Second Amendment Demonstration

[Coach]

Had and idea today. There are a lot of political things swirling around regarding the second amendment. Here is my propsal and it will take some work. Let's put together a 3-5 item list of gun related issues for Indiana and stage demonstration at or near the state house on the opening day of the legislature. How great would it be to have 500 people open carry and draw some attention to the issues?

Thoughts?

 

[Bill of Rights]

Had and idea today. There are a lot of political things swirling around regarding the second amendment. Here is my propsal and it will take some work. Let's put together a 3-5 item list of gun related issues for Indiana and stage demonstration at or near the state house on the opening day of the legislature. How great would it be to have 500 people open carry and draw some attention to the issues?

Thoughts?

Great idea, Coach. I'd suggest it should be done in the main hall of the State House, but we cannot legally carry there unless we are either legislators, judges, or LEOs. We could possibly do an empty holster protest, there, though.

I'd recommend
1) the sealing of our records related to applications for the LTC-that is, any information in an application or a LTC is privileged and any disclosure to anyone other than the person named in the record or a LEO related to a specific, bona fide investigation should be actionable.
2) No department of the state or any political subdivision of the state shall be permitted to restrict the holder of a valid LTC issued by any government body from carrying a firearm in a peaceable manner in buildings or on properties owned or leased by such entities, with the exception of penal facilities. No exception shall be granted based on previously passed legislation. (full preemption, no "grandfathered" laws)
Last session's SB 65 was a good start but did not address preemption)

3) The right of the people to keep arms in their locked motor vehicles in any location shall not be restricted in any manner. A property owner or manager who chooses to so restrict any person shall assume liability for the safety of those persons so restricted, and shall provide locked safe-storage for such arms as a citizen might have need to secure to comply with those restrictions. (Last session's SB 66 addressed this also.)


I think these three make a good start. I'd like to see unlicensed open carry as most other states have, and I'd like to see the 180 day restriction on the Lifetime LTC renewal go away as well, but I think those are of lower priority and should possibly wait for a later term to be introduced. I do not agree with, but I can see justification for restricting an 18 year old high school student with a LTC from carrying while at his or her school. If this restriction is a part of the introduced bill, such student should be able to bring a firearm and secure it safely in the office at the start of the school day and retrieve it at the end of the day.)

Those are my recommendations. Anyone else have something to suggest?

Blessings,
B

 

[Coach]

Perhaps the empty holster protest would be the way to go. However we could open carry and parade around the State house.

I like your suggestions. I want to add allowing teachers with LTC to carry at school. I would be fine with them having to pass the LEO qualification. Could we get 500 people to take off work and participate? Can we find a legislator to sponsor these?

 

[quiggly]

Senator Obama was in Terre Haute the other day I heard. That would have been a good time. Could have also have brought the Terre Haute issues to light at the same time.

Of course you risk with this the possibility of the Secret Service getting involved.

 

[hoosiertriangle]

An empty holster protest would also permit those who support the measure but don't have a LTCH to participate more easily. It would also cut alot of criticism about safety, etc. off at the ankles.

 

[obijohn]

i'm all in favor of these suggestions. count me in.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Perhaps the empty holster protest would be the way to go. However we could open carry and parade around the State house.

I like your suggestions. I want to add allowing teachers with LTC to carry at school. I would be fine with them having to pass the LEO qualification. Could we get 500 people to take off work and participate? Can we find a legislator to sponsor these?

If the stuff about last session's SB 65 passed, teachers with LTCH would be just like anyone else with a LTCH, with the possible exception of the 18 yr. old student. As for a legislator, Sen. Johnny Nugent is a friend of gun owners as is Sen. Jackman, as are Rep. Jackie Walorski and Rep. Eric Koch. I also hasten to add that Rep. Trent Van Haaften refused to allow the "encoded ammunition" bill a hearing in his committee. Hats off to all these patriots!

Blessings,
B

 

[Bigum1969]

I wasn't aware the Trent Van Haaften refused to allow the encoded ammunition bill in his committee. I usually don't agree with his positions.

 

[Coach]

If the stuff about last session's SB 65 passed, teachers with LTCH would be just like anyone else with a LTCH, with the possible exception of the 18 yr. old student. As for a legislator, Sen. Johnny Nugent is a friend of gun owners as is Sen. Jackman, as are Rep. Jackie Walorski and Rep. Eric Koch. I also hasten to add that Rep. Trent Van Haaften refused to allow the "encoded ammunition" bill a hearing in his committee. Hats off to all these patriots!

