Should Indiana require training for a license to carry a handgun?

Should Indiana require Hoosiers to complete handgun safety training classes to get a carry permit?

A state senator thinks so.

Sen. Jean Breaux, D-Indianapolis, authored a bill that would require those who are applying for a license to carry to first complete at least eight hours of classes from a certified firearms instructor. Breaux said doing so is a "common-sense practice."

Breaux said requiring firearms training for a carry permit "provides the assurance to those of us who are around you with that gun that you know how to operate it safely and appropriately."

Senate Bill 48, if it becomes law, would apply to those applying for a license to carry a handgun after Dec. 31. It also would impose a penalty — a Level 6 felony charge punishable by up to two years in prison — to an instructor who's accused of signing a training completion form for someone who did not actually complete training. That charge could be reduced to a Class A misdemeanor on a case-by-case basis.

Breaux also said other states that require handgun training programs would recognize Indiana's license to carry if SB 48 becomes law. For that reason, she said, she's optimistic her bill would move forward.

Currently, more than 20 states, including Illinois, Ohio, West Virginia and much of the East and West coasts do not recognize Indiana's carry permit.

"We support SB 48 because going through basic live-fire training before handling a gun is just common sense," said Stephanie Grabow, a volunteer with the Indiana Chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. "We respect responsible gun ownership, and we know that safeguards like handgun safety training and background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals both respect the Second Amendment and save lives."

Guy Relford, a professional firearms instructor, said he believes someone who's planning to carry a handgun should receive some training. He added that the bill would be advantageous for his training business. But he does not support SB 48. Training, he said, should be an individual choice and not a government requirement.

"I believe that the decision to participate in firearms training has to be a matter of personal responsibility," Relford said, "and I don't like the idea of the government putting restrictions and conditions on the exercise of a constitutional right."

Relford added that imposing a punishment on an instructor who knowingly certified someone who had not completed training is justifiable if there's evidence that that trainer committed fraud. However, he said charging someone with a felony is "dramatically excessive," since carrying a handgun without a license is only a misdemeanor.

He also said there have to be some exceptions.

For example, in a situation where an instructor certified someone for completing only seven hours and 45 minutes because that person came to class 15 minutes late, "charging that instructor with a crime is silly."

Relford said SB 48 will face some resistance from Second Amendment supporters who believe one should not have to apply for a license in the first place because carrying a gun already is a constitutional right. That's the logic behind a separate bill pending in the House.

House Bill 1144, by Rep. Jim Lucas, R-Seymour, would repeal the law that requires a person to obtain a license to carry a handgun.

"If there's some movement to do away with the license to carry altogether," Relford said, "then obviously, putting additional restrictions is going to be opposed by people who believe you shouldn't have to have a license to begin with."

Kirk Freeman, director-at-large for the Indiana State Rifle and Pistol Association, said the bill would prevent people without any means of paying for training classes to practice a constitutional right.

"I don't think the law should discriminate against those that are economically disadvantaged," Freeman said. "We shouldn't create a hierarchy of who gets to exercise their constitutional right.

SB 48 has been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee but has not been scheduled for a hearing. Sen. Brent Steele, R-Bedford, the chairman of the committee, said through a spokeswoman that he opposes the bill.

Breaux introduced similar legislation last session, but that bill did not move forward.

Call Star reporter Kristine Guerra at (317) 444-6209. Follow her on Twitter: @kristine_guerra.