Indiana Constitutional Carry 2017

[Timjoebillybob]

Side comment/question: did anyone ever even bother to get a "hunting and target" LTCH? What would be the purpose?

Yep. See below.

I think this had more use when the law was ambiguous about transport to hunting or range. I forget exactly what changed, but I remember the wording of the law was updated to fix this. It was something that didn't include the range and maybe hunting as a valid transportation reason.

Edit: Found this with a quick search Police voice concerns over Indiana's new gun law - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

The law used to be unless on your own property or place of business you had to have a LTCH, with just a couple of exceptions. Those being from place of purchase to home or place of business, to and from a place of repair, and when moving home/place of business. Per a strict reading of the IC it would be illegal to handle a friends handgun at their home unless you had a LTCH. People did get tickets, handguns confiscated, and/or arrested for being at a DNR firing range without a LTCH. The law changed to allow carry while hunting, target shooting, gun show, training, etc. And transport with restrictions.

Any issues can easily be, and will be corrected, via amendments. More importantly is getting people to show up at the Statehouse for a show of support on the day this bill (hopefully) gets a committee hearing. Keyboard warrioring is easy, showing up and actually doing something is what really helps push these things across the line.

Yep, they can be fixed easily. But they have to be brought up/recognized first. Not everyone can show up at the Statehouse, but can call/write/email.

 

[Excalibur]

So what's the status of this?

 

[Timjoebillybob]

So what's the status of this?

Its had it's "first reading" and been sent to the committee on public policy. It has to be brought up in committee for discussion/vote and/or amendment. If it's brought up and passed out of committee it goes back to the floor for a 2nd reading and/or amendments, then has a third reading and vote. If it passes it goes to the Senate for pretty much the same process I believe. Right now we need to focus on getting it voted on in committee. It's been left to die the last couple of years it's been introduced. Write/call/email the committee chair Rep Smaltz and any other members of the committee. It's up to Smaltz if it gets a hearing or not.
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2017/committees/public_policy_1600

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Making them pay consequences is what really helps push these things across the line.

Ensure that they won't want what happened to the last guy to happen to them.

Choices used to have consequences. Attempting to vote someone else into their position next election is hardly a consequence.

All John Galt is saying is "get in the political fight and speak up". I am saying get your friends and family in it as well. Get the politicians to feel the heat so they see the light.

All the cryptic libertarian nonsense about consequences. Why don't you tell us these consequences?

 

[foszoe]

All John Galt is saying is "get in the political fight and speak up". I am saying get your friends and family in it as well. Get the politicians to feel the heat so they see the light.

All the cryptic libertarian nonsense about consequences. Why don't you tell us these consequences?

Ok So I am sending letters to my locals dudes....anybody else I should be including?

 

[ATM]

All John Galt is saying is "get in the political fight and speak up". I am saying get your friends and family in it as well. Get the politicians to feel the heat so they see the light.

All the cryptic libertarian nonsense about consequences. Why don't you tell us these consequences?

I thought you'd read every L. Neil Smith book? How do you not know about cryptic libertarian nonsense or consequences?

You've been reading Republican books on the side again, haven't you?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Ok So I am sending letters to my locals dudes....anybody else I should be including?

Brian Bosma, Speaker of the House.

Write Brian Bosma, HSOTHIC.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I thought you'd read every L. Neil Smith book? How do you not know about cryptic libertarian nonsense or consequences?

I don't know because I can never get a libertarian to answer me. They run away.

What consequences are you referencing?

 

[ATM]

I don't know because I can never get a libertarian to answer me. They run away.

What consequences are you referencing?

Interesting. I've never met someone I'd run away from.

It's always best to tie a politician up with what they fear most in this world.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Interesting. I've never met someone I'd run away from.

It's always best to tie a politician up with what they fear most in this world.

A 60 Minutes news crew in their office?

 

[ATM]

A 60 Minutes news crew in their office?

No, they have no reason to fear the mainstream press or media.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Hold on. Whatever the consequences are that ATM is referring to, if they are outside the political process, we're getting into territory that is not discussed here. ATM is smart enough to know that and stick to what is discussed here. Kirk, whether you were or not, please don't try to get folks to draw infractions or bans.

In Appleseed, we made clear that we discussed only the politics of 1775. Our goal was to get the people involved and get them paying attention to the political process. In the time I was with that program, never once did the name of Barack Obama come from an instructor at a shoot I worked, in the course of instruction. George III, General Gage, Lord Percy... those names we heard often, but never a current politician.

At my shoots, we saw people step up to take hats in the program. We saw people start paying attention to their vote. We heard of them writing letters to those who were supposed to represent them. At a shoot I did not attend, a man was asked to instruct. He declined, but got himself elected as a city councilman or some similar office.

ATM, I don't know if any of those things ever made a difference. I hope it did. For my part, my friend, thank you for adhering to our site rules.

This post is not intended as an in-thread warning. I'm not coming down on anyone. I am a moderator. I am attempting to moderate.

Carry on.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[ATM]

Good reminder, Bill, and no, I wasn't heading off the reservation.

Choices and consequences is very 1775, but the one thing most politicians fear the most is Truth. Truth exposes and humiliates, it frees people.

 

[Doug]

I did a search of this thread and couldn't find the answer.
The bill says anyone who can lawfully possess a handgun in Indiana can carry it concealed.
Non-residents can lawfully possess handguns. Does this mean people visiting from Mississippi can carry concealed without a license or does the law apply only to Indiana residents?

 

[chipbennett]

I did a search of this thread and couldn't find the answer.
The bill says anyone who can lawfully possess a handgun in Indiana can carry it concealed.
Non-residents can lawfully possess handguns. Does this mean people visiting from Mississippi can carry concealed without a license or does the law apply only to Indiana residents?

The bill removes the statutory requirement to possess a license as a condition of lawfully carrying a handgun.

So, where in the Indiana statutes would you find a requirement that a resident of Mississippi (or any other Indiana non-resident) possess a license?

 

[ATM]

I did a search of this thread and couldn't find the answer.
The bill says anyone who can lawfully possess a handgun in Indiana can carry it concealed.
Non-residents can lawfully possess handguns. Does this mean people visiting from Mississippi can carry concealed without a license or does the law apply only to Indiana residents?

If carrying a handgun is no longer prohibited, there would be nothing to charge anyone with for carrying a handgun.

To prohibit non-residents, they'd have to prohibit carrying and create an exception for residents.

 

[indyjoe]

Due to the wording of Federal Law 18 U.S. Code 922-q-2:

(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—

(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;

Just like carrying in a state that recognizes your Indiana license, someone Constitutionally carrying would have to yield to all of the 1000 ft school zones. We really need this federal law changed to reword "possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State" to something like "possessing the firearm in a manner legal by the State". (or remove Gun Free zones all together.) If only it was illegal to shoot at people in schools. Wait. I think it is still would be.

Otherwise, the LTCH is still required to get out of the 1000 ft limit.

 

[KDUBCR250]

I had a interesting conversation with a gentlemen about this bill who has a direct line to Jim Lucas and this is the reply I got via text message. --Just got this back from Jim Lucas. Never hesitate to drop me a note if you have questions.

Fwd: There's a lot of momentum, but you never know.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

Called and talked to Luke at Smaltz' office. Nice guy. Told me Smaltz hasn't indicated his position yet...

Asked me if I called my rep, too. Told him my rep was B. Pat Bauer and that I did waste my breath...

 

[Trigger Time]

Just a friendly reminder for people who haven't yet to please contact your personal representative and also the speaker Brian Bosmas office. Let's get our rights back from the government that took them away illegally