Indiana Constitutional Carry 2017

[brotherbill3]

Perhaps I'm misreading these bills or am just too cynical, but why is everyone so excited about these bills? SB43, 191, and 1071 refer to carrying without a LTCH only if that person is under a protective order or is under a protective order and has applied for a LTCH. Even then, it's only for 60 days. SB 191 has a section about appointing a committee to look at repealing the necessity to first obtain a LTCH in order to carry a firearm, but that's it (Section 4 for those keeping track at home). While I do think it's fantastic that those who are under a protective order, and therefore ostensibly in more imminent need of protection than others, are able to carry without a license, I don't see how it's so great for the rest of us. Sure, it's a step in the right direction, but one never knows how long the committee is going to do its study, whether or not a committee will even be appointed to do said study, nor what the findings will be (See? Cynical! ). If I'm misreading the bills, then, please, let me know. I'll start rejoicing, too! But, if I am indeed reading them correctly, then I'll wait until the requirement for a LTCH is actually repealed.

Read back up the thread - Summer Study is an advancement of the legislation and discussion of constitutional carry. Without this we start at ground zero next session. HB 1071 was completely amended into SB 191 when it appeared HB 1071 was going to die in the Senate. SB 43 isn't as grand. It expands who is legally allowed to carry in the state house - a step stone to wider legality - and an example of why employers shouldn't limit the rights of employees (IMO).

Without HB 1071 (and subsequently SB 191) - constitutional carry was going no where this session - to much opposition. Its all up there - go back to mid January after the hearing on HB 1071.
The summer study is a step forward - with Indiana's part time legislature - this is the only way to have more than a few short hearings and keep things moving -
keep the discussion going with the legislature and the interested / invested parties. For the past 3 sessions the previous Public Policy Committee Chairman - stalled this and didn't let it move. This moves it into new territory.
that's why we're glad. We get to keep pushing for it.

 

[CraigAPS]

Read back up the thread - Summer Study is an advancement of the legislation and discussion of constitutional carry. Without this we start at ground zero next session. HB 1071 was completely amended into SB 191 when it appeared HB 1071 was going to die in the Senate. SB 43 isn't as grand. It expands who is legally allowed to carry in the state house - a step stone to wider legality - and an example of why employers shouldn't limit the rights of employees (IMO).

Without HB 1071 (and subsequently SB 191) - constitutional carry was going no where this session - to much opposition. Its all up there - go back to mid January after the hearing on HB 1071.
The summer study is a step forward - with Indiana's part time legislature - this is the only way to have more than a few short hearings and keep things moving -
keep the discussion going with the legislature and the interested / invested parties. For the past 3 sessions the previous Public Policy Committee Chairman - stalled this and didn't let it move. This moves it into new territory.
that's why we're glad. We get to keep pushing for it.

I'll admit that I hadn't kept up on this thread since the beginning of the year, and I only read the last several pages to reacquaint myself with it. I definitely understand that these bills are necessary stepping stones as they expand areas in which firearms are allowed as well as allowing some to carry sans LTCH. The government just moves so slowly that I worry they won't make any bigger strides until it's too late and pro-2A no longer runs the state senate.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I'll admit that I hadn't kept up on this thread since the beginning of the year, and I only read the last several pages to reacquaint myself with it. I definitely understand that these bills are necessary stepping stones as they expand areas in which firearms are allowed as well as allowing some to carry sans LTCH. The government just moves so slowly that I worry they won't make any bigger strides until it's too late and pro-2A no longer runs the state senate.

The Senate has mostly been pro-2A, as far as I can tell, for at least 10 years. Sen. Long did make a couple of statements I disagreed with and posted about, and Sen. Alting was not very happy when I called him out on lying directly to my face when we once met. Thankfully, Tom Wyss is no longer a senator, and sadly, neither is Lindel Hume, who was a (D), but always staunchly pro-2A. All in all, I think the Senate is the lesser concern than either the House (which is more to our favor now) and the Governor's Mansion. It could have gone very badly for us if Captain Mustache had won the latter. I do agree with you that we need to make some bigger strides; consider how far we've come just in the last 11 years, though: Lifetime LTCH, breaking down barriers in places like schools, parks, gov't buildings, removal of need to carry LTCH on person, SBS legal, the list goes on. Indiana has been at the forefront of the list of "good" states, but we all know we want to be the best.

