Carry at work

willy1094 · Mar 8, 2014

Sorry my title is so vague. I posted a while ago that I was trying to get carry at work. Well, it is looking like that is going to happening now that everyone has been consulted. :banana: I would like to stay in front of this (as long as I can) and thought that suggesting some guidelines would be helpful to keep restrictions from getting too crazy. I just thought I would ask you all firwhat you think should or shouldn't be suggested. I realize that some will say that there should be NO guidelines but as we all know, in the real world, that is not going to happen. Include ANYTHING you can think of. For example: No handling your firearm while in the building (take it to your car to disarm).
Thanks!

Rusty Young Man · Mar 8, 2014

I mentioned this in another thread (simply exchange congregation to "business"

):

From this thread (http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...-and-ready-for-a-confrontation-with-my-pastor)
You could mention the following:
Only with OC can anyone know for certain who is armed
OC is, generally, a deterrent to those that wish to cause harm

One can simply have a sign of instruction that goes something like this:
View attachment 11334

Violent criminals don't tend to use holsters to conceal since that associates them with cops
If they don't want "just anyone" carrying, it may be due to some bad apples in the congregation, in which case those bad apples should be talked to, since they need instruction the most
If someone is unstable while carrying a gun, they are unstable without it

Rusty Young Man · Mar 8, 2014

Now, to answer your question more directly, you could suggest a staff meeting to cover the four (3) Laws of gun safety (the "rules" part that is in the works):

1) Treat all firearms as though they are loaded
2) Don't point the muzzle at anything you're not willing to destroy
3) Finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot
4) Know your target, and what is beyond it [this last one is really just a subset of #2]

For the "regulations" part your employer would be working up:

1) Firearms must be properly maintained and in a safe, serviceable condition
2) All guns must remain holstered at all times unless a threat of lethal force arises (eg: bad guy appears)
3) If the gun must be unholstered, judicious marksmanship is appreciated
4) To better marksmanship, it is suggested that armed employees frequent the range about once a month, preferably in groups of 3-4. One 20-rd box of ammunition shall be awarded to the "marksman of the month" for his/her efforts at honing their firearm skills in the interest of maintaining a safe work environment.

willy1094 · Mar 9, 2014

Thanks for the great suggestions. Sorry if I left too much out. I work for a County agency as a dispatcher, sitting for 8hrs a day. I work in a "government center" but there is no one saying that they can find a reason to prohibit carry (trust me, they tried). My goal is just ensure that no one does anything that could become unsafe and/or create a reason to revert back to a no carry workplace. We have received threats and, up to this point, those have been dealt with by hanging a picture with a warning below. I would like to have and keep a better option of protecting myself. I was thinking along the lines of...

Must be holstered and on your person (no leaving it in your locker or showing it off). This could possibly include a limit or exclusion on purse/backpack/gym bag/grocery bag carry.

Some sort of retention device for open carry (something as simple as a thumb snap)

If you start getting tired of having it on you while sitting you must go to your vehicle to remove it

I'm not sure if CC is an option yet. Our policy used to be that we were to have our shirts tucked in but they have been pretty lenient with that. I'm trying to work toward both options.

I thought about talking to a range officer with one of the PDs in my area to see if we may even have an option of training with them. This would possibly give us free range time. It would be great to get some ammo to use but I'm not too hopeful about that. If I left anything out please ask. Thanks again for your help!

self preservation · Mar 9, 2014

willy1094 said:
Thanks for the great suggestions. Sorry if I left too much out. I work for a County agency as a dispatcher, sitting for 8hrs a day. I work in a "government center" but there is no one saying that they can find a reason to prohibit carry (trust me, they tried). My goal is just ensure that no one does anything that could become unsafe and/or create a reason to revert back to a no carry workplace. We have received threats and, up to this point, those have been dealt with by hanging a picture with a warning below. I would like to have and keep a better option of protecting myself. I was thinking along the lines of...

Must be holstered and on your person (no leaving it in your locker or showing it off). This could possibly include a limit or exclusion on purse/backpack/gym bag/grocery bag carry.

Some sort of retention device for open carry (something as simple as a thumb snap)

If you start getting tired of having it on you while sitting you must go to your vehicle to remove it

I'm not sure if CC is an option yet. Our policy used to be that we were to have our shirts tucked in but they have been pretty lenient with that. I'm trying to work toward both options.

I thought about talking to a range officer with one of the PDs in my area to see if we may even have an option of training with them. This would possibly give us free range time. It would be great to get some ammo to use but I'm not too hopeful about that. If I left anything out please ask. Thanks again for your help!

