Indiana LTCH Training Requirements

[jwglock]

I'll stand with Ted Nugent... "The Second Amendment IS my concealed carry permit, period!

 

[steveh_131]

I understand that 100%.

If you WANT to be trained, then MANDATORY training shouldn't be a problem, now should it? Get where I'm going with this?

Any other explanation needed can be referred back to my other post.

the nonsensical nature of this post combined with the implied disdain for any opposing thought provides me with epic lulz

thank you for that

 

[Captain Bligh]

I don't need training to exercise a constitutional right.

I'm not against training, but let's keep it voluntary. We're working on have a free country here, right?

 

[sxshep]

the nonsensical nature of this post combined with the implied disdain for any opposing thought provides me with epic lulz

Like calling those who support the notion of manditory training "unconstitutionalists" or "gun control advocates"? That's a little harsh and comical too.

I don't need training to exercise a constitutional right safely.

Inserted another word for increased accuracy... And just because YOU don't need training does not mean others don't.

And regarding the last part, it's not a "free" country. There are laws, and some states feel the need to have them more than others do. Is it a P.I.T.A. to get a little training to "exercise a constitutional right"? Sure... That doesn't mean the right has been taken away.

 

[Joe Williams]

Like calling those who support the notion of manditory training "unconstitutionalists" or "gun control advocates"? That's a little harsh and comical too.



Inserted another word for increased accuracy... And just because YOU don't need training does not mean others don't.

And regarding the last part, it's not a "free" country. There are laws, and some states feel the need to have them more than others do. Is it a P.I.T.A. to get a little training to "exercise a constitutional right"? Sure... That doesn't mean the right has been taken away.

There is a proposal to license internet posters. Do you feel that idea infringes on our First Amendment?

 

[jeremy]

Like calling those who support the notion of manditory training "unconstitutionalists" or "gun control advocates"? That's a little harsh and comical too.



Inserted another word for increased accuracy... And just because YOU don't need training does not mean others don't.

And regarding the last part, it's not a "free" country. There are laws, and some states feel the need to have them more than others do. Is it a P.I.T.A. to get a little training to "exercise a constitutional right"? Sure... That doesn't mean the right has been taken away.

How about YOU need to have a license to post or say anything. Plus a mandatory class so you do not say or post anything offensive or dangerous...

How about YOU have to have the same procedure to practice a religous choice...

How about YOU have to follow the same procedure to exercise your 4th Amendment rights...

Slippery slope once began...

 

[rhino]

It's a tough road to travel when you think you're right and everyone else is wrong.

 

[infidel]

It's a tough road to travel when you think you're right and everyone else is wrong.

You get used to it

 

[ATM]

No you don't.

 

[infidel]

No you don't.

Just ask Jack Ryan, but he would tell you that you are wrong, the road isn't that rough, and everyone is a sissy-girl for thinking it is.

 

[finity]

Like calling those who support the notion of manditory training "unconstitutionalists" or "gun control advocates"? That's a little harsh and comical too.

The comical part is that you can't see that requiring mandatory training is unconstitutional & is advocating a form of gun control.

No matter how you feel about it the Constitution doesn't allow for ANY training requirement. The 2A is THE MOST IMPORTANT amendment there is because without it the others mean nothing due to lack of teeth to enforce them.

Gun control advocates use mandatory training (along with other things) to try to deny the most effective means of self-defense to people. If you can't afford the training or if you are unable to attend training for some reason & you really NEED a gun NOW, then what?

Who decides what the training costs or consists of? What are the requirements to pass?

Inserted another word for increased accuracy... And just because YOU don't need training does not mean others don't.

So how many people are injured every year in IN by gun accidents?

How many are injured in car accidents?

Just because there is a mandatory training requirement doesn't mean that people are really going to be safer.

In IN we don't have a requirement for training & strangely, we don't have a serious problem with accidental gun injuries.

Just because there are some stupid people with guns doesn't mean that the vast majority who ARE SAFE should have their rights curtailed.

And regarding the last part, it's not a "free" country. There are laws, and some states feel the need to have them more than others do. Is it a P.I.T.A. to get a little training to "exercise a constitutional right"? Sure... That doesn't mean the right has been taken away.

