Gun law leads to lawsuits in Evansville, Hammond

In a newly enacted law in Indiana, cities throughout the state are unable to enact or enforce laws imposing firearm restrictions on most city properties.

However, numerous cities across the state currently have regulations in violation of this statute.

Zionsville attorney Guy Allen Relford, who is an NRA-certified firearms instructor, has been working for full compliance since the law first took effect on July 1. He is currently engaged in two lawsuits against two Indiana cities, Evansville and Hammond, and anticipates additional lawsuits in the future.

Relford said the law was created to unify the state under one set of firearms regulations. By doing this, individuals with concealed firearms permits could travel across the state without fear of breaking city ordinances.

Relford said cities across Indiana have inconsistent firearms policies.

“It was completely varying from town to town... where a law-abiding gun owner, who is trying very hard to comply with Indiana law... never knows what the law is,” Relford said. “They could be absolutely legal to carry a gun on city property in one town and completely illegal in the next.”

So far, Relford said he has sent out dozens of emails to city councils across the state informing the cities of statutes in violation of the policy. He said some cities, such as Speedway, have reacted positively to his emails and are currently in the process of repealing their statutes.

However, he said other cities, such as Hammond, have refused to comply.

The Evansville City Council has repealed a city ordinance banning firearms in city parks. However, Relford filed a lawsuit against the city and the Department of Parks and Recreation.

On Sept. 10, Evansville resident Benjamin A. Magenheimer was escorted by local law enforcement from the Masker Park Zoo in Evansville. City officials insist Magenheimer was booted from the zoo for his “belligerent” behavior toward zoo employees and law enforcement,

However, Relford, who has accepted Magenheimer as his client, said he believes Magenheimer was removed from the zoo because he was carrying a handgun in a holster on his hip. He said he believes the city’s claims are a fabrication.

According to Evansville City Attorney David L. Jones, two visitors of the zoo became concerned when they noticed Magenheimer’s gun. According to Relford, Magenheimer was visiting the zoo with his wife and four-year-old son.

A zoo manager eventually confronted Magenheimer about the gun on his hip and requested he conceal the weapon. Magenheimer refused, Jones said, because he was within the legal boundaries for carrying the gun.

Because the zoo manager was unsure if any regulations prevented Magenheimer from carrying a gun on his hip, Jones said the manager called the police. Jones said the officer asked Magenheimer to conceal his firearm. He did not tell Magenheimer he was breaking any laws, but said they were concerned, Jones said.

“In conversation from there, he started getting loud and basically unruly,” Jones said.
Law enforcement then escorted Magenheimer from the zoo, Jones said.

Jones said he has not yet interviewed the officers involved in the incident and therefore could not specify Magenheimer’s “unruly” behavior.

Since the incident, Jones said he has received a number of phone calls from Evansville citizens who addressed concerns about Magenheimer. According to one man’s account, Jones said, Magenheimer was recently removed from a hospital after bringing a gun into the facility and acting unruly.

He said he does not have specific details about the removal at the hospital.

Several of Magenheimer’s neighbors, Jones said, have also called with complaints about Magenheimer’s behavior.

But Relford described Magenheimer as a respectable, clean-cut man who understands Indiana laws surrounding firearms. He said he does not believe Magenheimer acted in an inappropriate manner when zoo and law enforcement officials confronted him about his firearm.

In fact, Relford has challenged the city to prove its position. There are security cameras in the zoo, Relford said. In fact, he said he has personally visited the zoo and photographed security cameras located in the “Enchanted Forest.”

“If my client was belligerent and hostile and was causing a scene and that’s why he got thrown out, do you think I would make that challenge?” Relford said. “Do you think I would say, ‘Let’s see the security video?’ That’s the last thing I would want the people to see if my client was being a jerk.”

Relford said he thinks it’s “telling” that the city has not yet released video footage from security cameras.

However, Jones denies the existence of security cameras in the zoo.  
“There were no cameras that captured this incident, and I have checked and verified that,” Jones said.

Though Evansville officials say Magenheimer was removed from the zoo for his misconduct rather than for his possession of a firearm, on Monday the Evansville City Council repealed a city mandate banning firearm possession in city parks. 

Either way, Jones said the city plans to defend Relford’s lawsuit to the best of its ability and hopes witnesses will testify in court.

“We’ll see what a jury has to say about this,” Jones said.

In addition to the controversy in Evansville, Relford is currently representing two clients who are suing the city Hammond concerning three city statutes contradicting the new state law. Relford filed the lawsuit on Aug. 29, nearly two months after the new law went into effect.

“The towns that are doing the right thing and are complying with state law, they don’t need to worry about a lawsuit,” Relford said. “It’s only those ones like the city of Hammond where the mayor stood up and openly defied state law.”

Relford said in Hammond it is illegal for residents to possess more than 500 rounds of ammunition in their homes without a license from the city’s fire marshal. This ordinance is unjustifiable, Relford said. For people shooting .22s, Relford said a standard carton of ammunition, a brick, is sold in a quantity of 550 rounds.

“Go to Cabela’s in Hammond and they’ve got hundreds of these boxes sitting around,” Relford said. “In Hammond, if you buy one of those and take it home, you’ve just violated a city ordinance and you’re subject to a $2,500 fine.”

Relford said Hammond also has an ordinance banning firearms from any city park and an ordinance banning firearms from any building owned or managed by the city
Relford is currently waiting for a reply on the lawsuit from the city.

Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott could not be reached for an interview before the IDS print deadline.

Other cities across the state are also in violation of the new law, Relford said. If they resist compliance with the new ordinance, he said he plans to file additional lawsuits.