Blessings,
B

Teachers would need a provision of schools would stop them as a matter of policy. You can carry but not if you want to work here. I would like to see it treated as pilots being armed. Nobody would be closer to the place where the rubber meets the road. Arm the teachers and let it be known and the school shooting disappear. I would happily go shoot the police qualification course annually if they want me to do so.

As gun owner we really should agree on a set agenda and make our voice heard and seen on this. I think we agreed on a place, date and time early on and we all promoted it we could have 500 people with signs there, and the media in Indy would take full advantage of it.

 

[VUPDblue]

Heck, while we're at it, why don't we ask for them to remove that silly prohibition against Short Barreled Shotguns...

 

[bigcraig]

Heck, while we're at it, why don't we ask for them to remove that silly prohibition against Short Barreled Shotguns...

A topic near and dear to my heart, no less.

I am in Coach.

 

[EatMeerkats]

I'm there.

 

[Prometheus]

Just don't go past the 'secured area'.

 

[rhino]

I'm totally up for this, and I can pledge the support of Gun Owners of Indiana (which is like, 3-5 guys on a good day).

Bill of Rights' list is excellent, with the addition of Coach's provision of forcing a change in school policy as well.

I won't do the empty holster thing, though. I am willing to carry openly.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I wasn't aware the Trent Van Haaften refused to allow the encoded ammunition bill in his committee. I usually don't agree with his positions.

Subject:

Re: Legislation introduced to your committee
From:trentvh@___.___
Date:Thu, Jan 17, 2008 9:37 pm
To:___@___.___
Bill,

Thank you for the email. HB 1260 will not receive a hearing in my committee.

Trent Van Haaften
State Representative
District 76


----- Original Message ----
From: ___@___.___
To: trentvh@___.___
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 1:06:06 PM
Subject: Legislation introduced to your committee

Dear Rep. Van Haaften,



Good day. I am writing to you in your capacity as chairman of the House Public Policy committee to express my displeasure with an ill-considered, "feel-good" bill before your committee, specifically Rep. Crawford's HB 1260, "Encoded Ammunition". Sir, the provisions of this bill will do nothing to fight crime but will increase it such that ammunition will now be either stolen (by those who break laws anyway) from those few people who will still be able to afford to purchase it, or purchased using false identification documents.



Rep. Van Haaften, I don't know if you shoot recreationally, but consider that presently, a box of .22LR ammunition, totaling 550 rounds, can be purchased for approximately 15 bucks. This, by the way, is the ideal round for target practice and for training new shooters, as it is inexpensive, has little to no recoil, and is not comparatively loud. Rep. Crawford's bill would add government fees which alone are almost double the cost of the purchased item, and if the manufacturer's costs increase by requiring serial numbers, those costs, too, will be passed on to the consumer. If the manufacturer's costs alone only double, this is a 400% price increase to the consumer. This would have a chilling effect on the lawful commerce in arms, on essential self-defense target practice, on recreational shooting, and on hunting as well.



For all of the above reasons, I strongly urge you to do everything in your power to prevent HB 1260 from leaving your committee at all and certainly to keep it from becoming law.



Please, also, sir, if you would let me know when this bill is to come before the committee for testimony, if at all, and if the information in this letter is insufficient for the purpose, if my testimony against it would be helpful in stopping it's progress.



I welcome correspondence and would be pleased to discuss this with you in greater detail at your convenience.



Sincerely,

 

[Bill of Rights]

Teachers would need a provision of schools would stop them as a matter of policy. You can carry but not if you want to work here. I would like to see it treated as pilots being armed. Nobody would be closer to the place where the rubber meets the road. Arm the teachers and let it be known and the school shooting disappear. I would happily go shoot the police qualification course annually if they want me to do so.

As gun owner we really should agree on a set agenda and make our voice heard and seen on this. I think we agreed on a place, date and time early on and we all promoted it we could have 500 people with signs there, and the media in Indy would take full advantage of it.

