U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)-— The Indiana Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing for Wednesday, February 23, 2022, on HB 1077, which is known as the Constitutional Carry bill in Indiana. The hearing will be in Room 130, starting at 1:30 p.m.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is where Constitutional Carry in Indiana was killed in 2021, after being passed by the Indiana House on a 65 to 31 vote. In 2022, Constitutional Carry passed the House 63 to 29, virtually the same margin of two to one.
Eight members of the Judiciary Committee are Republicans. They are Liz Brown (R), Chairman; Eric Koch (R), Ranking member; Mike Bohacek, (R), James Buck (R); Arron Freeman (R); Mike Gaskill (R); Susan Glick (R); Michael Young (R).
Two, Eric Koch and Michael Young are bill sponsors for Constitutional Carry.
Three members of the Judiciary Committee are Democrats. They are Lonnie Randolph, Ranking Minority Member; Timothy Lanane (D), and Greg Taylor (D).
There are 39 Republican members of the Senate and 11 Democrat members of the Senate.
If Constitutional Carry is passed out of the Judiciary Committee to the Senate, it will likely pass the Senate. 14 Republican senators would need to vote against it to stop it. It is more likely a couple of Republican senators will vote against it in the Judiciary committee, thereby limiting the exposure of senators to just a couple. Two of the Republican Judiciary Committee members are sponsors of the bill. They are unlikely to vote against it.
The bill needs four more votes to pass out of the committee. Alternatively, three Republicans will need to join with the Democrats to stop the bill in the committee.
It is not clear if a committee vote on the bill will be held on Wednesday. More hearings and testimony might be called for.
Last year, the Judiciary Committee was used to kill Constitutional Carry. in a week, we should know if the same committee will be used to kill the bill in 2022.
It is difficult for Republicans to vote against the bill, as there have not been adverse effects in 20 states which have restored Constitutional Carry. However, many police chiefs and some sheriffs, and State Police are useful in providing an excuse not to pass the bill.
It is not easy to know who is being used by who in these circumstances.
In general, those who work the system full time have more influence. The state legislatures in Indiana are part-time and their time is divided among hundreds of bills. Law enforcement administrators have divided time as well; however, they only need to look at a few bills. It is likely law enforcement has a strong influence on the legislators.
Some police administrators who lobbied against Constitutional Carry in Indiana are:
- State Police Major Mike White.
- The immediate past president of the Indiana Association of Police Chiefs, Kendallville Police Chief Rob Wiley.
- Indiana State Police Major Rob Simpson.
Hamilton County Sheriff Dennis Quakenbush spoke in favor of Constitutional Carry. From wthr.com:
“This right is a God-given natural right, not one given by the government. The government should not be your plan for self-defense. It’s your responsibility to protect yourself, your families, your loved ones as well as your neighbors,” said Hamilton County Sheriff Dennis Quakenbush.
Opinion:
In general, Sheriffs are more likely to favor Constitutional Carry. They are elected directly by the people.
Police are a step removed. Police chiefs are hired by Mayors or City Administrators or City Councils. Police chiefs do what the people who hired them want them to do.
State police can generally be counted on to do what the Governor wants them to do.
Federal officers do what the deep state wants them to do. As seen with President Trump, those at high levels in the bureaucracy believe they decide who may be elected, not the other way around.–
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
I watched it go down. The Rino chair favored the Antigunners and was helpful to them, and was dismissive of the pro speakers. To the point of asking for further testimony on an amendment, from a random Anti when only moments early declined to hear a statment on an amendment from the author of the bill. That was before they passed an amendment, which neutered the entire bill, to try and put a “provisional” licence scheme over top of the current scheme as suggested by Superintendent Carter, this was supported by Brown, Glick and Bohacek, and the Dems. Watching it… Read more »
Way back in 1994 I moved to Indiana. Indiana provided for a free lifetime carry permit for retired police officers, which I was and am. To this day I have that permit in my wallet, even though I have moved from Indiana. From the day I received that permit it has bothered me that I was allowed to carry without having to constantly go back to “renew” my 2nd amendment right, but my neighbors and friends had to go through that nonsense. In Indianapolis they danced around the state’s “shall issue” law by having very restricted hours to pick up… Read more »
Section 32. The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State. From the already existing Indiana Constitution.
So, if the people of Indiana get this new “right” to carry their arms, are they going to wait for the permission of Santa Claus to do it?
HLB
If this bill dies it will be because of Republicans and cops. Republicans have already gutted it to the point where it can’t even be considered permitless carry much less constitutional carry. Republicans have the majority and could easily pass it. Unfortunately, there are some who don’t support the 2A. Also, the overwhelming majority of police in the state don’t either. In fact, only two sheriffs spoke out in support of the bill.
https://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2022/02/24/indiana-lawmakers-gun-laws-republicans-gop-gut-constitutional-carry-bill-following-criticism/6906989001/?utm_source=indystar-Daily%20Briefing
“The current system is not broken. It works,” said Detective Matt Foote from the Fort Wayne Police Department. “Right now we have a good system in place with permits that allows us very quickly within a couple minutes to be able to tell whether somebody is a prohibited person.”
Matt needs to spend more time with “civilians.”
Meh, he sounded like most all of the cops in Ft. Wayne do. The institutional mindset of the FWPD is tyrannical from the top down.
No real surpise there, it’s been a Dem appointing the FWPD chief for the last 22 years or so.
Unfortunately, it’s not just Matt. The article Stag posted shows various people in LE lobbying against the bill:
“This is the problem with the supermajority. It stifles, prohibits, oftentimes limits public debate,” said ISP Superintendent Douglas Carter. “I sure hope you choose to show deference to law enforcement professionals that understand the magnitude and the frontline effects of this legislation, rather than the possibility of getting reelected or elected the next primary.”
The state police lobbied against the bill.
The head of the chiefs of police lobbied against it.
The head of the sheriffs association remained quiet.
I know, I watched it live.
I appreciate the article Dean, a couple points, though: Anti 2nd Amendment lobbying is frequently done by a spokesperson representing an entire agency or group of agencies (e.g., Rob Simpson was speaking on behalf of all the Indiana State Police and Rob Wiley was speaking on behalf of all the Chiefs of Police). Dennis Quackenbush was speaking for himself as a sheriff. Jeff Campos did not make a statement on behalf of all sheriffs supporting the bill. https://indianasheriffs.org/ The point you made about sheriffs being elected is overplayed in my opinion. Most of the anti-2nd Amendment lobbying done by sheriffs… Read more »
Comment appears to have been deleted (not put on hold).