My son's boss got denied his LTCH, what to do

[Bigum1969]

2-time DUI offenders should lose more than their 2nd Amendment rights.

There is no excuse for drinking and driving. None. I've never done it. Ever.

And because this guy didn't kill someone just means we've all been lucky. It could be any one of us who is killed or maimed by an idiot driving drunk.

I'm perplexed while so many people seem to give such leniency for drunks.

Think about it. Shouldn't 1 DUI be enough to motivate you to get your head out of your ass and never do it again?

If you want to get drunk, it's fine by me. Just don't expect any leniency if you think it's okay to risk the life of my family or friends with your life choices.

Rant over...

 

[j706]

Ok, my son calls me while I'm working today wanting to know what options his boss has.

The situation is this: his boss got a letter from the State Police saying he got denied his LTCP because of some kind of drug and alcohol issues. His boss has 2 DUIs more than 5 years old and no felony convictions.

My 2 cents on this is that my son's boss is on the IMPD list of troublemakers and they torpedoed him when he filed for his permit.

The bottom line is he's going need to fight tooth and nail in court for his permit.

Does anyone know a good Indy attorney that handles carry permit issues?

You wrote "2 DUI's more than five years ago" Is it possible that the two (2) OWI's were within five years of each other? If so that is a felony in and of its self.




**** I didn't read all the post before I posted mine in reference to the Felony. Anyway we all know it is pretty dang easy to get a license to carry in this state (As it should be) with that fact I am inclined to think he more than likely needed rejected.

 

[sj kahr k40]

OCing a longgun is legal, FTW

 

[Timjoebillybob]

And for everyone defending this, this guy can still buy a gun, and have it at home. He can even bring it to work if it's unloaded and secure. He just can't take it to the movie theater.

He can still buy a gun and keep it in his home or transport it UNLOADED and secured in the trunk or if a truck behind the seat and keep a few loaded mags in the glovebox for when he reaches his destination or unless he for some strange reason needs them before to DEFEND himself

In regards to the above. If your talking about a handgun, that is incorrect. You can not carry a handgun in a vehicle without a LTCH no matter what condition it is in, with very few exceptions.

In regards to long guns, it is also incorrect. You can transport them cocked, locked and ready to rock without a LTCH.

Comparing drunk driving to tired driving is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. I am not in any way saying you are stupid but that comment sure is.

Smitty have you ever seen the studies comparing drunk vs sleepy vs distracted driving? It is an apt comparison. There are studies that have shown a tired driver is more of a danger than one with a .08 bac.
Drowsy Driving Information
Negligent Driving

Sorry. It's only victimless if you're lucky. I've pulled my share of dead bodies out of wrecks caused by drunk drivers. Their victims are indeed real.

How many bodies have you pulled out because of tired/distracted/negligent drivers? If the law of averages holds true in your case, should be about double the number.

May be the first time HE GOT CAUGHT but not the SECOND TIME HE GOT CAUGHT. He's a drunk. A drunk is a drunk. Don't bet your life there won't be a third time.

Jack I think I know what your answer to this would be but, I'll ask anyway. Person get a dui, knows he was drunk and deserved it. Does everything he's required to do by the courts, finishes up probation etc.

2-3 years later he stops at a bar after work to have a couple beers and shoot some pool. He knows he's under the legal limit and is ready to head home (mile and a half or so away). As he's saying bye a girl buys him a shot. He does the shot and leaves. As he's pulling out of the parking lot a LEO gets behind him and about 2 blocks or so later he's pulled over for "weaving in his lane"

Passes the FST, and blows a .06 on the portable breath test. Officer decides to take him to the station and have him blow there because of the "strong order of alcohol" and the "weaving in his lane". After the time for the stop/transport and required wait the shot is now in his system and he blows a .08. In your opinion is he a drunk?

 

[pdg45acp]

You wrote "2 DUI's more than five years ago" Is it possible that the two (2) OWI's were within five years of each other? If so that is a felony in and of its self.




**** I didn't read all the post before I posted mine in reference to the Felony. Anyway we all know it is pretty dang easy to get a license to carry in this state (As it should be) with that fact I am inclined to think he more than likely needed rejected.

I'm guessing that Jr's boss in is denial about the 2nd DUI.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Jack I think I know what your answer to this would be but, I'll ask anyway. Person get a dui, knows he was drunk and deserved it. Does everything he's required to do by the courts, finishes up probation etc.

