Indy Star Investigates LTCH in Sunday's Edition

[Gaudard]

If they would just punish people accordingly for their crimes, we wouldn't have to worry about violent felons with guns because they would all be locked up anyway.

Or no longer breathing...

 

[JByer323]

They just keep focusing on this during the duration of the article:

But what is not defined - and what seems to give State Police the most leeway to issue denials in the interest of safety - is the "good character and reputation" clause, which dates back to the 1930s.

"They didn't put that in there for nonsense", State Police attorney Jerome Ezell said, "But boy, who defines that?"

Anybody have any ideas as to why that clause was originally put it? It was easy to be of "good character and reputation during the 1930s. Just don't be black.

That clause was Jim Crow, through and through. Don't quite feel comfortable letting African American's carry guns? Oops, now they're not of good character, denied.

Obviously Jim Crow laws where and still are a terrible thing, but many things that weren't quite as obviously racial based are still on the books. I'm not saying being of good reputation and character in order to carry a gun is something that shouldn't even be considered, but I have a feeling that the Star writers have absolutely no idea how so many of the firearms laws in effect today came to be.

 

[Shoots4Fun]

Overall I thought the article was weak. I thought there was enough focus on the criminal aspects and the poor background check process that I didn't feel as attacked or threatened as I thought from mainstream media...

Overall, I'd give it a big but happy it didn't take on a broader tone of gun owners = criminals.

I'd like to add I love this country and especially love my lifetime LTCH in Indiana...

 

[SavageEagle]

Overall I thought the article was weak. I thought there was enough focus on the criminal aspects and the poor background check process that I didn't feel as attacked or threatened as I thought from mainstream media...

Overall, I'd give it a big but happy it didn't take on a broader tone of gun owners = criminals.

I'd like to add I love this country and especially love my lifetime LTCH in Indiana...

But you have to understand that these people are not convicted of Domestic Battery or Violent Felonies. These are guys that were either in the wrong place at the right time or people with troubled pasts but are now going to be denied the basic right to self-defense. MOST of these guys if not ALL of them do not deserve this. If they wanted to do an article about these guys, focus on the reason they didn't get a strict sentence for firearms offenses and their other crimes. Focus on why the Justice system is failing the people by letting violent felons go early. Focus on how REAL criminals obtain firearms on the black market.

Instead they chose to run a front page article harassing regular people. I'd sue the crap outta the Star for that. Especially if they used my criminal history are what not without my permission to defemate my character and aid in the revokation of my right to carry a gun.

 

[czar996]

Anytime the media puts mug shots and guns in the headline, it is going to be bad for the responsible gun owners out there. The article could be worse, but still not a fan.

 

[jd3772000]

Anytime the media puts mug shots and guns in the headline, it is going to be bad for the responsible gun owners out there. The article could be worse, but still not a fan.

Could be worse but still doesnt account for the way that the LTCH is displayed as something that can be manipulated or obtained easily if need be to someone that should not be in possesion of a firearm. Makes the whole system look bad including gun owners. Front page status makes it even worse.

 

[dburkhead]

My letter to the Editor

My letter to the IndyStar editor:

Dear Editor,

I am very disappointed in your coverage of License To Carry Handgun (LTCH) in the October 11th Indianapolis Star. The piece reads like a deliberate hatchet job. You tell only one side of the story, never mentioning the literally hundreds of thousands of Indiana residents who have LTCH who never have any trouble with the law of any kind, let alone involving firearms.

Even in your headline examples, you have cases of people who were accused of crime, not convicted of anything, or convicted of non-violent misdemeanors even your headline case, the only actual confiction before the person applied for and was granted the license was misdemeanor battery which the Indiana Code defines as "A person who knowingly or intentionally touches another person in a rude, insolent, or angry manner commits battery, a Class B misdemeanor." And then we had another individual with five, unspecified, misdemeanor convictions. I'm sure if any of them had involved violence you would have said so.

As for the Indiana State Police issuing licenses despite recommendations to the contrary of local law enforcement, in most cases I consider that a good thing. The ISP is simply following the law. If there are not specific, legal justifications, spelled out in law, to deny the license then it must be issued. We do not rely on local law enforcement to determine guilt or innocence of an individual. That is for the courts. Denying someone their rights because someone in local law enforcement doesn't believe they should be allowed to do so does not meet any definition of "due process" of which I am aware.

Never mind the US Constitution and pending legal cases, the Indiana Constitution says: "The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State."

If it is so certain that a person is a threat and should not be allowed to exercise their rights under the Indiana State Constitution, then let the State prove it in court with proper due process. Otherwise "The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State" stands.