Indiana and it's reciprocity with other states.

[Scutter01]

I can't get behind any of those three items either.

A rigid ID would be fine, but my pink paper that I can make all the copies of that I want is just fine, thank you very much. A DL-style ID card means $20 per duplicate and you'll likely only be allowed to have one. The addition of a photograph will make the process more complicated and increase the fee to apply.

Same objections for the training requirement as already stated. No need to reiterate.

Lastly, we want Indiana to honor MORE permits/licenses, not FEWER. This is one of the few states that actually respects the 2nd Amendment. Why would you want to make it more strict?

 

[wolfman]

I would not poke the sleeping bear. We give anything up and we are subject to giving up more, (like maybe the lifetime license?, maybe OC?).

Put these kind of things up in today's political climate and you're asking for trouble. We got the most of our freedoms after Republicans were voted in on a National level then the state level. If you haven't noticed, it looks to be trending the other way now.

 

[BloodEclipse]

To the OP instead of getting Indiana to change, why don't we support a push to get bills passed at the Federal level that makes all states recognize our LTCH?
Better yet why don't we push for a law that requires no LTCH. In my world we have a right to carry that was given to us in the 2nd Amendment. As long as you are a Proper Person any requirement, license or permit, is an infringement.

 

[Lars]

To the OP instead of getting Indiana to change, why don't we support a push to get bills passed at the Federal level that makes all states recognize our LTCH?
Better yet why don't we push for a law that requires no LTCH. In my world we have a right to carry that was given to us in the 2nd Amendment. As long as you are a Proper Person any requirement, license or permit, is an infringement.

The fear I'd have with a National Level LTCH, is who's laws are each state going to follow? California's Carry Laws? New York's Carry Laws? Maryland's Carry Laws? or Alaska's Carry laws.


IF there is going to be control, it should be done at the state level. Personally I agree as I mentioned above. The Second Amendment as explained in the Heller Case should make all LTCH licenses Null and Void as they are no longer required at any level. Since I don't see that happening soon, I'd rather keep any restrictions as close to home as possible. Easier to get rid of the @$$ Clowns who try to infringe on my rights, and less Whackos who agree with them (California/Chicago/NYC anyone?)

 

[Steelman]

IF there is going to be control, it should be done at the state level.

co-signed!

 

[BloodEclipse]

The fear I'd have with a National Level LTCH, is who's laws are each state going to follow? California's Carry Laws? New York's Carry Laws? Maryland's Carry Laws? or Alaska's Carry laws.

I'm not saying establish a Federal LTCH. I'm saying just as with Drivers Licenses, each states sets their own requirements (So Indiana would not change) the Federal law would make all states have a reciprocity agreement making each State's LTCH legal in all other States.
As I have stated before in another thread, I don't think this takes away any States rights it just helps to restore some of my 2nd Amendment rights that are being infringed upon.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I'm not saying establish a Federal LTCH. I'm saying just as with Drivers Licenses, each states sets their own requirements (So Indiana would not change) the Federal law would make all states have a reciprocity agreement making each State's LTCH legal in all other States.
As I have stated before in another thread, I don't think this takes away any States rights it just helps to restore some of my 2nd Amendment rights that are being infringed upon.

I think I read from GOA that David Vitter of LA was introducing a bill to do just that, under Full Faith and Credit. Basically, the states that don't allow carry would not be affected, but any state that does would have to recognize everyone else's LTC/CCW/whatever. Actually, since WI now does have some kind of provision for CCW (or so I read here a couple of days ago, albeit only for retired LEOs, etc) they would be included, too. IL allows cops to carry, so I imagine they might be, too. Wouldn't THAT be a kick in the @$$ to Daley?

Blessings,
B

 

[BloodEclipse]

I think I read from GOA that David Vitter of LA was introducing a bill to do just that, under Full Faith and Credit. Basically, the states that don't allow carry would not be affected, but any state that does would have to recognize everyone else's LTC/CCW/whatever. Actually, since WI now does have some kind of provision for CCW (or so I read here a couple of days ago, albeit only for retired LEOs, etc) they would be included, too. IL allows cops to carry, so I imagine they might be, too. Wouldn't THAT be a kick in the @$$ to Daley?

Blessings,
B

Yes that is the type of legislation I am talking about. I would love to see Daley's reaction to that

 

[Dogman]

I like the ideal of # 1, but think #2, 3 could cause problems that we don't have now, and hopefully a bill Like Senator Vitter is/has put forth in the senate will pass. Where a state that issues LTCH permits has to recognize any other states permits. The bill can be seen on GOA's website.

