Elkhart Police Detain Andrew Champ for legally carrying

[Bunnykid68]

What IC states you have to prove you have a LTCH? There is not one, you cant drive a car without a license, cops dont stop you to check your license without a reason, same should apply for someone with a gun. No, you are not guilty until proven innocent, you live in america, right? Thats not how it works, maybe thats how you and some others want it to work, but by LAW, no dont think so.

You are still wrong. There is case law concerning the Drivers License infringement. It is illegal to carry a handgun in Indiana.

 

[92ThoStro]

What IC states you have to prove you have a LTCH? There is not one, you cant drive a car without a license, cops dont stop you to check your license without a reason, same should apply for someone with a gun. No, you are not guilty until proven innocent, you live in america, right? Thats not how it works, maybe thats how you and some others want it to work, but by LAW, no dont think so.

EDITED: To sound nicer to Brian. "Please read the entire thread, your question was already answered earlier"

IC 35-47-2-24
Indictment or information; defendant's burden to prove exemption
or license; arrest, effect of production of valid license, or
establishment of exemption
Sec. 24. (a) In an information or indictment brought for the
enforcement of any provision of this chapter, it is not necessary to
negate any exemption specified under this chapter, or to allege the
absence of a license required under this chapter. The burden of proof
is on the defendant to prove that he is exempt under section 2 of this
chapter, or that he has a license as required under this chapter.
(b) Whenever a person who has been arrested or charged with a
violation of section 1 of this chapter presents a valid license to the
prosecuting attorney or establishes that he is exempt under section 2
of this chapter, any prosecution for a violation of section 1 of this
chapter shall be dismissed immediately, and all records of an arrest
or proceedings following arrest shall be destroyed immediately.

If you don't prove you are licensed to the LEO, you will have to prove it to the prosecutor.

So again it IS guilty until proven innocent. You cannot carry a handgun without being exempted, and proving your are exempt. Just like an LEO, if the LEO is going to carry off-duty, in plain clothes, then he has to prove he is an LEO. He can't just say " I don't need a license" " I am not required to prove anything ". He either has to cough up his LEO credentials, give his drivers license over ( un-preferred method) , or produce LTCH information, verbal or physical.

 

[HmDBrian]

Nvm, ok, thanks for the code.

I just started open carrying a couple weeks ago, but now that I know this BS inconvenience is a law, I think my ocing days are done. Here is the best reason cc is better than oc, wont have to waste part of my day to prove im innocent. What BS.

 

[92ThoStro]

If you say im wrong, please show me the IC that says so. If you cant, I might not be as wrong as you think. I understand its illegal to carry without a ltch. If there is no law that says you have to show them your ltch, its that simple, its not lawful to ask for someone to show it without PC. How can it be lawful if there is no such law? Is it bad law making? Yes, but just as negligence of the law is no excuse, so is negligence of writing a law or puting a law in place is no excuse.

EDIT: You found it, glad you just skipped over it. You also might have missed it in the IC because it is actually the VERY LAST thing, WAY at the bottom, past even the laws governing obtaining an LTCH and whatnot.


The law no longer says you have to show your LTCH, but it does lay the burden of proof on you to prove you are licensed. You can do that a few ways.

Show your LTCH
Recite your LTCH number
Give them name and DOB
Give them your ID
Let them arrest you and give your LTCH to the prosecutor.

 

[Hoosier8]

Giving your LTCH is not "identifying" yourself, so that code you just posted does not apply to your argument. You won't be charged with "refusal to identify" for not handing over your LTCH, or giving them your info so they can call it in. You will be charged for carrying without a license....... and then you can go to court and have it dismissed. You absolutely do have to either show LTCH or give them your license # so they can look it up.

You are sadly mistaken with your earlier post as well. There IS a law about carrying a handgun. It is by default illegal to carry a handgun off private property owned by you or someone who consents to your carrying. The EXCEPTION to the law is that the person is licensed, and the burden of proof is on the licensee. So an officer has the ability to stop and ask for an LTCH. Since we no longer HAVE to carry the LTCH, you can give them your license number for them to call it in.

Yes, there are laws covering where you can carry with or without an LTCH.

IC 35-47-2
Chapter 2. Regulation of Handguns

Law covering stops.

IC 34-28-5-3.5
Refusal to identify self
Sec. 3.5. A person who knowingly or intentionally refuses to provide either the person's:
(1) name, address, and date of birth; or
(2) driver's license, if in the person's possession;
to a law enforcement officer who has stopped the person for an infraction or ordinance violation commits a Class C misdemeanor.

