Indianapolis Zoo [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Indianapolis Zoo


LordJackel
05-18-2007, 15:56
Hi Everyone...been lurking for a while but thought I would log on and say Hi and ask a quick question.

The Indy Zoo - is a state park (not a city one) so does they mean it is covered by the DNR "rules" that now allow carry?

What about the zoo rules that say firearms are not allowed? Taking the kids there tomorrow so want to make sure they are safe.

Thanks for the info.

Pitmaster
05-18-2007, 17:30
Originally posted by LordJackel
Hi Everyone...been lurking for a while but thought I would log on and say Hi and ask a quick question.

The Indy Zoo - is a state park (not a city one) so does they mean it is covered by the DNR "rules" that now allow carry?

What about the zoo rules that say firearms are not allowed? Taking the kids there tomorrow so want to make sure they are safe.

Thanks for the info.

Are your sure? :shocked:

Gorilla wreaks havoc in zoo escape (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/05/18/rotterdam.gorilla.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories)

MSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) -- A 400-pound gorilla escaped from his enclosure and ran amok in a Rotterdam zoo Friday, biting one woman, dragging her around, and causing panic among dozens of visitors before he was finally subdued, officials and a witness said.

The Diergaarde Blijdorp zoo was evacuated and the 11-year-old gorilla, named Bokito, was eventually contained in a restaurant within the park, police spokeswoman Yvette de Rave said.

Four people were injured, including the woman who was bitten, zoo director Ton Dorrestijn said.

Bokito was shot with a sedative dart and recaptured, said zoo spokeswoman Lilian Jonkers, but she couldn't say what his condition was. It was not immediately clear how he managed to climb the high stone walls surrounding his enclosure.

"He got over the moat, which in itself is remarkable, because gorillas can't swim," Dorrestijn said. "He got onto a path for visitors and started running and went at full speed through tables and diners at the Oranje restaurant."

A witness, Robert de Jonge, told NOS radio that he didn't see the gorilla escape but began following it and tried to help after he saw people running and screaming that the animal had grabbed a woman.

"I saw the beast running through the park with a woman behind him, him grabbing her forearm," De Jonge said.

At a distance of around 30 yards, he saw the gorilla lie down near the woman and then heard her scream.

"He bit her, or I think he bit her, because when he stood up his mouth was covered in blood," De Jonge said.

He said he then stopped to tell arriving police what had happened and ran with them as they traced the gorilla to a nearby restaurant terrace.

The zoo was packed with visitors as many Dutch took advantage of a national holiday Thursday to make a long weekend.

"Everyone was in panic, running away, screaming, wailing, screaming kids running around, I don't know what all, kids without parents -- it was a total drama," De Jonge said.

Children cowered in their parents' arms as the gorilla loped past.

People tried to hide inside the restaurant and were trying to bar the door, but fled as the gorilla approached, De Jonge said. Bokito then punched through the glass door and ran inside.

"They were all in panic -- the animal, too, I mean -- and all the people ran outside the restaurant, and zoo personnel were running up and they were able to keep the animal inside by barricading the doors with garden furniture and things," he said.

De Jonge said he later saw the woman "covered in blood," but walking unaided.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

LordJackel
05-18-2007, 17:59
Now I know for sure I need to carry there. You never know when you will need to take out a 400lbs Gorilla. LOL

Now I just need to make sure it is legal?

Harlequin
05-18-2007, 20:30
I don't advocate illegal activity but I'm pretty sure that what they don't know won't hurt them.

LordJackel
05-19-2007, 05:22
Originally posted by Harlequin
I don't advocate illegal activity but I'm pretty sure that what they don't know won't hurt them.

That is why I am asking the question...is it illegal?

R. Emmelman
05-19-2007, 07:41
I think this may be one of those funny arraignments. While the zoo is located "in" the state park, it is a private 501(c)3 organization governed by a Board of Trustees. So I would think this would come under the "is isn't unlawful but you can be asked to leave" area. However remember, IANAL and I don't stay at Holiday Inn Express.

fire1035
05-19-2007, 09:35
But we don't have gorillas at our zoo.

biggl35
05-19-2007, 12:28
Concealment is your friend, carry on.

