Indiana Code - prohibits municipal employee from carrying?

[alabasterjar]

Does Indiana Code prohibit a municipal employee from carrying a firearm (for personal protection, not enforcement)?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Depends. Maybe yes depending on what said municipal employee does.

And so, what does said hypothetical employee do?

 

[Mgderf]

Depends. Maybe yes depending on what said municipal employee does.

And so, what does said hypothetical employee do?

Evidently being vague is part of his job description.

 

[Roland of Gilead]

I was told weapons were prohibited on United Water property. They are the waste water treatment plant for Indy.

 

[alabasterjar]

Depends. Maybe yes depending on what said municipal employee does.

And so, what does said hypothetical employee do?

Public works, such as water, wastewater, street dept., etc. (Regarding Roland's statement below) United Water is a privately owned utility, so they make own rules for employees. Municipalities have the same authority, if in their municipal ordinance.

 

[alabasterjar]

Evidently being vague is part of his job description.

Relax, I'm from the government, I'm here to help!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Do you mean "in trunk of car in parking lot"? Or do you mean "carry around with the employee during shift"?

Sorry, for the Socratic method but I need to narrow it down before I answer.

 

[alabasterjar]

Do you mean "in trunk of car in parking lot"? Or do you mean "carry around with the employee during shift"?

Sorry, for the Socratic method but I need to narrow it down before I answer.

No problem. Carry around during the shift. I am aware that the legislature required most employers, including municipalities, allow firearms to be secured in the employees vehicle.

 

[Bill of Rights]

No problem. Carry around during the shift. I am aware that the legislature required most employers, including municipalities, allow firearms to be secured in the employees vehicle.

Kirk will correct me if I'm mistaken, I'm sure, but IC 35-47-11.1-4(2) is pretty specific on that point. Employer may prohibit carry while on duty.

 

[alabasterjar]

Kirk will correct me if I'm mistaken, I'm sure, but IC 35-47-11.1-4(2) is pretty specific on that point. Employer may prohibit carry while on duty.

Yes, I agree that IC gives the authority to set that policy, my question is if IC specifically prohibits municipal employees from carrying.

I'll expound a little bit. State po po working with local pd recently conducted active shooter training. ISP is using the "Run, Hide, Fight" video created by the Huston TX pd, I think. A well intentioned video, I think, but short of a little awareness training, I'm not certain how useful it is. I digress, that's not the point of this post. As one might anticipate, there may be a small handful of employees that recall that the US Bill of Rights and the Indiana Constitution declare that citizens have a right to protect life and limb by bearing arms. .

During the post scenario debriefing, someone may have brought up this topic and may have questioned the wisdom of expressly prohibiting employees from from having the liberty to protect themselves as they see fit. (Municipality currently prohibits employees from carrying a firearm). The topic generated heated debate, and at least one person claimed that IC prohibited municipal employees from carrying (except law enforcement, of course). This person may have been speaking from a personal idealogical point of view instead of knowledge of the law, which is troubling given this person's formal training and position with the municipality.

 

[alabasterjar]

I'm not trying to be vague or dodgy to irritate anyone, but based on the post-scenario discussions, it is clear that their are people that vehemently oppose the liberty argument who may be in a position to affect employee status, if you catch my drift. Free speech isn't as free as it used to be.

 

[Hawkeye]

...
During the post scenario debriefing, someone may have brought up this topic and may have questioned the wisdom of expressly prohibiting employees from from having the liberty to protect themselves as they see fit. (Municipality currently prohibits employees from carrying a firearm). The topic generated heated debate, and at least one person claimed that IC prohibited municipal employees from carrying (except law enforcement, of course). This person may have been speaking from a personal idealogical point of view instead of knowledge of the law, which is troubling given this person's formal training and position with the municipality.

Lot of "may haves" in your comment. Either they did or didn't. You can, or course make the whole thing a hypothetical. Of course, I may have read this thread, or I may have not read it....

 

[Bill of Rights]

I am not a lawyer. I don't play one on TV, and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night. This is not legal advice.

To my understanding, and and all ordinances, rules, etc., before or after the date of enactment of the law, or otherwise in effect at the time it was effective, were nullified by it on it taking effect. That is, no municipality, county, township, etc. may have rules governing the carriage or ownership or possession of guns, ammo, or accessories. This is a partial listing of what the law did, not a complete one.

