LTCH Daycare-Child drop off/pickup

[rickrish]

Stupid, catch 22 law. I can carry it in my car, I can't carry it in school to pick up kids, but I must leave my car to get kids and...I can't leave it in my car.

That all seems in order.

Yea, This is my problem exactly. Nobody has mentioned about a lockbox for storing the gun and exiting the vehicle, why is that any different on a daycare parking lot vs the grocery store or any other parking lot? Isn't it a requirement to lock the gun up when stored in the vehicle? Too complicated on the regulations.

 

[GLOCKMAN23C]

In the IC I quoted above, it stipulates as an exception:

(3) A person who:
(A) may legally possess a firearm; and
(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.

If you exit the vehicle, you are no longer operating it. An easy loophole is to simply park off of the property, leaving your firearms locked in your vehicle.

I am probably wrong in the eyes of the law, IANAL, but if you have the key(s), is one not still in "operation" of the vehicle? According to the M-W dictionary: operate = to perform a function : exert power or influence. If one has the key(s) aren't they exerting power and influence over the vehicle. I am not reading that one must remain in the vehicle.

I'm just thinking out loud, what I'm thinking makes sense to me, does it to anyone else, or did I make a line drive into left field? I'm sure that I would not want to be the test case in court.

 

[mrortega]

Hehe...Guess you're referring to Catholic schools

Not really. Good pro-gun legislators in toss up districts have to watch the political winds. It's not right at this time to make such a major change. I believe Sen. Tomes has stated that he believes the best course sometimes is to let new laws take effect and let people see that there isn't mass hysteria for awhile.

 

[linkinpark9812]

I asked Sen. Jim Tomes about making that simple change in IC to bring it into conformance with federal law (exempting licensed carriers) and he said there isn't the stomach or the votes for that kind of change in the legislature at this time. Even supporters of the good laws passed last session couldn't survive in their districts if they voted for "mass murder" in the schools.

Now that I think about it, I understand his concern.

I have noticed that even when I drive on a road adjacent to the school, my gun tends to get jumpy and wants to jump out of the holster. I'll bet if I went on school property, it might just jump out and start shooting! Weird...

 

[GuyRelford]

Personally, I would not carry a firearm into any church-operated preschool or daycare facility, primarily because of French v. State, 778 N.E.2d 816 (Ind. 2002).

In French, the defendant was accused of dealing cocaine, and the prosecution sought to enhance the penalty because the crime was committed within 1000 feet of "school property." The "school property" involved was a "quasi-kindergarten" being operated by a local church. French challenged whether there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find that the church-operated pre-school was actually "school property." In response, the Indiana Supreme Court stated:

French contends that there was no evidence to support the proposition that St. Bartholomew Preschool was "school property" for purposes of the enhancement provided by Indiana Code section 35-48-4-1 for dealing within 1000 feet of a school. Section 35-41-1-24.7 provides, in relevant part, that the term "school property" includes "a building or other structure owned or rented by ... [a] private school (as defined in IC 20-9.1-1-3)." Section 20-9.1-1-3 defines a private school as "any school which is not supported and maintained by funds realized from the imposition of a tax on property, income or sales."

The Director of St. Bartholomew Preschool testified that the preschool is part of the St. Bartholomew's Catholic Church. She testified that the school was a private school, did not receive state funding, and was privately sponsored by the church. She also stated that the children at the school range in age from twenty months to six years; they learn their numbers and alphabet, sing songs, go on field trips, and play. She testified that the building in which the school is located is owned by the parish.

French contends that based on this information, one may speculate that St. Bartholomew was nothing more than a "church run babysitting service." We disagree. We think that this kindergarten level institution falls within the definition of "school property."

We can argue about the differences between "daycares" and "pre-schools," but the French case tells me that it's too close to call - and definitely not worth risking a felony conviction.

As to whether you can leave your firearm in your vehicle and enter the school, several earlier posters are absolutely correct that this is illegal, because you are no longer "operating" the vehicle. In Newson v. State, 785 N.E.2d 1155 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003), the defendant drove his vehicle onto school property to drop off another person who worked at the school. While there, he decided to park his vehicle and enter the school for some reason. Newson possessed a valid LTCH. The Indiana Court of Appeals stated:

It is undisputed that Newson legally possessed the handgun; at issue is whether he possessed it in a motor vehicle "that [was] being operated" to transport another person to the school. Ind.Code § 35-47-9-1(3). The record clearly indicates that Newson was not operating his car when the student saw the handgun in the passenger seat. As such, we must conclude that Newson failed to establish his affirmative defense.

Putting the gun in a safe or lock box in your vehicle wouldn't make any difference on the issue of whether you were breaking the law.

Also, multiple Indiana cases have held that disassembled guns and even inoperable guns are still "firearms" under the statutory definition cited above. Taking a gun apart wouldn't help. For example, in Staten v. State, 844 N.E.2d 186 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006), the court stated the following:

Staten asserts that whether a disassembled gun is a firearm under Indiana Code Section 35-47-1-5 is an issue of first impression in Indiana, requiring construction of the statute.   But we need not construe the statute.   Section 35-47-1-5 includes any weapon “that may readily be converted to expel a projectile by means of an explosion.”  (Emphasis added).   The statute clearly contemplates that some conversion, such as reorganization or assembly, of parts may be required.   Thus, we conclude that the statute includes in the definition of “firearm” a disassembled gun.

