• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Clarksville, IN band weapons for a day!


Regular Member
Aug 25, 2009
, ,
Indiana Code Section 35-47-11.1 Specifically Prohibits a Unit of Government from Regulating Firearms, Ammunition for Firearms, Firearm Accessories, Firearm Components, and Firearm Supplies.

There is NO Exception for The 'Thunder' Event.

The Law is Clear, and Violations of This Law by a Unit of Government are Recoverable through Court Action for Damages, and other Relief.


Jun 14, 2014
McCordsville, IN
First post here.

I read up on the law and found something contradictory.
First is the law your referring to...

"IC 35-47-11.1-2
Political subdivision regulation of firearms, ammunition, and
firearm accessories prohibited
Sec. 2. 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."

Yet later its states...

"IC 35-47-11.1-4
Not prohibited by chapter
Sec. 4. This chapter may not be construed to prevent any of the
(10) For an event occurring on property leased from a political
subdivision or municipal corporation by the promoter or
organizer of the event:
(A) the establishment, by the promoter or organizer, at the
promoter's or organizer's own discretion, of rules of conduct
or admission upon which attendance at or participation in the
event is conditioned; or
(B) the implementation or enforcement of the rules of
conduct or admission described in clause (A) by a political
subdivision or municipal corporation in connection with the
However, except as provided in subdivision (5) concerning a
building that contains a courtroom, a unit may not prohibit or
restrict the possession of a handgun under this subdivision in a
building owned or administered by the unit if the person who
possesses the handgun has been issued a valid license to carry
the handgun under IC 35-47-2."

... So it's legal if you have a permit, okay I get that. But isn't that statement redundant, since it isn't legal to carry without a permit? Or is it leaving the possibility to be charged with another crime IF they carry at an event without a permit?...

Also, yes suing a "political subdivision" for violation of state law is even stated in the chapter, which is surprising.

"IC 35-47-11.1-5
Civil actions concerning political subdivision violations
Sec. 5. A person adversely affected by an ordinance, a measure,
an enactment, a rule, or a policy adopted or enforced by a political
subdivision that violates this chapter may file an action in a court
with competent jurisdiction against the political subdivision for:
(1) declarative and injunctive relief; and
(2) actual and consequential damages attributable to the

"IC 35-47-11.1-7
Civil actions; recovery of damages, costs, and fees
Sec. 7. A prevailing plaintiff in an action under section 5 of this
chapter is entitled to recover from the political subdivision the
(1) The greater of the following:
(A) Actual damages, including consequential damages.
(B) Liquidated damages of three (3) times the plaintiff's
attorney's fees.
(2) Court costs (including fees).
(3) Reasonable attorney's fees."

So basically, if you sue and win you are legally entitled to ALL of these. "Liquidated damages of three (3) times the plaintiff's attorney's fees" sounds like a nice vacation! :cool:


Regular Member
Aug 8, 2008
South Bend, Indiana, USA
Yes, the part about having a license is redundant.

Yes, there have been several individuals who have sued under 35-47-11.1 and things turned out well for at least one of them.