Indiana LTCH Training Requirements

[dross]

You know, I'm starting to reconsider. We might be able to turn this into a win. We gun owners agree to training, testing, and licensing for carry. In return, everyone has to get training, testing, and licensing to vote.

I'm telling you guys, we'd come out winners on that one. In a couple of years the folks who got elected under that system would drop the carry licensing provision.

If you even had to be able to name the three branches of government before you could vote, we'd never have another Democrat President or Democrat controlled Congress again.

 

[MTC]

Now tell me MCT, do you want a guy like this walking around out in public with YOUR family around. I don't. I don't even allow my kids anywhere near him anymore.

Your BIL's actions, inactions, or irresponsibility is not my problem. Definitely no excuse to strip the entire adult population of Indiana of their rights and subject them to arbitrary state-mandated training requirements as well as invasions of their privacy.

 

[Bill of Rights]

The idiocy of the minority should not cause a restriction of the majority. Or the minority. Or anyone with the exception of the individual causing the problem.
If a person is not worthy of trust with a firearm, that person is not worthy of trust with most of the things to which free people have access, to include kitchen knives, power tools, vehicles, powerful chemicals, and oh yeah, that little thing we do every couple of years: Voting to determine who holds the offices of power.

Show me how people like the above-mentioned brother-in-law are restricted from those other dangerous actions and things, which also do not require training to purchase or, with one exception, to use, and NONE of which are a right appertaining to all people, then we'll talk. You still won't convince me that mandatory training is a good idea, but I'll be happy to hear your points on the subject.

In addition: our LTCH is recognized in 26 states. Of the remaining 24, two neither issue nor recognize any license or permit at all. Twelve recognize only their own. Of the other ten, some cite "training requirements", others cite some failure of our laws. At least one refuses to accept our LTCH because we have the audacity to issue it to 18 year olds! The HORROR!

Here's an analogy: If your kid and the neighbor kid like to play at each others' houses, but the neighbor parent won't let your kid play on their swingset because you allow him/her to watch _______ (tv show) or because your kid's bedtime is a half hour later than the neighbor, do you agree to change the rules of your house because the neighbor doesn't like it? Do you restrict their kid from YOUR swingset because your kid isn't allowed to use theirs?

I would hope that the answer to both questions is no. So it is with other states. If they choose to bury their heads in the sand, that is their choice. I hope for their sakes that they change their minds before someone reminds them that if they are bent over with heads in the sand... Something else is raised high and unprotected.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[LawDog76]

Your BIL's actions, inactions, or irresponsibility is not my problem. Definitely no excuse to strip the entire adult population of Indiana of their rights and subject them to arbitrary state-mandated training requirements as well as invasions of their privacy.

Sorry didn't mean to miss type your name.

I never anything about striping anyone of their rights in any way shape or form. I wanted to throw the idea of a Federal License out there and the rules needed to get it. It basically the same set of rules the stricter states are using therefore giving states like Ohio more of a reason they would have to honor it.

 

[LawDog76]

Bill of Right's my answer is no, I would not restrict my kids cause of the things you have posted. There's ALOT more to my brother-in-law than I'm tell everyone mainly because of his right to privacy. But just to go into one more aspect why I deam him dangerous person is his driving. He has been in so many car accidents that were HIS fault no one including High-Risk companies will insure him anymore. The reason he can still renew his tags is because of the mail-in renewal form where all you have to do is check the box stating the insurance info has not changed. Proof of Insurance is not required when you renew threw the mail or at the machines they have set up outside the BMV.

 

[MTC]

'ts OK, LawDog. Read your proposal and it looks essentially like a federalized version of Nevada's concealed carry law. The gunowner licensing and registration laws, both federal and state, are my most hated items.

Respectfully, no.
Don't know what to tell you about your BIL. I've run into those types, too.

I was raised in a family run more or less as a dictatorship/theocracy. Rewards and freedoms were many, the punishments immediate and severe. If Dad was still alive, I'd have already got an ***beating for even sounding disrespectful to a police officer. There were certain things you just didn't do.
But it shaped how I treat others and what I expect from them. Hope this helps explain comments past, present and future.

