Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG) gun ban??

[BB62]

imported post

Mike wrote:

OK, good work!

No we need to scour the ordiances of lexington City and see if they have any ordinance banning gun carry at this airport.

Small correction - since we're talking about CVG, you mean "Cincinnati", not Lexington City.

The Lt. has already said it is an "airport ordinanace", not a county ordinance: "Kenton County Airport Board Ordinance 01.06.15".

However, it could be a county ordinance that applies to the airport. I really don't think it matters - as I've posted previously, itseems that governmental entities can disallow concealed carry in their buildings, so they CAN post the airport.

Are you simply trying to make sure there is a county ordinance that does so? If there is not, they can pass one in a second - so again, does it really matter? What am I missing?

It seems the larger issue is one of the threatened disorderly conduct charges.

 

[Mike]

imported post

langzaiguy wrote:

I looked into Bluegrass Airport and the KY auditor says, "The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Airport Corporation, a public non-profit organization and a component unit of Lexington city government, owns the airport. The airport board, appointed by the mayor, oversees the airport and its $18 million in annual expenditures."

Don't know if Cincy has the same setup.

oops, missed what you were saying - let's focus on the airport in question - what entity runs it, who appoints the board, does the coutny have a gun ban ordinance etc.

 

[BB62]

imported post

gutshot wrote:

This issue seems to be getting confused. Cincinnati has nothing to do with it since the airport is in KY. Ohio statutes (and the ordinances of Ohio municipalities) are not enforceable in KY Also, whether it's private property or public property, CC can be banned in the airport (although I'm not conceding that it has been properly done). It's the manner in which that was done (or not done) and OC, and the use of DC charges to discourage it, that should be in dispute here.

No, the issue is NOT getting confused, except maybe by you.

In addition, you're just repeating what's already been said.

#1 - I never said Cincinnati or Ohio's laws had anything to do with "it", except to point out toMike which airport we are talking about.

#2 - I've already made the point that a gun ban could be put in place whether the airport is public or private property.

As far as your final sentence, again,you are justrepeating what I just stated (look at MY last sentence in my most recent post) a short time ago, and at least one other time before in this thread.



P.S. - I have calls into the County Attorney, Airport Board, Fiscal Court, and the Lt. who wrote the initial note to M1Gunr asking what law (passed by a legislative body) underlies the signage posting.

 

[Mike]

imported post

gutshot wrote:

We agree that the CC can be banned in the airport. My question is not can it be, but has it been, legally. I have found many places around KY that banned CC and could do so legally, but hadn't taken the time or care to do so properly. I also found that many of those jurisdictions were unwilling to go through the process. We should investigate to see if the airport did that. Our posts may have been similar, but mine was much clearer and more to the point.

Right - and as we see in TN right now re parks, many local boards will blink when it comes time to a published vote to ban guns.

We need somebody on the ground in or near that County in Kentucky where this airport is to get the facts on this airport and any applicable ordinances.

 

[BB62]

imported post

Mike wrote:

Right - and as we see in TN right now re parks, many local boards will blink when it comes time to a published vote to ban guns.

We need somebody on the ground in or near that County in Kentucky where this airport is to get the facts on this airport and any applicable ordinances.

(my emphasis above)

Sheesh.

#1 - I have asked specific questions (of you) which have gone unanswered.

#2 - I live in Cincinnati.

#3 - From my most recent post:"I have calls into the County Attorney, Airport Board, Fiscal Court, and the Lt. who wrote the initial note to M1Gunr asking what law (passed by a legislative body) underlies the signage posting."

#4 - the "form" of the airport has been answered in this thread multiple times.

 

[BB62]

imported post

I just got off the phone with a pleasant man, Mr. Chad Everett, of the airport board.

Despite raising the specter of "public safety", he informed me that the prohibition of concealed firearmswas in fact NOT backed up by anything other than the airport board ordinance.

He mentioned that a Federal Court had ruled that Hartsfield in Atlanta was okay to prohibit carry, but I corrected him and said that the reason was merely that Georgia's legislature had not specifically allowed carry in the non-sterile portion of the airport.

