Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Marion County - Proposal 174

Discussion in 'Indiana Glockers' started by JT-Hickman, Apr 9, 2007.

  1. JT-Hickman


    Jan 6, 2007
    Indy, IN
    Link to proposals:

    You will want to right click and save the PDF file to your desktop, then open with acrobat reader

    Is anyone looking into this? Buddy of mine brought it up because he plays paintball, but this looks like it could affect us right to carry folks as well. Does it limit us or change the way we carry?
  2. R. Emmelman

    R. Emmelman Tired Member

    It appears that you posted a dead link.

    While I have not seen the proposal I think the idea is to expand the pre-unigov ban aganst firing a firearm in the city limits. It is not suppose to affect ranges, only those who want to hunt or shoot on their land in Marion county. Should not affect carrying as that is a state issue.

  3. Sh33pDog


    Apr 7, 2007
    PROP 174

    I suggest everyone read this prop!

    Trust me this will affect all ranges in Indianapolis. It will also affect many other counties in the state as most counties eventually do what Marion does (i.e. the smoking ban). The catch with this mess is that all ranges will have to pass a safety inspection by the sheriff. Who sets the criteria for this inspection? The sheriff sets the standard and the Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee approves the standards. All it will take is an anti sheriff and an anti committee and we will not be shooting in Marion county anymore!

    This prop wont affect your right to carry as long as you are an irresponsible gun owner who has no problem carrying a tool that you have not properly trained yourself with! If you are a gun owner who likes to put some rounds down range in an effort to train with the tool you carry everyday then yes it will affect your right to carry!

    There is a hearing on this prop on April 17, 2007 at 5:30 P.M. If you are a gun owner and you give a damn about you rights you will be there! If your not there don't come crying when you can't do a little target practice!

    Sh33pdog out!
  4. Ignition

    Ignition Insanityville

    Dec 5, 2004
    Cherry Point NC
    i love how some many ppl are soooooooo adimate against their own freedoms. (freakin anti's)

    seriously please dont sell out to this bill just because you dont think it affects you now
  5. JT-Hickman


    Jan 6, 2007
    Indy, IN
    What can YOU do?
    Attend a hearing
    In the meantime, be sure to make plans to attend the hearing on Tuesday, April 17, at 5:30 p.m. in Room 260 of the City-County Building, 50 North Alabama Street, Indianapolis.

    Contact the council
    Rules and Public Policy Committee:
    Rozelle Boyd (D) – - 317-327-4240
    Dr. Philip Borst (R) – 317-327-4242
    Cherrish Pryor (D) – - 317-327-4242
    Bob rum (R) – 317- 856-5549
    Lonnell Conley (D) – - 317-547-6652
    Monroe Gray (D) – - 317-297-1155
    Joanne Sanders (R) – - 317-283-6040
    Scott Schneider (R) – - 317-845-1815

    Link to council as a whole

    If you can, go to the hearing, at the least write an intelligent email and send it to the council members letting them know your feelings.

    Information for this post found on Council website and on NRA’s legislation website
  6. minuteman32

    minuteman32 NRA & GOA Life

    Aug 20, 2004
    Central IN.
    Meeting w/ pro 2A attorney scheduled

    Originally posted by minuteman32
    I was just contacted by the president of a local organization who informed me that he was contacted by a local attorney, who had worked on pro 2A matters in D.C., who has offered his services to organize & fight the Marion County shooting ban proposal! The specifics are in rout to me @ this time, but he would like to meet w/ 'us' on Thursday evening @ 6 PM @ his office (he offered the use of his boardroom) on Delaware St. (address forthcoming).
    He said that if we can organize effectively, we can beat this. And, he is volunteering his services.
    As soon as I get more specifics, I'll post them here. I hope that we can get a good turn out & some good ideas.
    Tell even your "Elmer Fudd" friends, because they won't be able to shoot trap/skeet/etc., or hunt in Marion Co. if this goes through.

    Okay, just got the email, which I'm just going to copy/paste here;

    This is the run down on what I spoke to you about this morning. I heard from a local Pro-2nd Amendment attorney this morning. His name is Ros Stovall and he has worked on pro-2A issues in Washington. Ros has offered to help us defeat Proposition 174. We are planning a meeting at his downtown Indianapolis office this Thursday, April 12 at 6p.m. His office is located downtown at 225 North Delaware. He has asked if we could get some people together to help work on this issue. Please contact anyone that you feel could help us and give them the details on the meeting. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
  7. rhino465


    Sep 24, 2003
    Indiana, USA
    I hope Mr. Stovall is correct and that this onerous infringement on our rights can be defeated.

