Wow, it's becoming pretty obvious that no one here has ever actually been to a bank within minutes of a robbery, or knows anyone who works in a bank. I have, and the employees are often terrified to the point of hysterics. They've just had guns pointed at their heads by some thug screaming at them, and for what, minimum wage? The employees are predominantly women, sometimes pregnant, and unarmed. With worker's comp statutes in place, the banks have to provide counseling assistance to their employees in dealing with the psychological trauma that often results from robberies, including lost man-hours since the employees go to the counseling on-the-clock. Add to that the fact that many employees never come back to work afterward, and the banks have to pay to continually train new employees to keep up with the accelerated attrition, and you begin to get the picture. If the bank's security procedures are effective enough to keep your gun outside, doesn't it stand to reason they'll catch the bad guys' weapons too? Really guys, giving up your weapon for a brief period for the sake of someone else's peace of mind doesn't have to emasculate you. If having your gun with you every waking moment is more important than the safety of the bank's vulnerable employees, then they probably won't miss you if you pull your accounts.
Wow, it's becoming pretty obvious that no one here has ever actually been to a bank within minutes of a robbery, or knows anyone who works in a bank. I have, and the employees are often terrified to the point of hysterics. They've just had guns pointed at their heads by some thug screaming at them, and for what, minimum wage? The employees are predominantly women, sometimes pregnant, and unarmed. With worker's comp statutes in place, the banks have to provide counseling assistance to their employees in dealing with the psychological trauma that often results from robberies, including lost man-hours since the employees go to the counseling on-the-clock. Add to that the fact that many employees never come back to work afterward, and the banks have to pay to continually train new employees to keep up with the accelerated attrition, and you begin to get the picture. If the bank's security procedures are effective enough to keep your gun outside, doesn't it stand to reason they'll catch the bad guys' weapons too? Really guys, giving up your weapon for a brief period for the sake of someone else's peace of mind doesn't have to emasculate you. If having your gun with you every waking moment is more important than the safety of the bank's vulnerable employees, then they probably won't miss you if you pull your accounts.
Wow, it's becoming pretty obvious that no one here has ever actually been to a bank within minutes of a robbery, or knows anyone who works in a bank. I have, and the employees are often terrified to the point of hysterics. They've just had guns pointed at their heads by some thug screaming at them, and for what, minimum wage? The employees are predominantly women, sometimes pregnant, and unarmed. With worker's comp statutes in place, the banks have to provide counseling assistance to their employees in dealing with the psychological trauma that often results from robberies, including lost man-hours since the employees go to the counseling on-the-clock. Add to that the fact that many employees never come back to work afterward, and the banks have to pay to continually train new employees to keep up with the accelerated attrition, and you begin to get the picture. If the bank's security procedures are effective enough to keep your gun outside, doesn't it stand to reason they'll catch the bad guys' weapons too? Really guys, giving up your weapon for a brief period for the sake of someone else's peace of mind doesn't have to emasculate you. If having your gun with you every waking moment is more important than the safety of the bank's vulnerable employees, then they probably won't miss you if you pull your accounts.
Anyone getting stuck between the doors because they are armed, that think they have something on the bank, better think again. If you refuse to leave when security gives you that option, better be ready to be relieved of your firearm by the Po-Po when they arrive on a MWG refusing to leave call from the bank. The Feds could even be part of the responding crew as part of a bank robbery task force. They have no sense of humor regarding this issue. It won't be pleasant for you and the minimum charge will be disorderly conduct.
You could be charged with any number of felonies.
Matter of fact, you can drive to the bank armed anyway you want to be. Upon arrival, call the bank and the Security dude will escort you from your car into the bank. Or use the drive up window.
Anyone getting stuck between the doors because they are armed, that think they have something on the bank, better think again. If you refuse to leave when security gives you that option, better be ready to be relieved of your firearm by the Po-Po when they arrive on a MWG refusing to leave call from the bank. The Feds could even be part of the responding crew as part of a bank robbery task force. They have no sense of humor regarding this issue. It won't be pleasant for you and the minimum charge will be disorderly conduct. You could be charged with any number of felonies.
This is serious **** guys. Don't do something that will haunt you for years.
Regards
if they don't want someone to carry fine, lock the door and let the person leave..
but trapping a person who has not commited a felony is not allowed and someone would have a case..
+1 on the "don't try to fight this unless you are willing to go all the way... to jail and then court."
-1 on the "banks don't have the right to stop you in the air lock." it is nice that the outside door closes and locks ( i certainly don't want to be standing in the "air lock" while an armed criminal enters) . It is nice that they have a system to prevent a gun from entering. they should have every right to do this. They don't call LEO unless you demand entry or otherwise create a disturbance. They will let you out as soon as your business has been determined, and this doesn't take long. certainly no undue inconvenience IMHO. I mean... there IS a sign after-all.
+1 I would take my business elsewhere. If they have THAT much trouble with crime IN THE BANK, I don't want to go there anyway.
If there isn't a way to open the outer door, then the bank has committed Criminal Confinement (IC 35-42-3-3), a Class D Felony.
Nobody should do business with this bank...
You may very well be right regarding the Indiana Code... but I already asserted my opinion as fact that this was not the case... case closed.
Seriously though, I believe attempting to assert the code violation cited, seeking criminal punishment for 'whomever' at the bank would result in your own arrest for trespass due to violation of the bank's clearly posted policy regarding guns in their bank.
p.s. again aware that my opinion is most likely not that of the majority of readership.
p.s.s. the 'push here to exit' bar makes sense to me. that WOULD be more appropriate.
trespass would only happen if the person refuses to leave when asked..
Misdemeanor trespass vs. Felony confinement .....
In similar terms, confinement only happens if a person refuses to let you leave when asked. I know this is different, but for instance... come to my house, and I lock the door (like I always do). you try to leave and can't figure out how to unlock my door (it is old and hard to unlock).
I unlock it... no problem.
I don't... criminal confinement.
No?
A person who knowingly or intentionally confines another person without the other person's consent has committed criminal confinement. Making me stand in your airlock while you question me sounds like a confinement under the law, and I have certainly not consented.IC 35-42-3-1
Definition
Sec. 1. As used in this chapter, "confine" means to substantially interfere with the liberty of a person.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.2. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.33.
[...]
IC 35-42-3-3
Criminal confinement
Sec. 3. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally:
(1) confines another person without the other person's consent; or
(2) removes another person, by fraud, enticement, force, or threat of force, from one (1) place to another;
commits criminal confinement. Except as provided in subsection (b), the offense of criminal confinement is a Class D felony.
(b) The offense of criminal confinement defined in subsection (a) is:
(1) a Class C felony if:
(A) the person confined or removed is less than fourteen (14) years of age and is not the confining or removing person's child;
(B) it is committed by using a vehicle; or
(C) it results in bodily injury to a person othewr than the confining or removing person; and (2) a Class B felony if it:
(A) is committed while armed with a deadly weapon;
(B) results in serious bodily injury to a person other than the confining or removing person; or
(C) is committed on an aircraft.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.2. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.35; Acts 1979, P.L.299, SEC.1; P.L.183-1984, SEC.2; P.L.278-1985, SEC.8; P.L.49-1989, SEC.21; P.L.59-2002, SEC.2; P.L.70-2006, SEC.1.
In similar terms, confinement only happens if a person refuses to let you leave when asked. I know this is different, but for instance... come to my house, and I lock the door (like I always do). you try to leave and can't figure out how to unlock my door (it is old and hard to unlock).
I unlock it... no problem.
I don't... criminal confinement.
No?