Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37

Thread: An officer and the police chief stopped me at the Highland County Fair

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358

    Consensual encounter at the Highland County Fair with an officer and the police chief

    I open carried at the Highland County Fair this morning. Sometime after noon I was walking past a Hillsboro City officer that I know. He motioned me over to another area to talk. The Hillsboro City Police Chief was with him. They were cordial and nice but told me that the fair grounds is not owned by the county and the group that owns it can tell me to change my shirt even if they wanted to and I'd have to do it. They claimed that only a small portion of the grounds are owned by the county. But, I know that the complete fair grounds ARE owned by the county. I pointed that out and told them that I would leave. They told me that I didn't need to leave and they didn't WANT me to leave but I would have to cover up. (They do support CHL and have been pro-rights for as long as I've lived here.)

    They have the fences posted with old, faded signs which I've been trying to get the county to remove for over a year. A County Commissioner had previously told me in a telephone conversation to just cover up like everyone else and I could go into the buildings... nobody would say a word. This afternoon, the officers said the same thing. I told them that I obey postings when they are lawful and that it's not necessarily clearly lawful for me to carry in the buildings so I will not be doing that. The buildings aren't posted, BTW.

    I went out to the car and got a cover shirt. After getting my children set with money for the rest of the day, I went to the auditor's office and they gave me the documents showing that the county owns all of the fairgrounds. I asked them to put their seal on the documents and they did. I then went to the County Commissioners' office and got the issue on the agenda for the public meeting after next. I then went to the Chief of Police's office and showed him that the county did indeed own the entire fairgrounds. He defers to the law director/city prosecutor(?) on the matter but conceded that what the law director had told him didn't seem correct.

    I have this all recorded. When the officers spoke to me at the fair, they said that they were wondering when I'd be back around so they could speak with me. Apparently, there had been quite a buzz on telephones this morning as to what to do about me open carrying at the fairgrounds. Thankfully, they decided on their game plan before they approached me. No guns were drawn, I wasn't asked for my ID, I wasn't disarmed, and they didn't follow me around making sure that I left the fair grounds to get a shirt. They were chilling by a building waiting for me to circulate by and they left when we were done speaking.

    On a good note, I had reminded they Chief of Police that I'd be open carrying in the city and hoped that there would be no issues. He assured me that there would not be. At my later meeting with him at his office, I reminded him that open carry alone is not RAS and he understood. I had sent him an email earlier in the week with the July 2012 Cincinnati Police Department Staff Notes, the Ohio Attorney General's 2005 opinion about posting county owned fairgrounds, and a copy of ORC 9.68. In both conversations he acknowledged that he received, read, and understands the email.

    This was not intended to be a "Am I being detained? Am I free to go?" type of encounter unless they got investigative in a LE fashion. They did not. They were wrong but it is correctable, I think. I'm trying to go easy on my local area here as they have been so pro-rights in the past. They obviously are trying to treat me with kid gloves as well.

    I'll have to record off the audio from my recorder to MP3 when I can find my cable and my free MP3 recording software. Then I guess I'll post it to youtube unless someone knows of a good free host for it.

    They want to allow concealed carry at the county fair, on county property, but prohibit open carry. That ain't gonna work...

    (Remember, some of these guys are my friends and I'm torn on this very much. If the Commissioner would've just removed the signs, I would have probably just chilled out until someone ran into legal trouble carrying there.)
    Last edited by JmE; 09-07-2012 at 12:05 AM. Reason: changed title

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    , Ohio, USA
    Posts
    291
    Its guys like you that keep guys like us out of trouble, good job and thank you for doing the leg work as far as who owns the property.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    The problem is that they are claiming that it's owned by the AG Society. This was done in other counties and acts as sort of a block. The latest State of Ohio audit that I found *appears* (I haven't dug deeply into the PDF yet) to show that most of their financial influx is from donations compared to government money. Then again, Greene Cty. Agricultural Soc. v. Liming determined that an AG society is a political subdivision for some purposes.

