Man wearing gun around neck arrested

[Kutnupe14]

Same Guy?

If so, he probably needs a gun more than most...

St. Joe County man recovering, stabbed in his sleep during home invasion

 

[AllenM]

It's Jewelry that shoots

 

[melensdad]

uhh... don't see anything illegal...I see some dumb, but not some illegal.

Kirk makes a valid point about the car, but getting beyond that point, the law clearly states that the gun must be:

A) unloaded;
(B) not readily accessible; and
(C) secured in a case​

And those 3 criteria apply to anyone who does not have a LTCH. This guy does not, apparently, possess a LTCH so therefore he failed on at least points "B" and "C" in the code.

 

[Denny347]

Well, so a person buys a gun without a LTCH and no case and no vehicle. They decide to just stuff it in their waistband. All they are doing is transporting it home. Or they buy a holster at the same time and they decide that the only way to get it home would be to wear it on their belt? Carrying it around your neck with a string or in your waistband is the same thing.

 

[sumphead]

This is where I wish our resident LEOs would chime in with "here is what I would do." I know its vague and all the details aren't there, but I am still curious. Did he have misdemeanor priors? Is that even relevant?

I was just talking with a good friend who is a street cop with IMPD when we went to the range together on Wednesday. I asked her what type of training they receive on handgun law. Apparently none! She says she disarms everyone carrying for her protection and returns the weapons of those licensed after the stop. I tried explaining how this was bad bad bad. I give her a little credit as she works in a bad part of town and most of the weapons she comes across are illegal. The young officer that was shot in the drive by at the liquor store on Tibbs last fall is a good friend of ours too, and I can understand they are a little gun shy.

I give LEOs a ton of credit for what they do and put up with. I would also argue, it isn't their fault. The departments SUCK at preparing them.

 

[melensdad]

Well, so a person buys a gun without a LTCH and no case and no vehicle. They decide to just stuff it in their waistband. All they are doing is transporting it home. Or they buy a holster at the same time and they decide that the only way to get it home would be to wear it on their belt? Carrying it around your neck with a string or in your waistband is the same thing.

PUT IT IN A BAG! What is so hard about that? Maybe they'd have a bag that came with that holster?

It is ILLEGAL to holster it, it is illegal to carry it in some other way like "stuffing it in their waistband" because that qualifies as "carrying" the gun, and that requires a LTCH. If they "decide" that the only way to carry it home is to wear it on their belt then they are simply a stupid moron. Carrying on a string around your neck is the same thing, that is carrying it on your person and clearly is easily accessible which is in violation of the law if you don't have a LTCH.

If you buy a gun you have the responsibility to understand the laws. To transport a gun without a LTCH its very simple. If you don't have a car, you can still transport it properly by following the rules:

• Unloaded
• In some sort of case
• Not easily accessible

You can buy a car without a drivers license or insurance. But if you want to drive it home there are some simple rules for that but people here don't seem to consider having a drivers license or insurance unreasonable???

 

[ATM]

...You can buy a car without a drivers license or insurance. But if you want to drive it home there are some simple rules for that but people here don't seem to consider having a drivers license or insurance unreasonable???

Just because a rule is simple doesn't mean that I can't still consider it unreasonable.

 

[donnie1581]

Kirk makes a valid point about the car, but getting beyond that point, the law clearly states that the gun must be:

A) unloaded;
(B) not readily accessible; and
(C) secured in a case​

And those 3 criteria apply to anyone who does not have a LTCH. This guy does not, apparently, possess a LTCH so therefore he failed on at least points "B" and "C" in the code.

Bingo right here!

 

[Kutnupe14]

This is where I wish our resident LEOs would chime in with "here is what I would do." I know its vague and all the details aren't there, but I am still curious. Did he have misdemeanor priors? Is that even relevant?

I was just talking with a good friend who is a street cop with IMPD when we went to the range together on Wednesday. I asked her what type of training they receive on handgun law. Apparently none! She says she disarms everyone carrying for her protection and returns the weapons of those licensed after the stop. I tried explaining how this was bad bad bad. I give her a little credit as she works in a bad part of town and most of the weapons she comes across are illegal. The young officer that was shot in the drive by at the liquor store on Tibbs last fall is a good friend of ours too, and I can understand they are a little gun shy.