Snowman92D
05-19-2007, 16:16
Originally posted by fire1035
But we don't have gorillas at our zoo.

I notice a fair number of them in the parking area, from time to time, and in the residential areas immediately surrounding the zoo within walking distance. Sounds like a good place to be armed to me.

LordJackel
05-19-2007, 17:46
Thanks for all the feedback...needless to say we were well protected today and the kids had a blast.

Didn't run into any gorillas today but I swear that lemur was giving me the evil eye :)

rhino465
05-19-2007, 18:22
Did you visit the . . . rhinos??!! :hugs:

sjstill
05-19-2007, 18:27
DOH!!!:rofl:

Originally posted by rhino465
Did you visit the . . . rhinos??!! :hugs:

LordJackel
05-19-2007, 19:46
Originally posted by rhino465
Did you visit the . . . rhinos??!! :hugs:

Yup...just for you ;)

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j214/lordjackel_photos/DSC00397.jpg
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j214/lordjackel_photos/DSC00399.jpg

And here is that lemur ready to attack :animlol:
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j214/lordjackel_photos/DSC00367.jpg

Harlequin
05-19-2007, 20:16
Originally posted by LordJackel
That is why I am asking the question...is it illegal?

Don't know, but since illegal activity can't be promoted on this board I thought I'd state it in that manner.

boilergonzo
05-19-2007, 21:42
LordJackal... I saw you crossing the bouncing bridge to get to the rhino area. I stalked you and almost attacked. Two things stopped me... first, my one year old pooped his pants and the odor would have betrayed my stealthy approach, and two, I was concerned you may be packing. So I went over to the Lorikeets instead and got bit while feeding them... darned critters!

(okay, okay... so I don't know what you look like and made that part up, but I really WAS at the zoo and DID get my finger chomped on!).

You saw the White Rhino's, but did you see any pink ones? White rhinos = wide mouths, Black rhinos = pointy mouth, pink rhinos = Big mouths? Loud mouths? (just funnin', no intent to harm! :stooges: ). Regardless, the Pink Rhino population is down to one, and we should make all efforts to keep him safe!

rhino465
05-20-2007, 19:24
Originally posted by LordJackel
Yup...just for you ;)



Hey! Thanks! Those are really good photos ... and some handsome beasts as the subjects! :supergrin:


Originally posted by boilergonzo
Regardless, the Pink Rhino population is down to one, and we should make all efforts to keep him safe!



Dude! Check the colors on your monitor! I'm PURPLE!!

Snowman92D
05-20-2007, 20:51
Originally posted by R. Emmelman
While the zoo is located "in" the state park, it is a private 501(c)3 organization governed by a Board of Trustees. So I would think this would come under the "is isn't unlawful but you can be asked to leave" area.

I checked with a Metro PD copper who runs security at the Zoo, and he said that it's indeed a state park but the private group that "manages" the show out there has an administrative policy of no guns on the property. They'll never catch you packin' if you do it intelligently, and all they can do is tell you you're in violation of their policy and ask you to leave.

Just be sure you promptly leave if and when requested, or you're subject to be arrested for trespassing...and that could ultimately cause you problems with the State Police and your LTCH.

Do what you feel you need to do. If folks don't want my gun there, they can do without my patronage. I try to be respectful of other folks attitudes and feelings, but I can never quite forget that old saying about "Fools will make rules, and fools will obey them". Consequently I just stay away from some places. Besides, there are a lot of places in this town that are a "zoo". So those blue-nosed folks on West Washington don't have a monopoly on anything. :)

R. Emmelman
05-21-2007, 05:01
I thought reading the rules the wording was funny.

"Weapons are prohibited on Zoo grounds, including firearms."

Why not just "Weapons are prohibited on Zoo grounds." or "Weapons are prohibited on Zoo grounds, including pocket knives."

Interesting they would specificaly call out firearms.

boilergonzo
05-21-2007, 08:07
Indeed, it is purple. I do not mean to discriminate based upon race, color, religion, or gender, and I humbly apologize to Rhino for my unwarranted color slur!