    The county might have been successful at blocking OC for time being. I wish they wouldn't lie about ownership to do it. If they are going to prohibit something... stop with bologna excuses and being sneaky.

    Please hold any accolades, JSlack7851. I think I have failed on this one. I have a good idea how to defeat my own argument but my friend on the opposition doesn't. That's a quandary for me. Right now I'm a little down about it and think that I will most likely just get their position on record at the County Commissioners' meeting on the 19th. IDK, because what I'm going to do changes by the hour right now.

  4. #4
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Quote Originally Posted by JmE View Post
    The problem is that they are claiming that it's owned by the AG Society. This was done in other counties and acts as sort of a block. The latest State of Ohio audit that I found *appears* (I haven't dug deeply into the PDF yet) to show that most of their financial influx is from donations compared to government money. Then again, Greene Cty. Agricultural Soc. v. Liming determined that an AG society is a political subdivision for some purposes.

    The county might have been successful at blocking OC for time being. I wish they wouldn't lie about ownership to do it. If they are going to prohibit something... stop with bologna excuses and being sneaky.

    Please hold any accolades, JSlack7851. I think I have failed on this one. I have a good idea how to defeat my own argument but my friend on the opposition doesn't. That's a quandary for me. Right now I'm a little down about it and think that I will most likely just get their position on record at the County Commissioners' meeting on the 19th. IDK, because what I'm going to do changes by the hour right now.
    It doesn't matter where they get their money from - the AG has made it clear that they're an governmental entity, and the property ownership records as well as the non-tax status of their property confirms that.

    These "societies" play the game of NGO or not depending on whether it suits their purposes, so don't let their objections bother you.
    Last edited by BB62; 09-05-2012 at 09:57 PM.

  5. #5
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,739
    Greene Cty. Agricultural Soc. v. Liming, 89 Ohio St.3d 551, 2000-Ohio-486.

    A county agricultural society is a political subdivision pursuant to R.C. 2744.01(F).
    Agricultural Societies are without question a political subdivision.

    Don't try to analyze who has immunity in a political division of the state. Immunity cases are decided at the whim of the court.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Yeah, but see, what muddies the waters for me is that this isn't the only county doing it that way. IMHO, that makes it not a slam dunk as there is safety in their numbers. This one just isn't as good at it as the others. On a forum for a concealed carry organization (that hasn't always seemed to me to care about the right of OC but rather liked their own 'club' of sorts) really breaks this all down and by the end of the pages, it looks so gloomy for OC. I know that I'm going to have to get in there and concisely present the facts and issues in the 19th meeting. I'm going to ask about the time limit this week. My questions list is short but telling. (And a work in progress. )

    I'd like to hear it from them, on record, if they still claim to not own the land. If they admit to owning the land, as indicated in the county auditor's records, are they going to come into compliance with ORC 9.68 and take heed of the 2005 Ohio AG's opinion on the matter? If they don't own the land, why does the COUNTY auditor's records indicate otherwise and why has the property been tax exempt all of these years? If they claim that the Highland COUNTY Agricultural Society owns the place or runs it, what about Greene City AG Society v. Liming? Why isn't the county looking into the violation of ORC 9.68 by an organization with which the county commissioners have such close affiliation? If the county claims to own the land, when are they removing the signs from the county owned fence and will we Ohioans be further molested for exercising our rights under the Ohio Constitution and Ohio law?

    If they claim no ownership, AG Society runs it and isn't a a political subdivision, and they want people to conceal carry only; why not advise the AG Society to post simply that? My hunch is that they only want those in the 'club' to be able to carry and the rest can think that it's prohibited. In a way, I think they were inviting me into the 'club' today... no freakin' thank you!

    The caption for the matter that I gave the Commissioners' secretary was something like 'ORC 9.68 compliance and the Highland County Fair'. No doubt I'll get at least one telephone call from them before the meeting. I'm thinking that I should defer getting too deeply into the issues on the telephone with them prior to the meeting so this doesn't get bumped from the agenda as 'resolved'.

