Bloomington Gun Sieze After Threat?!?

[Donnelly]

Time for Mom & Dad to open up a can on Junior. IMHO...

And once again lose your right to legally own firearms due to the misdemeanor domestic violence conviction that someone will be willing to pin on you.

 

[Turn Key]

I read in a blog that the parents firearms were seized by using the Laird Law.

Had not heard of this Law prior to the Bloomington asshat kid's incident.

I assumed the Laird Law would apply to our officer Jake Laird that was shot in the line of duty.

Anyone with any real legal knowledge on a "Laird Law" please chime in. I tried to Google the law w/o success.

TK

 

[goinggreyfast]

And once again lose your right to legally own firearms due to the misdemeanor domestic violence conviction that someone will be willing to pin on you.

And one of the reasons I'm glad I don't have children. If I raised them with the same loving diligence my parents did with me--I probably would get in trouble. It's pathetic.

 

[Yes]

It's my belief that if a person owns a car and their kid takes the car at night, goes out and gets drunk with his buddies, then crashes the car, killing his buddies and a family of 5 that happened to be on the road that night, then said car owner should be imprisoned for manslaughter since their kid stole their keys and used their car without permission

But if your kid threatens to do just that in order to have you locked up, you're not allowed to kick his ass, right? Because that would somehow be wrong.

Believe it or not, some kids are true scum, have no idea how lucky they really are, and go out of their way to ruin their parents lives.

If we punished people's parents for their wrongdoings, then we'd be punishing a lot of parents for a lot of things. Seems a little ridiculous to me. In the situtation you described, the only way punishing the parents would be valid would be if it could be easily proven that the parents A) encouraged this behavior and B) willingly furnished the kid with the keys.

But you described a situation where a car was stolen. What if this all happened while the parents were asleep at 2am? Should parents always stay awake at all hours in order to prevent being put in jail due to the actions of their kids? Seems almost like maybe you were being sarcastic...and if you were, boy do I feel dumb!

 

[IndyDave1776]

Are we sure that Old Man Bill isn't Dianne Feinstein in drag?

 

[Bigshep]

But if your kid threatens to do just that in order to have you locked up, you're not allowed to kick his ass, right? Because that would somehow be wrong.

Believe it or not, some kids are true scum, have no idea how lucky they really are, and go out of their way to ruin their parents lives.

If we punished people's parents for their wrongdoings, then we'd be punishing a lot of parents for a lot of things. Seems a little ridiculous to me. In the situtation you described, the only way punishing the parents would be valid would be if it could be easily proven that the parents A) encouraged this behavior and B) willingly furnished the kid with the keys.

But you described a situation where a car was stolen. What if this all happened while the parents were asleep at 2am? Should parents always stay awake at all hours in order to prevent being put in jail due to the actions of their kids? Seems almost like maybe you were being sarcastic...and if you were, boy do I feel dumb!

Lol, he was being sarcastic. Purple text here on INGO is used to show sarcasm

 

[public servant]

I read in a blog that the parents firearms were seized by using the Laird Law.

Had not heard of this Law prior to the Bloomington asshat kid's incident.

I assumed the Laird Law would apply to our officer Jake Laird that was shot in the line of duty.

Anyone with any real legal knowledge on a "Laird Law" please chime in. I tried to Google the law w/o success.

TK

IC 35-47-14
Chapter 14. Proceedings for the Seizure and Retention of a Firearm

IC 35-47-14-1
"Dangerous"
Sec. 1. (a) For the purposes of this chapter, an individual is "dangerous" if:
(1) the individual presents an imminent risk of personal injury to the individual or to another individual; or
(2) the individual may present a risk of personal injury to the individual or to another individual in the future and the individual:
(A) has a mental illness (as defined in IC 12-7-2-130) that may be controlled by medication, and has not demonstrated a pattern of voluntarily and consistently taking the individual's medication while not under supervision; or
(B) is the subject of documented evidence that would give rise to a reasonable belief that the individual has a propensity for violent or emotionally unstable conduct.
(b) The fact that an individual has been released from a mental health facility or has a mental illness that is currently controlled by medication does not establish that the individual is dangerous for the purposes of this chapter.
As added by P.L.1-2006, SEC.537.


IC 35-47-14-2
Warrant to search for firearm in possession of dangerous individual
Sec. 2. A circuit or superior court may issue a warrant to search for and seize a firearm in the possession of an individual who is dangerous if:
(1) a law enforcement officer provides the court a sworn affidavit that:
(A) states why the law enforcement officer believes that the individual is dangerous and in possession of a firearm; and
(B) describes the law enforcement officer's interactions and conversations with:
(i) the individual who is alleged to be dangerous; or
(ii) another individual, if the law enforcement officer believes that information obtained from this individual is credible and reliable;
that have led the law enforcement officer to believe that the individual is dangerous and in possession of a firearm;
(2) the affidavit specifically describes the location of the firearm; and
(3) the circuit or superior court determines that probable cause exists to believe that the individual is:
(A) dangerous; and
(B) in possession of a firearm. As added by P.L.1-2006, SEC.537.

