Terry stopped and searched inside a police station today....well, sorta.

09jisaac said:

If you give them permission to infringe on your rights then they can basically do what they want legally.

Click to expand...

What was permission in this incident?

self preservation said:

What was permission in this incident?

Click to expand...

You originally stated you smiled and played along, that would be argued by the prosecution that you implied consent, if sussesful that = permission therefore no RAS needed, if they fail then the evidence would be supressed

self preservation said:

What was permission in this incident?

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, in our modern society if you comply without an objection to an unlawful command, it would probably be considered consent in a court of law.

KRS 527.020 10

Carrying a concealed weapon is a Class A misdemeanor, unless the defendant has been previously convicted of a felony in which a deadly weapon was possessed, used, or displayed, in which case it is a Class D felony.

So Does this not make carrying a concealed weapon in a police station (Since it says your license is not valid here) a Class A Misdemeanor?

Big Daddy XD said:

Since it says your license is not valid here

Click to expand...

Does it say your license is not valid there, or does it say that it does not authorize you to carry concealed into a police station?

09jisaac said:

Does it say your license is not valid there, or does it say that it does not authorize you to carry concealed into a police station?

Click to expand...

According to KRS 237.110 it says authorize. Which to the majority of people would probably mean the same as not valid. If it does not authorize you to carry there then its not valid there. Hence you are carrying concealed without a license. A Class A Misdemeanor.

Big Daddy XD said:

According to KRS 237.110 it says authorize. Which to the majority of people would probably mean the same as not valid. If it does not authorize you to carry there then its not valid there. Hence you are carrying concealed without a license. A Class A Misdemeanor.

Click to expand...

It also does not authorize you to carry a loaded firearm onto private property, are you saying that you would be illegally carrying concealed if you walked into Walmart concealed?

Politicians argue for hours on the exact wording of the statutes for a reason. If they wanted invalid, the statute would have said invalid. It should say something that it does not.

Commas, semicolons and exact, but similar, wording can change a statute drastically.

09jisaac said:

It also does not authorize you to carry a loaded firearm onto private property, are you saying that you would be illegally carrying concealed if you walked into Walmart concealed?

Politicians argue for hours on the exact wording of the statutes for a reason. If they wanted invalid, the statute would have said invalid. It should say something that it does not.

Commas, semicolons and exact, but similar, wording can change a statute drastically.

Click to expand...

There is no list of the places that you can carry concealed. (I'm sure that would be a nightmare to list every place.) They do however clearly define where you CAN'T carry concealed. Again I go back to the law the way it is clearly written. Your concealed carry permit does not allow you to carry concealed in a police station. Therefore there is no CCDWL that does allow you to carry concealed in a police station. So again you would be carrying concealed without a license to do so which is a Class A Misdemeanor. I don't see how anybody can argue that point.

Big Daddy XD said:

There is no list of the places that you can carry concealed. (I'm sure that would be a nightmare to list every place.) They do however clearly define where you CAN'T carry concealed.

Click to expand...

Do they? I would be interested in seeing that. Is Lawrence County Courthouse, Extension Office and health department on there? Pikeville Medical Center also does allow anyone to carry, the movies in Pikeville has a no concealed carry sign, are these too on the list?

They do specially deny that you can carry concealed into a police station, but at no point do they say your concealed carry permit becomes invalid. You still have your CCDW and you can legally carry openly in there, so I stick with my original answer. Without a change in statute to clarify this or without a court case then we'll never know for sure. I am arguing though the way the statutes are written, you though are arguing how you should take the statute.

Like I said, politicians argue for hours of a similar word. The wording of the statutes are critiqued long before they are entered as a bill.

