Carry permits.

[Jeremiah]

I have a few questions, and basically am curious on the thoughts of INGO.


would you support

Leagal permitless open carry or concealed carry in Indiana with the abiltiy to obtain a Utah or ohio type carry permit to aide in carrying a handgun outside our great state.


permitless carry being legal, with the abilty to aquire a permit the same as what we currently have ( wich is recognized by 24 states at the moment so you could still carry in other states in like AK residents )

or just not messing with it?

 

[Prometheus]

I have a few questions, and basically am curious on the thoughts of INGO.


would you support

Leagal permitless open carry or concealed carry in Indiana with the abiltiy to obtain a Utah or ohio type carry permit to aide in carrying a handgun outside our great state.


permitless carry being legal, with the abilty to aquire a permit the same as what we currently have ( wich is recognized by 24 states at the moment so you could still carry in other states in like AK residents )

YES!

VT and AK do the same thing and it's long over due here. Many other states (like PA and OH, even WI) don't require anything for open carry.
It's long over due.

A fee to exercise the second amendment is no different than a poll tax which was outlawed decades ago.

It's immoral and reprehensible!

 

[cce1302]

Yes.
I'd also support removal of ALL no-carry zones.

 

[tharlow514]

Yes.
I'd also support removal of ALL no-carry zones.

No carry zones are useless for preventing violent crime. If anything they promote crime. I totally support no permit requirements. If you go through a background check why do you need a permit to carry? It's completely ridiculous and another control mechanism by the government.

 

[minuteman32]

1) No license required to carry.
2) Class B license (current LTCH) available to those who want curently available reciprocity.
3) Class A license (training required, maybe 21+ age) available for (potentially) greater reciprocity.
Would potentially accept restrictions on where carry allowed for #1, as long as #2 or at least #3 had NO restriction (schools, gov't buildings, etc. basically, same as a 'badge').

 

[bigiron]

1) No license required to carry.
2) Class B license (current LTCH) available to those who want curently available reciprocity.
3) Class A license (training required, maybe 21+ age) available for (potentially) greater reciprocity.
Would potentially accept restrictions on where carry allowed for #1, as long as #2 or at least #3 had NO restriction (schools, gov't buildings, etc. basically, same as a 'badge').

 

[opus1776]

1) No license required to carry.
2) Class B license (current LTCH) available to those who want curently available reciprocity.
3) Class A license (training required, maybe 21+ age) available for (potentially) greater reciprocity.
Would potentially accept restrictions on where carry allowed for #1, as long as #2 or at least #3 had NO restriction (schools, gov't buildings, etc. basically, same as a 'badge').

 

[cce1302]

Why, as long as we're dreaming, would you (minuteman, bigiron, and opus) want to keep restrictions on where we can carry without a license?

 

[minuteman32]

Why, as long as we're dreaming, would you (minuteman, bigiron, and opus) want to keep restrictions on where we can carry without a license?

It's not that I want to keep the restrictions, I would just be mostly content w/ what I suggested. I also think that it would be more likely to be implemented. As far as I'm concerned, everyone should be able to carry whatever they want, whenever they want and wherever they want, w/o license or restriction. If someone criminally misuses a weapon of any kind, there should be severe penalties, too. Along with that, there should also be laws/policies in place to encourage folks to carry (tax credits, pay increase,etc.?) as well as protection against criminal/civil penalties for propper use in the defense of oneself/others. Ideally, this would be world wide, or at least nationwide (and if this madness the left is trying to get thought.... disolving borders between Canada/US/Mexico..., thoughout the continent!).

Now THAT would be me dreaming, but I thought we were suggesting what we would like to see happen, that we thought was possible.

 

[infidel]

I should have the right granted to me in the 2nd Amendment to bear arms. Any arms, anywhere, any time, with no permit.

 

[dbd870]

I should have the right granted to me in the 2nd Amendment to bear arms. Any arms, anywhere, any time, with no permit.

Works for me.

 

[Lucas156]

I should have the right granted to me in the 2nd Amendment to bear arms. Any arms, anywhere, any time, with no permit.

what he said

 

[VERT]

1) No license required to carry.
2) Class B license (current LTCH) available to those who want curently available reciprocity.
3) Class A license (training required, maybe 21+ age) available for (potentially) greater reciprocity.
Would potentially accept restrictions on where carry allowed for #1, as long as #2 or at least #3 had NO restriction (schools, gov't buildings, etc. basically, same as a 'badge').

I like this idea.

 

[VERT]

I should have the right granted to me in the 2nd Amendment to bear arms. Any arms, anywhere, any time, with no permit.

I agree with this in principal, but this will never be the case.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I should have the right granted to me in the 2nd Amendment to bear arms. Any arms, anywhere, any time, with no permit.

