Local Gun Law Database

imported post

Kentucky law, KRS 65.870, prohibits city, county, or urban-county governments from passing any ordinances pertaining to firearms. When local governments enact any gun laws, they are illegal and Kentucky law requires those illegal ordinances to be abolished. We've had great success removing these illegal ordinances, but a few years later, a new local government will enact a new illegal anti-gun law.

This database is a quick at-a-glance view of city and county gun laws so we can more quickly target our efforts to ensure that all of Kentucky is legally abiding by the provisions of our preemption law that prevents local anti-gun laws.

Links are provided to detailed discussions for each local area where we're working to remove illegal gun bans and restrictions.

Help us keep this list up to date. If your city or county is not verified as complying with state law prohibiting local firearms ordinances, or the verification is more than a year old, please verify the status and report back so we can keep an eye on the local governments and prevent them from illegally infringing on our right to keep and bear arms.

Local Gun Law Checklist:

City office buildings
County office buildings
Libraries
Public Parks

No local restrictions on open carry are permitted. State and federal laws can prohibit open carry in federal buildings such as the post office. Firearms can be prohibitted in courtrooms, schools, jails, prisons, bars serving alcohol, etc.

Concealed carry can be prohibitted in most local government buildings by local ordinances, but an ordinance must first be passed.



Let's turn these lists green!

Please send me a private message with updated info for each city or county, or post in this thread if you think it should be public info.


Legend:

No Local Firearms Restrictions

Status Not Verified or Corrective Action Underway

Local Firearms Restrictions - Action Needed

imported post



Cities:

Ashland
Firearms prohibited in Central Park - city officials contacted 05FEB09
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum25/37674-1.html
Firearms prohibited in public library

Lexington
Firearms prohibited in city parks - resolved AUG09
Deadly weapons prohibited in libraries - resolved JAN10

imported post

Counties:

Adair

Allen

Anderson

Ballard

Barren

Bath

Bell

Boone

Bourbon

Boyd

Boyle

Bracken

Breathitt

Breckinridge

Bullitt

Butler

Caldwell

Calloway

Campbell

Carlisle

Carroll

Carter

Casey

Christian

Clark

Clay

Clinton

Crittenden

Cumberland

Daviess

Edmonson

Elliott

Estill

Fayette
Firearms prohibited in city parks - resolved AUG09
Deadly weapons prohibited in libraries - resolved JAN10

Fleming

Floyd

Franklin

Fulton

Gallatin

Garrard

Grant

Graves

Grayson

Green

Greenup

Hancock

Hardin

Harlan

Harrison

Hart

Henderson

Henry

Hickman

Hopkins

Jackson

Jefferson

Jessamine

Johnson

Kenton

Knott

Knox

Larue

Laurel

Lawrence

Lee

Leslie

Letcher

Lewis

Lincoln

Livingston

Logan

Lyon

McCracken

McCreary

McLean

Madison

Magoffin

Marion

Marshall

Martin

Mason

Meade

Menifee

Mercer

Metcalfe

Monroe

Montgomery

Morgan

Muhlenberg

Nelson

Nicholas

Ohio

Oldham

Owen

Owsley

Pendleton

Perry

Pike

Powell

Pulaski

Robertson

Rockcastle

Rowan

Russell

Scott

Shelby

Simpson

Spencer

Taylor

Todd

Trigg

Trimble
Verified free of gun ordinances 23MAR10 per sipowicz'

Union

Warren

Washington

Wayne

Webster

Whitley

Wolfe

Woodford

imported post

I meant that local governments are required to abolish their illegal laws when WE catch them and bring it to their attention. I've seen no attempt by the state government to take the initiative to compel local governments to respect our right to keep and bear arms. We have the state preemption law. It's incumbent upon us to use it to protect our rights.

imported post

They play the "We didn't know" game, but once they know, the law is very unambiguous, and there are a couple of airtight written opinions from the attorney general. They don't have a lot of choice. Continuing to willfully violate state law is criminal, and they could be held personally responsible. It's also malfeasance and they can be removed from office.

I don't explain the law and then offer the option of complying. I explain the law and then advise them that they are required to remove the illegal signage and amend or abolish any ordinances that are not in compliance with state law.