2-3 years later he stops at a bar after work to have a couple beers and shoot some pool. He knows ...blah blah blah... all the other blah drunks use as an excuse why they are drunks....

Passes the FST, and blows a .06 on the portable breath test. Officer decides to take him to the station and have him blow there because of the "strong order of alcohol" and the "weaving in his lane". After the time for the stop/transport and required wait the shot is now in his system and he blows a .08. In your opinion is he a drunk?

IN MY OPINION he is still a drunk.
IN MY OPINION he was NOT driving drunk that specific time.
IN MY OPINION he probably was driving drunk plentydozensof times he didn't get caught or kill any one.

In actuallity he can fight that in court. The prosecutor will most likely drop the DWI charge and file driving while IMPAIRED and he will spend crap loads of money only to end up with the same essential result. All of this only applys to regular citizens not to super citizens like cops, the judge and prosecutor's lawyer gang brothers, politicians in their political party, or blood relatives to people who all work together and pal around together down at the court house.

 

[flatlander]

Amazing. If ANY of us REALLY looked at our lives I'll bet we've done something that could have landed us in jail if the letter of the law was followed. Anybody here driven sleepy? I suppose all the hardliners only drove that way once and never did it again. How about just near misses?
Before anybody starts talking too much I will say that I've already buried a daughter due to a driving accident. A young man ran a stop sign in the country and broad-sided the car she was in. Killed her and her friend. What should be the penalty? No drugs or alcohol was involved but she's just as dead. Don't pretend you know about something until you've walked a mile in that persons shoes.

Bob

 

[Pale Rider]

Both sides of the arguement are based in Pathos: The pro-give it to the manager's son has a sentimental, "I know the guy" tinge to it. The anti- side has a security issue they bring up.

But the folks that say no way Jose: How did you answer in the thread regarding even having a permit at all? A permitless system? On one hand, folks scream and yell its a right to carry. But, will deny another's right at the drop of a hat because they are essentially a criminal. Security or liberty?

I brought up my reservations about a permitless system, got my butt chewed for it. But driving is just as, if not more so dangerous than a gun.

Sort of a double edged sword. Folks that yell for liberty and the end of tyranny will dispute someone practicing the First Amendment because they dont like it.

Not taking a side, just showing something I have been seeing on INGO lately...

Amen. It's all about perspective.

I've known plenty of people who, at one time, drank and drove and never got caught and did no damage to anyone.

I would not admit this, it reflects poorly on your ability to pick associates.

 

[IndyTech]

Amazing. If ANY of us REALLY looked at our lives I'll bet we've done something that could have landed us in jail if the letter of the law was followed. Anybody here driven sleepy? I suppose all the hardliners only drove that way once and never did it again. How about just near misses?
Before anybody starts talking too much I will say that I've already buried a daughter due to a driving accident. A young man ran a stop sign in the country and broad-sided the car she was in. Killed her and her friend. What should be the penalty? No drugs or alcohol was involved but she's just as dead. Don't pretend you know about something until you've walked a mile in that persons shoes.

Bob

I'll just say you're a more tolerant man than I. I have a hard time believing that I could maintain the stance you are taking if I were to have the same experience.

Kudos.

 

[CarmelHP]

Or if they are an attorney.

You mean cops are covering up attorney drunk driving? Other than PAs who are the cops' shills, you mean? When did this start and why didn't I hear about it?

 

[smitty12b]

Amazing. If ANY of us REALLY looked at our lives I'll bet we've done something that could have landed us in jail if the letter of the law was followed. Anybody here driven sleepy? I suppose all the hardliners only drove that way once and never did it again. How about just near misses?
Before anybody starts talking too much I will say that I've already buried a daughter due to a driving accident. A young man ran a stop sign in the country and broad-sided the car she was in. Killed her and her friend. What should be the penalty? No drugs or alcohol was involved but she's just as dead. Don't pretend you know about something until you've walked a mile in that persons shoes.

Bob

Bob
Your pain is something I pray I never have to feel. I loved my niece but compared to a my own child, well, there is no comparison.
I believe there is a difference between an accident and negligent homicide, which is what I consider a drunk taking a life.
prayers to you and yours
Dave

 

[WWIIIDefender]

When does he take any personal responsibility for any of this?

It's someone else's fault the ISP denied him. It's my fault he can't defend himself. Stop making excuses for people. That is the biggest reason people are the way they are. There is always *someone else* to blame.

What I would like to hear from one damn drunk driver is, "I did this to myself. I caused this and I should be held responsible."

