2022 Legislative Session Thread

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!
  • GodFearinGunTotin

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    41,414
    113
    Mitchell
    FWIW:
    From the Hoosier Gun Rights FB page

    Pro-Gun Hoosiers

    From what we are hearing from sources inside the Capitol be on high alert during Conference Committees tomorrow.

    Constitutional Carry is not dead.

     

    JEBland

    INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Oct 24, 2020
    1,545
    113
    West Lafayette
    @JEBland
    I can't find a link on Fox59's site. On the 1800 hours news it was after the "Army vet found decapitated" segment I believe. There was discussion of HB 1187, video of pairs of shoes painted red, and a hand written sign on red background with lies about how passage of 1187 would put more guns on the streets...

    The usual Fear Uncertainty Doubt campaign of lies and distortions told by the anti who "only wants to save the children".
    Thanks. I'll try to search for it myself just to give it the ol' college try.

    P.S. I want to thank you again for going to the committee meeting the 23rd, and sitting through the slinging and the rising tide of excrement. You did stellar work, and remained far better composed that I likely would have.
    Thank you, thank you. I talked with the author Smaltz beforehand and he warned me to keep on track and don't get distracted by them. I had some notes in preparations for the "wHaT aBoUt vOtInG?" question they kept throwing out just in case along with some tweaks to my statement notes based on how they were treating people during previous testimony (part of why I needed to check my notes at first). In that moment, I got the impression that Brown didn't want me up there any longer than I was.
     

    JEBland

    INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Oct 24, 2020
    1,545
    113
    West Lafayette
    How pathetic that they have to pull a stunt like this to get the thing to possibly be voted on.
    I agree. It leaves me a little conflicted on the matter of principle. The majority of the committee (and likely even Bray himself) tanked it on purpose, which is bad (vote them out!), but I think strip-and-replace is also bad. I'm not sure how to feel about two wrongs making a right in this case.
     

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    17,479
    77
    Porter County
    I agree. It leaves me a little conflicted on the matter of principle. The majority of the committee (and likely even Bray himself) tanked it on purpose, which is bad (vote them out!), but I think strip-and-replace is also bad. I'm not sure how to feel about two wrongs making a right in this case.
    At least they are following the rules as they are in doing this.

    Can it still be blocked from getting a vote at this point?
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    41,414
    113
    Mitchell
    How pathetic that they have to pull a stunt like this to get the thing to possibly be voted on.
    I agree. It leaves me a little conflicted on the matter of principle. The majority of the committee (and likely even Bray himself) tanked it on purpose, which is bad (vote them out!), but I think strip-and-replace is also bad. I'm not sure how to feel about two wrongs making a right in this case.
    I'm not defending the practice...but if memory serves, it's how we got one of the other "big" 2A bills passed a few years ago. Which one? I'm not sure. It might have been the church carry bill.
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    41,414
    113
    Mitchell
    At least they are following the rules as they are in doing this.

    Can it still be blocked from getting a vote at this point?
    Good question. I'm not sure. If 209 was already senate passed bill, does it have to go back and be "revoted" on again? If so, is will that open it back up for more amendments, possibly poisoning it? Or...does it simply go back over to the house to be accepted?

    This will be interesting.
     

    JEBland

    INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Oct 24, 2020
    1,545
    113
    West Lafayette
    At least they are following the rules as they are in doing this.

    Can it still be blocked from getting a vote at this point?
    Fair enough. No idea for the question, I think they could, but it at least keeps the fight going for another round.

    I'm not defending the practice...but if memory serves, it's how we got one of the other "big" 2A bills passed a few years ago. Which one? I'm not sure. It might have been the church carry bill.
    I'm not sure of the history on that. But would be interested if anyone knows the answer to that.
     

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    17,479
    77
    Porter County
    Fair enough. No idea for the question, I think they could, but it at least keeps the fight going for another round.


    I'm not sure of the history on that. But would be interested if anyone knows the answer to that.
    I think that, for me, the changing of the bill is better than the blocking simply because it gives the bill a chance to be voted on by the Senate. As it was, a handful of Senators were taking it upon themselves to block it.
     

    JEBland

    INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Oct 24, 2020
    1,545
    113
    West Lafayette
    I think that, for me, the changing of the bill is better than the blocking simply because it gives the bill a chance to be voted on by the Senate. As it was, a handful of Senators were taking it upon themselves to block it.
    I agree that it's perhaps worse to kill it in committee out of fear of it passing on the floor. Still leaves it a little bittersweet for me, but I get it.
     

    Jaybird1980

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jan 22, 2016
    8,334
    113
    NWI
    These kind of shenanigans is what is wrong with the system.

    I fully understand fighting fire with fire, but it should not be allowed in the first place. Amending a bill isn't replacing it entirely with different language.
     

    El Conquistador

    Expert
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    37   0   0
    Jan 28, 2019
    857
    109
    far from here
    At least they are following the rules as they are in doing this.

    Can it still be blocked from getting a vote at this point?
    From my experience when it gets to conference committee anything goes. They have to get all four conferees to sign off on the bill. If a conferee doesn't sign off then the Speaker or President replaces the conferee with someone who will sign it. Then it goes to both houses for a floor vote.
     

    El Conquistador

    Expert
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    37   0   0
    Jan 28, 2019
    857
    109
    far from here
    Good question. I'm not sure. If 209 was already senate passed bill, does it have to go back and be "revoted" on again? If so, is will that open it back up for more amendments, possibly poisoning it? Or...does it simply go back over to the house to be accepted?

    This will be interesting.
    No when it goes back for a floor vote it is a yes or no vote. No amendments allowed.
     

    Cavman

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 2, 2009
    719
    63
    Fingers crossed this is passed. And maybe it'll be a lesson to bray and brown
     
    Top Bottom