|
Kentucky Firearms Foundation, Inc. P.O. BOX 1249 Owingsville, KY Phone: Fax: Email KFFI Official Website of Kentucky
Firearms Foundation, Inc.
ITS ALL ABOUT GUNS JUST
NOT YOUR GUNS Craig Palmer
The Story Develops
Sometime this past week I was contacted by a
Louisville-area resident and concerned gun owner about the Frazier Historical
Arms Museum in Louisville. His concern
was the absurdity, the insult to gun owners, of the museum posting No Weapons
Permitted on their doors.
It
is a sad commentary that the museum touts its permanent collection: Other exhibit areas examine related topics of
recreational shooting, the manufacture of arms, famous American gunmakers, and
Theodore Roosevelt as sportsman, conservationist, and military hero. Of course, its okay to glorify guns and other weapons for the profit of the foundation and the salaries of errant-minded incompetents. But of course, none of this includes YOUR weapons or guns, even though you possess them for legal purposes and in many cases with a license form Kentucky (or elsewhere) to lawfully carry them concealed. Too bad selfishness, greed and elitism are not
crimes. If so, this rises to a felony. Upon investigating the policy, I asked and found
that many of my friends and associates also questioned the logic and prejudices behind this
posting. So it wasnt just a single
disgruntled person. I then turned to the museum itself, and went there
to capture a few photos of the posting.
Indeed, both the public entrance and the employees entrance are posted
with the oh-so-attractive gold leaf lettering. The next step was to contact the museum staff to see just what this policy is, and how it affects thee and me. The response from
Frazier's Director of Security
Below is the response to my inquiry to the
Frazier Historic Firearms Museum concerning their posting of "No Weapons
Permitted" signs at the entrances to their facility. Pretty
ironic, pretty tragic, very wrong-minded. My original request for information precedes the
Frazier response. Of course there is a certain risk in citing
only one section of a statute that fits your agenda and not recognizing the
entire statute. I often do this myself toward supporting an argument, but
with full awareness that other sections of the statute apply. KRS is written in a "ladder logic" way by
tradition, but also out of necessity. The earliest sections are usually
"definitions" for the rest of the statute. The very next section is a "generality"
stating the statute. The following sections make exceptions and
clarifications. One cannot cite the first and last sections without
recognizing that the other sections omitted are the independent basis of
the law, and the later sections cited are exemptions or limitations. In this case, the citation ignores the entire
exemption for those licensed to carry concealed weapons by KRS 237.110. Also ignored is the Kentucky Constitutional
protection - Section 1(7) - of your "inherent and inalienable"
right to BEAR ARMS that empowers ONLY the General Assembly to control ONLY the carrying
of concealed weapons. This is supported in the 1956 Kentucky Court Of
Appeals decision in Holland v. Commonwealth in which it is stated quite
clearly: "If the gun is worn
outside the jacket or shirt in clear view, no one may question the wearer's
right so to do..." KFFI will now take this discussion to the next
level, which will include conversation with national organizations. In the meantime I ask that you recognize they may indeed deny you concealed carry in their museum, but under Kentucky LAW and your Constitutionally protected RIGHT they may NOT bar you carryingy in their establishment. To do so would be as serious a violation of rights as denying entry to any person of a minority group. Your RIGHT to bear arms did not come from this or any government. This right existed before and outside of any government, being recognized and protected as a right inherent in you by virtue of being a man (the species, not the sex) as in: Section 1: ..."All men are, by
nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among
which may be reckoned: Seventh: The right to bear arms in
defense of themselves and of the State, subject to the power of the General
Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed
weapons." This has been in effect since 1891, and I have found
no mention of security directors of private businesses being empowered to
repeal your rights or enact law. I am not advocating entering or trying to enter the
museum or ANY private business or government building with any weapon they
advise is not permitted. This will without doubt result in your
arrest for "disorderly conduct" or any variety of civil offenses.
You might win in court, but you will lose legal fees, work time, business time,
and maybe have a very hard time recovering your firearm. Certainly, NEVER violate an actual LAW prohibiting
the carry of firearms or other weapons. Breaking a law is not the answer, and
you WILL be arrested and likely convicted. (Remember, Holland v.
Commonwealth came about because Holland was CONVICTED of illegally carrying a
weapon. He had to APPEAL his
conviction!) This attitude and policy of the Frazier
Museum really is a shame since I am told this is a marvelous
facility and display. But two of the cornerstones of
their displays are Teddy Roosevelt's "Big Stick" double
rifle, and some guns supposedly owned by Buffalo Bill Cody.
