Carry without ltch card on you

[cbickel]

I am waiting on my license to come in the mail and don't intend on carrying until it's in my wallet, but was curious about the legality of carrying if you have been issued the license but don't have it with you. I have seen from a few unreputable sources online that leos can look it up in the system. Seems risky though.

Does anyone have experience with being stopped without your card on you?

 

[cziemer]

They can look it up, and (at least around here) if they call you in they tell them back over the radio. (Heard this first hand with my best friend on a "disturbing his neighbors call) In reality, wait until you have the physical card. Not too long ago you were required to carry it, and not all cops have that notion out of their mind yet. Also, carrying a handgun without a permit is a crime in Indiana, sure they give you thirty days to prove that you have one, but wouldn't it be better to just hand to them and be able to say here's your proof? Some police seem to have a hard enough time with non-leos carrying even with a permit, so to make life easy it's a good idea to have it on your person, unless of course you feel like exercising your rights to the full extent of the law no matter short term consequences.

 

[cg21]

Can you post a link showing me where it says carrying your ltch is no longer required in Indiana?

 

[Cameramonkey]

Its a recent law change CG21. It has been posted here before.

I say dont do it even though its legal. I had an ignorant officer several months back during a traffic stop point blank tell me that if my permit address ON THE CARD wasnt correct, I was going to jail that day. Not in the database, mind you, ON THE CARD. Patently false, but that didn't prevent him from thinking he could give me a nice set of silver bracelets and a ride to his office.

To make matters worse, ISP wasnt calling his dispatch back to confirm the validity of my permit. 20 minutes later he finally let me go after taking pics of my sidearm to prove I was carrying that day. This was in case they came back 20 mins later telling him I wasnt legit, in which case he could "prove I was illegal and would come to my house and arrest me." I cant even imagine what he would have done had I not been able to show that pink permission slip.

Needless to say if I had chosen that option to follow state law and NOT carry my Larry with me that day, I may have had to meet Mr. Relford in a professional situation and be out $$ to fight for my innocence. Its just not worth it IMHO.

The only positive part of that interaction was he was nice enough to cut me slack and not give me a $500 ticket for losing track of the fact that although the new road was finished, it was technically still a construction zone. (and therefore I was speeding... I was following the otherwise normal speed limit posted on my GPS)

 

[SSGSAD]

I am waiting on my license to come in the mail and don't intend on carrying until it's in my wallet, but was curious about the legality of carrying if you have been issued the license but don't have it with you. I have seen from a few unreputable sources online that leos can look it up in the system. Seems risky though.

Does anyone have experience with being stopped without your card on you?

If this is your FIRST LTCH, I wouldn't carry until your LTCH, arrives in the mail ..... If it is a renewal, you SHOULD be gtg .....

 

[Mgderf]

If this is your FIRST LTCH, I wouldn't carry until your LTCH, arrives in the mail ..... If it is a renewal, you SHOULD be gtg .....

This^ If it is a renewal you are already/still in the system.
If it is a first issue I wouldn't trust it until I had it in my hand.
YMMV

 

[ATM]

Can you post a link showing me where it says carrying your ltch is no longer required in Indiana?

https://iga.in.gov/legislative/laws/2014/ic/titles/035/articles/047/chapters/002/

Section 1(a) now reads: "...without being licensed under this chapter..."

Years ago, it used to read: "...without a license issued under this chapter being in the person's possession."

 

[TiMMaY]

https://iga.in.gov/legislative/laws/2014/ic/titles/035/articles/047/chapters/002/

Section 1(a) now reads: "...without being licensed under this chapter..."

Years ago, it used to read: "...without a license issued under this chapter being in the person's possession."

I am not a lawyer, but I do not think I would hang my hat on that. I could see how an argument could be made that since a license was issued by the state, the license should be on your person while carrying a firearm.

 

[cziemer]

Many LEOs seem to think the same way, hence why quite a few recommend carrying your Larry regardless...

 

[ATM]

I am not a lawyer, but I do not think I would hang my hat on that. I could see how an argument could be made that since a license was issued by the state, the license should be on your person while carrying a firearm.

"should" is not a legal argument. You should carry it for convenience sake only because the burden to prove exception remains upon the carrier.

However, it was once illegal to carry without the physical license and now it is not required - these are codified facts.

 

[cbickel]

Thanks for the replies. Yeah, I don't plan on carrying till the card is in my wallet. Just curious as to what everyone's experiences were with this.

