John Krull, publisher, TheStatehouseFile.com
INDIANAPOLIS – Maybe there is common ground in the national debate over guns.

Commentary button in JPG – no shadowGuy Relford and Steve Dunlop are discussing guns, gun violence and gun rights.

Relford, an attorney who specializes in Second Amendment issues, and Dunlop, president of Hoosiers Concerned About Gun Violence, talk on the air during a live broadcast of the radio program I host.

The news hook for the show is the arrival of 70,000 gun devotees in Indianapolis for the National Rifle Association’s national convention. The NRA’s event advertising promises that it will celebrate guns and gear. The convention’s culmination will be a huge “Stand and Fight” rally in Lucas Oil Stadium that will feature appearances by Iran-Contra figure Oliver North and former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

Stand and fight?

Sounds pretty bellicose.

There are signs, though, that the NRA is softening some of its more combative stances.

For years, the NRA staked out a position that people alleged to have committed domestic abuse shouldn’t have to give up their firearms when they’re served with protective orders. The NRA said the alleged abusers should only have to give up their guns after a conviction.

In several states, though, the NRA has done an about-face. Their lobbyists have accepted changes in state laws that make the protective order the trigger for surrendering firearms.

Critics say the NRA has done so as part of an attempt to reach out to women as potential members.

Maybe, but it’s also possible NRA members realize the change is one that makes sense and will prevent senseless tragedy.

Inside the studio, for much of the conversation, Relford and Dunlop politely re-enact the typical debate between gun rights and gun control advocates. Both present numbers that support their positions. Both dismiss, again politely, statistics that undercut their positions as “discredited.”

But, then, toward the end of the discussion, things get more interesting.

A listener sends an email saying that gun control advocates seem to focus much of their effort on restricting gun use and ownership rather than promoting safe and responsible gun ownership and use. The listener says the most effective gun safety courses are the ones the NRA runs.

Dunlop, to a degree, agrees. He says more gun education and training would be a good idea. In fact, he argues, that many of the responsible gun ownership practices the NRA endorses ought to be written into law.

In quick succession, a listener named Tim sends an email Relford’s way. Relford had talked about the fear many NRA members have about registering their guns as a prelude to taking them away. Tim’s email reads:

“I’d just like to point out that there is a difference between laws that actually violate Second Amendment rights and laws that raise the fear of that possibility in the future. A law that requires a national registry is not the same as a law that infringes on gun ownership.”

Relford nods his head and grants that, maybe, this is a case of gun advocates being too alarmist.

I ask Relford a question about the often absolutist reading of the Second Amendment. I say that people have a First Amendment right to express themselves by texting, but we don’t see laws preventing them from texting while they’re driving as infringements of their constitutional rights. We argue that, while they’re in the public sphere, the public’s interest has to be taken into consideration.

Relford nods his head and says that should be the standard – acknowledging the individual’s right to bear arms while realizing that the public also has an interest in providing reasonable assurances of safety.

Once we’re off the air, I tell Relford that, for millions of us, the issue is not one of wanting to take guns away from law-abiding citizens but of getting some acknowledgement that the public’s interest matters, too.

Relford says that’s a fair point.

And he adds that what irritates many NRA members and gun advocates is that they’re lumped in with criminals who behave in a way that defies and violates the NRA’s very principles of safety and responsibility. Gun owners resent, he says, the implied argument that they bear moral responsibility for actions they despise.

That, too, is a fair point – one that suggests that, rather than holding rallies to “stand and fight,” we all would be better served to issue invitations to sit down and talk.

John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits” WFYI 90.1 Indianapolis and publisher of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

By Paige Clark
TheStatehouseFile.com

INDIANAPOLIS – The Indiana Education Roundtable endorsed new state standards for math and English during a meeting Monday despite boos from opponents who say the new education guidelines are too much like Common Core.

The standards passed easily and now move to the State Board of Education for a final up-or-down vote.

Members of Hoosiers against the Common Core – a group that has been fighting standards that have been adopted by a majority of states and endorsed by President Barack Obama’s administration – rallied at the Statehouse then marched to the roundtable meeting Monday to show their protest.

“We’re going to that meeting to have them looks us in the eye,” said the group’s co-founder, Erin Tuttle. “We are the people that have to live with the consequences of their decision.”

In 2010, Indiana adopted the standards for math and English but opted out of the science, social studies and history standards set by the Common Core. But as the state began phasing in Common Core, became increasingly controversial.

Last year, the General Assembly paused Common Core’s implementation and ordered education officials to take a second look. Then one month ago, Gov. Mike Pence signed SB 91 – calling for new standards written “by Hoosiers for Hoosiers.” Superintendent Glenda Ritz and the state board have been working through that process.

Pence said Monday that the new standards were created by “the best process” with “more Hoosier input and transparency than ever before.” They combine some of Indiana’s past standards with Common Core and ideas from other states.

