Driver License Check Returns Carry Permit

[nobody_special]

not sure about other areas,but in south bend/st joseph county the drivers license and ltch are two totally seperate checks since it's two different databases

 

[kevman65]

Under the "Freedom of Information" BS anyone can get the full list of LTCH holders anytime they want by paying whatever fee the Agency requires. Pretty much any license issued by the State is in a database and the holder of that license has then entered their information into the public domain arena.

 

[Hammerhead]

If I'm not mistaken, the IC doesn't allow for the release of any information related to those who hold a valid Larry.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Under the "Freedom of Information" BS anyone can get the full list of LTCH holders anytime they want by paying whatever fee the Agency requires. Pretty much any license issued by the State is in a database and the holder of that license has then entered their information into the public domain arena.

Nope. That used to be true, but no longer. IC 35-47-2-3(l) (that's an L) specifies that that information is confidential and not open to public inspection.

If I'm not mistaken, the IC doesn't allow for the release of any information related to those who hold a valid Larry.

Correct, since 2010. Good info.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Hammerhead]

Thanks, Bill. I just couldn't remember where in the IC it was located.

 

[tbhausen]

Hey guys... I've linked this here before, but if you want to hear this policy in action, I maintain a 24/7 online feed of the Marion Co. digital public safety radio system (specifically, Police dispatch channels including Metro, Speedway, Lawrence, and Beech Grove). I've recently added video feeds so we can ID the agency:

For desktops...
Marion County Police Dispatch Live Scanner Audio Feed

For desktops (includes video)...
IndyScan - live streaming video powered by Livestream

For mobiles (includes video--may take awhile to start)...
Livestream Mobile - Featured Live Channels

 

[tbhausen]

Also, any of the mobile apps such as Scanner Radio can hear my feed... Just search for "Marion County Police Dispatch" or drill your way to Marion Co., IN and it should show up.

 

[Hammerhead]

Well actually, for us the LTCH pops up only when we run a driver's license. To get a driver's license, I would have to have already made contact with the driver first. The pop-up would come after I'm done talking to the driver and I'm back at my car.

Ok, so not with the plates. But even if I don't show you my LTCH or inform you of my sidearm and it pops up after you run my DL, the conversation can legally go no further.

 

[The Keymaster]

Just wanted to add a thought to this thread (almost) dead thread. An LEO can run DL information on the REGISTERED owner of the vehicle. Most information is run by name and date of birth, not by DL number. The LEO can acquire the name and DOB of the registered owner of a vehicle from the license plate number. By the transitive property, that means that an LEO can know whether the registered owner has a valid DL, and an LTCH before he approaches the vehicle.

 

[mike8170]

Just wanted to add a thought to this thread (almost) dead thread. An LEO can run DL information on the REGISTERED owner of the vehicle. Most information is run by name and date of birth, not by DL number. The LEO can acquire the name and DOB of the registered owner of a vehicle from the license plate number. By the transitive property, that means that an LEO can know whether the registered owner has a valid DL, and an LTCH before he approaches the vehicle.

Necroposter

 

[The Keymaster]

I got to this thread through the FAQ, and really thought it needed to be revived. Citizens in the county in which I live are being disarmed, and having their firearm serial numbers run at an alarming rate. I listen to my scanner 2-4 hours a day, and not a day goes by that I do not hear a dispatcher inform an officer that the subject holds a valid "permit", and subsequently hear the officer run a 10-29 on a firearm.

Having this information at the LEO's disposal has created a conduit, for what I consider to be harassment of legally armed law abiding citizens. I even took the time to write an email to Bryan Ciyou pointing out that this was a subject that was sorely lacking in the latest edition of his book. He responded to me immediately, indicating that it was a very complicated subject, and that he would try to address it in one of his blog posts in the near future.

The practice of asking citizens that are legally carrying firearms to hand them over to LEO's for no reason has to be curtailed. Someone is going to be injured do to the unnecessary, and/or unsafe handling of firearms in roadside traffic stop situations. There is no safe way for an officer to remove my weapon from my person. It is impossible to do this procedure without sweeping one or the other of us. Frankly, how can an LEO be expected to be familiar with every weapon that a citizen may be carrying. It scares me. I have no wish to be shot. What happens if the LEO shoots himself with my weapon. Is he going to file a civil suit against me?

