Indianapolis, Indiana – On Wednesday night, the Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee approved the mayor’s proposal for a gun restriction law.
Republicans abstained from voting, and Democrats supported the measure.
With the passage of Proposal 156, the minimum age to acquire a firearm in Marion County would be raised to 21, “semiautomatic assault weapons” would be outlawed, permit-less carry would be phased out, and concealed carry would be prohibited.
During the meeting on Wednesday, Hogsett stated, “These policies were chosen because they are supported by the vast, vast majority of the people of the city of Indianapolis.”
Hogsett proposed the rule as a part of his initiatives to combat crime and gun violence in the city.
Due to Indiana’s pre-emption statute, which prohibits local governments from regulating practically anything related to guns, even if the ordinance is approved by the entire council, it won’t take effect right away.
The ordinance would basically serve as a “trigger law,” taking effect only in the event that the state law is altered or overturned in court.
Despite having a little immediate effect, IMPD Chief Randal Taylor noted that this step is important to families whose lives have been affected by the near-record levels of violence Indianapolis has seen.
We’re doing it because, according to Taylor, “it’s important to me, it’s important to our officers, and it’s important to this community.”
The council’s democratic members concurred, saying that in addition to sending a statement, doing so could have consequences if the state’s pre-emption statute is altered.
It isn’t posturing, according to Councilwoman Crista Carlino. “I don’t think it’s empty because it’s codified, and you can look it up and point to it in Marion County’s municipal code,” the speaker said.
Republicans on the committee countered that enacting an ordinance with no immediate effects is a waste of time and the incorrect way to handle the problem.
Councilor Brian Mowery remarked, “These ‘what if’ comments don’t work. “Let’s look at the people who are doing the wrongdoing and put them behind bars instead of trying to blame firearms,” the speaker said.
The meeting was frequently heated, and there were several outbursts from the audience. At one point, deputies had to accompany a man outside.
The 2nd Amendment Project and Moms Demand Action, two lobbying organizations, were present to make their claims to the councilors.
Limiting access to assault weapons will undoubtedly help stop mass shootings, according to Mom’s Demand Action’s Liz Mozer.
Guy Relford, a supporter of the second amendment, asserted that “this is all about politics and not keeping anyone safer.”
After the meeting, Chief Taylor stated that he had discovered that he couldn’t satisfy everyone and that he respected the various viewpoints presented. He still supports the city’s strategy, though.
Therefore, Taylor stated, “Even if I may not agree with them, I understand where they’re coming from. But I believe we are on the right track here.
It seems improbable that the state’s pre-emption statute would be overturned or repealed, according to legal expert Jody Madeira. According to Madeira, state and federal courts have consistently sustained those kinds of laws.
The whole council will vote on the ordinance the following month.
