-1 Noblesville Officer Noname

[Echelon]

Are you legally required to have your LTCH on you? I swear I read you didn't, but can't find the info now.

 

[MikeDVB]

Required or not, what's the big deal about showing your ID to a LEO?

Nobody said it was a big deal - if that's what you want to do, to provide ID to an officer for any and every interaction go for it. I won't stop you.

Put the guy at ease and show it.

So he's on edge and not at ease because you don't want to show personally identifying information for no reason whatsoever?

Then educate the fellow on your rights.

Unlikely to ever succeed - especially with an officer that is going out of his way to hassle and/or lecture you he's likely not going to be receptive to changing his opinions based upon your feedback.

Even if he were receptive, that instance in time likely isn't the best time or way to go about it.

Now the guy probably things less of LTCH holders beacuse of it.

I would venture to say he already thinks little of LTCH holders to begin with and there was likely nothing the OP could have done to change that. The officer isn't going to run into one LTCH carrier that goes out of their way to make the cop's life easier and then suddenly change all of his opinions and outlooks based upon that one experience.

I would not make a seen.

If I understand the OP correctly - it wasn't the OP that chose to make a scene, but the officer.

Not worth making a bunch of people around me nervous beacuse I want to be righteous! Just show it.

So the people around were nervous because he chose not to provide photo ID? So what you're saying is that had he simply shown photo ID everybody that was previously nervous would suddenly be placated?

I don't follow your logic ... at all...

One simple solution would just be to have a LTCH similar to a driver's license, with a photo and/or thumbprint of the holder.

Sure, until you see that as the end of the lifetime license because - you know - what good is a 30 year old picture?

How about this - they can't even keep up with the simple pink slip - how do you expect them to keep up with issuing nicer licenses? Then think about it - to update your picture (required every so often, likely lifetime gone to force you to update) you not only have to go through that hassle but also will certainly have to pay for it.

I mean if you want a 1~6 year license that costs $100~200 to renew and you have to go through the hassle of going to an Indiana State Police branch to have it done and then wait for it to show up in the mail etc... Sure - push for this.

A better way would just be to have the LTCH as an 'endorsement' on the driver's license. Less paperwork to carry, anyway.

That would be an ideal alternative to the above, imho. Then you still have the issue of having to renew it every few years (you know, when your ID expires). If it didn't add any extra cost to the license I could perhaps see it but I know I pay $20/renewal just to keep my motorcycle endorsement even though it's nothing but an extra record in the computer.

The error by the OP was not asking the LEO for his Police ID. Sorry, you MAY be a cop, but you're NOT a cop until you verify that you are.

I agree, but to be honest I never thought about somebody impersonating an officer in this capacity. If I ran into this exact situation I'd likely call 911 and request a uniformed officer to the location unless the original officer chose to identify themselves.

Citizens have the right to know with whom they're dealing, just as LEO's do. The cop should've properly identified himself at the onset.

Officers do not have a right to knowing who they are dealing with anymore than anybody else except in certain situations (you know, the ones where the law says you must ID yourself).

I'm not sure what the laws say about an officer identifying themselves but if I were in doubt as to whether the officer was an actual officer I'd likely take additional steps to ensure I wasn't dealing with a fake/imposter.

As an LEO, if I'm unsure of your identity, or believe that the LTCH is fake, I have the authority to make sure you're the person identified on the LTCH, since there ARE fake LTCH permits out there.

Can you show me where Indiana Code or Case Law states that if you believe a LTCH to be fake, that the carrier is required to ID themselves?

As near as I understand the law and case laws - once the LTCH is provided questioning about the, now established as legal, carry are to end. If you don't believe the LTCH is real - call in the number and verify the name.

If you still believe it's a fake - well - sounds like you need to talk with your lawmakers about having the laws updated because legally, unless I'm grossly misunderstanding, you're SOL as an officer in this situation.

That said, being uncooperative certainly CAN reasonably lead any LEO to conclude there's "something more to the story", and therefore further investigate.

So you are saying that being uncooperative = probable cause or reasonable suspicion?

What if they chose to exercise their right to remain silent... Suddenly they're a criminal where as a guy who talked to you wasn't?

I don't know any LEO's that OC off duty, but surely there are some out there. I've just never seen or met them.

I don't know any that do either... Know plenty of them - all of them carry all the time but none of them OC when off-duty.

 

[Double T]

Are you legally required to have your LTCH on you? I swear I read you didn't, but can't find the info now.

No, but I would suggest having the number memorized if you don't plan on showing your DL number.

 

[Bill B]

Are you legally required to have your LTCH on you? I swear I read you didn't, but can't find the info now.

The IC used to read something like in possesion of license but was changed to is licensed but there has been no case law on the new wording of the IC.
I'm too lazy to look it up right now.

 

[Double T]

Up until the part of the law that says "The burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that he is exempt under section 2 of this chapter, or that he has a license as required under this chapter."

Defendant. They need to prove their case to make me a defendant and make it stick enough to present to the DA no?

