Indiana CPl: returned for more info?

[rxraptor02]

My g/f submitted her CPl application on the same day that I did. Mine was issued on April 4th. She waited a week and called to see if it was in the system. She was told it was in the system and being processed. well she called again today to see if it was approved. The lady on the phone told her that it was missing info or they needed more info. We checked our copies of the application form. The only difference between our forms was her occupation. At the time she applied she had no job and put unemployed.

We are waiting for the return of her application so we can see what she needs to do.

I hope she doesn't have to start all over with the application process.

But on the bright side of things she was told it was not denied.

Could her not having a job caused her application to be returned?

Has this happened to anyone else?

 

[RH822]

No, Indiana is a "shall issue" state. If she qualifies she will receive her permit (employment is not a qualifying factor).
Some one some where forgot to dot their I's and cross their T's. They'll get it figured out and as I said IF she qualifies she will get it.

RH

 

[kludge]

To qualify for an Indiana LCH you must be a proper person and have a proper reason. Both are defined in statute:

IC 35-47-1-7
"Proper person"
35-47-1-7 Sec. 7. "Proper person" means a person who:
(1) does not have a conviction for resisting law enforcement
under IC 35-44-3-3 within five (5) years before the person
applies for a license or permit under this chapter;
(2) does not have a conviction for a crime for which the person
could have been sentenced for more than one (1) year;
(3) does not have a conviction for a crime of domestic violence
(as defined in IC 35-41-1-6.3), unless a court has restored the
person's right to possess a firearm under IC 3-7-13-5;
(4) is not prohibited by a court order from possessing a
handgun;
(5) does not have a record of being an alcohol or drug abuser as
defined in this chapter;
(6) does not have documented evidence which would give rise
to a reasonable belief that the person has a propensity for
violent or emotionally unstable conduct;
(7) does not make a false statement of material fact on the
person's application;
(8) does not have a conviction for any crime involving an
inability to safely handle a handgun;
(9) does not have a conviction for violation of the provisions of
this article within five (5) years of the person's application; or
(10) does not have an adjudication as a delinquent child for an
act that would be a felony if committed by an adult, if the
person applying for a license or permit under this chapter is less
than twenty-three (23) years of age.

IC 35-47-1-8
"Proper reason"
35-47-1-8 Sec. 8. "Proper reason" means for the defense of
oneself or the state of Indiana.

 

[exar]

Don't worry, I don't know anyone who has ever been denied for a LTCH.

 

[El Tejon]

Bureaucratic snafu.

I've had some real lulus here at the office but nothing like that.

I once had a guy denied because he was a "convicted murderer" (excepting the fact that he was 40 years younger and had a different spelling of his middle name it was an exact match).

 

[rxraptor02]

Thanks guys,

We are still waiting for the return of the application. I hope it was just something missed my the city police dept. I was looking at out applications and noticed I left off the county of residence on mine. After thinking about it I should of had the problem and not her. I just hope we can get this cleared up quick.

We think after this is all fixed she might have to wait all over again. Which she is very upset about. It had been almost 4 months and I got her hooked on shooting and she is ready to find a gun that will suit her well.

 

[RH822]

We think after this is all fixed she might have to wait all over again. Which she is very upset about. It had been almost 4 months and I got her hooked on shooting and she is ready to find a gun that will suit her well.

So? What's stopping her? She does not need a permit to purchase a handgun in Indiana. Tell her to find her gun, buy it, shoot it and when her permit shows up, carry it.

Have a blast gun shopping.
RH

 

[kludge]

"Shooting" it is hard to do in Indiana without a permit. There is no exception in the law that lets you take your gun to the shooting range.

IC 35-47-2-1
Carrying a handgun without a license or by person convicted of
domestic battery
35-47-2-1 Sec. 1. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) and
section 2 of this chapter, a person shall not carry a handgun in any
vehicle or on or about the person's body, except in the person's
dwelling, on the person's property or fixed place of business, without
a license issued under this chapter being in the person's possession.

<snip>

IC 35-47-2-2
Excepted persons
35-47-2-2 Sec. 2. Section 1 of this chapter does not apply to:

<snip>

(11) any person while carrying a handgun unloaded and in a
secure wrapper from the place of purchase to his dwelling or
fixed place of business, or to a place of repair or back to his
dwelling or fixed place of business, or in moving from one
dwelling or business to another.

