Got my IN CCW today-too easy?

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tyrajam

New member
Well, I got my Indiana concealed carry permit today. I had to submit a backgound check, I think thats a good thing, and give fingerprints, which I don't like. But thats it. No written test, no drug test, no hands on training or test-nothing. What do you guys think about this? I could not know which end of the gun a bullet comes out of and believe I could justifyably shoot someone for stealing a candybar, and I get a concealed permit without anyone telling me I'm wrong.

Is there a compromise between more gun control, and making sure the person getting a permit isn't a complete idiot? Maybe review a booklet of safety and shoot/don't shoot scenarios with a short test? Or showing the LEO how to safely load/unload a gun?

I like the way Indiana law is, you can buy as many handguns as you want and there is no registration, but if you want to take ANY handgun out of your house concealed, then you, not the gun, needs to be registered. That seems like a good common sense law. Do you guys think there is a way to make sure a person getting a concealed permit has common sense without starting a slippery slope of stupid new gun control laws?
 
If it is too difficult to get a carry permit, well, then the folks who are afraid they won't qualify (or who flunk the application process) will simply carry anyway. Look at the number of unlicensed auto drivers.

I doubt any stringent carry permit licensing procedure would be any more comprehensive than the one for getting a driver's license and there are a lot of people on the road who can't halfway drive in a reasonable manner. And that doesn't include the masses who don't have licenses or insurance.

To summarize, I don't think carry permits do a lot one way or the other, although I suppose it would be more convenient to have a permit to show to an officer if the need arises.

John
 
John, of course I agree that no law on guns or licensing will have ANY affect on criminals. My main concern is that if any nutjob with a pulse can get one, then a few "licensed" morons shooting up the town could cause the knee jerk kalifornia style concealed carry laws here.
 
Generally the best thing going is that it's self filtering and that abundance of CCW'ers prevents miscreant activity by means of MAD. The #1 filter is knowledge: most anyone who isn't serious about it probably doesn't know permits exist in the first place. #2 is people's comfort level individually: not a lot of people are comfortable or familiar having a loaded sidearm on them, particularly among other people in everyday life. Scrutiny just deters them right off the bat. #3 The act of going to the police to purposefully put oneself on file is a pretty strong wakeup in itself.

Those elements have been enough and not subject to change.
 
Too easy?

If you really, *truly* believe in what the Second Amendment says, the answer must be:

Not too easy. Too hard.
 
I do "truly" believe that everyone should be able to keep and bear arms without registering the person or the gun. My question is about legally concealing them in public. Yellowfin, you made some good points, I guess if it aint broke...
 
You agree on keeping arms, but it would seem you have reservations about people's right to bear them, IMHO.

In my understanding, CC or OC would be how one would "bear arms." I'm not trying to criticize, but it seemed your post was a bit contradictory, at least in my understanding of the wording in the 2A.
 
Raimius said it better than I could.

Keep means own.
Bear means carry with you.

Concealed or open makes little difference.
 
The sad part is that government requires a license to exercise a RIGHT, and so many of us have been conditioned to thinking this is acceptable.

Not only is it not too easy to get the permit, there shouldn't be any requirement for a permit.
 
Do you guys think there is a way to make sure a person getting a concealed permit has common sense without starting a slippery slope of stupid new gun control laws?
Click to expand...


Too easy?

If you really, *truly* believe in what the Second Amendment says, the answer must be:

Not too easy. Too hard.
Click to expand...

Good answer Bluesman. The 2nd Amendment is an innate right, idiot or not. I think putting "rules" in place to keep idiots out are what got us into this place all along.

Look at this from the perspective of the gun banners; Fienstien, Clinton, the Brady Campaign and the others. In their though process and current laws, they are trying to keep guns out of our hands because they don't think we are responsible enough to own them.

I'd guess Fienstein would say that you aren't responsible enough to own a gun if she had her way.

Be thankful that Indiana allows you to get a CCW permit with a minimum of hassle.
 
I like the way Indiana law is, you can buy as many handguns as you want and there is no registration, but if you want to take ANY handgun out of your house concealed, then you, not the gun, needs to be registered.
Click to expand...

Just a note, I don't believe Indiana differentiates between open and concealed. If you take it off your property, open or concealed, you must have a license. And no, it's not too easy, why, has there been problems? If not, why do you ask?
 
I could not know which end of the gun a bullet comes out of and believe I could justifyably shoot someone for stealing a candybar, and I get a concealed permit without anyone telling me I'm wrong.
Click to expand...


