TexasCHLforum.com

Apparently, Indiana law permits carrying in government buildings unless the building contains a courtroom. Lafayette, Indiana, lawyer Kirk Freeman is in the news because he looked into whether he was being told the truth. Officials claimed there was a courtroom in the basement of a new building across the street from the courthouse. He investigated that and found the claim to be untrue. Then he filed an open records request to learn who was behind the false claim.

On or about May 17, 2017, Freeman was pulled into a restroom and questioned by courthouse deputies. Someone had accused him of carrying a gun in the courthouse and ranting about it on Facebook. Freeman knew that was nonsense, so asked the officers who made those allegations and who ordered them to question him. They reportedly told him they could not tell him. Freeman believes someone may have intended to intimidate him for raising questions and asking for public information.

https://lafayettecitizenjournal.com/201 ... a-request/

I am curious to see where his inquiries lead him.

bdgyeah wrote:I am curious to see where his inquiries lead him.

I'll predict that the answer is: nowhere.

The City of Lewisville holds Western Days downtown and fences off several city blocks. A couple of years ago, they added a private security firm and started wanding everyone who entered. I refused to be wanded and ended up having a chat with two of Lewisville's finest who escorted me in - after they had wanded me and the wand screached over my EDC and spare mag.

The next year, the city posted 51% signs on the fence, claiming that it was required by the TABC because of the liquor license for the event. Except that no one could find the license information for the liquor vendor. I wanted to do an open records request for the name of that vendor but some of my life events got into the way. I'll be, along with the nowhere answer above, that the liquor vendor does not have a 51% license, even though the signs were posted everywhere and that if someone really investigated the situation, it would be chalked up to a large scale "misunderstanding". The sneeky people who pull these stunts, just like the new Denton County Precinct 3 building in Lewisville that is posted 30.06, game the system for their own ends. They depend on people not digging too deep and try to prevent them from doing so.

I bet if you do a search, you will find that the liquor vendor is in fact a 51% license, because that's all the vendor sells. And since the license is for an event, it likely covers the entire grounds where the event is held, even tho consumption is restricted to a certain area. They do this at Bass Hall in FTW also. Many public events use this tactic to prevent carry. They used to do this at the Waco Cameron Park Zoo, by keeping up the 51% signs, even when there was no liquor event (but they have changed now).

oohrah wrote:I bet if you do a search, you will find that the liquor vendor is in fact a 51% license, because that's all the vendor sells. And since the license is for an event, it likely covers the entire grounds where the event is held, even tho consumption is restricted to a certain area. They do this at Bass Hall in FTW also. Many public events use this tactic to prevent carry. They used to do this at the Waco Cameron Park Zoo, by keeping up the 51% signs, even when there was no liquor event (but they have changed now).

The premises definition for the TABC licensee is irrelevant to the 46.035 statute prohibiting licensee carry, it covers only a "building or portion of a building" . Dallas tried this with the State Fair 20 years ago and presumably would if they could still get away with it.

KLB wrote:Apparently, Indiana law permits carrying in government buildings unless the building contains a courtroom. Lafayette, Indiana, lawyer Kirk Freeman is in the news because he looked into whether he was being told the truth. Officials claimed there was a courtroom in the basement of a new building across the street from the courthouse. He investigated that and found the claim to be untrue. Then he filed an open records request to learn who was behind the false claim.

On or about May 17, 2017, Freeman was pulled into a restroom and questioned by courthouse deputies. Someone had accused him of carrying a gun in the courthouse and ranting about it on Facebook. Freeman knew that was nonsense, so asked the officers who made those allegations and who ordered them to question him. They reportedly told him they could not tell him. Freeman believes someone may have intended to intimidate him for raising questions and asking for public information.

https://lafayettecitizenjournal.com/201 ... a-request/

Mr. Freeman has (or had) two legal actions going here. One was to find out who designated a storage room in the basement as a court room, and then other is to find out who told the deputies to pull him aside and question him.

As far as whether he will get to the bottom of it: well, he is a lawyer, a criminal defense lawyer by trade, he is a 2A advocate, and he is apparently quite persistent. Since he has the skills to work the system, and doesn't have to hire somebody else, I think he is not going to be put off easily or run out of money for legal work.

I regularly follow an Indiana gun forum where he is an active member, and he posted about this when it first happened, and also posts on his Facebook page. If you're interested in first hand details from him, here are the links:

https://www.ingunowners.com/forums/carr ... yette.html

https://www.facebook.com/kirkfreemanlaw/

Interrogated in a bathroom? Those aren't cops, they're thugs.

Mr. Freeman's own comment on the deputies who questioned him:

(In no way do I blame or hold the Sheriff's deputies for any wrongdoing. They are retired cops, brave and honorable men doing a retirement gig and I hold them not at fault for any issue here).

It's no big deal because they're just following orders?



I understand Mr. Freeman is an attorney and has to go to that courthouse for business, but I'm free to be frank about armed men sent to intimidate someone and refusing to say who sent them.

Freeman knew that was nonsense, so asked the officers who made those allegations and who ordered them to question him. They reportedly told him they could not tell him. Freeman believes someone may have intended to intimidate him for raising questions and asking for public information.

greyjack wrote:Interrogated in a bathroom? Those aren't cops, they're thugs.

Maybe they gave him a swirlie...

ScottDLS wrote:

greyjack wrote:Interrogated in a bathroom? Those aren't cops, they're thugs.

Maybe they gave him a swirlie...

Waterboarding Lite

"The arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled." - misattributed to Cicero, but true nonetheless.

The Annoyed Man wrote:"The arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled." - misattributed to Cicero, but true nonetheless.

Some officials' arrogance begs to be tempered like steel, in fire and water.

I believe in Texas the "owner" of a liquor license must produce the license on request of anyone who asks... I believe it is required by the alcoholic beverage code.

greyjack wrote:It's no big deal because they're just following orders?



I understand Mr. Freeman is an attorney and has to go to that courthouse for business, but I'm free to be frank about armed men sent to intimidate someone and refusing to say who sent them.

Freeman knew that was nonsense, so asked the officers who made those allegations and who ordered them to question him. They reportedly told him they could not tell him. Freeman believes someone may have intended to intimidate him for raising questions and asking for public information.

Mr. Freeman has never been shy about excoriating anyone, cops or others, when he thought them out of line. If he says the deputies were not out of line to investigate, then I frankly feel he probably knows what he's talking about.