LTCH... Do I have to provide if asked?

[Rookie]

Rookie loves to report n00bs... Or so I hear

I am an equal opportunity reporter.

 

[Rookie]

Me or Tim? I'm pretty sure on this one.

You are. Indiana defines a firearm as anything that fires a projectile by means of explosion.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

You are. Indiana defines a firearm as anything that fires a projectile by means of explosion.

Even federal law does. The confusing point is their exemption in the 1934 NFA and 1968 GCA.

 

[BRILEY]

Thanks for all the responses guys! The fact remains that even after all that no one can give a definitive answer, it all seems like assumptions and/or opinions, so I decided to call my attorney, the verdict is in, the answer is NO! You are NOT required (technically by IN state law) to show your LTCH unless the LEO has reason to believe that you are committing are are about to commit a crime, but he also said to avoid a BIG legal hassle you may want to go ahead and comply.

 

[Rookie]

Thanks for all the responses guys! The fact remains that even after all that no one can give a definitive answer, it all seems like assumptions and/or opinions, so I decided to call my attorney, the verdict is in, the answer is NO! You are NOT required (technically by IN state law) to show your LTCH unless the LEO has reason to believe that you are committing are are about to commit a crime, but he also said to avoid a BIG legal hassle you may want to go ahead and comply.

Um, I said that. I even provided IC to back it up.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Thanks for all the responses guys! The fact remains that even after all that no one can give a definitive answer, it all seems like assumptions and/or opinions, so I decided to call my attorney, the verdict is in, the answer is NO! You are NOT required (technically by IN state law) to show your LTCH unless the LEO has reason to believe that you are committing are are about to commit a crime, but he also said to avoid a BIG legal hassle you may want to go ahead and comply.

Um... Carrying a handgun without a license IS a crime in Indiana... Sooo...

But I appluad you for contacting a legal professional!

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Um, I said that. I even provided IC to back it up.

Shut up Rookie! He's taking my advice!

 

[Rookie]

TECHNICALLY, you are not required to show your LTCH upon request.

In Indiana, it is a crime to carry a handgun without a license. You have two choices, you can show your ltch, or you can refuse to. If you refuse to, you will receive a complementary ride to jail. Sooner or later, you can show the prosecutor that you are properly licensed. When that happens, all record of your arrest will be expunged and the prosecutor will look at you and think, "what an incredible tool."

It's completely up to you.

IC 35-47-2-24

See? Free of charge even!

 

[BRILEY]

Sorry if it seemed like I got all fired up, didn't mean for it to come across that way! I'm liking this place more and more with each post I read! I think I'll do a "Open Carry vs Concealed Carry" for my next post, any thoughts... jk

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Sorry if it seemed like I got all fired up, didn't mean for it to come across that way! I'm liking this place more and more with each post I read! I think I'll do a "Open Carry vs Concealed Carry" for my next post, any thoughts... jk

[STRIKE]I'm outta rep but I'll get you a badge tomorrow.[/STRIKE]

ETA: I missed him by one bar...


BTW which DO you prefer???

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Still a 'firearm' and also a 'handgun' requiring LTCH to carry.

Sorry I should of posted the IC.

For SBRs

IC 35-47-1-6
"Handgun"
Sec. 6. "Handgun" means any firearm:
(1) designed or adapted so as to be aimed and fired from one (1) hand, regardless of barrel length; or
(2) any firearm with:
(A) a barrel less than sixteen (16) inches in length; or
(B) an overall length of less than twenty-six (26) inches.

The non fixed cartridge and age.

IC 35-47-2-19
[URL="http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar47/ch2.html"] Application of chapter
Sec. 19. This chapter does not apply to any firearm not designed to use fixed cartridges or fixed ammunition, or any firearm made before January 1, 1899.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32.[/URL]

Me or Tim? I'm pretty sure on this one.

Me.

Even federal law does. The confusing point is their exemption in the 1934 NFA and 1968 GCA.

Yep they are firearms under IN and Fed law. But different rules apply for some things. A serious violent felon can't legally own one in IN, but they can own non fixed cartridge under Fed law. Fed law also doesn't require a 4473 for them.