Our holding in Manley v. State, 656 N.E.2d 277 (Ind.Ct.App.1995), trans. denied, is relevant by analogy.   After being convicted of carrying a handgun without a license, Manley petitioned for post-conviction relief on the ground that the gun he was convicted of carrying was inoperable.   We concluded that his claim was an indirect attack on the sufficiency of evidence and held that, “according to the plain terms of the statutes, Indiana law does not require that the State prove a handgun is operable to obtain a conviction [for] carrying a handgun without a license.”  Id. at 279.   We further held that the handgun, though inoperable, “had been designed to expel a projectile by means of an explosion.”  Id.

I hope this helps.

Guy

 

[WC Deer Hunter]

Personally, I would not carry a firearm into any church-operated preschool or daycare facility, primarily because of French v. State, 778 N.E.2d 816 (Ind. 2002).

In French, the defendant was accused of dealing cocaine, and the prosecution sought to enhance the penalty because the crime was committed within 1000 feet of "school property." The "school property" involved was an unlicensed "quasi-kindergarten" being operated by a local church. French challenged whether there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find that the church-operated pre-school was actually "school property." In response, the Indiana Supreme Court stated:



We can argue about the differences between "daycares" and "pre-schools," but the French case tells me that it's too close to call - and definitely not worth risking a felony conviction.

As to whether you can leave your firearm in your vehicle and enter the school, several earlier posters are absolutely correct that this is illegal, because you are no longer "operating" the vehicle. In Newson v. State, 785 N.E.2d 1155 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003), the defendant drove his vehicle onto school property to drop off another person who worked at the school. While there, he decided to park his vehicle and enter the school for some reason. Newson possessed a valid LTCH. The Indiana Court of Appeals stated:



Also, multiple Indiana cases have held that disassembled guns and even inoperable guns are still "firearms" under the statutory definition cited above. Taking a gun apart wouldn't help. For example, in Staten v. State, 844 N.E.2d 186 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006), the court stated the following:



I hope this helps.

Guy

Like always you knocked it out of the park. It's not what I wanted to hear but I believe that made it pretty clear. It's to close either way to risk it.

Thanks

 

[Tactical Flannel]

There is a lot of great knowledge and general application of the law as it concerns this topic.
As a suggestion, and perhaps I missed it from another poster, but why not park across the street from the school, leaving your weapon secured in your vehicle (obviously not ideal situation from a self defense stand point). The few extra feet of walking the youngster into and out of daycare/school wouldn't necessarily be detrimental. Wouldn't that negate the "on school property" argument?


Stay safe

 

[ATM]

...why not park across the street from the school...

The few extra feet of walking...

Wouldn't that negate the "on school property" argument?

Yes, parking and leaving the gun secured somewhere besides school property removes the need to even consider this law or its ridiculous penalties.

Also, for many school properties, that would amount to far more than a few extra feet of walking.

I doubt that this will ever be repealed or modified simply because uninformed public sentiment trumps logic and reason with most legislators.

 

[jetmechG550]

There is a lot of great knowledge and general application of the law as it concerns this topic.
As a suggestion, and perhaps I missed it from another poster, but why not park across the street from the school, leaving your weapon secured in your vehicle (obviously not ideal situation from a self defense stand point). The few extra feet of walking the youngster into and out of daycare/school wouldn't necessarily be detrimental. Wouldn't that negate the "on school property" argument?


Stay safe

In my previous situation that wasn't even possible. There was no on street parking in the neighborhood behind the daycare on either street, and across the street brought back memories of frogger, no crosswalk or light nearby, 45mph road 4 lanes with center turn. Not everyone gets lucky enough to have some other business or parking lot nearby. I can think of four other daycare's we looked at that didn't provide for a situation to park off school property.

 

[Tactical Flannel]

In my previous situation that wasn't even possible. There was no on street parking in the neighborhood behind the daycare on either street, and across the street brought back memories of frogger, no crosswalk or light nearby, 45mph road 4 lanes with center turn. Not everyone gets lucky enough to have some other business or parking lot nearby. I can think of four other daycare's we looked at that didn't provide for a situation to park off school property.

Good point.
I guess I was thinking of how it is here in Mayberry.
And playing 'Frogger' with a lil one would be difficult on a good day.

Stay safe

 

[rickrish]

I spoke with the daycare director on Friday when making my payment for child care for the week, we were in a private setting in her office and I thought now would be the time to ask about carrying in the daycare. I was floored by her response, she has absolutely no problem with it just keep it concealed, she stated there are other parents that carry as well, she said just dont be waiving it in the air, I thought OMG, who would do that, lol. I asked about the daycare as a school, she stated that they are goverened by the state as far as regulation are concerned but they are a faith based ministry daycare and she knows for sure they a exempt from a "no carry" as a school is. I stated what about the fact that a school bus picks up kids here, she stated that is just a courtesy that SBCS extends to pickup kids from the day care instead of at the child's home, it doesn't make it a school since a school bus come here, She stated you certainly could not get on the bus carrying...so there ya go.