Indiana Laws & Rules That Need Changing NOW.

[GetA2J]

I think ... IF I remember the jest of this thread from earlier reading, most responders were concerned that IF we began questioning the current laws we might spark a movement by lib-tards to make them MORE restrictive.

[Bill of Rights]

Originally Posted by GetA2J

I think ... IF I remember the jest of this thread from earlier reading, most responders were concerned that IF we began questioning the current laws we might spark a movement by lib-tards to make them MORE restrictive.

Partly that, yes, GetA2J. This also was the concern voiced to me by one of our state senators when I raised the issue of removing the 180 day limitation on renewing to Lifetime from 4-year.

When we get a sympathetic (rather than just pathetic) legislature as well as governor again, I'd like to see the laws relaxed such that others out of state can obtain our LTC (including the Lifetime) as easily as we can.

At the moment, I've sent the basic outline for legislation to make private the information in LTC applications and licenses to a state representative via a friend who is better connected than I am.

Blessings,
B

[dbrier]

Just add to this thread...
The State government center in downtown Indianapolis became a gun free zone in July. All entrances to the building became locked to the public (employees with access cards only) and the public must go through one entrance with metal detectors. The City-County building has been like this for years, mostly because of the courts.
The State house did the same thing at the beginning of the year. I don't think any laws were passed, someone just decided to restrict the buildings.

[Bill of Rights]

Originally Posted by dbrier

Just add to this thread...
The State government center in downtown Indianapolis became a gun free zone in July. All entrances to the building became locked to the public (employees with access cards only) and the public must go through one entrance with metal detectors. The City-County building has been like this for years, mostly because of the courts.
The State house did the same thing at the beginning of the year. I don't think any laws were passed, someone just decided to restrict the buildings.

I thought the State House did that a couple of years ago. Regardless, this is why next session we need to see another introduction of last session's SB 65 or at a minimum last session's SB 356, and we need to make sure it is passed and signed this time.

Blessings,
B

[cosermann]

Up to the mid-90's staff at Indiana University who had their LTCH could carry on campus. The policy was arbitrarily changed by then President, Myles Brand (as well as kicking the gun club off campus that had been there forever, all for no good reason, but I digress).

Indiana needs a law to override this sort of "policy" at state institutions of higher learning. Utah has done it. We should too.

State pre-emption should really apply at the large schools, which are really like small cities with their own policy force, utilities, etc., but I don't see that going anywhere legally.

[Scutter01]

Originally Posted by cosermann

State pre-emption should really apply at the large schools, which are really like small cities with their own policy force, utilities, etc., but I don't see that going anywhere legally.

We need *complete* state pre-emption. Get rid of all this stupid little municipal ordinances (South Bend, Speedway, and IndyParks, I'm looking at *you*).

[txgho1911]

This is from Washington state.





RCW 9.41.290

State preemption.


The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.

[txgho1911]

The article.

CCRKBA Hails Washington AG Opinion On Nickels’ Proposed Gun Ban
BELLEVUE, WA – The Bellevue-based Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is hailing an opinion issued this week by Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna that says cities cannot enact local laws to prohibit the possession of firearms on city property or in city-owned facilities, effectively nixing a plan by Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels to do just that by executive fiat.

The opinion was written in response to an inquiry from several state lawmakers. It was signed by Deputy Solicitor General William B. Collins.

CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb said the opinion, dated Monday, Oct. 13, “confirms what we said in June regarding the mayor’s proposal.” CCRKBA said then that the Nickels proposal would violate the state’s model preemption statute, one of the first and most effective such laws in the nation.

“We advised the mayor in a letter that his proposed ‘executive order’ would run afoul of the law, and that we would take legal action,” Gottlieb recalled. “Thanks to the attorney general’s opinion, that no longer appears necessary.”

“The opinion,” added CCRKBA Legislative Affairs Director Joe Waldron, “stands not only as a detailed explanation about why Mayor Nickels’ plan was legally unsound, but it also demonstrates why Washington’s preemption statute is a monument to legislative wisdom. Washington’s law has been duplicated by more than two dozen other state legislatures that saw the sensibility of statewide uniformity in the regulation of firearms, so that cities and counties could not create a confusing and even contradictory legal patchwork of local gun ordinances.

“This opinion should also have a spill-over effect on local ordinances banning firearms in parks and other municipal property and buildings in cities like Federal Way, Lacey and in the Seattle City Library,” Waldron said.

Gottlieb noted, “We have a law, and it works. It recognizes the right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms as affirmed in both the state and federal constitutions. Mayor Nickels was wrong to think he could usurp legislative authority through executive edict. We expect state lawmakers to zealously protect their authority if Nickels comes lobbying in Olympia in January.”

[txgho1911]

The response article.

AG says Nickels' authority restricted on guns
Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels does not have the authority to ban guns on public property, says State Attorney General Rob McKenna.

By Sharon Pian Chan
Seattle Times staff reporter

McKenna's opinion, which had been requested by state legislators, is nonbinding, so the city can proceed with its gun prohibition on public property. But historically, such opinions have been given great weight in court, according to the Attorney General's Office.

Washington state law "pre-empts a city's authority to enact local laws that prohibit possession of firearms on city property or in city-owned facilities," McKenna wrote with Deputy Solicitor General William Collins in the opinion issued Monday. Nickels said the ban is needed for public safety.

"While we appreciate the Attorney General's opinion, we have a moral responsibility to pursue common-sense gun laws," Nickels said in a statement.

"We cannot wait for another incident, or another victim. Our communities face real consequences if our state fails to act and I am hopeful that we will get further clarity on this issue. The simple fact is our public buildings, events, parks and community centers are safer without guns."

In May, a man who had a concealed-weapons permit fired a gun at Seattle Center's Northwest Folklife festival and wounded three other people.

Two weeks later Nickels issued an executive order directing city departments to come up with a plan to make city facilities — including buildings, parks and community centers — gun free. He said the city would post signs about the ban on city property, and would charge people who violated it with trespassing.

The Mayor's Office is now drafting an administrative rule and plans to hold a public hearing.

Many questioned whether the city had the authority to restrict firearms. In Washington state, cities cannot go beyond state restrictions on firearms. State legislators led by Sen. Bob Morton, R-Kettle Falls, and Rep. Kevin Van De Wege, D-Sequim, requested a legal opinion from McKenna's office.

The city has suggested that a state Supreme Court ruling permitting the city of Sequim to regulate firearms at a gun show in a city convention center allowed Seattle to make similar restrictions.

After reviewing the Sequim case, which was filed by Pacific Northwest Shooting Park Association, McKenna wrote that in that instance the city was acting as a private business owner.

Under Mayor Nickels' prohibition however, the city would not be acting as a private business owner because large parts of city property are generally open to the public, McKenna wrote.

Two organizations, The Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, have notified Nickels they intend to mount a legal challenge to his order.

[txgho1911]

The previous two articles I found at thehighroad.org. The first was strait from the Washington state website.

We need law simple and plain that takes control away from Indy and every other city and town in the state.