I think you are confused about what a "right" is. If a "right" can be removed by government then it is not a "right" it's a "priveledge". If the "P.I.T.A." is too much & someone decides that they can't meet the requirements then what you have is a priveledge.

Some people like to say that rights aren't unlimited. That's true but not in the way most people think of the concept of a limitation. I don't have a right to say something that injures or harms someone else (i.e. slander or libel). Is it illegal to yell "fire" in a crowded theater? Nope, not if there is really a fire.

As others have pointed out, you don't need a license or training to excercise any other right secured in the Constitution. Are there laws against using those rights to harm others? Yes. Just like there are laws against using your 2A right to injure someone with a gun or any other "arm".

 

[Josh Ward]

Like calling those who support the notion of manditory training "unconstitutionalists" or "gun control advocates"? That's a little harsh and comical too.



Inserted another word for increased accuracy... And just because YOU don't need training does not mean others don't.

And regarding the last part, it's not a "free" country. There are laws, and some states feel the need to have them more than others do. Is it a P.I.T.A. to get a little training to "exercise a constitutional right"? Sure... That doesn't mean the right has been taken away.

Again your socilaist like attitude. Just because 'some' LTCH holder 'might' do something unsafe YOU are proposing more infringment on ALL OUR rights by imposing more stupid requirements for obtaining a LTCH. (which we shouldnt need in the first place). No the right has not been taken away (yet) but it certainly has been infringed upon......to top that off its one more giant step toward taking it away. You seem all for that.....thats a shame.

 

[Dredd]

i support the OP. LTCH permits should be restricted to trained indviduals only. getting to take my gun in other states is better than making it easy for any1 to get a permit

 

[EvilKidsMeal]

i support the OP. LTCH permits should be restricted to trained indviduals only. getting to take my gun in other states is better than making it easy for any1 to get a permit

only trained individuals should have the right to protect themselves? i think not. that kind of thinking is what starts alot of CC/OC issues.

 

[2500ekW]

Absolutely not, the Constitution says nothing about training. We should be completely unrestricted like Alaska, Vermont, and Arizona (i.e. no permit required to carry) because the Constitution says nothing about permits/licenses, either.

On the other hand, if we were to be unrestricted, I would be in favor of optional training that satisfies other states' regulations and get a permit issued by Indiana simply to carry in other states, even though one would not be required to carry in Indiana.

 

[patton487]

i support the OP. LTCH permits should be restricted to trained indviduals only. getting to take my gun in other states is better than making it easy for any1 to get a permit

Our Founding Fathers would roll over in their collective graves to see what we are now, let alone adding more restrictions. Can't you read??? "Shall not be infringed" !!! I'm sure you would make a great little public official deciding what others can and cannot do in your socialist utopia.

If you want more people with permits to take training then give them an incentive. Maybe a tax break or something. But not by government force!

 

[Hawkeye]

And you don't think that it'd be 100000x worse out there if said kids had no mandatory, only voluntary formal driver's training, and were left with the option to simply teach themselves?

Riiiiggghhhhttt......

According to my logic, you should want to be trained, therefore, it shouldn't be an issue for training to be mandatory. Sorry that I simply made a few statements addressing some of the points brought up, as they were not the basis of my whole thought process.

Last I checked, formal Driver's Ed is not mandated in Indiana. Helps you get your permit earlier (16 instead of 16 and 6 months IIRC). So what's your point?

 

[ironmanran]

Come on making me take class's on what... Gun Safety??? This is a constitutional right. Unless you give those rights up by committing a felony then we all should be able to carry. ANYWHERE!!!!

 

[JettaKnight]

What I want is for IN to hand out a pamphlet that list the details about carrying. Like where and how and the relevant laws.

How many questions are posted on this board about carrying? How many of you have friends that get a LTCH and don't know the laws?

Heck, just make a good website with all the details and put the URL in the envelop with the LTCH.

 

[JettaKnight]

Last I checked, formal Driver's Ed is not mandated in Indiana. Helps you get your permit earlier (16 instead of 16 and 6 months IIRC). So what's your point?

If you don't take Driver's Ed then you have to take a test. The same is for motorcycle endorsements.