Indiana Considers an Upper Tier CCW Permit

[Viper1973]

It's in ALL of our best interests for this piece of legislation to die.... and to do so QUICKLY!

Right now, a new gun owner has to get their permit their gun and they're set. The level of training being discussed will add an additional $100-450 PER PERSON (say husband and wife that both carry - depending on where they live) to the current permit and firearm costs as well as the costs for 'passport-style' photos every 4 years and probably an 'update' fee to give you an updated photo on the card.

It's ridiculous!

Anyone who wants Ohio can get UTAH or FLORIDA and be done with it. And, that doesn't jeopardize reciprocity recognition for the rest of us already holding permits.

 

[glockmeister]

Someone needs to explain this to me. Is there some kind of understanding that states that currently don't recognize our carry license is going to all of a sudden grant us reciprocity if we jump through these new "hoops"??
I travel to Florida once in awhile, and all of the states that I travel trough recognize Indianas license. Also a bunch of other states do as well.
So is this wishfull thinking from a few people or a genuine fact that more states will recognize our license??? Also, will the states that currently recognize our license then make us get the "NEW" license or we're hosed??
I think we need to think about this before we find out we've just screwed ourselves.

 

[Paul30]

The real question is if it goes through and a higher license becomes available, will the many states that honor our current license change policy where they only honor the higher license. This would cause all current license holders to lose reciprocate in a lot of states, and my prediction is that is exactly what would happen.

Also, once they start writing new laws, they might decide to enter new road blocks as in going from a shall issue to a "if the local law enforcement will sign off for you". Or if you can pass all types of new restrictions. I don't like where it is going.

 

[glockmeister]

Where is this at in the legislative process anyway?? Also, good point on the cost. We are retired, and every, and I mean every penny counts. I don't think I could afford to for us to take any training. From reading some of these posts it appears that folks like my wife and I haven't been given any consideration whatsoever. I guess people on this forum have some deep pockets, whereas mine are constantly empty............

 

[Viper1973]

Its through the senate and into the house. Has, I believe, two readings there and off to become law. Senator Nugents office said we should call our House reps in Indy and keep calling... Even those for other districts.

If we can delay a vote or cause others to start asking questions and can run the vote out until mid-April it dies and can't be carried over to the next session.

Im personally going to be writing, calling and faxing everyone I can daily until this thing is dead and buried. We all need to do the same.

 

[glockmeister]

correct me if I'm wrong (being old, retired, and worthless now), but doesn't this play right into the hands of the leftwing types who would love to see less concealed carry?? I know that if this bill passes, and states only honor the new deal, then I most assuredly will not be able to carry out of state. So, this bill will be good for who?? Not me, or my wife, so they've cut down on concealed carry by 2 right there. How many more??
Sounds like there are some members of this forum that are playing right into their hands..........

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

correct me if I'm wrong (being old, retired, and worthless now), but doesn't this play right into the hands of the leftwing types who would love to see less concealed carry?? I know that if this bill passes, and states only honor the new deal, then I most assuredly will not be able to carry out of state. So, this bill will be good for who?? Not me, or my wife, so they've cut down on concealed carry by 2 right there. How many more??
Sounds like there are some members of this forum that are playing right into their hands..........

I don't know for sure what would happen. But from what I've read, all the posters that have written against this bill fear this will be the outcome. I don't believe the risk is worth the miniscule gains its supporters are advertizing.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I'll get one if it passes.

As far as training: Sorry, I believe everyone SHOULD be trained in the proper use and safety of firearms.

MORE importantly, I fervently believe that everyone should be able, and required to demonstrate a proficiency with firearms before they're allowed to OC or CC in public. If they can't hit what they shoot at, I have to question whether that person is then a greater asset or a greater liability to the public, which is where they're carrying that weapon. If they can't hit what they shoot at, in reality they're not an asset to themselves, and likely a liability to others.

The problem with not having such a 'requirement' (of proficiency) is that there are those who will simply and consistently refuse to train themselves, refuse to demonstrate they've acquired the necessary skills not to be a liability to others, yet still demand the same opportunity. That simply doesn't wash.

Do these same people drive without a driver's license? Do they work at a skilled job (Welder, Boilermaker, Electrician, Lawyer, Doctor) with some form of 'licensing' and some demonstration of their skills in that chosen profession? Would they allow me to come work in their profession or work at their company without some sort of knowledge / training FIRST, and also require a demonstration of my skill sets that qualifies me to get the same job and pay they have? We all KNOW the answer is 'HELL NO'.

Would I not only be required to have the appropriate 'license', somehow demonstrate my skill sets for that job, but perhaps also be REQUIRED to join some union / association in order to receive the same benefits? We all KNOW the answer is 'HELL YES'.