Thanks to all who have helped push the state in that direction.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[KellyinAvon]

We are in the NRA-ILA News again!! Easy button attached.

Thanks to your calls and emails, House Bill 1071, the victim defense bill, has been scheduled for a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee this Wednesday, March 29. Please contact the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and respectfully urge them to support HB 1071!


https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170327/indiana-victim-defense-bill-scheduled-for-hearing-this-week

​

 

[brotherbill3]

Update (well on all current and Summer Study / Const. Carry) on Legislation ...

Via IMAGC (for those on / willing to check FB)
http://www.facebook.com/IndianaMomsAgainstGunControl/posts/1264372213654671

Text and links for those not:

IGA STATUS OF LEGISLATION – March 28 2017

I have been tied up but I hope you all are learning to be involved on your own. (Although, I also hope you find the updates and information we provide helpful). There were quite a few items passed and to this time – only 1 remains to pass its second chamber committee hearing.


SB 191 and HB 1071 have become “linked”: HB1071 – which we’ve discussed in depth – will be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee – Tomorrow 3.29 – 9 AM in room 130. I’ve never been to a Senate Hearing and it is unlikely I will get to attend tomorrow’s hearing; so if someone can go, try to testify in support or at least listen, that would be great. And report back on what you learn if you go! (Committee link included at end of post)
If fact here is a quick link to a letter, courtesy of the NRA-ILA, to the Senate Committee on HB 1071 – You can edit if you wish – or simply send this as they have it worded. I have so please, and I hope you will too: TAKE ACTION! And let’s see if we can accomplish all this this session and be ready to tackle the summer study to pass Constitutional Carry – next session.
http://act.nraila.org/composeletters.aspx?AlertID=1592


I mention that SB 191 is now linked (to this); it appeared that the Senate was not going to hear HB 1071, so in order to keep both the victim protection AND the constitutional carry summer study (or better!) language alive – The entirety of HB 1071 was also amended into SB 191; which then passed out of the committee. This legislation is waiting its second and third hearings in the House Chamber but if it passes these, it will almost certainly head to a conference committee.


SB 43 was amended in the House Public Policy Committee – which (IMO) improved the legislation. Yesterday (Mon 3-27) during 2nd reading, there were 2 attempts to amend this. BOTH attempt were to BROADEN the legal areas where Licensed (LTCH approved) Citizens COULD legally carry. BOTH measures would have reduced or eliminated many gun free zones. These amendments, by Rep. L. Arnold (R-74) and Rep J. Lucas (R-69) – were defeated; though Mr. Arnold’s was a very close vote.
THANK YOU to both Rep ARNOLD & Rep LUCAS for your continued efforts to restore these rights.
SB 43 did, as pass the house as it was approved by the Public Policy Committee, and will be returned to the Senate; this is also likely headed for a Conference Committee in the upcoming weeks.


SB 13 and HB 1250 have both passed 3rd readings in both chambers. The President Pro Tempore of the Senate has already signed both. These will be enacted into law.
SB 344 was approved; and passed 3rd reading as well; so this is simply awaiting signatures.
HB 1095 was approved by the Senate, but with amendments within the Senate Committee – this could be approved by the House as amended - or it will (most likely) go to conference committee in the next week or two.


The defeat of the amendments to SB 43 – to eliminate some Gun-Free-Zones – just exemplifies the fight we have to restore even part of our, even with many the “PRO-2A Republican Supermajority” in the IGA. This is why it is essential to continue to write and educate others. I’m sure the legislators have heard often from our core group and solid 2A supporters – but we need to broaden our base and create new supporter of the 2A and Art.1-Sec.32 (of the Indiana Constitution) – if we wish to see continued progress toward the restoration of our rights.


