Need a quick answer to a LTCH app question

[cp009]

Yea basically what I got is that PDs are being nice to each other. Not claiming they are necessarily in the wrong.

 

[Mr. Habib]

Go back and inform them that you don't care what they claim the ISP told them, IC 35-47-11.1 is VERY clear on this issue and that your attorney will be filling suit shortly.

 

[Bill B]

I'm going to assume that you are in contact with a good attorney and are going to pursue this further.

 

[cp009]

I'm going to assume that you are in contact with a good attorney and are going to pursue this further.

You are assuming correctly

 

[HoughMade]

This statute is what local law enforcement must (shall) do in reference to an application for a LTCH.

(a) A person desiring a license to carry a handgun shall apply:

(1) to the chief of police or corresponding law enforcement officer of the municipality in which the applicant resides;

(2) if that municipality has no such officer, or if the applicant does not reside in a municipality, to the sheriff of the county in which the applicant resides after the applicant has obtained an application form prescribed by the superintendent; or

(3) if the applicant is a resident of another state and has a regular place of business or employment in Indiana, to the sheriff of the county in which the applicant has a regular place of business or employment.

* * *
​

(c) The officer to whom the application is made shall ascertain the applicant's name, full address, length of residence in the community, whether the applicant's residence is located within the limits of any city or town, the applicant's occupation, place of business or employment, criminal record, if any, and convictions (minor traffic offenses excepted), age, race, sex, nationality, date of birth, citizenship, height, weight, build, color of hair, color of eyes, scars and marks, whether the applicant has previously held an Indiana license to carry a handgun and, if so, the serial number of the license and year issued, whether the applicant's license has ever been suspended or revoked, and if so, the year and reason for the suspension or revocation, and the applicant's reason for desiring a license. The officer to whom the application is made shall conduct an investigation into the applicant's official records and verify thereby the applicant's character and reputation, and shall in addition verify for accuracy the information contained in the application, and shall forward this information together with the officer's recommendation for approval or disapproval and one (1) set of legible and classifiable fingerprints of the applicant to the superintendent.

Ind. Code Ann. §35-47-2-3.

This statute means that what they must do is all they may do and that they can put no additional requirements on the application for a LTCH. In other words, the State Police saying that the statute is "silent" on whether they can take pictures as a condition for fulfilling the statutorily mandated duties is an admission that the local law enforcement agency cannot do that. They are not permitted to add requirements as that would be regulating the posession, carrying or transportation" of firearms in violation of the statute below:

Except as provided in section 4 of this chapter, a political subdivision may not regulate:

(1) firearms, ammunition, and firearm accessories;

(2) the ownership, possession, carrying, transportation, registration, transfer, and storage of firearms, ammunition, and firearm accessories; and

(3) commerce in and taxation of firearms, firearm ammunition, and firearm accessories.

If they were clever (or too clever by half) they would claim that the photograph is one of the ways they gather the identifying information they must submit with the application...but since they don't submit that info to the state (the state has no way to process the photos), that would be a losing argument in my estimation.

 

[hdrenollet]

I'm all for principle and whatnot, but this seems like a way to get your ltch issuance delayed for a ridiculously long amount of time. IMO - having fingerprints taken is a lot more invasive than having a picture taken, and every application requires fingerprints. When I had my prints taken at the city-county building (downtown indy), an old mugshot popped up on the screen... I think I would have preferred they take a new photo, 'cause that wasn't my most photogenic moment...

I think I would go along with whatever they needed, just to get it processed and over with, then fight the system afterward, but that's just me...

 

[IndyGunFreak]

Interesting... How long as Highland PD been doing this? I don't live up that way, so I'd never heard this. If the OP had to do it 6yrs ago, it's obviously been quite a while. Surprised nobody has ever challenged them on this before.

My guess is, they're not going to like the result.

 

[actaeon277]

I'm all for principle and whatnot, but this seems like a way to get your ltch issuance delayed for a ridiculously long amount of time. IMO - having fingerprints taken is a lot more invasive than having a picture taken, and every application requires fingerprints. When I had my prints taken at the city-county building (downtown indy), an old mugshot popped up on the screen... I think I would have preferred they take a new photo, 'cause that wasn't my most photogenic moment...

I think I would go along with whatever they needed, just to get it processed and over with, then fight the system afterward, but that's just me...

Hmm.
We wouldn't want to make the police follow the law or anything.
I fight for the small things, because if you won't fight for the small things, you won't fight on the big issues.


Portage PD used to require a "reason LTCH was 'needed'" on the back of the application.
I think they might have stopped that before the 'preemption'.


NWI has some PDs that decide to add extras to the law. If you don't fight it, then they get away with it.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...arry-stopped-hobart-pd-while-pumping-gas.html
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...e/369091-open-carry-hobart-youtube-video.html

 

[actaeon277]

Interesting... How long as Highland PD been doing this? I don't live up that way, so I'd never heard this. If the OP had to do it 6yrs ago, it's obviously been quite a while. Surprised nobody has ever challenged them on this before.

My guess is, they're not going to like the result.

Sometimes people don't challenge, because it's "not worth their time".
"it's not worth it"
"if you have nothing to hide"
"you can't fight the government"
"they'll retaliate"

 

[cp009]

My father is in no hurry to obtain his LTCH he's lived without for some time (don't tell him I said that). It has been stated earlier in this thread that we must uphold our government to a standard. I am just happy my father is taking the initiative to stick it to the man so to speak because so many people just let municipalities get alway with things.

This is also to help the 2,500+ people that have submitted their pictures unknowingly that the PD was taking advantage of them.

 

[Bill B]

I'm all for principle and whatnot, but this seems like a way to get your ltch issuance delayed for a ridiculously long amount of time. IMO - having fingerprints taken is a lot more invasive than having a picture taken, and every application requires fingerprints. When I had my prints taken at the city-county building (downtown indy), an old mugshot popped up on the screen... I think I would have preferred they take a new photo, 'cause that wasn't my most photogenic moment...

I think I would go along with whatever they needed, just to get it processed and over with, then fight the system afterward, but that's just me...

The fingerprints are used by the state for your background check. The photo has no valid purpose in this situation.

 

[hdrenollet]

Unless they use the photo to run a facial recognition scan to verify identity, criminal history, etc... just like they do with fingerprints? They probably don't (and I'm really not taking their side or anything), but could that be considered a valid reason to take a photo?

 

[hdrenollet]

The fingerprints are used by the state for your background check. The photo has no valid purpose in this situation.

These prints where in addition to the electronic prints that I had taken at the Indiana State Police Headquarters. They were taken to verify my identity with the IMPD, and we're not passed on to the State.

This doesn't seem much different than a photo to me IMO.

 

[cp009]

Well the department has yet to change their position. The town attorney was also contacted. So without going into too much more detail Guy Relford is taking the initiative to correct this policy of the Highland Police Department. So I don't know if he would like to chime in and give more details, but for now I'm going to leave it to him until there is a final decision to this situation.

 

[actaeon277]

I'm definitely waiting to see what happens.

 

[tatic05]

I think someone should pass the popcorn...

 

[Ruffnek]

I think someone should pass the popcorn...

Mine!

 

[1775usmarine]

Mine!

Come on at least this time it isn't an idiot INGO member losing a wallet.

 

[lonehoosier]

 

[jamil]

1) On the "you don't have anything to hide do you?" argument, the police want to make sure you're obeying the law. Expecting them to obey the law is not hiding something.

2) For the people who go along with it for expediency, I understand. Sometimes you're busy. Life happens. But you thank the principled people for taking the time, effort, and expense to help reign in government overreach. Seems Highland is soon to be better served.

3)