Why wouldn't KRS 65.870 apply to you? Unless your dispatch is in a police station maybe, then I could maybe see no conceal carry. Or an ordinance for that matter against conceal carry. No idea where you dispatch at but here in Bath County our dispatch center is just a dispatch center. No other offices are inside of it. Sure, LEO's are in and out 24/7, but it is not a police/sheriff office so no gun regulations at all. If your work place truly falls under 65.870 then your employer can't have any regulation on carry. I work for a city and one of my supervisors called me a few weeks back to ask if they could have a policy about how we position our body with an OC'd gun. (EMS...what he was getting at is turning our hips away from a patient so they couldn't grab our OC'd gun) I read him the part of 65.870 that said no regulation of carry. He took it to the city attorney and was told not to regulate firearms in any way. Most of your battle may already be won for you. Are you close to my area?

willy1094 · Mar 10, 2014

gutshot said:
They can't find any authority to keep county employees from carrying, because none exists. They can do none of the things mentioned. This is one of the reasons that I asked. A county government can not stop public employees from carrying a gun at work. They can put no limits on how it is carried. They can not prohibit carrying in a vehicle owned by the county. They can prohibit CC in county buildings by ordinance, but KRS 65.870 prohibits local governments from having any policy on guns. There is no exception for employment "policies". Some of the activities that you mentioned could be covered by state law; wanton endangerment, terroristic threatening. Do you work in the Sheriff's office? That would also stop CC. As long as you are OC, they can't stop anything you want to do. I advise you to be very careful. Document every conversation or comment on this subject. They may try to find a reason to get rid of you. They can't do that either, but you have to do your part to protect yourself. Do you have a CCDW?

We all know they can fire anyone they wish to for any made up reason :lol:. I knew they couldn't find anything and that is what I presented when I had my very first talk with the director. As you know though, these things go through channels for approval. I depend on my paycheck so I wasn't going to just walking in with a gun on my hip. There may not be a policy that comes down from this(PD's have policies). I will post it if one pops up but it really is too close to home for me to FIGHT this fight. I'll keep working on it but can't get as demanding as I could from the outside. I guess the only thing I mentioned that couldn't be included is the no purse carry? I assume they can tell you that you cannot remove your firearm from your holster (unless deadly force is justified). Just common sense things that would lead to charges otherwise. I do have CCDW and worry that the director may OK CC but be overstepping and we my be in violation with the city. I work in at the government building in the Northern Kentucky city with a mall that "Y'all" might be familiar with. There is a PD that shares the building but in a different office (locked doors at every office entrance). Thanks again.

willy1094 · Mar 11, 2014

gutshot said:
[/COLOR]There may not be a policy that comes down from this(PD's have policies). If they do, its illegal and unenforceable. State law give LEO authority to carry weapons and determines under what conditions they may be carried. There is no exception for Police Depts. in KRS 65.870. State law, KRS 237.110 prohibits CC in a police station. City/county law can not deal with this subject in any manner, same thing for rules and/or policies. It doesn't have to be a written "policy" or "rule". The statute says, "ordinance, executive order, administrative regulation, policy, procedure, rule, or any other form of executive or legislative action." They just can't involve themselves in this issue in any manner. Have you shown them a copy of KRS 65.870? Once they read the first two paragraphs, most local officials realize they have to comply.
[/SIZE][/FONT]

This may have changed but they used to be required to carry a certain type of gun for duty. I thought they had to have a certain type of holster also. I will have to ask around about this.

willy1094 · Mar 11, 2014

gutshot said:
Edit: I can find no ordinance for the City of £|©®€^¢€ or 3©©^€ ¢0. prohibiting CC in government buildings.
[/SIZE][/FONT]

There you go giving me away...maybe

I will keep you posted. Luckily my director is pretty easy to talk with.

self preservation · Mar 12, 2014

gutshot said:
Holsters are not preempted.

That brings up an interesting point then. Section 1 addresses not being able to regulate the "carrying" of a firearm. So by default wouldn't holsters be preempted? Or do we have different definitions of what we think "carrying" means?

09jisaac · Mar 12, 2014

65.870Local firearms control ordinances prohibited -- Exemption from immunity -- Declaratory and injunctive relief.
(1)No existing or future city, county, urban-county government, charter county, consolidated local government, unified local government, special district, local or regional public or quasi-public agency, board, commission, department, public corporation, or any person acting under the authority of any of these organizations may occupy any part of the field of regulation of the manufacture, sale, purchase, taxation, transfer, ownership, possession, carrying, storage, or transportation of firearms, ammunition, components of firearms, components of ammunition, firearms accessories, or combination thereof.

