Indiana Constitutional Carry - HB1022 (2018)

[Trigger Time]

You and I are in complete agreement that the current Indiana criminal code is grotesquely confusing, filled with redundancies, and written in a needlessly complicated way which makes it very difficult for both lawyers and laypeople to have an easy grasp of how it all works and what exactly is prohibited. And yes, at least part of the blame goes to lawyers who can't get out of their own damn way.

I'm glad you took that the right way as I do respect and like you for what it's worth

 

[Fargo]

I'm glad you took that the right way as I do respect and like you for what it's worth

Thank you very much for the kind words. While I know we disagree on a number of things, I have always valued your perspective and opinion as well.

 

[chipbennett]

But they tend to get out of jail when they’ve served their time. Personally I think felons should get their rights back once they’ve served their sentence. But it’s not because they are or aren’t still dangerous. My qualms are about logic. If they’re still “dangerous” we can’t just not let them out after they’ve served their time. For every criminal, the thing that lets them out of jail, other than maybe parole isn’t a decision of whether they’re too dangerous to own firearms.

If you are convicted of murder, forcible rape, kidnapping - and perhaps a very short list of other, especially violent crimes - you should either receive the death penalty, or else an actual life sentence. No parole. No time off. Society is spared dealing with the threat of your violence, for the remainder of your natural life.

For such people, incarceration is not a matter of repayment of debt to society or of rehabilitation; rather, it is a safety measure for law-abiding society.

 

[actaeon277]

If you are convicted of murder, forcible rape, kidnapping - and perhaps a very short list of other, especially violent crimes - you should either receive the death penalty, or else an actual life sentence. No parole. No time off. Society is spared dealing with the threat of your violence, for the remainder of your natural life.

For such people, incarceration is not a matter of repayment of debt to society or of rehabilitation; rather, it is a safety measure for law-abiding society.

For such people, incarceration is not a matter of repayment of debt to society or of rehabilitation; rather, it is a safety measure for law-abiding society

 

[Kurr]

We still talkin about violent criminals or double dealin politicians?

 

[Hawkeye]

I don't know how many of you listened to Guy Relford's WIBC show on Saturday, or to the podcast. If you haven't you should listen to the podcast at least. I think he made some good points there.

The main point he made, to me at least, was that we may be living in a bit of an echo chamber here on INGO or as 2nd Amendment enthusiasts. We realize that the LTCH likely does not have any real purpose except to put law-abiding people through some hoops in order to exercise their RKBA. But does the general population of Indiana have that perception? Perhaps not. Maybe even probably not.

Maybe our focus should be educating the general populace on this issue?

Politicians are likely to vote the way they think their constituency wants. WE probably need to convince a substantial % of the Indiana population that Constitutional Carry is a good an reasonable thing to do. I know too many Hoosiers who think it assists law enforcement. I also know too many gun owners who say "I already have my Lifetime LTCH so why shoudl I care?"

Guy mentioned some poll results that Republican leadership had that indicated that the majority of the Hoosier population was not in favor of Constitutional Carry. I'd like to see those polls, both the questions and the results. Wonder how we oculd get that info, assuming it exists.

 

[brotherbill3]

I don't know how many of you listened to Guy Relford's WIBC show on Saturday, or to the podcast. If you haven't you should listen to the podcast at least. I think he made some good points there.

The main point he made, to me at least, was that we may be living in a bit of an echo chamber here on INGO or as 2nd Amendment enthusiasts. We realize that the LTCH likely does not have any real purpose except to put law-abiding people through some hoops in order to exercise their RKBA. But does the general population of Indiana have that perception? Perhaps not. Maybe even probably not.

Maybe our focus should be educating the general populace on this issue?

Politicians are likely to vote the way they think their constituency wants. WE probably need to convince a substantial % of the Indiana population that Constitutional Carry is a good an reasonable thing to do. I know too many Hoosiers who think it assists law enforcement. I also know too many gun owners who say "I already have my Lifetime LTCH so why shoudl I care?"

Guy mentioned some poll results that Republican leadership had that indicated that the majority of the Hoosier population was not in favor of Constitutional Carry. I'd like to see those polls, both the questions and the results. Wonder how we oculd get that info, assuming it exists.