He said that I would not find the airport ordinance online, but that he would send it to me in the next day or so (!?) - via e-mail.

He was aware of M1Gunr's contact, and said that the Chief of the airport police had been involved in the discussion.

He said that the airport wanted to do the "right thing".

He questioned me a number of times about what my "angle" was - I told him simply that I was expected to follow the law and that I expected governmental/quasi-govenmental entities to do the same. I told him that a number of Ohio cities, etc. had done the same "it's our law" stuff, ignoring preemption.

I toldhim that what really got me focused on the matter was the threat of bogus "disorderly conduct" charges which the Lt. mentioned - and that police departments in Ohio have done the same thing when they had no applicable charges of substance to "deal" with a circumstance.

Finally, he told me that the governor appointed one board member (not the chairman?) and that county Judge Executives (not sure what they are) in three KY counties: Kenton, Boone, and Campbell, as well as some entity(didn't ask who) in Hamilton County, Ohio, appointed the rest of the board. The board itself selects a chairman, and the Kenton County JE appoints the majority of the board members.

Do you have further questions orsuggestions, MIKE?

 

[Mike]

imported post

BB62 wrote:

I just got off the phone with a pleasant man, Mr. Chad Everett, of the airport board. . . .

Great work - please post the airport authority's ordinance when you get it. Then we can ask them to remove their signs asI understand from the statutes above that it takes a County to enact such "ordinances."

As for the Atlanta Airport federal case, I don't think it stands for the proposition that the Atlanta airport ban is valid - it seems to me to be more like the federal court was just not going to issue an injunction against enforcement of state law because the state law was not completely clear. I think the state law does preempt the Atlanta ordinance but it will take a state court to tell us for sure.

 

[BB62]

imported post

Mike wrote:

Great work - please post the airport authority's ordinance when you get it. Then we can ask them to remove their signs asI understand from the statutes above that it takes a County to enact such "ordinances."...

Thanks.

Yep.I've got a call into KC3 to give them a heads-up in case they try to. Unfortunately, there seems to be some division in the ranks there.


Mike wrote:

...As for the Atlanta Airport federal case, I don't think it stands for the proposition that the Atlanta airport ban is valid - it seems to me to be more like the federal court was just not going to issue an injunction against enforcement of state law because the state law was not completely clear. I think the state law does preempt the Atlanta ordinance but it will take a state court to tell us for sure.

I don't know about that...

http://www.examiner.com/x-5619-Atlanta-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m3d13-Court-Rules-that-Legislator-Did-Not-Mean-What-He-Said

And the lawsuit was brought by the author of the law!!

EDITED TO ADD - yeah, I guess I can see where you're coming from, but the legislators sure thought they were clear.

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

imported post

Mike wrote:

As for the Atlanta Airport federal case, I don't think it stands for the proposition that the Atlanta airport ban is valid - it seems to me to be more like the federal court was just not going to issue an injunction against enforcement of state law because the state law was not completely clear. I think the state law does preempt the Atlanta ordinance but it will take a state court to tell us for sure.

Mike, you are very, very close. The court refused to enjoin Atlanta from arresting people, but it was not based on an ordinance. Atlanta is contending that two state laws prohibit firearms in the airport. The first is the public gathering law, which is what the legislators amended to permit carry on public transportation, and the other is the public transportation law, which is what the legislators referred to when they amended the public gathering law to state that a license holder may carry on public transportationnotwithstanding the public transportation law that banned carry on buses, trains, planes, and airport terminals, and notwithstanding the law that defined airport terminals.

The federal judge (appointed by Carter) held that the other law was "a completely different Code section" that was not affected by the amendment, but he also held that the amendment was for trains and buses and train and bus terminals but not the airport or the airport terminal, even though it is the exact same statute in each case.

Although the holding is technically only a refusal to enjoin arrests for the public gathering law or the public transportation law, nobody now wants to risk arrest. Why?