 

[Lucas156]

I vote no

 

[LawDog76]

Actually MTC I'm a former Police officer, an Ohio one at that. I never took anything you said as being disrespectfull. Just a person standing strongly behind what they belive in which is exactly what we need when we have other people trying to push bills through like HR 45 and Indiana House Bill 1260. I just thought a Federal License as a 2ND option would be nice for us that travel out of state alot and would like to carry. It sucks that I have to hide my gun every time I hit the Ohio line when I goto visit friends and family.

 

[Pami]

Hes gotta want to practice first. You can learn if you don't practice

First I'm going to assume you meant "you canNOT learn if you don't practice."

Going on that assumption....

You won't take your BIL shooting to teach him proper gun handling and firearm safety because he's not interested in practicing, ergo he won't learn anything you try to teach him.

And so this makes state/federal-mandated training a good way to ensure people who carry for self-defense are more safe than others.. how? I guess I'm just not following your logic here. If people are getting the training simply to get the license so they can carry their gun anywhere they want to, there's no guarantee they're going to learn anything (which your statement clearly illustrates). The people who WANT to learn and WANT to be safe would get the training whether it was required or not. The people who aren't interested in learning aren't going to absorb a darn thing.

 

[finity]

We need a Federal Issued license that ALL states MUST honor.

I think we already have one...it's called the 2A. Well at least it's supposed to be.

I know a bunch of people don't want the goverment to know about what and all the guns we own but you and I both know they have a very good idea what we have.

Did you watch the video posted recently about the national ID card & one lame excuse to not oppose it was that "the government already knows everything about us anyway"?

And theres tip #3, remember the paperwork you filled out so you could take your new gun home from the dealer? Well a copy of that goes to the ATF, a Federal Goverment Agencey.

Anybody feel free to correct me if I'm wrong (& please provide a source ) but I don't think the 4473 gets sent to the ATF. It gets stored at the FFL's business for at least 20 years. If the FFL goes out of business before then it then (& only then) gets sent to the ATF for storage.

If for some reason the ATF didn't get that paperwork, there's the phone call to N.C.I.C. the dealer made where he gave all your info to them so you may actually take your new gun home. All that is kept on file at yet, Another Goverment Agency.

Again, I could be wrong (but I doubt it) the NCIC information is supposed to be destroyed in 30 (60/90?) days. If they aren't doing that then they are breaking the law.

Here's the main reason I think you must qualify with your weapon before you can carry it for person protection. There's someone out there (and probably one in every town) thats carrying the bigest, most powerful handgun they could get ahold of because of some "Shoot 'em up" movie or movies they watch all the time and the think guns are "cool" and haven't really earned a respect for them yet. The time is going to come around when they actually have use it to defend theirself and they are going to miss because they have NO training what so ever and they're going to hit an innocent bystandard.

Being an ex-police officer I'm sure you know what the statistics are for hit/miss ratio's. I think it's less than 25% & this is within the group that you are wanting us to be trained to their standards.

In fact if ANYBODY has to use their gun in self-defense, there is a good chance that an innocent bystander could be shot not just by your untrained "someone".

Federal SHALL ISSUE License
ALL states Must honor.
Can only be revoked for Violent crime and Felony CONVICTIONS (Just like Indiana does already)

#1 Pass the criminal background check (Just like Indiana does already)
#2 Pass a simple shooting course with the guns you want to carry using a solute target(So states like Ohio can't argue that we don't know how to use our weapons.)
Target one - 50ft 6 rounds into the target under 2 min. All rounds must hit the target
Target two - 25ft 6 rounds into the target under 2 min. All rounds must hit the primary target area.
#3 The Guns you qualified are the only you can carry for self defense and will be listed on the back of the permit. Name, model, and caliber.

Example –
Walther P99 40 Cal
Glock 19 9mm
Ruger Super Black Hawk 44 Mag

In theory I don't mind the idea of a Federal license that all states MUST recognize, ignoring, of course, the fact that we shouldn't have to have a license in the first place. If it was the ONLY way we could be guaranteed to be able to carry everywhere then I could bite the bullet.

