A Portion of the GOUtah! Presentation Prepared for the Interim Committee on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice of the Utah State Legislature, 19 May 2004
Prior to 1986 concealed firearms permits (often called CCW's) were issued by the local chief law enforcement officer (CLEO) on a purely discretionary basis, regardless of any demonstrated competence or other training requirement on the part of the permittee. While some CLEO's issued permits in a fair and impartial manner, many others used CCW's as incentives or rewards for campaign contributions or other political favors.
Due to the widespread abuses in this system, in 1986 the Utah Legislature shifted the issuance of CCW's to the state level under the Bureau of Criminal Identification, but retained the discretionary aspect and added a requirement to 'demonstrate familiarity' with safe firearm handling, usually via a taking a short self-defense class or through some other activity using firearms such as organized competition. At the peak of this period perhaps 2000 CCW permits were issued statewide.
Because BCI elected to implement a highly-restrictive discretionary policy on issuance of CCW's, many local and national self-defense advocates worked for nearly a decade with both BCI and the Utah Legislature to reform the law, retaining the 'demonstrated familiarity' requirement but removing the discretionary aspect of the statute requiring a 'demonstration of need' and replacing it with a mandatory 'shall issue' unless something in the applicant's documented background disqualified them from owning or possessing a firearm or indicated they were of questionable character.
Following a strong national trend during the 1980's and 1990's, this mandatory 'shall issue' CCW practice became Utah law in 1995. Since that time many ten's of thousands of Utah residents have been issued CCW permits, and about 60,000 permits are currently valid in the state. Currently nearly 40 states, containing about two-thirds of the national population have some form of 'shall issue' CCW permit.
When the issue of training for civilian CCW permit applicants is discussed, the statutory and regulatory model most often considered is the one used by law enforcement agencies for their sworn officers. While this may vary from agency to agency, it often consists of extensive classroom instruction, then live-fire training at a dedicated law enforcement range facility leading to firing a minimum qualifying score on a standardized course of fire, followed by a regular schedule of re-qualification on a quarterly, semi-annual or annual basis.
In view of today's litigious society, while this training model may be appropriate for the sworn law enforcement officer charged with powers of arrest who may be taking violent suspects into custody at gunpoint on a regular basis, it also provides the 'deep pockets' of government with a documented measure of performance that can be used in court to refute claims of misuse of deadly force in the course of their official duties. The government's legal indemnification of their officer's actions make thus may make such training a legitimate requirement of employment or retention of POST certification.
Civilian CCW permit holders, by contrast, have no such powers of arrest or use of force beyond those held by any other private citizen. The chances of a CCW permittee having to fire in lawful self-defense are much less than those of a law enforcement officer on patrol. Further, no government entity indemnifies the CCW permittee's actions, and thus this rigorous level of training is both inappropriate and serves only to erect a substantial regulatory hurdle to the lawful exercise of the individual right of self-defense.
In addition, as Utah becomes increasingly urbanized, many public access shooting ranges are being closed due to encroaching development. Absent the existence of a network of affordable public shooting ranges similar to our public golf courses or the public library system, the physical facility infrastructure to conduct any form of live fire training or ongoing re-qualification of our current 60,000 CCW permittees does not exist and will not exist without a major infusion of scarce tax dollars to create and maintain such a network of range facilities.
Finally, there is apparently no currently documented pattern of widespread lack of marksmanship skills on the part of Utah's 60,000 CCW holders. No one seems to have come forth with the hundreds or thousands of broken windows, perforated auto fenders and wounded innocent bystanders that would clearly indicate any such problem with marksmanship actually exists. If there is a serious problem, where's the carnage?
Thus, it becomes abundantly clear that any of the current proposals to somehow enhance public safety by requiring CCW applicants to undergo any additional training, including live fire, are totally unfounded. In addition, Utah's 60,000 CCW permit holders are, both individually and as a whole acting with commendable restraint when it comes to their 'use of force' decisions. No widespread pattern of 'Rambo' behavior has been observed or documented.
Since no pattern of reckless behavior or danger to the public as a whole is attributable in any way to the current training levels of Utah's 60,000 CCW permittees, it is now time to give serious legislative and regulatory consideration to further reducing the existing training requirement for Utah CCW permit applicants.
A number of states currently have NO formal training requirement for CCW permit applicants. For example Washington State, one of our very progressive neighbors to the northwest has issued several hundred thousand CCW permits over the past decade-plus with no specific training requirement, and no documented pattern of problems that can be attributed to lack of training. Other states such as Georgia show similar results.
Vermont and Alaska have both eliminated any requirement as to CCW training simply by eliminating existing laws prohibiting carrying of concealed weapons by peaceable adult private citizens. As long as an individual doesn't carry a weapon with the intent to cause unlawful harm to a specific person, they are free to go about their daily lives secure in the knowledge that they are able to lawfully protect themselves and their loved ones, that their government trusts them to behave in a responsible manner, and in turn that such public trust is not misplaced.
There is no legitimate public policy reason why Utah's laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons by peaceable adult private citizens for lawful self-defense could not be eliminated. Utah may wish to maintain some form of CCW permit, primarily for purposes of CCW recognition in other states, to satisfy the federal instant background check system at point of purchase, and/or to allow lawful carry on Utah school grounds. Should Utah wish to retain a demonstration of specific knowledge by a CCW applicant, a brief printed study guide similar to that given to driver's license applicants, followed by a simple 10 to 15 question written test covering firearms safety, firearms laws and use of force issues administered at time of application would be more than adequate.
In this dark period of growing threats from terrorists and other extremists to the personal safety of every American citizen, especially right here on our own soil, in our homes, streets and other institutions, it is time for Utah to again be among the national leaders in this growing movement forward individual freedom, responsibility and personal empowerment.
We would encourage each of you to give serious consideration to eliminating Utah laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons by peaceable adult private citizens and related training rather than enlarging the current training requirement for Utah CCW applicants.
Return to GOUtah! Home Page
Return to GOUtah! White Papers Index