I think you mean in the last paragraph "no" perceptible rise in crime, correct?
Dang! I copied that into Word and corrected all of my spelling mistakes and proof read it twice.
Yes, but I do not think they will give me the benefit of the doubt.
I think you mean in the last paragraph "no" perceptible rise in crime, correct?
AmenHopefully facts and truth wins the day.
Unlikely, the standard for public officials to sue for libel is very high and from what I can read of that article I don't see anything that even gets close.
Here's the link for live video. The session starts at 10 AM:
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2017/meeting/watchlive/ef192847-6a21-4e3e-beaf-e24c195b12f8/
Just starting now - video at least.
I'm getting nothing.
Carrying without a LTCH by a person with a prior felony conviction within the last 15 years is probably a good chunk of those felony cases. I see that enhancement much more often than than the 2nd offense enhancement.Q - how many of those felonies had an LTCH? Sounds like none.
Sounds like 43 were arrested for no LTCH only. The only felony cases were no LTCH as a second offense. He is arguing against the removal of the LTCH because it removes a crime...
It took a minute for the video to load and I had to hit the button a few times.