 

[MikeDVB]

Defendant. They need to prove their case to make me a defendant and make it stick enough to present to the DA no?

I do believe the quoted section is referring to court proceedings, and not simply talking to an officer on the side of the road but I could be reading it too narrowly.

 

[iChokePeople]

Defendant. They need to prove their case to make me a defendant and make it stick enough to present to the DA no?

You were carrying a handgun...

 

[Double T]

I do believe the quoted section is referring to court proceedings, and not simply talking to an officer on the side of the road but I could be reading it too narrowly.

True. But on the corner approaching a guy seemingly committing no crime, but openly displaying a holster with a handgun in it. The burden of proof is on the officer. If I provide a LTCH number and my name, DOB, and address I have done my part.

There is no need to show the license, or have any ID on my person other than my person.

 

[Double T]

You were carrying a handgun...

Which is not a crime if I give my ID info and LCTH number

 

[KG1]

As near as I understand it - unless you've committed a crime or they have reasonable suspicion that you were about to commit a crime - you do not have to ID yourself that I'm aware of... If there were - officers could go walking down the street just asking everybody for IDs to see who does or does not have warrants (or any other reason).

They suspected you of carrying illegally at which point, you provided your LTCH showing you were licensed and, as such, not committing a crime. At that point - unless there is some other non-firearms type of crime they also think you're committing there is nothing that requires you to ID yourself.

A carry license with a photo on it sounds ideal on the surface until you think about them not even being able to keep up with issuing the simple pieces of pink paper followed by the fact that you most certainly would need to do some sort of renewal (i.e. bye bye lifetime) because your photo of you at 21 isn't going to be helpful when you're 50 for the purposes of identification unless you're the luckiest person around.

At the end of the day if you're going to OC, you can expect at some point in your life to be hassled by an officer and it's best if you know your rights, how to assert your rights, and how to handle the overall situation.

I'd say the OP did fair enough, it could have been better but it also could have been much worse.

OC'd every day for over a year now and nary a LEO interaction for me - I hope when the day does come [as it certainly will] that I handle it at least as good as the OP.

Yes, I understand all that. The reason I posed the question though is to seek an admission that there is no requirement by law for an individual to provide an ID as proof that the LTCH is legit, no matter how much they think it should be because it's just a pink piece of paper that can be easily forged.

I've heard numerous times that if we don't like a LEO enforcing a certain law that we don't agree with not to take it out on them but petition legislators for change.

Same goes for a LEO asking for ID to prove the legitimacy of an LTCH. It simply is not required by law. Once the LTCH is provided and called in by the LEO and verified as legitimately issued then that is all that is required and the encounter should be over at that point.

 

[iChokePeople]

Which is not a crime if I give my ID info and LCTH number

I must have misunderstood -- thought you were saying you weren't going to provide that. If you've identified yourself and somehow demonstrated your having an LTCH, all is well. Or should be.

 

[Echelon]

So, if you're not required to carry the LTCH on you, then you can't be required to produce it on demand. If LEO can't require DL without probable cause.... No LTCH, no ID, now what? mexican stand-off until I pull an ID from somewhere?

I suppose the actual answer to this question is to have LEO's stop assuming a person carrying a firearm = illegal activity requiring harassment & detainment until I can PROVE my innocence. Not gonna happen.

 

[Double T]

I must have misunderstood -- thought you were saying you weren't going to provide that. If you've identified yourself and somehow demonstrated your having an LTCH, all is well. Or should be.

I'm just trolling the trolls. Give me some time to get my story straight

 

[Double T]

So, if you're not required to carry the LTCH on you, then you can't be required to produce it on demand. If LEO can't required DL without probable cause.... No LTCH, no ID, now what? mexican stand-off until I pull an ID from somewhere?

I suppose the actual answer to this question is to have LEO's stop assuming a person carrying a firearm = illegal activity requiring harassment & detainment until I can PROVE my innocence. Not gonna happen.

No, you can identify yourself without handing them anything. That's what I'm trying to emphasize.

No papiere.

 

[iChokePeople]

You could identify yourself with a SUSPENDED DL.

 

[jbombelli]

Even if it is not yours?

I only have to prove I have the license. I don't have to prove I'm not a forger of government documents.

 

[Double T]

You could identify yourself with a SUSPENDED DL.

But I'm not driving in this scenario. I could also identify myself on a burger king napkin that says Double T 1/2/1934 HTown, IN

 

[Bunnykid68]

But I'm not driving in this scenario. I could also identify myself on a burger king napkin that says Double T 1/2/1934 HTown, IN

Damn, you're old

 

[qwerty]

I only have to prove I have the license.

And who are you?

 

[92ThoStro]

You could identify yourself with a SUSPENDED DL.

I was in McDonald's not Subway, was that wouldn't fly

I do like that other states only require a permit or license to carry concealed, and OC is constitutionally legal. Or carry is constitutionally legal period. That way if you are OCing, the police have no grounds to detain you to ask for I.D, LTCH, etc, because it's not a crime to carry open without a license.