The thing I don't like is the requirement to "qualify" on a particular gun. I can't see how it helps but I can sure see how it could hurt. Is there a significant difference between the operation of a Sig/XD/Glock/etc pistol or between any generic type of revolvers that would impart a benefit to someone by making them shoot 6 bullets into a piece of paper in 2 minutes?

If you even had to be able to name the three branches of government before you could vote, we'd never have another Democrat President or Democrat controlled Congress again.

Contrary to what you think there are just as many IDIOTS that vote Republican as Democrat. Look at all the IDIOT Republicans who voted for W...TWICE! Then continued to be apologists for him untill the bitter end & beyond.

 

[rhino]

I voted "No."

On a fundamental level, I object to the existence of the License to Carry Handgun because it shouldn't be required to exercise an innate human right that is ennumerated in the US Consitution and even more strongly in the Indiana Constitution.

Since we're stuck with it for now, I absolutely oppose any further restrictions or requirements.


The only way I would support a training requirement or any further restrictions would be under the following circumstances:

• The current license to carry handgun was either retained as is, or replaced with no legal obligation for a license in order to carry handguns in Indiana (i.e. Vermont-style laws).
• A new "super license" would be available with training and proficiency requirments that was valid in every state and US territory and property and allowed the possessor to carry anywhere a Federal law enforcement official is allowed to carry AT LEAST, including on commercial aircraft, all Federal facilities, etc.
• The only places the "super license" wouldn't allow carry (potentially) would be places that are actually secure (or at least as close as possible) such as areas of prisons where the guard are unarmed as well.

I'm not going to hold my breath for any of that to ever happen.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Bill of Right's my answer is no, I would not restrict my kids cause of the things you have posted. There's ALOT more to my brother-in-law than I'm tell everyone mainly because of his right to privacy. But just to go into one more aspect why I deam him dangerous person is his driving. He has been in so many car accidents that were HIS fault no one including High-Risk companies will insure him anymore. The reason he can still renew his tags is because of the mail-in renewal form where all you have to do is check the box stating the insurance info has not changed. Proof of Insurance is not required when you renew threw the mail or at the machines they have set up outside the BMV.

Lawdog, apologies for not being more clear. I was not referring to your BIL in re: the comments about kids, I was only giving an example where the rules of your house compared to state laws, the kids in the example compared to the citizens of the two states, and my belief that the stricter rules of one house/state should not be used to change the rules/laws in the other house/state.

I also need to correct my above post.

I said that our LTCH is recognized in 26 states, and this is still true. There are two more states now, though, that recognize others' licenses/permits, those being ME and NE. The former recognizes three others, DE, LA, and SD, the latter, 34, including UT and FL.

For those keeping score, if you hold a resident IN LTCH and a non-res Utah, you can now lawfully carry in 34 of the 50 states.

IN is recognized in

1. Alabama
2. Alaska
3. Arizona
4. Arkansas
5. Colorado (resident only)
6. Florida (resident only)
7. Georgia
8. Idaho
9. Indiana
10. Kentucky
11. Louisiana
12. Michigan(resident only)
13. Mississippi
14. Missouri
15. Montana
16. New Hampshire(resident only)
17. North Carolina
18. North Dakota
19. Oklahoma
20. Pennsylvania
21. South Dakota
22. Tennessee
23. Texas
24. Utah
25. Vermont
26. Wyoming

The Utah CFP adds:

1. Delaware
2. Minnesota
3. Nebraska
4. New Mexico
5. Ohio
6. Virginia
7. Washington
8. West Virginia

The states that recognize others but neither of these are

1. Kansas
2. Maine
3. Nevada
4. South Carolina

The states that recognize no permit but their own are:

1. California
2. Connecticut
3. Hawaii
4. Iowa
5. Maryland
6. Massachusetts
7. New Jersey
8. New York
9. Oregon
10. Rhode Island
    

The states that neither recognize nor issue permits are:

1. Illinois
2. Wisconsin

So... to list alphabetically, we have:
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado (resident only)
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida (resident only)
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan(resident only)
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire(resident only)
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

Over half of the states, 52%, are green, as I've colored them.. That's over half the nation that recognizes our LTCH
Another just-under 1/6 of the states, 16%, are "blue", meaning they're added by the Utah CFP.
Recognizing some states, just neither of the above two, are 8%
Just under 1/4 of the states, 24%, are either pink or red, meaning they recognize at most one permit, and neither of the two above.
Of note, NE, the most recent to start recognizing other states, does not recognize AL, DE, GA, IN, MD, MA, MS, NH, NY, PA, SD, VA, or WA.