 

[haldir]

I have thought for many years that every person after high school should have one year of military service (yeah, make some provision for COs). I think it would have lots of benefits. Gun training would lessen the fear that guns run around doing things without human involvement. It would increase security in this country as criminals would be dealing with a much better armed and trained populace. We would be better manned and ready for crises. Plus get the poor kids away from their parents that have their entire lives planned out for them so that they can learn to think for themselves.

 

[CarmelHP]

This is a very bad idea.

 

[flagtag]

I have thought for many years that every person after high school should have one year of military service (yeah, make some provision for COs). I think it would have lots of benefits. Gun training would lessen the fear that guns run around doing things without human involvement. It would increase security in this country as criminals would be dealing with a much better armed and trained populace. We would be better manned and ready for crises. Plus get the poor kids away from their parents that have their entire lives planned out for them so that they can learn to think for themselves.

Excellent idea!

 

[Glock21]

I have thought for many years that every person after high school should have one year of military service (yeah, make some provision for COs). I think it would have lots of benefits. Gun training would lessen the fear that guns run around doing things without human involvement. It would increase security in this country as criminals would be dealing with a much better armed and trained populace. We would be better manned and ready for crises. Plus get the poor kids away from their parents that have their entire lives planned out for them so that they can learn to think for themselves.

You should add one year of growing your own food, one year of working cleaning up sh*t and blood in a veterans hospital, and one year in public service for the county you live in, and a year of mowing elderly peoples lawns. That would all have a lot benefits!

...and it would also be indentured servitude!

I'm not picking on you when I say this, but it just never ceases to amaze me what some peoples ideas of freedom and liberty are.

We all only have so many minutes, hours and days on this planet, and no one, I mean NO ONE can claim right to a single minute of my life, and I can make no claim to a single minute of anyone elses. When you FORCE people to do anything you are at the very least stealing their time. It's immoral, and any argument to the contrary is an effort to disguise a criminal act.

 

[IndyBeerman]

I can't get behind any of those three items either.

A rigid ID would be fine, but my pink paper that I can make all the copies of that I want is just fine, thank you very much. A DL-style ID card means $20 per duplicate and you'll likely only be allowed to have one. The addition of a photograph will make the process more complicated and increase the fee to apply.

Same objections for the training requirement as already stated. No need to reiterate.

Lastly, we want Indiana to honor MORE permits/licenses, not FEWER. This is one of the few states that actually respects the 2nd Amendment. Why would you want to make it more strict?

If I was informed right if lost destroyed or mutilated beyond recognition, a copy of our pink LTCH card is unacceptable, must be a original form. So as it goes now, I think it cost $20.oo to replace it, so how about a rigid plastic card WITH NO PIC ID, no addtional bar coded info on itm just the info that is contained on the current pink card.

So how about changing #2, to not a requirement to obtain training before LTCH permit, but recommended after acquiring it?

Now as it stands Indiana recognizes 47 states, those 3 states, WI, IL and VT are not recognized by any other state in the Union.

Seen a lot of people say that they would rather get a Utah permit, but that falls into the trap where you still have to attend their approved course and send that $65.00 to Utah's tax coffers, I'd rather it stay in Indiana. So a gentle nudge towards each states AG to promote reciprocity with Indiana. Because believe me there would a uprising of mammoth proportions if say Pennsylvania residents where told that they could not carry in Indiana because they fail to honor our permit. So this does not have to be a law added to the books, just a little friendlt bartering between the States.

So adding a recommendation of acquiring a basic course may have this snowball affect of other states starting to honor our permit.

After all these are thoughts, just seeing what we can come up with as a group and see what we might get accomplished.

IndyBeerman.

 

[Pami]

If I was informed right if lost destroyed or mutilated beyond recognition, a copy of our pink LTCH card is unacceptable, must be a original form. So as it goes now, I think it cost $20.oo to replace it, so how about a rigid plastic card WITH NO PIC ID, no addtional bar coded info on itm just the info that is contained on the current pink card.

So how about changing #2, to not a requirement to obtain training before LTCH permit, but recommended after acquiring it?

Now as it stands Indiana recognizes 47 states, those 3 states, WI, IL and VT are not recognized by any other state in the Union.

Seen a lot of people say that they would rather get a Utah permit, but that falls into the trap where you still have to attend their approved course and send that $65.00 to Utah's tax coffers, I'd rather it stay in Indiana. So a gentle nudge towards each states AG to promote reciprocity with Indiana. Because believe me there would a uprising of mammoth proportions if say Pennsylvania residents where told that they could not carry in Indiana because they fail to honor our permit. So this does not have to be a law added to the books, just a little friendlt bartering between the States.

So adding a recommendation of acquiring a basic course may have this snowball affect of other states starting to honor our permit.

After all these are thoughts, just seeing what we can come up with as a group and see what we might get accomplished.