Good to hear the facts on the zoo. I agree, that is an odd way to phrase a sign!

Tall people are banned from my property, including Yao Ming (as if someone might not consider him tall?!?).

rhino465
05-21-2007, 08:10
Originally posted by boilergonzo
Indeed, it is purple. I do not mean to discriminate based upon race, color, religion, or gender, and I humbly apologize to Rhino for my unwarranted color slur!

Apology accepted! Such crucial matters must always be addressed immediately! :supergrin:



Originally posted by boilergonzo

Tall people are banned from my property, including Yao Ming (as if someone might not consider him tall?!?).

And rightly so! You just can't trust tall people. Especially tall, redheaded guys who operate shooting ranges and work in gunshops.

minuteman32
05-21-2007, 08:53
While it may be against a rule, it's not illegal. Now, when you are going into the parking lot, you might want to see ifthere are any school busses there. If there are, then it could conceivably be a "school event", which would make it a felony to even have it in your car! Same thing if you are already there & a school bus full of kids shows up afterward.

This is why we need to change our laws to provide for lawful carry in ALL areas & preemption w/ teeth!

Snowman92D
05-21-2007, 10:39
Originally posted by minuteman32
Now, when you are going into the parking lot, you might want to see if there are any school busses there. If there are, then it could conceivably be a "school event", which would make it a felony to even have it in your car!

Not unless the school in question "owned" or had "leased" the Zoo property for the day, at least according to the statute. But correct, it is a management rule, but it's not "illegal".

R. Emmelman
05-21-2007, 11:04
Originally posted by Snowman92D
Not unless the school in question "owned" or had "leased" the Zoo property for the day, at least according to the statute. But correct, it is a management rule, but it's not "illegal".
I beg to differ:

IC 35-47-9-2
Possession of firearms on school property, at school function, or on school bus; felony
35-47-9-2 Sec. 2. A person who possesses a firearm:
(1) in or on school property;
(2) in or on property that is being used by a school for a school function; or
(3) on a school bus;
commits a Class D felony.

When my daughter was in 2nd grade they had a "field trip" to McDonalds. At that time the resturant was being used for a school function (A planned, official, school ordained, field trip).

minuteman32
05-21-2007, 11:19
Originally posted by Snowman92D
Not unless the school in question "owned" or had "leased" the Zoo property for the day, at least according to the statute. But correct, it is a management rule, but it's not "illegal".




Where did you get this? I would like to have references so that I don't give out bad info, too. Considering that the difference between being right & wrong is an escort out vs. felony arrest, it would be good to have a hard copy to give to ones attorney if they were arrested.

IC 35-47-9-2
Possession of firearms on school property, at school function, or on school bus; felony
35-47-9-2 Sec. 2. A person who possesses a firearm:
(1) in or on school property;
(2) in or on property that is being used by a school for a school function; or
(3) on a school bus;
commits a Class D felony.

LordJackel
05-21-2007, 14:26
Originally posted by R. Emmelman
I beg to differ:

IC 35-47-9-2
Possession of firearms on school property, at school function, or on school bus; felony
35-47-9-2 Sec. 2. A person who possesses a firearm:
(1) in or on school property;
(2) in or on property that is being used by a school for a school function; or
(3) on a school bus;
commits a Class D felony.

When my daughter was in 2nd grade they had a "field trip" to McDonalds. At that time the resturant was being used for a school function (A planned, official, school ordained, field trip).

Glad I went on a Sunday (a non-school day- and no church buses either) :banana:

sjstill
05-21-2007, 15:20
Originally posted by rhino465
And rightly so! You just can't trust tall people. Especially tall, redheaded guys who operate shooting ranges and work in gunshops.

Good thing you left out stunningly handsome, otherwise I would have thought you were talking about me...:rofl: :rofl:

sjstill
05-21-2007, 15:20
oops, double tap....

boilergonzo
05-21-2007, 16:26
For the legal types... has there ever been a trial case regarding carry and the "school function" bit?