With MA, MD, NY, and WA in there, I don't think it has anything to do with training requirements.

The Utah "training" consists of four hours sitting in a classroom, no live fire, and yet, adding that to the Indiana allows you to lawfully carry in 68% of the states in this country.

Training ain't the issue, folks. We need to change minds, not laws.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[HICKMAN]

I went through the Texas CCW training, which requires classroom training in safety, the laws and a visit to the shooting range. I went through it because it's what I had to do to carry.

Prior to that, I received all my firearms training in the Army.

Hoosiers can get an LTCH with no instruction, training, understand of the law or anything, just basically have a clean record... but that's only if they want to carry it. We don't need to go through all that crap if we want to keep it at home, with our rifles and shotguns.... which I understand we can carry any time we want.

I think the LTCH needs to go away... there is no need for it. We already have laws making it illegal for felons and so forth to carry a gun, so everyone else is basically cleared to carry... why do we need to pay the ISP for a pink piece of paper?

 

[printcraft]

I..............
I think the LTCH needs to go away... there is no need for it. We already have laws making it illegal for felons and so forth to carry a gun, so everyone else is basically cleared to carry... why do we need to pay the ISP for a pink piece of paper?

To prove we're not a felon...... I know burden of proof on us to prove otherwise.

NO.

Mandatory hoops to block a God given right. No thank you.

The Alaska and Vermont ideals were given as an example that works,
I'm pretty sure both places are not crime ridden toilets unlike oh, I don't know...... Washington DC and Chicago.

 

[kingnereli]

I value freedom more then regulation. We should be lobbying to get red of the requirement to be licensed at all rather then adding more restrictions on our rights.

 

[evansvillethompsongunner]

I wouldn't be opposed to training. More than likely, our LTCH would be accepted by more states by adding training and a photo.

Who cares?

I don't live in another State - I live in Indiana.

If NO other State in the Union recognizes our LTCH, that's quite all right.

In fact, I resent the notion of being required to have to send in for LTCH.

An innate right only granted by a pink slip of paper? It's offensive.

 

[Speed Kills]

Who cares?

I don't live in another State - I live in Indiana.

If NO other State in the Union recognizes our LTCH, that's quite all right.

In fact, I resent the notion of being required to have to send in for LTCH.

An innate right only granted by a pink slip of paper? It's offensive.

Who cares? The other 70% of americans who travel out of state at least once a year. That's who.

I voted that yes, I do feel there should be some training in place to receive an LTCH. Not for the fact of being recognized by more states (that'd be a nice byproduct, but not my basis), but the sheer fact that any training is good training, and most people simply won't take the initiative if they don't have to. Think, at 16, you're not turned loose into a car with no type of training (at least anymore), and I'll speak for my idiot generation, since I'm a young dude, and say that it's 100% for the better. Imagine what would happen if you were to turn kids out today with no formal driver's training. Granted, it'd be on a much larger scale as the LTCH, considering there's more people that drive than carry, but still.....

And I'd say that the juggalo chasing after someone with a loaded gun thread would be enough to justify saying so as well. I'm sure he's not the only one out there with that mentality, and JUST MAYBE with some specialized training, instances like that could be kept to a minimum.

Remember, just because YOU have common sense, and could properly drive a car, carry a handgun, etc. without training, doesn't mean everyone else can.

 

[Joe Williams]

Who cares? The other 70% of americans who travel out of state at least once a year. That's who.

