Don't repeal Indiana's gun permit law

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Cameramonkey

    www.thechosen.tv
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    35   0   0
    May 12, 2013
    31,688
    77
    Camby area
    I love how they clipped Rep Lucas' quote to make him look bad.

    Earlier this year, Lucas went even further when discussing the bill he introduced in the most recent legislative session: "To me it's immoral and even criminal ... to force a person to jump through hoops and pay money to the state ..."

    What came after that last ellipse? as I recall it was "...to exercise a constitutional right."

    It totally changes the meaning of that quote. And they know it.

    Maybe Lucas' example law proposal to license the 1st amendment is a good idea after all with "journalists" like this abusing their power ...
     

    SSGSAD

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Dec 22, 2009
    12,404
    48
    Town of 900 miles
    And, we are NOT repealing, ANY LAW !!!!!

    You, will still need your LTCH, for reciprocity .....

    Guy Relford, has talked about this repeatedly .....

    (not talking to anyone on this board ..... with the exception, of maybe one .....) .....
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    And, we are NOT repealing, ANY LAW !!!!!

    You, will still need your LTCH, for reciprocity .....

    Guy Relford, has talked about this repeatedly .....

    (not talking to anyone on this board ..... with the exception, of maybe one .....) .....

    I'm still not absolutely sold on Constitutional Carry, which in most instances I view through a pro-LE lens.

    A few questions:
    If the state adopted Constitutional Carry:
    -why should they waste money and manpower issuing LTCHs?
    -should carriers be required to inform (if legally stopped) LE that they are carrying?
    -how does reciprocity work?
     

    SSGSAD

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Dec 22, 2009
    12,404
    48
    Town of 900 miles
    I'm still not absolutely sold on Constitutional Carry, which in most instances I view through a pro-LE lens.

    A few questions:
    If the state adopted Constitutional Carry:
    -why should they waste money and manpower issuing LTCHs?
    -should carriers be required to inform (if legally stopped) LE that they are carrying?
    -how does reciprocity work?
    1. MONEY .....
    2. No ..... most people, that have LTCH, will still have them .....
    3. Reciprocity, WITH THE LTCH .....
     

    Fargo

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Mar 11, 2009
    7,575
    63
    In a state of acute Pork-i-docis
    I'm still not absolutely sold on Constitutional Carry, which in most instances I view through a pro-LE lens.

    A few questions:
    If the state adopted Constitutional Carry:
    -why should they waste money and manpower issuing LTCHs?
    -should carriers be required to inform (if legally stopped) LE that they are carrying?
    -how does reciprocity work?

    Questions one and three I think kind of answer each other. The purpose in continuing to issue licenses is for reciprocity purposes. It is the same system that I believe all other states that have gone this route have put in place.

    Question two is an interesting one in Indiana. Indiana currently has no duty to inform, but it is in many ways circumvented by the tying of drivers licenses and handgun licenses together in LE databases which occurred a few years ago. Before that was done, at least locally, licenses for handguns did not appear in state returns in the local database here. There are also a decent number of people who may carry handguns without a license, so when they are stopped no such thing shows up.

    I would be more open to a duty to inform statute if there was some language in it to limit some of the stupid behavior that has gone on on traffic stops, such as the seizure, attempted disassembling of weapons, and running of serials. I know that least one cop ripped a round off between his feet on the side of the road doing this. I also know of other cops who have left with citizens holsters etc. which just shouldn't be happening.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Questions one and three I think kind of answer each other. The purpose in continuing to issue licenses is for reciprocity purposes. It is the same system that I believe all other states that have gone this route have put in place.

    Question two is an interesting one in Indiana. Indiana currently has no duty to inform, but it is in many ways circumvented by the tying of drivers licenses and handgun licenses together in LE databases which occurred a few years ago. Before that was done, at least locally, licenses for handguns did not appear in state returns in the local database here. There are also a decent number of people who may carry handguns without a license, so when they are stopped no such thing shows up.