When dealing with local elected officials or locally appointed government bureaucrats, I don't have any trouble remembering who works for whom.

imported post

I agree that all governments can be complicit in the Big Government game. It's difficult to convince an agent of the state government to enforce state laws by prosecuting willful violators in local government. There is some turf war competition between the local and state government sometimes, and maybe we can use this if we get lucky, but more often, state government likes to empower state government and local government likes to empower local government, and as long as they aren't stepping on each others toes and are only sticking it to the taxpayers, it's all good!

North Jessamine County was paying excessive special fire district tax to the tune of about $3M and finally got sick of their non-representative local government. They had a representative from the state auditor come in and audit the books, and they discovered all sorts of accounting irregularities. It's a mess, and it's taken a long time and a lot of citizen activism, but they are finally fixing the inequities.

I suspect it'll be like that with local gun laws. We will have a lot of easy victories. I've already experienced a couple myself in Fayette County. Show them the law, and they don't like it, but they comply. We will have a few struggles with obstinate local officials. They'll ultimately be resolved in our favor. I recommend:

1) Inform and ask nicely.

2) Go over their head to their boss in local government if possible.

3) Get more people involved and complaining. This would be a lot easier if the media wasn't so anti-gun.

4) Try to compel them to obey state law by involving state government (attorney general, etc.) and state law enforcement (Kentucky State Police?)

5) Run a liberty minded candidate against them. Choose someone who has respect for the law. It's particularly galling when it's the sheriff who is so blatantly disregarding a law they are required and sworn to uphold. That's a difficult situation, because the sheriff is the supreme law enforcement agent in the county. Not too long ago, we knew that and voted accordingly. Now, the local police do most of the actual police work and the sheriff is more of a figurehead and the election is more of a popularity contest. We don't worry enough about who we vote into that powerful position.

imported post

gutshot wrote:

Liberty4Ever wrote:

I agree that all governments can be complicit in the Big Government game. It's difficult to convince an agent of the state government to enforce state laws by prosecuting willful violators in local government. There is some turf war competition between the local and state government sometimes, and maybe we can use this if we get lucky, but more often, state government likes to empower state government and local government likes to empower local government, and as long as they aren't stepping on each others toes and are only sticking it to the taxpayers, it's all good!

North Jessamine County was paying excessive special fire district tax to the tune of about $3M and finally got sick of their non-representative local government. They had a representative from the state auditor come in and audit the books, and they discovered all sorts of accounting irregularities. It's a mess, and it's taken a long time and a lot of citizen activism, but they are finally fixing the inequities.

I suspect it'll be like that with local gun laws. We will have a lot of easy victories. I've already experienced a couple myself in Fayette County. Show them the law, and they don't like it, but they comply. We will have a few struggles with obstinate local officials. They'll ultimately be resolved in our favor. I recommend:

1) Inform and ask nicely.

2) Go over their head to their boss in local government if possible.

3) Get more people involved and complaining. This would be a lot easier if the media wasn't so anti-gun.

4) Try to compel them to obey state law by involving state government (attorney general, etc.) and state law enforcement (Kentucky State Police?)

5) Run a liberty minded candidate against them. Choose someone who has respect for the law. It's particularly galling when it's the sheriff who is so blatantly disregarding a law they are required and sworn to uphold. That's a difficult situation, because the sheriff is the supreme law enforcement agent in the county. Not too long ago, we knew that and voted accordingly. Now, the local police do most of the actual police work and the sheriff is more of a figurehead and the election is more of a popularity contest. We don't worry enough about who we vote into that powerful position.

Click to expand...

That's a long way from your original post:

......Kentucky law requires those illegal ordinances to be abolished. ......................

I'm still waiting for that cite.

Click to expand...

65.870 Local firearms control ordinances prohibited.
No city, county or urban-county government may occupy any part of the field of regulation of the transfer, ownership, possession, carrying or transportation of firearms, ammunition, or components of firearms or combination thereof.


Also to add to Liberty4Ever's first post, OC (possibly CC, not certain) of a firearm IS NOT prohibited in a bar as long as the firearm is unloaded. Just carry that clip or speed loader in your pocket and your good to go.

imported post

In a very real sense, none of us, whether acting as individuals or as part of a government, can be required to obey any law. We can decide the consequences of non-compliance are worth it. However, if I opt not to comply with laws as an individual, I can be jailed, and even executed, but there is nothing that can be done to prevent me from being an individual. If an elected official chooses not to comply with state law, a law abiding electorate CAN AND SHOULD remove that person from government.