First, you have to be stopped in good faith for an infraction or ordinance violation and are only required to identify yourself as above. If you are doing nothing wrong and just open carrying, show the law that this is an infraction or ordinance violation and show the law that says you have to provide your LTCH.

 

[Hoosier8]

Here you go, this probably gives the authority to produce the LTCH, note though, that this appears to be after arrest.

IC 35-47-2
Chapter 2. Regulation of Handguns

IC 35-47-2-24
Indictment or information; defendant's burden to prove exemption or license; arrest, effect of production of valid license, or establishment of exemption
Sec. 24. (a) In an information or indictment brought for the enforcement of any provision of this chapter, it is not necessary to negate any exemption specified under this chapter, or to allege the absence of a license required under this chapter. The burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that he is exempt under section 2 of this chapter, or that he has a license as required under this chapter.
(b) Whenever a person who has been arrested or charged with a violation of section 1 of this chapter presents a valid license to the prosecuting attorney or establishes that he is exempt under section 2 of this chapter, any prosecution for a violation of section 1 of this chapter shall be dismissed immediately, and all records of an arrest or proceedings following arrest shall be destroyed immediately.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32.

 

[j706]

IC 34-28-5-3.5
Refusal to identify self
Sec. 3.5. A person who knowingly or intentionally refuses to provide either the person's:
(1) name, address, and date of birth; or
(2) driver's license, if in the person's possession;
to a law enforcement officer who has stopped the person for an infraction or ordinance violation commits a Class C misdemeanor.


Open Carry in and of itself is not an infraction or ordinance violation and there is no requirement to produce an LTCH.

Carrying a handgun with out a license is an ordinance violation. Most cities and towns have ordinance violations the mimick state laws.


What is the big hang up on providing id? I dont quite get that. Warrants?

 

[johnny45]

Your order is out-of-place as you listed the primary second, and vice-versa, but yes. I don't know what could be made more plain about either of those enunciations.

Still, cheaper to comply than to risk imprisonment, isn't it?

For now, at least.

My order is not out of place, though I suppose it depends on whether you believe the States created the federal government or the federal government created the States.

Liberty does not come cheap.

 

[KG1]

Carrying a handgun with out a license is an ordinance violation. Most cities and towns have ordinance violations the mimick state laws.


What is the big hang up on providing id? I dont quite get that. Warrants?

Can you provide a specific ordinance for the municipality you work for that states the carrying of a handgun without a license is a violation of municipal ordinance so and so? I would tend to be under the impression that something like that might be deferred to state law.

To be honest though I do not even know if the town I reside in has such an ordinance that mimics state law on the books. Just curious.

Edit: I checked the list of ordinances for my town and it pretty much mainly deals with discharging a firearm within municipal limits. Haven't seen anything regarding carry. I did note though that there is a section dealing with licensing of handguns but it basically deals with procedures and fees regarding their role in the LTCH application process spelled out in IC. Again they are deferring to state law.

 

[Sharkie308]

I feel like I'm watching a NASCAR race the same stuff keeps going around and around. If your particular city etc doesn't have anything regarding carry then it does defer to state. Which per Indiana state code it is illegal to carry either OC or CC unless you fall under one of the exceptions. On a side note I think there is actually one city in IN where you aren't allowed to carry CC or OC even with LTCH. . . the city of Speedway I think it was. Random. . . I'm thinking it was an old code that never got thrown out. Now there is case law that pertains to CC. As far as OC goes you're screwed unless our state legislature does something about it. Start writing letters if you don't like how things are. If you do decide to write letters please don't sound like a bunch of hicks just wanting to show off your guns. Try to at least write something they won't just laugh at rather than actually take an interest in.

 

[lonehoosier]

I think this thread would make a great sticky if the title was changed.

 

[Delmar]

What IC states you have to prove you have a LTCH? There is not one, you cant drive a car without a license, cops dont stop you to check your license without a reason, same should apply for someone with a gun. No, you are not guilty until proven innocent, you live in america, right? Thats not how it works, maybe thats how you and some others want it to work, but by LAW, no dont think so.

How sure are you of that they don't? Reasons to stop you are terribly easy to manufacture.

 

[stephen87]

I feel like I'm watching a NASCAR race the same stuff keeps going around and around. If your particular city etc doesn't have anything regarding carry then it does defer to state. Which per Indiana state code it is illegal to carry either OC or CC unless you fall under one of the exceptions. On a side note I think there is actually one city in IN where you aren't allowed to carry CC or OC even with LTCH. . . the city of Speedway I think it was. Random. . . I'm thinking it was an old code that never got thrown out. Now there is case law that pertains to CC. As far as OC goes you're screwed unless our state legislature does something about it. Start writing letters if you don't like how things are. If you do decide to write letters please don't sound like a bunch of hicks just wanting to show off your guns. Try to at least write something they won't just laugh at rather than actually take an interest in.

There are probably quite a few cities that still have random laws like this on the books. Speedway had that violation for a while, fortunately it was one that was never enforced. It was voided by state law that says that municipalities may NOT create or enforce laws that regulates firearms that are more strict than state law.

Carrying a handgun with out a license is an ordinance violation. Most cities and towns have ordinance violations the mimick state laws.


What is the big hang up on providing id? I dont quite get that. Warrants?

All cities/towns have violations that mimic state laws in regards to firearms. SB292 took care of that and has since become state law.

As far as providing ID, why should I provide more information than necessary? I understand being cooperative, but I will not be cooperative with an illegal request.

Here you go, this probably gives the authority to produce the LTCH, note though, that this appears to be after arrest.

IC 35-47-2
Chapter 2. Regulation of Handguns

IC 35-47-2-24
Indictment or information; defendant's burden to prove exemption or license; arrest, effect of production of valid license, or establishment of exemption
Sec. 24. (a) In an information or indictment brought for the enforcement of any provision of this chapter, it is not necessary to negate any exemption specified under this chapter, or to allege the absence of a license required under this chapter. The burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that he is exempt under section 2 of this chapter, or that he has a license as required under this chapter.
(b) Whenever a person who has been arrested or charged with a violation of section 1 of this chapter presents a valid license to the prosecuting attorney or establishes that he is exempt under section 2 of this chapter, any prosecution for a violation of section 1 of this chapter shall be dismissed immediately, and all records of an arrest or proceedings following arrest shall be destroyed immediately.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32.

That is one section that covers it, but the other part of it is in the first section that I posted.

IC 35-47-2-1
Carrying a handgun without being licensed; exceptions; person convicted of domestic battery
Sec. 1. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) and section 2 of this chapter, a person shall not carry a handgun in any vehicle or on or about the person's body without being licensed under this chapter to carry a handgun.

Note that it says that you must be licensed unless you fall under an exemption. It does not specifically say that you must carry that license and show officers when asked, but the section that you posted states that YOU must provide the proof. Officers have no obligation to look it up for you. Some will, others will not. You show it, you're good to go. You deny it, you're illegal until proven otherwise.

Section 32. Arms--Right to bear

Section 32. The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State.

Indiana is a right to bear arms State so you have every legal right to bear arms. There is no law against Open Carry and the only regulation is that you have to have an LTCH.

I said that it was unfortunate that it does not hold weight. I write letters and try to get laws passed. I email my reps to get laws passed. Unfortunately, it does not look like they are going to get rid of the restriction of having a license to carry anytime soon. Every time I see a bill regarding carry, I write letters weighing in on them. So before you tell me that Section 32 of the Indiana Constitution states that I have the right to bear arms, make sure that you know your laws regarding it and make sure that I agree with those laws.

 

[stephen87]

What IC states you have to prove you have a LTCH? There is not one, you cant drive a car without a license, cops dont stop you to check your license without a reason, same should apply for someone with a gun. No, you are not guilty until proven innocent, you live in america, right? Thats not how it works, maybe thats how you and some others want it to work, but by LAW, no dont think so.

SCOTUS ruled in Prouse v Delaware that stopping a driver to check for a driver's license violates a person's fourth amendment rights.

Unfortunately, no one has taken a case like this involving firearms stops to the SCOTUS yet. Once someone eventually gets there, which could be soon, we will have our final ruling. Until then, each individual state will have their own laws and rulings.

 

[TiminMishawaka]

Maybe I just like living a happy, drama free life but I had a similar instance in Mishawaka where I was concealed carrying but my coat slipped and the officer saw my gun. I just showed the officer my license. No drama, all smiles and thank yous on both sides, everyone got their coffee, the sun was shining and the birds were singing, it was just a zippideedooda day. It's kind of nice living life not being an a-hole just to get yourself 15 minutes of youtube fame.

 

[lonehoosier]

Maybe I just like living a happy, drama free life but I had a similar instance in Mishawaka where I was concealed carrying but my coat slipped and the officer saw my gun. I just showed the officer my license. No drama, all smiles and thank yous on both sides, everyone got their coffee, the sun was shining and the birds were singing, it was just a zippideedooda day. It's kind of nice living life not being an a-hole just to get yourself 15 minutes of youtube fame.

It helps when both parties understand and know the laws. That's the way it should be handled. That's a big plus one to you and the LEO.