Danville Repeals Firearms Ordinances

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Concerned Citizen

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 1, 2010
    735
    18
    Brownsburg
    Danville repeals firearms ordinances » Local News » Hendricks County Flyer, Avon, IN

    From the article:
    The move was made at the suggestion of Town Manager Gary Eakin. He alerted the council about Guy Relford, a Zionsville attorney who has filed lawsuits in Evansville and Hammond because those municipalities still have laws that go against Indiana Senate Bill 292.
    Looks like they don't want a lawsuit :)

    Brownsburg should be next, I've already put them on notice. I was not interested in getting asked to leave a Town Council meeting for OCing, & then starting a lawsuit, I figured it would be better to ask them change the law. So, this is the email I sent to the town manager:

    Hello Mr. Kleinhenz,

    I am a local resident, & have a concern with one of Brownsburg's current ordinances. According to the website I found, the Town prohibits firearms in any government buildings:

    FIREARM. Any weapon which is capable of, designed to or that may be readily converted to expel a projectile, whether by means of an explosion, by the use of compressed air, compressed gas, or otherwise.
    TOWN OF BROWNSBURG GOVERNMENT BUILDING. Includes, without limitation, the Town Hall, Police Station, Fire Station No. 2 and the Police/Fire Facility (Fire Station No. 1).
    (`92 Code, § 6-166) (Ord. 96-10, passed 4-11-96)
    § 37.16 DEADLY WEAPONS PROHIBITED.

    Except as provided in § 37.17, a person shall not possess on or about his person within any Town government building, any deadly weapon.
    (`92 Code, § 6-167) (Ord. 96-10, passed 4-11-96) Penalty, see § 37.99

    Indiana Code (specifically SB 292 passed July 1st, 2011) prohibits local political subdivisions from regulating (prohibiting the legal carry of) firearms on any government property unless it is a school, or the building has a court room inside it. Obviously the police station building would be covered because it has a court room in it, but besides that building and the schools, Brownsburg is violating state law by prohibiting firearms in "any Town government building".

    I have no intention of showing up at a town council meeting openly carrying a firearm, but what I am afraid of is the Town has clearly made themselves the target of a lawsuit they cannot win. Our tax money here in Brownsburg is stretched far enough already, without having to pay out a lawsuit settlement because the Town is unaware they are going against State law, or has decided they don't agree with the law.

    I happen to know a lawyer that is aggressively pursuing local governments on this issue. Since I live here in Brownsburg & since I am a 2nd Amendment Advocate, he asked me to get clarification from the town on their ordinance before he proceeded with legal action. His name is Guy A. Relford, & if you do a Google search including his name & the term 'lawsuit', I'm sure you will be able to find a couple of lawsuits he has already started.

    Please let me know what you find out this, and what the town plans to do moving forward.

    Thanks,

    I got an email back within minutes, stating he would forward the information to the town lawyer. I thought was was pretty good "customer service" coming from a local government.
     

    Concerned Citizen

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 1, 2010
    735
    18
    Brownsburg
    This is also stated in the article:

    Danville Town Council President Jeff Martin asked Eakin what would prevent someone from target shooting in Ellis Park. Eakin responded that the new state law now rests with interpretation from local law enforcement.

    Don't the local municipalities still have the ability to prohibit the dicharge of firearms in town limits??
     

    Udderchaos

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 17, 2011
    57
    6
    NW Indy
    The Town Council President needs to read up on the law(s). It's blurbs like his that start people thinking stupid thoughts. "If people are carrying in the parks, how can we tell the difference between the good and the bad.? What about the safety of my child.? Council President Sparks said they are going to target practice in the park." We all know how people get words turned around.

    I'm just saying not implying anything.
     

    Bigc177

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    May 2, 2011
    149
    16
    Westside of Indy
    +1 to you sir!

    My uncle, cousin, and I had the same discussion about a month ago. We are all Brownsburg residents too. Fight the good fight, and please keep us posted!

    Go Bulldogs:rockwoot:
     

    RugerAvenue9

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 11, 2019
    7
    1
    Avon
    Good for Danville for repealing this unconstitutional law

    This is also stated in the article:



    Don't the local municipalities still have the ability to prohibit the dicharge of firearms in town limits??


    On firearms, all three authority levels are subject to the same law (limitation). Local, state and federal officials all take the same oath, which holds they will defend and obey the supreme law of the land, the Constitution. The right to bear arms shall not be infringed means exactly that. Government cannot view the law we are ruled by subjectively. In order for all individuals including the minorities as they are protected by the same law, to be seen as equal in the eyes of the Creator and the law they must look at it objectively. All men were Created equal means we are equal in the eyes of the Creator and the law regardless of our differences among human society. Not equal results. We are ruled by law not a majority. This inalienable right is inclusive of shooting on ones own property, another God given right the government can't take away without due process of law.

    There is a great book by a former County Sheriff that talks about his case where he sued the federal government when Clinton passed the Brady bill arguing that federal government cannot dictate to states what they do period. The book is entitled "The County Sheriff America's Last Hope" by Sheriff Richard Mack. This is a landmark decision on federalism and solidified states to not be subject to any federal law.

    The balance of power is kept stable when all are abiding by the Constitution (federal enumerated, states numerous).

    I'm glad I found this group. Lots of good information! ;)
     
    Last edited:

    ashby koss

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    18   0   0
    Jan 24, 2013
    1,168
    48
    Connersville
    Truly sad that the only time gov goves responses and “take action” is when legit lawyers are brought to the table. Otherwise the gov likes to be the king in the room.
     

    rhino

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Mar 18, 2008
    30,906
    113
    Indiana
    Truly sad that the only time gov goves responses and “take action” is when legit lawyers are brought to the table. Otherwise the gov likes to be the king in the room.


    It's a shame no one warned us in the late 1700s about something like that happening. Oh, wait.
     
    Top Bottom