I read it the same way SelfP does.

I think the a rule specifying holsters is regulating some part of carrying a firearm, even if it is just for the officers. Just because you don't need a holster, does not mean that they can regulate it.

self preservation · Mar 12, 2014

I'm just saying if they can regulate holsters then they can regulate open carry in general. All they would have to say is "no outer waistband holsters" and you would be forced to CC. Unless you duct taped a gun onto your leg/hip. I know that the Lexington/Fayette Co. Government once made a comment that an outer waistband holster would conflict with their uniform requirements(not talking about LEO's). No Lexington/Fayette Co. employee, to my knowledge, other than LEO's OC while at work. So the issue was never pressed. But what if it had been? This issue will likely remain a non-issue, but all it takes is 1 anti-gun anything to stir the pot to prove a point. Maybe that will be a bridge that we will have to cross if we ever get to it.

willy1094 · Mar 13, 2014

gutshot said:
We are still far, far afield from the OP.

This back and forth actually help answer some questions I would have had. I personally wouldn't mind a requirement for some sort of retention for any employee that open carries (even if it is just a thumb snap/break). To me, this is common sense. Before anyone jumps on me, you have to understand that there are couple (or more) people that I work with that have shown little interest in furthering their knowledge beyond the CC. I am not even talking about taking more classes. It is like this is a fad or maybe someone talked them into it. I do not think a loaded pistol should be tossed into a full purse without a holster. However, I can see how that could be a slippery slope. I guess this is where I could step it up and direct others to so education resources. I still have not asked an officer to find out if there really is a requirement for their firearm and/or holster.

Thanks again.

Just an update: We still haven't got the official go ahead :cuss:

willy1094 · Mar 14, 2014

gutshot said:
I personally wouldn't mind a requirement for some sort of retention for any employee that open carries (even if it is just a thumb snap/break). To me, this is common sense. However, I can see how that could be a slippery slope. Slippery slope!!?:banghead:? Its an outright violation of state law. You'd be OK with your employer breaking the law? What other laws would you be in favor of them breaking?

Well, it appears that my employer is already breaking the law. It sounds as though local PDs are already breaking the law. I read other posts as whether or not holsters were part of the preemption was not certain. I could have misread that, but that was were my comment came from. I agree with everything you are saying. I also believe that carrying is a huge responsibility and in the real world, there are those that do not realize that. Instead of typing "a requirement" I should have typed "if it was a law". Maybe the slippery slope comment makes more sense now.

Anyway, still waiting to hear about approval by one last person.

self preservation · Mar 14, 2014

willy1094 said:
Well, it appears that my employer is already breaking the law. It sounds as though local PDs are already breaking the law. I read other posts as whether or not holsters were part of the preemption was not certain. I could have misread that, but that was were my comment came from. I agree with everything you are saying. I also believe that carrying is a huge responsibility and in the real world, there are those that do not realize that. Instead of typing "a requirement" I should have typed "if it was a law". Maybe the slippery slope comment makes more sense now.

Anyway, still waiting to hear about approval by one last person.

It sounds as though local PDs are already breaking the law

Refresh my memory. How are they violating the law?

still waiting to hear about approval by one last person

One last person to approve what?

willy1094 · Mar 15, 2014

gutshot said:
Yes, local governments all over the state are violating the constitution and exceeding their authority and have been getting away with it for years. That is why KRS 65.870 was necessary. If the cities and counties had stayed within their authority under the "Home Rule" statute of 1980, the original KRS 65.870 of 1984 would not have been necessary. If they had obeyed the original 65.870, the amended version would not have been necessary in 2012. Its not that they want to break the law, it just that they refuse to accept the (or even realize the concept of) limitations on their authority. I had a parks board member once say to me , "We're the government, we can do anything we want." I could expect that remark in North Korea or Iran, but that is a startling thing to hear from an elected official in a supposedly free society with a constitutional government. We, as a nation, have come to think that our government can take any action that it wants to, and in response to that expectation our government has lived up to it. I find some of your statements equally dangerous. If we don't make them live up to their legal obligations, in full, our freedom will disappear. It doesn't matter what you think is "common sense" or what I think is "common sense", we and every other person will never agree on what that is, but we should insist that the government obey the law. They insist that we do.

