The session has wrapped up for the 2014 year and here is where we stand. Some great bills were passed that will affect how you may carry.  Please read through all these to determine what may apply to your carry style.

H.B. 75S1 Restoration of Civil Rights for Nonviolent Felons.

BILL STATUS: BILL HAS PASSED and is awaiting signature of the Governor.

Summary: This bill exempts nonviolent felons from the categories of restricted persons who are prohibited from possessing a dangerous weapon.

Detail:

51          (c) As used in this section, a conviction of a felony or adjudication of delinquency for
52      an offense which would be a felony if committed by an adult does not include:
53          (i) a conviction or adjudication of delinquency for an offense pertaining to antitrust
54      violations, unfair trade practices, restraint of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the
55      regulation of business practices not involving theft or fraud; or
56          (ii) a conviction or adjudication of delinquency which, according to the law of the
57      jurisdiction in which it occurred, has been expunged, set aside, reduced to a misdemeanor by
58      court order, pardoned or regarding which the person’s civil rights have been restored unless the
59      pardon, reduction, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person
60      may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.
61          (d) It is the burden of the defendant in a criminal case to provide evidence that a
62      conviction or adjudication of delinquency is subject to an exception provided in Subsection
63      (1)(c), after which it is the burden of the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the
64      conviction or adjudication of delinquency is not subject to that exception.

–

H.B. 276 Disorderly Conduct Amendments

BILL STATUS: BILL HAS PASSED and is awaiting signature of the Governor.

Summary: This bill includes displaying a dangerous weapon under certain circumstances in the definition of disorderly conduct.

28          (1) A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if:
29          (a) The person refuses to comply with the lawful order of a law
30      enforcement officer to move from a public place, or knowingly creates a hazardous or
31      physically offensive condition, by any act which serves no legitimate purpose; or
32          (b) intending to cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm, or recklessly
33      creating a risk thereof, the person:
34          (i) engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous, or threatening behavior;
35          (ii) makes unreasonable noises in a public place;
36          (iii) makes unreasonable noises in a private place which can be heard in a public place;
37      or
38          (iv) obstructs vehicular or pedestrian traffic.
39          (2) “Public place,” for the purpose of this section, means any place to which the public
40      or a substantial group of the public has access and includes but is not limited to streets,
41      highways, and the common areas of schools, hospitals, apartment houses, office buildings,
42      transport facilities, and shops.
43          (3) The mere carrying or possession of a holstered or encased firearm, whether visible
44      or concealed, without additional behavior or circumstances that would cause a reasonable
45      person to believe the holstered or encased firearm was carried or possessed
45a      with
46      criminal intent, does not constitute a violation of this section.  Nothing in this Subsection
48      (3) may limit or prohibit a law enforcement officer from approaching or engaging any person in
49      a voluntary conversation.
50          [(3)] (4) Disorderly conduct is a class C misdemeanor if the offense continues after a
51      request by a person to desist. Otherwise it is an infraction.

—
H.B. 70 Forcible Entry Amendments

BILL STATUS: BILL HAS PASSED and is awaiting signature of the Governor.

Summary: This bill modifies the Utah Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the use of forcible entry by law enforcement officers when conducting a search or making an arrest.

Highlighted Provisions:
This bill:

• Amends existing law regarding the use of forcible entry by law enforcement officers to include searches;
• Requires law enforcement officers to identify themselves before forcing entry into a building;
• Amends existing law to allow law enforcement officers to force entry into a building without first issuing a demand or explanation if there is probable cause to believe that evidence will be easily or quickly destroyed;
• Requires law enforcement officers to use the least amount of force necessary when executing forcible entry, as authorized;
• Requires that any application for a warrant to forcibly enter a place of residence shall:
  • explain why law enforcement officials cannot use less invasive or confrontational methods to effectuate the necessary search or arrest;
  • explain why the search or arrest cannot be executed during the day, if it is to be executed at night, as defined; and
  • describe investigative activities that have been or will be undertaken prior to executing the search or arrest to ensure that the correct building has been
  •  identified or explain why no investigative activities are needed; and
  • clarifies that any information or property obtained in violation of these provisions is inadmissible in court.

