Dissenting Opinion of the Kansas State Rifle Association Regarding Attorney General Opinion 2014-02 January 17, 2014 The Kansas State Rifle Association has initiated a bill that includes remedy for an Attorney General Opinion with which we strongly dissent on interpretation. The area of disagreement is regarding Attorney General Opinion 2014-02 wherein the synopsis of the opinion states,” The Personal and Family Protection Act (PFPA) does not prohibit a county from demanding disclosure of an employee’s concealed carry licensure status in order to verify whether the employee is entitled to certain protections available only to concealed carry licensees. The PFPA does not prohibit a county from making a record of an employee’s licensure status, but such record must remain confidential and may not be disclosed. A county may discipline an employee for refusing to disclose his or her licensure status for the purpose of determining whether the employee may lawfully carry a concealed handgun into the employee’s work place. Lastly, it is unlikely that a Kansas or federal court would recognize a county employee’s claim for discrimination on the basis of concealed carry licensure status.” It is our belief based on firsthand knowledge that the Kansas legislature was clear in their intent to protect the privacy of concealed carry licensee’s. It is also our opinion that it is widely understood that the passage of provisions contained in K.S.A. 75-7c06 were to accomplish that end. K.S.A. 75-7c06 (a) clearly states in regards to records related to licensees, “The attorney general shall be the official custodian of all records relating to licenses issued pursuant to the personal and family protection act. Subsection (b) clearly continues to say, “Except as provided by subsections (c) and (d), records relating to persons issued licenses pursuant to this act, persons applying for licenses pursuant to this act or persons who have had a license denied pursuant to this act shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed pursuant to the Kansas open records act. Any disclosure of a record in violation of this subsection is a class A misdemeanor.” In subsection (c) and (d) there are exemptions. Those sections read, “(c) Records of a person whose license has been suspended or revoked pursuant to this act shall be subject to public inspection in accordance with the open records act. (d) The attorney general shall maintain an automated listing of license holders and pertinent information, and such information shall be available at all times to all law enforcement agencies in this state, other states and the District of Columbia when requested for a legitimate law enforcement purpose.” We believe based on firsthand knowledge that the intent of the legislature in subsection (c) was only records of those licensees whose license has been suspended and that in subsection (d) the legislature clearly intended that maintenance of those records be solely maintained by the Attorney General and disclosure of such records be made available only to law enforcement and only when requested for a legitimate law enforcement purpose. We are perplexed that these provisions could be interpreted to have any other meaning such as allowing individual municipalities to require that information from their employees or interpreting it to mean that they have a right to make a record of those disclosures. While the existing Statute does not clearly express a prohibition on individual municipalities collecting this information, it was clearly the intent of the legislature to not allow it by not providing for it in the list of exemptions. In order to ensure that the privacy of Kansas concealed carry licensees is protected from this stretch in interpretation presented in the Attorney General opinion we are working with Representative Jim Howell on a legislative measure that will settle this matter and will clearly lay out a prohibition for any jurisdiction, municipality or subdivision of the State of Kansas to collect such information or retain the records of any concealed carry licensee in their employ. Additionally, it is our belief that should a public employer feel that there is an issue with an employee, and there is a specific need to know the status of that employee in regards to rather they have a concealed carry permit and are carrying concealed, that based on probable cause law enforcement should be called and a law enforcement officer may, as provided for in the law, inquire directly of the employee as to rather they have a concealed carry permit and request to see such a permit. It is our opinion that this type of issue was never conceived in the origination of the concealed carry statute and there was no notion that this would be a question so no provisions were made for this specific situation. Please rest assured that we have the best interests of Kansas gun owners in mind and believe that there will be wide legislative support for the measure that will address this issue legislatively. It is our position that to do otherwise would endanger any licensee from having their status revealed and run the risk of persecution by a public employer and co-workers who may not support their right to have that license. Respectfully Submitted, Patricia A. Stoneking President and Lobbyist Kansas State Rifle Association
Posted on: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 05:15:02 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015