I give LEOs a ton of credit for what they do and put up with. I would also argue, it isn't their fault. The departments SUCK at preparing them.

I would ascertain if the guy was really transporting the firearm before making a decison. The article states that he bought the weapon earlier in the day. How much earlier in the day if he was encountered by police at 2:30pm (I think that's what it stated)? Depending on the timeframe of the purchase, and the distance between the shop and the home, I figure I could come up with a pretty fair idea whether or not to arrest.

 

[ghitch75]

uhh... don't see anything illegal...I see some dumb, but not some illegal.

I also see a news agency with a need for a copy editor...

i see it being illegal.....he didn't have a LTCH and that was for sure OPEN CARRY.....

 

[handgun]

uhh... don't see anything illegal...I see some dumb, but not some illegal.

I also see a news agency with a need for a copy editor...

I usually get site and sight confused too.

 

[cbop]

The guy who was arrested posted a comment to the article linked in the OP. He states " I had a hoody and a thermal over the gun. It was a pistol grip A.K. so it stuck out the bottom of my shirt. I get off the bus when i get closer to my house to get a cab because I no linger want to ride a bus with a a.k. 47."

As so often there is, there seems to be some discrepancies between the 2 stories...

 

[ryknoll3]

PUT IT IN A BAG! What is so hard about that? Maybe they'd have a bag that came with that holster?

It is ILLEGAL to holster it, it is illegal to carry it in some other way like "stuffing it in their waistband" because that qualifies as "carrying" the gun, and that requires a LTCH. If they "decide" that the only way to carry it home is to wear it on their belt then they are simply a stupid moron. Carrying on a string around your neck is the same thing, that is carrying it on your person and clearly is easily accessible which is in violation of the law if you don't have a LTCH.

If you buy a gun you have the responsibility to understand the laws. To transport a gun without a LTCH its very simple. If you don't have a car, you can still transport it properly by following the rules:

• Unloaded
• In some sort of case
• Not easily accessible

You can buy a car without a drivers license or insurance. But if you want to drive it home there are some simple rules for that but people here don't seem to consider having a drivers license or insurance unreasonable???

Where in the IC does it state that you can transport a handgun without an LTCH on public property (that isn't a shooting range, instruction course or hunting activity)? The ONLY two exemptions are in a vehicle and on private property. A strict reading of the law doesn't allow for walking down the street with a handgun no matter how you have it packaged. To say "you can transport it this way" is relying only on officer discretion if you are stopped because he CAN arrest you based on the wording of the IC. Poorly written law, IMO.

 

[ryknoll3]

i see it being illegal.....he didn't have a LTCH and that was for sure OPEN CARRY.....

What does open carry have to do with it?

 

[MMRUSH]

If the man was approached by a LEO and his story checked out with a recept. And the man had no vehicle why didnt the officer give the guy a ride home?

 

[jedi]

If the man was approached by a LEO and his story checked out with a recept. And the man had no vehicle why didnt the officer give the guy a ride home?

Cause it's Gary, Indiana and only thugs and the popo are suppose to have guns there per the mentality of the City.

 

[VN Vet]

Bling that goes Bang. Cool.

Safe shooting,
Vv

 

[Kirk Freeman]

If the man was approached by a LEO and his story checked out with a recept. And the man had no vehicle why didnt the officer give the guy a ride home?

Because it is a misdemeanor to be out of your vehicle with your new pistol and no LTCH.

 

[ghitch75]

What does open carry have to do with it?

you need LTCH to open carry in Indiana.........it don't have to be on your hip to be OC.......read the laws...

 

[$mooth]

Because it is a misdemeanor to be out of your vehicle with your new pistol and no LTCH.

Yes, cause everyone parks on the property that they are visiting and has a driveway at home so they are never out of their car on public property.

you need LTCH to open carry in Indiana.........it don't have to be on your hip to be OC.......read the laws...

And you need an LTCH to conceal carry too. So OC vs CC does not affect this story.