I have argued this point before. There are two points to look at when arguing that it is illegal with no penalty to carry concealed into a police station. 1.) There is no SPECIFIC penalty specified for doing so. It doesn't SPECIFICALLY state that carrying concealed into a police station is punishable by [FINE] and/or [JAIL TIME]. 2.) You can constitutionally carry a firearm openly into a police station. It SPECIFICALLY states that no penalty shall be attached for carrying a concealed weapon in a place that a firearm may be constitutionally carried. The point made when arguing it does include a penalty is that it says it doesn't AUTHORIZE one to carry concealed into a set number of specific places. I will concede that there are certainly a number of prosecutors that would try to nail you to the cross for cc'ing into one of those prohibited places. Most judges would say that there's substantial enough evidence to proceed to a hearing. At this point it would be up to a jury or a judge to decide if you were guilty of it or not. This is where I can see it going either way. Long story short, both parties are likely right on the matter, and without a higher court decisively instructing either way it will be one of things left to be weighed on the scales of justice.

Big Daddy XD said:

KRS 527.020 10

Carrying a concealed weapon is a Class A misdemeanor, unless the defendant has been previously convicted of a felony in which a deadly weapon was possessed, used, or displayed, in which case it is a Class D felony.

So Does this not make carrying a concealed weapon in a police station (Since it says your license is not valid here) a Class A Misdemeanor?

Click to expand...

It is ILLEGAL.

I would ask others here that are saying otherwise to go in a police station and inform them that they are carrying a concealed firearm and see how that plays out for them.

You can listen to them if you want, but it is MY opinion that it is illegal. It would be a CCDW charge because the license is not valid in a police station, and KRS 527.020 specifically states wherever a license is not recognized under authority of KRS then you can be charged with CCDW. That is my read anyway.

I would suggest someone ask a competent attorney for an answer. Better yet, we should find a way to get the Attorney General to give an opinion.

The GA would not SPECIFICALLY list places that are off limits if doing so would be completely useless.

People are having a hard time understanding a very basic concept: if the license is not valid in a sepcific location, then you are carrying a concealed weapon without the proper licesne. What is this? This is a violation of KRS 527.020!

KYGlockster said:

It is ILLEGAL.

I would ask others here that are saying otherwise to go in a police station and inform them that they are carrying a concealed firearm and see how that plays out for them.

You can listen to them if you want, but it is MY opinion that it is illegal. It would be a CCDW charge because the license is not valid in a police station, and KRS 527.020 specifically states wherever a license is not recognized under authority of KRS then you can be charged with CCDW. That is my read anyway.

I would suggest someone ask a competent attorney for an answer. Better yet, we should find a way to get the Attorney General to give an opinion.

The GA would not SPECIFICALLY list places that are off limits if doing so would be completely useless.

People are having a hard time understanding a very basic concept: if the license is not valid in a sepcific location, then you are carrying a concealed weapon without the proper licesne. What is this? This is a violation of KRS 527.020!

Click to expand...

Once again Glockster, NOBODY is arguing this it is not illegal. EVERYBODY agrees that it is illegal to carry concealed into a police station. There is no question to that.

We are arguing ONLY that there is no penalty attached to it.

You are not easily swayed to understanding your opponents position.

Never ONCE does it say that your permit is null, void, invalid, not recognized or non existent in a police station. Ask yourself why. Why would the GA use the word authorize when they do not mean it so? They could have used shorter and less ambiguous wording to great effect. Less typing and less misunderstandings, wouldn't that be better?

It is not useless to list those places specifically because it is ILLEGAL to carry concealed into them. Once again though, just because something is illegal does not mean it holds a penalty. Just because it does not hold a penalty does not mean it is legal.

It is EXACTLY like 65.870 prior to the recent change, it stated something was illegal but without a penalty clause. It is still illegal, just without punishment. They can only make you correct the illegal action.

Did you notice that the General Assembly does not authorize you to carry OUTSIDE of the commonwealth? Have you ever carried into an adjoining state? Then clearly you were breaking the law, right? That is the essence of your argument. But just because the General Assembly doesn't authorize you to do things, don't mean you do not have authorization to do it.

Not sure if any of the recent changes to the law affected this statute.
The information in the CCDW course booklet summarizes this section of statute as:

"If a license holder carries a concealed firearm into any of the above places [KRS 237.110 subsection 16 list, i.e. police station, courthouse, etc.], he may be found guilty of the crime of Carrying a Concealed Deadly Weapon."

