Man removed by PD for carrying at St. Joe County polls

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Timjoebillybob

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Feb 27, 2009
    9,567
    149
    I never understood that part of SB 292. It's already illegal for someone without a license to carry in those locations, right?

    That's not my point. I get the "optional" aspect (are not prevented from prohibiting, but are not forced to prohibit).

    My question still stands. The courtroom part says that they may prohibit otherwise legal carriers. But the metal detector section says that they may prohibit illegal carriers (those without LTCH, who would already run afoul of the law), but not legal carriers (those with LTCH).

    What am I missing?

    What your missing is that it's legal to carry a long gun or a cap and ball pistol without a LTCH. For instance if they wanted to they could put up a metal detectors at the entrance(s) to the local library, water dept, city council meeting room, etc. And stop people from carrying a long gun or cap and ball pistol (without LTCH) in.

    For the cap and ball (and really old antiques)
    IC 35-47-2-19
    Application of chapter
    Sec. 19. This chapter does not apply to any firearm not designed to use fixed cartridges or fixed ammunition, or any firearm made before January 1, 1899.
     

    Roadie

    Modus InHiatus
    Rating - 100%
    17   0   0
    Feb 20, 2009
    9,775
    63
    Beech Grove

    LockStocksAndBarrel

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    The Hammond attorney said: “The city’s position is once the ordinance became void, we didn’t have to do anything,” she said. “It hasn’t come up, other than Mr. Relford.”

    An outright lie. The city council argued over it in at least 2 meetings and voted down the removal of it aginst their attorney's advice, IIRC, and to appease the mayor of Hammond.
     

    jon5212

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 24, 2010
    450
    18
    I'm wondering about that. That last line in section 4 only excludes courthouses via section 5. However, it says that the unit can't prohibit LTCH holders. Sub-section 10 says that the event organizer or promoter can make rules as terms of admission. So the city can't say no carry in Lucas Oil, but whomever is using it can.

    Anyone interested in leasing Lucas Oil for a day and having a giant OC event?


    One of hundred's of thousands of laws and subsections that need to be revoked. Marion county tax payers and anyone else who pays tax in marion county is paying for lucas oil stadium.

    Taxpayers are the majority stake holder in that stadium. I think we need a large enough group of people to tell Irsay to go "F" himself.

    As far as I'm concerned lucas oil is public property. And until it is deemed that I will not support the colts franchise in anyway.

    I think I'm going to ask my local representative to initiate a review of what I consider an illegal policy in the terms of that piece of property.

    I'd even go as far as an inquiry with the senate and house.
     

    long coat

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Jun 6, 2010
    1,612
    48
    Avon
    Did I read that right, Simmons got an email from ISP & was told Clay was OK to vote, but they still stopped him?

    He just lost the case for them.
     

    Jack Burton

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 9, 2008
    2,432
    48
    NWI

    CathyInBlue

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    I'm surprised no one has mentioned this little tidbit of legal trivia in this thread yet.
    IC 3-5-4-4
    Immunity from arrest while at or going to and from polls
    Sec. 4. A voter is not subject to arrest while going to the polls, while in attendance there, and while returning from the polls. However, this section does not apply in a case of:
    (1) treason;
    (2) felony; or
    (3) breach of the peace.
    As added by P.L.5-1986, SEC.1.
    Unless his possession of a firearm at the time was a felony, they couldn't have arrested him if they had wanted to.
     

    BravoMike

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Nov 19, 2011
    1,164
    74
    Avon
    I'm surprised no one has mentioned this little tidbit of legal trivia in this thread yet.

    Unless his possession of a firearm at the time was a felony, they couldn't have arrested him if they had wanted to.

    I think the only defense they would have with this is breach if peace. Not saying I think that's what Clay did, but I could see them trying to argue this.
     

    Pitmaster

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jan 21, 2008
    868
    18
    South Bend, IN
    Guns Allowed At Polls

    During the primary election, a local man was not allowed to vote because he was carrying a permitted firearm. This year, he’ll be allowed to vote – and will be carrying his sidearm.

    "You want everyone who is entitled to vote in St Joseph County to have the opportunity to vote,” said Murray Winn, Republican member St. Joseph County Election Board.

    The 1400 poll workers were trained to make sure everything goes smoothly.

    "Every year there is something new in state law that changes how the election happens,” said Winn.

    Changes to state gun laws slipped through the cracks earlier this year and caused quite a problem.

    "St Joseph County was sued following the primary election because we did not let a voter into the polling place who was carrying a side arm,” said Winn.

    That voter was Clay Edinger. At the time he didn't want his face shown.

    "I asked for clarification, what law is it that prohibits me from doing so?" said Edinger in May 2012.

    Workers couldn't give him an answer and turned to the election board.

    "There was a call about that, so the election board did respond; Unfortunately, we responded incorrectly,” said Winn. “We were not aware of the law and so we were remiss in that we were not giving them the correct advice when they called us."

    Ultimately, Edinger did not cast his vote in the primary election, but he brought the issue to light.

    This fall, poll workers were re-trained on how the new law works.

    "Many of them were surprised. Many of them were wondering why the state legislature didn't carry the ordinance through to polling places,” said Winn.

    Edinger says he will cast his vote in Tuesday presidential election and when he does, he will be wearing his gun on his hip.
     
    Top Bottom