Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 47

Thread: Lawrence county at it again!

  1. #1
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694

    Lawrence county at it again!

    From the Levisa Lazer:

    Another "hot" topic at today's meeting was how to handle the state's requirement that the 'open carry' laws for weapons which is a federal law, could be changed so that people are not allowed to carry a weapon in the courthouse.

    County Attorney Michael Hogan and Sheriff Garrett Roberts have been adament in their call for the court to do something about the law which cannot be ignored by localities.

    Sheriff Garrett Roberts and County Attorney Mike Hogan are working on a lawsuit that would forbid the 'open carrying' of weapons in the courthouse. "I don't thimk people realize how many times on Mondays that people lose custody of their children for one reason or another which makes them mad enough to harm court officials," Hogan said. "There are several issues that make people so angry they might use a weapon if they had one."

    The court has been wrestling with the issue since Osborne received a letter and a complaint from a Lawrence County citizen asking that the law be enforced and citizens allowed to carry weapons in the courthouse like the consittution says. Roberts and Hogan do not deny the legality of the 'open carry' law but say they want to challenge it.

    The fiscal court voted 4-0 today on a motion by Bill Lemaster and second by Earl Boggs to have Hogan file a lawsuit challenging the validity of the law although Hogan said he is still researching whether to file it in Lawrence Circuit Court or in Frankfort.

    "I'm all for hunting rights and the right to own weapons," Magistrate Morris Howard said. "But I just can't see people carrying around guns in the courthouse, why would they want to do that?"
    This is getting on my nerves. I didn't get the chance to go to this meeting so I don't know anymore than this article.

    Also, I think someone told me that fiscal courts cannot pass an ordinance (1st or 2nd reading) during a special meeting. Did I just imagine that or can someone point me to that information?
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917
    How obnoxious!

    I emailed Roberts and commented on the article. Are you attending any more meetings? Anyone know when can we file suit on our own based on SB500?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917
    It appears we're up against a lot here--all the magistrates, the sheriff, and the commonwealth attorney.

  4. #4
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    Quote Originally Posted by langzaiguy View Post
    It appears we're up against a lot here--all the magistrates, the sheriff, and the commonwealth attorney.
    Yep, all of them are part of the "good ol boys" club. One starts something and the rest follows. We can file suit January 12th (I think). They don't care what the laws are, they have some power and that is all that matters to them.

    It pisses me off because this is MY tax money trying to take away MY rights that I exercise, this is all because of me. You don't even want to know how many people illegally conceal carry in there, but one person follows state laws and they want your rights removed.
    Last edited by 09jisaac; 10-29-2012 at 07:10 PM.
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917
    I say we pool our money, hire and attorney and follow suit. What do we know at the moment: are there ordinances on the books against OC? signs against it? have they prevented anyone from OCing?

  6. #6
    Regular Member self preservation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Owingsville,KY
    Posts
    1,039
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post
    I don't think they have enough. Its not a matter of getting a law changed. It will take a constitutional amendment to overturn open carry.
    So do you think that they are wasting their time, or do you think these are the "right folks" to make the noise to take away our rights?
    “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Edmund Burke

    self-pres·er·va·tion (slfprzr-vshn)
    n.
    1. Protection of oneself from harm or destruction.
    2. The instinct for individual preservation; the innate desire to stay alive.

  7. #7
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    Quote Originally Posted by langzaiguy View Post
    I say we pool our money, hire and attorney and follow suit. What do we know at the moment: are there ordinances on the books against OC? signs against it? have they prevented anyone from OCing?
    They have an ordinance STILL on the books (as far as I know), they're still no signs visible and they had me thrown out of the courthouse once and threatened both KYglockster and I with arrest for carrying firearms in the courthouse.

    These are the people over Lawrence county, all of them. What is getting me down is that to fix ANY problems you have with them you have to go back to the government (them or someone that they know personally) to fix it.
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917
    Well, we can always go back and try to attend a meeting while OCing. Did they say what you would be charged with?