I mean, this can get ridiculous... extreme lunacy example:

I am on State Road 31 in Columbus, Indiana (with my gun and carry license) driving and singing with the radio. Unbeknownst to me, a school bus on the way to an elementary school field trip to Napanee/Amish country is also on State Road 31 leaving South Bend. Bus crashes and by unhappy coincidence I get pulled over by a State Policeman who is aware of the accident via radio chatter.

Technically I am "on" property being used for a "school function" (and a several hour drive south). While I am sure no police officer would choose to connect the two, technically it sounds as if they could. Am I wrong, or is this simply nuts?

R. Emmelman
05-21-2007, 19:54
Originally posted by boilergonzo
For the legal types... has there ever been a trial case regarding carry and the "school function" bit?

I mean, this can get ridiculous... extreme lunacy example:

.... snip ....


Well, there is intent vs what can happen. The intent was probably ment for school functions like dances, games, etc. that might not be held on school grounds. Example would be B-ball play-off at a local college. As stated before due to the poor language in the code a local prosecutor could very well think that a school bowling party qualifies. I would not want to be a test case.

Snowman92D
05-24-2007, 08:00
Originally posted by minuteman32
Where did you get this? I would like to have references so that I don't give out bad info, too. Considering that the difference between being right & wrong is an escort out vs. felony arrest, it would be good to have a hard copy to give to ones attorney if they were arrested.

Where did I get this? The Marion County Prosecutor's Office. Specifically, the felony screening desk. The issue of just what constitutes a "school function" under this statute has come up several times since that law was put in effect. Keep in mind, there's the law as it's written, and the law as it's commonly applied in a specific jurisdiction. It's a matter of very specific interest to me, since I've been a police officer here for a bit over 35 years.

The simple side of it is, the Indianapolis Zoo and the local McDonald's restaurant, or Wal-Mart, etc., are deemed to be places of public resort under the law...i.e., they're privately owned and/or operated but are open to any member of the public. Sort of like the law governing an arrest for public intoxication...as a cop, I have to prove that (a) you were "intoxicated" and (b) you were in a public place (government-owned property) or a place of public resort, i.e., privately-owned/operated but open to the public. If not, then you aren't guilty of public intoxication as provided by the statute.

The Marion County Prosecutor's Office has repeatedly told me that unless a school corporation owns the property in question, or has leased it, or has some other type of contractual agreement reserving that property exclusively for school use on that day...then the property in question remains a place of public resort open to any other citizen there during normal business hours. If you're in an MCL cafeteria, or at a Mickey D's, or The Childrens Museum, Indiana Beach Amusement Park, etc., lawfully armed with a LTCH permit, and a school group piles off the bus and comes onto the property to eat, take a tour, ride the rides, whatever...they're simply another group of patrons, among the general public, availing themselves of that privately-owned/operated place of public resort at that place and time. Their mere presence, among other members of the general public, does not suddenly make you present at a "school function".

Under those circumstances, you would not be in violation of the "school function" section of the above-referenced statute if you were carrying a firearm under your state-issued LTCH permit. At least according to the Marion County Prosecutor's Office. Like any other prosecutor's office, they're disinclined to file charges when they think judges and juries won't convict. If you live outside of Marion County, it might behoove you to check with your local prosecutor, if you have any questions. Don't ask a cop buddy, or a friend who's an attorney...hunt down the local prosecutor, or his appointed deputy, the guy who decides what gets filed, and ask him how the statute is interpreted locally.

I can't imagine that it'd be looked at any differently than it is here. If Pike Township Schools "Honor Society" has contracted with Melody Skateland to have exclusive use of the skating rink on a Thursday afternoon, it'll be pretty easy for you, as a member of the general public, to tell that the rink's being used for a "school function".

minuteman32
05-24-2007, 08:12
Originally posted by Snowman92D
Where did I get this? The Marion County Prosecutor's Office. Specifically, the felony screening desk. The issue of just what constitutes a "school function" under this statute has come up several times since that law was put in effect. Keep in mind, there's the law as it's written, and the law as it's commonly applied in a specific jurisdiction. It's a matter of very specific interest to me, since I've been a police officer here for a bit over 35 years.

