2019 Legislative Session Thread

[MarkC]

Did you read my post that you quoted?

Right? It's not hard to see Rep. Schaibley's amendment with the added language. It is in the Committee Report part of the document, page 18.

House Bill 1651 - Judicial evaluation of dangerous individuals - Indiana General Assembly, 2019 Session

 

[KellyinAvon]

I read through posts on this thread going back a few pages and didn't see it addressed. Also, I went to the latest version on HB1651 and didn't see it there. That's why I asked.

I guess the way I see it is if it doesn't specifically say PDs are also liable for attorney fees, then there would still be the potential for abuse. As opposed to only being liable for the damage/loss of property.

I'm looking at this as we are moving in the right direction. It's a crap-ton better than where we are now. Perfect? Hell no. Better? Hell yes. Free ice cream doesn't come with sprinkles? I'm ok with that. Free beer is mass-produced American swill? Hey it's free. Do I get discouraged? Yes. Do I give up? Never. Keep moving the sticks Moriarty.

 

[SwikLS]

I'm looking at this as we are moving in the right direction. It's a crap-ton better than where we are now. Perfect? Hell no. Better? Hell yes. Free ice cream doesn't come with sprinkles? I'm ok with that. Free beer is mass-produced American swill? Hey it's free. Do I get discouraged? Yes. Do I give up? Never. Keep moving the sticks Moriarty.

Fair enough.

and don't get discouraged. certainly we all appreciate your efforts and the efforts of others (Relford, Lucas, etc). i know I do.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Fair enough.

and don't get discouraged. certainly we all appreciate your efforts and the efforts of others (Relford, Lucas, etc). i know I do.

We get to start all over again when it gets to the side with more comfortable chairs and nicer sound-systems.

 

[2A_Tom]

We get to start all over again when it gets to the side with more comfortable chairs and nicer sound-systems.

Kelley, You make mention of this often, is really the case? If so, it would almost seem that representatives are considered second class. I know that in the US Congress the Senate is almost as uppity as a House of Lords, looking down on the House, but is it the same at our state level?

 

[KellyinAvon]

Kelley, You make mention of this often, is really the case? If so, it would almost seem that representatives are considered second class. I know that in the US Congress the Senate is almost as uppity as a House of Lords, looking down on the House, but is it the same at our state level?

I Have made this observation. The hearing rooms in the basement the house uses suck. House chambers are pretty sweet. Based on my limited experience, the Senate side is nicer.

 

[KellyinAvon]

OK team, HB 1643 is up for third reading and vote on 25 Feb (Monday). It is not as good as the original draft, here are the Cliff's Notes:

The good: still has the change in definition to "school property", accomplishes what the Church Carry bill tried to do.

More good: still has the 5-year NICS exempt LTCH provision.

Not as good (but moves the sticks): State fees for application eliminated after 30 Jun 2020. Local fees still there. This came out of Ways and Means. Not as good, but in the right direction.

The real bad: As amendments from antis including UBC. Forestal's amendment that violated Heller got thrown out. These must be discussed and voted out to get the bill out of the House and to the Senate. The antis are trying to run the clock out, we've seen this before.

Draft to send to your reps is below. This isn't everything we wanted but it's still is one hell of a lot better than status quo.

(Representative name here),
I’m writing to encourage your support of HB 1643: Firearms Matters, authored by Representatives Smaltz, Wesco, Speedy, and Goodin.


By changing the definition of school property, excluding property not in exclusive use and control of a school, head start program, developmental daycare from the definition, this is very similar to the Houses of Worship and Firearms bills introduced last year and this year.


According to the Indiana Department of Education: there are 362 non-public schools in Indiana. 58 are not obviously religiously affiliated, lacking words such as: Saint, Christian, Catholic, Lutheran, Islam, Providence, Holy and/or Cross. 304 nonpublic schools, 84% do contain those words.


It is unknown how many of these are in the same building as the church, or how many share property with a church. It is certain that if an individual walked into any church service at these facilities, it would be a felony; but not in the church across the street.


Although not required, HB 1643 includes the statement “This subdivision does not affect the right of a property owner to prohibit, in whole or in part, the possession of a firearm on a property where a school or house of worship is located. This bill affirms the rights of all property owners.


The language from 18 USC, Section 922 (federally prohibited possessors of firearms: felons, adjudicated mentally deficient, illegal aliens, fugitives from justice, etc.) is added under the list of circumstances in which a LTCH shall not be issued.


HB 1643 provides for significantly reduced cost of the License To Carry a Handgun (LTCH), making it attainable to more law-abiding Hoosiers. A bill allowing a free lifetime LTCH was introduced in the 2018 Legislative Session. It received no opposition from anyone testifying in the committee hearing. HB 1643 also creates a 5-year NICS exempt LTCH, aligning Indiana Code with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.



