Kentucky Supreme Court support of the 2nd Amendment
Results 1 to 2 of 2
Like Tree3Likes
  • 3 Post By Mojo57

Kentucky Supreme Court support of the 2nd Amendment

This is a discussion on Kentucky Supreme Court support of the 2nd Amendment within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Main Category category; Taken from a legal publication . . . I claim no ownership or accurancy of this and it is not ...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    125

    Default Kentucky Supreme Court support of the 2nd Amendment

    Taken from a legal publication . . . I claim no ownership or accurancy of this and it is not intended to serve as legal advice. But it is interesting to say the least.

    Kentucky Supreme Court Finds Employees May Not be Terminated for Storing Deadly Weapons within their Vehicles on Employer’s Property

    June 1, 2012
    In Mitchell v. University of Kentucky, the Kentucky Supreme Court has recognized, for the first time, that employers in Kentucky may not terminate or discipline employees—including at-will employees—for lawfully carrying deadly weapons within their vehicle. If they do so, the employee may bring a claim for public policy wrongful discharge and could be entitled to damages for back pay, front pay, emotional distress, and punitive damages, among others. According to the Supreme Court, there are three Kentucky statutes which protect an employee's right to carry a firearm within their vehicle.
    The first statute provides that an individual—even one not licensed to carry a concealed weapon—may store a weapon within certain designated locations within their vehicle. This statute formerly permitted the individual to store the weapon only within their glove compartment. However, in June 2011, this statute was significantly broadened. Now individuals in Kentucky may store their weapons in any enclosed container, compartment, or storage space installed as original equipment in a motor vehicle by its manufacturer, including but not limited to a glove compartment, center console, or seat pocket, regardless of whether the enclosed container, storage space, or compartment is locked, unlocked, or does not have a locking mechanism. According to the Supreme Court, an employer may not discharge an employee for storing a deadly weapon in one of these locations permitted under the statute.
    Under the second statute, an individual who is authorized to carry a concealed deadly weapon within the state may store a deadly weapon anywhere in their vehicle, and is not limited to storing the weapon in one of the designated areas identified above. An employer, therefore, may not discharge an employee with a concealed carry license for exercising this right.
    Lastly, under the third statute, an employer may not discharge an employee for possessing a firearm, part of a firearm, ammunition, or ammunition component, within their vehicle. The statute provides that an employer that terminates, disciplines, demotes, or otherwise punishes an employee who is lawfully exercising this right is liable in civil damages.
    As identified above, the Kentucky Supreme Court has broadly defined Kentucky's public policy regarding an individual's right to bear arms. Of course, this right is not absolute. For example, the law generally makes an exception for convicted felons. There are also questions that the Supreme Court did not answer, such as the application of these statutes to employer-owned vehicles. Needless to say, employers must take care that, when they discharge an employee, they do not do so because the employee has exercised their right to store firearms or other deadly weapons within their vehicles as permitted by Kentucky law.
    Disclaimer: In no way should any post be deemed legal advice and no such legal advice is being given. All posts are for entertainment purposes only and should not be construed as rendering legal advice as no such attorney client relationship is created herein.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Houston, Tx
    Posts
    207

    Default

    Seems to mention "their vehicle" repeatedly so I'd say that covers their own vehicle and not company vehicles.
    Good move Kentucky SC in protecting the rights of workers.
    "One cannot restrict the defiant by constraining the compliant."
    Project One Million:Texas - Click here and Join NRA Today!
    Suggestions by Domineaux | Texas Gun Forum

Posting Permissions

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