Open carry is not grounds for even a Terry Stop. Fourth Circuit agrees with me-

[Prometheus]

After having the chance to read the text of the decision, it's truly vindicating for those in RKBA circles as well as for the fourth amendment.

I break down why the Fourth Circuit got it right and highlight some excerpts from the decision.

13C - Thirteen Colonies: Open Carry is not grounds for a non voluntary police encounter.

 

[mrjarrell]

Unfortunately, it won't apply here in Indiana and Open Carriers will still be open to questioning. Maybe one of these days Indiana will change things to make carry legal without state permission.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Correct me if I'm wrong...but since in Indiana you may not carry a gun unless you have a LTCH, this decision, if appealed, would have no bearing here.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Correct me if I'm wrong...but since in Indiana you may not carry a gun unless you have a LTCH, this decision, if appealed, would have no bearing here.

It could go either way. If I, for example, CC, an officer has no way of knowing that I have a handgun, and thus has no PC to suspect me of committing that particular offense under our current law. If the two of us happen to be walking somewhere and are both armed, but yours is OC and he stops you but not me, an argument could be made for you being singled out. Ideally, however, the solution to this is indeed removing the requirement of the LTCH.

IANAL, IDPOOTV, IDSIAHIELN, and TINLA

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Prometheus]

Correct me if I'm wrong...but since in Indiana you may not carry a gun unless you have a LTCH, this decision, if appealed, would have no bearing here.

Setting aside that Indiana isn't in the 4th circuits jurisdiction, the court makes some excellent points that would cover what you are asking.

Please follow the link and read the excepts and then if you still aren't sure, follow on to the full decision.

Can an officer pull you over because driving is illegal in Indiana without a license? Nope.

Read thru the courts words for yourself: 13C - Thirteen Colonies: Open Carry is not grounds for a non voluntary police encounter.

 

[ModernGunner]

Read it all. Not sure what the idea is the OP was wanting to share.

 

[Denny347]

It's one thing for a court of another jurisdiction to make a ruling, it's a whole other ball of wax for the USSC to get involved to make it binding nationwide.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

True enough, Denny but FEderal court is federal court and CAN be used as precedent as a plausible outcome in court, though it is not necessarily binding if the judge from another circuit has reason to dismiss it as invalid precendence.

The language from the excerpt by Prometheus is pretty potent and is obviously directed at certain law enforcement habits such as detainment without RAS jsut by citing Terry.

 

[lonehoosier]

Read it all. Not sure what the idea is the OP was wanting to share.

Maybe it has to do with something like this.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...tain_andrew_champ_for_legally_carrying-2.html

In my opinion LEO has every right in Indiana to stop you and ask for your LTCH if you are OC/CC a handgun. It is illegal for someone to carry a hand gun with out a LTCH in Indiana. Also my opinion is that court ruling only applies to the states that have open carry with out a license/permit.

I get what Biil of Rights is saying but that argument will have to be fought in court.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

“it is undisputed that under the laws of North Carolina, which permit its residents to openly carry firearms . . . Troupe’s gun was legally possessed and displayed.

This is not the case in Indiana as Indiana requires a license to carry (openly or concealed) a handgun. Carrying a handgun is a crime in Indiana, the LTCH is an affirmative defense (well, affirmative defense plus).

I think this is an important difference.

Just another motivation to eliminate the LTCH.

 

[GunnerDan]

Hey Kirk,

I assume that the reason an officer has the legal authority to stop and demand an LTCH from a person carrying a handgun is kind of like how the game warden has the legal authority to stop you from fishing and demand that you provide a fishing license. IT is unlawful to fish unless properly licensed and until you prove that you are licensed to fish, or to carry a handgun then it is a requirement to provide the officer your license. Now what about a long gun, if I am walking down the street minding my own business carrying a long gun and since there is no requirement to provide identification to a police officer unless the stop is considered a Terry stop, then there is no requirement to identify oneself to a LEO upon demand, correct?

Gunner

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Well, I would not go as far as the DNR analogy (slightly different), but think of it this way:

Carrying handgun=crime in Indiana, license is a defense.

Carrying long gun=not a crime in Indiana.

Identification is a different matter but Indiana requires no identification unless you are suspected of committing an infraction or ordinance violation.

