2014 Legislative Wish List

[CathyInBlue]

A) Constitutional Carry (Repeal of IC 35-47-2-1 et seq. wholesale)

B) Legal carry on school/presehool/child care grounds (Repeal of:
IC 10-14-3-33.5(b) (keep gun owners from becoming felons if they are evacuated to a GFZ during an emergency)
IC 20-33-8-16 (except for handgun or destructive device possession) (students have 2nd Am. rights too)
IC 33-37-5-18 (just for good measure, Safe Schools Fee for people convicted of crimes with guns)
IC 34-28-7-2(b)(1, 2 (except for C), 5, 6, 8, 9, & 10) (the guns in locked vehicles exceptions)
IC 35-47-5-2.5 (just for good measure, because knives are arms too)
IC 35-47-9-1 et seq. (the meaty part of this tronch)
IC 37-47-11.1-4(12) (zoning against gun shops near schools)
465 IAC 2-9-80(b)(3), 2-10-79(b)(3), 2-12-78(b)(3), 2-13-77(b)(3)

(It's important to note here that I explicitly did not mention IC 34-28-7-2(b)(2)(C) or 465 IAC 2-11-80(b)(3) as they relate to private secure facilities.)

C) Repeal of state law against Short-Barrelled Shotguns (IC 35-47-5-4.1)

D) Repeal of state law against full-auto/select-fire firearms (IC 35-47-5-9 & 10)

E) Repeal of state law against armor-piercing ammunition (IC 35-47-5-11)

F) Repeal of state law banning shuriken (IC 35-47-5-12)

G) Repeal of state law against knives of any kind (IC 35-47-5-2)

H) Repeal of state laws against electric stunners (IC 35-47-8-1 et seq.)

I) Repeal of Jake Laird's Law (IC 35-47-14-1 et seq.)

J) The affirmative right, described in the local preemption statute, to go forth in public armed, openly or concealed, with blunt objects or blades, handguns or long guns, or anything thereto appertaining.

K) The affirmative codification of when an agent of the state has the authority to disarm a person for which the agent does not have affirmative knowledge of the commission of a crime with said arms.

L) Make ISP and all other state law enforcement agents subject to IC 35-47-11.1 as well as LEOs employed by political subdivisions.

M) Clarify what constitutes a legitimate MWAG call and when the police need to tell a hoplophobe off.

N) Repeal the statute banning weapons from the Capitol grounds. (25 IAC 8)

O) Only allow local law under IC 35-47-11.1-4(5) (guns in courthouses) to have effect during hours with actual court business taking place on the premises and/or only in the actual courtrooms themselves.

 

[hookedonjeep]

Good start!

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Tagging for later.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I'd like to see Indiana return to the federal 2A as the guideline of what can be carried, and I'd limit carry only by those who are not free citizens, those being the people incarcerated for a crime or for mental illness. Carry by minors would be regulated not by law but by parents, who are responsible for the actions of their children.

Realistically, I think I'd like to see the end of "gun free zones" in Indiana for those who hold a LTCH, and I'd like to see clarified that no school or institution of higher learning (college/university) can lawfully prohibit those who lawfully own and possess firearms from keeping them in their locked vehicles regardless of the owner's presence or absence from the vehicle. I think those two are attainable goals this year, and can be used, much as the currently active law prohibiting business owners from disallowing firearms in their parking lots could be used to advance the above. Note: I'm not a fan of the implication that gov't can tell a business owner what he can and/or must allow on his property, but I can't deny that such a law is useful to show precedent for another law that restores freedoms.

 

[Trigger Time]

BOR, do you see constitutional carry as something that's possible this session? I know you keep your ear to the ground.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Honestly, Trigger Time? No, I don't. I think we're making good strides, but I don't think that TPTB in Indy are quite ready to go that far. As I said in the other thread, there is good reason to amass political capital, and at present, with no insult intended, I think that Mr. Jefferson's quote is most applicable to our elected leaders: "Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." Let's be honest... liberty is a laudable goal, but we all know it can be frightening as well, to those unaccustomed to it. That's no reason to not seek it, but it is an explanation of why some do not.

I think we've a few more sessions to go before the GA is ready to accept that, however much some of the people want it to happen. I think we need to keep good, pro-rights people there a lot longer as well, lest their replacements repeal the gains we've made and may make this year.

Not good news, but my honest answer to your question.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Rookie]

What are the odds of, at the very least, being able to legally secure a firearm in a vehicle on school property?

 

[Bill of Rights]

If I was guessing, I'd guess those odds to be good. A bill to that effect was introduced last year, but sadly, Rep. Davis refused to give it a hearing. With a new person, especially one who is reportedly very pro-gun rights, at the helm of that committee, I'd be surprised if such a bill was not re-introduced.

I'd love to see a bill like that go farther, and end the prohibition on LTCH holders carrying there (recognizing that there is no magic about the property line of a school that makes a bad man good or vice versa), but again, I think maybe it's yet a bit soon to expect that the GA will go quite that far. C'mon, Senators and Representatives... if you're reading this, PROVE ME WRONG!