You DO have the right to keep, to bear, and to use what arms you find necessary to defend your life, but that right is not granted by the 2nd Amendment, only protected by it. The right is yours as a human being, granted by your Creator. He gave you your life and the duty to protect it. By what misshapen bastardization of logic can anyone feel his life is not his own to live, to protect, and to defend?

Oh, that's right.. that would be the province of those who know what's best for us and feel they must rise and save us from ourselves. Silly commoners, we have no idea what God meant for us, we need them to interpret His will for us.

*fornicate* that! This country's laws may forbid us from the lawful exercise of our rights, but that does not change the rights we have.

Carry should never be restricted at all. The abuse of those weapons is punishable, and harshly, but to punish carry is to punish assumed intention; to punish what might be. It has the color of law, but it is unConstitutional, not that I expect our present government to overrule it.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[alfahornet]

Yes.
I'd also support removal of ALL no-carry zones.

What no-carry zones do we have in Indiana. I am only aware of federal buildings, post offices, court houses and schools. And of course private property if the owner so chooses. The first 2 are not really up to the state to regulate neither is the latter. So, we're left with schools and court houses and I don't see that too much of an issue. I do concur with Bill of Rights as to the assumption and that misuse should be harshly punished.

Now other states, ie. Virginia comes to mind as I visit it often, you are prohibited to carry anywhere where alcohol is sold or served, ie that rules out convenience stores, supermarkets, some gas stations, restaurants, bars and so forth. That is real B.... as you really can't carry most places you'd go. Just my

 

[cce1302]

What no-carry zones do we have in Indiana. I am only aware of federal buildings, post offices, court houses and schools. And of course private property if the owner so chooses. The first 2 are not really up to the state to regulate neither is the latter. So, we're left with schools and court houses and I don't see that too much of an issue. I do concur with Bill of Rights as to the assumption and that misuse should be harshly punished.

Now other states, ie. Virginia comes to mind as I visit it often, you are prohibited to carry anywhere where alcohol is sold or served, ie that rules out convenience stores, supermarkets, some gas stations, restaurants, bars and so forth. That is real B.... as you really can't carry most places you'd go. Just my

Yes, all those. Also airports, airplanes, the state fair, private property, whatever.
I'd like all no-legal-firearm zones removed.

 

[basswizard]

1) No license required to carry.
2) Class B license (current LTCH) available to those who want curently available reciprocity.
3) Class A license (training required, maybe 21+ age) available for (potentially) greater reciprocity.
Would potentially accept restrictions on where carry allowed for #1, as long as #2 or at least #3 had NO restriction (schools, gov't buildings, etc. basically, same as a 'badge').[/quote

I am in agreement with minuteman32 on this.

 

[Bill of Rights]

What no-carry zones do we have in Indiana. I am only aware of federal buildings, post offices, court houses and schools. And of course private property if the owner so chooses. The first 2 are not really up to the state to regulate neither is the latter. So, we're left with schools and court houses and I don't see that too much of an issue. I do concur with Bill of Rights as to the assumption and that misuse should be harshly punished.

Now other states, ie. Virginia comes to mind as I visit it often, you are prohibited to carry anywhere where alcohol is sold or served, ie that rules out convenience stores, supermarkets, some gas stations, restaurants, bars and so forth. That is real B.... as you really can't carry most places you'd go. Just my

Federal buildings: Not as per IN law.
Post offices: Big debate, not entering it here, but IF it is truly a no-carry, this also is federal (some states include it in their state statutes as well, but not IN.)

Schools: Public, private, Head Start, K-12, daycares, school buses. Inapplicable to postsecondary schools.

Courthouses: Actually, any unit of government other than a township may regulate carry on property they own or administer, according to state law, highways excepted.

Other places forbidden are the Indiana State Fairgrounds (during State Fair only), shipping ports, riverboat casinos, and secure areas of airports and commercial airplanes.

IANAL, TINLA

Thanks for the backup. Yes, IN gun laws are pretty good, but that does not mean there is not room for improvement. No carry restrictions, no LTCH required, no "off limits" locations. I can understand having a restriction on carry in penal facilities because of who is housed there and the desire not to keep the guns from the people but to keep those specific people from the guns. Note that I said I can understand it. I think it should be a "strongly recommended" thing and that if a person is armed, the criminals may not be in the same room with them. If a visitor, that visitor can complete their business via videophone. (My local sheriff's office does this for jail visitors routinely.)

Control the criminals. Why is this such a difficult concept?

Blessings,
Bill

 

[clydesdale]

if i cant conceal carry im not satisfied and i dont think you can in WI they dont issue permits