    Truthfully, I'd rather sit in county jail for a few months, risking a record over this, and have someone the likes of {KH- firearm's attorney} navigate the case other than deal with government bull like this.
    (I warned everyone that I will waffle for a while on this... I'll settle out after the presentation is organized and I finally commit.... I hope.)

  7. #7
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Quote Originally Posted by JmE View Post
    ... I wish they wouldn't lie about ownership to do it. If they are going to prohibit something... stop with bologna excuses and being sneaky...
    Asking a politician to be honest and straightforward is like asking water not to be wet.

    They may be better at conjuring up excuses than you - but you're persistant enough to drive them out of their minds with your undeniable proof and persistance. So, take the hill, soldierl!!

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by color of law View Post
    Greene Cty. Agricultural Soc. v. Liming, 89 Ohio St.3d 551, 2000-Ohio-486.



    Agricultural Societies are without question a political subdivision.

    Don't try to analyze who has immunity in a political division of the state. Immunity cases are decided at the whim of the court.
    BB62 around and you showing up, I feel stronger about this already.

    In the facts part of the short presentation, I was planning on just that; give the case and assert that the court ruled AG societies are political subdivisions. Throw any at me that you can as it will all help when time to write it up comes around! Thank you, Color of Law, BB62, et al.

  9. #9
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Quote Originally Posted by JmE View Post
    ...Truthfully, I'd rather sit in county jail for a few months, risking a record over this, and have someone the likes of {KH- firearm's attorney} navigate the case...
    And you would gain what? (Except a record, free food, and smoking cessation)


    Quote Originally Posted by JmE View Post
    ...(rather) than deal with government bull like this...
    Then you have to decide - fight or surrender. It's not for everyone, and in concentrated doses, dealing with the lowlife who infect public office makes one ill.


    Either way, we'll still respect you.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by BB62 View Post
    And you would gain what? (Except a record, free food, and smoking cessation)
    It's just me being temporarily lazy. It's a natural tendency which I overcome in time. Then I go at the objective with focus and precision... usually.

    Quote Originally Posted by BB62 View Post
    Then you have to decide - fight or surrender. It's not for everyone, and in concentrated doses, dealing with the lowlife who infect public office makes one ill.
    It would grate on my nerves if something wasn't at least attempted. I'm one of those grumpy-gusses that grouses and grumbles but eventually does something. I'm not graceful like an eagle... more like some sickly albatross but I eventually get into the air.

    Quote Originally Posted by BB62 View Post
    Either way, we'll still respect you.
    I do really appreciate that. Things like what the county is doing and their cop-outs aren't things from which I can usually just walk away. I'm used to moving dirt from Boss Keen's ditch into Boss Shorty's yard and back again until time to move comes along. Besides, this is the exact scenario that I, deep down, expected before even OCing there. It's one of those bland or unpalatable mouthfuls that I've bitten off, knowing it'd taste like that. I've just gotta chew and chew until it's all gone.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Okay, I'm going to try not to ramble. I've done my thinking 'out loud' in posts and have a really good idea of the outline. My concerns about friends in the political line of fire have been pretty much put to rest and am moving forward on this.

    /rant on
    What burns my behind and gets me worked up about things like this is that I'm of the belief that the system is backwards. Government, when it wants to restrict a right in any way, should have to break its back doing the heavy lifting in justifying exactly why it has a compelling interest in even daring to encroach. As the system works now, they infringe and restrict with impunity and the People have to scrape, claw, and do all of the heavy lifting to stop it. It's expensive and lives are sometimes destroyed. The damage is always generational. To me, having to scrap with the government over every little thing is simply obscene! I understand diligence of the People in defense of liberty, but I am often disgusted (but NOT surrendering). It's like the People are limited and draw their power from the government nowadays. Again, it is obscene.
    /rant off

    If anyone has anything to add, I'll gladly look at it.