I voted that yes, I do feel there should be some training in place to receive an LTCH. Not for the fact of being recognized by more states (that'd be a nice byproduct, but not my basis), but the sheer fact that any training is good training, and most people simply won't take the initiative if they don't have to. Think, at 16, you're not turned loose into a car with no type of training (at least anymore), and I'll speak for my idiot generation, since I'm a young dude, and say that it's 100% for the better. Imagine what would happen if you were to turn kids out today with no formal driver's training. Granted, it'd be on a much larger scale as the LTCH, considering there's more people that drive than carry, but still.....

And I'd say that the juggalo chasing after someone with a loaded gun thread would be enough to justify saying so as well. I'm sure he's not the only one out there with that mentality, and JUST MAYBE with some specialized training, instances like that could be kept to a minimum.

Remember, just because YOU have common sense, and could properly drive a car, carry a handgun, etc. without training, doesn't mean everyone else can.

Can you provide your proof of training to exercise your privilege to speak your mind, and show us your card from the state certifying that you have been granted permission to speak your mind? Your failure to capitalize "Americans" indicates you may need to obtain some recurrent training before speaking publicly again.

If you want to turn one right into a privilege, why not the rest of them?

 

[jeremy]

Who cares? The other 70% of Americans who travel out of state at least once a year. That's who.

I voted that yes, I do feel there should be some training in place to receive an LTCH. Not for the fact of being recognized by more states (that'd be a nice byproduct, but not my basis), but the sheer fact that any training is good training, and most people simply won't take the initiative if they don't have to. Think, at 16, you're not turned loose into a car with no type of training (at least anymore), and I'll speak for my idiot generation, since I'm a young dude, and say that it's 100% for the better. Imagine what would happen if you were to turn kids out today with no formal driver's training. Granted, it'd be on a much larger scale as the LTCH, considering there's more people that drive than carry, but still.....

And I'd say that the juggalo chasing after someone with a loaded gun thread would be enough to justify saying so as well. I'm sure he's not the only one out there with that mentality, and JUST MAYBE with some specialized training, instances like that could be kept to a minimum.

Remember, just because YOU have common sense, and could properly drive a car, carry a handgun, etc. without training, doesn't mean everyone else can.

I belong in that 70% class and want NO more regulation. Period!

Government mandated firearms training is a farce, at best. I have had to set though several of these classes in States and Countries that I have lived in. I have yet to sit in one that even borders on being competent. All they actually do is make it more difficult for someone to legally own a firearm.

As far as mandatory training it should begin at home with your parents. I was shooting before I was in school as a young child. I on my own continue to seek out training.

Personally I think we should take a step back a hundred years. Destroy the National Guard system, bring back the Militias and resume under the older course of the Swiss model again.


Just my $.02, and apparently your opinion does vary from mine... Oh well... Got to love that 1st amendment, at least until someone decides I should have to attend training and registration before I am allowed to speak...

 

[Josh Ward]

Who cares? The other 70% of americans who travel out of state at least once a year. That's who.

I voted that yes, I do feel there should be some training in place to receive an LTCH. Not for the fact of being recognized by more states (that'd be a nice byproduct, but not my basis), but the sheer fact that any training is good training, and most people simply won't take the initiative if they don't have to. Think, at 16, you're not turned loose into a car with no type of training (at least anymore), and I'll speak for my idiot generation, since I'm a young dude, and say that it's 100% for the better. Imagine what would happen if you were to turn kids out today with no formal driver's training. Granted, it'd be on a much larger scale as the LTCH, considering there's more people that drive than carry, but still.....

And I'd say that the juggalo chasing after someone with a loaded gun thread would be enough to justify saying so as well. I'm sure he's not the only one out there with that mentality, and JUST MAYBE with some specialized training, instances like that could be kept to a minimum.

Remember, just because YOU have common sense, and could properly drive a car, carry a handgun, etc. without training, doesn't mean everyone else can.

Whoa whoa whoa.....wait just a min. Your basis of thinking is screwed. A drivers license is a state issued PRIVLEDGE, not a God given RIGHT supposedly protected by our constitution!!!! The absolute LAST thing we need is more restriction/requirement to be "allowed" to lawfully carry a handgun.