LTCH limits you to only one gun?

[ashenfang]

During a conversation with a LEO friend of mine, he was telling me about another LEO he works with and the disagreement they had regarding LTCH and the number of handguns one can have on their person or vehicle. My friend, who is a LEO, but also an avid 2nd amendment supporter said there is no limit. If he pulls somebody over or stops an individual in the park and finds they have ten handguns on their person and have a valid LTCH, they are GTG.

However, the other LEO disagrees saying that the "wording" on the Indiana LTCH specifically says "May carry any HANDGUN", not HANDGUNS. He believes this wording is clear and that any person carrying more than one would be in violation and is "up to no good"

I took a look at my LTCH and it indeed does say "HANDGUN", but the word "ANY" that precedes it would make me think I can carry as many as I would like.

 

[Valvestate]

I would think numerical limits would be written with numbers, not guesswork. And where is the penalty codified? Where is the limit per person and per license codified?

 

[ashby koss]

He can think that, then he can act on it, and then we can take it to court where he will get his wrist slapped. Acting on "law" created on the spot due to wording will not face an easy day in court, where someone who knows the law can have a say.

 

[metaldog]

[h=2]an·y[/h] [en-ee]
adjective1.one, a, an, or some; one or more without specification or identification: If you have any witnesses,produce them. Pick out any six you like.

2.whatever or whichever it may be: cheap at any price.

3.in whatever quantity or number, great or small; some: Do you have any butter?

4.every; all: Any schoolboy would know that. Read any books you find on the subject.

5.(following a negative) at all: She can't endure any criticism.


pronoun6.an unspecified person or persons; anybody; anyone: He does better than any before him.

7.a single one or ones; an unspecified thing or things; a quantity or number: We don't have any left.

 

[nakinate]

You can use the article posted on here about the guy carrying at the state fair for reference. In it, ISP says there is no limit to the LTCH.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

This is a variation of Kirk's First Law of the Internet, or in semantics we would call it "corruption".

You know how Gnaw Bone, Indiana got its name, right? As a "corruption" of the French city of Narbonne.

You know why the officer thinks this? Because during the lead up to the new handgun carry licensing bill in Illinois there was discussion to limit the number of guns and magazines. When people hear about the laws OR the proposed laws of other states they graft it onto Indiana law.

1. There is no statute limiting the number of handguns an individual may carry, 1, 3, 23, etc. are all legal (as long as they are not stolen).

2. The language of the Larry is not controlling but as metal posts above, get a dictionary and show the officer the definition of "any". His 7th grade Language Arts teacher will be unhappy.

 

[metaldog]

"However, the other LEO disagrees saying that the "wording" on the Indiana LTCH specifically says "May carry any HANDGUN", not HANDGUNS. He believes this wording is clear and that any person carrying more than one would be in violation and is "up to no good".

The question going through my head is this... Since LEO have to also possess a LTCH, and most, if not all, carry a back-up firearm; Is he not in violation of his own interpretation of the "law"?
Last I knew, possession of a badge does not place one ABOVE the law. PLease correct me if I am wrong....

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Since LEO have to also possess a LTCH

Metal, where is this coming from???

 

[metaldog]

Metal, where is this coming from???

I have known several LEO for a few years now, each one has told me that they have LTCH, just like the rest of us. Maybe its true, maybe its not. But i have no reason to believe it isnt.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

A LEO may have a Larry if they choose, or if mandated by a department (I am unaware if any do). However, LEOs are exempted from needing a Larry as per Indiana law.

