The courts can act. It is called case law. Remember the law is silent on it. I don't want OC to be illegal but I can tell you that the OC topic has been discussed at length in chiefs meetings ect. If chiefs associations get on board with being anti OC then legislation might follow. II just would like to see people use a little bit of common sense if they decide to OC.
Sorry Dude, but you aren't convincing anyone. The courts can't act on something that isn't illegal! Its the legislature that changes the laws and you elect them so hopefully you get to decide what is legal and what isnt in regards to this situation. And so what if OC is illegal? Won't you be happy then? I'd just conceal it then. But until that day, I OC everywhere possible and make friends everytime I do.
Opinion, yes. But alas you are trying (uselessly) to convince people on an internet message board to change their lifestyle and I "Disapprove". Actually its a little childish to say figuratively "I know you are but what am I"
That's why I didn't respond to the obviously contentious topic. However, I will give my now:
1. The LEOs who responded to the call should have simply checked to see if the OP had a valid LTCH. Then they should have informed the manager the OP was not in violation of any IN codes by OC. At this point, their obligatory duties would have been accomplished; unless the manager insisted they escort the OP out of his establishment.
2. This kind of inconsistent conduct on the part of LE is why I generally only CC in public places. Due to this inconsistent approach to handling MWAG calls, I can only surmise that there are undocumented departmental tactics employed throughout the State of IN to psychologically discourage private citizens from OC even when it is legal. In fact, a former T.H.P.D chief let it be known that his officers were to discourage OC by embarrassing, humiliating, and deliberately provoking private citizens who chose to legally OC.
Cool!!! You are a precedent now LOL. His arguments were creative, but pretty much doomed to failure. I found his attempt to argue that he hadn't "drawn" his gun interesting, to say the least. The judges got it right, of course. Juror's common sense is usally actually pretty good, and they know darned well whether or not he was trying to draw a gun on you. Then again, maybe he was just proud of it, and wanted to share his joy with you LOL.
Our rights have been eroded away for generations because good men did nothing while legislation passed around them. The 'common sense' approach you want to employ is to cower in hiding and not scare the masses. I for one will not merely be satisfied by asserting my rights in the dark. Do it in the light of day for the world to see.
As I told someone else re: this thread. When I was a CCB Special Deputy, if I had seen 5 guys outside the CCB, two of them with long-guns, I would have notified my supervisor and I'm sure it would have been investigated (and knowing the level of knowledge of CCB Special Deputies, it probably would have been mis-handled, too). As a supervisor, I would probably have fired anyone who didn't report it as a potential threat.