Reply #49: Holland v. Commonwealth, 1956 [View All]

[one-eyed fat man]

The Kentucky court of appeals settled the question in clear and unambigous language.

"In our state the legislature is empowered only to deny to citizens the right to carry concealed weapons. The constitutional provision is an affirmation of the faith that all men have the inherent right to arm themselves for the defense of themselves and of the state. The only limitation concerns the mode of carrying such instruments. We observe, via obiter dicta, that although a person is granted the right to carry a weapon openly, a severe penalty is imposed for carrying it concealed. If the gun is worn outside the jacket or shirt in full view, no one may question the wearer’s right so to do; but if it is carried under the jacket or shirt, the violator is subject to imprisonment for not less than two nor more than five years. The heavy emphasis, we suppose, is upon the undue advantage given to a person who is able suddenly to expose and use a weapon, although the gun itself is the vicious instrument………."

Seeing someone wearing a gun in a holster openly does not particularly draw my attention. On the other hand, if someone is constantly fiddling with the thing for no apparent good reason, I would look askance. I will not tolerate people handling firearms in an unsafe or careless manner.

After seeing them drive, there are people I will not ride with either.