–

H.B. 301 Concealed Weapon Permit for Servicemembers

BILL STATUS: BILL HAS PASSED and is awaiting signature of the Governor.

Summary:  This bill provides an exemption for an active duty service member when renewing a concealed firearm permit.

Highlighted Provisions:
This bill:
26      An active duty service member of the United States Armed Forces who possesses a Utah
27      concealed firearm permit is exempt from the requirement in Subsection 53-5-704 (4)(a) when
28      renewing a Utah concealed firearm permit.

–

H.B. 322 Protection of Activities in Private Vehicles

BILL STATUS: BILL HAS PASSED and is awaiting signature of the Governor.

Summary: This bill amends Title 34, Chapter 45, Protection of Activities in Private Vehicles.

Highlighted Provisions:
This bill:
12          .    provides that alternative parking for an individual who desires to transport, possess,
13      receive, transfer, or store a firearm in the individual’s motor vehicle may not be
14      located on a public right-of-way; and
15          .    makes technical and conforming changes.

(a) the person provides, or there is otherwise available, one of the following, in a
43      location reasonably proximate to the property the person has designated for motor vehicle
44      parking:
45          (i) alternative parking for [individuals who desire] an individual who desires to
46      transport, possess, receive, transfer, or store a firearm in the individual’s motor vehicle [at] that:
47          (A) imposes no additional cost [to] on the individual; [or] and
48          (B) is
50          (ii) a secured and monitored storage location where the individual may securely store a
51      firearm before proceeding with the vehicle into the secured parking area; or
52          (b) the person complies with Subsection 34-45-107 (5).

The Utah Legislature commenced its’ 2014 Legislative session on Monday. Below is a list of bills that may have an affect on you and your 2nd amendment rights. These will be updated and others added as the session progresses. Click on a title to taken to the related page on the Legislatures website.

—
H.B. 75S1 Restoration of Civil Rights for Nonviolent Felons.

BILL STATUS: Bill has passed the House and is awaiting to be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

This bill exempts nonviolent felons from the categories of restricted persons who are prohibited from possessing a dangerous weapon.

Suggested change to the code: (directly from the bill at the time of posting)

51        (c) As used in this section, a conviction of a felony or adjudication of delinquency for
52       an offense which would be a felony if committed by an adult does not include:
53       (i) a conviction or adjudication of delinquency for an offense pertaining to antitrust
54      violations, unfair trade practices, restraint of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the
55      regulation of business practices not involving theft or fraud; or
56      (ii) a conviction or adjudication of delinquency which, according to the law of the
57      jurisdiction in which it occurred, has been expunged, set aside, reduced to a misdemeanor by
58      court order, pardoned or regarding which the person’s civil rights have been restored unless the
59      pardon, reduction, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person
 60      may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.
61          (d) It is the burden of the defendant in a criminal case to provide evidence that a
62      conviction or adjudication of delinquency is subject to an exception provided in Subsection
63      (1)(c), after which it is the burden of the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the
64      conviction or adjudication of delinquency is not subject to that exception.—

—
H.B. 276 Disorderly Conduct Amendments

BILL STATUS: Waiting to be heard at the House Rules Committee — This bill is not moving very fast which can can indicate that it does not have the backing to pass both the House and Senate.

This bill includes displaying a dangerous weapon under certain circumstances in the definition of disorderly conduct.

Suggested change to the code: (directly from the bill at the time of posting)

43          (3) The mere carrying or possession of a holstered or encased firearm, whether visible
44      or concealed, without additional behavior or circumstances that would cause a reasonable
45      person to believe the holstered or encased firearm was carried or possessed unlawfully or with
46      criminal intent, does not constitute a violation of this section. For purposes of this section, the
47      belief of a reasonable person may not be based on a mistake of law. Nothing in this Subsection
48      (3) may limit or prohibit a law enforcement officer from approaching or engaging any person in
49      a voluntary conversation.

