• 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.

KC3 Goes to KY Supreme Court to settle gun law violations by City of Pikeville

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
782
Location
Central Ky.
On Wednesday of this week, February 8, Kentucky Concealed Carry Coalition (KC3) will be inthe Chambers of the Ky. Supreme Court for oral arguments for our lawsuit against the City of Pikeville for multiple violations of Ky. gun laws. This lawsuit has been in the works for over 5 years. This case was dismissed in Pike Circuit Court and KC3 appealed to Ky. Court of Appeals. COA ruled in KC3's favor and Pikeville appealed to Ky. Supreme Court. This will be the final showdown. If you want to hear more about the details involved in this lawsuit go to the Facebook page of Kentucky Concealed Carry Coalition. This is the 20th lawsuit filed by KC3 for gun law violations. We are 19-0 to this point.
 

willy1094

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
201
Location
Nothern KY
This is great to hear. Would have been better if they would just follow the law. Thank you for you efforts.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,964
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Court of Appeals:
Moreover, Appellant provided a copy of a rental agreement for the Expo Center between the City Corp and a renter containing the following language:
[City Corp] represents to tenant that [the Expo Center] is located in a School Zone as defined by the Gun[-]Free School Zone Act of 1990 as contained in 18 U.S.C.[United States Code]adopted November 29, 1990 (the Act).[City Corp] prohibits the possession of all concealed weapons upon [the Expo Center’s] premises pursuant to this Act. All persons are prohibited from possessing firearms and other deadly weapons on the premises unless such possession is authorized by the exceptions in the Act...
This section of the rental agreement is void per United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995). The term "school zone" is defined as "in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or private school" or "within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public, parochial or private school." § 921(a)(25) was deemed unconstitutional.
 

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,887
Location
Granite State of Mind
Court of Appeals:

This section of the rental agreement is void per United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995). The term "school zone" is defined as "in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or private school" or "within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public, parochial or private school." § 921(a)(25) was deemed unconstitutional.
Lopez held that it was invalid because there was no nexus to interstate commerce. Congress then immediately amended the GFSZA with a direct reference to interstate commerce as justification, and that new law has not been successfully challenged.

Mostly because it's almost never challenged; it's a plea-bait stacking charge.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,964
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Lopez held that it was invalid because there was no nexus to interstate commerce. Congress then immediately amended the GFSZA with a direct reference to interstate commerce as justification, and that new law has not been successfully challenged.

Mostly because it's almost never challenged; it's a plea-bait stacking charge.
Incorrect. That is what congress wants you to believe. See United States v. Morrison, 529 US 598, 609 - Supreme Court (2000)

"In Lopez, we held that the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, 18 U. S. C. § 922(q)(1)(A), which made it a federal crime to knowingly possess a firearm in a school zone, exceeded Congress' authority under the Commerce Clause. See 514 U. S., at 551."

The 1st. and 9th. circuits both ignored what the SC said and upheld the new version of 922(q). There is no way to slice and dice Lopez/Morrison to make it a crime to posses a firearm in a federally defined school zone. If that were the case then possessing a banana in a school zone could be deemed a crime. Almost everything moves through commerce.

As to the Kentucky case, they specifically point to the original statute that was found unconstitutional.
 

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,069
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Last edited:
Top