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917

    Cognitive Dissonance

    They argue that they will go ahead and file suit to change the law to make it illegal to open carry, but they threaten you all now saying that you're breaking the law. Either it's legal to OC and they may continue in their legal challenges, or it is illegal to open carry in the courthouse and there's no law to change. Not only are they wrong, but they're trying to have it both ways.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,505
    Quote Originally Posted by langzaiguy View Post
    It appears we're up against a lot here--all the magistrates, the sheriff, and the commonwealth attorney.
    ...and a metric ton of ignorance.

    Really, they think there's some "federal law" at play here?

  11. #11
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    Quote Originally Posted by langzaiguy View Post
    Well, we can always go back and try to attend a meeting while OCing. Did they say what you would be charged with?
    I was thrown out of one meeting, that same day Glockster and I was threatened with arrested. By the next fiscal court meeting the Sheriff (Roberts) talked to a different attorney that said that Glockster and I were legally allowed to carry. After that I have OCed in the courthouse plenty of times. Now this came up.
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  12. #12
    Regular Member DrakeZ07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,107
    Hang on a minute, I'm confused. Why are the officials makign a big deal about this issue? we canno bring firearms into a courthuse that holds the court district/circuit/etc, and that holds drivers licensing. The wording of the article,a nd the subsequent posts, atleast to me, sounds like a bunch of idiot officials trying to ban OC in general from a courthouse with court proceedings where it is already illegal to have firearms within said court proceedings. And everybody keeps sayign courthouse in reference to the building, and I'm having a hard tiem figuring out if you all mean like, a courthouse housing the justice of court, and DL department, or a courthouse like a annex that holds sheriff, and county/state taxing and vehicle taxing seperate of court proceedings/DL dept.

    If it is concerning a 'courthouse' with no district court/circuit court, and no Drivers licensing in it, then well, why dont we have an Armed, OC protect on the public/local property, to show we LAC's outnumber the corrupt good ole boys.
    I'm a proud openly gay open carrier~
    Trained SKYWARN spotter, and veteran Storm Chaser.
    =^.^= ~<3~ =^.^=
    Beware the Pink Camo clad gay redneck.

  13. #13
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by 09jisaac View Post
    From the Levisa Lazer:



    This is getting on my nerves. I didn't get the chance to go to this meeting so I don't know anymore than this article.

    Also, I think someone told me that fiscal courts cannot pass an ordinance (1st or 2nd reading) during a special meeting. Did I just imagine that or can someone point me to that information?
    I want to attend the next meeting and inform these people how ignorant they are. They would have to amend the constitution to have OC banned. The CA is acting like weapons are allowed in the ANNEX where the circuit and district courts are held (since he mentioned child support cases and custody rights which are held in district court or sometimes cicruit court) and that is incorrect! These people amaze me at how IGNORANT they are of the law and Constitutional rights in this state!

    They want to challenge the law? I guess they mean the preemption statute which has been on the books since '84, and which was amended LAST YEAR WITH ALL OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE AGREEING TO THE AMENDED STATUTE EXCEPT A SMALL HANDFUL (UNDER 10 LEGISLATURES)! Do they honestly believe they are going to get it rescinded when the entire body of the senate and house voted for the new amendments?

    BOTTOM LINE: if this ordinance is still on the books come January, and they are still trying to enforce it illegally and against the authority of 65.870, then they WILL BE SUED! The entire Fiscal court, the CA, and the Sheriff will be named in the suit since all of them are refusing to obey the law, and they will ALL lose their posistions! They act like nothing will happen to them, however, the statute itself strips them of their immunity! They are a joke!

    Apparently they don't realize there is NOTHING they can do except obey the law! Lousiville, Lexington, Frankfort, etc., have tried doing something about this, and they have ALL failed! Are these guys honestly thinking they will accomplish anything? They are only allowed to do what the state legislature allows them to do, and what they haven't specifically prohibited them from doing, and they CANNOT regulate firearms in ANY WAY!

