Constitutional Carry bill filed in Indiana

[Viper1973]

It's ironic that some people are so concerned about a paltry sum of money they paid to get their rights out of hostage status from the state. From a long term perspective and especially for future generations this is a worthwhile legacy to pass down, whatever it costs.

And it needs to be paid for somehow, a whole new database and admin will need to be implemented at the ISP to make reciprocity happen for LEO inquiries etc.

Another $40.00? bucks to promote some real liberty for a change? Small price to pay...

Money isn't so much of a concern as having to go through the whole finger printing (significant expense) and getting another LEO sign-off and the wait. Considering my local LEO is anti-gun it's not a 'simple' process. Additionally, no LTCH voids all of my non-resident permits which ARE expensive until the home-state one is obtained.

If someone would add a 'grandfather' clause to this bill I could get behind it 100%.

 

[Kurr]

Please e-mail Speaker Bosma on legislative matters at h88@in.gov

Just leavin this here.

 

[trophyhunter]

Money isn't so much of a concern as having to go through the whole finger printing (significant expense) and getting another LEO sign-off and the wait. Considering my local LEO is anti-gun it's not a 'simple' process. Additionally, no LTCH voids all of my non-resident permits which ARE expensive until the home-state one is obtained.

If someone would add a 'grandfather' clause to this bill I could get behind it 100%.

I see no more need for any involvement of local LEO's if this passes, you're either a prohibited person as a matter of adjudicated record or not and it should be a simple and straightforward process handled by the ISP entirely as the change in statute streamlines the process.

There's absolutely no more cause for fingerprinting etc., apply for and pay the fee to the ISP and it's issued to you at the legal address on your driver's license and maintained in the ISP database for purposes of lawful inquiries with a mechanism for address change if a future need arises. All they need to do is run you through NCIC and you're either good to go or not.

The ISP has to have a funding mechanism to do this, only way to get this passed into law and implemented is if enough people see the real value in it for those that follow and are willing to pay for it to make it happen. If too many people are making this a "me" issue and not a "we" issue over the cost to implement it there's zero chance of it passing if the monetary end can't stand on it's own.

 

[rvb]

personally, I think the way the issue could best be handled is 1) a removal of the statute making carrying w/o a permit illegal and 2) continuing to offer LTCH permits exactly as they are today.

Yes, it may be "overkill," but reciprocity agreements may be put at risk if we go removing some of the existing steps/checks. Reciprocity would be the only reason for these permits to exist. Especially initially, reciprocity could be a target, politically, from other states looking to make a "stand" against constitutional carry. Over time, the permit process can be tweaked/modified/etc as makes sense. But in the immediate aftermath, it could go a long way to placate the AG's in other states to be able to tell them "absolutely nothing has changed in regards to your acceptance of IN permits."

Also, if the current permits go away and new ones are required, could that affect the validity of permits from places like UT that require a permit from your home state before you get their non-res? Even in the application period? Cause to have to re-apply for UT non-res? etc?

I say start simple to avoid the potential bureaucratic pitfalls. Change the licenses later.

-rvb

 

[Viper1973]

personally, I think the way the issue could best be handled is 1) a removal of the statute making carrying w/o a permit illegal and 2) continuing to offer LTCH permits exactly as they are today.

Yes, it may be "overkill," but reciprocity agreements may be put at risk if we go removing some of the existing steps/checks. Reciprocity would be the only reason for these permits to exist. Especially initially, reciprocity could be a target, politically, from other states looking to make a "stand" against constitutional carry. Over time, the permit process can be tweaked/modified/etc as makes sense. But in the immediate aftermath, it could go a long way to placate the AG's in other states to be able to tell them "absolutely nothing has changed in regards to your acceptance of IN permits."

Also, if the current permits go away and new ones are required, could that affect the validity of permits from places like UT that require a permit from your home state before you get their non-res? Even in the application period? Cause to have to re-apply for UT non-res? etc?

I say start simple to avoid the potential bureaucratic pitfalls. Change the licenses later.

-rvb

EXACTLY!

As written, this piece of legislation will screw us all over unless someone gets a 'grandfather' clause put in there somewhere to make the LTCH equal to and exchangeable for the new 'reciprocity' license.

 

[BFG]

Assuming this passes. When this goes into effect and if the current LTCH is no longer valid there will be a mad rush for reciprocity licenses with possible long delays. So there would be a potential time window (days, weeks, months?) that you wouldn't be able to carry out of state until your new license shows up.

For those of us that have the lifetime LTCH, I wouldn't be opposed to a small fee ($20 ?) same as getting a duplicate. Four year LTCH holders would be good until they expire and have to get the new one anyway.

First time lifetime recip licenses would follow the price schedule in the bill.

 

[cosermann]

Hmm. The state wouldn't have to honor lifetime LTCHes like they honored lifetime hunting/fishing licenses? Interesting.

 

[=Josh=]

Overall, I would certainly support this bill, but I just got my lifetime LTCH in December. I'm not going to be too happy if that was a waste of ~$140 that I could have put toward purchasing my first handgun.

 

[Viper1973]

Hmm. The state wouldn't have to honor lifetime LTCHes like they honored lifetime hunting/fishing licenses? Interesting.

Based on the text of the bill, no.

This thing would be a fantastic piece of legislation if someone just added like a one paragraph amendment to it stating that the LTCH = Reciprocity license. I can't believe no one was smart enough to put that in there... however they are congress critters. We all need to push this issue before it gets to be voted on!

 

[Bill of Rights]

Guys, relax. As John Galt posted upthread, the bill will be reviewed and if that is not in it now, it will be by final passage. My source at the State House has verified this. With that assurance, I have no objection to this bill at all and lend to it my full support. (for whatever that's worth to y'all.)