This ^^^ (BOLD ITALIC UNDERLINED) is undoubtedly true ... one reason I tolerate "non 2A types" (and other liberal sorts to a degree) - on my FB timeline / friendslist to keep some semblance of perspective (and sometimes it is hard and frutsrating.) ...


anyway ... ALSO - HOT OFF THE PRESSES:

HB 1424 ("Handgun Licenses" or - "The failed dream" haha) ... was amended and passed from Ways and Means ... AMENDED - AGAIN ??!!

yes ... link https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2018...mittee_ways_and_means_2200/#document-26d18f6a

ENT
HB 1424 # 6
DIGEST
Simultaneous licensure.
1 Page 6, line 27, after "practice." insert "An individual may
2 separately apply for and simultaneously hold both a five (5) year
3 license and a lifetime license.".
(Reference is to HB 1424 as printed January 26, 2018.)

which would mean that - after the changes go into effect - you can hold Lifetime LTCH and add a 5 yr "LTCH" to take advantage of the "Brady Exempt" status. - if you want to pay for it.

 

[Trigger Time]

No most people have no clue about anything to do with carry or the ltch or constitutional carry or any other gun right related stuff.
Most people who even have a gun call it a conceal carry permit. Which it isn't of coarse.
The best thing I can think of to do since news organizations nor law enforcement are going to let us use their platform to spread the truth, is to create some sort of simple 2 page at most booklet in layman's terms that's describes gun laws and carry law ECT. And how Constitutional carry does not allow criminals to carry guns. Talk gun store owners into including it with every gun that's sold and also hand it out for free. Give a discount if people listen to a short 5 minute online video in which a coupon code is given at the end (inability to fast foreward).
We have to get creative and put in our own sweat and money to get the truth out. I'm no rocket scientist but we probably gave at least one on here and other really smart people that can come up with ways to do it. I Also don't have a lot of money but I'm willing to donate some money and time towards this cause and so I know others will too. We need to form a group that can legally accept donations and that uses 100% of that money to get the truth out and get our rights back

 

[KellyinAvon]

This ^^^ (BOLD ITALIC UNDERLINED) is undoubtedly true ... one reason I tolerate "non 2A types" (and other liberal sorts to a degree) - on my FB timeline / friendslist to keep some semblance of perspective (and sometimes it is hard and frutsrating.) ...


anyway ... ALSO - HOT OFF THE PRESSES:

HB 1424 ("Handgun Licenses" or - "The failed dream" haha) ... was amended and passed from Ways and Means ... AMENDED - AGAIN ??!!

yes ... link https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2018...mittee_ways_and_means_2200/#document-26d18f6a





which would mean that - after the changes go into effect - you can hold Lifetime LTCH and add a 5 yr "LTCH" to take advantage of the "Brady Exempt" status. - if you want to pay for it.

thanks for the update Bill. We start 2019 ConC operations now.

 

[brotherbill3]

thanks for the update Bill. We start 2019 ConC operations now.

I think so - but don't forget - there are 3 solid chances (may even up to 5) for this bill (or SB 237 - its Fraternal Twin, now)
to be amended into - well who know what ... something better ... or more "Franken-bill" changes ...

This and there are other measures this session getting hearing this week (SB 33) ... SB20 is alive (though more "hunting")
and the House Public Policy Committee I would expect to meet this week .... who knows what's there.

I think at this point - we track the "twins" here and;

Start a "2018 - ConC - Ongoing Education" Thread - to share all our efforts and refocus things.

 

[jamil]

I don't know how many of you listened to Guy Relford's WIBC show on Saturday, or to the podcast. If you haven't you should listen to the podcast at least. I think he made some good points there.

The main point he made, to me at least, was that we may be living in a bit of an echo chamber here on INGO or as 2nd Amendment enthusiasts. We realize that the LTCH likely does not have any real purpose except to put law-abiding people through some hoops in order to exercise their RKBA. But does the general population of Indiana have that perception? Perhaps not. Maybe even probably not.

Maybe our focus should be educating the general populace on this issue?

Politicians are likely to vote the way they think their constituency wants. WE probably need to convince a substantial % of the Indiana population that Constitutional Carry is a good an reasonable thing to do. I know too many Hoosiers who think it assists law enforcement. I also know too many gun owners who say "I already have my Lifetime LTCH so why shoudl I care?"

Guy mentioned some poll results that Republican leadership had that indicated that the majority of the Hoosier population was not in favor of Constitutional Carry. I'd like to see those polls, both the questions and the results. Wonder how we oculd get that info, assuming it exists.

I listened on my way home from work tonight. And I came away believing that likely the only way to get this done is to educate the Fudds. I haven’t bothered to count the number of people I’ve heard say they know too many people who shouldn’t have firearms when we talk about constitutional carry.

I actually have to explain, no. This doesn’t have anything to do with who gets to own guns...

And then I have to start from the beginning. Going from the attitudes most people have who aren’t “gun people” to something resembling an informed position is a far span.