We are sometimes forced to suffer the tyranny of the majority. It's democratic mob rule, which is not consistent with our constitutional republic, but that's what happens when government education and the media teach us that "we're a democracy". Once we believe that, it's a relatively simple matter to fool 51% of the people into thinking something will provide a short term benefit, government is empowered to take away the rights of the individual, and we have gun control, nationalized socialist health care, and all manner of unconstitutional abuses.

Operating under mob rule, we need to fight an educational campaign. The majority of the people need to understand the long term benefits of the right to keep and bear arms. We cannot allow those who favor big nanny government controlling the people to fool Sally Soccer Moms (of either gender) into taking away our right to keep and bear arms... "for the children".

That's why I've been trying to encourage open carry events in central Kentucky, that's why I've been pushing so hard for the Kentucky Firearms Freedom act, and that's why I spent an hour setting up the database at the top of this thread. I hope that we can all contribute to it, and it becomes a useful tool to focus attention on the areas gutshot mentioned where local governments are actively violating KRS 65.870 to create local gun bans. The local gun bans are illegal, and with enough public attention and education, we can have them rescinded, regardless of any local public support. If we allow them to stand, they encourage other local governments to violate our preemption law, and soon it'll be worthless.

We have the upper hand now, but our advantage is eroding. Let's fight the educational battle, and if needed, let's fight a legal battle to enforce KRS 65.870.

I assume that a large part of the reason we congregate on OpenCarry.org is to organize and be effective in the fight to protect our right to keep and bear arms. We're all doing different things to promote our right to bear arms. I'd think we could all agree that we should each monitor our local gun laws and when violations of KRS 65.870 are found, we should all work together to convince the local government to abide by the state law. We have many methods we can use to force local governments to comply. They get by with flaunting the state law because many local areas don't have enough gun rights activists to effectively oppose them, but if we all take each of these cases one at a time, we can defeat them. There is political power in numbers.

imported post

It doesn't require the abolition of anything? The very word "prohibited" requires just that.

Of course an official can do something they are not supposed to do, it's almost always going to be resolved in a court and ultimately in the voting.

I'm still learning about the actual procedure of law, but can't an individual file a civil case, even without a lawyer?

Not hard to prove your case, "Your Honor, such and such firearm prohibition sign is obviously in violation of KRS 65.870."

What's he going to say? No? I doubt it, no reasonable person would.

Even if he did, appeal and it will go to the Supreme and you know they are going to rule in your favor.

Yeah sure it's bull that anyone should even have to go through the procedures, but they are there. I doubt it would take that many instances of this for officials to get the idea.

imported post

gutshot wrote:

Unfettered Might wrote:

It doesn't require the abolition of anything? The very word "prohibited" requires just that.

Of course an official can do something they are not supposed to do, it's almost always going to be resolved in a court and ultimately in the voting.

I'm still learning about the actual procedure of law, but can't an individual file a civil case, even without a lawyer?

Not hard to prove your case, "Your Honor, such and such firearm prohibition sign is obviously in violation of KRS 65.870."

What's he going to say? No? I doubt it, no reasonable person would.

Even if he did, appeal and it will go to the Supreme and you know they are going to rule in your favor.

Yeah sure it's bull that anyone should even have to go through the procedures, but they are there. I doubt it would take that many instances of this for officials to get the idea.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, no. That suit would never be heard. It would be dismissed for lack of standing.

Click to expand...

How do you know that? Have you tried?

imported post

I was thinking exactly the same thing that gutshot posted, before I scrolled down and saw his reply. The federal government routinely tramples on our Bill of Rights, and if an individual or group of individuals files a lawsuit to use the federal court to remedy the federal government's unconstitutional behavior, the cases are routinely dismissed for lack of standing.

It's not difficult to imagine the same legalistic trick being used in state courts.

I must admit, I'm feeling negative today. We had a lot of bills with no co-sponsors and no popular support that flew out of committee for nearly unanimous votes in the Kentucky legislature this past session, while the Kentucky Firearms Freedom Act that I worked hard to promote had 26 co-sponsors and MASSIVE support among Kentuckians (1600+ petitions!) and was killed in the House Elections Committee, presumably by one non-representative from urban Louisville, but certainly with the passive support of many others in the House and Senate who did not want this bill to pass regardless of the will of the people.

Yesterday, the US Congress passed the national socialized health care bill that is in direct violation of our Constitution and the most fundamental principles upon which our nation was founded, and they passed this bill knowing that 60% of Americans opposed it.