IC 35-47-14-3
Warrantless seizure of firearm from individual believed to be dangerous
Sec. 3. (a) If a law enforcement officer seizes a firearm from an individual whom the law enforcement officer believes to be dangerous without obtaining a warrant, the law enforcement officer shall submit to the circuit or superior court having jurisdiction over the individual believed to be dangerous a written statement under oath or affirmation describing the basis for the law enforcement officer's belief that the individual is dangerous.
(b) The court shall review the written statement submitted under subsection (a). If the court finds that probable cause exists to believe that the individual is dangerous, the court shall order the law enforcement agency having custody of the firearm to retain the firearm. If the court finds that there is no probable cause to believe that the individual is dangerous, the court shall order the law enforcement agency having custody of the firearm to return the firearm to the individual.
(c) This section does not authorize a law enforcement officer to perform a warrantless search or seizure if a warrant would otherwise be required.
As added by P.L.1-2006, SEC.537.


IC 35-47-14-4
Filing of return after warrant is served
Sec. 4. If a court issued a warrant to seize a firearm under this chapter, the law enforcement officer who served the warrant shall, not later than forty-eight (48) hours after the warrant was served, file a return with the court that:
(1) states that the warrant was served; and
(2) sets forth:
(A) the time and date on which the warrant was served;
(B) the name and address of the individual named in the warrant; and
(C) the quantity and identity of any firearms seized by the law enforcement officer.
As added by P.L.1-2006, SEC.537.

IC 35-47-14-5
Requirement of hearing on whether firearm should be returned or retained
Sec. 5. (a) Not later than fourteen (14) days after a return is filed under section 4 of this chapter or a written statement is submitted under section 3 of this chapter, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether the seized firearm should be:
(1) returned to the individual from whom the firearm was seized; or
(2) retained by the law enforcement agency having custody of
the firearm.
(b) The court shall set the hearing date as soon as possible after the return is filed under section 4 of this chapter. The court shall inform:
(1) the prosecuting attorney; and
(2) the individual from whom the firearm was seized;
of the date, time, and location of the hearing. The court may conduct the hearing at a facility or other suitable place not likely to have a harmful effect upon the individual's health or well-being.
As added by P.L.1-2006, SEC.537.

IC 35-47-14-6
Burden of proof at hearing; court orders
Sec. 6. (a) In a hearing conducted under section 5 of this chapter, the state has the burden of proving all material facts by clear and convincing evidence.
(b) If the court, in a hearing under section 5 of this chapter, determines that the state has proved by clear and convincing evidence that the individual is dangerous, the court may order that the law enforcement agency having custody of the seized firearm retain the firearm. In addition, if the individual has received a license to carry a handgun, the court shall suspend the individual's license to carry a handgun. If the court determines that the state has failed to prove that the individual is dangerous, the court shall order the law enforcement agency having custody of the firearm to return the firearm to the individual from whom it was seized.
(c) If the court, in a hearing under section 5 of this chapter, orders a law enforcement agency to retain a firearm, the law enforcement agency shall retain the firearm until the court orders the firearm returned or otherwise disposed of.
As added by P.L.1-2006, SEC.537.

IC 35-47-14-7
If firearm seized is owned by another individual
Sec. 7. If the court, in a hearing conducted under section 5 of this chapter, determines that:
(1) the individual from whom a firearm was seized is dangerous; and
(2) the firearm seized from the individual is owned by another individual;
the court may order the law enforcement agency having custody of the firearm to return the firearm to the owner of the firearm.
As added by P.L.1-2006, SEC.537.

IC 35-47-14-8
Petition for return of a firearm
Sec. 8. (a) At least one hundred eighty (180) days after the date on which a court orders a law enforcement agency to retain an individual's firearm under section 6(b) of this chapter, the individual may petition the court for return of the firearm. (b) Upon receipt of a petition described in subsection (a), the court shall:
(1) enter an order setting a date for a hearing on the petition; and
(2) inform the prosecuting attorney of the date, time, and location of the hearing.
(c) The prosecuting attorney shall represent the state at the hearing on a petition under this section.
(d) In a hearing on a petition under this section, the individual:
(1) may be represented by an attorney; and
(2) must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the individual is not dangerous.
(e) If, upon the completion of the hearing and consideration of the record, the court finds that the individual is not dangerous, the court shall order the law enforcement agency having custody of the firearm to return the firearm to the individual.
(f) If the court denies an individual's petition under this section, the individual may not file a subsequent petition until at least one hundred eighty (180) days after the date on which the court denied the petition.
As added by P.L.1-2006, SEC.537.

IC 35-47-14-9
When law enforcement agency may be ordered to destroy firearm
Sec. 9. If at least five (5) years have passed since a court conducted the first hearing to retain a firearm under this chapter, the court, after giving notice to the parties and conducting a hearing, may order the law enforcement agency having custody of the firearm to destroy or otherwise permanently dispose of the firearm.
As added by P.L.1-2006, SEC.537.