Blessings,
Bill

What are the odds of, at the very least, being able to legally secure a firearm in a vehicle on school property?

 

[Trigger Time]

I was just hoping the men and women who are public servants would have the guts to do the right thing based on the constitution. I guess sitting behind a desk being ridiculed by the left is too muc for some to handle. What about the men who died to give us the rights that they are keeping from us? We know these laws are wrong yet we ignore it. I really would like to see thousands of letters supporting constitutional carry. Indiana is supposed to be a 2nd amendment leader yet other states have it and we don't.

 

[Bill of Rights]

It's a lot less about guts and/or ridicule from the left, Trigger. Keep in mind that we're not their whole constituency, either, and there are many other issues just as important as this one is to us, to the other people they serve. Further, most of the other citizens in their constituency get their info about guns from the media, and we know what they say about us.

I've talked to a few of our representatives... With a very few exceptions, those with whom I've spoken have not only been pro-2A, they're shooters themselves. Of those I've written to, the mix is a little more even, and lots of education is still needed. The example I've used before is Sen. Long: A few years ago (2008 or 2009, I forget which) there was a debate on the Senate floor over a bill that Sen. Johnny Nugent had penned, which would have ended state-level GFZs with full preemption, and would have in the process ended the prohibition on carry in gov't schools for anyone with a LTCH. One of Sen. Long's statements in the debate was, in reference to the 18 yr old senior with his LTCH, "We don't need kids carrying guns to school!" (that's a paraphrase; I've slept since then and forgotten his exact words.) The simple fact is that if that 18 yr old has passed his background check, he has as much business carrying as anyone else, and BGC or not, either way, he has the right to do so. As I said, lots of education is still needed, but we were only a year or two out from Virginia Tech at the time, and the echoes of Columbine are still heard even today, let alone four or five years ago.
I'm preaching to the choir to say here that those incidents were driven by and in part caused by the very laws designed to prevent them.

Constitutional Carry is a goal I want to see us reach, but, as I used to hear and say often when I was more active in Appleseed, "Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good enough." I'm not saying by any stretch that that our laws are "good enough", but what I'm saying is that our laws are very good. By way of example, look at a few other states: No guns in banks, no guns in restaurants, no guns in restaurants if they sell alcohol, no guns at public gatherings, no guns at sporting events, no guns on private property without specific permission of the owner, no guns if you're under 21, no guns without passing a training requirement, no guns that aren't specifically listed on your permit to purchase and/or your carry permit, if you can even get one, and until recently in our neighbor to the west, no guns at all if you don't have a badge. Find a state that you think is better. I can find something good we have that they don't.

Sure, some other states have Constitutional Carry. Some also have unlicensed OC, and some specifically allow in statute the carry of a handgun in a school, but hell, even the Brady Bunch recognize IN as being a leader, though they don't see us that way. IIRC, their most recent "report card" (2011) had us with 4 points: 2 for the requirement of a state-level license for those selling guns, and 2 for us not having a "shoot first law"-- of course, they're mistaken on that, as that's their name for Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground, and we've had that for many years.

Our laws are not bad by any stretch of the imagination. They could be better, but they're not bad, and they're moving in the right direction with good momentum. We just have to keep it going. Thanks for writing your letters, as you told me you'd done. Rep inbound.

Blessings,
Bill

I was just hoping the men and women who are public servants would have the guts to do the right thing based on the constitution. I guess sitting behind a desk being ridiculed by the left is too muc for some to handle. What about the men who died to give us the rights that they are keeping from us? We know these laws are wrong yet we ignore it. I really would like to see thousands of letters supporting constitutional carry. Indiana is supposed to be a 2nd amendment leader yet other states have it and we don't.

 

[CathyInBlue]

P) The explicit abrogation of any duties, responsibilities, or obligations at all levels of government in the state of Indiana to follow, obey, or implement any part of any legislative or other plan based on such precepts as "U.N. Agenda 21", "responsibility to protect", or the U.N. "Arms Trade Treaty"

 

[fundy87]

I'd like to see unlicensed OC

 

[CathyInBlue]

I can't believe I mentioned primary and secondary schools without any mention of post-secondary universities and colleges.

Q) Reform IC 35-47-11.1-1 thusly:

IC 35-47-11.1-1
Application
Sec. 1. This chapter applies to a political subdivision (as defined in IC 3-5-2-38) or an approved postsecondary educational institution (as defined in IC 21-7-13-6) which receives any funding from the state of Indiana.

Thereafter, no one can be legally trespassed from a college campus just because they are exercising their 2nd Amendment rights.

 

[Hammerhead]

I'd like to see unlicensed OC

I don't like the idea of converting our current system of licensing into CC licensing. Forget to Virginia tuck and you're gigged for unlawful carry. Aside from the fact that it's now equating CCing to something dirty that you have to get permission to do.