 

[Dragon Talon TSi AWD]

the "disability" clause is one that raises questions here... I have a ton of time, but not that much time to search 40+ pages to find key words I just searched for... If it is for a social anxiety disorder or for a learning disability, this is absurdly mad and has to be taken seriously... shall not be infrigned, INFRINGEMENT being a key word here....

 

[brotherbill3]

the "disability" clause is one that raises questions here... I have a ton of time, but not that much time to search 40+ pages to find key words I just searched for... If it is for a social anxiety disorder or for a learning disability, this is absurdly mad and has to be taken seriously... shall not be infrigned, INFRINGEMENT being a key word here....

If you're referring to the references to this from 1022 and "the original" 1424 - they mimicked / copied the Federal Statutes in 18 USC 922.g ... and required adjudication for a reason to prohibit carrying - a reason which would preclude possession -

However - BOTH of those are [STRIKE]pretty much[/STRIKE] out the window at this point in time.

 

[Dragon Talon TSi AWD]

of course due process and a reason to not allow possession... Well, don't say it's over til the fat lady sings, or until you are knee deep in the suck... Look at the watch lists though, no due process and rights are taken away erroneously, guilty until proven innocent with no real way to appeal the "decision" made on the peoples behalf... Ridiculous once again... How is everyone not up in arms with this?

 

[brotherbill3]

of course due process and a reason to not allow possession... Well, don't say it's over til the fat lady sings, or until you are knee deep in the suck... Look at the watch lists though, no due process and rights are taken away erroneously, guilty until proven innocent with no real way to appeal the "decision" made on the peoples behalf... Ridiculous once again... How is everyone not up in arms with this?

Well the watchlists are not part of the federal protocol - and that's a whole other subject for another thread.

As far as this one goes, they aren't part of the discussion; and I doubt they would be in Indiana.



AS TO THE STATUS of 1424 ...

Here is the amended bill ready for 2nd Reading:
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2018/bills/house/1424#document-8c6198e9

Also - SB 237 - its fraternal twin - is also ready for 2nd reading in the senate as well. Link:
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2018/bills/senate/237#document-fe3d18b1

 

[BigMoose]

The Bean counter committee (ways and means) left some interesting notes on the bill.

https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2018/bills/house/1424#document-7ba83554

 

[Bill of Rights]

of course due process and a reason to not allow possession... Well, don't say it's over til the fat lady sings, or until you are knee deep in the suck... Look at the watch lists though, no due process and rights are taken away erroneously, guilty until proven innocent with no real way to appeal the "decision" made on the peoples behalf... Ridiculous once again... How is everyone not up in arms with this?

The reason we are not “up in arms” over this is that we are peaceable people. We are the level-headed, even-handed people who keep the peace and are not inclined to draw a weapon other than in response to an immediate, clear-and-present danger, type of life threat.

Compare and contrast to “antifa” (Which my phone just autocorrected to “antics”) a group that gets angry and violently destructive when someone fills out a butthurt form.... even falsely.

THAT is why we’re not up in arms.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Dragon Talon TSi AWD]

The reason we are not “up in arms” over this is that we are peaceable people. We are the level-headed, even-handed people who keep the peace and are not inclined to draw a weapon other than in response to an immediate, clear-and-present danger, type of life threat.

Compare and contrast to “antifa” (Which my phone just autocorrected to “antics”) a group that gets angry and violently destructive when someone fills out a butthurt form.... even falsely.

THAT is why we’re not up in arms.

Blessings,
Bill

Speak for yourself.... Far too long have we stood silent as I have said previously... When I say up in arms I meant why aren't we doing something about it physically, legislatively, or some other sort? Your profile picture is contradicting what you said... Men of talk or men of action when the darkside comes? Remember what happened with hurricane Katrina?

And be careful with that, even pulling out in position "sul" with firearm is a misdemeanor or felony in this state...

And don't get me started on ANTIFA, as I already mentioned again, NOT TODAY ANTIFA!!!

 

[BigMoose]

HB1424 was amended again, but it only changed a couple words at the top. Nothing big.

It seems poised to roll thru for a vote.

 

[cbhausen]

The reason we are not “up in arms” over this is that we are peaceable people. We are the level-headed, even-handed people who keep the peace and are not inclined to draw a weapon other than in response to an immediate, clear-and-present danger, type of life threat.

Compare and contrast to “antifa” (Which my phone just autocorrected to “antics”) a group that gets angry and violently destructive when someone fills out a butthurt form.... even falsely.

THAT is why we’re not up in arms.

Blessings,
Bill

I might be mistaken but “up in arms” as I understand it has nothing to do with weapons.

Edit: Maybe it used to when knights jousted but now it just means riled up or angry, at least in my book.