With public opinion polls indicating that many Utahns have bought into the idea of outlawing legally carried guns in schools, churches and on private property, perhaps nine out of 10 Utahns need to reconsider their stance in light of a few facts.
The concept of "less guns equals less crime" is true only when referring to firearms possessed by those with criminal intent. Since criminals by definition are those who ignore laws, is it reasonable to assume that this proposed law is one that criminals will obey? If the answer is no, then such laws must be targeting someone other than the criminal, namely, the law-abiding citizen possessing a legally concealed weapon.Remember, this is the same citizen who has passed a state and FBI background check and has been pronounced clean, has been fingerprinted, received the required instruction concerning firearm safety and the lawful use of lethal force, has paid the applicable taxes and been recommended by at least two upstanding members of his or her community.
Alarmists who maintain that such permit holders pose a threat to society in any setting not only fail to recognize the difference between criminals and the law-abiding but deliberately mischaracterize gun owners as irresponsible and dangerous. And do so without a single documented incident to illustrate how or when a legally concealed handgun was used to commit a crime in a church, a school or anywhere else.
To suggest that the public needs protection from concealed carry permit holders is an exercise in demagoguery. Nine out of 10 Utahns would do well to consider why they've been led to believe that the law-abiding pose a greater danger than the criminal. The most vivid examples of profiles in cowardice are those who call for restriction of the law-abiding for the sake of a nonexistent problem.
Bryan Hyde
St. George