And, I have as much right to earn a living as I or THEY do to carry a weapon in public places. Earning a living, as good of one as I can, is NO 'less' a right than being able to carry a weapon. Truly, ANY person that's a member of a union / bar / association affiliated with their job OR hold's a valid driver's license cannot be anti-licensing / qualification without being, at some level, hypocritical, can they?

So, if the 2-tier licensing is passed, I'll simply do what I'd do if I wanted to join such a profession or work for such an employer. I'll meet (or exceed) whatever training / education / licensing is needed and meet (or exceed) whatever demonstration of skill sets is needed.

Pretty simple, really.

Leaving aside the issue of you not having a "right" to a job or to feel safe with others exercising their rights (as those issues have been well-covered) I'd ask you this:

You say you have the amount of training you think should be required for the privilege of carrying a gun for your own defense. I won't dispute the level of training you have, as I don't know it nor is it germane. I similarly won't dispute that it's adequate; I'll accept for the moment your statement that it is.

My question is: Who required you to get that training? Before you answer, if you joined a police force or a military department of our country's armed forces, you did so voluntarily, so telling me that they required it is not a valid answer: You chose to join up (and if that's the case, you have my thanks for your service.) So who else required it? Your father? Excellent, but that proves the point I'm making, as no law required him to demand that of you. So my point here? You have this excellent level of training and no law required you to get it. Why then, do you feel there should be one applicable to everyone else? Are there, perhaps, people who are better trained than you who think you should not be allowed to exercise your natural rights, those granted you by your Creator, unless you meet their standard?

In the final analysis, you have every right to require whatever level of training of yourself. You have, however, no right at all to require that or any other level of anyone else, unless you are our Creator... and somehow, I don't think you qualify for that title. (If I'm mistaken, of course, please let me know... I have a few other questions I'd like to address, unrelated to firearms, such as why parents don't *actually* have that extra set of eyes in the back of our heads, why we only have one place to breathe through (trachea), and what the heck were you thinking when the platypus came about?)

Blessings,
Bill

 

[ryknoll3]

The real question is if it goes through and a higher license becomes available, will the many states that honor our current license change policy where they only honor the higher license. This would cause all current license holders to lose reciprocate in a lot of states, and my prediction is that is exactly what would happen.

Also, once they start writing new laws, they might decide to enter new road blocks as in going from a shall issue to a "if the local law enforcement will sign off for you". Or if you can pass all types of new restrictions. I don't like where it is going.

This is a great question.

 

[ryknoll3]

I'll get one if it passes.

As far as training: Sorry, I believe everyone SHOULD be trained in the proper use and safety of firearms.

MORE importantly, I fervently believe that everyone should be able, and required to demonstrate a proficiency with firearms before they're allowed to OC or CC in public. If they can't hit what they shoot at, I have to question whether that person is then a greater asset or a greater liability to the public, which is where they're carrying that weapon. If they can't hit what they shoot at, in reality they're not an asset to themselves, and likely a liability to others.

The problem with not having such a 'requirement' (of proficiency) is that there are those who will simply and consistently refuse to train themselves, refuse to demonstrate they've acquired the necessary skills not to be a liability to others, yet still demand the same opportunity. That simply doesn't wash.

Do these same people drive without a driver's license? Do they work at a skilled job (Welder, Boilermaker, Electrician, Lawyer, Doctor) with some form of 'licensing' and some demonstration of their skills in that chosen profession? Would they allow me to come work in their profession or work at their company without some sort of knowledge / training FIRST, and also require a demonstration of my skill sets that qualifies me to get the same job and pay they have? We all KNOW the answer is 'HELL NO'.

Would I not only be required to have the appropriate 'license', somehow demonstrate my skill sets for that job, but perhaps also be REQUIRED to join some union / association in order to receive the same benefits? We all KNOW the answer is 'HELL YES'.

And, I have as much right to earn a living as I or THEY do to carry a weapon in public places. Earning a living, as good of one as I can, is NO 'less' a right than being able to carry a weapon. Truly, ANY person that's a member of a union / bar / association affiliated with their job OR hold's a valid driver's license cannot be anti-licensing / qualification without being, at some level, hypocritical, can they?

So, if the 2-tier licensing is passed, I'll simply do what I'd do if I wanted to join such a profession or work for such an employer. I'll meet (or exceed) whatever training / education / licensing is needed and meet (or exceed) whatever demonstration of skill sets is needed.

Pretty simple, really.

Leaving rights out of it... can you point to an instance of a licensed carrier misusing their firearm out on the street? Behaving in a way that they wouldn't have had they had training? Higher instances of misuse of a license or permit to carry in non-training states?

Mandatory training is useless. The best training is the training that you seek out yourself, training that pushes you and teaches you. The mandatory training (a 4-hour lecture and an easy written test and being able to hit targets at 7 and 21 feet 75% of the time) is a waste of time.

Finally, you shouldn't have to ask permission and pass tests to exercise a Constitutional right.