should we stir the SBS pot

[knobcreeknut]

Just want opinions as to whether we should attempt to get the Indiana SBS restriction changed ? Do you think the current make up of the state legislature would be a good time to try. My local state rep is a gun guy, and I feel he would be receptive to introducing the change. with the budget woes of the state, would we be able to slip it in , or do you think it would be political suicide when we are facing real problems. just throw out your thoughts.

 

[Bill B]

I would rather see a push to require state universities and colleges to follow the law and honor our lcth.

 

[jjohnisme]

I would rather see a push to require state universities and colleges to follow the law and honor our lcth.

+1. Would much rather have this change than a new fancy 2-rounder SBS.

 

[alfahornet]

Curious how this turn out. Don't really have an opinion one way or the other (as far as pushing it now or later or not at all is concerned) as I don't care too much for SBS but don't see the point of them being illegal nowadays. Now I do believe in an individuals right to own firearms and don't see the point of the SBS restriciton. I have no idea as to whether now is a good time or not to stir it up. But by stiring it up there is always the risk that they may restrict some other right we now have. But then federally registered MGs are legal so I don't really see why there would be an issue with SBS and if one doesn't try one certainly doesn't gain anything. Just don't know.

 

[bigcraig]

If properly done, it would not raise an eyebrow to even the most hyped gun hater.

I say go for it.

 

[Gungho_1989]

I think it would be a great idea there are actually some rumblings around about it, I know of a couple of guys who are getting pretty serious about it I think it always boils down to money and support on something like that.

 

[Ter]

I would like to see the SBS restriction done away with..Go for it.

 

[NateIU10]

If properly done, it would not raise an eyebrow to even the most hyped gun hater.

I say go for it.

Agreed. Just add "...except those registered under the NFA"

Done deal, tiny amendment

 

[ATM]

Never seen a pot that didn't need stirred.

 

[bigcraig]

Agreed. Just add "...except those registered under the NFA"

Done deal, tiny amendment

Yep.

In fact you could sway gun haters to your side of the vote by telling them that the new law would be identical to the federal law, and conviently leave out the good particulars.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I would agree with removing any restriction on the right... however, I think that the timing of introduction is wrong. If you push for this now in the House, Pat Bauer will assign the bill to a committee that will never meet and the bill will die before it is ever heard. If it's introduced in the Senate, the same thing will happen after the Senate vote sends it to the House.

Now... Kick Pat Bauer's :moon: out of the legislature and put in someone as Speaker who actually respects the Constitutions and the people, and my opinion as to timing will change as well.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Zoub]

I have a life long friend who is a multi term state rep and has a high ranking wih the NRA.

That being said, he is not a true gun guy so he has never wanted to champion this in 18 years of talking with him about it. Same goes for a State Senator I know (mutual friends). Good guys but not shooters, just savy pro gun types.

I think if a pro gun rep led the conversation. In turn we could reach out to others we know and say "hey, listen to what Mr. X has to say about this" and we could help put it in laymans terms for them.

Do it Knobcreek, talk to the guy you know, see how he reacts.

 

[Gungho_1989]

Yep.

In fact you could sway gun haters to your side of the vote by telling them that the new law would be identical to the federal law, and conviently leave out the good particulars.

The great thing about the Demo Sheeple get a Democrat to head it up and were in business.

Maybe we could find an angle on them producing less CO2 and get gore on board as a spokesman.

Smart *** comments aside though I think its a great idea I don't know about all the political nuances but I for one would like to see it, It would definitely be an asset to our business as well.

 

[shooter521]

If properly done, it would not raise an eyebrow to even the most hyped gun hater.

I say go for it.

As has been previously pointed out, all we'd need to do is insert an exception for federally registered weapons, just like the language that currently exists in the IC for machine guns.

If you push for this now in the House, Pat Bauer will assign the bill to a committee that will never meet and the bill will die before it is ever heard. If it's introduced in the Senate, the same thing will happen after the Senate vote sends it to the House.

I bet folks said the same thing about the Lifetime LTCH and carry in state parks, too...

If we don't try, we'll never win.

 

[kevinj110]

I agree with the small amendment.

 

[Jerry]

It would definitely be an asset to our business as well.

I like this... Bring up the positive economic impacts.

 

[BloodEclipse]

I would agree with removing any restriction on the right... however, I think that the timing of introduction is wrong. If you push for this now in the House, Pat Bauer will assign the bill to a committee that will never meet and the bill will die before it is ever heard. If it's introduced in the Senate, the same thing will happen after the Senate vote sends it to the House.

Now... Kick Pat Bauer's :moon: out of the legislature and put in someone as Speaker who actually respects the Constitutions and the people, and my opinion as to timing will change as well.

Blessings,
Bill

Agreed.
This is what happened to SB12, which would have let Gunowners keep a gun locked in their vehicle while at work.

 

[Bill of Rights]

As has been previously pointed out, all we'd need to do is insert an exception for federally registered weapons, just like the language that currently exists in the IC for machine guns.



I bet folks said the same thing about the Lifetime LTCH and carry in state parks, too...

If we don't try, we'll never win.

While you're right that if we don't try, we'll never win, the circumstances were different. With the Lifetime LTCH, Brian Bosma was Speaker, and it got a hearing and a vote in both Houses, then a signature. Ever since the prayer thing, when Bosma lost the majority and therefore the Speaker's office, no pro-gun-rights bills have even had a hearing in committee in the House.

Carry in State Parks came as a result of Kyle Hupfer being in charge of DNR, making a new rule, and it being heard by the Natural Resources Commission. Anything pro-gun in a House "led" (read: ruled by/overlorded by/in thrall to) Bauer is DOA.

Too, pushing it now will face the same thing that happened with SB 12 in the Senate: Many anti-gun Senators voted in favor of it, knowing fully well that Bauer would not give it a hearing, therefore it served as political cover. We do not need to give them any more camoflauge than they already have-there are enough RINOs and other rectal apertures in the Legislature, and I think they need smoked out, voted out, and then run out (of town on a rail after being tarred and feathered)

I want to see all the good bills the rest of us want to see, but I'm ever reminded of the old ram and the young ram at the top of the hill, overlooking the flock.
The young ram says, "Let's run down this hill and ____ one of those sheep!"

And the old ram says, "Nope. Let's walk down and ____ 'em ALL."

Our time will come. We need to concentrate first on restoring a friendly majority.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[VUPDblue]

I agree with the addition of the few simple words that Nate suggested. I'd be willing to do whatever it takes to get this done. Count me in!

 

[Indecision]

I'd like to see it happen, but bad timing and I'd rather see the ability to carry on campus like someone else mentioned.