What was Indy Trading Post thinking?

[IndyGunFreak]

I'm not a heavy poster here, but I'm guessing most have seen me around on other forums... I tried to search, so sorry if this is a repost (I can only imagine it is)... but I just saw their comments in the paper today about a Indy Trading Post wanting stricter regulations due too burglaries at KS&E and others...

https://fox59.com/2018/08/08/indian...security-regulations-after-rash-of-break-ins/

Seriously? I've never been to Beech Grove (I always mean to get by there, but never get around to it).. but the owner there was spot on in his comments...

Beech Grove Firearms set up concrete barriers in front of their shop and they have not been robbed yet. The owner did not feel there should be requirements in Indiana. He is a retired officer with the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department and believed changes need to be made to the criminal justice system.


"I have a problem with the government imposing more regulations which would ultimately be attacks on a lawful business to protect itself from a lawful product," said Greg Burge.

Admittedly I have only been to Indy Trading Post a couple of times so I will not be hurting their bottom line, but I will NEVER set foot in that place again. Anyone calling for more regulations on what is probably the most heavily regulated industry there is, has their head up their posterior. Might as well just go to Don's.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Eh, I have mixed feelings about that article. Sounds like ITP has already added additional security voluntarily and is adding more. It's a pity other shops (like KS&E) haven't done the same, or maybe this wouldn't even be a consideration. Also, I think it's noteworthy that they interviewed a manager, and not Brian the owner. I would be more interested in his views on this.

 

[IndyGunFreak]

Eh, I have mixed feelings about that article. Sounds like ITP has already added additional security voluntarily and is adding more. It's a pity other shops (like KS&E) haven't done the same, or maybe this wouldn't even be a consideration. Also, I think it's noteworthy that they interviewed a manager, and not Brian the owner. I would be more interested in his views on this.

And I'm fine w/ voluntarily adding security... but once again putting the burden of criminal behavior on people/businesses that have done nothing wrong. It's not right and it's not going to do anything. Criminals will just find another way to be criminals. Whether he is the manager, etc.. is irrelevant. If the owner doesn't want him speaking on his behalf, he needs to tell him to can it and issue a public apology for this clown.

 

[KellyinAvon]

"We keep getting burglarized, every business of this type needs more regulation" was my take-away. "Lets find a way to get an entire area of business regulated out of existence, in the mean time passing the costs on to customers" would be another way to put it.

 

[MrWizard]

Interestingly, the article did not quote that manager as having said anything about regulation. He just suggested that stores needed to do a better job with security which is a perfectly safe, valid point. Have they actually come out asking for regulation, or is this a media spin on a truism-level statement to put words in their mouth? Not familiar with the store at all, so could go either way as far as I know.

 

[Mattroth54]

I did not see anything in the article that stated him asking for more government regulation.

 

[Clay Pigeon]

He was on Fox news this morning also.

 

[Goodcat]

I also see nothing in the article indicating ITP was calling for regulations. Click bait!

 

[IndyGunFreak]

"We keep getting burglarized, every business of this type needs more regulation" was my take-away. "Lets find a way to get an entire area of business regulated out of existence, in the mean time passing the costs on to customers" would be another way to put it.

You know what... you're right. I got zapped by a catchy title and a few lines in the article. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt (I'd like to see the whole video interview because he was talking before the audio kicked in)... I'd like to see clarification on this either from the media source or the shop manager himself.

This is why you never trust the media, one way or the other.

 

[joe138]

I would think this would be an issue between the business and their insurance company.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

You know what... you're right. I got zapped by a catchy title and a few lines in the article. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt (I'd like to see the whole video interview because he was talking before the audio kicked in)... I'd like to see clarification on this either from the media source or the shop manager himself.

This is why you never trust the media, one way or the other.

That's kind of why I mentioned the owner, because he HAS been interviewed in the past about gun regulation in general and has consistently said that we don't need more laws. I think I must have read something into the article too because I was left with the impression that the manager had asked for more regulation. Apparently we both need to read more carefully!

