Local officials oppose changes in Indiana gun laws

Three bills have been introduced in the Indiana General Assembly that will change the state's handguns law.

State Rep. Jim Lucas' (R-Seymour) bill would eliminate the requirement for a person legally allowed to own a handgun to obtain a license and make it an option. Another bill would allow guns at public universities and state office buildings.

A third bill introduced by Sen. Jim Tomes (R-Wadesville) will repeal a law that makes it difficult for people with repeat alcohol offenses to obtain a handgun license.

“It wouldn't be a good idea for a number of reasons,” Madison County Prosecutor Rodney Cummings said. “Law-abiding citizens are conscientious enough to get a permit.”

Cummings said requiring a person to obtain a license allows law enforcement agencies the opportunity to do a background check.

“There are people that shouldn't be able to carry a gun,” he said. “There are a lot of things that take place behind the scenes. It's an administrative procedure.”

Cummings said the licensing requirement allows a police chief or sheriff to do a background check to determine if a person has mental health issues.

Madison County Sheriff Scott Mellinger said he is personally opposed to the elimination of the licensing requirement.

“I'm pro gun,” he said. “Not everyone has retained the right, in my opinion, to carry a handgun.

“Some people have proven that they will resort to violence to solve personal problems,” Mellinger said.

He was also surprised that a state legislator would introduce legislation that would decrease state revenues.

It costs between $100 and $135 in state and local fees to obtain a lifetime handgun license.

A majority of local residents interviewed Thursday at the Anderson Public Library voiced opposition to eliminating the requirement for handgun owners to have a license.

Barb Vorhees said she is opposed to the elimination of the license requirement and believes gun owners should go through a background check.

”Without a license anyone can get a handgun and we already have enough problems with that,” she said.

Skyler Auker-Hicks took the view that some people may need to obtain a license, but didn't really know how background checks would be done in the future.

People need to have protection, she said. She said certain people may need to have a license and other people won't need one because they need protection.

“I would prefer not to have a license, but I would have protection at any point in time,” Auker-Hicks said. “Some people might need a background check if they're a little kookie in the head.”

James Stephens said not requiring a license is a bad idea because people are getting shot all the time and they're going to get shot more if there are no restrictions.

He said it's a concern that people wouldn't have to get a background check.

Kenleigh Devine agreed that the current state law shouldn't be changed and requiring a license is a good idea.

“Not everyone really deserves to have a gun,” she said.

Both Cummings and Mellinger believe the laws shouldn't be changed to allow handguns at public universities or state office buildings in Indiana.

“That's a horrible idea,” Cummings said. “It's hard to believe that any reasonable person would think that is acceptable.”

Mellinger said gun advocates are taking the stance that legislation is all or nothing when it comes to regulation.

“There is a gray area,” he said. “There should be good legislation passed to maintain safety and security in those locations.”

Cummings said the introduced legislation is being proposed to be provocative and to generate public discussion.

He said the pendulum is moving toward more regulation especially in light of President Barack Obama's call to clarify and enforce existing gun laws and better define who should be licensed as a gun dealer and thus be required to conduct background checks on customers to weed out prohibited buyers.

“There should be a discussion about public policy,” Cummings said. “I'm not opposed to gun possession by law-abiding citizens.”

Law-abiding citizens are less likely to use force even when they legally can, he said.

“The criminals don't have the same restrictions against the use of violence,” Cummings said.