    I was listening to Greg Garrison on the radio this morning and he opined that the ordinance is effectively already passed. He based this on conversations with three of the council members (Republicans) who indicated to him that the Demo supporters of the ordinance on the council have the majority and will use it. Then, all it will take is for His Majesty Bart to sign it into law and it's finished.

    I suspect Mr. Garrison is correct, but we still need to fight it (and I don't even live in Marion Co.). Go to the meeting tomorrow night with the attorney if you can. Attend the public meeting and voice your opposition!

    I just hope more people care enough to oppose this than cared to oppose the new security measures at the govt' center campus.
  8. txgho1911


    Jan 1, 2006
    From supporters in Southern Indiana.

    From: jmtomes []
    Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 1:22 PM
    To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
    Subject: They never quit

    Several weeks ago I received a letter about the Marion County city/county council in Indianapolis, Indiana entertaining the prospect of restricting shooting in that area.

    On March 26th, Councilor Angela Mansfield, introduced a proposal to expand on a 1975 ordinance that prohibited shooting within the old city limits.

    Now, because of development and expansion, she wants this ordinance to include the entire area. This will absorb areas that were hunting grounds and in some places still are.

    Researching Indiana's preemption law Section 35-47-11-1(c) it appears that because this ordinance was in effect prior to the preemption statute they will be allowed to do this, unless there's enough people to oppose it.

    She's concerned about festive gun fire and hunters. I guess gang bang drive by shootings isn't a big deal anymore.

    According to her press release she has support from some NRA members and a former gun shop owner.

    The article reads that these folks are more than willing to accept these new restrictions, because it excludes some areas of the county that are not yet developed, however, once they too reach the point they determine too populated those areas also will be restricted.

    Here is a little of Proposal 174 that does not appear in the press release, and remember this is being supported by people we might think are on our side.

    Sec. 451-8. Written Approval by the Sheriff for Private Shooting Purposes.

    (a) A person may apply to the sheriff for written approval to shoot firearms on his/her property if his/her property is at least 15 acres for a limited period of time not to exceed one year. The application must contain the following:

    (1) Name of the person who owns the property;

    (2) Names of any other persons that the owner is permitting to shoot on his/her property;

    (3) Address including boundaries of where the person proposes to shoot;

    (4) Time period requested to shoot; and

    (5) Purpose of the request to shoot.

    (b) The Sheriff in his sole discretion shall determine if the shooting activity on the property presents a danger to any person, animal or property outside the boundaries of the property.

    (c) The Sheriff may revoke the written approval prior to the expiration of the time permitted for shooting if the sheriff subsequently determines that the shooting activity presents a danger to any person, animal or property outside the boundaries of the property or is in violation of any section of this code, or of any applicable state or federal law.

    (d) The sheriff may collect a fee of $100 from the applicant.

    SECTION 3. This resolution shall be in full force and effect upon adoption and compliance with I.C. 36-3-4-14.

    The foregoing was passed by the City-County Council this _____ day of __________, 2007, at _____ p.m.

    $100.00 and permission to shoot on your own property? No this won't cause any problems.

    I've been told that there may be a hearing on this on April 19, but it may already be a done deal. I hope that some of our group who live in the Indy area can get more details or attend this hearing.

    I had intended to write on another subject, but I'll save that one for another day.

    This story here though points out why those of us who understand the REAL REASON FOR THE SECOND AMENDMENT become so frustrated with people who claim to be on our side and jump on board with some gun restrictions for the other guy.

    These milkweeds feel so good about themselves because they can accept compromise, especially when it's someone else who pays the price.

    I don't know who the ,"former gun shop owner" is, but I wonder if it ever crossed his mind when he was in business that if no one can shoot a firearm why would they bother to buy one?

    I understand that subdivisions have spread out and taken up what was once open land. Gun owners need to be alert to what is happening around them. They need to support their local gun ranges. It would be nice if they could provoke their state legislators to push for land to be set aside for gun range development.

    Here in Indiana there is a lot of old coal mine land that would make terrific shooting ranges. Sadly,now some of that land is being built up as residential.

    In the future we may have to drive a half day to get to a range and then you may need written permission to spend the gas to drive that far and for that purpose.