—
H.B. 70 Forcible Entry Amendments

BILL STATUS: Waiting to be heard at the House Judiciary Committee — This bill has been held in committee.  This is an indication it will go no further in the process.

This bill modifies the Utah Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the use of forcible entry by law enforcement officers when conducting a search or making an arrest.

Highlighted Provisions:
This bill:

• Amends existing law regarding the use of forcible entry by law enforcement officers to include searches;
• Requires law enforcement officers to identify themselves before forcing entry into a building;
• Amends existing law to allow law enforcement officers to force entry into a building without first issuing a demand or explanation if there is probable cause to believe that evidence will be easily or quickly destroyed;
• Requires law enforcement officers to use the least amount of force necessary when executing forcible entry, as authorized;
• Requires that any application for a warrant to forcibly enter a place of residence shall:
  • explain why law enforcement officials cannot use less invasive or confrontational methods to effectuate the necessary search or arrest;
  • explain why the search or arrest cannot be executed during the day, if it is to be executed at night, as defined; and
  • describe investigative activities that have been or will be undertaken prior to executing the search or arrest to ensure that the correct building has been
  •  identified or explain why no investigative activities are needed; and
  • clarifies that any information or property obtained in violation of these provisions is inadmissible in court.

The Utah Legislature commenced its’ 2014 Legislative session on Monday. Below is a list of bills that may have an affect on you and your 2nd amendment rights. These will be updated and others added as the session progresses. Click on a title to taken to the related page on the Legislatures website.

—
H.B. 75S1 Restoration of Civil Rights for Nonviolent Felons.

BILL STATUS: Bill has passed the House and is awaiting to be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

This bill exempts nonviolent felons from the categories of restricted persons who are prohibited from possessing a dangerous weapon.

Suggested change to the code: (directly from the bill at the time of posting)

51        (c) As used in this section, a conviction of a felony or adjudication of delinquency for
52       an offense which would be a felony if committed by an adult does not include:
53       (i) a conviction or adjudication of delinquency for an offense pertaining to antitrust
54      violations, unfair trade practices, restraint of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the
55      regulation of business practices not involving theft or fraud; or
56      (ii) a conviction or adjudication of delinquency which, according to the law of the
57      jurisdiction in which it occurred, has been expunged, set aside, reduced to a misdemeanor by
58      court order, pardoned or regarding which the person’s civil rights have been restored unless the
59      pardon, reduction, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person
 60      may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.
61          (d) It is the burden of the defendant in a criminal case to provide evidence that a
62      conviction or adjudication of delinquency is subject to an exception provided in Subsection
63      (1)(c), after which it is the burden of the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the
64      conviction or adjudication of delinquency is not subject to that exception.—

—
H.B. 276 Disorderly Conduct Amendments

BILL STATUS: Waiting to be heard at the House Rules Committee — This bill is not moving very fast which can can indicate that it does not have the backing to pass both the House and Senate.

This bill includes displaying a dangerous weapon under certain circumstances in the definition of disorderly conduct.

Suggested change to the code: (directly from the bill at the time of posting)

43          (3) The mere carrying or possession of a holstered or encased firearm, whether visible
44      or concealed, without additional behavior or circumstances that would cause a reasonable
45      person to believe the holstered or encased firearm was carried or possessed unlawfully or with
46      criminal intent, does not constitute a violation of this section. For purposes of this section, the
47      belief of a reasonable person may not be based on a mistake of law. Nothing in this Subsection
48      (3) may limit or prohibit a law enforcement officer from approaching or engaging any person in
49      a voluntary conversation.

—
H.B. 70 Forcible Entry Amendments

BILL STATUS: Waiting to be heard at the House Judiciary Committee — This bill has been held in committee.  This is an indication it will go no further in the process.

This bill modifies the Utah Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the use of forcible entry by law enforcement officers when conducting a search or making an arrest.