However, the section I showed you was one of the "void" carve-outs included, allowing any employer to forbid carry while on the clock, including municipalities, counties, townships, etc.

For more detail, read the info at this link: Indiana General Assembly, 2015 Session

The short answer, I believe, is, "yes", the IC does specifically allow municipalities to forbid their employees from carrying. It does not require them to forbid thusly, but does allow them to.

Kinda like there's no law prohibiting spanking your kid. You MAY do so (so long as you don't abuse, i.e. leave marks, break bones, etc.) but you are not required to spank them.

You may carry a handgun on your own property, unencumbered. You are not required to do so, but neither are you forbidden.

Ain't law FUN???!

To the guy who claimed IC specifically forbids municipal employees from carrying, the easiest answer to him is "Really? What law? That is, Title, Article, Chapter, Section." Make HIM look up this non-existent law, or hire a lawyer to do so for him.

To repeat:
I am not a lawyer. I don't play one on TV, and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night. This is not legal advice.

Blessings,
Bill

Yes, I agree that IC gives the authority to set that policy, my question is if IC specifically prohibits municipal employees from carrying.

I'll expound a little bit. State po po working with local pd recently conducted active shooter training. ISP is using the "Run, Hide, Fight" video created by the Huston TX pd, I think. A well intentioned video, I think, but short of a little awareness training, I'm not certain how useful it is. I digress, that's not the point of this post. As one might anticipate, there may be a small handful of employees that recall that the US Bill of Rights and the Indiana Constitution declare that citizens have a right to protect life and limb by bearing arms. .

During the post scenario debriefing, someone may have brought up this topic and may have questioned the wisdom of expressly prohibiting employees from from having the liberty to protect themselves as they see fit. (Municipality currently prohibits employees from carrying a firearm). The topic generated heated debate, and at least one person claimed that IC prohibited municipal employees from carrying (except law enforcement, of course). This person may have been speaking from a personal idealogical point of view instead of knowledge of the law, which is troubling given this person's formal training and position with the municipality.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

No problem. Carry around during the shift. I am aware that the legislature required most employers, including municipalities, allow firearms to be secured in the employees vehicle.

IF you are not in a prohibited area, e.g. a school, then your employer can allow you to carry (actually so could the school), however there is no law that requires your employer allow you to carry. In fact the General Assembly expressly provided that employers may disallow the carrying of firearms while on the clock (excepting the whole parking lot issue).

 

[T.Lex]

In my experience, municipal employees are generally forbidden from carrying. Forbidden, except in cases where an elected official can exempt individuals on his or her staff from the rule.

The justification for the policy can come in different variations, including something along the lines that employees often deal with members of the public in emotionally tense situations. Generally, the employees are not trained in how to deal with those situations, so for their own safety, and that of the public, the preference is for them to call authorities/security.

Basically same rules apply as private business - if your boss says you can't carry, then its an HR violation to carry. Run your own risk/benefit analysis.

 

[ModernGunner]

Agree with Bill. Make your 'hypothetical guy' provide the Indiana Code citation that specifically prohibits municipal employees from carrying during work hours.

Fat chance on that one happening. 'Mr. Hypothetical' is a doofus.

 

[T.Lex]

But, check your written HR policy, too.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Thank you Kirk and T for verifying my cite, and MG for the support. :-)

 

[alabasterjar]

Thank you for the replies - from what I understood, this was the case, but I was concerned that I missed a hidden prohibition somewhere in the IC.

It is fascinating to witness the false equivalence and strawman arguments that get sputtered when antigun folk try to build their case against firearms. I've read about many on this forum and other sites, but this is the first time I've seen them in person. I think I heard everything but "you'll shoot yer eye out!" It was also shocking to see people who are pro gun fold and concede to the anti's...

thanks again for your input everyone!

 

[philo]

I got the impression from Mr Ciyou's book that weapons of any kind are prohibited in water/wastewater treatment facilities due to some federal antiterror law. As I recall it was due to the availability of hazardous chemicals at such locations (ie. Chlorine, sulfur dioxide, etc.). I don't know if it's still in effect, but I was interested in it at the time because my previous career required frequent visits to those facilities.