 

[indyjs]

Indy Trading Post is not in Beech Grove. Beech Grove Firearms is. Don't know which made the statement, but assume it was ITP. If so, they have no reason to talk as they are not in the best of neighborhoods themselves.

 

[croy]

Indy Trading Post is not in Beech Grove. Beech Grove Firearms is. Don't know which made the statement, but assume it was ITP. If so, they have no reason to talk as they are not in the best of neighborhoods themselves.

Yes but they have also been successful in fending off break ins. They have had a total of 2 successful and I believe have never made it to the store front. Once was in a side door to the office, once they drove a car into the range.

I don't know how I feel about this. Yes none of us want guns stolen. I'm also against more regulation but at the same time the same stores keep getting hit.

 

[halfmileharry]

Yes but they have also been successful in fending off break ins. They have had a total of 2 successful and I believe have never made it to the store front. Once was in a side door to the office, once they drove a car into the range.

I don't know how I feel about this. Yes none of us want guns stolen. I'm also against more regulation but at the same time the same stores keep getting hit.

I have my preferred gun stores too. Though I don't break into LGS I can understand crooks having their preferences as well.

 

[snowwalker]

As the well known saying goes 'Guns have two enemies, rust and politicians.' Everyone needs to get out, and vote and not for Demoncrats.

 

[GREEN607]

All of this reminds me of a LGS that I used to visit in/near Plainfield (I think it was 'Bob's Guns'). It was on the same property with his home, and may be closed now, as he was quite a bit older than me, and I already have one foot in the grave.

Any way, he had a big sign in his shop.....

This shop is guarded by a 12-gauge shotgun, and a German Shepard police dog, 4 nights a week.

You guess the nights...

Seems to me, this is the only 'regulations' needed to prevent these robberies of LGS's.

On another note, most of these places have video surveillance. If the owners of these local shops got together -OR- if IMPD and the other LE teams in the area.... were to review some of the video from the previous two days (of the date they were robbed), maybe they would see some of the same peeps in more than one store, as in "casing the joint".... and possibly solve some of these crimes at our LGS's.

As it is right now, I doubt that police sources like Lawrence, IMPD, Avon, Mooresville, etc..... share the store videos with EACH OTHER. They might find the perps in more than one, if they did.

 

[LP1]

Not sure how I feel about further regulation, as there are numerous factors to consider.

When guns are stolen, we ALL pay for it, like it or not. Greater security measures, higher insurance premiums, or increased regulations - all of these are reflected in what we pay to purchase firearms. Also need to consider that there is a multiplier effect - the stolen guns will almost certainly be used to commit more crimes - what is the financial and human cost of all that? And the optics of gun stores as an easy burglary target are very bad with the general public. It's not our fault, but it reflects badly on the firearms community, which isn't helpful.

Seems like we shouldn't need another law, but the following minimum requirements seem reasonable to me: 24/7 video surveillance with good quality pictures, barriers to entry at all doors, and the requirement that all guns go into a safe at night.

 

[Vigilant]

Not sure how I feel about further regulation, as there are numerous factors to consider.

When guns are stolen, we ALL pay for it, like it or not. Greater security measures, higher insurance premiums, or increased regulations - all of these are reflected in what we pay to purchase firearms. Also need to consider that there is a multiplier effect - the stolen guns will almost certainly be used to commit more crimes - what is the financial and human cost of all that? And the optics of gun stores as an easy burglary target are very bad with the general public. It's not our fault, but it reflects badly on the firearms community, which isn't helpful.

Seems like we shouldn't need another law, but the following minimum requirements seem reasonable to me: 24/7 video surveillance with good quality pictures, barriers to entry at all doors, and the requirement that all guns go into a safe at night.

And who is on the hook for paying for all of this? Small businesses have it rough enough as it is on the bottom line, adding yet more financial strain will further erode that same bottom line.

 

[HoughMade]

Where's the quote that said they wanted more regulation by government?

 

[LP1]

And who is on the hook for paying for all of this? Small businesses have it rough enough as it is on the bottom line, adding yet more financial strain will further erode that same bottom line.

Please reread my post. I covered your question.