And to help BoR out - the first wave (105 items) of legislative proposals for the IGA SENATE have been posted:
Of interest to INGO's subject matter:
SB 13 - guns as "loan colateral" - looks ok to me.
SB 14 - IGA Staff OK to carry at State House with LTCH - ugh. again? privilege is nice isn't it -
SB 43 - Removes Penal Institutions from parking lot prohibitions (for employees) for firearm locked in car.
SB 50 - regulates sale of tannerite to 18+ w/ proof of age; and allows requires it locked away from general access.
SB 78 - allows "carry at house of worship" on school property w/ LTCH (best one I've seen so far, and good even w/ general repeal of LTCH being necessity if Mr. Lucas' proposal passes to avoid federal conflict IIRC) ...
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2017/bills/
****ing ruling class always think they are better than us peasants. Even if they introduced a bill allowing veterans to carry in the statehouse I wouldn't be for it because it isn't right to make one class of people better than the other. Even though a lot of us would be FAR more qualified to carry than the staff and reps as it relates to training in most cases.
HEY ****TARDS READING THIS THREAD ... shall not be infringed! Learn about it idiots! We all are allowed to carry in the statehouse granted by god. You've just chose to go against his will and oppress us. Knowingly.
Also the tanerite bill is bs too
i will not bow to any of you or kiss your asses. I will give credit where credit is due and call out injustices as I see it. I have fought against oppressors in other countries and I will fight them in mine (through voice) .
Eliminate the LTCH and all other form of oppression of our gun rights. Do your sworn duty and quit being politicians and making excuses. Man up or let someone in the seat that is a
real man or woman.
Bill,Trigger,
Help me out with something, please? I have a member I need to contact because something he's posted is not technically in violation of any site rules, but his tone is really inflammatory. As I see it, I can use "mod discretion", of course, but I'd rather not. I prefer to cite an actual rule if there's an issue. That leaves me with two options, either of which would go via PM:
1) What are you, an idiot? Posting stuff like this isn't going to win you any friends, and may make you some enemies. It's sure as hell not going to convince anyone to do anything you ask! Straighten up before you get yourself banned, dude!
or
2) Hey, I saw your post about ______ and I have some concerns that it's going to backfire and have the opposite effect you want. Would you consider rephrasing it in a less inflammatory tone, so maybe the people you want to see it and do as you ask will listen to what you have to say? Catch more flies with honey than vinegar, and all that. Give it some thought and if I can help, let me know, please.
You know people, and you understand human behavior, so which do you think is going to have a better result from the member?
Blessings,
Bill
Bill,
i think you are a smart guy.
so when will you realize that these public servants will either do what is right already or they will not. You really think they care about you and me? I mean the ones that aren't doing the right things. We say worse things about federal public servants on ingo than anything I've said in this thread. I think it's important to be honest with these people some of which I believe are in it for the wrong reasons. Maybe calling them out more will work because we have kissed their behinds for over 4 years that I can remember and have gotten no where on constitutional issues. Yes I'm happy with the crumbs they've thrown us but it's all or nothing. No more compromise remember?
I think the recent elections sent a clear message. If they don't want to listen then I'm sure other people would like their job. If someone is circumventing their oath and not enforcing the ultimate law of the land the federal and even more specific and clear Indiana Constitution then do you consider me the enemy? I figured it would be the other way around. Not the one calling out hypocrites being called the enemy. I know how these games are played bill. Been there done it. Participated in it. Sick of it. Some I believe are true patriots and believe me I let them know and thank them.
You're the mod. If you want to censor my comments because you think it's appropriate or will keep a legistlator that isn't our friend happy then go for it. I'm simply speaking my mind and I do try hard not to violate site rules. I won't complain if you erase or edit my post:
SB 123 Handgun training. Sen. Jean Breaux is back with this one that has gone nowhere and won't go anywhere, but still should be opposed. She wants anyone who applies for a LTCH on or after 1/1/2018 to be required to take an 8 hour firearms safety class, consisting of no less than 3 hrs range time and firing no fewer than 45 rounds of ammo. Oh, but she's willing to not have us have to tell ISP the reason we're applying for a LTCH (in exchange for a lot more information.) They never, ever quit.
Blessings,
Bill
SB 123 Handgun training. Sen. Jean Breaux is back with this one that has gone nowhere and won't go anywhere, but still should be opposed. She wants anyone who applies for a LTCH on or after 1/1/2018 to be required to take an 8 hour firearms safety class, consisting of no less than 3 hrs range time and firing no fewer than 45 rounds of ammo. Oh, but she's willing to not have us have to tell ISP the reason we're applying for a LTCH (in exchange for a lot more information.) They never, ever quit.
Blessings,
Bill
It's been so long since I had to do the LTCH thing.
Do you still have to put why you want the license?
It's been so long since I had to do the LTCH thing.
Do you still have to put why you want the license?
No. Just select which one you want.
SB 123 Handgun training. Sen. Jean Breaux is back with this one that has gone nowhere and won't go anywhere, but still should be opposed. She wants anyone who applies for a LTCH on or after 1/1/2018 to be required to take an 8 hour firearms safety class, consisting of no less than 3 hrs range time and firing no fewer than 45 rounds of ammo. Oh, but she's willing to not have us have to tell ISP the reason we're applying for a LTCH (in exchange for a lot more information.) They never, ever quit.
Blessings,
Bill
Then why the comment at the end ?
She doesn't know the current requirements?