Thanks – Please LIKE SHARE AND COMMENT (and please share outside of Facebook too!) –
It’s about our rights – and growing a strong – knowledgeable electorate and patriots in this and future generations.
--- BB3


SENATE COMMITTEE: Senate Committee on Judiciary - Indiana General Assembly, 2017 Session
Also:
Video of House Sessions: Archives - Indiana General Assembly, 2017 Session
(note you must use pull downs to find the date and item to watch)

The videos were not playing earlier when I tried to watch ... so but Link was included.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Interesting point on SB 344: This was a bill (now an Act) to make it a crime for an illegal alien to possess a firearm. There was some argument on Third Reading, where one of the House Democrats questioned Rep. Lucas about a SCOTUS decision (I don't recall him citing which, but he may have) where it was decided that all of the rights in the Constitution apply to all persons on American soil, citizenship not required, and thus, how can we justify taking guns away from people when the US Constitution protects the RKBA for all.

No slam at all on Mr. Lucas, he was obviously blindsided by this attack; As I was watching, I thought, from the luxury of my computer screen, "The Constitution allows for the exercise of one's rights to be curtailed by the law when one has violated it, via due process. It is specified that we have the rights to life, liberty, and property in that document, yet no one questions that people may be detained against their will (liberty violated) in the event of violations of laws and the rights of others."

Much later, I also thought, "Oh, so you favor removing the restrictions on the RKBA for US citizens also! Wonderful! I'm glad we can count on your support!" Alas, Mr. Lucas did not answer either of those, though his answer was equally fine: His answer was along the lines of the latter of these, addressing that our own citizens are restricted in their exercise of the right, and the people this bill affects are already violators of the law, simply by their presence here.

Again, this comment is not to speak ill of Rep. Lucas, whom I consider a friend.

The bill did pass the House with 91 "ayes" and a single "no" from.... Rep. Charlie Brown, who said in committee that he would never vote to allow people to have more guns.

Apparently, that only applies to those people who obey the law. Rep. Brown indicated by his vote that he was fine with people who flagrantly violate the law by their mere presence in this country, not having a law in place stopping them from being lawfully armed.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Thor]

0946 and the testimony from the ladies, including ISPD, is great. She just said that she wished IN could take the front seat on 2nd amendment issues not follow along.

 

[Thor]

Graphic descriptions of stalkers and attacks. Why being able to carry a gun is important.

 

[Thor]

1007 lady talking now from 'victim rights group' is saying this is just going to cause more mayhem, ladies will have their guns taken away and used on them. Said Guy Relford was wrong. Now Chesterfield Police Chief talking against it.

 

[Thor]

Bill passes 9-0. Regret was expressed by several that this needed to go to Summer Study.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Bill passes 9-0. Regret was expressed by several that this needed to go to Summer Study.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Bill passes 9-0. Regret was expressed by several that this needed to go to Summer Study.

Hi Thor,

The IGA website says DO PASS, AMEND

What did they amend?

Also now curious if someone will offer an amendment (given that expressed regret) that it just happen this year. It's not impossible; hell, it might even happen in conference committee, and given that the House has already passed this language, I think it might even just sail through if they did.

Legislators? Are you listening?

Blessings,
Bill

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Bill passes 9-0. Regret was expressed by several that this needed to go to Summer Study.

This is for SB 191 and HB 1071 combo, right? Wow...I would have expected someone to vote 'no'. Glad they didn't.

 

[Thor]

Hi Bill,

I think they moved the part that allowed those with protective orders to carry to the study group also but I don't think the web site has been updated yet. Then again IANA lawyer/legislator.

And I do hope they are listening...

 

[brotherbill3]

Busy day; I'm behind ...

Sounds like we have a ball of yard being played with by cats between HB1071 (senate vsn) and SB 191 (house vsn - provided it passes 2nd hearing) ...