    - Ohio Constitution Article 1, Section 4
    - ORC 9.68
    - Ohio AG 2005 opinion
    - County owns the entire fairground & tax exempt per county auditor (and then ask them directly if they are going to contend, on record that the county doesn't own it)
    - AG societies are political subdivisions per court decision (I have that AG society fair list that shows independent ones at the bottom if needed)
    - As a political subdivision the AG society is subject to ORC 9.68
    - Finish with hard hitting, specific questions about "When are you going to do this, and this, and this?" (They probably won't answer this.)

    COL, if you don't mind me asking, what is the strongest way to present the "AG societies are political subdivisions" argument? Should it be simply, "In {case} the court found that... You can PM me and I'll give you my contact info if you don't already have it or you can post here.

    Anyone else that wants to chime in can too. I can use any help. I'm trying to make sure that I 100% understand how ORC 9.68 compels government lessor than state legislature to comply. How much or how little teeth does it have? Is there much that contradicts Greene City AG Soc v. Liming? How strongly does it define AG societies as political subdivisions? Things like that...

    I wrote a book anyway, sorry about that. It's the way that my mind works.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Cincy area, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    891
    Quote Originally Posted by JmE View Post
    I wrote a book anyway, sorry about that. It's the way that my mind works.

    No, that last post was very cogent, it just happened to cover a lot of ground. I suspect you're like me and don't like to get into these things without having a veritable arsenal of facts to work with.

  13. #13
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Quote Originally Posted by JmE View Post
    .../rant on
    What burns my behind...
    /rant off

    If anyone has anything to add, I'll gladly look at it.

    - Ohio Constitution Article 1, Section 4
    - ORC 9.68
    - Ohio AG 2005 opinion
    - County owns the entire fairground & tax exempt per county auditor (and then ask them directly if they are going to contend, on record that the county doesn't own it)
    - AG societies are political subdivisions per court decision (I have that AG society fair list that shows independent ones at the bottom if needed)
    - As a political subdivision the AG society is subject to ORC 9.68
    - Finish with hard hitting, specific questions about "When are you going to do this, and this, and this?" (They probably won't answer this.)

    ...I'm trying to make sure that I 100% understand how ORC 9.68 compels government lessor than state legislature to comply. How much or how little teeth does it have?...
    If you want to make sure you have enough talk time I'd eliminate the Ohio Consitution part.

    Teeth? Ohio's preemption is far better than nothing, but Florida's means business. Courts can tell you things like "You didn't do enough to notify the offending party" - so make sure you've got your I's dotted and your T's crossed before going the court route. Try not to give them ANY excuse for not being notified, or not knowing.

    btw, I entirely agree with your rant.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian D. View Post
    No, that last post was very cogent, it just happened to cover a lot of ground. I suspect you're like me and don't like to get into these things without having a veritable arsenal of facts to work with.
    You hit the nail on the head.

    Generally, I don't go into a fight to lose and I don't like getting caught flat footed in the middle of one. Additionally, I really don't like misleading anyone so I try to fact check the best that I can. Lastly, I have a disability involving memory loss (creates a lot of social anxiety for me) so it makes fighting these things harder for me anymore. I never know how my memory is going to perform until I'm in the thick of it.

    I felt like an idiot late last night because I realized why I didn't do this last year. I had decided that it was too iffy with the AG society complication so I decided last year not to do it. This year I forgot so here I am! ROTFL

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Anyone know anything about this? I haven't been able to find that OAG opinion on the web yet. I'm still looking for a 1988 opinion as well.

    http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/servi...etings_act.htm
    1992-078 Board of Directors of County Agricultural Society
    The board of directors of a county agricultural society is a public body subject to the open meeting requirements of R.C. 121.22.
    I'm thinking something like, "Not only are county agricultural societies political subdivisions, having been deemed by the Ohio S.C. in Greene County AG Soc v. Liming as such; their board of directors' meetings are subject to the open meeting requirements of ORC 121.22 because they are a public body."