We only have the rights we're willing to demand, in large numbers. A few people can't stand up for everyone's rights, because our nation is no longer a republic with respect for the rule of law and individual rights. Our country was recently a democracy, with the tyranny of the majority and mob rule, but now it's even worse than that. Our nation is now an oligarchy, where the ruling class and their financial backers decide everything for us, and our contribution is working longer hours for less pay while their inflation eats away at our savings and purchasing power, as they bleed us dry with ever bigger government and ever increasing taxes to pay for it.

Sorry. I'm in a dark place right now.

All I can say is, if you want our country back, you'd better be willing to fight for it, because nobody's going to just give you your rights.

imported post

According to http://www.civilcase.net/

Civil Case Explanation In the common law, civil law alludes to area of laws and justice that impact on the legal standing of people. Civil law, in this sense, is mostly alluded to in comparison to criminal law, which is that body of law concerning the state against people ( including incorporated bodies ) where the state depends on the power given it by statutory law.

Civil law could also be compared to army law, executive law and constitutional law ( the laws ruling the political and law making process ), and global law.
Where there are legal options for factors behind action by people inside any of these areas of law, it is so civil law. Civil law courts offer a forum for deciding disputes concerning torts ( like accidents, neglectfulness, and libel ), contract disputes, the probate of wills, trusts, property disputes, executive law, commercial law, and any other non-public matters that involve personal parties and associations including central authority departments.
An action by an individual ( or legal equivalent ) against the lawyer general is a civil matter, but when the state, being represented by the prosecutor for the solicitor general, or another agent for the state, takes action against an individual ( or legal equivalent including a state office ), this is public law, not civil law.
The objectives of civil law are dissimilar from other kinds of law. In civil law there’s the plan to right a wrong, respect an understanding, or settle an argument.
If there’s a victim (This infers that there is not always a victim), they get compensation, and the individual that is the root of the incorrect pays, this being a civilized form of, or legal alternative choice to, vengeance. If it is an equity matter, there’s regularly a pie for division and it becomes allotted by a method of civil law, doubtless invoking the doctrines of equity. In public law the target is mostly deterrence, and retribution. An action in criminal law does not always preclude an action in civil law in common law states, and may supply a mechanism for compensation to the victims of crime. Such a situation took place when O.J. Simpson was ordered to pay damages for murder after being acquitted of the criminal charge of murder. Civil law in common law nations customarily pertains to both common law and the law of equity, which while now combined in administration, have different customs, and have traditionally operated to different doctrines, though this dualism is increasingly being put aside so there’s one coherent body of law rationalized around common beliefs of law.


So you know by experiencing it? Because according to that, a civil case can easily be brought over a constitutional infringement. To just dismiss a case by saying it is without merit is to deny someone due process, which according to wikipedia is defined as the principle that the government must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person according to the law. Due process holds the government subservient to the law of the land, protecting individual persons from the state.


If a judge denies due process, make it VERY public and vote him out. They are elected officials as well as the rest. All I'm saying is, the legal system might have made it difficult, but not impossible. It only takes a persistent individual to make it happen.

Federal judges are chosen by the POTUS, if I remember correctly, so voting them out isn't an option. But to allow state level judges to use "lack of standing" as a catch all loophole for them to not hear cases they don't want to is OUR FAULT for letting it happen.

imported post

Ok, you didn't read that right, let me simplify.

If an illegal search is performed, you can file a civil case because your fourth amendment has been violated, you were victimized.

Don't say it doesn't happen, because it has and I know of people who received monetary compensation over it.

Having your right to bear arms infringed upon is no different, it's a violation of constitutional law. If a police officer stops you and forces you to surrender your weapon when you have done no wrong, it is also a violation, you were victimized.

Officials doing the same thing, by proxy or not, is also a violation. In fact, the only place that is actually forbidden by law in this state for you to open carry a firearm is a court proceeding, K-12 schools, or a LOADED firearm into a bar.

Everywhere else that it is forbidden is only backed by an opinion of the attorney general, NOT LAW. They can't make it law because they are forbidden to by the Kentucky Constitution.

Unless you have actually filed a case regarding a second amendment violation and had it thrown out for lack of standing then you don't know. Just like me, your only speculating, but at least I'm basing mine in some factual relevance.

I don't want other people who are reading this to walk away thinking they have no recourse. Unfortunately, I haven't had the chance to encounter such a situation to file a civil case. Anywhere I've been denied my firearm has been on the up and up. But rest assured if I am denied my second amendment unlawfully, I will take it to court as should anyone reading this.