I think this thread is focused on Indiana legislation. The two Senators and the Representative you mentioned are in Congress.I haven't received a reply from Walorski or Todd Young. 4 times I've sent emails and paper letters since before Nov-present.
Mike Braun says he is on board and pushing for term limits for Senate members.
That’s correct. Getting back to the state legislation, Christopher Judy, my Rep, says he fully supports HB 1369.I think this thread is focused on Indiana legislation. The two Senators and the Representative you mentioned are in Congress.
I know, I haven't received a response from Mike Bohacek or Jim Pressel.I think this thread is focused on Indiana legislation. The two Senators and the Representative you mentioned are in Congress.
I could not possibly think that it is a thing. Unless you're Biden, it may get you into some trouble.I thought I heard something on the news earlier this morning or late last night about some state legislator here in IN introducing a bill to stop police from firing "warning" shots. Is that still a "thing"?
I thought police department/agencies had stopped doing that years ago. For obvious reasons...
Apparently Sen. Baldwin said some agencies are considering requiring warning shots before deadly force by a firearm can can be used and he wants to prevent that (duh). Where he heard that, who knows, but sounds like he's trying to get ahead of the issue if it's a real thing.I thought I heard something on the news earlier this morning or late last night about some state legislator here in IN introducing a bill to stop police from firing "warning" shots. Is that still a "thing"?
I thought police department/agencies had stopped doing that years ago. For obvious reasons...
You have it backwards. A D would want to require them.Sounds like too me. D looking for a problem to his solution.
The amendments just show where it’s being plugged in, and the reference. It’ll take some digging to figure out the exact context.Does it preempt DNR from banning carry at ranges?
This has to be fake news. A warning shot, by definition, is deployment of deadly force. Worse, a "warning shot" violates Rule 4 and risks deployment of said deadly force against an innocent bystander.Apparently Sen. Baldwin said some agencies are considering requiring warning shots before deadly force by a firearm can can be used and he wants to prevent that (duh). Where he heard that, who knows, but sounds like he's trying to get ahead of the issue if it's a real thing.
You may be assigning too much intelligence to the people in charge. After all, we now have a President who recommended warning shots with a shotgun!This has to be fake news. A warning shot, by definition, is deployment of deadly force. Worse, a "warning shot" violates Rule 4 and risks deployment of said deadly force against an innocent bystander.
There is absolutely zero chance that any LEO agency is giving any serious consideration to such a policy.
If nothing else go to Legiscan.com ans sign up. Find the bills you want to keep up with and you're all set.Is there any way to subscribe to updates on a given bill in Indiana? I'm not seeing how to do this...