    Also, what is with the Levisa Lazer saying that Open Carry is a "state requirement," but then they go on to say it is a "federal law?" The reporting from this news agency is beyond unprofessional.
    Last edited by KYGlockster; 10-30-2012 at 08:10 PM.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  14. #14
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    We need some volunteers to attend this next meeting and record the entire activity -- from the time we walk in to the time we leave. If we get arrested, then we cannot only sue them for failing to rescind an unlawful ordinance, but for false arrest, deprivation of rights, and so on. Anyone want to help?
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  15. #15
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by 09jisaac View Post
    From the Levisa Lazer:



    This is getting on my nerves. I didn't get the chance to go to this meeting so I don't know anymore than this article.

    Also, I think someone told me that fiscal courts cannot pass an ordinance (1st or 2nd reading) during a special meeting. Did I just imagine that or can someone point me to that information?
    They can have an emergency meeting and enact an ordinance if it is needed immediately. I can't remember the statute -- it is under chapter 65 or 67.

    Has ANYONE tried to remove you or prohibit you from entering the courthouse since our last meeting? If so these need to be documented thoroughly.
    Last edited by KYGlockster; 10-30-2012 at 08:06 PM.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917
    So when is the next meeting?

    There is an interesting discussion on the comments page. Anyone here commenting on there with the handle "JD"?

  17. #17
    Regular Member DrakeZ07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,107
    Quote Originally Posted by KYGlockster View Post
    We need some volunteers to attend this next meeting and record the entire activity -- from the time we walk in to the time we leave. If we get arrested, then we cannot only sue them for failing to rescind an unlawful ordinance, but for false arrest, deprivation of rights, and so on. Anyone want to help?
    I'm game for it, I have three SLR digital cameras, and two camera/video capturing phones to lend for the effort. But would it be best for camera peeps to go unarmed so we wont be arrested as well, and can watch it unobstructed, or just carry anyway and such?
    I'm a proud openly gay open carrier~
    Trained SKYWARN spotter, and veteran Storm Chaser.
    =^.^= ~<3~ =^.^=
    Beware the Pink Camo clad gay redneck.

  18. #18
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post
    You can OC in a courthouse unless the Court of Justice is the ONLY occupant of the building. If county offices are present you can OC in that part as long as you stay out of the Court spaces. The Lawrence Co. Courthouse has county offices in it.
    The Lawrence county courthouse doesn't have anything BUT county offices. The county has an Annex which is a different building that contains the COJ and Circuit clerk. The main courthouse has the Judge/Exec., County attorney, PVA, etc. This is why it is so upsetting when the CA tries to bring the COJ side into this discussion. Nobody is trying to say that firearms have to be allowed in the annex, because state law allows the COJ to prohibit anything they please. We are just trying to make them understand that they CANNOT ban firearms in the County courthouse, which they are obviously having a hard time understanding.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  19. #19
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by DrakeZ07 View Post
    I'm game for it, I have three SLR digital cameras, and two camera/video capturing phones to lend for the effort. But would it be best for camera peeps to go unarmed so we wont be arrested as well, and can watch it unobstructed, or just carry anyway and such?
    Yes, the one that is recording the meeting should be without weapons. If we have them asking us to leave, or arresting us on video then we have solid evidence to sue them for deprivation of our rights. It is rather sad that is must come down to such a thing, but when the government refuses to recognize our rights that are protected by the Kentucky constitution then something MUST be done. We cannot allow them to continue to trample our liberties and violate the laws of this state. I don't want to get arrested, but if that is what it takes to show the good people of Lawrence county what their elected representatives think of their rights and the law then that is what it takes. I am expected to obey the laws of this state all day everyday, as should all government officials.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  20. #20
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by langzaiguy View Post
    So when is the next meeting?

    There is an interesting discussion on the comments page. Anyone here commenting on there with the handle "JD"?
    I have submitted two comments under the name "Brandan Taylor." I am awaiting their moderation. They are lengthy, and contain the correct statutes and other information that can better help people to understand what is really at risk here.
    Last edited by KYGlockster; 10-30-2012 at 11:19 PM.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Englewood, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    653

    So I can protect myself...

    "I'm all for hunting rights and the right to own weapons," Magistrate Morris Howard said. "But I just can't see people carrying around guns in the courthouse, why would they want to do that?"