IC 35-47-2-23
Violations; classes of misdemeanors and felonies

<snip>

(c) A person who violates section 1 of this chapter commits a
Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class C felony:
(1) if the offense is committed:
(A) on or in school property;
(B) within one thousand (1,000) feet of school property; or
(C) on a school bus; or
(2) if the person:
(A) has a prior conviction of any offense under:
(i) this subsection; or
(ii) subsection (d); or
(B) has been convicted of a felony within fifteen (15) years
before the date of the offense.

 

[rxraptor02]

She is waiting to buy one because she cannot take it anywhere to shoot.

She has been going with me to shoot. She has been doing really well with all of mine.

She could buy one and I could carry it to/from the range until her permit arrives. but she is happy shooting the guns that I have right now. Once she gets the permit and has the ability to carry every day she will then look for one. I told her she could pick out any carry gun she wants and I will pay for it.

 

[kludge]

That's good to hear!

My post wasn't necessarily for you, but for lurkers who stumble by.

The Indy 1500 is coming around again... June 1,2,3

www.indy1500.com

Bob (Plainfied Shooting Supply) always has a big selection and good prices.

 

[Headless]

Holy cow. You can't even have your handgun in your ****ing trunk, in a locked case, unloaded in indiana? without a concealed carry permit....?!
LOL.

 

[El Tejon]

1. There is no such thing in Indiana as a concealed carry permit, italicized or not. A License to Carry a Handgun does not specify whether the weapon(s) are to be carried openly or concealed, under your hat or on a boat with a goat.

2. While I have never seen it prosecuted in my years, but yes, it can be construed that carrying an unloaded pistol to or from the range in a locked case is "carrying". You could be arrested and prosecuted for it. (The prosecution may be unlikely to prevail, but being arrested is a hassle and you have to deal with guys like me). Thus, get a license to carry, lifetime.

Yes, 99 out of 100 cops could care less and may be under the impression that you can carry to the range and there may be a 99 out of 100 chance that your attorney can talk the Prosecuting Attorney out of any action. However, there is always the possibility of that 1 cop and prosecutor making your life rough.

3. Yay, 1500! I can't wait to see my nephews.

 

[Headless]

My mistake - the OP referring to 'cpl' and i thought that meant 'concealed pistol license'. I noticed the 3rd post said correctly LCH - missed that. Thanks for the correction...but...
That's totally crazy. A permit required just to have a gun in your posession? Is Indiana still in the USA? Was there an earthquake that dumped it into NYC or wash d.c. or something?

So much for 'shall not be infringed' That makes me sad.

 

[El Tejon]

Headless, no, you do not need a permit to possess a gun.

Under Indiana law, one needs a license to carry a handgun off your property or business. No license is required to carry a rifle, shotgun, submachine gun, club, Bowie knife, baseball bat, inter alia,.

We are used to people referring to the Indiana license as a CHL (since they do in Texas), CCW or CPL or C something-or-other. However, concealment is not a requirement here as it is in many states. Typical Indiana, smile and nod.

 

[Headless]

Right...so if the only gun i own is a handgun, and i'm not at home, it's illegal for me to possess it.

 

[El Tejon]

That is incorrect as a blanket statement.

Presuming you are not in one of the many exempt categories for the license, and change possess to "carry", and off your property to include your business, then the answer is generally yes.

 

[mp510]

so do they let you indiana folk transport between the place of purchase and your residence/business premisis without a permit or does that require one as well?

 

[Headless]

I group together place of business with my property (it is in my case), sorry about that; i wasn't too clear.
Seems like you are arguing that the gun control isn't as bad as it seems given the laws provided in this thread... you mention 'the many exempt categories', of which it appears there are a total of 11 from what i can see, 5 of which are ways of phrasing 'cops' and 4 of which are ways of saying 'government employees/military officers on duty'...and the last 2 are employee's of 'express companies when engaged in company business' and the exception discussed below with MP510 - the exemptions don't seem to help the average joe keep his handgun nearby when away from home (and work)..

MP510: you can legally take your gun back and forth from work and from a place of repair, in your car, apparently. That's it. It must be 'unloaded and in a secure wrapper'...The exception to the law forbidden possession of handguns that applies in this case:
(11) any person while carrying a handgun unloaded and in a secure wrapper from the place of purchase to his dwelling or fixed place of business, or to a place of repair or back to his dwelling or fixed place of business, or in moving from one dwelling or business to another.

From what i've read of the statutes, it appears that unless you're in law enforcement, active military duty, work for an 'express company(?)' or are part of any organization 'duly authorized to purchase or receive such weapons from the United States or from this state who are at or are going to or from their place of assembly or target practice' (government contractor it sounds like), or actively on your way to or from your home or place of business...you can't have your pistol in your car, even unloaded in the trunk, legally. Hopefully i didn't get it wrong again - Tejon will probably want to fry me if i keep spouting untruths.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Presuming you are not in one of the many exempt categories for the license, and change possess to "carry", and off your property to include your business, then the answer is generally yes.