Let's look at who does not need a Larry to carry:

35-47-2-2
Excepted persons
Sec. 2. Section 1 of this
chapter does not apply to:
(1) marshals;
(2)
sheriffs;
(3) the commissioner of the department of correction or
persons authorized by the commissioner in writing to carry
firearms;
(4) judicial officers;
(5) law enforcement
officers;
(6) members of the armed forces of the United States or of
the national guard or organized reserves while they are on duty;
(7)
regularly enrolled members of any organization duly authorized to purchase or
receive such weapons from the United States or from this state who are at or are
going to or from their place of assembly or target practice;
(8)
employees of the United States duly authorized to carry handguns;
(9)
employees of express companies when engaged in company business;
or
(10) any person engaged in the business of manufacturing,
repairing, or dealing in firearms or the agent or representative of any such
person having in the person's possession, using, or carrying a handgun in the
usual or ordinary course of that business.

 

[metaldog]

A LEO may have a Larry if they choose, or if mandated by a department (I am unaware if any do). However, LEOs are exempted from needing a Larry as per Indiana law.

Thank you. I stand corrected. Seriously, I do appreciate it.

 

[HoughMade]

Let's just hope the terms "a handgun" or "the handgun" as used in IC 35-47-2-1 and 3 never get tested in court.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Let's just hope the terms "a handgun" or "the handgun" as used in IC 35-47-2-1 and 3 never get tested in court.

Singular includes the plural.

 

[Blown71X]

Deer or Deers
Sheep or Sheeps

 

[Somemedic]

(Ken) Gunn v State, 49A02-1102-CR-82 (2011) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions...0241103pss.pdf
The law is what it is. It is unreasonable for the police to apply their own misunderstanding of it as if it were law.

This is easy and if you ever get to speak to this derp here's the argument you need to have with him as it was already mentioned previously

What is the penalty for having multiple handguns? Where is the IC that states this is a no no?

Since there isn't any the folks who saw forth to make a Larry a requirement are using the word "any handgun" meaning if you can carry 120lbs of glocks then go ahead. There's no penalty because it is worded to mean the plural. Were he to arrest someone for having multiple hg's with only 1 Larry he would have a difficult time writing his report since he would have to note what law was violated.

I mean how does one apply for a second LTCH so I can carry a 2nd weapon?

Oh you can't. Why?

Because you're covered under your single license. Kinda like you can drive a different car under one license. You can serve different liquors under one license. I can treat multiple patients and work for different agencies under one EMT license...

 

[UncleMike]

Singular includes the plural.

This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The LEO making the single handgun statement must have slept through the Law classes at the Academy.
When a specific number is not in the statute it is presumed that there is no limit imposed.

 

[indykid]

Funny, mine says "License to Carry Handgun". The word "any" is nowhere to be found. It doesn't say "a" handgun nor does it say "handguns".

License to carry handgun, in pocket, and in shoulder holster, and in waistband holster, and ...

Not grammatically correct but also not limiting.

 

[Redhorse]

You can carry more than one. It's legal.

 

[cobber]

And a LEO may only carry one gun on strength of his badge? So a LEO who carries a duty weapon and a BUG without a LTCH is violating the law? Good.

And if the LTCH said "handguns" then I can ONLY legally carry MORE than one, with no actual limit? (i.e., may NOT carry less than two)

Yeah, that makes sense. What was said officer drinking at the time he issued his learned opinion on the law. To which, BTW, the courts will give ZERO as in "not any" deference if it comes to that.

Some officers say the darndest things.

 

[MTC]

When people hear about the laws OR the proposed laws of other states they graft it onto Indiana law.

Can it also be added, "And/or, in precatory fashion, they attempt to insert or squeeze out of the text that which they wish it actually stated?"

This is a variation of Kirk's First Law of the Internet...

Not again.

Just for fun:

<Courtroom scene>

"Your Honor,

Notwithstanding the broad applicability of Kirk's First Law, due to the tenuous connection in the particulars of this case we ask for a finding that our client, Maximus Pachydermus Purplinius, member of the endangered species Rhinocerosidae, be not compelled by the Court to remit as remuneration a further quantity of .45 ACP to the Juridical Director of the Royal Reformatory, whose larders must surely be bursting at the seams - indeed - overflowing with vast quantities of the aforementioned bounty."