Can 18 YO Marine/IN Resident Carry in IN?

[SmokinSigs357]

A co worker just asked if I can post this up here. He has an 18 YO son who is in the Marines and is inquiring whether or not he is eligible to legally carry a handgun in Indiana.

Thanks in advance for your help!!!

 

[SteveM4A1]

IANAL, but Yes. He is eligible to obtain a LTCH, provided he is a proper person.

Indiana Code 35-47-1

Indiana Code 35-47-2

 

[iChokePeople]

IANAL, but Yes. He is eligible to obtain a LTCH, provided he is a proper person.

So... Marine, yes. Squid, no.

 

[SteveM4A1]

So... Marine, yes. Squid, no.

Lol I've never served, so I have no right to say things such as that

 

[halfmileharry]

So... Marine, yes. Squid, no.

Sounds fair to me.
Semper Fi

 

[Kutnupe14]

OP clarify. Is the 18 year old a resident? I'm just wondering since you pointed out he was a Marine.

 

[SmokinSigs357]

Yes, 18 year old Indiana Resident.

 

[SmokinSigs357]

Hah...nevermind....I thought you had to be 21 in Indiana. Duh.

 

[lonehoosier]

I don't think just because he's a marine allows him to carry without a LTCH weather he's a resident or not.

 

[SmokinSigs357]

Right, yeah, I'm sure he has to go through the hoops like the rest of us.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

A co worker just asked if I can post this up here. He has an 18 YO son who is in the Marines and is inquiring whether or not he is eligible to legally carry a handgun in Indiana.

Does he have a Larry? If yes, then carry.

If No Larry, no carry (unless under the 3 necessary conditions for transport in vehicle).

If he has Larry, but also has orders (no carry on leave home), then follow orders.

The military exemption for a Larry is if he is on duty, just being a Marine is not enough (for the law at least). Let's look at the statute for excepted persons:

IC 35-47-2-2

Excepted persons

Sec. 2. Section 1 of this chapter does not apply to:
(1) marshals;
(2) sheriffs;
(3) the commissioner of the department of correction or persons authorized by the commissioner in writing to carry firearms;
(4) judicial officers;
(5) law enforcement officers;
(6)members of the armed forces of the United States or of the national guard or organized reserves while they are on duty;
(7) regularly enrolled members of any organization duly authorized to purchase or receive such weapons from the United States or from this state who are at or are going to or from their place of assembly or target practice;
(8) employees of the United States duly authorized to carry handguns;
(9) employees of express companies when engaged in company business; or
(10) any person engaged in the business of manufacturing, repairing, or dealing in firearms or the agent or representative of any such person having in the person's possession, using, or carrying a handgun in the usual or ordinary course of that business.

 

[Tactically Fat]

Certain provisions of LEOSA may also help a .Mil member carry legally without an IN LTCH but that's a rather rare exception.

 

[mrortega]

Carry, yes. Purchase said handgun, no.

 

[in625shooter]

I don't think just because he's a marine allows him to carry without a LTCH weather he's a resident or not.

If he is an MP he can carry when off duty without a LTCH with one exception. A select few Military are going to be allowed to carry under the LEOSA update of 2014. In the 2013 revision to the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act Military Members that are Military Police/Security Police were added to the mix. The 2013 updates simply added the "powers to detain"/ This was done to include the DOD civilian police that had no statutory powers of arrest only detention. The 2013 update also required the Agency issued ID card/credentials to actually state "Law Enforcement Officer" The Military has been VERY slow in the establishment of their protocol. The USAF was the first branch and only one to start issuing ID cards to their Security Force members as of this minute.

So if he is an MP he needs to get with his command and see what the USMC requirements to get the required credentials are.

I have delt with LEOSA since it's inception and as simple as it is some folks make it complicated.

Below is the link to the new USAF credentials and how they do it.


Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act: Leosa

 

[Tactically Fat]

Carry, yes. Purchase said handgun, no.

Not entirely true.

A private sale is 100% perfectly legal.

If he is an MP he can carry when off duty without a LTCH with one exception. A select few Military are going to be allowed to carry under the LEOSA update of 2014. In the 2013 revision to the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act Military Members that are Military Police/Security Police were added to the mix. The 2013 updates simply added the "powers to detain"/ This was done to include the DOD civilian police that had no statutory powers of arrest only detention. The 2013 update also required the Agency issued ID card/credentials to actually state "Law Enforcement Officer" The Military has been VERY slow in the establishment of their protocol. The USAF was the first branch and only one to start issuing ID cards to their Security Force members as of this minute.