Also, in my reading of the statutes (and mind you, I'm a mechanic, not a lawyer), the prohibition on punishment in 237.115 is against local governments, not the state. The title of section 237.115 is "Construction of 237.110--Prohibition by local government units of carrying concealed deadly weapons in governmental buildings -- Restriction on criminal penalties." So if the state in 237.110 wants to impose a penalty, 237.115 has no application, as it's against local governments.

My two cents.

No, I was saying the prohibition was on local governments making penalties. Not on local governments carrying concealed weapons. But, my entire argument is moot because the basis for this discussion was 237.110 and 527.020, not 237.115. Somehow got them crossed in my puny mechanics brain.

The course book is not so much full of bad information as simply out of date. A lot has changed since the 2008 changes it has included.

But, absent court precedent, we won't have a resolution, so, as KYGlockster said, give it whirl and let us know how it turns out.

I think i am more confused now than when I started reading this post. It is my opinion that the laws are written so they can use them as they wish when they wish. If your gave this question to 10 lawyers you would probably get at least 5 different opinions. The fact is the only opinion that is going to matter is the judge who the poor soul that gets caught is standing in front of. I'm also sure that none of us want to be that soul.

BTW I personally am going to stick with my initial opinion that your CCDWL does not "authorize" you to carry there so you are in fact carrying where you are not allowed so you are guilty of a Class A Misdemeanor. Again this is my opinion only.

Gutshot and 09jissac I can see what you guys are saying however I respectfully have to disagree. I see it clearly defined. I am not for sure what the punishment is for a class a misdemeanor but that's whats I see. (I've never been accused of being the smartest person though.)

gutshot said:

That is an opinion that is shared by many people. It has been my experience that most of those people don't understand the law and don't feel comfortable explaining their actions or relating those actions to the law. I don't believe it is true. Judges can't get by with saying black is white and no means yes. The statutes are written as clearly as possible. I have seen arguments over the placement of a comma go on for days. Show me a statute that can be used "when they want" and "how they want". And who are these "they"? Do you mean officials elected by the people? If "they" are conspiring to railroad law abiding citizens, how do they get reelected?



I never used the word "authorize". I only said there could not be a penalty.



I don't know how much more "clearly defined" it could be. Two statutes say there can be "no penalty". If you wanted there to be no "penalty", how would you write "no penalty"? What would it have to say to make you believe "no penalty" means "no penalty"? I suspect that it could not be done. If this wording of "no penalty" doesn't mean "no penalty", why is it there and what does it mean. The General Assembly wanted to exclude CC from some places, but didn't want citizens to fall into traps or to be penalized for walking into the wrong door or be arrested for missing a sign that was hidden. This was their solution and I see it as "clearly defined" as it possibly could be. How would you have handled the problem of making carrying a concealed weapon in a place where concealed weapons were exclude to not be the crime of carrying a concealed weapon?

Click to expand...

Stupid uninformed voters who vote based on political party instead of who is best for this country.

As for your no penalty view......well lets just agree to disagree because I promise you if someone carries concealed in any of those "unauthorized" places there will definitely be a penalty. You know this as well as I do.

gutshot said:

I found this in the thread KYGlockster posted on Ky Law Enforcement Magazine. It is a "whitepaper" on Ky gun laws and how LEO's should apply them. Go to the second paragraph on page 3. Here is a link to the entire document from the Department of Criminal Justice Training. The DCJT seems to think "No Penalty" means "no specific criminal charge".
https://docjt.ky.gov/legal/documents/WhitePaperonOpenCarryandCarrying.pdf

Click to expand...

Well now that was an interesting read. I think I will have to read all of this. Thanks.

I still find it hard to believe but there it is in black and white. I would hope that it would hold up in a court but I have doubts. Anyway thanks for the info.

After thinking about it and listening to the recording again, I believe they still believe that they can regulate OC inside of the police station. I believe that if I OC in there again I will catch the same grief as I did last time.

It's one of those things where you'll just have to test the waters and keep pressing the issue.

CharleyCherokee said:

It's one of those things where you'll just have to test the waters and keep pressing the issue.

Click to expand...

I'm sure I will. But first I'll recruit some help....guys with cameras and what not.