Indiana Town Resolutions

[stephen87]

I was at the Hartsville FD fish fry yesterday with my girlfriend and the kiddos. We met her parents there, since they live in town. I was holding my daughter and her mom grabbed my shirt, pulled it over my OCed Glock, and said "didn't you see the sign? No firearms." I figured since there was a carnival going on as well, it was the carnival rules. So I asked whose sign it was and she replied that it's always there. Since I was there to support the FD, I kept it covered when I was near them. We had to rush out of there later, so I missed the sign, but she sent a picture of the sign to my girlfriend.

It apparently signs it is in accordance with Hartsville Resolution 2012-3. No firearms. No alcohol. No fireworks etc on the square. Having said this, I carry on the square EVERY TIME I am in Hartsville. No one has ever said anything to me until yesterday.

However, I can't find any resolutions for the town of Hartsville. Anyone know who I could contact for this? I am not at the point of hiring a lawyer to have them removed and I have a way with writing. I was going to draft something up and toss it in the mail asking that they be removed, IF the resolution is off the books (think the Hammond case). If it is still on the books, I was going to highly recommend them removing the law along with the signs.

Either way, the signs are not in compliance with Indiana Code and, if enforced by the local LEO or town marshal, could open them up for a legal battle.

 

[CitizenX]

I would think the mayor's office could tell you something of the matter. Wasn't it the town mayors that came up with this resolutions idea? I think it's their way of trying to have some control over firearm policies the Indiana law clearly limits.

 

[Dead Duck]

Years ago I believe people were contacting Guy to report the "No Guns" signs that were still up and shouldn't be at parks and places throughout Indiana. I bunch of them were changed (even with permanent markers) but some stayed up because of the cost of changing but the cops promised they weren't being enforced. (if I remember correctly)

But this one sounds like a new rule from the mayor. Sounds like he didn't get the memo or just doesn't care because guns are bad and........ feelings.

 

[stephen87]

I don't know if Hartsville even has a mayor. It's a town of leas than 500 people.

 

[Dead Duck]

I don't know if Hartsville even has a mayor. It's a town of leas than 500 people.

Well, do they at least have a board?

 

[stephen87]

I would assume so. I will find out though.

 

[GNRPowdeR]

They have a Town Marshall, so they have a Town Board. I haven't been to the square, so not sure when the sign or ordinance came to exist.

 

[femurphy77]

THINK OF THE CHILDREN MAN!!!! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

 

[T.Lex]

First, Guy Relford is the attorney who probably has the most knowledge about this stuff.

If he doesn't reply, you're stuck with the rest of us.

I think some municipalities have taken the position - supported by some case law on the subject - that the actual ordinance is void. Unenforceable. Meaningless. (Due to the pre-emption law that was passed in that same timeframe.) And, as noted upthread, there is a cost associated with taking down or changing the signs, which is not required, so they don't do it.

There's a phrase in the law "chilling effect." That is, some actions "chill" someone from otherwise exercising their rights. This kind of sign totally does that, because not everyone knows it is unenforceable. But, I do not think that angle has been litigated successfully.

I would be curious about what the response might be. There are some exceptions to pre-emption that might apply, but I kinda doubt it.

 

[lonehoosier]

Years ago I believe people were contacting Guy to report the "No Guns" signs that were still up and shouldn't be at parks and places throughout Indiana. I bunch of them were changed (even with permanent markers) but some stayed up because of the cost of changing but the cops promised they weren't being enforced. (if I remember correctly)

But this one sounds like a new rule from the mayor. Sounds like he didn't get the memo or just doesn't care because guns are bad and........ feelings.

I am very interested in knowing about any town, county, township, etc. (i.e., political subdivision) that is still restricting the possession of firearms on its property. If you have any current examples of this (including "no firearms" signs in local government buildings or on local government property) - anywhere in the State of Indiana - would you please let me know?

Thanks!!

Guy

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...efense/164442-local-prohibition-firearms.html

 

[indyrun]

Remember good ole Mayor Photo Op Joe Hognuts in Indy tried to ban guns for the Christmas Tree lighting on the Circle. That didn't go so well for Mayor Hognuts.

 

[rhino]

Do "resolutions" carry any height of law, or are they like House and Senate resolution that are essentially, "This is how we feel about it, so there."?

 

[stephen87]

I believe they are like town ordinances.

 

[T.Lex]

Do "resolutions" carry any height of law, or are they like House and Senate resolution that are essentially, "This is how we feel about it, so there."?

For Indiana municipalities, the difference between "resolution" and "ordinance" is basically just how they are spelled. Except for certain specific things that have to be one or the other, if a city/town says something should or shouldn't happen, it can be by either.

Most of the time, things regulating conduct of citizens are called ordinances. If someone violates one of them, they can be issued a citation for an ordinance violation (it gets an "OV" cause number). They are enforceable, if they contain a penalty provision.