Instead we hear..."Anyone know a good lawyer?" WTF...

Man the eff up for once in your life.

Speaking of responsibility when I get in my car I take full responsibilty and know full well that I might be killed by a drunk driver,stupid person or it just wasn't my day. I chose to drive no one else did and I know all the risks that come with it when I get behind a wheel. He had or has a drinking problem, not a gun problem.

 

[Lex Concord]

it doesnt roll off the tongue well though

No, not nearly as well as "Vermont-style".

 

[hi-pointfan1]

this ^^^ bill is a guy i would want to take with me to go club hopping (if i still did that). he would be the guy that tells you "uh, man, you might not wanna keep making out with that other guys girlfriend because when he and his buddies come back there is gonna be hell to pay"

he is the calm voice of reason that some of us need in life. I have calmed down a lot as i have aged some, but man I wish I would have had Bill as my battle buddy afew times

Im very new on here and its funny because I noticed that as well lmfao! +1 for "this bill guy"

 

[down3green]

He can still buy a gun and ...transport it UNLOADED and secured in the trunk or if a truck behind the seat and keep a few loaded mags in the glovebox for when he reaches his destination or unless he for some strange reason needs them before to DEFEND himself

WHAT? Have they changed the law on this or should this be considered with a HUGE dose of your disclaimer?


.

 

[IndianaGTI]

I would suggest to his boss that he call an attorney then drop the issue. Chances are that there is some other reason for the denial of the LTCH than what the boss said. Just today I saw someone explain why something happened without mentioning to the group standing around the other convictions he had. Did one of those DUI's include a resisting law enforcement? If so, that is typically an automatic denial.

Give him the name of a local attorney then never breach the subject again. Frankly, if he doesn't pursue the issue, it is no ones business.

 

[k12lts]

You can't tell me that the two times he got caught were the only two times he drove drunk. His girlfriend has a DUI. This guy is a drunk and is not responsible enough to carry a handgun. Good call by the ISP.

My wife's mother was killed by a drunk driver 7 months after we got married. That was 31 years ago next month and I have no sympathy for drunk drivers. Fortunately he was killed in the accident too.

 

[rambone]

So the Gun Controllers successfully have taken away gun rights from another unfavored group. One by one, we rescind our rights, and the progressives sing for joy. Yay for gun control. Now your driving record is another government excuse to take away more rights; to alter your family's defense for the rest of their lives. I'm sure denying the 2nd Amendment will do a whole lot to prevent future car accidents!! Not to mention the unconstitutionality of the whole situation. But the gun controllers don't worry about trivial things like the constitution or "rights."

Keep justifying more Government control. We are just a few laws away from utopia.

 

[rambone]

Out of all of the punishments that could be handed down to someone with a DUI, you pro 2nd amendment supporters are telling me you believe it right to take away his right to defend himself? That right there is what I call STUPID!!!

He had or has a drinking problem, not a gun problem.

You guys are right on the money. Amazing how our ingenious government takes away a LTCH but returns the Driver's License.

 

[public servant]

You mean cops are covering up attorney drunk driving? Other than PAs who are the cops' shills, you mean? When did this start and why didn't I hear about it?

No...actually I meant that attorneys have no problem helping these people walk. Prosecution and defense. I guess as long as they are collecting a fee...it's all good though. We'll even use the example you brought up. If the person you're referring to is guilty...there is an attorney making every effort to get him off that doesn't care if he's guilty or innocent. It's a fee that is all that matters.

I honestly don't know how these people sleep at night. I guess money buys a lot of sleep aids. But we could start several threads pointing out *all* the snakes in the grass.

I just saw something on the news that disturbed me. I don't know why...it's not like it was a shock or anything.

A guy was just sentenced to 6 years in prison for a DUI. His 8th conviction. His first alcohol related arrest came nearly 35 years ago. He's certainly kept some attorney busy.

Speaking of responsibility when I get in my car I take full responsibilty and know full well that I might be killed by a drunk driver,stupid person or it just wasn't my day. I chose to drive no one else did and I know all the risks that come with it when I get behind a wheel. He had or has a drinking problem, not a gun problem.

So let me get this straight. It's somehow *my* responsibility a drunk is on the road and it's a risk *I* should have to take? You're out of your mind.

I will concur that the risk is always there. That risk would be substantially lower if the drunks remained behind bars rather than allowed to return to the streets.

He has a judgment problem. And he sure as hell doesn't need a firearm.