My son and i went to get his conceal carry permit he just came of age . He asked dad why do we have to pay for this i thought we had the right to bear arms . I thought about it and i'm not sure. Driving is a privilege so i understand fees and a license but really if its our right why do we pay for it ???
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
gun permit
- Thread starter bighop1
- Start date
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!
Member Benefits:
No good reason. We shouldn't have to pay for it. Then again, we shouldn't have to get the "permission" at all; our Constitution guarantees the right to begin with.
P.S. When that pretty pink piece of paper shows up, read it very carefully. It does not specify that you must carry concealed. It is your License To Carry a Handgun (LTCH), period. You may choose to carry in whichever manner you prefer.
P.S. When that pretty pink piece of paper shows up, read it very carefully. It does not specify that you must carry concealed. It is your License To Carry a Handgun (LTCH), period. You may choose to carry in whichever manner you prefer.
Just be glad you didn't ask why we don't require applicants to have a minimum amount of training before being allowed to pay to exercise their 2A right...
I agree with buck...we don't make people pay to exercise other rights such as voting, praying, freedom of speech, etc.
Sorry bighop1; many, many people seem to believe the IN LTCH is a "concealed carry permit", so we try to correct that wrong assumption when we see people making it. No offense intended.
I, for one, thought the asking of why we pay for it was rhetorical, and chachi73 answered as well as it could be answered; because politicians have passed legislation codifying the method by which you may obtain permission from the State to exercise your 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, and that codification includes paying fees to the State, presumably to cover the administrative costs of checking your suitability as a "proper person", pursuant to licensing your right to you.
I, for one, thought the asking of why we pay for it was rhetorical, and chachi73 answered as well as it could be answered; because politicians have passed legislation codifying the method by which you may obtain permission from the State to exercise your 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, and that codification includes paying fees to the State, presumably to cover the administrative costs of checking your suitability as a "proper person", pursuant to licensing your right to you.
Titanium_Frost
Grandmaster
I've got a good question! Why do people STILL call it a concealed carry permit and then get MAD at us when we politely try to educate them???
The fact is many people "feel" safer because we are finger printed and a routine (run of the mill) background check is done before we are ALLOWED to carry a handgun loaded off of our property. Politicians cater to this "feeling" and they get elected. They like the perks and money and power associated with being an elected official and they do whatever they can to remain elected.
Despite this fact that little pink piece or paper has NEVER prevented a crime, or kept a criminal from having a handgun if they wanted to carry one anyway. You can't regulate away the human condition. There isn't even anything effective at preventing it in regards to laws.
So I guess the real answer IMO is because our License to Carry makes the sheep feel like it makes them safer while out in the pasture of life.
The fact is many people "feel" safer because we are finger printed and a routine (run of the mill) background check is done before we are ALLOWED to carry a handgun loaded off of our property. Politicians cater to this "feeling" and they get elected. They like the perks and money and power associated with being an elected official and they do whatever they can to remain elected.
Despite this fact that little pink piece or paper has NEVER prevented a crime, or kept a criminal from having a handgun if they wanted to carry one anyway. You can't regulate away the human condition. There isn't even anything effective at preventing it in regards to laws.
So I guess the real answer IMO is because our License to Carry makes the sheep feel like it makes them safer while out in the pasture of life.
i was not mad. i was trying to point out that my subject was not the type of permit or the pink paper or if it was laminated .it was our right and as other people suggested we should not have to pay for it . or we may well go back to the time when u had to have an acre of land to vote
General Political Discussion (where this thread was originally) is for non-firearms related political discussion. I moved it to Carry Issues because that is where LTCH issues are discussed. However, given your intent I've now moved it to 2nd Amendment in an effort to generate more discussion on our rights, and less about the LTCH itself.
Bingo.....anyway to bring in the money, its all about the benjamins.
Harleyrider_50
Shooter
Dude......
It AIN'T a PERMIT.........
It's License To Carry Handgun......LTCH.....an' can carry as many as ya can strap on ya.........
Dude......
It AIN'T a PERMIT.........
It's License To Carry Handgun......LTCH.....an' can carry as many as ya can strap on ya.........
Which really is immaterial. The fact is that it's a state-issued permission slip. License, permit, official okee dokee, whatever.
What he wants to discuss is the reason for paying for it.
Partly, I think it's a revenue thing, but it's also about reassuring and pacifying the sheep. On that, it's served us very well, because in having it, we can show incontrovertibly that despite all the violent crime out there, fewer than 1/4 of 1% of us have the license revoked for ALL causes... that is, it isn't even necessarily violent or firearm-related causes for which it is revoked or suspended, and that 0.2% of revoked LTCHs is over a four-year period (2002-2006, the last time I inquired of ISP how many were so disposed. This means that approximately 0.05%, or five in 10,000 are revoked every year, on average.)
Mind you, I still don't agree with the premise of a LTCH being required. I consider it an infringement on our rights and quite possibly falling into the category of "prior restraint". What I'm doing is saying that even if we're all having to take a bite of the big
sandwich, at least the bread isn't half bad.Blessings,
Bill
A distinction without a difference, since you are being permitted to/allowed to/"officially" authorized to do a certain thing, in this case bear your own handgun/sidearm while off your property.Dude......
It AIN'T a PERMIT.........
It's License To Carry Handgun...
li·cense
[lahy-suhns] noun, verb, -censed, -cens·ing.
noun
1.
formal permission from a governmental or other constituted authority to do something, as to carry on some business or profession.
2.
a certificate, tag, plate, etc., giving proof of such permission; official permit: a driver's license.
3.
permission to do or not to do something.
4.
intentional deviation from rule, convention, or fact, as for the sake of literary or artistic effect: poetic license.
5.
exceptional freedom allowed in a special situation.
6.
excessive or undue freedom or liberty.
7.
licentiousness.
8.
the legal right to use a patent owned by another.
verb (used with object)
9.
to grant authoritative permission or license to.
A better question is why does it exist in statute. Having to pay for it only adds insult to injury.
Well put.
Congratulations, Bighop. Your son knows the difference between a right and a privilege.
Last edited:
I got my Larry because Indiana made it illegal to carry a handgun without it.
It's a ridiculous law that violates the protection of the 2A and Indiana's own constitution Article 1 Sec. 32.
I cannot but loathe this vile pink permission slip by which we must purchase our "privileged" exception.
Did I mention that I don't like it?
It's a ridiculous law that violates the protection of the 2A and Indiana's own constitution Article 1 Sec. 32.
I cannot but loathe this vile pink permission slip by which we must purchase our "privileged" exception.
Did I mention that I don't like it?
Considering the stink that was raised when indiana adopted the law of requiring a photo ID to vote as being discriminatory against the poor, I wonder if the state's licensing process has ever been challenged for the same reason. To be permitted to exercise our 2A requires a fairly significant outlay of money. Considering the neighborhoods in which many of our poorer citizens live, it would seem the law abiding folks are prevented from enjoying the same ability to defend themselves that us, more fortunate, folks do.
Bunnykid68
Grandmaster
Why should you need a license to drive or carry a gun? They both started out as rights.
