• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Verbal 65.870 violation.

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
I'll be damned. It seems as soon as you see one place come into compliance with 65.870, another place violates it. But the twist to this violation isn't signage or an ordinance, but rather a verbal order. I received an email last night from an EMT from the Powell Co. Ambulance Service. He said that earlier this month he was OC'ing a compact 9 while on duty, when the director and asst. director ordered him to remove his gun and return it to his vehicle. When he asked why, they said "guns are forbidden here."

I've told him to keep his yap shut and say nothing...... I have filed an open records request with the county as well to the ambulance service to see if any ordinances, policies, rules, regs, etc exist. I figured this was a good starting point. For now, this is all the information that I have.
 
Last edited:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Just so everyone's on the same page....

65.870 Local 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.

(2) Any existing or future ordinance, executive order, administrative regulation, policy, procedure, rule, or any other form of executive or legislative action in violation of this section or the spirit thereof is hereby declared null, void, and unenforceable.

(3) Any person or organization specified in subsection (1) of this section shall repeal, rescind, or amend to conform, any ordinance, administrative regulation, executive order, policy, procedure, rule, or other form of executive or legislative action in violation of this section or the spirit thereof within six (6) months after July 12, 2012.

(4) Pursuant to Section 231 of the Constitution of Kentucky, insofar as any person or organization specified in subsection (1) of this section is considered an agent of the Commonwealth, it is the intent of the General Assembly to exempt them from any immunity provided in Section 231 of the Constitution of Kentucky to the extent provided in this section. A person or an organization whose membership is adversely affected by any ordinance, administrative regulation, executive order, policy, procedure, rule, or any other form of executive or legislative action promulgated or caused to be enforced in violation of this section or the spirit thereof may file suit against any person or organization specified in subsection (1) of this section in any court of this state having jurisdiction over any defendant to the suit for declaratory and injunctive relief. A court shall award the prevailing party in any such suit: (a) Reasonable attorney's fees and costs in accordance with the laws of this state; and (b) Expert witness fees and expenses.

(5) If any person or organization specified in subsection (1) of this section violates this section or the spirit thereof, the court shall declare the improper ordinance, administrative regulation, executive order, policy, procedure, rule, or other form of executive or legislative action specified in subsection (1) of this section null, void, and unenforceable, and issue a permanent injunction against the person or organization specified in subsection (1) of this section prohibiting the enforcement of such ordinance, administrative regulation, executive order, policy, procedure, rule, or any other form of executive or legislative action specified in subsection (1) of this section.

(6) A violation of this section by a public servant shall be a violation of either KRS 522.020 or 522.030, depending on the circumstances of the violation.

(7) The provisions of this section shall not apply where a statute specifically authorizes or directs an agency or person specified in subsection (1) of this section to regulate a subject specified in subsection (1) of this section. Effective: July 12, 2012 History: Amended 2012 Ky. Acts ch. 117, sec. 1, effective July 12, 2012. -- Created 1984 Ky. Acts ch. b 42, sec. b 1, effective July 13, 1984

It would appear the answer is right there in para (1).
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Are we certain that the service is a county service vs. being contracted out and a private service. May not make any difference regarding ownership if they are working for the county. Don't know, just asking.
 

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
Prior to 2001 it was a private service. It is now county ran. If it were still private it would be legal for them to have policies in regards to firearms. Not so much with it being a county agency.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
--snipped--
65.870 Local firearms control ordinances prohibited -- Exemption from immunity -- Declaratory and injunctive relief
That is an extremely well written statute IMHO. Could well serve as a model for other states, Virginia included where state agencies are exempted.

Only thing I might hope could be added is punitive damages.
 

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
Yes, we are certain.

http://www.powellcounty.ky.gov/department/ambulance.htm

I believe it was ran by Wells (sp) funeral home before becoming an entity of the county. As you know, I work in an adjoining county doing the same fashion of work, so I am somewhat familiar with them. I actually worked with a former director and just yesterday I worked with the last former director. (Either very political in Powell co.or my co-workers stink as boss men)

In talking with the most recent former director, he worried that due to the current administrations arrogant attitude, they would fire the employee on spot if they find out that he complained about this violation.

Needless to say, keeping the employees job safe is a top priority. I advised him of the risk, but he basically said that liberty is more important than a job. Nonetheless, handling this in a delicate manner is a concern of mine. As I stated before, this is a different kind of violation that I have never handled before. If you have any advice, I'm all ears.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
Doubtful.

Thanks for correcting me on Kentucky law all the way from Florida. I guess I had better stop asking local government to remove signage that I once felt was illegal. And I'll go ahead and cancel my open records request on those ordinances, rules, regulations and whatnot since it doesn't matter if they exist or not. Gutshot, looks like KC3 owes some restitution to some places for wrongful lawsuits that was filed against them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
I never received my open records request, so I placed a call to the ambulance service. As luck would have it, I talked with the main boss himself. He stated to me that his agency had no written policy, but the practice of carrying was discouraged. At the end of the conversation I got the impression that basically he was telling me "we don't have a written policy because it is forbidden by law, but if you carry we will make your life hell." He did acknowledge that the employees story did in fact happen, but corrective action was taking afterwards to comply with the law (whatever that means).

He stated the same "concerns" about employees carrying as my work place did. Such as needing to enter "gun free" zones such as hospitals, unsecured firearms left in company trucks, combative patients being able to remove employee firearms, etc. The shocker is that he had never heard of 65.870 :shocker:, but he did quote KRS 237.106(5) that states "A private but not a public employer may prohibit employees or other persons holding a concealed deadly weapons license from carrying concealed deadly weapons, or ammunition, or both in vehicles owned by the employer............."

In the end he said that we would love to change this law so that he could legally have policies against all forms of carry, so.....not a very pro-2A kinda guy IMHO.
 

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY

Well done. You have put him on notice that his actions are being watched and he may be less hostile to OC on the job. At least, he acknowledges the fact that he can't regulate guns. His "concerns" are unimportant. Did you give him a copy of 65.870 or provide a link so he could access it himself? The penalties in 65.870, that he claims he didn't know about, may get his attention and cause him to forget about his "concerns". 65.870 does not require a "written" policy, but it is very difficult to prove one exists without it. The only way would be to prove a chain of repeated violations and assert that constitutes a de facto policy. Whatever actions he takes have to be justified, somehow. If he acts and there is no policy to justify those actions, he may have some explaining to do. As I said, very difficult. It I were you, I'd keep an eye on him and contact him occasionally, just to let him know you had not forgotten him.
Once again, great job keeping them on there toes. I'd find out why I never got the Open Records Request. That is a big no-no and should not be allowed to stand. Who did you file it with and how long has it been? You should give them hell and report them to th e AG's office. They take that very seriously. More seriously than gun control violations, unfortunately.

I hope that he is more aware of this issue now. Time will tell. This situation is a thinker, because as you say, nothing is written. Once more through the grapevine I have heard that a memo has came out to employees that address this issue. I don't know if the memo is pre or post our conversation. I'm working on getting a copy.
 
Top