Indianapolis city council votes in favor of banning 'assault' rifles, removing concealed carry

www.foxnews.com...

The Indianapolis City-County Council passed a proposed gun control measure by a vote of 18 to five Monday evening.

Introduced by Mayor Joe Hogsett as part of his public safety plan, Proposal 156 was initially approved nine to four by the city's Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee.
The ordinance increases the age required to purchase a gun in the city to 21 years old, bans "assault rifles" within city limits and mandates a license to carry.

The part that really pisses me off, is the Kardashian size "but" in all this. See, they can't enforce it. It goes completely against state law and that would have to be changed before this can take effect.

The plan, however, is not immediately enforceable, as state law prohibits local governments from enforcing this kind of gun regulation. The city would be allowed to enact the measure if state regulations are lifted or the law is changed by the legislature or the courts, according to WTHR.

They knew from the get go that is was unenforceable, so what was the point. Why go to all that time and trouble, not to mention tax payer funds, to even put this out there. Just another anti gun virtue signal that has no teeth.
Seriously, what were they thinking.
Well, we can't enforce it, but let's go ahead and waste everyone's time and money to draw this up, approve it and then sit back and say "Well we tried".
Here's a crazy idea...How about actually catching and prosecuting criminals ?

Another thing : I Hate the term "assault rifle". Exactly what is an assault rifle ? In my opinion, it's just a catch all phrase the gun grabbers use for any firearm they want to ban. Look at Illinois. There is a very long list of guns you can't own, all under the that description.

Take a hard look at the people who are trying to take away your Rights under the guise of protecting you.

originally posted by: DAVID64
www.foxnews.com...

The Indianapolis City-County Council passed a proposed gun control measure by a vote of 18 to five Monday evening.

Introduced by Mayor Joe Hogsett as part of his public safety plan, Proposal 156 was initially approved nine to four by the city's Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee.
The ordinance increases the age required to purchase a gun in the city to 21 years old, bans "assault rifles" within city limits and mandates a license to carry.

The part that really pisses me off, is the Kardashian size "but" in all this. See, they can't enforce it. It goes completely against state law and that would have to be changed before this can take effect.

The plan, however, is not immediately enforceable, as state law prohibits local governments from enforcing this kind of gun regulation. The city would be allowed to enact the measure if state regulations are lifted or the law is changed by the legislature or the courts, according to WTHR.

They knew from the get go that is was unenforceable, so what was the point. Why go to all that time and trouble, not to mention tax payer funds, to even put this out there. Just another anti gun virtue signal that has no teeth.
Seriously, what were they thinking.
Well, we can't enforce it, but let's go ahead and waste everyone's time and money to draw this up, approve it and then sit back and say "Well we tried".
Here's a crazy idea...How about actually catching and prosecuting criminals ?

Another thing : I Hate the term "assault rifle". Exactly what is an assault rifle ? In my opinion, it's just a catch all phrase the gun grabbers use for any firearm they want to ban. Look at Illinois. There is a very long list of guns you can't own, all under the that description.

Take a hard look at the people who are trying to take away your Rights under the guise of protecting you.

You are correct. It is virtue signaling to make it look like they are doing something except arresting and prosecuting criminals. It will have zero effect on actual gun violence because most of the gun violence is committed by criminals using illegally owned firearms.

The folks will try anything to stop gun violence EXCEPT actually discussing the demographics of gun violence perpetrators and the cultural issues and dysfunction that causes it. We do not have a gun problem, we have a young poor black male problem and this is the elephant in the room. The vast majority of gun violence is committed by young black males against other young black males. Until we call it like it is and address this head on, we will never solve the problem.

Sounds like someone in charge of the city doesn’t know what he/she is doing , they don’t really know government Or government laws.. And, they were Thinking they have power and control , they will change what they want . This is a big “oopsie, what do you mean there are state laws I have to play by ?” On their part ….

So like less than 3% of deaths by gun are from all rifles, so what is the point here, what are they trying to solve? Also, what is a generic AR?

I think it is nothing more than a dog whistle to the voters that keep them in office.

what a waste of time and energy
...and money

We have a problem with an assault government. That is what needs to be banned.

In this case, the state made the mistake. Instead of making this kind of law uninforcable, they should have made making this kind of law illeagle.

I hope the people that put them in office realize the waste of resourses they are.

This is what the Democrats do, promise things they know they can't control and blame Republicans for not passing, or joining them, in the illegal promises. Just like the student loan forgiveness plan and Governor Evers promise to legalize cannabis in Wisconsin if he's elected. Then, he uses the same promise to win re-election. The Democrats fall for it every time!

When Hunter Biden serves jail time for lying on the form that he used to buy a gun, they can talk to me about gun laws. Until then they can pound sand.

The supremacy clause in the Constitution and the SCOTUS opinions that filter down from it make all such fascist rulings invalid. Every voting members should be automatically impeached.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
So like less than 3% of deaths by gun are from all rifles, so what is the point here, what are they trying to solve? Also, what is a generic AR?

I think it is nothing more than a dog whistle to the voters that keep them in office.

3% of 20,138 firearm deaths (not including suicide by firearm) is still not insignificant.

The USA has a gun problem and some of those firearm deaths are mass shootings, which aren't usually done by handguns.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Xtrozero
So like less than 3% of deaths by gun are from all rifles, so what is the point here, what are they trying to solve? Also, what is a generic AR?

I think it is nothing more than a dog whistle to the voters that keep them in office.

3% of 20,138 firearm deaths (not including suicide by firearm) is still not insignificant.

The USA has a gun problem and some of those firearm deaths are mass shootings, which aren't usually done by handguns.

The USA has a stupid problem, not a gun problem. The guns all behave rather well, but the very few nutters who decide to use them to kill others seem to be the problem. Do guns walk around looking rough and mean in KIWI land? Ya'll should maybe do a few push ups and try not to let inanimate objects scare you.

a reply to: chr0naut

The US has a mental health problem, disguised as a gun problem. Plain and simple



And, the statistics would beg to differ on your last statement.

originally posted by: chr0naut

3% of 20,138 firearm deaths (not including suicide by firearm) is still not insignificant.

The USA has a gun problem and some of those firearm deaths are mass shootings, which aren't usually done by handguns.

3% for ALL rifles, not just ARs... So 600... out of 400 million guns. A person can kill 20 people tomorrow with a handgun if they wanted to and planned it out well. A person can kill 20 people with a knife too. The fact that we have only 600 rifle deaths out of 330,000,000 people with 400 million guns kind of says a lot about how much hyperbole drives the whole AR narrative.

originally posted by: network dude

The USA has a stupid problem, not a gun problem. The guns all behave rather well, but the very few nutters who decide to use them to kill others seem to be the problem. Do guns walk around looking rough and mean in KIWI land? Ya'll should maybe do a few push ups and try not to let inanimate objects scare you.

Guns also stop 3+ million violent crimes every year too. We could save 50,000 traffic deaths each year by forcing people to drive 25 everywhere, but we need to weigh the plus with the minuses. We don't talk about the assaults in England at some mass level close to 1000 per 100,000 people. We don't talk about Australia which is 1 point away from the most rapes per 100,000 women of ANY country in the world either.

a reply to: DAVID64

Whenever you see the term, "Gun control measure", just remove the word, "gun" and you'll see what it's all about.

Assault Rifles account for only 365 of the 10,200 murders by gun.

Source: www.criminalattorneycolumbus.com...

Sounds like Indy is just trying to make non-thinking liberals happy.

The local DA will not prosecute crimes, letting criminals go free, killing more people. . . and they'll say, "See! We should have passed this measure!".

It's good when the government oversteps because it creates a chance to take it to the supreme court and get some caselaw on the books. Heller was a good case like that and also the recent case where they overturned the New York law where people had to show cause as to why they needed a gun to get a permit. Once the supreme court decides, it's res judicata.

originally posted by: carewemust
Assault Rifles account for only 365 of the 10,200 murders by gun.

Source: www.criminalattorneycolumbus.com...

Sounds like Indy is just trying to make non-thinking liberals happy.

And that ends that conversation

Facts tend to make the liberals run away