IC 35-47-2-2 Note 6 Debate (Excepted Persons - Military Personnel)

[Yup!]

I'd imagine (no sources here, just trying to use some common sense) it pertains to "on duty" (as far as any reserves would be concerned) when you're actually being paid to be on duty. Operating in the official capacity of the military. On a convoy, stopping for gas/chow at any gas station, restaurant while armed you'd be fine carrying a duty/TO/issue weapon. Drill over, changed into civvies, or still in uniform, carrying your personal piece (non-issue), picking up your kid at school (not official military business or in an official military capacity), you're not good.

ive seen this topic kicked around several times. No one I know would test this theory.

I do agree it does hinge a lot in the definition of Duty. So stepping away from a drilling reservist, how would it apply to an active duty person, someone paid 24/7 for their service. More so, how would it apply if their duty day consisted of being out and about in the community, say as a recruiter?

 

[ATM]

How do you interpret the following:

IC 35-47-2-2 Says that Section 1 of IC 34-47-2-1 does not apply to the following excepted persons - Specifically Note 6.

It's my understanding that Members of the Armed Forces while on Duty, do not need to possess a LTCH and are able to legally carry into normally considered GFZs.

How do you read it?
What constitutes "on duty"?
...

The exception you note only excepts an armed forces member while on duty from the prohibition in section 1 of this chapter (to generally carry a handgun in a vehicle or on their person).

It does not except them from carrying on school property which is prohibited in a different chapter (IC 35-47-9) and contains its own list of exceptions.

Sorry.


ETA: added section 1, other sections of this chapter may still apply.

 

[Yup!]

Y o u cant be igr unless youve been regular guard first. Same as iar (inactive army reserve)

That's not how it reads:
IGR: Join Us!

 

[Yup!]

The exception you note only excepts an armed forces member while on duty from this chapter (to generally carry a handgun in a vehicle or on their person).

It does not except them from carrying on school property which is prohibited in a different chapter (IC 35-47-9) and contains its own list of exceptions.

Sorry.

Fair enough, so does it act as a LTCH would?

 

[ATM]

Fair enough, so does it act as a LTCH would?

Yes, being on duty should provide the exact same exception a Larry would for the general prohibition of section 1.

 

[Booya]

I do agree it does hinge a lot in the definition of Duty. So stepping away from a drilling reservist, how would it apply to an active duty person, someone paid 24/7 for their service. More so, how would it apply if their duty day consisted of being out and about in the community, say as a recruiter?

Good point. A recruiter would be the only exception I can think of that would be in a GFZ (like a school) on official military business. That said, there are probably other paragraphs somewhere that the lawyers would hash out. I couldn't see this going down and not ending up with lawyers being involved. However, when are recruiters issued weapons? I can't see just throwing on your personal piece and claiming duty and having any luck. I'd assume that the "duty" includes being armed. If for example an MP was conducting an official investigation out in town carrying an issued sidearm, good to go. Recruiter doing a school visit, with P238, not good to go.

 

[Yup!]

Good point. A recruiter would be the only exception I can think of that would be in a GFZ (like a school) on official military business. That said, there are probably other paragraphs somewhere that the lawyers would hash out. I couldn't see this going down and not ending up with lawyers being involved. However, when are recruiters issued weapons? I can't see just throwing on your personal piece and claiming duty and having any luck. I'd assume that the "duty" includes being armed. If for example an MP was conducting an official investigation out in town carrying an issued sidearm, good to go. Recruiter doing a school visit, with P238, not good to go.

ATM pointed out that CH9 does not exempt Military members from carrying on school grounds, So that point has been resolved.

 

[Yup!]

These times they are a changing. As the threat levels continue to rise and the enemy is getting harder to identify, combined with the fact that recruiters are vulnerable off post and easily identifiable as a soft target, you never know what the current policy is.

 

[dansgotguns]

That's not how it reads:
IGR: Join Us!

There is more to it than that website

 

[Yup!]

There is more to it than that website

Respectfully, I think you're confusing the IGR with the IRR.

 

[dansgotguns]

Lol idk I just don't see going to drill and not getting paid. one thing ive learned is theres more to what the army tells you and half of what they tell you is bs.

 

[dansgotguns]

But nevertheless im in the army reserves not the national guard

 

[Paul30]

Since the military doesn't allow you to carry your personal weapon on duty, I would not want to be a test case. There is always an exception written to about every law to include police or military in the official capacity of their duty. I'm sure a prosecutor would have no problem winning that one, and I'm also sure anyone who has worked so hard to build a military career would be foolish to not just get the lifetime license and be done with it. You don't have to take a written text, shooting test, or even have someone bless you as a good person. The real question is, why would anyone not go the guaranteed way?