I agree with every comment (now and any other I have read in prior threads). I don't want you (or anyone else) to take what I am saying as meaning I think that any law should be created. I would like to see SOME people use more caution than they do :shocker: Anyway, thank you for your input and thank you for all the fighting you do for the carry community!

self preservation · Mar 16, 2014

willy1094 said:
I agree with every comment (now and any other I have read in prior threads). I don't want you (or anyone else) to take what I am saying as meaning I think that any law should be created. I would like to see SOME people use more caution than they do :shocker: Anyway, thank you for your input and thank you for all the fighting you do for the carry community!

I would like to see SOME people use more caution than they do

So would the rest of us. We'd like to see this out of all folks that carry. But you don't want "caution" to be very regulated by the Government. If so, you will see laws such as "guns must be in a triple retention holster, must be worn under 3 layers of clothing and must remain unloaded." Government, local, state and federal all seem to have a nasty habit of not knowing when to stop.

A little peer pressure can go a long way when you want to correct actions that you find unfavorable. To give you an example, my immediate supervisor liked to carry a DB9, unholstered in his front pocket. I simply made the statement to him "man, you have bigger balls than me! I'd be scared to death of an accidental discharge the way you carry. Do you ever worry about a coin, ink pen or anything else for that matter getting between your trigger guard and shooting a round through your leg?"

He thought for a minute and said "never thought of that." The next shift he had a pocket holster. See.....that action was corrected not by regulation, force, rule, policy, law, etc etc. But by friendly conversation. Keep in mind that this is my boss man. But it still worked. If you see unfavorable action, try with tact to correct it.

@gutshot..... do you mind to share some education with us as to what "home rule" is?

self preservation · Mar 18, 2014

gutshot said:
Prior to 1980 cities were only allowed to do the things that were expressly mentioned in the statutes. Each and every function of government had to be specifically granted to them, separately. Without this express grant of authority, a city could not legally perform that function. As cities became larger and governments became more complex this became more and more cumbersome for the cities. These grants of authority were not all listed in one place in the KRS. They were scattered all through it, according to the subject of the grant of authority. It became very difficult to even find out which authorities actually existed. If a cities found it necessary to do something new they had to call their state representative, tell them what needed to be done, the Representative had to wait until the next session of the GA, introduce a bill, get it passed etc. This might take months or even years. Home Rule essentially reversed this process and gave the cities blanket authority to perform any action necessary to their operation, but within certain limitations. Section 156b of the Kentucky Constitution authorizes the General Assembly to grant broad home rule powers to cities, but does not require it. In 1980 the General Assembly did decide to grant home rule authority to cities through the adoption of KRS 82.082. This statute gives all classes of cities broad home rule powers. Prior to the enactment of the home rule statute, cities, which have no inherent right of self-government, depended almost exclusively upon specific acts of the General Assembly to authorize various functions.
Now, under KRS 82.082, a city may exercise any power or perform any function that is:
1) Within the boundaries of the city;
2) In furtherance of a public purpose of the city; and
3) Not in conflict with a constitutional provision or statute. (This is the part the cities don't or won't understand).
Of course, the cities immediately started to push the envelope and gun control was at the top of their list, even though they still didn't have any authority in this area. The result of this overreaching was KRS 65.870, in 1982. The General Assembly thought that if the cities couldn't understand that this involved constitutional issues, they might understand if it was spelled out for them in a statute. It didn't work. We all know the rest of the story.

Thanks for the lesson. Several times I have heard the term "home rule" used but never knew what it meant. Just to make sure that I understand, once upon a time cities had to ask the GA permission to do pretty much anything. This was a pain in the rump so the GA said "do as you see fit, just don't violate the Constitution or law in doing so", and the cities said "great. now we are kings and can do as we please." Basically the GA gave cities an inch and the cities tried/tries to take a mile. This is way KY. cities attempts to use "home rule" in gun legislation doesn't work because it goes against the KY. Constitution as well as state statute. Is this it in a nutshell?

self preservation · Mar 18, 2014

gutshot said:
You said it better that I did; shorter, too.

Naw, you provided the history and an in depth explanation, which is great. I just wanted to make sure that I understood it correctly.

self preservation · Mar 27, 2014

Any updates yet?

willy1094 · Mar 27, 2014

self preservation said:
Any updates yet?

Sorry about that. The last person was supposed to be asked last week and my director forgot to ask. I've already determined that I will ask every Monday until I receive an answer. I'm getting to the point of dropping the KRS on the desk (highlighted of course) but I've got my bills that keep coming in like clockwork.

Carry at work

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member