The simple side of it is, the Indianapolis Zoo and the local McDonald's restaurant, or Wal-Mart, etc., are deemed to be places of public resort under the law...i.e., they're privately owned and/or operated but are open to any member of the public. Sort of like the law governing an arrest for public intoxication...as a cop, I have to prove that (a) you were "intoxicated" and (b) you were in a public place (government-owned property) or a place of public resort, i.e., privately-owned/operated but open to the public. If not, then you aren't guilty of public intoxication as provided by the statute.

The Marion County Prosecutor's Office has repeatedly told me that unless a school corporation owns the property in question, or has leased it, or has some other type of contractual agreement reserving that property exclusively for school use on that day...then the property in question remains a place of public resort open to any other citizen there during normal business hours. If you're in an MCL cafeteria, or at a Mickey D's, or The Childrens Museum, Indiana Beach Amusement Park, etc., lawfully armed with a LTCH permit, and a school group piles off the bus and comes onto the property to eat, take a tour, ride the rides, whatever...they're simply another group of patrons, among the general public, availing themselves of that privately-owned/operated place of public resort at that place and time. Their mere presence, among other members of the general public, does not suddenly make you present at a "school function".

Under those circumstances, you would not be in violation of the "school function" section of the above-referenced statute if you were carrying a firearm under your state-issued LTCH permit. At least according to the Marion County Prosecutor's Office. Like any other prosecutor's office, they're disinclined to file charges when they think judges and juries won't convict. If you live outside of Marion County, it might behoove you to check with your local prosecutor, if you have any questions. Don't ask a cop buddy, or a friend who's an attorney...hunt down the local prosecutor, or his appointed deputy, the guy who decides what gets filed, and ask him how the statute is interpreted locally.

I can't imagine that it'd be looked at any differently than it is here. If Pike Township Schools "Honor Society" has contracted with Melody Skateland to have exclusive use of the skating rink on a Thursday afternoon, it'll be pretty easy for you, as a member of the general public, to tell that the rink's being used as a "school function".

Cool! That is good, @ least if you live in Marion Co. I do wonder about being able to tell, though, just by walking into a place, whether they have a contract w/ a school. My wife & I went to a bridal fair before we got married @ the convention center. As we walked by one big room on our way to our function, we noticed a bunch of cheerleaders. We found out that it was a competition & I instantly wondered if I was breaking the law by being armed! I also had the Hamilton Co. Persecutor's investigator tell me that their (the prosecutor's) veiw was that it was illegal to have a gun w/ in 1000' of a school, church, etc.
What would be nice it to just insert, "has a valid license to carry a handgun" in the current law. Then, there would be no issue (@ least for those w/ a permit).
Thanks for the info!

fire1035
05-24-2007, 14:02
1000' feet from a school. So does that mean I cannot carry in my driveway since I live across the street from an elementary school? Just curious how they would feel about that.......

minuteman32
05-24-2007, 17:04
I don't normally think of myself as a "know it all", but, this dude is an idiot! (@ the persecutors office).

I know about the federal 'gun free school zones', I know it was ruled unconstitutional. I know it was re-passed to make it 'constitutional'. I also know that it says that if one has a state issued permit, for which a background check was completed, one may carry w/in that 1000'. In fact the UT CFP is specifically FOR inside schools!

Sorry, trying to not get too much on a tirade.
You can have a gun @ your home w/ in the 1000' but (w/o a permit issued by IN, which I am assuming that you do have) one would have to transport it to/from that location (once you hit that magical 1000' line) unloaded.


Like I & many others have said, this law needs to change, on the state and federal levels!

R. Emmelman
05-25-2007, 05:17
Originally posted by minuteman32
... snip ... I also had the Hamilton Co. Persecutor's investigator tell me that their (the prosecutor's) veiw was that it was illegal to have a gun w/ in 1000' of a school, church, etc.

... snip ...

