Petition for Constitutional Carry in Indiana

[Woobie]

If these scenarios were to take place, do you think our puny pink cards will stop them from taking away our right to carry? If they can repeal the 2A, they can get away with whatever else they choose.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

From our friend, Jim Lucas' Facebook page. The following have been filed and assigned bill numbers.

SPREAD THE WORD
GREAT NEWS!
2 of my Gun Rights Restoration bills have received bill numbers:
HB1055 - Carry on state property
HB1056 - Constitutional Carry

He says a couple more of his are still in the works. Start contacting your state house critters.

 

[bwframe]

If these scenarios were to take place, do you think our puny pink cards will stop them from taking away our right to carry?...

Yes, presently Indiana law supersedes federal law. The feds only have control over hoosiers when we give it to them.

 

[Bull]

signed

 

[IndyDave1776]

I'd like to have someone show proof that Indiana would not be affected by a constitutional change. I'm sceptical of giving over control.

The Indiana State Constitution would still protect the RKBA from the state government. If the feds get out of line and/or repeal the 2A, state licensure or constitutional carry would be irrelevant one way or the other.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

The Indiana State Constitution would still protect the RKBA from the state government. If the feds get out of line and/or repeal the 2A, state licensure or constitutional carry would be irrelevant one way or the other.

It would depend on the language of the replacement language. It's not so far fetched they could word it so that all existing state amendments are null and void.

 

[IndyDave1776]

It would depend on the language of the replacement language. It's not so far fetched they could word it so that all existing state amendments are null and void.

If so, pink cards or not would be completely irrelevant. I am not sure, however, that it would pass legal muster to argue that the repeal of an amendment to the US Constitution can be used to nullify any part of a State Constitution so far as it controls the behavior of state personnel. Of course, that brings us around to the point where we have to consider when following the Constitution, US or state, has been a real issue to these domestic enemies in decades.

At the end of the day, passing constitutional carry cannot adversely affect us regardless of what may happen since, once again, if there is a power grab, it isn't like they are going to respect our rights any more or less one way or the other.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

If so, pink cards or not would be completely irrelevant. I am not sure, however, that it would pass legal muster to argue that the repeal of an amendment to the US Constitution can be used to nullify any part of a State Constitution so far as it controls the behavior of state personnel. Of course, that brings us around to the point where we have to consider when following the Constitution, US or state, has been a real issue to these domestic enemies in decades.

At the end of the day, passing constitutional carry cannot adversely affect us regardless of what may happen since, once again, if there is a power grab, it isn't like they are going to respect our rights any more or less one way or the other.

The powers on loan to the Feds by the people and the states are only limited by the people that lent them those powers. There's nothing to keep the people from formally surrendering more of their rights, should they so decide. I would submit that if the 2A were simply "repealed", that would be all that is required by many to usurp state level amendments because...federal law is supreme and supersedes whatever those silly states think their constitutions state.

But I agree...all of this theorizing and what-iffing should not prevent us from doing what is right---passing CC for Indiana.

 

[Kurr]

Meh, the Constitution did not give me my Rights. De-listing one from the enumeration would not take them away.

 

[John Galt]

If the 2nd goes, we've got bigger things to worry about ...

 

[Bill of Rights]

Meh, the Constitution did not give me my Rights. De-listing one from the enumeration would not take them away.

^^This, exactly. That pink card would end up with bullet holes in it, and so what? Your rights don't come from it. I don't honestly think that people sent to confiscate would give a rat's tuchus about Indiana law superseding federal or vice versa- I think they would follow orders, esp. if given false, inflammatory intel. "There are people on this street we have reason to believe have plots in place against the US Gov't."

That said, a Constitutional Carry law would merely remove the requirement of a LTCH to carry in the state, not make the right dependent upon the language of the Constitution, which, though unfathomably difficult, could be changed.



Blessings,
Bill

 

[chipbennett]

I'd like to have someone show proof that Indiana would not be affected by a constitutional change. I'm sceptical of giving over control.

It's not a stretch at all to consider that if we don't get immigration under control, we will be outnumbered in the near future. The first thing they'll do when they have the numbers is take away our means of fighting off the tyrannical government.

But what does that have anything to do with Indiana repealing the statutory language that criminalizes the carry of handguns?

 

[bwframe]

But what does that have anything to do with Indiana repealing the statutory language that criminalizes the carry of handguns?

Maybe nothing? Why would it be termed "Constitutional Carry" if it wasn't tied to the constitution?

 

[24Carat]

If constitutional carry is adopted here, where does Indiana fall if the 2nd Amendment is changed or repealed on the federal level?

LOL ! Indiana falls into the center of the single largest "adverse reaction movement" that the planet has ever seen is where Indiana falls !

 

[Thor]

Signed...still don't appreciate that these things are click bait for fund raising though. With everyone asking for money all the time and the government just taking it without asking I have fund raising fatigue.

 

[chipbennett]

Maybe nothing? Why would it be termed "Constitutional Carry" if it wasn't tied to the constitution?

"Constitutional Carry" is merely a term used to describe the state (circumstance) in which people carry under the auspices of the second amendment, rather than under some subordinate, statutory language. Returning Indiana to this state (circumstance) merely requires the removal of the statutory language that explicitly criminalizes the carry of handguns. The Indiana state constitution already recognizes and protects the inherent right to keep and bear arms. Proposed legislation would have no impact on the constitutional language, but rather, only on the (unconstitutional) statutory language that criminalizes the carry of handguns.

 

[jwh20]

Perhaps it has been mentioned already but I'd really like to see a 3-level system in place here in Indiana:

1) Constitutional Carry for anyone who is a "proper person" in the State, resident or not.
2) LTCH as it currently exists for those who travel out-of-state to States where it is recognized.
3) A "premium" LTCH that has an appropriate training requirement that would meet of the standards for those States that won't recognize IN LTCH because it lacks a training requirement.

It seems to me that this would let each of us choose the option that best fits our circumstances. While I am 100% for Constitutional Carry, it's clear that Indiana gun owners have little or no clout in other States who are less enlightened.

 

[Bill of Rights]

A couple of years ago, one of the state Senators put forth a bill to create your #3. It failed miserably, and appropriately. The big problem with the existence of #3 is that #2 would quickly be "no longer accepted" in the same way that, for example, Wisconsin now recognizes only non-resident permits from somewhere... Virginia, I think, because the non-res permits get a more extensive background check. While I'm sure you don't mean it to be one, this is a surefire play into the antis' wishes.

Let the other states make their laws as they see fit. No, we can't influence them, but by the same token, we should not allow them to influence our laws either.

Blessings,
Bill

Perhaps it has been mentioned already but I'd really like to see a 3-level system in place here in Indiana:

1) Constitutional Carry for anyone who is a "proper person" in the State, resident or not.
2) LTCH as it currently exists for those who travel out-of-state to States where it is recognized.
3) A "premium" LTCH that has an appropriate training requirement that would meet of the standards for those States that won't recognize IN LTCH because it lacks a training requirement.

It seems to me that this would let each of us choose the option that best fits our circumstances. While I am 100% for Constitutional Carry, it's clear that Indiana gun owners have little or no clout in other States who are less enlightened.

 

[Trigger Time]

Thanks to Representative Jim Lucas we now have bill numbers!! Start sending those emails!!

HB1055 carry on state property
HB1056 constitutional carry

 

[Trigger Time]

From our friend, Jim Lucas' Facebook page. The following have been filed and assigned bill numbers.



He says a couple more of his are still in the works. Start contacting your state house critters.

just saw this. Scooped me.