Yes, I am a faithful OCer. Yes, I am opposed to our current (in my view illegal) licensing system. I would like to see the requirement for a permission slip to go away completely. But I do CC as necessary (today, for an extended period of time). And I can see a huge stigma being attached to the idea of CCing should we only eliminate licensed OC.

I believe the best course of action is taking the laws off the books that restrict licensed carriers:

state capitol carry a la Texas (no, Kirk's first law doesn't apply, no .45 for you)
carry on school property/in schools
carry in public buildings including courthouses (city, county, and city-county buildings). Judges have their feifdoms, but they're not above the law even in the courtrooms.

...and the list goes on. I agree with Cathy's list of "wants" but I'd probably add something somewhere in the MWAG/telling the hoplophobe off that there be some real consequenses to false reporting.

The stigma that carry has in this state has waned over the last several years. If we can remove any restrictions on where/how/when licensed legal carriers can carry and show that it's not just some fluke of imaginary boundaries and locked doors that keep good guys good, then we can start really making a huge effort to kill the license altogether.

I'd also add some codification of the ILEA education and continuing education of LEOs on state gun laws. Yes, I know, LEOs go through only so much legal coursework at ILEA due to the constant ebb and flow of the law. However, you carry a gun professionally, you should know/be kept abreast of the laws that pertain to that particular item in much greater detail. This would be an addendum to the disarm or not/individual LEO-political subdivision employee 11.1 personal responsibility Cathy brought up.

I'd also like to see the hospital carry rule exemption and the Irsay clause of 11.1 go away too. The hospital rule exemption is confusing at best and patently stupid at worst.

There's plenty more, but I'm tired.

 

[CathyInBlue]

2014 Legislative Session Scorecard:
Everything in bold was actually repealed. Everything underlined was reformed/modified/added to.

A) Constitutional Carry (Repeal of IC 35-47-2-1 et seq. wholesale)

B) Legal carry on school/presehool/child care grounds (Repeal of:
IC 10-14-3-33.5(b) (keep gun owners from becoming felons if they are evacuated to a GFZ during an emergency)
IC 20-33-8-16 (except for handgun or destructive device possession) (students have 2nd Am. rights too)
IC 33-37-5-18 (just for good measure, Safe Schools Fee for people convicted of crimes with guns)
IC 34-28-7-2(b)(1, 2 (except for C), 5, 6, 8, 9, & 10) (the guns in locked vehicles exceptions)
IC 35-47-5-2.5 (just for good measure, because knives are arms too)
IC 35-47-9-1 et seq. (the meaty part of this tronch)
IC 37-47-11.1-4(12) (zoning against gun shops near schools)
465 IAC 2-9-80(b)(3), 2-10-79(b)(3), 2-12-78(b)(3), 2-13-77(b)(3)

(It's important to note here that I explicitly did not mention IC 34-28-7-2(b)(2)(C) or 465 IAC 2-11-80(b)(3) as they relate to private secure facilities.)

C) Repeal of state law against Short-Barrelled Shotguns (IC 35-47-5-4.1)

D) Repeal of state law against full-auto/select-fire firearms (IC 35-47-5-9 & 10)

E) Repeal of state law against armor-piercing ammunition (IC 35-47-5-11)

F) Repeal of state law banning shuriken (IC 35-47-5-12)

G) Repeal of state law against knives of any kind (IC 35-47-5-2)

H) Repeal of state laws against electric stunners (IC 35-47-8-1 et seq.)

I) Repeal of Jake Laird's Law (IC 35-47-14-1 et seq.)

J) The affirmative right, described in the local preemption statute, to go forth in public armed, openly or concealed, with blunt objects or blades, handguns or long guns, or anything thereto appertaining.

K) The affirmative codification of when an agent of the state has the authority to disarm a person for which the agent does not have affirmative knowledge of the commission of a crime with said arms.

L) Make ISP and all other state law enforcement agents subject to IC 35-47-11.1 as well as LEOs employed by political subdivisions.

M) Clarify what constitutes a legitimate MWAG call and when the police need to tell a hoplophobe off.

N) Repeal the statute banning weapons from the Capitol grounds. (25 IAC 8)

O) Only allow local law under IC 35-47-11.1-4(5) (guns in courthouses) to have effect during hours with actual court business taking place on the premises and/or only in the actual courtrooms themselves.

P) The explicit abrogation of any duties, responsibilities, or obligations at all levels of government in the state of Indiana to follow, obey, or implement any part of any legislative or other plan based on such precepts as "U.N. Agenda 21", "responsibility to protect", or the U.N. "Arms Trade Treaty"

Q) Reform IC 35-47-11.1-1 thusly:

IC 35-47-11.1-1
Application
Sec. 1. This chapter applies to a political subdivision (as defined in IC 3-5-2-38) or an approved postsecondary educational institution (as defined in IC 21-7-13-6) which receives any funding from the state of Indiana.

So, as far as my wish list, there wasn't a great deal of movement. We're still just nibbling at the fringe of the rampant degree of infringement.