ILNews

Debate and discussion of firearms welcomes scholars, experts and members of the public

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Tech Law School will examine gun regulations during its inaugural symposium, “On the Question of Regulating Guns,” scheduled for Nov. 8.

The event will feature three panel discussions in the afternoon with leading legal scholars and experts from across the country discussing the Second Amendment, permeation of gun violence, making of guns with 3-D printers, background checks and mental health disclosures.

In the evening, the symposium will end with a community-wide debate and dialogue. Participants in the debate will be former Fort Wayne Mayor Paul Helmke, who is also the former president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, and Cato Institute scholar Clayton Cramer.

“The topic of gun violence and firearms regulation has become one of the vexing questions of this generation, inspiring heated debate and passion on both sides of the issue,” said symposium co-organizer and Indiana Tech Law School Associate Dean for Academic Affairs andré douglas pond cummings. “Recent tragic events in Colorado and Connecticut have centralized focus on the question of whether and how much firearms possession should be regulated in the United States.”

The symposium begins at 1 p.m. with the debate at 5:30 p.m. in the courtroom of the law school, 1600 E. Washington Blvd., Fort Wayne. Both events are free and open to the public.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT