SB 7 is the Constitutional/Permitless carry bill in the Kentucky legislature for 2017.  It was moved to the Senate Veterans, Military Affairs, & Public Protection committee.  The NRA-ILA is reporting that the bill has been removed from Senate consideration.

Unfortunately, the constitutional/permitless carry legislation, Senate Bill 7, has been pulled from consideration in the Kentucky Senate.

SB 7, as with all modern Constitutional carry bills, leaves the permit system in place.  People who value the permit for state to state reciprocity, or as an alternate to NICS checks, will be able to use it for those purposes. Kentucky is one of 25 states where the carry permit can be used as an alternate to NICS.

It is not clear why the bill is not being presented to the Senate for a vote. The bill has bi-partisan support and sponsorship by the Majority Floor Leader Damon Thayer (R).

On opencarry.org, a Second Amendment activist who has been intimately involved in the situation, with the screen name of Gutshot, gives this explanation:

Well, I can assure you that it wasn’t Senator Robinson’s preference, but the bare facts are that the leadership counted and decided that the votes weren’t there and they didn’t want to call for a vote and lose. Why weren’t the votes there? Who knows? Politicians vote what they think is best for themselves. Somehow, they decided it was better for them to not vote for this and they decided the best thing was to not vote for it or against it, so that’s what they did.

The Kentucky Senate consists of 11 Democrats and 27 Republicans. That ratio is the same as in 2015.

The Kentucky House consists of 36 Democrats and 64 Republicans, a dramatic reversal from 2015, where the House had 53 Democrats and 46 Republicans.

The Kentucky Governor is Matt Bevin.

©2017 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

 

 

26 Responses to Constitutional Carry Bill in Kentucky Pulled from Consideration

    • Okay, apparently the bill is not well-crafted. It’s confusing and contradictory. Maybe the House version will be better and get some traction.

  1. Cowards. Put it up for a vote, and let us deal with your voting record in the next election. Otherwise it’s the committee chairs and presiding officers that have to go if they are manipulating the docket so severely.

  2. Effin’ Kentucky liberals!! There’s no liberal worse than a Kentucky Republican. Let’s call it Commie Fried Chicken from now on.

  3. Frankfort will take revenue any way they can. Losing the cash from permits will never be a priority in this state. In the meantime I’ll just continue to open carry.
    For what it’s worth – there was one name on my ballot for the state House… I used the write-in for Elvis.

  4. This bill died where they always do. This one was so poorly thought out it never had a chance. There was considerable public and law enforcement feedback against it. The later doomed it.

    Everyone seems to feel our current firearm laws are lax enough as is. If the Louisville mess does not get better I would expect talk of tightening our handgun, open carry, and vehicle carry laws versus loosening of them.

    There are also serious public safety concerns after recent civilian on civilian shootings in W. Virginia, Missouri, and another no permit state that I think was Kansas? Those incidents made a strong case for mandatory training. Lot of talk in the halls about sitting back for a few years and watching how permitless carry works out in states with similar demographics to ours versus just blindly following the pack.

    History shows the current CCW program requirements have worked out very well. Many feel it is not unreasonable to require you to be age 21, have a clean record, take an 8 hour course to demonstrate that you can safely handle a firearm, show you can hit the broadside of a barn with a handgun, be responsible in terms of storage of it, and demonstrate a basic understanding of use of force laws before you can carry a concealed handgun out in public.

    Even the bill’s sponsor admitted training was a good idea and did not fair well when questioned on the bill. Several big names in law enforcement also weighed in that the current laws have proven to be a good balance between accessibility, officer safety, and public safety.

    Barring some major changes in both public and law enforcement support, I would NOT expect to see permitless concealed carry in Kentucky anytime in the foreseeable future.

    • While I agree that currently the laws are reasonable, that 8 hour training course is a bit of a burden. It’s tough to find that time and it has kept my wife from taking the course. As a school teacher she won’t take a day off for the class, and doesn’t want to lose family time on weekends. It would be nice if that burden were reduced in some way; I think 5 hours is plenty. 4 hours of instruction and 1 of shooting.

      Obviously individuals should continue to seek training and practice I just think lowering that baseline a bit would be more friendly to some.

      • I realize that it’s been said many times before, but it bears repeating: Those states that have adopted Constitutional Carry have not seen blood flowing in the gutters as a result of there being no legal requirement for an X-number-of-hours training class and an x-number-of-rounds-fired-at-x-distance live-fire exercise before being ‘allowed’ to exercise a guaranteed civil right. Any arbitrary requirement is simply a step in the wrong direction, particularly as it cannot be shown which magical arbitrary amount is the dividing line between ‘qualified’ and ‘not qualified’ to exercise a right. If 8 hours is good, why not 16? 24? A semester? An entire year? Is 16 rounds enough? 50? 250? 70% accuracy? 90%? 100%? Major calibers only?
        If there can be a ‘training-class-and-proof-of-proficiency’ course required by Government for a citizen to carry a concealed firearm, there can be one for exercising free speech in public or for choosing which religion to follow (or not follow), and most certainly one for voting. If one has a ‘requirement’ arbitrarily set by Government that must be met before exercising a right, it is no longer a right, but is instead a privilege that can be granted or removed at government’s will or whim.
        Many good-intentioned restrictions on civil rights might seem to be ‘good things;’ Restricting free speech to include only those words that don’t hurt feelings, requiring voters to pass a test of some sort before receiving a ballot, and restricting ‘religion’ to only those practices acceptable to the mainstream are all ‘good ideas.’ Really, what’s so bad about occasionally quartering troops in private homes if housing is short, even if the homeowner objects, so long as Government compensates the homeowner fully?
        That’s right up there with Eminent Domain: “We’re going to take your property against your will, because we want it, but we’ll pay a fair price. By the way, how much for the women? Especially the little girl?”
        Blatant infringement, be it ever so well-intentioned, is still blatant infringement, and a little goes a long way.

        • KY is pretty firearms friendly. I mostly agree with you and the fact is that you’re kind of preaching to the choir around here. The state Capitol wants the CCW fees. That’s all this is. Everybody has guns here. Open carry is legal and you can have one loaded in the vehicle in any “factory compartment.”(Glove box, center console, trunk.) I doubt if IN or TN would be so tolerant.

  5. When a bill’s content and language is half-baked, then it needs to be reworked.

    Good ideas (that legislators genuinely want to support) sometimes get tabled because of it.

    That said, it is always good to be skeptical of a politician’s excuses.

  6. “Well, I can assure you that it wasn’t Senator Robinson’s preference, but the bare facts are that the leadership counted and decided that the votes weren’t there and they didn’t want to call for a vote and lose. Why weren’t the votes there? Who knows?”

    We would know a lot more if it was put up for a vote. They’re not afraid of losing the vote, they’re afraid of having to vote at all and then explain how, with a huge majority, the GOP is unable to come through for the gun-owners that it demands vote for it every year.

  7. I am still hopeful for the future. I have a feeling by 2020 a lot of states will have switched to Constitutional Carry. Really, 3 years is nothing considering that it took decades to get the carry laws rolling. We have steam now and are going to make great leaps in freedom in the coming years.

  8. Again I have to remind all of you that being a Republican does not mean you are pro-gun.
    I am scared that Trump is going to be tryed on all sides and will end up as a sacrafice to the alter of the Republicans. They are waiting in the wings to crack his bones – after that happens, with all the powers of the Patriot Act behind them, they will dismantle all that Trump has done for us.
    We should all be ready for the treachery coming and not let it be a surprise.

    • I worry for the same thing and get a little more worried every time he sticks his neck out on an issue that isn’t important. I think we have two years, at the very best, to get pro-gun legislation through or it’s going to end up DOA.

  9. Kentucky and 29 other states are far ahead of most states, since it has been an open carry state for a long time. Only Kentucky and 12 other states allow for an open carry of a loaded firearm. The country should be open carry anyway. Kentucky wants the CCW revenue and if you want to hide your loaded sidearm you should pay for it in an open carry states like Kentucky.

  10. There’s a lot of speculation that since HB 249 was introduced to eliminate gun free zones at schools, constitutional carry would be difficult to pass this year. I see this as picking the battle you can win today rather than losing the war. If they were to pass constitutional carry first, then the argument against will be 18yo kids will be allowed to carry concealed at school. It’s still too early to start to declare the new republicans in control to be a bunch of RINOs.

  11. Bingo. Politicians vote for what they think is good for them. That’s the problem right there. They are supposed to represent US.

  12. I’m a huge 2A guy obviously, or I wouldn’t check out TTAG every day. I live in KY, and I gotta tell you – I’m fine with the way the current system is here. Anyone who wants one can get one with a background check & a 5 (ish) hour class.
    I’m fine with people having to make that tiny effort to get a CCDW. I’m surprised I feel this way actually, but I like that there is a little thought involved & that CCDW process could give me a leg up vs. having every idiot carry.
    Again, I’m surprised I feel this way!

    • Therein lies the problem with a democracy. A plural majority can restrict the rights of others based on nothing more than feelings. This is why we are a constitutional republic, not a democracy. Unfortunately when the so called representatives care only about getting reelected and enriched by their time in office, they fail their duty to protect and uphold the Constitution.

  13. We should not even be seeing this controversy to begin with. The people are (supposed) to be the rulers. Nothing I’ve read in the Constitution says we must pay the government, whether it be city, county, state or federal, to exercise a right guaranteed by the Constitution. It simply says that we have the right to keep and BEAR arms, it does not specify how we carry them!
    Now, let’s consider a really good reason not to have to jump through the hoops and get permission from the government to carry a concealed weapon. Anyone who does will be known to possess a weapon(s) and should at some point they decide to come for our guns, what better way for them to know where to start looking. This and background checks will provide all the information they will need for confiscation!
    As for training, thanks to the fact that lawyers and judges rule, what you’re taught today will likely be changed tomorrow to fit a different agenda that better serves their purpose.
    I am glad that Kentucky does “allow” open carry and also “allows” people that choose to do so to be able to obtain permission to carry concealed, but I do believe it is just another example of government overreach mainly to bring in more revenue. Another right infringed upon!

  14. I live in Vermont where no permit is required, but our “constitutional permit” is only good in the state. I have a NH non-resident permit which is honored in many states, including KY. NH recently went permitless conceal carry but they continue to issue permits for residents and non-residents, therefore they are still collecting money for these. I have a friend that teaching gun classes in VT and he stays booked because people want to learn even though it’s not required. Ky could go permitless carry and still have permits for those who want them for traveling out of state, therefore they would continue to clean up in fees. In my opinion, the training issue is kind of a moot point because you don’t have to have it for open carry but you do for conceal carry, so either way you have untrained people carry guns around. I do not know what all is entailed in a conceal carry class but things like weapons retention would be more pertinent to open carriers because there is a higher likelihood someone may try to snatch your weapon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *