Lying Low 3

More rumination of how they (bureaucrats and politicians) tick.

Previously in Lying Low 2: I explained how I had been checking into the 'no carry in the Statehouse' fiat rule being foisted on the decent honest Hoosiers who visit 'their' legislature. How pro 2A people (I think) suggested I go ahead after they found out I was preparing to do so already. I began to meet more people at the Statehouse, supposedly interested in stopping this. The results were different.

I met the Secretary of State as well. He seemed receptive and expressed his displeasure at the 'rule'. He had gone on record in a newspaper interview saying so. I arranged a meeting with members of CTASC and initially the Director of IDHS. I attempted to solicit support from this 2A group whose 'head' was so glad I was doing this work. That's when the doors started to close.

I suggested people gather at the CTASC meetings. Those who did initially were too conciliatory. There was an air of 'being able to see' the threat and offering alternatives like safe storage. I put my foot down and said no, we must be adamant. We must be able to carry in the Statehouse as we always had, no restrictions. As for the threat, there was NONE. There was not even a study of the odds of an attack of any kind.

Along the way with all involved, I stressed that armed Hoosiers were grassroots counter-terrorism. There was word among the State Police patrolling the Statehouse that they were 'uncomfortable' with citizens being armed. According to one State Senator, staff were scared of armed citizens. I demanded to take a survey and as a solution educate folks so their fear of firearms woud be allayed. No avail.

When I questioned a State Police rep, she of course claimed that it was not so concerning reticence regarding armed citizens (of course). Asked who told me that, I smiled and replied, 'Cops I knew'. She didn't press it (smile). I'm sure the meeting with CTASC was just to show 'they listened'. I believe they had NO intention of rescinding there unnecessary 'rule'. Check my post Friday Meeting 3/30 for more.

At this point, I noticed a withdrawal of the smiling backslappers. The 2A group guy failed to respond mostly and refused to spread what I was doing, except a brief blurb. When I insisted, he, begrudgingly, published a letter explaining what was happening. This after much had been done and support re meeting etc was pointless.

After a fairly cordial phone call, the 'friend' of the aforementioned guy stopped answering my calls. One time, with my son along, I stopped by the office. The receptionist was friendly. I asked to see him. She said sure and went in the back. A moment later, she stuck her head out and asked my name. I gave it and she disappeared again briefly. She quickly came back and seemed awkward. She said he wasn't there and must have slipped out without her seeing. Uhuh. I left my card and asked her to have him call me. She haltingly said ok. My son and I smiled at each other and joked about the obvious snub. Better to laugh at cowardice!

I accidentally bumped into him after a CTASC meeting while I was taking a call regarding my business. The look on his face was 'oops'! He apologized about not seeing me. However he remained evasive about having lunch with him again and even more about meeting the Lt. Governor (which I had done twice already in passing). I told him I just needed 5 minutes. Please arrange it? He begged off and left.

An amusing aside. At a previous meeting, my son indeed accompanied me. I introduced him to Becky Skillman and bragged about his wanting to become a Marine pilot and aerospace engineer. She smiled and said she hoped he enjoyed this lesson in 'democracy at work'. HUH? I stood slightly agape. My son finished my answer lol. I was too stunned to educate her to the fact that we are a Constitutional Republic. I shouldn't have been so surprised. 'Democracy' is used far too often to decribe us. Then again, that is what we are becoming or have become.

Next 'episode', I'll conclude and offer an opinion regarding this silliness.