If alive today, Teddy would surely charge right in
and pull his beloved rifles and symbols of freedom from their perches and leave
without more than a sniff and a nod. Bill Cody I think would also pull
his guns from the case, but would likely take one of those fringed gloves and
swat the snot out of whoever directed this rule. Find
someplace else to spend your money. Maybe a shooting range for a
day. When you do, get a receipt for your fees and photocopy it or send
the original to the officer at the address below and explain why you spent the
money there instead of his museum.
J. Edwin Webb, Executive Director THE FRAZIER
HISTORICAL ARMS MUSEUM 829 W. Main
Street Louisville, KY 40202
And spread the word, please. (None of this information is, and should not be
considered to be, legal advice. I am not an attorney. KFFI is
not a source for legal opinion unless so stated, and KFFI is not responsible
and should not be considered responsible for your actions. For legal advice on this or any issue please
contact a competent attorney. CLP) My
original letter to the museum Frazier Historic Arms Museum ATTENTION: J. Edwin Webb, Executive Director Jeffrey A. Hawkins, Director, Museum
Operations and Chief Security Officer Larry Cortez, Lead Security Supervisor Dear sirs: It has come to my attention from
numerous sources that the Frazier Historic Arms Museum has established
a prohibition of "weapons" on the premises.
Indeed I have found on the doors of the Frazier Historic Firearms Museum,
the admonition: "No Weapons Permitted". (photo taken
September 15, 2004, attached) I ask you please to clarify to what
extent "weapons" are prohibited in your establishment: Does this include concealed deadly
weapons lawfully carried by persons licensed by the Commonwealth of
Kentucky to do so in accordance with KRS 527.020? Does this include weapons other than
firearms and if so, what weapons? Considering the Kentucky Constitution
Section 1(7) and the 1956 Kentucky Court Of Appeals ruling in "Holland v.
Commonwealth", does this also include weapons carriedy and not
concealed? Answers to these questions will help me
reply to the many people who have asked me about your policies. Sincerely, Craig L. Palmer, President Emeritus Kentucky Firearms Foundation,
Inc. (KFFI) Their
response From: Jeff Hawkins [mailto:jhawkins] To: Craig Palmer Subject: Your inquiry Dear Mr. Palmer, Thank you for your inquiry reference the policy of
The Frazier Museum. The Board of Directors of The Frazier
Museum has opted to exercise its right to prohibitor concealed deadly
weapons, as defined by Kentucky statutes - KRS ), as many
private, public and government buildings have also adopted.
We do make
statutory exceptions for law enforcement personnel KRS ) and
(7)). I hope this will answer your questions
and concerns; if you should have any other inquiries, please feel free to
contact me. Sincerely, Jeff Hawkins Jeffrey A. Hawkins, CIPM,
CIPI Director, Museum
Operations & Chief Security Officer THE FRAZIER HISTORICAL
ARMS MUSEUM 829 W. Main Street Louisville, KY 40202 (office) (FAX)
HB 39/FN/LM/CI (BR 39) - J. Richards, M. Cherry AN
ACT relating to crimes and punishments. HB 39
- AMENDMENTS HCA (1,
G. Lindsay) - Make technical correction. Jan
2-introduced in House KFFI
has been following this bill since its inception. It was originally
proposed in the 2000 General Assembly. Its purpose is clear and appears to
be fast tracked for approval during this session. We
support this bill and urge all Kentucky gun owners to do the same. HB 49/CI (BR 249) - R. Damron, S. Baugh, B.
Colter, J. Gray, R. Nelson, S. Riggs, G. Tapp AN
ACT relating to crimes and punishments. Jan
2-introduced in House KFFI Position: KFFI
has strongly supported this bill since it was introduced into the House. It
has not yet been called for discussion in the House Judiciary Committee.
Letters and phone calls from you to the committee members and to your
representatives could shake this bill loose and on to the House floor. We
support this bill and urge all Kentucky gun owners to do the same. AN ACT
relating to prohibition of possession of firearms in domestic violence
cases. Feb 7-introduced in Senate
Continues on Next
Page Upcoming Bills: (Cont.) SB 81/CI (BR 1082) J. Denton (Cont.) This is the same point that is currently under review
in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans in the case of U. S. v
Timothy Joe Emerson. We have no need
of getting Kentucky into the same problems that have been raised on the
federal level. A domestic violence
order can be issued without any finding of guilt for the offense charged. That means that somebody could be
accused of domestic violence and be barred from possession of any
firearms. What about the individual
who is falsely accused but must rid himself of his collection of Civil War
firearms because of the accusation?
This is bad law and should never even come out of committee. HB 108/LM (BR 394) - J. Gray, B. Colter, H.