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Kirk Freeman]

When this goes into effect and if the current LTCH is no longer valid there will be a mad rush for reciprocity licenses with possible long delays. So there would be a potential time window (days, weeks, months?) that you wouldn't be able to carry out of state until your new license shows up.

Just my opinion, but I could care less what happens with reciprocity.

Destruction of the LTCH is far too important and if means that all other 56 states do not recognize Indiana then it is an acceptable loss. I'll trade a knight for a queen all day long.

Gentlemen, the LTCH represents the ability of the State of Indiana to sanction a fundamental civil right on the front end. The State should have no such a prior restraint on our rights.

I have been waiting for this. Waiting since I pounded the pavement to make it happen in 1996. We are due. We are owed. Let's make it happen and damn the torpedoes of reciprocity.

 

[cbhausen]

Just my opinion, but I could care less what happens with reciprocity.

Destruction of the LTCH is far too important and if means that all other 56 states do not recognize Indiana then it is an acceptable loss. I'll trade a knight for a queen all day long.

Gentlemen, the LTCH represents the ability of the State of Indiana to sanction a fundamental civil right on the front end. The State should have no such a prior restraint on our rights.

I have been waiting for this. Waiting since I pounded the pavement to make it happen in 1996. We are due. We are owed. Let's make it happen and damn the torpedoes of reciprocity.

^^^THIS***

Deal with the fallout later, get Constitutional Carry now.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

This opinions of Kirk Freeman in post #71 are the opinions of Kirk Freeman and not representative of any person, persons or organizations.

 

[Mgderf]

This opinions of Kirk Freeman in post #71 are the opinions of Kirk Freeman and not representative of any person, persons or organizations.

And yet, I approve this message.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Just making sure everyone knows what hat I was wearing when I said that.

 

[rvb]

Destruction of the LTCH is far too important and if means that all other 56 states do not recognize Indiana then it is an acceptable loss. I'll trade a knight for a queen all day long.

Gentlemen, the LTCH represents the ability of the State of Indiana to sanction a fundamental civil right on the front end. The State should have no such a prior restraint on our rights.

I agree with your priorities. But just because one issue is more important than the other, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to also look out for the lower priority issue. I never said I would withhold support for the bill if they don't improve the reciprocity licensing part...

-rvb

 

[BigMoose]

Also don't forget that Dermody RINO that kept killing this stuff by not putting it on the Agenda is a lame duck politician this year. No clue what if any agenda he will have this year.

 

[chipbennett]

Just my opinion, but I could care less what happens with reciprocity.

Destruction of the LTCH is far too important and if means that all other 56 states do not recognize Indiana then it is an acceptable loss. I'll trade a knight for a queen all day long.

Gentlemen, the LTCH represents the ability of the State of Indiana to sanction a fundamental civil right on the front end. The State should have no such a prior restraint on our rights.

I have been waiting for this. Waiting since I pounded the pavement to make it happen in 1996. We are due. We are owed. Let's make it happen and damn the torpedoes of reciprocity.

As someone who spends a great deal of time out of the state, I am not willing to cut off my nose to spite my face.

 

[Amishman44]

What chance does this have to pass?

Fairly good chance, it had great support last year before they decided they would refocus on other issues.

I listened to a state senator from southern IN on WOWO radio last Friday and, according to him, if the House and Senate pass it...the Gov will sign it!

I think it's interesting to watch, these past 7 years, that as the more the feds 'clamp-down' on gun 'control'...the more the states do to 'allow' individuals the freedom to protect themselves!

 

[Bill of Rights]

I missed this before.

Trophyhunter, if I was paying that $40 to actually advance liberty, I'd not have said a word. I'd pay it happily. However, what I misunderstood at the time was that we would lose recognition in other states unless we ponied up more money to the state coffers, to be used who the hell knows how.

A few years ago, a guy (and his wife, I think, not sure) made an appeal to the nation. Money poured in from all over to help his conjoined-twin babies get an operation to separate them from each other. They got the operation, but somewhere along the way, he got found out for using that money not to pay medical bills but to fund his habit... seemed he liked blow more than he liked his kids. Recently, a couple in Ohio (from Alabama, as I recall, but this happened in OH) ODd on heroin in their baby's hospital room bathroom. The birth giver died and the sperm donor is in jail, on charges. There was a GoFundMe to help with their expenses too, but somehow, I don't imagine most of the people who gave expected to be buying smack. In both cases, people were happy to pay to help, but not to pay money someone else could waste.

Too often, the power of the State is brought to bear upon those who have done nothing to deserve to have their lives ruined. If I recall, part of the LTCH money we paid goes to the training budget of the local LEA where you apply. If your $40 is going to help pay for the SWAT raid that comes in your door on a wrong-address warrant, and God forbid, you kill an honest cop who just got bad info, everyone loses. If they create a new database, rather than just use the one already in place, that's wasteful. Much better, IMHO, to put that $40 into helping turn a 2A-ambivalent legislator into a soidly-pro-2A legislator. Take them to dinner or better yet, the range, and let them see what it is they're legislating to affect. Want to pass down a legacy for those coming along after us? Let's fight to make Indiana the most gun-friendly state in the Union. Constitutional Carry will help that. Wide reciprocity (we already are recognized in well over half the country!) will help that. Just paying money because someone in a uniform has his hand out, asking you to pay for something you already have will not help advance liberty.



Blessings,
Bill

It's ironic that some people are so concerned about a paltry sum of money they paid to get their rights out of hostage status from the state. From a long term perspective and especially for future generations this is a worthwhile legacy to pass down, whatever it costs.

And it needs to be paid for somehow, a whole new database and admin will need to be implemented at the ISP to make reciprocity happen for LEO inquiries etc.

Another $40.00? bucks to promote some real liberty for a change? Small price to pay...