I'll try to catch up. Perhaps if the IGA site catches up later today (and the videos play) we can figure out what's up between the lot of us.

 

[brotherbill3]

Hi Bill,

I think they moved the part that allowed those with protective orders to carry to the study group also but I don't think the web site has been updated yet. Then again IANA lawyer/legislator.

And I do hope they are listening...

THIS ^^^ ... whole of 1071 to summer study ... is what I got from one that testified (Tamara, ret. ISP; now WCDI) via FB discussion.

RIDUNCKULOUS.

nice conflict w/ 1071 and 191 ... this should be interesting (or messy) ... glad we have a marine leading the charge ...

 

[KellyinAvon]

Why is it anything pro-2A is controversial but confiscating the firearms of hundreds of thousands of veterans and social security recipients, denying 5th amendment due process rights goes unnoticed?

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. – Two controversial gun bills may require further study and may not be up for final votes during this legislative session. A state Senate committee voted to send the proposals to a summer study committee.

One measure would allow domestic violence victims to carry a handgun without a license after a protective order is issued. The measure, House Bill 1071, had already passed in the Indiana House.

Supporters said the bill would allow victims of domestic violence to better protect themselves, but critics cautioned that it could lead to an increase in violence.
The committee also wanted to more closely examine a bill that would allow Hoosiers to carry a handgun without a license.
The full Senate still has to weigh in on Wednesday’s legislative actions.
State Senate committee recommends further study of controversial gun bills | Fox 59

 

[Bill of Rights]

It's "controversial" because of who's doing the reporting. If the reporter is against it, it causes controversy. If the reporter agrees with it, it doesn't need to stir up the public, and therefore is barely worthy of mention.

I'll add this as well:
"...critics cautioned that it could lead to an increase in violence."
If someone needs a protective order, the right person is already worried about violence against them. They're not initiating it. The "critics" aren't apparently worried about THAT violence. A "protective order" is essentially a judge shaking his finger and saying, "Don't go to this address, don't go within 1000 feet of this person, don't call this phone number, or you'll be tried in court, with a lawyer trying to weasel you out of any responsibility for doing it." to the person the order is directed against. It's kinda like your teacher shaking a finger at you and saying "no, no, no" when you know that all the school can do is kick you out for a few days, and you don't want to be there anyway.

The only "violence" this will increase is the kind that stops an attacker. How permanently it stops him or her is up to the attacker and the will of the intended victim. It could "stop" them from attacking in that moment, or it could stop them from ever attacking anyone again. Or doing much of anything else.

I don't see stopping attackers with the very violence they would use against their victims as a bad thing.

Blessings,
Bill

Why is it anything pro-2A is controversial but confiscating the firearms of hundreds of thousands of veterans and social security recipients, denying 5th amendment due process rights goes unnoticed?

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. – Two controversial gun bills may require further study and may not be up for final votes during this legislative session. A state Senate committee voted to send the proposals to a summer study committee.

One measure would allow domestic violence victims to carry a handgun without a license after a protective order is issued. The measure, House Bill 1071, had already passed in the Indiana House.

Supporters said the bill would allow victims of domestic violence to better protect themselves, but critics cautioned that it could lead to an increase in violence.
The committee also wanted to more closely examine a bill that would allow Hoosiers to carry a handgun without a license.
The full Senate still has to weigh in on Wednesday’s legislative actions.
State Senate committee recommends further study of controversial gun bills | Fox 59

 

[brotherbill3]

Update - Reviewed video on SB 43 (2nd reading) - and status of SB 191 and HB 1071 ...

http://www.facebook.com/IndianaMomsAgainstGunControl/posts/1266137076811518

IGA UPDATE – WOW, We need ACTION – March 30, 2017

Well, I am quite astounded. We have a storm brewing as we head into the end of the session. We need to STRONGLY state our positions, to support our firearms rights in the most no-nonsense terms; and that these rights are neither for sale, nor are they to be infringed. We need to clearly articulate this to our state representatives and state senators.