 

[Cameramonkey]

ATM is correct. Burden of proof is still on you to prove you have one. Carrying the card is the easiest. Others might take a photo of the card and be prepared to show it to the officer on screen. I don't agree with that as I dont think the proper precedent has been set to prevent the officer from snooping once you hand him the phone. (Just like you can't say "I only consent to the search the glove box officer, you may not search the whole car" )

You can also rely on the ISP to vouch for you, but as you saw in my post that doesn't always work.

So so although you can't get arrested or charged for not carrying the card [in and of itself], it's still most likely going to be a VERY uncomfortable and drawn out conversation with the officer.

 

[TiMMaY]

"should" is not a legal argument. You should carry it for convenience sake only because the burden to prove exception remains upon the carrier.

However, it was once illegal to carry without the physical license and now it is not required - these are codified facts.

If that is the position you want to take, that is fine. You can be the one that argues your case to the State Supreme Court, I will just keep a copy of my LTCH in my wallet. If the wording is not implicit on whether you need to have it on your possession or not , it is open to interpretation and I am not sure if it has been interpreted yet. I think Bill Clinton summed it up best with the statement, "It all depends on what the definition of 'is' is."

 

[Cameramonkey]

Why would he take it to the supremes? It USED to be illegal, and no longer is. Are you suggesting he thinks that it SHOULD be illegal to not carry your larry? Thats not how I read it.

 

[ATM]

I can only give you the facts, I can't make you free.

 

[ModernGunner]

...I had an ignorant officer several months back during a traffic stop point blank tell me that if my permit address ON THE CARD wasnt correct, I was going to jail that day. Not in the database, mind you, ON THE CARD. Patently false, but that didn't prevent him from thinking he could give me a nice set of silver bracelets and a ride to his office...

HOPEFULLY, you immediately filed both a complaint AND a harassment charge and suit against said badge-wearing yabo.

Without question, that doofus should be fired. NOT 'chastised', not 'reprimanded', not 'given time off'. Fired, terminated, kicked off the Force, booted through the door.

Morons like that make ALL LEO's (current or former) look bad.

 

[TiMMaY]

The facts are that even under the updated code, the burden of proof still falls on the individual to prove they are properly licensed to carry a handgun in Indiana and in absents of that proof that they are properly licensed to carry a handgun they are still subject to arrest and to be charged.

The moral of the story is don't be "That Guy", just put your LTCH in wallet and be done with it.

 

[ATM]

The facts are that even under the updated code, the burden of proof still falls on the individual to prove they are properly licensed to carry a handgun in Indiana and in absents of that proof that they are properly licensed to carry a handgun they are still subject to arrest and to be charged.

Sure, but not convicted (since it's no longer illegal to carry without the license being in your possession). Those facts were already laid out clearly.

The moral of the story is don't be "That Guy", just put your LTCH in wallet and be done with it.

No, the moral of this story is to take whatever extra precautions or convenience measures you prefer, but don't attempt to equate your own uncertainty with requirements contrary to the facts.

In your personal endeavors to not be "That Guy", don't lose sight of the fact that we're citizens, not subjects.

 

[TiMMaY]

Sure, but not convicted (since it's no longer illegal to carry without the license being in your possession). Those facts were already laid out clearly.



No, the moral of this story is to take whatever extra precautions or convenience measures you prefer, but don't attempt to equate your own uncertainty with requirements contrary to the facts.

In your personal endeavors to not be "That Guy", don't lose sight of the fact that we're citizens, not subjects.

I agree not convicted, but you could be arrested. If you have that much free time to waste so you can prove you are a citizen and not a subject then go right ahead. It does not make you any less of a citizen to be prepared.

 

[ATM]

I agree not convicted, but you could be arrested.

Good, this is progress! At least you seem to agree now that it's not illegal (thus I shouldn't need to fight anything up through the courts looking for their interpretation or establishing case law on this matter).

If you have that much free time to waste so you can prove you are a citizen and not a subject then go right ahead. It does not make you any less of a citizen to be prepared.

I'd say that it depends greatly on what the individual citizen is prepared to do. One could be prepared to stand firm against abuses or overreach of authority while another is prepared to submit and even surrender their rights to that same authority at the first trifling threat of inconvenience.

Like my pal, T.J., I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.

Remember, though, I never suggested that one should not carry their Larry on them, I simply showed that it is no longer required.