2014 Legislative session

[brotherbill3]

Thanks Everyone who wrote and called.

Speaking solely for me, sometime I felt like the .03% (that's 3/100 ths of a percent) not 3% ... but we got it done.

NOW - as I shared some where - and I hope a few of you were wakened up by this "FUN" ... lets continue to write and stay up on our laws. ...
In fact on all of them.
Use the 5th box ... (seem my thread) - that's - the MAIL BOX. (E or Snail) ...

The Vote in the Senate (38-10) hasn't been posted; so when it is Lets look up who was for this in BOTH HOUSES, (I plan to link the PDF's when available)
and thank those that WORKED to get this done - that is - the committee members in the Senate, House and Conference Committees
- I'm sure they are getting an earful from the opposition.

And those that voted against, and ESPECIALLY spoke out their nonsense against this ... they need an earful ... polite, factual of course ... from us.

This is a step. Take a breath - hit the range - we're done; with this, for now. BUT the "Fight" for our rights goes forward. I'm POSITIVE there will be more next session.

THANKS

 

[jetmechG550]

Did I miss it or has has pence not signed it yet?

 

[CathyInBlue]

Generally, a thank you letter from a constituent to an elected official comes in one of two forms, a vote in the ballot box or a hefty check to the campaign fund, but I heartily encourage you all to invent another form.

 

[MemphisR32]

Thanks Everyone who wrote and called.

Speaking solely for me, sometime I felt like the .03% (that's 3/100 ths of a percent) not 3% ... but we got it done.

NOW - as I shared some where - and I hope a few of you were wakened up by this "FUN" ... lets continue to write and stay up on our laws. ...
In fact on all of them.
Use the 5th box ... (seem my thread) - that's - the MAIL BOX. (E or Snail) ...

The Vote in the Senate (38-10) hasn't been posted; so when it is Lets look up who was for this in BOTH HOUSES, (I plan to link the PDF's when available)
and thank those that WORKED to get this done - that is - the committee members in the Senate, House and Conference Committees
- I'm sure they are getting an earful from the opposition.

And those that voted against, and ESPECIALLY spoke out their nonsense against this ... they need an earful ... polite, factual of course ... from us.

This is a step. Take a breath - hit the range - we're done; with this, for now. BUT the "Fight" for our rights goes forward. I'm POSITIVE there will be more next session.

THANKS

One that is going to get an earful from me is I the rep (have to go back and look up name) who said no one is effected by this law and to go ahead and carry anyway because you won't get caught. What does that say to kids? Go be a criminal by the law just don't get caught. How irresponsible from an elected official. He also thought you would get a ticket if caught not a class D felony.

Just wreckless and my wife and I were both shocked by that comment.

Law abiding citizen means just that. We follow and respect the law because we understand the consequences.

 

[brotherbill3]

One that is going to get an earful from me is I the rep (have to go back and look up name) who said no one is effected by this law and to go ahead and carry anyway because you won't get caught. What does that say to kids? Go be a criminal by the law just don't get caught. How irresponsible from an elected official. He also thought you would get a ticket if caught not a class D felony.

Just wreckless and my wife and I were both shocked by that comment.

Law abiding citizen means just that. We follow and respect the law because we understand the consequences.

Exactly!

That would be Representative Battles ... that you are speaking of ...

(with a side note that GiaQuinta was more or less implying the same).

 

[87iroc]

Thanks to the Bills for keeping us informed. I am not going to get to thank you's today...but I will get to it this weekend. Some of the arguments were stupifying as I checked in during an extended church meeting on my phone.

 

[brotherbill3]

Thanks to the Bills for keeping us informed. I am not going to get to thank you's today...but I will get to it this weekend. Some of the arguments were stupifying as I checked in during an extended church meeting on my phone.

Yes Harry Potter, they were stupifying, (LOL) ... I has notes; and a fried short term, but vivid memory ... (don't ask I'm burned out).

 

[brotherbill3]

OK ... break looking at something saw IBJ had a list of people opposing this (which to me was more in their favor than the original HB1048) ...

while it is opposed by the Indiana State Teachers Association, the Indiana Association of School Principals, Indiana Association of Public School Superintendents, Indiana School Boards Association, Indiana Urban School Association, and the Children’s Coalition of Indiana.

made me go back to look BoR at your 1-15 post following the first hearing of HB1048 (cut a snippet):

The prosecutors were going to request that, their speaker said, and they also had a couple of questions about some apparent contradictions in the text. They did try to carve out an exception or two, but to all appearances today, seemed to have been "shut down". I did notice Rep. Lucas speaking with them at length afterward as well.
The superintendent's association had a couple of questions that were clarified by explanation, and once explained, their speaker stated aloud in the meeting that the bill had their support.

