Need something clarified regarding carry laws

[M9Hoosier]

When I applied for my LTCH, there was options for personal protection and target practice, At the time I was only interested in target practice so I chose that. My question is, can I still carry my gun legally wherever I go or only to the gun range?

 

[bigcraig]

Only to and from the range, and you can not carry it on your person.

If I were you, I would just go get a Lifetime LTC.

 

[Episcopus]

I think you might be stuck with the limited permit for a while, too. I think you can only reapply when you are 6 months before the expiration of your current permit. Not sure though, somebody please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[M9Hoosier]

Only to and from the range, and you can not carry it on your person.

If I were you, I would just go get a Lifetime LTC.

wow, this really sucks. Is there anyway I can reapply for the personal protection?

 

[Soundslikejosh]

I bet you could, because you are not trying to renew your license, you are getting a different license type. I would try to go get the new one, the same as you got this one except specify you want LTCH, not whatever you have. I don't see why you couldn't do so. Also, I would look closely at what your license says to be certain of what you already have.

 

[M9Hoosier]

I bet you could, because you are not trying to renew your license, you are getting a different license type. I would try to go get the new one, the same as you got this one except specify you want LTCH, not whatever you have. I don't see why you couldn't do so. Also, I would look closely at what your license says to be certain of what you already have.

well it says I can carry on person or in my car, but is that just to and from the range?

 

[Soundslikejosh]

Thats what mine says too. "the Licensee is hereby licensed by the Indiana State Police to carry on their person or in a vehicle, any handgun lawfully possessed by the Licensee." The only expressed exception is on commercial aircraft. Unless yours says something more, I don't see how it can be construed to include only going to the range. If you are still nervous, you could try talking to someone at the Firearms division of the ISP in Indianapolis. They might be able to sort it out, if you feel like there is still confusion. I certainly wont fault you for wanting to know the answer.

 

[BloodEclipse]

Handgun Safety- Sheriff of Huntington County, Indiana

I think this will answer all your questions.

 

[esrice]

Any property owner has the right to deny anyone access, and this could certainly be the case for persons carrying handguns. You should therefore, be aware that you may be in violation of laws when entering certain businesses.

This is the only part of that link that bothered me. Just entering a store with a "no guns allowed" sign does NOT constitute breaking any laws. It would only be breaking the law if the shop owner saw your weapon, asked you to leave, and you refused. You would then be tresspassing, which has nothing to do with carrying a gun.

 

[BloodEclipse]

This is the only part of that link that bothered me. Just entering a store with a "no guns allowed" sign does NOT constitute breaking any laws. It would only be breaking the law if the shop owner saw your weapon, asked you to leave, and you refused. You would then be tresspassing, which has nothing to do with carrying a gun.

True. But it might be a case where they saw your gun and called LE. It's not against the law but just a hassle. I would hope LE would have asked if the owner had asked first to have you leave before they ever approached you.

 

[Episcopus]

This is the only part of that link that bothered me. Just entering a store with a "no guns allowed" sign does NOT constitute breaking any laws. It would only be breaking the law if the shop owner saw your weapon, asked you to leave, and you refused. You would then be tresspassing, which has nothing to do with carrying a gun.

You could be violating the law just by being there, depending on how the sign is worded. If it said "Any person carrying a firearm is hereby denied access to this property" or "No person may enter this property while in possession of a firearm", then you would be trespassing as Indiana law allows for denial of entry by signs. If it just says "No firearms allowed" or "Gun-free zone" or "Victims only" or something like that, you probably wouldn't be trespassing.

 

[esrice]

then you would be trespassing as Indiana law allows for denial of entry by signs.

So a sign has legal weight if it is worded correctly? Interesting. Can you expand on this?

(having a deputy prosecutor on-site is nice...) lol

 

[Episcopus]

IC 35-43-2-2(a)(1) says that a person who, not having a contractual interest in the property, knowingly or intentionally enters the real property of another person after having been denied entry by the other person or that person's agent commits criminal trespass, a Class A misdemeanor.

IC 35-43-2-2(b)(2) says that a person has been denied entry for purposes of (a)(1) when the person has been denied entry by means of posting or exhibiting a notice at the main entrance in a manner that is either prescribed by law or likely to come to the attention of the public.

I'm not saying that it definitely is trespassing, just that it isn't as simple as "if they don't tell me to leave, I am not trespassing." I would think that if the sign was clear, like the first two examples I gave above, then there could be trouble, but if it is more ambiguous, like the second set, then there might be wiggle room. Just keep in mind that it is a gray area, definitely not black and white.

Disclaimer: I haven't done any research on trespass and the implications of signs. I am just stating my own personal interpretation of the trespass law, as written. If there are cases that interpret the law differently from me, I am not aware of them because I have never had to look for them. If someone else knows of any, I would be interested too.

Disclaimer 2: please don't take anything I say on this board as legal advice or binding interpretation of law or anything. I am just one guy with opinions which could be right just as easily as wrong I am not conceited enough to think that I know everything about anything, or that I am a final authority or anything like that, but I am always interested in learning. That said, I am always willing to answer legal type questions as a member of the board, if I know the answer.