Herein lies the proof that the law can be interperted as the Prosecutor's office sees fit. While Marion County may have no problrm with a McDonalds field trip another county might. Not to mention that some police/sheriff departments tend to apply the laws as they see fit. Open carry is a good example. As posted several times, some PDs think it is unlawful. We need good detailed law clarifying some of these murky issues or better yet just give us all our rights everywhere.

boilergonzo
05-25-2007, 08:13
Snowman... very informative, and good to know. This topic is so fuzzy it is nice to know at least how things are viewed in Marion County.

Follow-up. Suppose you are at (park, zoo, other place with no carry policy), and you are noticed and asked to leave. If they called the police anyway (precautionary because they are scared), and as I was leaving a police officer showed up. Would Average Officer be inclined towards a trespassing charge, or simply verify you were peacefully leaving and let you go on your way (perhaps with a check of license to carry, etc., but NOT arresting).

Thanks!

Snowman92D
05-25-2007, 10:03
Originally posted by minuteman32
My wife & I went to a bridal fair before we got married @ the convention center. As we walked by one big room on our way to our function, we noticed a bunch of cheerleaders. We found out that it was a competition & I instantly wondered if I was breaking the law by being armed!

I also had the Hamilton Co. Persecutor's investigator tell me that their (the prosecutor's) veiw was that it was illegal to have a gun w/ in 1000' of a school, church, etc.

The corridors you're walking through in the Convention Center are held to be "common areas", in my experience. If it'll help anything, you might again look at it from the standpoint of an arrest for being drunk in public. If you're drunk at a "private" party held in one of the CC's halls, then you're not in violation. If you step outside the confines of the privately rented hall into the "common area" of the corridor, then you can legally be hooked up for "public" intox.

If the school sponsoring the cheerleading event rented a hall inside the CC for a cheerleading competition, then within the confines of that individual hall there is a "school function" in progress...and you can't enter that individual hall while armed under your LTCH. So, strolling sedately down the corridor with your lovely bride, past the doors to the hall where the cheerleading competition is in progress, would not get you in a jam because you were lawfully CCW...at least in Marion County. I wouldn't try hanging around those same doors dressed in gangster threads, though, unless you want problems.

In a previous post, I suggested that if you have questions about how Indiana statutes will be interpreted and applied in your area, you really ought to stop in and see the local prosecutor. It's easy here because our prosecutor has several deputies who do nothing but prosecute illegal gun cases, and they're up to date on the pertinent statutes. If you ask the prosecutor, or his appointed deputy, you're dealing with the people who decide what gets filed on, and have the pressure of pushing their prosecution through to a successful conclusion withing the legal system. It's just much better to get your info from the guy at the sharp end of the stick, the same as it is with anything else.

The position of "prosecutor's investigator" is a political appointment handed out by the local prosecutor. There's no state-mandated level of competence or training that a prosecutor's investigator has to meet, so it's a toss-up over who'd land that sort of job, though it's usually a retired or "former" cop. I've never understood the concept of having a prosecutor's investigator, since the various detectives with state and local agencies should take care of any investigative needs a local prosecutor might have. In any event, I've yet to run into a prosecutor's investigator who was anything other than a start-the-coffee-pot-in-the-morning-before-the-secretaries-get-here adjunct to the prosecutor's office...at least in most small counties.

Consequently, I'd be inclined to give little weight to what one of them would say about much of anything. It's best to check with the prosecutor himself, provided you've thoroughly read up on the statute in question beforehand so you force him to dig out his book and and refresh his memory before he answers. I'm not a big fan of taking someone's answer "just off the top of his head". If you start talking in specifics of the statute, he'll have to respond in kind. Prosecutors need your vote, too, remember...and you find that a lot of them are pretty decent folks to talk to once you take a few minutes to get to know each other.

The 1,000 foot rule is a penalty "enhancement" for someone caught in unlawful possession of a firearm. The state law provides the same sort of penalty enhancement for being caught within 1,000 feet of a school in unlawful possession of drugs.

If you live across the street from a school and have firearms or drugs in your home, you're not in violation as long as you possess them lawfully. Your prescription drugs are lawful, crystal meth is not. The Glock 19 you bought at Plainfield Shooters Supply is fine, while having a Glock 19 at home that's listed as stolen in a burglary could make you subject to the 1,000 foot penalty provision, since possession of stolen property is unlawful. You don't need to have an Indiana handgun "license" to have a handgun in your home, on your property, or at your fixed place of business...even across the street from a school, just so long as you're in otherwise lawful possession of it.

