Bill in Utah reflects problem with WA RCW 9.41.270(1)

[Dave Workman]

Utah gun bill reflects problem with Washington statute

Utah lawmakers will consider legislation next month that would remove criminal penalties for merely carrying a firearm in public, in a lawful manner, whether openly or concealed, prohibiting the armed citizen from being charged with, for example, disorderly conduct.

<broken link removed>

We need to remove the language about "causes alarm in another person."

Read More

 

[Misterbill]

Utah gun bill reflects problem with Washington statute

Utah lawmakers will consider legislation next month that would remove criminal penalties for merely carrying a firearm in public, in a lawful manner, whether openly or concealed, prohibiting the armed citizen from being charged with, for example, disorderly conduct.

<broken link removed>

We need to remove the language about "causes alarm in another person."

Indeed, Being basically at the mercy of a moon-bat anti's hoplophobia as interpreted by a moonbat judge is not exactly open-carry friendly.

 

[phathom]

Yup. This definitely needs to be changed. I have said this for years and still agree. Looking at someone and smiling will cause alarm to not all, not most, but some people. How that person reacts, no matter how justified or unjustified is no grounds to land someone in jail for doing nothing unlawful.

 

[hermannr]

I would think that just adding the wording in Casad into 270 would do the job, though the best resolution would be to just reword or better, repeal, 270.

 

[MikeSettles]

Utah gun bill reflects problem with Washington statute

Utah lawmakers will consider legislation next month that would remove criminal penalties for merely carrying a firearm in public, in a lawful manner, whether openly or concealed, prohibiting the armed citizen from being charged with, for example, disorderly conduct.

<broken link removed>

We need to remove the language about "causes alarm in another person."

Dave, we need to parallel what they recently did in Florida: Any elected official who makes a rule which is against state firearms laws gets a stiff civil penalty. (I'm not against jail time for the varmints, either!) That would fix McGinn and the Vancouver City Counsel. ;-)

 

[drew]

Dave, we need to parallel what they recently did in Florida: Any elected official who makes a rule which is against state firearms laws gets a stiff civil penalty. (I'm not against jail time for the varmints, either!) That would fix McGinn and the Vancouver City Counsel. ;-)

I'd like to see every state with a preemption clause adopt this. That way you wouldn't have to worry about public officials making laws that are null and void. They also penalize officers who enforce those laws.

We have some city officials in OR who need reigned in too.