So, if you are carrying a long gun and throw a granola bar wrapper on the sidewalk, an officer can stop you for littering (littering and, littering and) but not carrying the long gun (assuming no game law violations were at issue).

 

[drillsgt]

This is not the case in Indiana as Indiana requires a license to carry (openly or concealed) a handgun. Carrying a handgun is a crime in Indiana, the LTCH is an affirmative defense (well, affirmative defense plus).

I think this is an important difference.

Just another motivation to eliminate the LTCH.

But then just any ol' person could carry a gun, it would be madness!

 

[jgreiner]

This is not the case in Indiana as Indiana requires a license to carry (openly or concealed) a handgun. Carrying a handgun is a crime in Indiana, the LTCH is an affirmative defense (well, affirmative defense plus).

I think this is an important difference.

Just another motivation to eliminate the LTCH.

The time to do that is now...with a super majority in house and senate, and a Pub gov.

 

[jgreiner]

But then just any ol' person could carry a gun, it would be madness!

I will be moving to Virginia in the near future, and I am looking forward to their Open Carry laws. No permit/license needed to open carry, just for conceal carry.

 

[apfroggy0408]

New Mexico has similar OC laws, needing no license to OC only CC. OC'd all the time and the biggest reaction I got was a double take then continuing with their business.

 

[Bill of Rights]

But then just any ol' person could carry a gun, it would be madness!

Not just ol' persons , young ones, too!

Madness, I tell you! MADNESS

Blessings,
Bill

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Setting aside that Indiana isn't in the 4th circuits jurisdiction, the court makes some excellent points that would cover what you are asking.

Please follow the link and read the excepts and then if you still aren't sure, follow on to the full decision.

Can an officer pull you over because driving is illegal in Indiana without a license? Nope.

Read thru the courts words for yourself: 13C - Thirteen Colonies: Open Carry is not grounds for a non voluntary police encounter.

I did read your blog, Prometheus. I did not take the time to read the entire decision however. I would love for it to apply to Indiana--as is, but to my layman's understanding, as I eluded to in my earlier response, I am of the understanding, that in Indiana, it would not apply, as Kirk states below, better than I did.

The difference, I think, is that driving a car, in and of its self is not illegal while the mere possession of a fire arm (off of your property, etc.) is.

I'd love to be wrong.

This is not the case in Indiana as Indiana requires a license to carry (openly or concealed) a handgun. Carrying a handgun is a crime in Indiana, the LTCH is an affirmative defense (well, affirmative defense plus).

I think this is an important difference.

Just another motivation to eliminate the LTCH.

 

[CathyInBlue]

The difference, I think, is that driving a car, in and of its self is not illegal while the mere possession of a fire arm (off of your property, etc.) is.

I'd love to be wrong.

You are wrong. Driving an automobile and carrying a handgun in the state of Indiana are profoundly similar activities. When done on private lands, no government permits are required. When done in public, it is presumptively illegal, with a license issued by the state being an affirmative defense to committing the act without a license.

Driving, however, differs from carrying a handgun in Indiana is two very important ways: 1) You are required to have your DL on your person while driving on a public thoroughfare (2011 saw a similar requirement expunged from the law for handgun carrying), and 2) arbitrary documents checks on drivers was ruled unreasonable and hence a violation of the 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures by the SCOTUS in Delaware V Prouse.

This case in the 4th Cir. could become handgun carriers', OC and CC alike, Delaware V Prouse, which would overrule the state laws which make carrying a handgun a presumptive crime, making it much harder for LEOs to harass identifiable handgun carriers for documents checks.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

You are wrong. Driving an automobile and carrying a handgun in the state of Indiana are profoundly similar activities. When done on private lands, no government permits are required. When done in public, it is presumptively illegal, with a license issued by the state being an affirmative defense to committing the act without a license.

Driving, however, differs from carrying a handgun in Indiana is two very important ways: 1) You are required to have your DL on your person while driving on a public thoroughfare (2011 saw a similar requirement expunged from the law for handgun carrying), and 2) arbitrary documents checks on drivers was ruled unreasonable and hence a violation of the 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures by the SCOTUS in Delaware V Prouse.

This case in the 4th Cir. could become handgun carriers', OC and CC alike, Delaware V Prouse, which would overrule the state laws which make carrying a handgun a presumptive crime, making it much harder for LEOs to harass identifiable handgun carriers for documents checks.

I hope you're right.