    I would be more open to a duty to inform statute if there was some language in it to limit some of the stupid behavior that has gone on on traffic stops, such as the seizure, attempted disassembling of weapons, and running of serials. I know that least one cop ripped a round off between his feet on the side of the road doing this. I also know of other cops who have left with citizens holsters etc. which just shouldn't be happening.

    Yeah, well kinda... but why should Indiana be concerned with reciprocity? There's no benefit in it, and for persons who oppose constitutional carry, why should their tax dollars be used for a benefit that is designed to be used in another state? Perhaps, LTCHs should be issued, unless the person want one pays for it individually?
     

    Fargo

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Mar 11, 2009
    7,575
    63
    In a state of acute Pork-i-docis
    Yeah, well kinda... but why should Indiana be concerned with reciprocity? There's no benefit in it, and for persons who oppose constitutional carry, why should their tax dollars be used for a benefit that is designed to be used in another state? Perhaps, LTCHs should be issued, unless the person want one pays for it individually?
    is there a typo in your last sentence? I'm not certain I understand. Should it say "shouldn't"?
     

    cosermann

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Aug 15, 2008
    8,372
    113
    ... why should Indiana be concerned with reciprocity? There's no benefit in it ...

    So you're saying there's no benefit to citizens of Indiana being able to carry when they travel to other states, and there's no benefit to/of citizens of other states being allowed to carry while in Indiana? There's no benefit to justice, liberty, and the public order? Really?

    Well shucks, let's do away with the right to life, the right to defend that life, and the right to the tools to defend that life (i.e. the carrying of firearms) all together then.

    Persons who don't support it don't see the benefit. That kind of goes without saying.

    "TO THE END, that justice be established, public order maintained, and liberty perpetuated; WE, the People of the State of Indiana, grateful to ALMIGHTY GOD for the free exercise of the right to choose our own form of government, do ordain this Constitution."
     

    Cameramonkey

    www.thechosen.tv
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    35   0   0
    May 12, 2013
    31,688
    77
    Camby area
    Im against must inform. I've had too many BS "officer safety" disarms in my life. (two is too many)

    Now maybe if we could guarantee the officers are properly trained to only take it away for only RAS, maybe. But I doubt seriously that would happen.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    35,615
    149
    Valparaiso
    BTW- "Constitutional Carry" is misnomer.

    We're talking about "unlicensed carry". I know, using language itself to influence opinion...but it's inaccurate.
     

    1911ly

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Dec 11, 2011
    13,419
    83
    South Bend
    The democrat cesspool is deep in South Bend. I would not expect a gun friendly article or news story from any of the local news media.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    "designed to be used in another state?"

    Be used by whom? Oh... Hoosiers, of course. Citizens of Indiana.

    If Indiana has constitutional carry, then there's no reason for further bureaucracy, at the cost of all taxpayers. If one wants a LTCH, then they should pay for it themselves, and be taxed for all associated devices (i.e. background checks). No way that should be passed on to everybody.
     

    Kirk Freeman

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Mar 9, 2008
    47,969
    113
    Lafayette, Indiana
    I'm still not absolutely sold on Constitutional Carry, which in most instances I view through a pro-LE lens.

    A few questions:
    If the state adopted Constitutional Carry:
    -why should they waste money and manpower issuing LTCHs?
    -should carriers be required to inform (if legally stopped) LE that they are carrying?
    -how does reciprocity work?

    1. So citizens of Indiana can travel to other states and carry legally.

    2. No, why should carriers put themselves at risk of harm by informing LE that they are carrying?

    3. Reciprocity works exactly like it does presently.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    1. So citizens of Indiana can travel to other states and carry legally.

    2. No, why should carriers put themselves at risk of harm by informing LE that they are carrying?

    3. Reciprocity works exactly like it does presently.

    That is in the interest of the individual, not the state.
     
    Top Bottom