 

[bwframe]

Disclaimer 2: please don't take anything I say on this board as legal advice or binding interpretation of law or anything...
...That said, I am always willing to answer legal type questions as a member of the board, if I know the answer.

First of all, thank you for being here! Your educated opinions are much appreciated.

I am just one guy with opinions which could be right just as easily as wrong I am not conceited enough to think that I know everything about anything, or that I am a final authority or anything like that, but I am always interested in learning.

Hell, nearly everyone on here outta have that disclaimer, especially me.

 

[AFA1CY]

This is the only part of that link that bothered me. Just entering a store with a "no guns allowed" sign does NOT constitute breaking any laws. It would only be breaking the law if the shop owner saw your weapon, asked you to leave, and you refused. You would then be tresspassing, which has nothing to do with carrying a gun.

That was the only part that bothered you? How about:

"We would strongly recommend that you carry the handgun in a manner that conceals it from casual view. The sight of a handgun can cause people to panic in certain situations. This could result in a dangerous confrontation with police, and subsequent revocation of your permit."

Revocation of your permit? First of all it is not a permit it is a license. Second just because someone panics does not give grounds for revocation.
opcorn2:

 

[rkba_net]

IC 35-43-2-2(a)(1) says that a person who, not having a contractual interest in the property, knowingly or intentionally enters the real property of another person after having been denied entry by the other person or that person's agent commits criminal trespass, a Class A misdemeanor.

IC 35-43-2-2(b)(2) says that a person has been denied entry for purposes of (a)(1) when the person has been denied entry by means of posting or exhibiting a notice at the main entrance in a manner that is either prescribed by law or likely to come to the attention of the public.

I'm not saying that it definitely is trespassing, just that it isn't as simple as "if they don't tell me to leave, I am not trespassing." I would think that if the sign was clear, like the first two examples I gave above, then there could be trouble, but if it is more ambiguous, like the second set, then there might be wiggle room. Just keep in mind that it is a gray area, definitely not black and white.

Disclaimer: I haven't done any research on trespass and the implications of signs. I am just stating my own personal interpretation of the trespass law, as written. If there are cases that interpret the law differently from me, I am not aware of them because I have never had to look for them. If someone else knows of any, I would be interested too.

Disclaimer 2: please don't take anything I say on this board as legal advice or binding interpretation of law or anything. I am just one guy with opinions which could be right just as easily as wrong I am not conceited enough to think that I know everything about anything, or that I am a final authority or anything like that, but I am always interested in learning. That said, I am always willing to answer legal type questions as a member of the board, if I know the answer.

The "no trespassing" law is just about that TRESPASSING... ie entering ones property without permission. There can be NO ADDITIONAL qualifiers added to the sign... ie no shirt / shoes / gun signs mean nothing in Indiana... this law is about marking your property as "no trespassing" ie NOBODY can enter your property without your permission...

 

[Episcopus]

The "no trespassing" law is just about that TRESPASSING... ie entering ones property without permission. There can be NO ADDITIONAL qualifiers added to the sign... ie no shirt / shoes / gun signs mean nothing in Indiana... this law is about marking your property as "no trespassing" ie NOBODY can enter your property without your permission...

Like I said, it is just my interpretation of the statute. Nothing in the statute explicitly says what you say. Just as a property owner can ask anyone to leave for any reason, they can prevent anyone entry for any reason, as I read the law. If you have authority supporting your view, please share it. We will learn a lot more from authority than from blanket statements, which is why I cited the trespassing law above. Again, I'm not saying I am right, I just want to see some authority showing me I am wrong. In fact, I hope you can prove me wrong because then the issue would be settled somewhat definitively.

 

[skigun75]

A fairly quick review of the case law seems to indicate some middle position. I found no cases exactly on point. (shocking:rolleyesedit Nor did I find any bar to the qualifiers, as stated by rkba. I would venture to say that a qualifier, like "You are trespassing if you carry a gun on these premises. No Trespassing." could be cause for a conviction. But, I think it would take alot of proof that you saw, read, understood and disregarded this notice, in order to satisfy the "knowing" requirement of the statute.

And let's be realistic, in today's society, which PD or Pros. office has the time and energy to bring charges against Joe Permitholder for trespass if that is truly the ONLY violation? I'm betting none. More likely scenario is that trespassing is used as a BS add-on charge that your attorney has dismissed when he is defending you for the other "real" charges you were picked up on.

Truly, I would not worry 2 seconds about a posted sign RE: No Guns. I can think of so many possible reasons someone wouldn't see/read/understand a sign that it would almost be stupid for a prosecutor to entertain the thought of those charges. Besides, we are talking about a business that has opened itself up for the public.

So, don't tell me about any places that have posted No Guns. I want deniability and I don't want any proof, electronic or otherwise, that I knew. Just in case one of those mean old Lake County Prosecutor's finds me there.

 

[M9Hoosier]

can somebody give me the number (with area code) to the ISP gun division?

 

[M9Hoosier]

another thing, how could a police officer prove I wasn't on my way to a range or hunting ground If I were to get pulled over and searched for some reason or another?