I don't know why your local prosecutor's investigator would say what he did, but sadly I'm not in the least surprized. I could go on about how the general "dumbing down" of hiring, training and retention standards in American law enforcement has had a negative effect in my profession and the services we're supposed to provide. But that's not the subject of this thread.

Originally posted by R. Emmelman
...or better yet just give us all of our rights everywhere

I share this goal with Rich. Additionally, I think the increase of militarized criminal gangs, and religious and political terrorist violence, will soon force us to increase the presence of an armed populace in order to survive as a society. Just as in Israel. Having ready access to a defensive firearm is on a par with having ready access to a fire extinguisher, in my book. Just remember that with "rights" come "responsibilities".

Snowman92D
05-25-2007, 12:03
Originally posted by boilergonzo
Suppose you are at (park, zoo, other place with no carry policy), and you are noticed and asked to leave. If they called the police anyway (precautionary because they are scared), and as I was leaving a police officer showed up.

Would Average Officer be inclined towards a trespassing charge, or simply verify you were peacefully leaving and let you go on your way (perhaps with a check of license to carry, etc., but NOT arresting).

Well...bear in mind that you framed this as a supposition. I'm not sure how anyone would "notice" that you were armed if you were concealing the weapon the way you should. But since this is all theoretical:

The state statute covering "criminal trespass", at least the section that you seem to be referring to, provides that you're guilty of trespassing once you've been told to leave the property of another person by the owner, or the owner's agent...and you refuse to leave as told. In other words, if they ask you to leave, and you immediately comply with their wishes...then you've not violated that section of the trespassing statute.

If they tell you to get off the property and you fail to immediately comply with their wishes...at that point you're subject to arrest. If you're speculating as to what a responding officer would do if he showed up as you were complying with the property owner's request to leave, there's not much he can do except insure that you indeed get off the property. After all, there's no "criminal trespass" violation under that section of the penal code, provided you left immediately without further problems when told to do so. You can certainly expect him (or her) to detain you long enough to get your side of the story.

Additionally, since he'd be responding to a "man-with-a-gun" call, you certainly can expect him to brusquely inquire about your weapon, and likely disarm you at least momentarily until he checks you and your weapon out, and he'll probably file a report on the incident. Which, along with your LTCH permit number will make its way to the desk of the Superintendent of the Indiana State Police, perhaps to the detriment of your continued possession of a LTCH. But beyond that, he'd probably cut you loose to get off the property as requested, provided you hadn't fractured any other laws.

Regarding "parks", if you mean Indy Parks, as you know their "no guns" thing is not just an administrative policy of the property owner or manager...it's a local ordinance here in Marion County. The Park Rangers that I work with usually just give park patrons a warning as long as the person has a valid LTCH permit, and tell the permit-holder to get the firearm off the property. Assuming that you were carrying discreetly and they somehow inadvertently found out about it. We're talking in generalities, of course, but the Rangers know better than anyone that some city parks and facilities, like the Nairobi Trail, are haunted by criminals. Still they don't make the laws, they just enforce them, and they have a certain amount of latitude in their enforcement decisions same as any other cop.

The worst they could do anyway, if you have a LTCH permit, is confiscate your weapon and send it to the property room, and give you a summons to court for the ordinance violation. It can be a real PITA getting your stuff returned from the police property room at times. Most of the Rangers decline to do that to LTCH permit-holders, though, unless you're creating a disturbance among other park patrons with your firearm. Or subject the responding Rangers to a lecture about your "right" to create disturbances with your firearm, so you can "educate" others, etc., etc., etc. Someone who claims his "rights" without accepting the accompanying "responsibilities" usually ends up creating most of their own problems, as you know.

But...this is all theoretical response to a theoretical question, and it's hard to talk about generalities when "the devil is in the details", so I'm not sure I've helped much.

boilergonzo
05-25-2007, 13:53
You have helped a lot. Thanks for the information.