IndyBeerman.

Not to nit-pick, but the way I've understood other comments on the IC, we recognize all states' and countries' licenses and permits, with no exceptions, and I certainly do not see any exceptions within the code itself:

IC 35-47-2-21
Recognition of retail dealers' licenses and licenses to carry handguns issued by other states
Sec. 21. (a) Retail dealers' licenses issued by other states or foreign countries will not be recognized in Indiana except for sales at wholesale.
(b) Licenses to carry handguns, issued by other states or foreign countries, will be recognized according to the terms thereof but only while the holders are not residents of Indiana.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32.

Now, I was under the impression that WI and IL did not issue permits or licenses to their subjects, period, so there is nothing to recognize the reciprocity.

And based on other discussions on this board, I think you'd see a bigger uprising if Indiana stopped recognizing this open reciprocity with other states. As I believe was stated previously, we are setting an example other states should be following, and we should not be conforming to their restrictions.



Please feel free to correct me if I misunderstood.

 

[Dogman]

Now as it stands Indiana recognizes 47 states, those 3 states, WI, IL and VT are not recognized by any other state in the Union.

I believe that someone from VT can carry in Indiana, because they are not required to have a permit in their home state, just like Alaska.
Alaska will issue a permit if requested but it's not required.
The only reason that Indiana doesn't recognize IL, WI is because those two state don't issue permits.

 

[flagtag]

I believe that someone from VT can carry in Indiana, because they are not required to have a permit in their home state, just like Alaska.
Alaska will issue a permit if requested but it's not required.
The only reason that Indiana doesn't recognize IL, WI is because those two state don't issue permits.

But we CAN get one from another state - like PA, to be used in IN and several other states.

 

[haldir]

You should add one year of growing your own food, one year of working cleaning up sh*t and blood in a veterans hospital, and one year in public service for the county you live in, and a year of mowing elderly peoples lawns. That would all have a lot benefits!

...and it would also be indentured servitude!

I'm not picking on you when I say this, but it just never ceases to amaze me what some peoples ideas of freedom and liberty are.

We all only have so many minutes, hours and days on this planet, and no one, I mean NO ONE can claim right to a single minute of my life, and I can make no claim to a single minute of anyone elses. When you FORCE people to do anything you are at the very least stealing their time. It's immoral, and any argument to the contrary is an effort to disguise a criminal act.

Oh pooh! I assume then, that if you had been around a little longer that you would have been a draft dodger during Vietnam... I assume you refused to attend public school as required. There are a lot of things we are required to do as part of being a member of our society (taxes for one).

 

[Lars]

I actually did refuse to attend public school.
I would have accepted Military service if drafted.

Paying taxes isn't the same as forcing at gunpoint someone to give you a year or more of their life.

Example. If the two of us are walking down the street, and see a homeless man. Do I have the right to give him $10 from my wallet? Do you have the right to give him $10 from your wallet? Do I have the right to point a gun at your head and demand you give him $10 from you wallet?

I can avoid paying taxes legally, by not having an income, not owning property, and not buying anything.

Now that I'm completely off topic. I actually think there's something to be said about required service. However everyone I know from foreign countries (Singapore & Norway to name two) that have required military service starting at 18 for 1-4 years was less likely to love their homeland at least in part because of it.

 

[flagtag]

You should add one year of growing your own food, one year of working cleaning up sh*t and blood in a veterans hospital, and one year in public service for the county you live in, and a year of mowing elderly peoples lawns. That would all have a lot benefits!

...and it would also be indentured servitude!

I'm not picking on you when I say this, but it just never ceases to amaze me what some peoples ideas of freedom and liberty are.

We all only have so many minutes, hours and days on this planet, and no one, I mean NO ONE can claim right to a single minute of my life, and I can make no claim to a single minute of anyone elses. When you FORCE people to do anything you are at the very least stealing their time. It's immoral, and any argument to the contrary is an effort to disguise a criminal act.

The problem is that too many people - especially the younger ones seem to think that everything is owed to them and that they don't have to do anything to earn it. Freedom is NOT free. It is NOT owed to anyone. Yes, it is our right, but we all have to work to preserve that right. And the younger people have to be reminded that SOMEONE ELSE earned that that freedom they now enjoy for them, now it's Payback/PAYFORWARD time. It's their turn to guard and protect that freedom for their generation and for the generations that follow.

My father and his generation did it for me and for you in WWll. Others did it after that in the various wars/"police actions"
It's NOT indentured servitude, it's a service WE all OWE our country and her people. As President John F. Kennedy said:
"Ask NOT what your country can do for YOU, ask what YOU can do for YOUR country".

FREEDOM IS NOT FREE!!!