For example: SB 43, initially expanded parking lot vehicle storage protection to prison guards / workers (a good step). This was amended in the senate with SB 14, to expand the “exemption to the prohibition” to carry (with LTCH) on the state capitol grounds and building, from legislators, to also include (most) staff. The house committee, expanded this exemption include another group that works in the capitol building, and passed it to the full house for 2nd reading (where it can be amended).

I reviewed the video archive of 2nd reading from Monday 3/27. (Link added in comments, below). Representative Lloyd Arnold offered an amendment (put to roll call vote) intended to eliminate the prohibition for all LTCH holders on all state owned properties. This is the way things SHOULD be, ultimately. While seemingly simple, the argument for this as presented was succinct, lacking in the strong factual support it deserved; and surprisingly – unchallenged for debate. In a close roll call vote, the amendment failed with some usually strong supports opposed.

Rep Lucas offered a more limited amendment. This eliminated the prohibition ONLY at the state capitol grounds and expanded legal carry to all LTCH holders on this limited state property. Mr. Lucas cited the rules of the state government AND Art.1 Sec.23 of the State Constitution, to factually and legally show the support for his amendment. Again there was no added support, rebuttal, or discussion. This time only a voice vote; with the LOUDER “Nay” side again infringing your rights. I would wish this had also been a roll call vote. The nays may have carried the day, but not simply by yelling more forcefully. And we would know who they were.

SB 43 was returned to the senate. A motion to concur was filed; or this will be heading for a conference committee to work out the differences, sometime in the next 2 weeks.

Then there is the perplexing situation of HB-1071 and the SUMMER STUDIES (yes now plural!). Wednesday morning HB 1071 was heard in the Senate Judiciary committee. I know that a number of well-spoken folks supporting our rights testified in support of this act as passed by the house and even in favor of constitutional carry. There was testimony from the usual anti-rights crowd as well. The committee then amended the bill and made the ENTIRE BILL – a summer study; which means more hearings this summer on BOTH the limited & temporary Protective Order exemption to the LTCH; and the Constitutional (permit-less) Carry Study. This is in deep contrast with the House action, where SB 191, was passed with the entirety of HB 1071 amended in.

At this time SB 191 is awaiting 2nd Hearing (amendments) in the House; and HB 1071 is awaiting its 2nd hearing in the Senate. The video of the testimony from the Senate committee is not yet available, but it should be soon. I will try to provide an update when I it is available.

Please contact the legislators and STRONGLY, but politely, urge them support HB 1071, AS PASSED by the State House, and SB 191 as passed by the House Committee. We need to be VERY clear and articulate with our positions. ALSO, be sure to get any friends and/or family that will support these to do the same. As we’ve noted, we need to broaden our base of support and educate new folks into standing up for our rights.

Please SHARE, COMMENT, LIKE. Please feel free share outside of Facebook or to groups that support this within. We need to reach as many people as possible. Votes could be as early as Monday and these important bills should then be headed to conference committee’s for more testimony.

Thanks for your Support. In Liberty

--- BB3

ETA:
Link to video archive
http://iga.in.gov/information/archives/2017/video/house/
Need to use the pull down for Mon 3.27 Part 2,
Full house 2nd reading of SB 43 start off the video for about 5 minutes.


Senate Testimony on HB1071 (Wed 3.29) not running yet.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Some folks need need to be looking for work after the next election.

Update - Reviewed video on SB 43 (2nd reading) - and status of SB 191 and HB 1071 ...

http://www.facebook.com/IndianaMomsAgainstGunControl/posts/1266137076811518



ETA:
Link to video archive
Archives - Indiana General Assembly, 2017 Session
Need to use the pull down for Mon 3.27 Part 2,
Full house 2nd reading of SB 43 start off the video for about 5 minutes.


Senate Testimony on HB1071 (Wed 3.29) not running yet.