In most of these cases this has nothing to do with officer safety. It is purely an intimidation tactic. I for one have an issue with being left on the side of the road with an unloaded weapon, an empty magazine, and a plastic bag with my cartridges in it. I cannot safely reload the weapon in the vehicle, or by the side of the road. I have truly been disarmed until I can get myself into a situation where I can safely reload my weapon.

This all started when LTCH information became available on IDACS. Now there is no choice as to whether or not to inform, a computer does it for us.

 

[ATM]

...The practice of asking citizens that are legally carrying firearms to hand them over to LEO's for no reason has to be curtailed.

I'm guessing that the only way asking will be curtailed is via legislative means or court order.

However, compliance with such requests is certainly not mandatory. I would decline such a request to "hand them over".
If an officer feels they are justified in seizing my property, they are going to have to do just that as I will not consent.
I am not implying that I would resist, but I'm not doing it for them.

...This all started when LTCH information became available on IDACS. Now there is no choice as to whether or not to inform, a computer does it for us.

No, the computer simply lets them know that I have a license to carry.

I have no obligation to inform them of my carry status even if asked directly.

Just because I have a fishing license doesn't mean I have poles and lures on me.

 

[STEEL CORE]

I am a responsible citizen and LTCH permit holder, for Officer safety I support sucjh information avaliable to my fellow officers, however, there may come a time when a check of your house number reflects gun ownership. HMMMMMMMM!? Consider that for a moment.

 

[The Keymaster]

I am a responsible citizen and LTCH permit holder, for Officer safety I support sucjh information avaliable to my fellow officers, however, there may come a time when a check of your house number reflects gun ownership. HMMMMMMMM!? Consider that for a moment.

If it wasn't being abused, I probably wouldn't be making such an issue out of it. Unfortunately that is not the case.

 

[daddymikey1975]

I have no obligation to inform them of my carry status even if asked directly.

Just because I have a fishing license doesn't mean I have poles and lures on me.

If asked directly "ATM, are there any guns in the car or on your person?".. and you answer "negative", even if you have a 1911 on your hip, suppose the officer happens to notice it during conversation.. isn't that lying to an officer and can we be punished as such ? (asking because I don't know, not to incite a flame war)

Thanks for the great info in this thread.. lots of insight.

 

[Bunnykid68]

If asked directly "ATM, are there any guns in the car or on your person?".. and you answer "negative", even if you have a 1911 on your hip, suppose the officer happens to notice it during conversation.. isn't that lying to an officer and can we be punished as such ? (asking because I don't know, not to incite a flame war)

Thanks for the great info in this thread.. lots of insight.

Only if ATM was being investigated would lying to a cop be a problem. If ATM was pulled over for speeding he can lie to the cop about guns all he wants.

 

[CathyInBlue]

... not a day goes by that I do not hear a dispatcher inform an officer that the subject holds a valid "permit", and subsequently hear the officer run a 10-29 on a firearm.

I've been trying to find a reference for the ten-codes used by public safety agencies here in Indiana and am coming up largely blank. How is it you know what a 10-29 is and how can I find out?

The practice of asking citizens that are legally carrying firearms to hand them over to LEO's for no reason has to be curtailed.

I'm working on it.

 

[Mr. Habib]

Cathy, here's one. http://www.oocities.org/kb9tmp/10_Code_Signal.pdf

 

[ATM]

If asked directly "ATM, are there any guns in the car or on your person?"...

ATM does not need to lie.

ATM is not required to answer whether he has any guns on him, in the vehicle, or any such nonsense.

He may choose to remain silent or, more than likely, will ask a question of his own...

"Why am I being detained?"

 

[Citizen711]

Thanks, OP, for bringing this to light. Personally, I'm not to worried about the LTCH info being included when my plates are run. I (would, haven't been pulled over since I started carrying) typically inform the LEO up front if I'm carrying.

Asking for my gun to run the numbers is another matter entirely. I would not consent to that. Like ATM said, I wouldn't resist, but I would not assist them in the matter.