Attorney 'dumb' for carrying gun to court

[singlestacksig]

Attorney 'dumb' for carrying gun to court
By Vic Ryckaert vic.ryckaert@indystar.com
October 16, 2008 11:31 AM

A day after his arrest, an Indianapolis attorney said he was "dumb" to bring an unloaded gun into the City-County Building to use in a courtroom demonstration.

"I should have got a squirt gun or a wooden gun," Loren Jay Comstock told The Indianapolis Star by phone this morning. "It was a dumb thing, not an intentional criminal act."

The Marion County Sheriff's Department arrested Comstock, 74, on a preliminary charge of carrying a handgun without a license after deputies found he brought the unloaded gun in Marion Superior Court 23 on Wednesday morning. The misdemeanor charge carries a maximum sentence of one year in jail. "In retrospect on that thing, I've brought guns into court several times but what I've always done before is to get a court order," Comstock said. Comstock planned to use the gun and a loose fitting shirt as courtroom props in hopes of persuading a judge to find police had unlawfully searched one of his clients. Comstock has an identification card that allows him to bypass building security. Before the hearing, deputies determined Comstock did not have a gun permit and arrested him. Comstock earned his Indiana law license in 1972. He was released without having to post bond after spending about 9 1/2 hours in custody.

 

[TomN]

Wow. I don't know what to say.... but I think he needs to invest in a training pistol like a blue gun.

 

[singlestacksig]

yeah, he belived the myth that you don't need a LTCH if "you have a good reason"

 

[TomN]

It's one of those instances where an attorney shouldn't be ignorant of the law, especially considering that you can't bring a gun into a courtroom even if you DO have a LTCH.

 

[singlestacksig]

is it a law or courthouse rule?
there are several courthouses in Indiana that don't have signs or checkpoints....

 

[dburkhead]

This is a criminal defense attorney? I think every case he ever tried where the defendant was convicted should be examined to being a possible mistrial on the grounds that the defending attorney was unconscionably stupid.

(Hyperbole, folks. Hyperbole)

 

[TomN]

is it a law or courthouse rule?
there are several courthouses in Indiana that don't have signs or checkpoints....

It's my understanding that it's state law that bans the carry of deadly weapons into a court of law.

It's Federal law that bans carry into Federal buildings and Federal courtrooms.

 

[Riffman15]

I'm pretty sure most courthouses have started enforcing this kind of stuff quite heavily since 9/11

 

[Mr.Hoppes]

It's my understanding that it's state law that bans the carry of deadly weapons into a court of law.

It's Federal law that bans carry into Federal buildings and Federal courtrooms.

I'd have to leave my body at the door.

The brain being the most deadly of weapons ever created. (IMHO)

 

[DRob]

Gist stoopid

What do you call the guy who graduates last in his class from law school? An attorney!

 

[quicksdraw]

What do you call 500 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?
A damn good start.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

My courtroom guns: Rings Blue Guns, CopsPlus

 

[indyjoe]

I\'d have to leave my body at the door. The brain being the most deadly of weapons ever created. (IMHO)

Well, then technically you would only have to leave your head.

 

[TomN]

Well, then technically you would only have to leave your head.

With all the stupid lawsuits going on it sounds like more people do that than you'd think.

 

[singlestacksig]

It's my understanding that it's state law that bans the carry of deadly weapons into a court of law.

It's Federal law that bans carry into Federal buildings and Federal courtrooms.

ok maybe the actual courtroom...
I was just in a county recorders office....

 

[quiggly]

Big question is, why didn't he have a LTCH?

Defense lawyer possibly defending a client on a CCW issue?

Of course I think everyone should have one if they carry or not if they are able to afford it.

Would they have charged him if he did have his permit?

 

[ar15junkie]

Maybe he is setting up a case to sue the state to have the law changed.

 

[agentl074]

1. Get a court order
2. Get a LTCH

 

[rhino]

It's my understanding that it's state law that bans the carry of deadly weapons into a court of law.

Cite the law, roomie! (good luck!)

In my non-lawyer opinion, if you have an ID that allows you to bypass the security, you'd be foolish to not retain the means to secure your own safety regardless of the rules.

Bringing a real gun for a demo is just stupid. Doing it without a LTCH is even more stupid.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Cite the law, roomie! (good luck!)

In my non-lawyer opinion, if you have an ID that allows you to bypass the security, you'd be foolish to not retain the means to secure your own safety regardless of the rules.

Bringing a real gun for a demo is just stupid. Doing it without a LTCH is even more stupid.

"Good luck!" is right. The closest there is is the part that permits units other than townships to regulate their own property other than highways. Technically, that is "state law" that permits it, but it is local regulation taking advantage of state law (in conflict with both state and federal Constitutions, IMHO) that is actually making that regulation. And yes, the attorney was an idiot. Not because he brought a real gun but because he did so without a LTCH, unless he was, as was guessed earlier, setting up a case to file to change the law. (note that I do not believe this, I merely state that it is a possibility.)

Blessings,
B