    Jim and Margie
    2nd Amendment Patriots
  9. luxone

    luxone dis-Member

    Nov 12, 2005
    This is incredibly irresponsible of Garrison! To opine that a law that has not passed has "effectively already passed" and thus discourage people from fighting it, is quite frankly idiotic! Next time he's at a gun show hocking his crap I'll be sure to stop and thank his Highness for giving up on us peasants that live in Marion County!
  10. rhino465


    Sep 24, 2003
    Indiana, USA
    Well, he does so much good overall that I don't want to can him for that! Maybe he will inspire people to fight it. Some people will do stuff only when you tell them they can't do it.

    It's also possible I misunderstood him ... we could ask him to explain when we see him.

    And I should add that "effectively already passed" is my interpretation of what he actually said. So maybe blame me!
  11. R. Emmelman

    R. Emmelman Tired Member

    The way I heard it was that Garrison was being realistic in that the CCC is stacked with those who will rubber stamp the librial (Dem.) views. Lets face it, the CCC pretty does what Sir Bart, Frank, and his ilk wants.
  12. Josed


    Feb 10, 2006
    Indianapolis, IN.
    It is time to get together and help vote this Democrats out of office. Before our Country ends up in the toilet.
  13. R. Emmelman

    R. Emmelman Tired Member

    I think it is too late. The country is already in the toilet, we just need to get out the plunger. As for Marion county, I don't see much hope. When we can still elect you-know-who to 7th district congress that just shows you where Indianapolis is going.
  14. dwh79


    Aug 7, 2006
    I am proud to say we had over 150 people show up to oppose prop 174. The vote was postponed when need everyone to show up again on May 22 to show our unity against such a useless proposal.
  15. IndyGunFreak


    Jan 26, 2001
    The more I hear Kyle Hepfer's statements, the happier I am he's in a position of authority in the DNR.

    Mr. Hepfer has more common sense than any 100 random politicians in this state. Although, I'm not sure his research of the last 10yrs is accurate. Anyone remember the incident at Marion County Fish and Game where the 1911 double fired, and a .45 shell hit a car in Kroger's parking lot.

    Regardless... I'm glad to have him on our side.


    April 18, 2007

    Council panel puts off vote on gun-firing ban
    Proposal's author tells 150 foes that delay allows time to digest changes to the plan

    A large crowd of gun rights supporters at a hearing Tuesday night voiced their opposition to a proposal restricting the firing of weapons in Marion County.

    A City-County Council panel heard about two hours of testimony but postponed a vote until its next meeting on May 22. The committee voted 5-3 against an effort to immediately strike the proposal. All three Republicans voted to kill it, but all five Democrats voted to continue the debate.

    In a show of hands among the crowd of about 150 people, not one person supported the measure. Nearly all of the speakers said they were hunters and National Rifle Association members, and many voiced some displeasure with the decision to put off the vote.

    Angela Mansfield, the author of Proposal 174, said she wanted time for people to digest the changes she had made since the original plan drew heated opposition. Her goal, she said, never has been to infringe on constitutional rights to buy or own a weapon. Instead, she said the ordinance aims to ban people from target practice or celebratory gunfire that endangers residential neighborhoods.

    "I recognize that this does not deal with criminals who don't care about the laws," Mansfield said. "There are a lot of people in our community using bad judgment about where they shoot. This gives law enforcement another tool."

    She altered the original proposal so that county residents could lawfully shoot on 5 acres of private property, down from 15 acres in the original proposal. She also removed a requirement to obtain a permit from police, which could cost $100.

    Still, the changes did not stop opponents from criticizing what they considered an infringement on their personal freedom.

    The opinion given by Kyle Hupfer, the former director of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, summed up many of the comments. He said his research did not turn up a single hunting or target-shooting accident in the county in more than a decade.

    "To take away rights from people seems short-sighted," Hupfer said. "Let's enforce the laws on the books, not penalize the legal shooters."
  16. R. Emmelman

    R. Emmelman Tired Member

    "All three Republicans voted to kill it, but all five Democrats voted to continue the debate."

    :faint: TELL ME IT ISN'T SO!
  17. rhino465


    Sep 24, 2003
    Indiana, USA
    Kyle Hupfer is indeed a strong voice for individual liberty, particularly RKBA. It's a very good sign that he is weighing-in on this issue.