    Tell Magistrate Morris Howard.... to protect myself from all those people who are upset on Monday... and bring a gun with total disregard to any signs... and start shooting innocent people.

    I know they don't have a police officer at every door and even if they did it wouldn't necessarily work out for them.... Ask the people in Kirkwood Missouri how it worked for their city council.

  22. #22
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    Like I said, the ONLY time that I had a problem carrying a gun into the courthouse was the time I was ejecte from the fiscal court meeting and KYGlockster was there for the latter half of that.

    Glockster is right, the courthouse is divided into two distict parts. They are set up in a "U" shape with ajoining halls.

    I tried to get some more information today but apparently noone who knew anything was around. Sheriff Roberts had to go to Boyd county, Hogan was out the whole day, Judge Osborne took a long lunch, and I was told it was too early to even get a draft of what was said in the meeting. I was too busy to make a second trip to the courthouse.

    The only information that I got was that Hogan is suing Kentucky in federal court and noone knows the basis of the suit (I don't even thing HE knows).

    The suit itself bothers me less that the fact that these men are my elected officials and they are working on OUR tax dollars. I don't think Hogan has a snowball's chance to get anything done. But if Hogan wants to make a fool of himself, he shouldn't be getting OUR money to do it. I am going to protest this every chance I get.
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  23. #23
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    From Big Sandy News Wednesday, OCT. 31, 2012:

    Court members allso discussed amendments to the open carry deadly weapons ordinance. Osborne explained that he had been told that if the court doesn't have something in place by January, the county would face potential fines by the Department for Local Government. He asked Hogan whether he thought they should apeal it in circuit court or go ahead and make an amendment to the county's ordinance, which currently prevents open carry in the courthouse.

    "It's up to you whether you want to fight it or not," Hogan said. "you were elected to represent the people, and I think you have a pretty good feel of what they want. If you think they want open carry and allow people in the courthouse with guns, then you can. Just don't acquiesce and say your hands are tied. It's certainly not me that sets policies."

    "They said if we didn't have something by January that they'll fine us," Osborne said. "Are you saying they won't?"

    "I'm not asking you to and not telling you to, but if you challenge it in court, they cannot fine you," Hogan said. "The fine would be suspended until the lawsuit is resolved."
    Hogan pointed out that there are situations that could upset people to the point of violence, and identified one of the ways as taking people's children out of a home.

    "We take people's children," Hogan said. "You know every Monday how many children are taken away? I'm sure you don't know what goes on in my office because you aren't thre, but it's a lot."

    Magistrate Bill Lemaster made a motion to have Hogan challenge the open carry law, which was seconded by Magistrate Earl Boggs, with all in favor.

    Hogan said he would get busy on it right away.
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  24. #24
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post
    IANAL, but my understanding of federal court procedure is that in order to challenge a state law in federal court you must have exhausted all of your remedies in state court first. That could take years and $$$$$.
    That would make sense.

    I think Hogan would need to either prove damages or that the state overstepped their bounds. He cannot do either.

    I thought it was a bit humorus how he seemed to try to distance himself from the issue during the meeting, as evident from the quotes provided. It seems that he only wants this to be his "baby" behind closed doors, not in the public view.

    A politictian not wanting to follow laws should be political suicide, and I hope it is. I am going to do my best to see that my courthouse gets cleaned out.

    This is an issue that I find dear, but they're ******* off more than just me. Apparently the last meeting was packed full, even thought it wasn't a regular meeting. I wish I could have went, but I don't think they would have brought this up again with me sitting there.

    Do you think this unanimous vote would go a long ways in proving that the magistrates were knowingly breaking the law?
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  25. #25
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,267
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post
    They certainly know that OC is legal and they have an ordinance that prohibits it. They have failed to "repeal or amend to comply" as required by KRS 65.870. That means "guilty".
    C'mon man.....they made a "good faith" effort to not understand the law, and they made a "good faith" effort to obfuscate the issue so as to delay, reasonably of course, the rectification of their ill timed "good faith" effort to contravene state law. All in the name of good faith.

    The bureaucracy moves at a glacial pace.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •