Hammond LEO interaction today

[aikidoka]

You can replace your LTCH for $20, next time that may be money well spent to remove yourself from the situation.

Excellent point! I will keep that in mind and do so if necessary next time. Thanks!

 

[aikidoka]

Too long. You don't need a play-by-play.

I thought that was necessary. I sent that to Guy already but I havent sent it in as a complaint yet.

 

[88GT]

I thought that was necessary. I sent that to Guy already but I havent sent it in as a complaint yet.

To Guy, yes. In a complaint, why? They made requests outside of their authority to enforce and unreasonably disarmed you. Someone may come along and tell me otherwise; I will defer to those with experience. But given that it sounds like your complaint will go nowhere and isn't likely to be read due to politics, you don't need to increase the likelihood that it gets round-filed without a reading because the disinterested party sees a short novel in front of him.

YMMV

 

[Yup!]

It is not a legal requirement to hand over ID, and they certainly had no right or reason to disarm you. If you are on public property verifying LTCH should be the end of transaction.

Since you were carrying on your own property there is no need for LTCH at all. Although that does raise the question of, how do they verify you are the property owner without identification.

Who rakes someone else's lawn?

 

[Old_grunt]

For what it's worth..........Gun law leads to lawsuits in Evansville, Hammond | Region | Indiana Daily Student
Court lets Hammond keep voided gun limits - Post-Tribune
Hammond cops ordered not to enforce city gun carry law : Lake

 

[Old_grunt]

Who rakes someone else's lawn?

The kid down the street?

 

[MCgrease08]

Who rakes someone else's lawn?

Someone with a landscaping business, an out of work neighbor looking for some extra cash, a neighborhood kid... there are a number of people who rake the lawns of others.

 

[red_zr24x4]

Who rakes someone else's lawn?

Even if it wasn't his lawn no need for a LTCH on private property with permission of the owner

 

[Yup!]

Ok - so is it against federal law to tamper with someone else's mailbox, and place a firearm in a mailbox?

 

[stephen87]

No, I don't think that would fall under that USC.

 

[Yup!]

No, I don't think that would fall under that USC.

Attempting to mail a firearm? (Very light purple)

 

[stephen87]

You're trying to make it something it's not.

 

[Yup!]

You're trying to make it something it's not.

I'm pretty sure the responding LEO did that. I'm just claiming self defense.

 

[aikidoka]

The kid down the street?

Ive been told often that I dont look my age but at 46 I'm pretty sure I dont look like a kid. Heck, I've been told (by Hammond officer) I look like LEO when I'm wearing cargo shorts and open carrying in the summer.

 

[MDave]

You know, it would be nice if there was some way for these poor police officers to be able to know things like this. If only the police had some kinda academy. Maybe a police academy or something like that.
Maybe they could know the law, that they are trying to enforce.

Or they could come here and we could tell em!

 

[aikidoka]

To Guy, yes. In a complaint, why? They made requests outside of their authority to enforce and unreasonably disarmed you. Someone may come along and tell me otherwise; I will defer to those with experience. But given that it sounds like your complaint will go nowhere and isn't likely to be read due to politics, you don't need to increase the likelihood that it gets round-filed without a reading because the disinterested party sees a short novel in front of him.

YMMV

Perhaps Guy will have some advice. I have some time to file so I can wait for that and/or consensus and input here.

 

[MDave]

Someone with a landscaping business, an out of work neighbor looking for some extra cash, a neighborhood kid... there are a number of people who rake the lawns of others.

Don't leave out the Boy Scouts....

 

[SteveM4A1]

You'd really think by now that police agencies would be telling their officers to come to INGO and read what NOT to do, but I think it makes them feel fancy in situations like these.

 

[Manatee]

My take is, and this is coming from someone who would like to be in LE but still very active in the gun community, it's verified that he has a LTCH, the officer should have left after that. Ideally, the encounter should have been something along the lines of "Do you live here? Have a nice day." Questioning the officer on whether you need to present the LTCH is not hassling the LEO, it's the other way around. I don't go around questioning LEOs or hassling them, or anything, and I expect the same sans RAS. OF course, implying that one is a nuisance to the officer and may have a "mangina" because they are asking questions during an encounter, could possibly mean that you aren't willing to stand up to officers if you feel you aren't doing something wrong and would like to know what the law is. I, for one, won't be walked on by a LEO who thinks he knows what the law is when I'm sure of what the law says.
I would have handed let them know it's my property and I'm in compliance.

Every situation is different. I prefer not to draw funny lines in the sand with anyone, particularly someone who might erroneously arrest me. It doesn't mean that there are no boundaries, just that I prefer to set them and not let a situation that can be resolved with an ID escalate.

Like I said, that's me. But, I've learned there are no old, bold gunfighters. If I have to fight, I want it to be over something more ideological than an ID.

 

[actaeon277]

Then you shouldn't call HIS mayor a D.

Mayor McDermott is a D.
Democrat.

In Hammond, that means he can have a hooker take a picture of him murdering someone, and he would still get elected over a R (Republican).