Workplace shooting sparks debate over Las Vegas city’s employee gun policy

The city of Las Vegas allows certain employees to carry concealed firearms at work.

Now, after police said a maintenance worker shot and killed a co-worker during a monthslong feud, that policy has sparked renewed debate.

City maintenance worker Brysen Kim, 31, is facing an open murder charge after allegedly gunning down his coworker, Joey McLean, 41, at a city maintenance yard.

After the shooting, Kim called 911, and when dispatchers asked why he had a gun, he replied, “I have a f------ right to carry.”

The city of Las Vegas policy states that firearms are prohibited at work, except for employees whose roles require carrying, such as city marshals, or those with sheriff-issued concealed-carry permits.

The memo, last updated in 2020, cites state law.

It is unclear whether Kim had a valid permit to carry a concealed weapon, as the Metropolitan Police Department, which issues such permits, did not respond to a request for that information.

Kim told police that he had been threatened and harassed by McLean for six months.

During that time, the pair had repeatedly reported each other to HR, according to his arrest report.

Police have said that there was a plan to assign Kim and McLean — who had been to human resources five or six times for their disputes — to different work locations, but the shooting happened before it could be implemented.

‘State law will prevail’

At a Thursday news conference, Las Vegas Mayor Shelley Berkley discussed the city’s concealed carry policy.

She said it was among the first things she asked about after learning of the shooting.

“We follow state law, and state law allows concealed carry. Whether I think that’s great or not is irrelevant,” Berkley said. “We could pass any ordinance we want, but if it is in contradiction with state law, state law will prevail.”

The city policy also says that if an employee displays or waves a firearm at work, disciplinary action will be taken.

It notes that employees with concealed carry permits must keep their firearm under their control and fully hidden on their person at all times.

Unlike similar policies at other government agencies, the city of Las Vegas’ memo does not discourage concealed carry among permit holders.

According to spokesperson Jace Radke, the policy was reviewed last year, but no changes were made.

Policy ‘sideshow’ to broader liability

Civil attorney Will Kemp said the Second Amendment, which protects the individual right to own firearms, “handcuffs” the city when it comes to changing its concealed carry policy.

“I don’t know what the city could do,” Kemp said. “These guys were out in the yard and interacting with the public — the city would have a tough time limiting that.”

Another veteran attorney, Robert Eglet, said that even if the city added a clause stating employees who carry a gun at work do so at their own risk, it would not automatically protect the city from liability.

Current city policy does not include any language that disclaims the city’s liability, or seeks to protect it from lawsuits, in cases where a person is injured or killed by an employee carrying a concealed weapon.

Eglet pointed out, however, that words on paper aren’t necessarily a shield against liability.

“The defendant cannot simply write itself out of negligence liability with a handbook disclaimer,” he said.

He said a key issue would be whether the employee was acting personally or in the course of his job when carrying the weapon.

Eglet added that the city could argue the employee acted outside the scope of his employment, but that argument becomes more complicated if the city allowed or tolerated armed employees.

Still, both attorneys said the concealed carry policy may be secondary to a larger issue: whether the city failed to act on documented complaints.

“From a plaintiff’s lawyer perspective, the key question is what did the city know and when did it know it?” Eglet said.

He added: “The concealed carry issue may ultimately be a sideshow, with the more important questions being whether the city knew these employees were in conflict; whether the threats had been reported beforehand; and whether reasonable steps were taken to protect the employees once the danger became known.”

Contact Akiya Dillon at adillon@reviewjournal.com.