So if you don't have the appropriate license, you can't buy the gun and transport it to your home or business?

Actually, the whole thread brings back my time in Bloomington (20 years ago a or so ). I wasn't doing any shooting at the time, but I remember this guy on TV who said, "I don't want to make money, folks, I love to sell guns!"

I'm surprised the gun laws are so restrictive - I think of it as a solidly Republican state.

Indiana did have some wierd laws. At least when I was there, I think that whatever party had a majority in the legislature administered the Drivers License bureaus. The liquor licenses were equally wierd - the licenses to served mixed drink were in very limited supply, and handed out in a highly political process. I think that when I was in Bloomington, there were only five bars in the whole town (with 40,000 students - most of them of legal drinking age in those days). Though they were awarded by the state, business could sell their licenses for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Mike

 

[RPCVYemen]

So if you don't have the appropriate license, you can't buy the gun and transport it to your home or business?

Never mind - Headless already answered that one.

Evil

 

[kludge]

What sux for me is that I just took my NRA traning certification course for pistol, and technically there is no way for me to teach people how be safe with/shoot their own gun unless they have a license.

I'll be calling the local sheriff/police to see what their interpretation is... er, maybe I should be calling a lawyer.

 

[ARperson]

Bob (Plainfied Shooting Supply) always has a big selection and good prices

I think Bradis is better. Plainfield has always been a complete asswipe attitude when I/better half have gone in. Not to mention one time I heard this discussing a particular firearm that one of the "customers" had in his possession. The whole thing was complete BS. I don't remember the details now as it was a few years ago, but I got out to the car, looked at hubby, and we both started laughing.

But back on topic.

Could someone explain to me why a "shall issue" state requires applicants to "qualify." My take on the whole thing is that an applicant does not qualify, but rather jumps through the required bureaucratic hoops. Qualification does not include filling out paperwork and getting fingerprinted, IMO. So, the real issue is that someone has to be disqualified based on "bad behaviors" to be denied. We're all "qualified" by being residents of Indiana. Not that it matters one way or the other. Just that I might be a little more interested in why there was a glitch in the process for no apparent reason.

rxraptor02, what date did you make actual application? We applied for lifetime renewal in the first week in April, and we're trying to get a feel for how long this whole stinking process might take.

 

[kludge]

Here's what gets me


IC 35-47-2.5-14
Providing handgun to ineligible purchaser; exemptions
35-47-2.5-14 Sec. 14. (a) This section does not apply to a person
who provides a handgun to the following:
(1) A child who is attending a hunters safety course or a
firearms safety course or an adult who is supervising the child
during the course.
(2) A child engaging in practice in using a firearm for target
shooting at an established range or in an area where the
discharge of a firearm is not prohibited or is supervised by:
(A) a qualified firearms instructor; or
(B) an adult who is supervising the child while the child is
at the range.
(3) A child engaging in an organized competition involving the
use of a firearm or participating in or practicing for a
performance by an organized group under Section 501(c)(3) of
the Internal Revenue Code that uses firearms as a part of a
performance or an adult who is involved in the competition or
performance.
(4) A child who is hunting or trapping under a valid license
issued to the child under IC 14-22.
(5) A child who is traveling with an unloaded firearm to or from
an activity described in this section.



So anybody can pick up your kid with your unloaded handgun and take him to the shooting range for practice (or he can ride his bike).

Certainly an adult should be allowed to "[travel] with an unloaded firearm to or from an activity described in this section"

 

[kludge]

Could someone explain to me why a "shall issue" state requires applicants to "qualify."

ARperson, great point.

"Qualify" was my word, and it was a pooly chosen one at that. This it what it actually says:

(e) If it appears to the superintendent that the applicant:
(1) has a proper reason for carrying a handgun;
(2) is of good character and reputation;
(3) is a proper person to be licensed; and
(4) is:
(A) a citizen of the United States; or
(B) not a citizen of the United States but is allowed to carry
a firearm in the United States under federal law;
the superintendent shall issue to the applicant a qualified or an
unlimited license to carry any handgun lawfully possessed by the
applicant.

 

[ARperson]

Yeah, I know. It's still tacit qualification. But under the "shall issue" banner, it's assumed that anyone applying already fits those criteria, and it's up to the powers that be to find out that they are not. At least that's how I understand/take the whole mess to work out.

No biggie. I just don't like to give ground even in semantics. It's bad enough in real life. Why make it worse than it is?