Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Firearms topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House approves law shielding property owners who allow permitted concealed carry; critics warn of blanket immunity
Summary
The House passed HB 380, a voluntary provision allowing private property owners who do not post prohibitory signage to permit concealed-weapon permit holders onto their property without civil or criminal liability for those permit holders’ actions; passage was 45–24 after heated debate over accountability and signage.
The Utah House voted to pass House Bill 380 on March 1, a measure that creates a voluntary option for private property owners to allow concealed-weapon permit holders on their premises without civil or criminal liability for third-party conduct, so long as the owner has not posted a ‘‘no weapons’’ sign.
Sponsor Representative Stephen Sandstrom described the measure as voluntary and protective of business owners who want to allow patrons with concealed-carry permits onto their property: ‘‘All it states is that if you are a private property owner ... and you do not post a sign that says you cannot come onto the property, then they will be immune from liability either criminally or civilly for the actions of the person that has the concealed weapon,’’ he said on the floor.
Sandstrom cited past mass‑shooting incidents and argued that a law allowing responsible permit‑holders to be present could help avert further tragedies. He emphasized the bill does not prevent property owners from posting ‘‘no weapons’’ signs and noted the bill excludes situations where an owner ‘‘solicits, requests, commands, encourages or intentionally aids’’ use of a firearm.
Opponents, including Representative King, argued the change would create a broad immunity that reduces owner accountability and improperly replaces case‑by‑case judicial review. King said the bill ‘‘moves us down the line a little bit toward the politicization of the judiciary’’ and argued the current legal framework allows courts to examine facts in each case to determine liability.
Floor questions clarified that businesses and homeowners retain the right to post signs prohibiting weapons; the sponsor repeatedly said signage remains permissible: ‘‘You can still put the sign up,’’ he told colleagues. Debate also included exchanges about whether removing signage after a well-known shooting (Trolley Square) would have materially changed outcomes.
After robust debate and multiple questions from the floor, the House recorded a vote of 45 yes and 24 no and sent the bill to the Senate.