Coach, with respect, I see a problem with what you've written. Feel free to disagree with me, of course, but I think that stipulating to the "go shoot the police qualification test annually" demand is still choosing which half of the sandwich to eat. You've already proven you're a law-abiding citizen. You've already proven your innocence (what happened to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty?) and our state does not (nor should it, IMHO) require proof of training or proof of ability; I see this as the foot in the door the liberals would love us to give them. The RKBA is not subject to "reasonable regulations", and the BG certainly will not have to prove his/her shooting ability. Further, just because the course (this year) is that which police officers fire does not mean that next year's legislature will not insist on a more stringent standard that few professional (as in several hundred rounds a day) shooters could complete.

Lastly, the provisions of the mostly-ignored SB 65 from last session are as follows:
SENATE BILL No. 65





A BILL FOR AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning criminal law and procedure.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana:​

SOURCE: IC 35-47-9-1; (08)IN0065.1.1. --> SECTION 1. IC 35-47-9-1 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008]: Sec. 1. This chapter does not apply to the following:
(1) A:
(A) federal;
(B) state; or
(C) local;
law enforcement officer.
(2) A person who has been employed or authorized by:
(A) a school; or
(B) another person who owns or operates property being used by a school for a school function;
to act as a security guard, perform or participate in a school function, or participate in any other activity authorized by a school.
(3) A person who:
(A) may legally possess a firearm; and (B) possesses the firearm in a motor vehicle that is being operated by the person to transport another person to or from a school or a school function.
(4) A person who possesses a valid license to carry a handgun issued under IC 35-47-2.

SOURCE: IC 35-47-11-2; (08)IN0065.1.2. --> SECTION 2. IC 35-47-11-2 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008]: Sec. 2. Notwithstanding IC 36-1-3, a unit may not regulate in any manner the ownership, possession, sale, transfer, or transportation of firearms (as defined in IC 35-47-1-5) or ammunition except as follows:
(1) Subject to IC 35-47-16, this chapter does not apply to land, buildings, or other real property owned or administered by a unit, except highways (as defined in IC 8-23-1-23) or public highways (as defined in IC 8-2.1-17-14).
(2) Notwithstanding the limitation in this section, a unit may use the unit's planning and zoning powers under IC 36-7-4 to prohibit the sale of firearms within two hundred (200) feet of a school by a person having a business that did not sell firearms within two hundred (200) feet of a school before April 1, 1994.
(3) Notwithstanding the limitation in this section, a legislative body of a unit other than a township may adopt an emergency ordinance or a unit other than a township may take other action allowed under section 6 of this chapter to regulate the sale of firearms anywhere within the unit for a period of not more than seventy-two (72) hours after the regulatory action takes effect.

SOURCE: IC 35-47-16; (08)IN0065.1.3. --> SECTION 3. IC 35-47-16 IS ADDED TO THE INDIANA CODE AS A NEW CHAPTER TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008]:
Chapter 16. Possession of Handguns
Sec. 1. This chapter does not apply to the following:
(1) A state prison, a correctional facility, a city or county jail, a penitentiary, or any other facility used to confine persons who:
(A) have been sentenced for committing crimes; or
(B) are awaiting trial or sentencing for committing crimes.
(2) IC 35-47-6 concerning weapons in airports and on aircraft.
Sec. 2. As used in this chapter, "political subdivision" means a:
(1) county;
(2) township;
(3) city;
(4) town; or
(5) municipal corporation (as defined in IC 36-1-2-10). Sec. 3. As used in this chapter, "state" means Indiana or any agency of state government.
Sec. 4. A person who possesses a valid license to carry a handgun issued under IC 35-47-2 may not be prohibited from possessing a handgun on land or in buildings and other structures owned or leased by:
(1) the state or a political subdivision of the state; or
(2) a nonpublic elementary school, nonpublic secondary school, or nonpublic postsecondary educational institution.


As you can see, the proposed IC 35-47-16-4 would have included the teachers, the parents, and (it's death knell) the 18-year-old high-school student with a LTC. Personally, I think that those students would be as safe carrying (if not more so) than some adults, however the possibility of one of their guns being swiped while in school is higher, so I can agree that those students should be permitted to access "safe storage" in the office at the beginning and end of the school day under normal conditions.
I don't know how the law would need to be phrased to allow for them to access their firearms in the event of a school shooter during the school day.

I've no desire to start an argument; we all want essentially the same thing: to be able to BE safe, not just to feeeeeeeeeeel safe, as the libbies want. I just don't want to give them anything on which to hang their little pointed hats.

Blessings,
B