    He's the reason why the multiple restrictions on carrying firearms on DNR properties were (temporarily) suspended. Don't forget that while we battle Prop 174 that we still need to make sure the rules changes implemented by Mr. Hupfer before he left DNR become PERMANENT.
  18. minuteman32

    minuteman32 NRA & GOA Life

    Aug 20, 2004
    Central IN.
    Kyle is, unfortunately, not w/ the DNR anymore. He is in another area of state government, but I don't recall where. I also hear that the individual that has his old DNR position, is "cut from the same cloth" (Kyle said this, directly to me, during a conversation a couple of months ago), which is reassuring.

    Perhaps Kyle will be able to positively influence the agency he's currently with!
  19. ericXD9


    Jul 28, 2004
    I would love to see documented cases that involve all these many people in our community using bad judgment. I never knew it was a problem.

    And Hupfer is spot-on, there are already ample laws at the disposal of law enforcement. Enforce those.

    I've already "digested" the changes in her ordinance, and the resulting turd is too big to flush down my toilet. Anyone know a good plumber?

    Here's a question for people who know more than me. She cited anecdotal evidence of this "widespread" problem - hearing gunshots, neighbors with bullet holes in their roofs, etc. Does she live in an area that would be covered by this ordinance? Just wondering...
  20. E-mail message

    From: jmtomes@(jmtomes) Date: Thu, Apr 19, 2007, 6:48pm To: "Undisclosed-Recipient:;" Subject: Marion County 174 and DNR
    ___ There is no denying that it will be difficult for all of us who support the Second Amendment to continue to promote and defend our Rights since the horrible episode in Virginia, but this is not the time to retreat.
    ___ The debate on the rights of citizens to protect themselves by being armed never gets this kind of media attention on it's own merit._ It only receives this amount of air time after a terrible incident.
    ___ Some may believe that those who support gun ownership should lay low for awhile._ I emphatically disagree.
    ___ Are we to keep quiet while the other side boldly steps up to every camera and microphone in the country to present their arguments supporting gun control?
    ___ Absolutely not!_ We must continue to stand up for what it is we believe and to explain to all those who are now hearing and listening to all the debating and pleas being made for, "sensible new gun laws".
    ___ I just had a phone conversation with Indianapolis,_Marion County Council member Angela Mansfield about her Proposal 174.
    ___ This is a proposal that will change_gun owner activity because of the expansion of residential and commercial property in the Indy area.
    ___ We talked for about an hour and Ms. Mansfield told me that she has made some major changes in her initial proposal._ She is going to send me the revised edition, but she told me she has dropped all of the offensive portions of that measure.
    ___ I can tell by our conversation that she is hoping to arrive at an agreement that will make everyone happy._ I also brought up some points of concern I have about_the references to_paint ball guns and other air or spring propelled guns._ She said I was the first to bring that up and wants me to send her an e-mail detailing that.
    ___ The next hearing on this will be on May 22 at the city/county office at 200 E. Washington address in Indy._ She has had other hearings on this so as to fine tune this to everyone's satisfaction.
    ___ I hope that some of our members in the area will make the meeting._ Angela_seemed willing to accept our views on protecting gun owners and gun rights._ She's agreed to keep us posted via e-mail on this issue and any other gun issues that may come up._ We appreciate that.
    ___ I was also given a notice from our good friend Dave S. in the mid part of the state about the DNR meeting concerning making permanent the rule to allow the carrying of firearms on state owned property and state parks.
    ____ The hearings will be held at 6 p.m. (EDT) at the following locations:
    1) Tuesday, May 15, at the Patio Building at the Miami County
    Fairgrounds located at 1029 W. 200 N. in Peru (Miami County)
    2) Wednesday, May 16, at Spring Mill State Park in the Lakeview Room;
    6666 Hwy 60 East in Mitchell (Lawrence County)
    Specifically, the changes would permanently allow individuals with
    handgun licenses for personal protection to carry a handgun on DNR
    properties. The other changes involve hunting activities on both private
    and public land. Those with handgun licenses for personal protection
    would continue to be able to carry such firearms when hunting wild
    turkeys or when hunting deer with a bow and arrow. Similarly, properly
    licensed individuals would also be able to continue to carry a handgun
    when running dogs for opossums and raccoons during the chasing season.
    Previously, DNR rules prohibited carrying licensed handguns in these
    instances. These proposals allow a means of personal protection while
    hunting or visiting a DNR property.
    ___ I will be a guest on the NRANews radio program tonight at 9:40 PM Central time to talk about some of these issues._ As always I appreciate their invitation.
    Jim and Margie
    2nd Amendment Patriots