I'm looking for the input of some of the more legally minded here.
It's related to carrying on school property.
Assume:
-group of 5 or six IN residents.
-none of them are employed by the school in any way but are associated with the school in the sense that their kids go there or they volunteer their time, etc.
-it is a private school located in Indiana
-none of the people are leo's but they all are ltch holders.
-the school is very pro 2nd Amend, or rather the school admin is.
-the school gives this group of individuals official, written, notarized, official as can be permission to carry on school property.
- they do this because they know these responsible individuals and realize that between all of them, normally at least one of them will be there all the time, providing de facto armed security.
Up until this point, I think we will all agree that they are permitted to carry beacuse of the "permission" exception. (If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me)
Here's where my questions start to arise:
These are not employees of the school, but have they become "security guards" by the nature of their understanding with the school?
If yes, do they now require some sort of security license to function as security guards in Indiana? Does this require recurrent training, etc?
Is the school now liable for the actions of the individuals or can the school hold that the individuals are acting as individuals? For examplen one of the people shoots at an armed intruder, hits a kid and now the school is on the hook? Granted every lawsuit is looking for the deep pockets, so they'll name the school, but do they have a legitimate shot at nailing the school?
Is there specific insurance related to security guards/companies/contract, etc?
Anything else you think would be pertinent would be appreciated. Keep in mind the distinctions in this case is that they are not an officially contracted secruity force, they are not paid and the school is private, meaning less likely to ever have any actual police patrolling.
I appreciate all constructive thoughts.
It's related to carrying on school property.
Assume:
-group of 5 or six IN residents.
-none of them are employed by the school in any way but are associated with the school in the sense that their kids go there or they volunteer their time, etc.
-it is a private school located in Indiana
-none of the people are leo's but they all are ltch holders.
-the school is very pro 2nd Amend, or rather the school admin is.
-the school gives this group of individuals official, written, notarized, official as can be permission to carry on school property.
- they do this because they know these responsible individuals and realize that between all of them, normally at least one of them will be there all the time, providing de facto armed security.
Up until this point, I think we will all agree that they are permitted to carry beacuse of the "permission" exception. (If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me)
Here's where my questions start to arise:
These are not employees of the school, but have they become "security guards" by the nature of their understanding with the school?
If yes, do they now require some sort of security license to function as security guards in Indiana? Does this require recurrent training, etc?
Is the school now liable for the actions of the individuals or can the school hold that the individuals are acting as individuals? For examplen one of the people shoots at an armed intruder, hits a kid and now the school is on the hook? Granted every lawsuit is looking for the deep pockets, so they'll name the school, but do they have a legitimate shot at nailing the school?
Is there specific insurance related to security guards/companies/contract, etc?
Anything else you think would be pertinent would be appreciated. Keep in mind the distinctions in this case is that they are not an officially contracted secruity force, they are not paid and the school is private, meaning less likely to ever have any actual police patrolling.
I appreciate all constructive thoughts.