Highlighted Provisions:
This bill:

• Amends existing law regarding the use of forcible entry by law enforcement officers to include searches;
• Requires law enforcement officers to identify themselves before forcing entry into a building;
• Amends existing law to allow law enforcement officers to force entry into a building without first issuing a demand or explanation if there is probable cause to believe that evidence will be easily or quickly destroyed;
• Requires law enforcement officers to use the least amount of force necessary when executing forcible entry, as authorized;
• Requires that any application for a warrant to forcibly enter a place of residence shall:
  • explain why law enforcement officials cannot use less invasive or confrontational methods to effectuate the necessary search or arrest;
  • explain why the search or arrest cannot be executed during the day, if it is to be executed at night, as defined; and
  • describe investigative activities that have been or will be undertaken prior to executing the search or arrest to ensure that the correct building has been
  •  identified or explain why no investigative activities are needed; and
  • clarifies that any information or property obtained in violation of these provisions is inadmissible in court.

Political Game: A commentator for the National Rifle Association (NRA) blasted Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday for proposing new expanded, universal background check system be implemented to purchase firearms.

The video features former Navy Seal Dom Raso explaining the alleged failure of our current background check system. He accuses Holder of playing “a political game” that “has nothing to do with making

Americans safer.”

 

“Here’s how it works: before the seller runs your name in the system, you have to fill out a form testifying you’re legally allowed to purchase a firearm. Lying on that form is a federal felony,” begins Raso.

So let’s say that’s what happens — the criminal lies on the form and the seller takes it to the back to run the name through the system. In 2010, that scenario played out 76,000 times … and only 13 of those 76,000 were legally blocked from buying a firearm and were actually prosecuted and convicted for committing a felony in order to TRY to buy a firearm,” he continues.

“The Attorney General Eric Holder was asked about this statistic, and he said there isn’t enough time to catch and prosecute all these criminals,” said Raso.

“OK, fine. Law enforcement is stretched thin and they’ve got a lot of problems on their hands already. But don’t tell me that that situation is going to get better if we have a ‘universal’ background check system.”

Mark Kelly’s campaign against “assault weapons” such as the AR-15 rifle has sparked a local backlash. On March 13, a Tucson, Arizona radio host published a photograph of former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords holding an AR-15 rifle at a gun range. Giffords has since confirmed that the photograph is authentic.

James T. Harris, blogging at the website of “101.4 FM The Truth,” wrote:

What is wrong with this picture? Absolutely nothing, and prior to the aggressive progressive opportunistic fear mongering in the wake of Sandy Hook, this picture would have raised no eyebrows and garnered little public attention.

However, in response to the exploitative political scheming of Mark Kelly, persons connected to Congresswoman Giffords released this photo in response to what they perceived to be her husband’s hypocrisy.

Subsequently, Breitbart News confirmed the authenticity of the image through law enforcement sources in Arizona, and obtained a copy of the photograph from a source who requested anonymity.

The latter source was present when the photograph was taken, and said that Giffords had requested it for campaign purposes during October 2010.

According to the source, the image sent to Breitbart News was cropped to protect the identity of the person on the right-hand side of the original photograph (to Giffords’s left).

The source, who is a member of the law enforcement community, told Breitbart News:

“We were told she wanted to toughen her image. She asked to come out and she wanted to shoot a rifle. She had one of our guys out there to show her how to shoot an AR-15.”

In January 2011, Giffords suffered near-fatal wounds in a mass shooting while meeting with constituents in Tucson. The perpetrator used a 9mm Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol.

Giffords and husband Mark Kelly have since formed an organization, Americans for Responsible Solutions, to press for policy changes such as limiting the sale of “assault weapons, ” including the AR-15.

Breitbart News reported last week that Kelly attempted to purchase an AR-15 from a gun store in Tucson earlier this month.

Likewise, the AR-15 that Giffords is shown holding in the image is a standard, semi-automatic civilian weapon, according to the source who saw it being taken.

The source saw a campaign official take the photograph, which was later provided to law enforcement personnel as a courtesy, according to the source.

