Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Proposed new law

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Olive Hill, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    186

    Proposed new law

    I am thinking about talking to my legislators and asking for an addition to our firearms law. I wondered what the colective wisdom here thought of it.

    I want a restriction on any LEO being able to disarm an open carry or concealed carry individual without RAS per Terry V Ohio and other specific case law.

    I am not a fan of the catch all "officer safety" ploy. Sounds strange considering my former career, but that is how it is.

    Too many bad things can happen when guns are out of the holster, especially considering any LEO cannot be proficient in the safe operation of every weapon they come into contact with. A ND can cause a great deal of problems even if no individual is struck.

    Perhaps a combined effort might be more effective than an individual effort.

    Your thoughts?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510
    Texas has such a statute, and it does nothing to stop police from disarming people at will, for the reasons gutshot stated: even without statutory authority, police have SCOTUS case law on the side of "officer safety".

    Texas Government Code Sec. 411.207. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICER TO DISARM. (a) A peace officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's official duties may disarm a license holder at any time the officer reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual. The peace officer shall return the handgun to the license holder before discharging the license holder from the scene if the officer determines that the license holder is not a threat to the officer, license holder, or another individual and if the license holder has not violated any provision of this subchapter or committed any other violation that results in the arrest of the license holder.

    Since this law was enacted, Texas has legalized unlicensed car carry. The statute only gives authority to disarm "license holders", though. Even that authority is limited to circumstances where the officer reasonably believes it's necessary for safety; blanket "disarm everyone" policies aren't allowed.

    But, it doesn't matter, as I said before. Terry allows it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917
    Well for one, if I'm detained legitimately, I don't mind surrendering my weapon temporarily provided that its numbers aren't run. This law would never get passed simply because it smacks of being anti-police. I don't think it is, but I think the general public would consider it to be. I also think that there are better gun laws to fall behind--the Kentucky Firearms Freedom Act, for instance.

  4. #4
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    Are we ignoring wat gutshot stated? 237.104 already states when and when not an officer can disarm you in ky. I never surrender my firearm, I do have a problem with it, I'm not a criminal, and who is some Leo that thinks they have the right to disarm me of my rights anyways?? If my weapons are ever
    Taken they better have a rock solid reason why they done so, BC I'd be in court the next day filing suit. if you let a cop disarm you when he has no right to do so then he thinks he
    Can always do this. Wat we need to concentrate on is getting some legal teeth in krs65.870, and doing away with the ignorant concealed carry prohibited places. We can open carry
    In these places wat makes cc ne different?? And getting ky to do away with the k-12 restriction for license holders, it's sad federal govt allows us to carry with license bit ky don't, that's insane.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Olive Hill, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    186
    You are speaking of Terry, and yes I did mention it. I was thinking more along the lines of a simple traffic issue. The classic speeding, one headlight, or for no reason at all, other than officer safety. These are not offenses for which you can be arrested, so I wonder if they fall under Terry, I really don't know.

    KRS 237.104 is great, but it is not as clear as I would like.

    As to being in court the next day with a suit, I admire you. In most cases though you will have o pony up several thousand dollars up front, which most often is a problem, perhaps not in your case thouhgh

    Of course you can go pro se, and sometimes those work, who knows. One fact remains though the State will spend a whole bunch of taxpayer money to overcome your suit and it will most likely take a few years to reach a conclusion.

    Cites are often asked for on this forum. Can anyone provide a Kentucky or USSC cite that allow an officer to disarm an individual who is legally carrying a firearm for any or no reason under the umbrella of officer safety?
    Last edited by MrOverlay; 08-28-2011 at 02:43 PM.

  6. #6
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    YEs we could go pro se but this wouldn't be an issue I would want to go at alone I'd definately want council. As far as an officer disarming you for a simple traffic violation that is not allowed in ky. They are supposed to have ras of you commiting a criminal offense, and a traffic violation does not constitute such. I have never been asked to surrender my firearm and hopefully never will. Like I said I'm not a criminal and if an officer disarms me he would have a hard time proving ras, because I would never commit a criminal offense, and as far as voluntary surrender of our firearm, I would never voluntarily do so, that is my right and I won't voluntarily give it up, even for a few minutes.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Olive Hill, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    186
    I agree with you KYGlockster, but if you read through the other states threads you can see that it happens all the time.

    My thought was if it was clearly spelled out that it couldn't be done on a whim, that it puts the shoe on the foot that it belongs, on the officer to explain why he/she did what they did.

    I might just be dreaming, but I still think it can be made much clearer than it currently is.

Posting Permissions

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