This is a pretty stupid pro-gun law...

Theohazard · March 24, 2016, 11:22 PM

The NRA is celebrating a pro-gun bill that Indiana passed yesterday. It requires your chief law enforcement officer to sign off on your Form 1 or Form 4 within 15 days. But the CLEO sign off requirement for Form 1s and Form 4s goes away entirely 12 days after the bill goes into effect, and we've all know that since 41F was finalized in January.

I'm all for pro-gun bills, but this one is a complete waste of taxpayers' money. People who live in Indiana should be pretty annoyed at this pointless law, regardless of which side of the gun issue they're on.

Mobuck · March 25, 2016, 07:25 AM

Seems it would help some folks who wanted to get things rolling before that change over. NMP since I'm not in Indiana .

Theohazard · March 25, 2016, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mobuck

Seems it would help some folks who wanted to get things rolling before that change over.

But by the time the CLEO is required by law to sign off on your paperwork, the sign off requirement has already been removed. This bill does absolutely zero to help anyone.

Brian Pfleuger · March 25, 2016, 11:38 AM

Unless submissions from prior to the sunset date still have to be signed off, in which case a sheriff so inclined could simply not sign them off, ever. This forced the issue, if that's what it's meant to do.

Theohazard · March 25, 2016, 11:50 AM

Any individual submitting paperwork that's postmarked before July 13th needs a sign-off. It looks like this Indiana law requiring the CLEO to sign off goes into effect on July 1st and gives him 15 days to sign it.

So if a person is being stalled by a CLEO that refuses to sign off, the earliest he would be required by law to sign is July 15th. But if that person just submitted under the new rules on the 13th, they wouldn't have to worry about the sign off at all.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but it sure looks to me like there's no point in time where this bill does anything at all.

**Spats McGee** · March 25, 2016, 03:56 PM

A couple of things to bear in mind:

1) Proposals for legislation begin well before the legislative session. I've been asked for input in stuff that was considered "my area" in our office a year or more before the legislative session even started. I know that it seems silly to have it take effect right before the CLEO sign-off goes away, but my guess would be that once the legislators started working it, quite simply, nobody followed up on federal rule-making stuff. Or maybe they wanted that in place in case the federal rule changed again.

2) Lobbyists and legislators may or may not know diddly squat about the topic at hand. (Yes, I know I'm preaching to the choir on this.) They also don't always have someone handy that they can ask when deadlines are running. Yes, they can contact some bureau of legislative research, which is undoubtedly understaffed and overwhelmed while the legislature is in session, and that office will promptly put it in line with all of the other requests . . .

Theohazard · March 25, 2016, 07:11 PM

Two good points, Spats. I figured this had begun a while before 41F was finalized in January, but it seemed to me that once it did the logical and practical thing to do would be to stop pushing this bill and go on to other matters. I know, I know, politicians are not always logical and practical, but still...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spats McGee

Or maybe they wanted that in place in case the federal rule changed again.

This is something a friend of mine also pointed out to me a few hours ago. Sure, 41F is more solid than some of the ATF's lesser determinations, but policy has been known to change before. I suppose this law would be useful if the sign-off requirement ever comes back.

Though I doubt that was the reason they kept going with this bill after 41F was finalized in January. I think it's more likely that some combination of ignorance and political showmanship is what kept this bill going.

TXAZ · March 25, 2016, 07:55 PM

Theohazard noted:

Quote:

But by the time the CLEO is required by law to sign off on your paperwork, the sign off requirement has already been removed. This bill does absolutely zero to help anyone.

But, it also gives the politicians (or the NRA for that matter) a claim of victory for certain voting blocks that they did something great. By the time most have forgotten about what was passed, pol's use it for the next reelection campaign.

March 24, 2016, 11:22 PM	#1
Theohazard Senior Member Join Date: April 19, 2012 Location: Western PA Posts: 3,829	This is a pretty stupid pro-gun law... The NRA is celebrating a pro-gun bill that Indiana passed yesterday. It requires your chief law enforcement officer to sign off on your Form 1 or Form 4 within 15 days. But the CLEO sign off requirement for Form 1s and Form 4s goes away entirely 12 days after the bill goes into effect, and we've all know that since 41F was finalized in January. I'm all for pro-gun bills, but this one is a complete waste of taxpayers' money. People who live in Indiana should be pretty annoyed at this pointless law, regardless of which side of the gun issue they're on. __________________ 0331: "Accuracy by volume."

March 25, 2016, 11:38 AM	#4
Brian Pfleuger Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 25, 2008 Location: Austin, CO Posts: 19,578	Unless submissions from prior to the sunset date still have to be signed off, in which case a sheriff so inclined could simply not sign them off, ever. This forced the issue, if that's what it's meant to do. __________________ Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley

March 25, 2016, 11:50 AM	#5
Theohazard Senior Member Join Date: April 19, 2012 Location: Western PA Posts: 3,829	Any individual submitting paperwork that's postmarked before July 13th needs a sign-off. It looks like this Indiana law requiring the CLEO to sign off goes into effect on July 1st and gives him 15 days to sign it. So if a person is being stalled by a CLEO that refuses to sign off, the earliest he would be required by law to sign is July 15th. But if that person just submitted under the new rules on the 13th, they wouldn't have to worry about the sign off at all. Maybe I'm missing something here, but it sure looks to me like there's no point in time where this bill does anything at all. __________________ 0331: "Accuracy by volume."

March 25, 2016, 03:56 PM	#6
Spats McGee Staff Join Date: July 28, 2010 Location: Arkansas Posts: 8,821	A couple of things to bear in mind: 1) Proposals for legislation begin well before the legislative session. I've been asked for input in stuff that was considered "my area" in our office a year or more before the legislative session even started. I know that it seems silly to have it take effect right before the CLEO sign-off goes away, but my guess would be that once the legislators started working it, quite simply, nobody followed up on federal rule-making stuff. Or maybe they wanted that in place in case the federal rule changed again. 2) Lobbyists and legislators may or may not know diddly squat about the topic at hand. (Yes, I know I'm preaching to the choir on this.) They also don't always have someone handy that they can ask when deadlines are running. Yes, they can contact some bureau of legislative research, which is undoubtedly understaffed and overwhelmed while the legislature is in session, and that office will promptly put it in line with all of the other requests . . . __________________ I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.

March 25, 2016, 07:25 AM	#2
Mobuck Junior member Join Date: February 2, 2010 Posts: 6,846	Seems it would help some folks who wanted to get things rolling before that change over. NMP since I'm not in Indiana .