KY House Republicans show anti-crime bill meant ‘to put the train back on the tracks’

Invoking a specter of urban chaos, Republican state lawmakers on Friday unveiled their plans to fight crime in Kentucky by locking up more people and imposing longer prison sentences.

In particular, a 68-page draft bill called the Safer Kentucky Act would rewrite many parts of the state’s criminal code, covering the homeless, shoplifters and vandals as well as carjackers, fentanyl dealers and habitual violent offenders.

The bill’s sponsors pointed to homicides, assaults, robberies and carjackings in Louisville as their motivation for abandoning what they described as the “soft on crime” strategy of criminal justice reform that prevailed in the General Assembly for the past decade, with a focus on rehabilitation over punishment.

“In the urban areas across the state, there is that recognition of crime, and specifically of violent crime, as a problem. People are willing to step up and take action to support the policy that’s going to put the train back on the tracks,” state Rep. Jared Bauman, R-Louisville, said at a news conference with fellow House Republicans on Friday.

The General Assembly returns to Frankfort Jan. 2 for its 2024 legislative session.

Speaking to the legislature’s Interim Joint Committee on the Judiciary on Friday, Bauman quickly summarized the changes the bill would make, including:

▪ Creating a “three strikes and you’re out” law, so Kentuckians convicted of violent felonies on three separate occasions would face life imprisonment with no possibility of parole for the third offense.

▪ Denying probation, parole or any other form of conditional release for people convicted of a crime in which they used a gun in violation of state law, including guns that were stolen, defaced or loaded with restricted ammunition.

▪ Requiring at least one parent or guardian to attend a youth’s juvenile court hearings, or else be fined $500 and ordered to perform 40 hours of community service.

▪ Expanding the definition of murder to include the sale of fentanyl or fentanyl derivatives if the use of the drug by the buyer led to their death.

▪ Creating the Class B felony of carjacking, or stealing someone’s motor vehicle away from them by means of force or intimidation.

▪ Expanding the felony and misdemeanor criminal mischief laws to include vandalism with property damage of $500 or more, although vandals could reduce their punishments by repairing or replacing the damaged property.

▪ Creating the crime of “unlawful camping” for homeless people who remained on streets, sidewalks, parks, under bridges or blocking entrances to homes, businesses or public buildings, with the intent to sleep or camp. A first offense would be a violation, which could bring a $250 fine. Future offenses would be a Class B misdemeanor.

▪ Elevating the offense level for people convicted of bringing fentanyl or fentanyl derivatives into a jail or prison, from the current Class D felony to a Class B felony.

▪ Preventing charitable bail organizations, like the nonprofit Louisville Bail Project, from posting $5,000 or more in bail to secure an inmate’s release from jail. It also would prohibit the nonprofit groups from posting bail for inmates charged with certain crimes, such as domestic or dating violence or felonies designated as violent offenses.

▪ Clarifying a “shopkeepers privilege” that would allow business owners and their employees to use “a reasonable amount of force necessary” to protect themselves and prevent the escape of a suspected shoplifter they’ve detained or the loss of goods from their businesses. This would be intended as a criminal and civil shield.

▪ Adding attempted murder to the violent offender statute, which would require anyone convicted of the crime to serve most of their sentence before they are eligible for parole.

▪ Changing the Kentucky Parole Board so its members serve at the pleasure of the governor and could be removed by him before their four-year terms expired. Also, parole approvals would have to be unanimous, made by panels of three to six members.

House Republicans first introduced an outline of their anti-crime bill at a news conference in September.

Two controversial measures were cut from the draft bill shared Friday, although they might resurface this winter in other pieces of legislation: a statewide wiretapping law, to allow local and state police to partner with federal law enforcement on electronic surveillance, and a proposed Kentucky State Police post in the city of Louisville.

Also on Friday, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., sent a video message to the legislative committee endorsing a separate draft bill on a related subject: expanding Kentucky’s violent offender statute to include more offenses.

Under Kentucky’s violent offender statute, people convicted of specified felonies classified as violent must serve most of their sentences — generally, 85% — before they are eligible for parole. This is primarily intended to cover serious crimes including murder, rape, first-degree robbery and first-degree assault.

Typically, Kentucky inmates are eligible for parole after serving 20% of their sentence, not counting any credit they might receive for earlier time spent in jail.

State Rep. Jennifer Decker, R-Waddy, has drafted a bill to add more crimes to the violent offender statute, such as strangulation and arson, more types of robbery and burglary offenses, and people who attempt to commit various violent felonies, such as murder or assault, but whose attempts fail for whatever reason.

In his video address to the lawmakers, Paul cited the man who attempted to assassinate Louisville mayoral candidate Craig Greenberg at his campaign headquarters last year. The man fired several rounds into a crowded room and barely missed Greenberg, who later was elected mayor.

Under the current state law, the shooter technically did not commit a violent crime, because he failed to hit Greenberg, Paul said.

The difference in how Kentucky punishes attempted and completed violent crimes is “staggering and nonsensical,” given that criminals in both cases intended the same outcome, Paul said.

“We have a duty to protect society from those who act with such reckless abandon or cruelty that an innocent life is put at risk,” Paul said.