The crowd against the new standards booed and laughed as Pence spoke.

“I teach for various colleges here in Indiana and I put together some of my own curriculum,” said David Lantz at the rally prior to the meeting. “I have a master’s degree and so what Common Core does is it pushes anybody that has any knowledge about their subject matter from creating competing text books.”

Molly Chamberlin, chief assessment and accountability officer for the Center for Education and Career Innovation, said the process included an evaluation board, assessment board, and a college and career ready panel.

For the first time in Indiana, the standards included math beyond algebra two – trigonometry, pre-calculus – and focused on the integration from high school to post-secondary options.

“There are things that other states will learn from our process,” Chamberlain said. The crowd, again, responded with a laugh.

“We always worried the that we would have a Common Core rebrand, but what I never imaged is that they would produce a set of new standards that is actually worse than the Common Core. That really shocked me. It contains more of what of we didn’t want and less of what we advocated for,” Tuttle said. “To me the new standards are really a smack in the face to parents who have fought really hard in opposition to Common Core.”

Despite the crowd’s loud objections, the standards passed – math 21-2, one abstention, and English 21-3.

Wendy Robinson, Fort Wayne Community Schools Superintendent, said the issue is complex and should be treated that way.

“People want to simplify something that is very complicated,” Robinson said. “I had to re-read (the new standards.) But I had to re-read the ones in 2000 too. We’re acting as if these are different the (standards) adopted in 2000.”

A big difference between the old and new standards is the focus on “media literacy” – which became controversial at the meeting. Amos Brown, a talk show host for AM 1310, said it was unreasonable to expect teachers to fully understand what media is.

“Was anyone in the media consulted on this?” Brown said. “I think the standards need to respect the simple Hoosier language.”

Danielle Shockey, deputy superintendent of public instruction for the Indiana Department of Education, said the term “media” was being misunderstood. She said the standard related to using the media and deciding what sources are credible and which aren’t.

“(Students) need to be taught how to be critical thinkers,” Shockey said.

Even though the “media literacy” standard was added to the curriculum, it will not be a part of the assessment testing, said State Superintendent Glenda Ritz.

The new standards move onto the Board of Education and must be finalized by July 1 of this year. However, they will not be fully implemented until the 2015-2016 school year.

Pence said Indiana is the first state to repeal the Common Core standards.

“I am grateful to every Hoosier who knew that Indiana could do better than the Common Core,” Pence said. “The Indiana standards before you today, I believe, were crafted in the Indiana way. I trust Hoosiers, I trust our teachers who worked in good faith to craft these standards.”

Paige Clark is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

 Hoosiers firmly believe in individual liberties and personal responsibility, which is why it is no surprise that Hoosiers across the state strongly support the right to bear arms. Before the start of the 2014 legislative session, I sent out a survey to everyone in House District 75, as I do each year, to gain a better understanding of what my constituents wanted to see happen. One of the ten questions I asked on the survey had to do with our state’s current gun laws.

Specifically, the question I posed explained that under current state law, a person with a hand gun permit may legally have a gun in their vehicle while dropping their child off at school. However, if they need to leave their vehicle to go into the school for any reason, it is a Class D felony to leave the handgun locked in the trunk of their car while entering the school.

Citizens, who were legal gun owners, were committing a felony if they had to get out of their car for any reason on school grounds. As a result, I wanted to know if you supported changing the law to allow that person to lock their legally owned handgun safely out of sight while on school property.

After reviewing the results of the survey and meeting with constituents, interest groups, teachers, administrators and many more, I supported Senate Enrolled Act (SEA) 229 this session, which allows legal gun owners to lock their firearms in their cars and to keep them out of sight.

This legislation, which will go into effect July 1, means that if a parent needs to go inside their child’s school for a parent-teacher conference or other school function, they will not be breaking the law, as long as the car is locked and their firearm is not left in plain sight.

This new law also addresses roaming school zones, which are areas where classes are taking place or where students are visiting, such as a historical site or zoo. Current law provides that it is a felony to knowingly or intentionally possess a firearm in or on property that is being used by a school for a school function. Therefore, a law abiding gun owner could be committing a felony if they are on property that ends up also being visited by students on a school field trip. To alleviate this problem, SEA 229 eliminates roaming school zones as it relates to firearm possession.

I cannot emphasize enough that the portions of this new law concerning schools only applies to legal gun owners. As a grandfather of young children, I want to be very clear on this. This new law will in no way, shape or form permit guns to be brought into our Indiana schools.

It is illegal, a felony to be exact, to possess a firearm on school property outside of your car or on a school bus, and the legislation we passed this session does nothing to change that. The changes that come with SEA 229 are simply logical updates to current law that make certain that individual liberties are balanced with the need to protect our children.