 

[BRILEY]

Um... Carrying a handgun without a license IS a crime in Indiana... Sooo...

But I appluad you for contacting a legal professional!

Ummm never said that it wasn't, you are in fact correct! What I said was; you are not required to comply with a request to SEE your permit if asked by a LEO if no crime (or suspension of one) has been committed. But thanks for your

I'd recommend re-reading a post before you reply next time, just a thought

 

[Booya]

[STRIKE]I'm outta rep but I'll get you a badge tomorrow.[/STRIKE]

ETA: I missed him by one bar...


BTW which DO you prefer???

I got the badge for ya!

 

[BRILEY]

[STRIKE]I'm outta rep but I'll get you a badge tomorrow.[/STRIKE]

ETA: I missed him by one bar...


BTW which DO you prefer???

Honestly it just depends, mostly CC, only because I prefer the element of surprise. And you?

 

[Booya]

Ummm never said that it wasn't, you are in fact correct! What I said was; you are not required to comply with a request to SEE your permit if asked by a LEO if no crime (or suspension of one) has been committed. But thanks for your

I'd recommend re-reading a post before you reply next time, just a thought

This is where the argument begins! I would suggest that you and your lawyer are incorrect to some extent. Since carrying in IN without a license is a crime, you can be suspected of breaking it as soon as you are carrying. Furthermore, if an LEO was to ask to see your LTCH and you refused, then you can be certain you are now suspected of at least breaking that law.

So if asked you can say no, once you refuse you are now suspected of breaking the law and cold be asked again rightfully?

 

[BRILEY]

You guys ROCK!! By the way, don't ever mistake my smartassedness for meanness, I just prefer a lively conversation... And it seems I'm not the only one?.

 

[BRILEY]

This is where the argument begins! I would suggest that you and your lawyer are incorrect to some extent. Since carrying in IN without a license is a crime, you can be suspected of breaking it as soon as you are carrying. Furthermore, if an LEO was to ask to see your LTCH and you refused, then you can be certain you are now suspected of at least breaking that law.

So if asked you can say no, once you refuse you are now suspected of breaking the law and cold be asked again rightfully?

I get what you're saying, but riddle me this... If we assume that same logic would it then be okay for LEO's to just start pulling random people over and asking for their drivers license? Since it is in fact illegal to operate a motor vechical without a license?

And since motor vehicles are associated with more deaths than firearms... nevrmind, you see what I'm saying, either way it's just frustrating to be treated like a criminal based on really nothing at all!

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Sorry I should of posted the IC.


The non fixed cartridge and age.



Me.



Yep they are firearms under IN and Fed law. But different rules apply for some things. A serious violent felon can't legally own one in IN, but they can own non fixed cartridge under Fed law. Fed law also doesn't require a 4473 for them.

Scooped me again... Today just isn't my day! I always thought that but some of the law and case law that Guy showed us in his class Saturday made me second guess it.

Not blaming Guy or his class at all just that I haven't had time to actually look up and study all the new goodies he showed us in his Comprehensive Indiana Gun Law class at Tactical Firearms Training.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I get what you're saying, but riddle me this... If we assume that same logic would it then be okay for LEO's to just start pulling random people over and asking for their drivers license? Since it is in fact illegal to operate a motor vechical without a license?

It used to be that way, and it was common for them to just stop someone to check their license. Until a SCOTUS decision stopped it. Sorry I can't remember the name of the case.

Scooped me again... Today just isn't my day!

Not a problem, it happens to me on a regular basis.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

I get what you're saying, but riddle me this... If we assume that same logic would it then be okay for LEO's to just start pulling random people over and asking for their drivers license? Since it is in fact illegal to operate a motor vechical without a license?

And since motor vehicles are associated with more deaths than firearms... nevrmind, you see what I'm saying, either way it's just frustrating to be treated like a criminal based on really nothing at all!

It is perfectly legal for LEOs to pull you over to check your DL, but I know EPD (and many others) has a policy that they must have reason for a stop like seatbelt violation, speeding, headlight out etc...