About Time

Usually, when you hear about freedom's these days, they're being retracted. It's refreshing to point out the occasional expansion. Concealed Carry Permits, in my opinion, were a step in the right direction. A truly free state would behave like Vermont or Alaska in terms of firearms and not require a permit to carry, as it really is a natural right of defense to have some form of protection. Remember, the Supreme Court ruled the police do not have an obligation to protect you.

Getting a Concealed Carry Permit for a handgun depends largely on the state you're in. Some require written tests and others require safety courses. Most have exorbitant fees, a sponge meant to assuage gun permit opponents who thinking soaking the gun owner is a small way to get back at them for having too much freedom. In Indiana, permit prices have been relatively minor. It was all of $25, in the form of two money orders to pay the local and state entities who processed it. That fee recently has changed, but with an acceptable twist.

While it is now $40 for a 4-year permit, the Indiana legislature has seen, in its wisdom, to offer a lifetime permit for $100 for current permit holders and $125 for new permit applicants. I for one think it's a great idea and one a long time in coming. All permits should be for life. The notion of them is ridiculous enough, but to require you to demonstrate nothing other than you can type a triplicate form every four years (a feat in itself, I will give you) is a bit ludicrous. The Indianapolis Star article linked above contains most of the relevant details, and of course the expected criticisms. Take this quote from Handgun Control's own Peter Hamm (or is it the organization formerly known as Handgun Control? I forget):

"I would presume the state legislature is going to do the same with driver's licenses and business licenses, because there is no reason anybody should have to go through the hassle of being checked out every four years," he said.

I believe that was the thought of Abdul Hakim-Shabazz as well, WXNT 1430 AM's resident morning talk host. Though, I could be wrong as I only heard him promo a piece with that agreement. The point being for Mr. Hamm to consider, Indiana gun licenses are not something you have to demonstrate any proficiency for after four years, and renewing "licenses'' anyway is often more about getting money than it is about testing competency anyway. From that point of view, I'm certainly in favor of the legislature expanding or making permanent licenses for businesses and drivers.

There still exists a mechanism for revocation when the law is broken. You won't keep your gun permit if you become a felon anymore than you would before, but that is something easily glossed over when someone's arguing for rights restriction like Mr. Hamm. The same would go for any license. Abuse the priviledge and away it goes. What about that is so difficult to understand?

Apparently, Mr. Hamm finds some difficulty, as he speaks for us Indiana gun owners when he says:

"Responsible gun owners understand that some gun owners ought to be checked out every four years."

I sure am glad people like him are there to speak for 'the little guy' like me. Actually, no. Every gun owner I know (and that's quite a few) in this state hates that we have to pay every four years to reinforce our right to carry. If one of us were to commit a felony, then we'd lose the permit. If the police can't handle that, then you have other issues more important than running a background check every few years. Responsible gun owners understand that people like Mr. Hamm don't want us owning guns at all and think of us as little better than criminals ourselves. So, no, I don't agree with his asinine statement or his viewpoint.

Luckily, I don't have to. We now have the option for a lifetime permit, and I for one think I'm going to take it.