So if he is an MP he needs to get with his command and see what the USMC requirements to get the required credentials are.

I have delt with LEOSA since it's inception and as simple as it is some folks make it complicated.

Below is the link to the new USAF credentials and how they do it.


Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act: Leosa

Isn't there a stipulation that the ID-card that .mil folks use must be a photo ID?

I know about a year ago I looked into this for an MP buddy of mine. His ID didn't/doesn't have his picture on it, therefore he wasn't allowed to carry under LEOSA.

 

[JettaKnight]

Carry, yes. Purchase said handgun, no, not from a dealer, but private sales is ok.

FIFY.

 

[Booya]

Certain provisions of LEOSA may also help a .Mil member carry legally without an IN LTCH but that's a rather rare exception.

If he is an MP he can carry when off duty without a LTCH with one exception. A select few Military are going to be allowed to carry under the LEOSA update of 2014. In the 2013 revision to the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act Military Members that are Military Police/Security Police were added to the mix. The 2013 updates simply added the "powers to detain"/ This was done to include the DOD civilian police that had no statutory powers of arrest only detention. The 2013 update also required the Agency issued ID card/credentials to actually state "Law Enforcement Officer" The Military has been VERY slow in the establishment of their protocol. The USAF was the first branch and only one to start issuing ID cards to their Security Force members as of this minute.

So if he is an MP he needs to get with his command and see what the USMC requirements to get the required credentials are.

I have delt with LEOSA since it's inception and as simple as it is some folks make it complicated.

Below is the link to the new USAF credentials and how they do it.

Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act: Leosa

I'm almost 100% certain that most if not all of the LEOSA requirements only fall into Air Force Security Forces. I don't think the Army/Marines have the same training that hits all the wickets the AF has. I know the Marines don't qualify.

Isn't there a stipulation that the ID-card that .mil folks use must be a photo ID?

I know about a year ago I looked into this for an MP buddy of mine. His ID didn't/doesn't have his picture on it, therefore he wasn't allowed to carry under LEOSA.

See my comment above about LEOSA. Also, your MP busy didn't give you an ID card then if it was only a year ago and it didn't have his picture. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but the the Armed Forces cards all have pictures on them for the last 10 years (we all get the same card basically, regardless of branch).

 

[in625shooter]

Not entirely true.

A private sale is 100% perfectly legal.



Isn't there a stipulation that the ID-card that .mil folks use must be a photo ID?

I know about a year ago I looked into this for an MP buddy of mine. His ID didn't/doesn't have his picture on it, therefore he wasn't allowed to carry under LEOSA.

One of the main things is a photographic ID card issued by the agency. With the new updates the ID card has to specifically state "Law Enforcement Officer" on it which is why a normal Military ID card does not cut it for LEOSA. The earlier LINK I posted is what the USAF has done to ensure their qualified members are covered. Many many Agencies had issues with some LEO's not realizing if the folks they stopped were qualified or not under LEOSA. One example was the Federal Bureau of Prisons. All BOP employees with few exceptions (Clergy, Public Health Service and certain Doctors) were covered butt under the old ID cards it didn't specify that they were Federal LEO's. The new ones BOP started issuing state "Law Enforcement Officer" They always put it on the retiree ID cards since the beginning of time but just started the new cards for active employees in the last couple years since the new LEOSA updates took effect.

That was what the big hold up with DOD was. Since the USAF did their program and have it in place all the other branches have to do is piggyback off of them. Sounds simple enough you'd think.

 

[Jagunn]

I believe in Indiana you can obtain a carry permit at the age of 18, but you cannot purchase a handgun or handgun ammo until the age of 21. Being in the military does not give you the right to carry, only on duty.

 

[Tactically Fat]

I believe in Indiana you can obtain a carry permit at the age of 18, but you cannot purchase a handgun or handgun ammo until the age of 21. Being in the military does not give you the right to carry, only on duty.

Partially true.

LTCH at 18, yes.

You CAN purchase a handgun and handgun ammunition at 18 - but from a private seller.

I THINK the age restriction on handgun ammunition may just be from an FFL holder, but am not sure (like if your local hardware store sells a small bit of ammo, I'm not sure if they're legally bound by the same rules that Premier Arms would be)