Currently HB 1643 has a number of amendments (including universal background checks) added for the sole purpose of preventing the bill from moving to the Senate. This is a familiar tactic that must be overcome.


Again, your support of HB 1643 is greatly appreciated.


Thank you,


Name

Address
Phone
e-mail

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

This one, honestly, I won't cry too much if it simply dies. Getting constitutional carry passed has been difficult enough. With free, or now cheaper, lifetime LTCHs, what is the path to constitutional carry from there?

 

[KellyinAvon]

This one, honestly, I won't cry too much if it simply dies. Getting constitutional carry passed has been difficult enough. With free, or now cheaper, lifetime LTCHs, what is the path to constitutional carry from there?

We got Sunday beer sales, anything is possible

I hear what your sayin GFGT. The church carry/change school property definition part of the bill is worth the effort to me. This politics stuff is still kind of new to me. I'm lucky enough to be able to leave work and be in a room in the Statehouse 30 minutes later. Plus I needed a hobby

We have some solid legislation already passed out of the House and in the Senate. Just keep moving the sticks, we'll get to ConC. After Kentucky and Oklahoma it appears, but we'll get there.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

We got Sunday beer sales, anything is possible

I hear what your sayin GFGT. The church carry/change school property definition part of the bill is worth the effort to me. This politics stuff is still kind of new to me. I'm lucky enough to be able to leave work and be in a room in the Statehouse 30 minutes later. Plus I needed a hobby

We have some solid legislation already passed out of the House and in the Senate. Just keep moving the sticks, we'll get to ConC. After Kentucky and Oklahoma it appears, but we'll get there.

if it were just the church bill, I'd see that as a marginal, yet positive advancement. The part about the licensing though, strikes me as a consolation prize to squelch the CC talk for years. Maybe I'm wrong. If there is a pathway I'm not seeing, I'd love to be corrected.

 

[KellyinAvon]

OK, that's it for the House side of things. We didn't move the ball as far as we wanted but three very solid bills going to the Senate. 1253 (Jim Lucas, Handgun Training for Teachers); 1284 (Jim Lucas, Self Defense and the Defense of Others) and 1651 (Donna Schaibley, Judicial Evaluation of Dangerous Individuals AKA strengthens protections in the Laird Law).

More to follow when these are assigned to committees in the Senate.

 

[engi-ninja]

Damn...so another year of being a sitting duck while at Church.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Damn...so another year of being a sitting duck while at Church.

We will get there.

 

[KellyinAvon]

OK INGOers:

HB 1253 (Handgun Training for Teachers, Jim Lucas) 1st reading in the Senate and assigned to the Education and Career Development Committee. They meet in the Senate Chambers on Wednesday, more to follow on the committee members.

HB 1284 (Self Defense and the Defense of Others, Jim Lucas) 1st reading in the Senate and assigned to the Judiciary Committee. Meets in room 130 on Wednesdays. IIRC the Rs are solid, Randolph, Lanane and Obtuse (all Ds and F's) on the D side.

 

[actaeon277]

I wish Jim Lucas were up here.
Well, no I don't.
NWI (little Chicago) would never allow it.

 

[KellyinAvon]

(Concerning HB 1253) Senate Education and Career Development Committee: Six solid 2A supporters among the R's with two unknowns. I reached out to see if I could get any Intel on these two, waiting to hear back. No hidden gems on the D-side.

 

[BiscuitsandGravy]

Does anyone have a link to any possible video from the HB 1284 hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday? I'm all thumbs trying to navigate the Inga site. I cannot seem to find a search for hearing video archives.

TIA,
B&G

 

[KellyinAvon]

Does anyone have a link to any possible video from the HB 1284 hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday? I'm all thumbs trying to navigate the Inga site. I cannot seem to find a search for hearing video archives.

TIA,
B&G

1284 hasn't had a hearing yet in the Senate. Below links will get you to the live stream and the archived videos.

Senate Committee on Judiciary - Indiana General Assembly, 2019 Session

Archives - Indiana General Assembly, 2019 Session

 

[lawyers guns and money]

These legislators are not going to do anything positive this year, as usual. They are all too worried about some butt hurt business owner worried about including certain groups into hate crime legislation.. Are they going to include non-Hispanics in the protected groups too?

 

[KellyinAvon]

These legislators are not going to do anything positive this year, as usual. They are all too worried about some butt hurt business owner worried about including certain groups into hate crime legislation.. Are they going to include non-Hispanics in the protected groups too?

I think that's a different thread, Moriarty.