Did you know? Indiana law allowed armed teachers?

[mergatroid]

Did you know? Indiana law at one time allowed armed teachers?

[FONT=&amp]IC 35-47-9-1[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Exemptions from chapter
[/FONT][FONT=&amp] Sec. 1. This chapter does not apply to the following:[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] (1) A:[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] (A) federal;[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] (B) state; or[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] (C) local;[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] law enforcement officer.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] (2) A person who has been employed or authorized by:[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] (A) a school; or[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] (B) another person who owns or operates property being used by a school for a school function;[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] to act as a security guard, perform or participate in a school function, or participate in any other activity authorized by a school.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] (3) A person who:[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] (A) may legally possess a firearm; and[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] (B) possesses the firearm in a motor vehicle that is being operated by the person to transport another person to or from a school or a school function.[/FONT]
As added by P.L.140-1994, SEC.11.

This was the law prior to 2011. Unless I am reading this wrong. ??

Funny now it is a big debate, but this is how it was.

 

[JettaKnight]

Yeah, I knew that.

The problem is most school boards are hoplophobes.

 

[CPT Nervous]

Yes. Or you. Or anyone whom the school board authorizes.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Yeah, I knew that.

The problem is most school boards are hoplophobes.

^^this!!^^^

 

[cce1302]

Yes, employed or authorized by the school...You have to complete the sentence 2 lines down: to act as a security guard, perform or participate in a school function, or participate in any other activity authorized by a school


So it isn't blanket approval for anybody employed by the school.

 

[mergatroid]

Guess that is correct, I don't know, but lots of wiggle room there, guess that is why they changed the reading.

 

[cce1302]

You have to watch for that throughout the IC. there are often bullets or subpoints that look like they say one thing until you find the rest of the sentence that puts a qualifier on it. Judges, legislators, lawyers know to do that, but a cursory reading without paying attention to the complete sentence can lead to misunderstanding.

 

[Mark 1911]

I never knew that before. Thanks for sharing that.

 

[HoughMade]

Careful...that's not the current version. Below is the current version.

Sec. 1. (a) This chapter does not apply to the following:
(1) A:
(A) federal;
(B) state; or
(C) local;
law enforcement officer.

(2) A person who may legally possess a firearm and who has been authorized by:
(A) a school board (as defined by IC 20-26-9-4); or
(B) the body that administers a charter school established under IC 20-24;
to carry a firearm in or on school property.

(3) Except as provided in subsection (b) or (c), a person who:
(A) may legally possess a firearm; and
(B) possesses the firearm in a motor vehicle.

(4) A person who is a school resource officer, as defined in IC 20-26-18.2-1.

(5) Except as provided in subsection (b) or (c), a person who:
(A) may legally possess a firearm; and
(B) possesses only a firearm that is:
(i) locked in the trunk of the person's motor vehicle;
(ii) kept in the glove compartment of the person's locked motor vehicle; or
(iii) stored out of plain sight in the person's locked motor vehicle.

(b) For purposes of subsection (a)(3) and (a)(5), a person does not include a person who is:
(1) enrolled as a student in any high school except if the person is a high school student and is a member of a shooting sports team and the school's principal has approved the person keeping a firearm concealed in the person's motor vehicle on the days the person is competing or practicing as a member of a shooting sports team; or
(2) a former student of the school if the person is no longer enrolled in the school due to a disciplinary action within the previous twenty-four (24) months.

(c) For purposes of subsection (a)(3) and (a)(5), a motor vehicle does not include a motor vehicle owned, leased, or controlled by a school or school district unless the person who possesses the firearm is authorized by the school or school district to possess a firearm.

Ind. Code Ann. § 35-47-9-1.

The highlighted section was changed in 2013 to only allow persons specifically authorized to carry.

 

[Coach]

Yes.

I have sat in on school safety committee meetings and had local law enforcement say it was not legal.

 

[MarkC]

Yes.

I have sat in on school safety committee meetings and had local law enforcement say it was not legal.

Unfortunately, I have lost track of the number of times I have heard police officers (and lawyers) pronounce that the law is what they wanted it to be, not what it is.

I have worked with lawyers that confused policy with law, and strongly averred that their preferred policy position was what the law requires.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Yes.

I have sat in on school safety committee meetings and had local law enforcement say it was not legal.

I’m scared to ask which one.

 

[HoughMade]

Just so we're clear that no employee of a school can carry legally in the school unless he or she is specifically authorized to do so by school board.

 

[cce1302]

Unfortunately, I have lost track of the number of times I have heard police officers (and lawyers) pronounce that the law is what they wanted it to be, not what it is.

I have worked with lawyers that confused policy with law, and strongly averred that their preferred policy position was what the law requires.

I prefer working with lawyers that take the time (and the defendant's money) to 'splain to the defendants how the law works.

 

[bwframe]

We need to take this authority out of the hands of the school boards. It needs to be a state law.

 

[cce1302]

What we need to do is get 18 USC 922 Q repealed (colloquially known as the Federal Gun Free School Zone Act).


I'm always in favor of repeal in 921-922.

 

[Coach]

I’m scared to ask which one.

School or officer?

 

[Coach]

Unfortunately, I have lost track of the number of times I have heard police officers (and lawyers) pronounce that the law is what they wanted it to be, not what it is.

I have worked with lawyers that confused policy with law, and strongly averred that their preferred policy position was what the law requires.

They speak with authority and are incorrect. I have seen it often. Even worse with educators talking about what research shows.

 

[HoughMade]

What we need to do is get 18 USC 922 Q repealed (colloquially known as the Federal Gun Free School Zone Act)...

Repeal would be great, but it doesn't apply to anyone with a LTCH anyway.

 

[KellyinAvon]

School or officer?

Officer