Told by FWPD illegal to OC in Indiana

[Notavictim646]

Given the opportunity, I think I would have asked to speak to his supervisor (in person). If the supervisor responded as the OP stated he did on the cell phone, I would have asked for HIS supervisor, and then HIS supervisor until I finally got to someone in the officers food chain that was smart enough to address the issue properly.
I look forward to hearing what kind of response you get from whatever action you take. Got any witnesses?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[henktermaat]

-1 for FWPD

 

[henktermaat]

If any Indiana LEO comes at me with a claim that they can arrest me for not concealing, I'll simply calmly put down whatever I'm doing, put my wrists together, and offer them up to the officer with the words, "Then arrest me, if you have the courage of your convictions."

Nice

 

[mrortega]

Without reading the entire thread I suggest you go back through and make your letter as short and crisp as possible. Long letters with a lot of excess descriptive wording is harder to read. How about something like:

Dear Chief.......:

My name is Travis...... and I have a valid LTCH. While openly carrying a hand gun at ......I was approached by FWPD officer ....... and told that openly carrying it was illegal. He further had me talk to Sergeant ..... who also stated that it was illegal. While I remained calm and respectful I felt that officer....... was not.

Please be aware that IC does not specify that a handgun must be covered. Your officer and sergeant are both uninformed. I am concerned that they and other officers who do not know the law in this area may endanger the public and cause your department and city to incur serious liability. Please take all necessary steps to bring your officers up to date in this important matter.

 

[Citizen711]

The City of FW has no right to limit the carrying of firearms by LTCH holders.

I would also go to the PD and file a formal complaint.

I would also send a copy to the Indiana Office of the Attorney General.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I would also send a copy to the Indiana Office of the Attorney General.

I gotta ask, why?

 

[CathyInBlue]

Not "uninformed". That implies that no one ever told them anything about the law regarding firearm carry in Indiana. The phrase you were looking for is "ill informed". Someone actively gave these law enforcement officials patently incorrect information.

 

[Ted]

what "damages" would you sue for?

IC 35-47-11.1-5
Civil actions concerning political subdivision violations
Sec. 5. A person adversely affected by an ordinance, a measure, an enactment, a rule, or a policy adopted or enforced by a political subdivision that violates this chapter may file an action in a court with competent jurisdiction against the political subdivision for:
(1) declarative and injunctive relief; and
(2) actual and consequential damages attributable to the violation.
As added by P.L.152-2011, SEC.4.

IC 35-47-11.1-6
Civil actions; adversely affected persons
Sec. 6. A person is "adversely affected" for purposes of section 5 of this chapter if either of the following applies:
(1) The person is an individual who meets all of the following
requirements:
(A) The individual lawfully resides within the United States.
(B) The individual may legally possess a firearm under the laws of Indiana.
(C) The individual is or was subject to the ordinance, measure, enactment, rule, or policy of the political subdivision that is the subject of an action filed under section 5 of this chapter. An individual is or was subject to the ordinance, measure, enactment, rule, or policy of the political subdivision if the individual is or was physically present within the boundaries of the political subdivision for any reason.
(2) The person is a membership organization that:
(A) includes two (2) or more individuals described in subdivision (1); and
(B) is dedicated in whole or in part to protecting the rights of persons who possess, own, or use firearms for competitive, sporting, defensive, or other lawful purposes.
As added by P.L.152-2011, SEC.4.

IC 35-47-11.1-7
Civil actions; recovery of damages, costs, and fees
Sec. 7. A prevailing plaintiff in an action under section 5 of this chapter is entitled to recover from the political subdivision the following:
(1) The greater of the following:
(A) Actual damages, including consequential damages.
(B) Liquidated damages of three (3) times the plaintiff's attorney's fees.
(2) Court costs (including fees).
(3) Reasonable attorney's fees.
As added by P.L.152-2011, SEC.4.

 

[T-DOGG]

Not "uninformed". That implies that no one ever told them anything about the law regarding firearm carry in Indiana. The phrase you were looking for is "ill informed". Someone actively gave these law enforcement officials patently incorrect information.

The question being who gave the incorrect information and why? I am curious how many officers believe open carry is illegal in Indiana.

 

[grogie]

I'm sure that the officer knows the law, but instead he decided to mess with you. They do have the power and experience to do so.

You handled it well.

 

[rockhopper46038]

I am curious how many officers believe open carry is illegal in Indiana.

Any number > 0 is too many.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Any number > 0 is too many.

WINNER

 

[IndyGunner]

...and he showed me his ID (being that he was not in uniform). He then asked me to step outside to further discuss the matter.

So he was on duty or not?

I wouldn't go anywhere... hes welcome to call his superior for backup (at that time I'd hope someone would b***h slap him with the ACTUAL law).

 

[Hammerhead]

For those who're asking "What damages can he sue for," I humbly submit that you take a look at IC 35-47-11.1-3, -5, -6, and -7. Section 7 specifically spells out damages. The actions of the officer are covered under section 3 as 1) he's an agent of a political subdivision and B) he's making up a rule that he's getting support from his sergeant about.

And to answer the question specifically, three times attorney's fees.

 

[Ted]

For those who're asking "What damages can he sue for," I humbly submit that you take a look at IC 35-47-11.1-3, -5, -6, and -7. Section 7 specifically spells out damages. The actions of the officer are covered under section 3 as 1) he's an agent of a political subdivision and B) he's making up a rule that he's getting support from his sergeant about.

And to answer the question specifically, three times attorney's fees.

Or you can just look toward my post on the previous page.

 

[Sailor]

I know a lot of squared away cops in FW. This issue has come up many times in the past on the FWPD's own web forum. Here is one response from officer Joyner.

mjoyner
Forum Moderator
Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 364

There is no requirement to keep a firearm concealed when on your person; however who would want to carry it unconcealed. We have had many past discussions concerning this question. You might enjoy going back to review them.

 

[Benny]

The officer called it a permit.

What's your point? The officer also told you OC is illegal, but that doesn't mean he was right.

If you are going to write a letter, you might as well know what you are talking about.

You asked for input, so I proofread it for you. I only read it once and probably missed a few errors, but it was a start.

 

[Jack Burton]

That is a different cup of tea.
A "let's go to Fort Wayne and open carry" day could be fun.

Personal pain is a wonderful motivator. If (and this is an important if) the city blows off the complaint then giving someone pain is going to be the right motivator for both the offender and others who wish to avoid similar pain to not take the steps to bring it on.

Have an open carry event and label it the "Officer _________ Ft. Wayne Open Carry Picnic (or March, or whatever). Use the original officer, or his sergeant, whichever you want to publicly embarrass the most.

The media needs to know about it in advance, and just why you are honoring the officer. A banner, signs and other paraphernalia should be prominently displayed. Hand flyers out to people. Keep to the right side of the line so that you don't cross over into slander and you'll be fine. There is no right to not be embarrassed or mocked in public, especially for a government official.

And it will cause a lot of pain. Something like a paddling. You don't actually enjoy spanking your kid and causing him to cry, but you know in the long run he'll be better for the experience.

Once the average FW police officer figures out that his name can be in the paper for committing the same level of boneheadness and willful misbehavior then it won't take long for them to go into pain-avoidance mode around open carriers.

These steps will get you far more than just a generic open carry day.

 

[Hammerhead]

Or you can just look toward my post on the previous page.

Yes, but the "Objection, asked and answered," probably would have been lost on some people. Might as well keep repeating it, so it may eventually sink in.