It looks like someone flip - flopped. hmmm.

I recall the first and second run through's of this in committee - that one of the Representative's had run this past the school groups ... with a positive response - up until MdA got involved. ...

 

[stephen87]

I was reading SB229 and see that it only eliminates "school" language, however it left child care institutions. So I went to read the definition for "school property," which was relatively easy to find.

[FONT=TimesNewRomanPSMT,Bold][FONT=TimesNewRomanPSMT,Bold]IC 35-31.5-2-285

"School property"

[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=TimesNewRomanPSMT,Bold][FONT=TimesNewRomanPSMT,Bold][/FONT][/FONT]Sec. 285. "School property" means the following:

(1) A building or other structure owned or rented by:

(A) a school corporation;

(B) an entity that is required to be licensed under IC 12-17.2

or IC 31-27;

(C) a private school that is not supported and maintained by

funds realized from the imposition of a tax on property,

income, or sales; or

(D) a federal, state, local, or nonprofit program or service

operated to serve, assist, or otherwise benefit children who

are at least three (3) years of age and not yet enrolled in

kindergarten, including the following:

(i) A Head Start program under 42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.

(ii) A special education preschool program.

(iii) A developmental child care program for preschool

children.

(2) The grounds adjacent to and owned or rented in common

with a building or other structure described in subdivision (1).

[FONT=TimesNewRomanPSMT,Italic][FONT=TimesNewRomanPSMT,Italic]As added by P.L.114-2012, SEC.67.
[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=TimesNewRomanPSMT,Italic][FONT=TimesNewRomanPSMT,Italic][/FONT][/FONT]

Does this mean that daycares are still off limits or are they now eliminated from the exemptions? I need to know this before I can write my representatives.

 

[SteveM4A1]

From my understanding, daycares are still off limits.

 

[asipes]

Correct me if I'm wrong (IANAL)... but won't this allow non-LTCH people to store long guns in school parking lots now? If so... cool!

 

[Scutter01]

I was reading SB229 and see that it only eliminates "school" language, however it left child care institutions. So I went to read the definition for "school property," which was relatively easy to find.



Does this mean that daycares are still off limits or are they now eliminated from the exemptions? I need to know this before I can write my representatives.

From my understanding, daycares are still off limits.

Isn't this:

(B) an entity that is required to be licensed under IC 12-17.2

or IC 31-27;

a daycare?

 

[SteveM4A1]

Correct me if I'm wrong (IANAL)... but won't this allow non-LTCH people to store long guns in school parking lots now? If so... cool!

Yes, as long as the conditions are met.

 

[SteveM4A1]

Isn't this:



a daycare?

Yes, so they are still off limits, correct? I am not referring to storing a firearm in your vehicle in the parking lot, as that is covered by SB229.

 

[Scutter01]

Yes, so they are still off limits, correct? I am not referring to storing a firearm in your vehicle in the parking lot, as that is covered by SB229.

Off-limits to what? SB229's passage will allow you to store a firearm in your vehicle in the parking lot. That and the roaming school zone are the only changes. I guess I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make between a school and a daycare since they both seem to be treated equally as far as I can tell.

 

[stephen87]

Gotcha! I was reading it wrong.

Daycares are not off limits, unless you are an employee and they enact a policy.

Am I reading it correctly now?

 

[SteveM4A1]

Eh my head hurts.

 

[Scutter01]

Gotcha! I was reading it wrong.

Daycares are not off limits, unless you are an employee and they enact a policy.

Am I reading it correctly now?

Again, off limits in what way? You still can't carry IN a daycare just like you still can't carry IN a school. Nothing has changed there. SB229 only refers to storing a firearm in your vehicle while in a school parking lot.

 

[FatDad]

A big THANKS to those that kept us all updated as this "sausage" was made. Also, thanks to everyone who called and emailed to support the passage of this bill.
BTW, social media(Facebook and Twitter) can be a good way to contact these elected officials as well. Beyond a confirmation saying they received my email, I never got an email response. I did get Facebook message responses. FWIW.

 

[revance]

Again, off limits in what way? You still can't carry IN a daycare just like you still can't carry IN a school. Nothing has changed there. SB229 only refers to storing a firearm in your vehicle while in a school parking lot.

Stephen87 is correct. Daycare centers can still enact policies prohibiting their employees from having guns in their cars. It won't be illegal, but you can get fired for it. They only removed schools from the list of exemptions.