The source says the existence of the photograph has been known in the local law enforcement community for a while: “I’m not the only one who knows about this photo.”

Multiple law enforcement sources in Arizona told Breitbart News that Mark Kelly’s campaign against “assault weapons” has generated resentment within the law enforcement community–and a desire that the photograph be made public.

The source who witnessed the photograph put it this way:

“Giffords and Kelly came across with a different demeanor in 2010. To me, it seems like they’ve done a complete 180 because of what happened. And with the latest controversy–with Mark Kelly doing what he did with the AR-15 stunt–this photo needs to be put out.”

While Kelly declined to comment, Americans for Responsible Solutions spokesperson Jen Bluestein told Breitbart News: “Looks like the photo is cropped.”

Bluestein noted that there are “many images of Gabrielle Giffords with guns,” though she said she had not seen the image of the AR-15 before.

At 1:14 p.m. PDT, Giffords posted two images on her Facebook page with the following statement:

Here are two photos of me that a conservative blog has dug up. I remember both of these days fondly. The first is at the Tucson Police Department firing range. They invited me to test rifles and tasers that they bought with federal funds, which I helped secure. The second was in Afghanistan while I was visiting with our troops serving abroad. My work as Southern Arizona’s Congresswoman frequently put me in close contact with some of the world’s most powerful and deadly weapons – supporting police departments, advocating for the Border Patrol, standing up for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and supporting my constituents’ and my own Second Amendment rights.

I grew up with guns, and I like owning them. So does my husband Mark. It’s an interest we’ve shared ever since we met. It’s part of my heritage as an Arizonan and it’s my right as an American. Being able to shoot a gun is something I haven’t been able to do since I was shot – because my right arm is paralyzed, and I’m less mobile than I was.

As I member of the House Armed Services Committee, I proudly spent a lot of time with our military, border patrol and state and local law enforcement. I guess the intention of those who have publicized these photos is to somehow call into question my belief that military style assault weapons should be more strongly regulated with background checks and other safeguards. I have never wavered in my support for those who serve our country. I fought to make sure they have the weapons and safety gear needed to carry out their mission, and proper health and mental care when their service ends.

Both sides of the gun violence debate usually miss the point. We don’t have to choose between owning, using, and enjoying guns, on one hand, and preventing gun violence, on the other. Both sides need to come together to support commonsense solutions to gun violence, like keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people like the young man who shot me. That’s why I’m fighting this fight. That’s why I’m working to bring people together to support gun rights and reduce gun violence. I hope you join me.

Senate Democrats today dropped a controversial proposal to ban assault weapon from a gun control bill they plan to introduce on the floor of the Senate in April.

The decision to drop ban indicated that Democrats could sense that the overall bill likely had no chance of passing with an assault weapons language included.

“I’m not going to try to put something on the floor that won’t succeed,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.  “I want something that will succeed. The worst thing in the world would be to bring something to the floor and it dies there. I am working to put something together than can get 60 votes on the floor.”

Reid guessed that the measure, sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., had support from fewer than 40 senators, far less than the 60 votes needed for passage

The assault weapons ban will still get a vote. It will be voted on as a standalone measure as an amendment to the base gun control bill. But stripping it off the base bill leaves it vulnerable and decreases the chance of it passing, as it will not receive the same support that it could have if it was bundled with the other less controversial measures.

Last Thursday the Senate Judiciary Committee voted in favor of the assault weapons ban bill during their markup of gun legislation.

Feinstein today told reporters she was informed of the decision by the Democratic leadership on Monday night and was “disappointed” in the decision and that her efforts at the end of the day were not good enough.

The assault weapons ban is just one of the gun measures passed last week by the Senate Judiciary Committee. The committee also voted in favor of a bill to boost school safety money, a bill that would expand federal background checks,  and a gun trafficking bill that makes “straw” purchasing – legally buying a gun to give to a criminal or someone not allowed to have one — illegal.

Reid is working to determine which measures will be included in the Democrats’ base bill and indicated he’d like to get a bill to the floor of the Senate “as soon after recess as I can.”