Public gathering = misdemeanor

Public transportation law = felony.

There is a punishment of 20 years in prison and a $15,000 fine for even having a gun in the parking lot of the airport. That is much worse than a mere ordinance.

Nobody wants to risk losing two decades of their life to prison and being branded as a felon to find out if the state criminal courts would agree with Judge Marvin Shoob and the Eleventh Circuit panel that upheld his decision.

 

[BB62]

imported post

Malum Prohibitum wrote:

...The federal judge (appointed by Carter) held that the other law was "a completely different Code section" that was not affected by the amendment, but he also held that the amendment was for trains and buses and train and bus terminals but not the airport or the airport terminal, even though it is the exact same statute in each case...

Those liberal judges sure take the cake regardingtortured interpretations!

Are the legislators going to change things around to make thingsmore explicitly legal?

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

imported post

There was already one attempt to do so last year that failed. Now pending is HB 615, which would make it legal to carry a firearm everywhere in Georgia but the portion of a building that houses a courtroom, jail, or prison, while protecting existing private property rights.

http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2009_10/fulltext/hb615.htm

A person possessing a license issued pursuant to Code Section 16-11-129 shall be permitted to carry a firearm in every location in the state not listed in subsection (a) of this Code section, notwithstanding any other Code section, provided that nothing in this subsection shall limit any pre-existing right to exclude others from private property. For the purposes of this subsection, 'a license issued pursuant to Code Section 16-11-129' shall include an unexpired license issued by a probate judge under a former version of Code Section16-11-129.


This is GeorgiaCarry.Org's top priority for 2010, and we have close to 5,000 members now all pushing to make this a reality.

 

[Bill Starks]

imported post

Who would have thought a simple question would have generated this much this much activity between various states and organizations. For everyone working on this I thank you.

Now if my back will ever ease up and allow me to become mobile again I can make my planned trip with this issue settled or not.

 

[langzaiguy]

imported post

I have been in correspondence with Ms. Carol Spaw, Liason to the Kenton County Airport board. She has stated that it is her belief that the airport is a public entity. She has referred me to their attorneys for a more formal statement. I'll definitely post what I find out!

 

[langzaiguy]

imported post

It's official!!

I received a formal reply from the attorney for the Kenton County Airport Board.

Mr. Wilbert Ziegler of Ziegler & Schneider PSC relpied as follows:

"In reply to your telephone call and e-mail, any my attempt to return your call, I wish to advise you that The Kenton County Airport Board, operator or the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport is a public governmental body under applicable Kentucky statutes. In Kentucky there are many Special Districts which are public governmental bodies performing certain functions. For example, School Boards operate school systems, Library Boards operate libraries, Water District Boards operate the public water supply systems, Transit Authorities operate public bus systems."

I did not ask about the carrying of firearms on premises. It would be my non-professional, amateur opinion that the Kenton County Fiscal Court can regulate conceal carry, but no one may regulate open carry at the airport.

 

[BB62]

imported post

langzaiguy wrote:

I have been in correspondence with Ms. Carol Spaw, Liason to the Kenton County Airport board. She has stated that it is her belief that the airport is a public entity. She has referred me to their attorneys for a more formal statement. I'll definitely post what I find out!

This will be REAL interesting.

Of course, they will claim tobe public if it helps in the instance at hand, and private if it's more to their benefit.

Did you read my post above? I suspect they're coordinating behind the scenes, and working on passing a law to support their signage - a law that at the moment doesn't exist!

Another thing - although I called fourpeople, including the Lt. mentioned by the OP, only ONE returned my call. Yep, they're coordinating (and obfuscating).

 

[BB62]

imported post

langzaiguy wrote:

..."In reply to your telephone call and e-mail, any my attempt to return your call, I wish to advise you that The Kenton County Airport Board, operator or the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport is a public governmental body under applicable Kentucky statutes...

Yep, more confirmation of what we knew.

langzaiguy wrote:

...It would be my non-professional, amateur opinion that the Kenton County Fiscal Court can regulate conceal carry, but no one may regulate open carry at the airport.