Cornett, J. Stewart, G. Tapp, Jo. Turner AN
ACT relating to gun buy-back programs. HB 108
- AMENDMENTS Jan
4-introduced in House KFFI
Position: KFFI
has not been strongly supportive of this bill since it was introduced. We
had hoped that the House would have been more interested in HB-107, which
dealt with this issue in a more satisfactory manner. The
House Committee Substitute that has been added to this bill has made this
bill (unsupportable/flawed) in that it would prevent police from possibly
making an arrest of the offender at the time of the offense. This
substitute provision would make it more difficult for police officers to
apprehend those who have illegally obtained firearms and would allow those
same individuals the opportunity to rid themselves of firearms that had
been used in a crime at taxpayer expense. This
bill needs to fail on the House floor. SB 114 (BR 1014) - R. Stivers AN ACT
relating to the carrying of concealed deadly weapons. Feb 9-introduced in Senate Continued on Next
Page Upcoming Bills: (Cont.) Are Commonwealths attorneys
or county attorneys somehow imbued with an ability the rest of us must
demonstrate? Perhaps we can assume
they are familiar with the laws of Kentucky in regard to the use of deadly
force in defense of yourself and your property. Perhaps we can be assured they will not carry their concealed
weapons where they are not permitted (although the wording of this law
gives them much wider latitude than the rest of us common folk). But we are not at all assured they know
which end of the barrel of a firearm emits the projectile, that they can
hit what they intend to hit, nor do we know they know how to clean and
maintain their handguns or inspect their ammunition. Let them first take the concealed carry
course from a certified instructor and get their CCDW license, then come
talk to us about where they should be permitted to carry their concealed
weapons. HB 115/CI (BR 180) - R. Damron, C. Belcher, R.
Nelson, J. Stewart AN
ACT relating to crimes and punishments. Jan
5-introduced in House KFFI
Position: KFFI
has supported Project Exile since it was first introduced in the 2000
General Assembly by Representative Damron. It has not yet been called for
discussion in the House Judiciary Committee and time is running short to
get this bill called. We support this bill and urge all Kentucky gun owners
to call their representatives and ask them to support committee discussion
of this bill. HB 153 (BR 1033) - P. Bather (Mentioned
in article on Page4) AN ACT
relating to firearms and ammunition. Feb 6-introduced in House Feb 7-to
Judiciary (H) KFFI Position: KFFI strongly disagrees with
this bill. It is another attempt to revisit the 2000 General Assembly and
then HB-331 that was passed by both houses and survived a veto, which was
overridden by both houses. This bill is another end
run attempt to corrupt the peoples will in regards to recovering taxpayer
assets to provide for local police departments body armor. The individual
presenting this bill cannot be unaware that if these taxpayer assets were
to be destroyed, then taxpayer dollars would have to be used to fund this
same body armor program. More feeding at the public trough! This bill needs to languish
in the committee room until the session ends. Continued on Next
Page Upcoming Bills: (Cont.) HB 298
(BR 1209) - K. Stein, M. Marzian, R. Meeks AN
ACT relating to concealed deadly weapons permits. Feb
13-introduced in House KFFI is strongly opposed to this bill and you should be
too! Think about this. You
go into the drivers license branch at Bowman Field to renew your drivers
license and you are just ducky until they ask you for your doctors
statement! What? They explain that you now need a statement
from your doctor, optometrist, or ophthalmologist that your visual acuity
has been tested and is 20/40 or better! After all that two thousand pound
vehicle is considered to be lethal in the wrong hands. Youre thinking Im
kidding? Read this new proposed section that would change the permit
application section to the Concealed Carry law being presented to the House
Judiciary Committee; (i) Has,
along with the application for issuance or reissuance of a concealed deadly
weapon permit, submitted a statement that his or her visual acuity, has
tested and is 20/40 or better. The statement shall be signed by a medical
doctor, optometrist, or opthamologist. The visual acuity testing shall have
been done not more than six (6) months prior to the time that the
application for issuance or reissuance of a concealed deadly permit is
submitted. Representatives Stein,
Marzian, and Meeks are again attempting to add insignificant regulations to
a law that has worked well to date. These three legislators have always
been in the forefront of the attempts to dismantle or regulate out of
existence, Kentuckys CCDW law. This is just another of those attempts. If
this bill is such a good idea, lets try it in the Department of Motor
Vehicles first were it will impact a more representative sample of the
population. Then we can judge the measure on its own merits in regards to
safety. Think about it then start
writing your legislators and telling them to stop this type of intentional
discrimination against Kentucky voters. Let this bill die in committee! We make every effort to report
the bills accurately. However,
amendments are constantly being submitted and bills can be changed during
any committee hearing. For that
reason, we can only deal with the information we have at the time this is
printed. |
