UT: Constitutional Carry with a twist

Gun Watch ^ | 11 February, 2015 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

An interesting variation on constitutional carry has been introduced in the 2015 Utah legislature.  Constitutional carry, that is, concealed or open carry of a weapon without the requirement to first obtain permission from the government, passed with veto proof majorities in 2013.  It was vetoed by Governor Herbert, and the 2013 legislature did not have the political will to hold an override session.   Now the same legislator,  Curtis Oda, pictured above, has introduced the same bill under a new number.   

Utah has a unique requirement in its open carry law.  Open carry is accepted with a peculiar twist: the pistol has to be "unloaded" under the definition in Utah law.  A pistol is considred unloaded if it takes two mechanical actions to fire the pistol, and it may not be carried with a round chambered.  This seems to have resulted as a reaction to modern pistol design.  The old way, standard until about 1972, to commonly carry a single action revolver safely, was to have an empty chamber under the hammer. 

The way that a single action revolver works, two mechanical actions are required to fire the firearm.  First, the hammer has to be cocked.  This also rotates the cylinder, bringing a cartridge underneath the hammer, in line with the barrel.   Then the trigger is pressed, causing the hammer to fall, firing the cartridge.

Modern revolvers can be carried safely with a cartridge under the hammer.  The mechanical designs of modern revolvers make it virtually impossible to fire a pistol by dropping it, as could happen with the 1873 design of the Colt revolver.  The same can be said for most modern semi-automatic pistol designs.  The Utah law has become technologically obsolete. 

Governor Herbert claimed that obtaining a permit, attending classes,and paying fees "...does not inhibit our ability to bear arms."  when he vetoed constitutional carry in 2013.   Representative Odah has reintroduced virtually the same bill.  Here is the relevant part from HB260 in 2015:

 General Description: This bill amends provisions of Title 76, Chapter 10, Part 5, Weapons, related to conduct involving the carrying of a concealed firearm. 

Highlighted Provisions: 

 This bill:
13 ▸ provides an exemption for a person, who is 21 years of age or older and who may lawfully possess a firearm, from certain criminal provisions related to the carrying of an unloaded concealed firearm.

Here is the relevant definition of what "loaded" means under Utah law.  From utah.gov:

U.C.A. 76-10-502.   When weapon deemed loaded.
            (1) For the purpose of this chapter, any pistol, revolver, shotgun, rifle, or other weapon described in this part shall be deemed to be loaded when there is an unexpended cartridge, shell, or projectile in the firing position.
            (2) Pistols and revolvers shall also be deemed to be loaded when an unexpended cartridge, shell, or projectile is in a position whereby the manual operation of any mechanism once would cause the unexpended cartridge, shell, or projectile to be fired.

Utah has strong Republican majorities in both the house and the Senate.

The Senate has retained the same proportions.  In 2013 and 2015 it had and has 24 Republicans and 5 Democrats.

In 2015 the House gained two Republicans, to 63, with 12 Democrats.

In 2013, the legislature voted for the measure with 'veto proof' majorities, but then chose not to override Governor Herbert's veto.   22 senators voted for the bill, and 7 against it.   51 representatives voted for the bill, and 18 against it.   In Utah, a two thirds majority is needed for an override.  If the bill is passed early in the session, there will be time to rally an override a veto, if necessary.

©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

Representative Oda has agreed to hold the bill for an undetermined period.

[Yo-Yo]

Dump the silly ‘unloaded’ bit and you’ve got something. For a double action revolver, the only way to legally carry under this bill (without a license) is to have the empty chamber next in line, so that the first pull of the trigger brings up an empty cylinder.

Makes a 6 shot into a 5 shot, and a 5 shot into a 4 shot.

[circlecity]

"Open carry is accepted with a peculiar twist: the pistol has to be "unloaded" under the definition in Utah law. A pistol is considred unloaded if it takes two mechanical actions to fire the pistol, and it may not be carried with a round chambered."

With an autoloading pistol aren't these these two things the same requirements. Ie. If you are carrying without a round chamebered then it takes two mechanical actions to fire: (1) chambering a round; and (2) pulling the trigger.

[Sasparilla]

What exactly is the “firing” position of a single action revolver when the first two cylinders to come up are empty and the others are loaded? And, lawmakers would probably be shocked at how quickly a magazine can be loaded into a semi auto.

[marktwain]

For a single action revolver, only the chamber under the hammer needs to be unloaded. For a double action revolver, the chamber under the hammer and the next chamber need to be unloaded.

For a semi-auto, only the chamber needs to be empty, they can be carried in condition three, with a loaded magazine in place, but no round in the chamber.

[circlecity]

"For a double action revolver, the chamber under the hammer and the next chamber need to be unloaded."

Ugggggh. Since my CC weapon is a double action revolver this would leave me with only three rounds to protect myself. Under those conditions I would probably switch to a sub-compact semi-auto.

[jaydee770]

Can the two actions consist of:
1. Disengaging a safety
2. Pulling the trigger

I mean, that’s two seperate and distinct actions for any weapon with a manual safety.

I’d truly hate to carry with an empty chamber, but if it means the difference between legal and illegal, I’d try to get *darned* comfortable with Israeli-carry as fast as I could.

[marktwain]

That is far too logical for this law. It is necessary that no live round be chambered underneath the hammer...

[ctdonath2]

So it requires “Israeli carry”: work the slide as you present.

[jaydee770]

Or what about a pistol with a mag safety? Even with a round chambered, she won’t go bang until the mag is inserted.

I guess this is what happens when they try to write laws too specifically - it’s hard to think of all the loopholes, gray areas and unintended consequences.

Quit trying to define details like loaded or unloaded and just pass something that says you can carry a *weapon* and leave it at that. If the Gov vetoes, then over-ride it.

And by *weapon*, if you can carry a handgun or long gun, then it makes no difference if you also carry a switchblade, nunchucks, sword, etc, etc, etc. (my opinion). Carry whatever weapon floats your boat - just don’t ask me to tote it for you if it gets unwieldy or too heavy.

[marktwain]

I sympathise. Still, it is hard to argue with success. Second amendment supporters have made considerable progress by moving the ball forward, step by incremental step.

[SampleMan]

So the only firearm that would be of any value to open carry, under this law, would be a revolver, with an unloaded chamber in the next cylinder to index (not the one under the hammer).

[faithhopecharity]

..’the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...”

(this ‘definition of unloaded’ krap is just the kind of garbage the government gets into when it tries to write ‘laws’ on matters it is prohibited from legislating...)

[S.O.S121.500]

Every ‘Law’ subsequent to the ratification of the Bill of Right regarding fire arms is repugnant to the constitution and thus null and void.

Had ENOUGH Yet ?