Man, how do those folks up in Vermont or Alaska manage? They're allowed to carry with no license at all! Yet, somehow, we never hear about gun crimes or accidental shootings or other "uneducated" mistakes gun owners make. :p

Testing and requiring proficiency does not cure problems with shooters. Take the following story for what it's worth to you...
My state does require a CCW course, 8 hours, plus a qualification with each specific semi automatic you want to carry (revolvers are generic: qualify with one, shoot them all). I qualified with a G27 3 weeks ago to add it to my permit, and while there another younger fella was taking his 5 year refresher course. He stepped to the firing line and didn't even have the mag all the way into his gun. He had racked it, squeezed the trigger and flinched about 3 feet when it went "click". This is a guy who has been carrying every day for the last 5 years, ever since his first carry class. Oh well, can't cure stupid. :barf:
 
Indiana permit is for carrying of a handgun. Concealed or otherwise. I recommend concealed. No need to make some folks wet themselves unecessarily.
 
So what are the laws of Indiana for concealed carry?

You might want to read what you signed and agreed to. In Texas we have a written test and a qualification test. As a concealed carry liscensee you can get yourself into misdeameanor trouble maybe even a felony in a heartbeat if you are not a responsible person.

You might want to read up on Indiana concealed carry law before you say to easy. :eek:
 
Another way to look at it....

First, I agree there should be no permit for a right, but that's another fight.

OK, permit required, so you do what they say, and get one. The check to see if you are in trouble with the law, or have a history of such (background check). Beyond that, they are allowing the citizens to demonstrate their responsibility by their actions. Instead of requiring an arbitrarty before the fact test.

The state is doing what was once common practice all over the US, trusting its citizens. No doubt that if they screw up they will be punished, and that is as it should be. But they are not exercising any more prior restraint on citizens actions than a requirement for a permit so that current legal status (no wants, warrants, etc.) can be determined. Seems a hell of a lot more reasonable to me than many states.
 
I thought the quality of the class for my Florida CCW could have been better. For the most part a lot of my classmates seemed uninformed and slightly trigger happy.
 
Egahd said:
So what are the laws of Indiana for concealed carry?
Click to expand...

Indiana doesn't issue a CCW permit. They issue a LTCH (License to Carry a Handgun) and do not specify how it may be carried...open or concealed is legal. However, there are some areas where the LEO's apparently don't agree (or know) and others where there are local ordinances, so be sure to become familiar with those before you travel about the state.
 
There is a story about the civil rights movement, and the days of literacy exams for voters to register. The story goes that the literacy exam in Georgia was to be administered by the local Sheriff. In one county, the test simply required that the person desiring to register had to read the headline of the paper out loud in the presence of the Sheriff.

A black man went in to register, and was handed a copy of a newspaper. It was printed in Chinese. He read aloud, "It says here that ain't no ni@@ers gonna vote in this county."

That is why there are no tests required for voting in this country, and is also why no American should ever tolerate ANY test for exercising ANY right, even ones you do not agree with. Requiring a test for what should be a right is saying that the behavior being licensed is not a right, but a privilege. A privilege that can be taken away at a whim- not just by lawmakers, but by any bureaucrat who wants to demonstrate his power over you.
 
divemedic, you must get off work earlier than me. You always seem to be one step ahead whenever I want to make a certain point! :D I was going to menton the voting rights act, too.

So I'll go on to another point. I think that tyrajam should bear the burden of personal responsibility of taking an NRA sanctioned firearm safety course and should be held liable if s/he shoots someone for stealing a candy bar, S/he should pay his/her hospital expenses if he/she holds their gun backwards to shoot it.

If the State decides that an NRA sanctioned firearm safety course should be a part of high school physical education curriculum and persons failing it should not be given their diploma...I agree...but that has nothing to do with the RKBA.
 
Testing requirements are designed to prevent poor people from being able to exercise their rights. It goes hand in hand with bans on affordable firearms, aka "Saturday Night Specials."

Statistical studies have shown that the more stringent the testing requirements and other qualification demands are made, the less crime-reduction benefit is seen.

New Hampshire's license doesn't even legally require a background check, let alone training, fingerprints, photographs, or all that other drivel designed to stand between a citizen and the fundamental human right to self-defense - and no license is needed for open carry - and we routinely make the very bottom of the list of state violent crime rates. Lower than Norway & Sweden, too, in fact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top