Ind. gun owner sues city over removal from zoo
Updated 04:23 p.m., Tuesday, September 20, 2011
EVANSVILLE, Ind. (AP) — An Evansville man has sued the city, claiming police violated a new state law when they made him leave the Mesker Park Zoo for refusing to cover a gun on his hip.
An attorney for Benjamin A. Magenheimer said the man was singled out because he was carrying a gun, and police and zoo employees clearly violated a new law that allows local governments to ban guns only from buildings that house courtrooms. Local ordinances banning firearms from other locations, such as libraries and parks, are no longer allowed.
According to a police report, zoo officials called police Sept. 10 after several patrons complained about a man who was visibly carrying a handgun. When one of the officers asked him to conceal the weapon, the man refused and "started getting loud and causing a scene," the report said.
Officers asked the man to leave the zoo because he was frightening other patrons, the report said. He refused and police escorted him out. After he left, zoo staff reportedly told police that Magenheimer told them he could not be denied his right to bear arms.
Magenheimer has a license to carry a gun and had a copy on his person at the time, the suit said. Gun licenses do not require concealment, the newspaper reported.
Magenheimer's attorney, Guy Relford of Zionsville, disputed the police report's claim that Magenheimer was argumentative.
"At no point did he become disorderly in any way," Relford said.
But City Attorney David Jones said Magenheimer was removed from the zoo for causing a disturbance, not just for carrying a gun. He said the city would fight the lawsuit, which was filed Friday in Vanderburgh Circuit Court.
"To me, it's not about the gun. I don't think you have a right to intimidate or frighten people or create the disturbance he created. To go into a petting zoo area with a gun, where there are children, that's just idiotic," Jones said.
The lawsuit names Evansville and its Department of Parks & Recreation as defendants. It seeks financial damages, a court declaration finding the city's actions were illegal and an injunction preventing future similar actions by the city.
Jones said Evansville has no ordinances or policies that restrict firearms. He said city officials reviewed the issue after the law was passed this summer. The law took effect July 1.
Jones said the law doesn't give local governments much leeway.
"It's poorly written. I don't think it was given much thought as to situations such as this," he said.
Relford also is representing two clients in a similar lawsuit against Hammond that was filed after the city council rejected an ordinance that would have brought local laws in line with the state change. The city directed its police officers not to enforce Hammond's ban on carrying firearms in municipal buildings earlier this month, but the city's law against carrying guns in public buildings and parks remains in place.
Information from: Evansville Courier & Press, http://www.courierpress.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment