United States by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(10) The Congress, therefore, should provide for national recognition, in States that issue to their own citizens licenses or permits to carry concealed handguns, of other State permits or licenses to carry concealed handguns.

SEC. 3. RECIPROCITY FOR THE CARRYING OF CERTAIN CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:

`Sec. 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms

`(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that–

`(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or

`(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.

`(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.

`(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted license or permit issued to a resident of the State.

`(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.’.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926C the following:

`926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms.’.

(c) Severability- Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, if any provision of this section, or any amendment made by this section, or the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, this section and amendments made by this section and the application of such provision or amendment to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

(d) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall take effect 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

sully007 05-09-2011 7:51 PM

So if HR 822 passes, then it would mean that California would have reciprocity with Utah (Or Utah would have reciprocity with California (I guess)) and then Non-resident permits would be worthless? Do I understand this right????

groovielou 05-11-2011 4:53 AM

Found this on the BCI website:
"One major change in the new law is regarding some non-resident applicants for the Utah concealed firearm permit. If a non-resident applicant is from a state that either has a formal reciprocity agreement with Utah or recognizes the Utah concealed firearm permit, the applicant must hold and provide proof of a current concealed firearm or concealed weapon permit issued by the applicant’s state of residency upon application for the Utah concealed firearm permit. This change will not affect those applicants who reside in a state that does not have formal reciprocity or recognition with Utah, i.e. California, New York, Kansas, etc. Renewal applications will be under this new requirement starting January 1, 2012."

Source:
http://publicsafety.utah.gov/bci/doc...rApril2011.pdf

sully007 05-11-2011 8:48 AM

Is this bill dead? How long can it sit in subcommittee with out any actions?

Last Action: Feb 28th Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

NorCalCCWinstructor 05-12-2011 2:51 PM

it passed, but they did clarify the issue. It will NOT affect CA residents.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.