If the Fiscal Court is a "legislative body of a state, city, county, or urban-county government", they may be able to, but see my previous postregarding the lack of a law doing so - and then consider that Kenton County "owns"(?) the airport, but it's in Boone County.

 

[langzaiguy]

imported post

I'm sorry, I didn't see a post where it had been established that the airport is a public entity. I suppose I missed that one somewhere.

I do want to distinguish between the airport board and the fiscal court. I do not believe the airport board has the right to ban ANY type of carry. That would be left up to the fiscal court.

As for the Kenton vs. Boone debate, I have no idea.

 

[BB62]

imported post

[align=left]Got this PDF from Chad Everett: (note the various "to the extent authorized by law")[/align]
01.06 General Public and Miscellaneous

(15) [font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"][font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"]Firearms, Weapons
[/font][/font]
(A) The possession of, use or storage of any firearm, ammunition, explosive or destructive device, or other deadly weapon in any form, is [font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"][font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"]PROHIBITED [/font][/font]on any area of Kenton County Airport Board property to which access is controlled by the inspection of Persons and property, (KRS 237.110(12)(g)); in the airport police station, (KRS 237.110(12)(a)); in any portion of the airport licensed to dispense beer and alcoholic beverages, (KRS 237.110(12)(e)); or any other place on airport property where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law, (KRS 237.110(12)(I)).

"Firearm" includes any weapon as defined by KRS 237.060(2).

"Weapon" includes all "deadly weapons" as defined by KRS 500.080(4).

"Destructive device" included explosives, bombs and similar devices as defined by KRS 237.030(1).

(B) To the extent authorized by law, the Board also prohibits the carrying of firearms and concealed weapons by licensees in all airport terminals or other buildings owned or controlled by the airport board.

(C) Firearms and other deadly weapons seized where prohibited in Section (A), including all Security Identification Display Areas (SIDA) such as ramps, taxiways and runway areas, shall be held for safe keeping pursuant to procedures established by federal and state security guidelines, including holding for evidence at trial. Weapons seized from individuals in areas prohibited under Section (B) above, where the individual is duly licensed to carry a concealed weapon pursuant to KRS Chapter 237, shall be returned to said individual upon proof of a valid license. Return shall be made by airport police at a location where the carrying of a concealed weapon by a licensee is permitted.

(D) Individuals licensed to carry concealed weapons under KRS Chapter 237 are directed to leave such weapons in their vehicles prior to entering any airport building, or before entering any area of the airport to which access is controlled by the inspection of Persons and property.

(E) All buildings or portions of buildings or any other areas where the carrying of concealed weapons is prohibited shall be clearly identified by signs posted at the entrance of the restricted area. Such signs shall be a minimum of eighteen (18) square inches in size and shall read as follows: "THE POSSESSION OF CONCEALED WEAPONS, EVEN WITH PROPER PERMIT, IS HEREBY PROHIBITED IN THIS AREA."

(F)(1) Individuals who violate Section (A) of this ordinance, or unlicensed individuals carrying concealed weapons, shall be subject to criminal penalty as provided under state law.

(2) Individuals licensed to carry concealed weapons who violate Section (B) of this ordinance shall not be subject to criminal penalty, but may be denied entrance to airport buildings or ordered to leave airport buildings

(3) Any airport employee, other than airport police as authorized by KRS 527.020, who violates any section of this Section 1.06(15) shall be subject to employee disciplinary measures for violations of state law or this ordinance.

 

[BB62]

imported post

langzaiguy wrote:

...I do want to distinguish between the airport board and the fiscal court. I do not believe the airport board has the right to ban ANY type of carry. That would be left up to the fiscal court...

I think you're right.

 

[langzaiguy]

imported post

Oh wow! Great find, gutshot. We definitely need to take care of this. Would anyone like to be the one to contact Kenton County about this issue? I don't mind doing it myself--just seeing if anyone wanted to pick up the ball on this one.