    Is this correct or is it too much? Can anyone add AG opinions, findings, and case law to it?

    ETA: The county issue is a slam dunk but they are going to really hammer on the AG society excuse so I want that to be very strong, if possible.
    Last edited by JmE; 09-06-2012 at 04:39 PM.

  16. #16
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Let them make all the excuses they want - tell them that you'll put it all in writing. Then, not only will your assertions and your evidence be easily verified, but also tell them you'll be glad to make yourself available to answer questions, or be corrected in your assertions - on the record of course.

    Tell them that after that, if the appropriate parties don't act in accordance with the law, it could be act that may cause unnecessary expense to the county.

    Then, tell them to have a nice day!

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358

    Question Does this mean some fairgrounds are public property?

    BTW: This is why the fairgrounds would be tax exempt regardless of which is the owner; county or ag society.

    http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/5709.10

    5709.10 Exemption of public property.

    Market houses and other houses or halls, public squares, or other public grounds of a municipal corporation or township used exclusively for public purposes or erected by taxation for such purposes, land and multi-level parking structures used exclusively for a public purpose and owned and operated by a municipal corporation under section 717.05 of the Revised Code that charges no fee for the privilege of parking thereon, property used as a county fairgrounds that is owned by the board of county commissioners or by a county agricultural society, and property of housing authorities created and organized under and for the purposes of sections 3735.27 to 3735.50 of the Revised Code, which property is hereby declared to be public property used exclusively for a public purpose, notwithstanding that parts thereof may be lawfully leased, shall be exempt from taxation.

    Effective Date: 03-15-1982

    {emphasis added}
    Does this mean that the Highland County Fairgrounds, owned entirely by the county and operated under the Highland County Agricultural Society, is public property? Or is the "which property is hereby declared" part only pertaining to property of housing authorities? I'm thinking the former is the case but I am a little confused about that part.

    So, if it's a public property, doesn't that mean: county owned + ag society (body corporate and politic) + public property = must comply with ORC 9.68?

    ETA: Sometimes, when reading too closely, I miss the big picture. The title of that section is "5709.10 Exemption of public property" so the properties mention in the section are ALL public properties, right?
    Last edited by JmE; 09-06-2012 at 10:19 PM.

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by JmE View Post
    SNIP This was not intended to be a "Am I being detained? Am I free to go?" type of encounter unless they got investigative in a LE fashion. They did not. They were wrong but it is correctable, I think. I'm trying to go easy on my local area here as they have been so pro-rights in the past. They obviously are trying to treat me with kid gloves as well.
    No offense; you probably didn't realize. But, this was not a stop as mentioned in the thread title.

    When it comes to police, being stopped is an involuntary encounter. A police stop is a seizure. The person stopped is seized for the purposes of the 4th Amendment. These words all mean the same thing: stop, Terry Stop*, detain, detention, detainment.

    If the meeting is not involuntary, it is differentiated by the words consensual encounter or sometimes just encounter, although technically an encounter could be either voluntary or involuntary.


    *From the court case Terry vs Ohio where temporary, minimally intrusive investigative seizures of the person were formally legalized by the US Supreme Court:

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...2_0001_ZO.html For some very interesting insight, do also read the dissenting opinion.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    No offense; you probably didn't realize. But, this was not a stop as mentioned in the thread title.
    No offense taken. In the title, "An officer and the police chief stopped me at the Highland County Fair," I meant that they verbally interrupted my forward stride and insisted that I step to another area to speak with me and subsequently ordered me to cover. When writing the title, I started to write something like, "Consensual encounter at highland county fair with officer and police chief resulted in me being told to cover" but it seemed very wordy and unnecessary. My intention was to convey as in they stopped by to chat. However, you are correct, it didn't meet the criteria for a law enforcement stop and I didn't intend to mislead anyone into thinking such.

    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    When it comes to police, being stopped is an involuntary encounter. A police stop is a seizure. The person stopped is seized for the purposes of the 4th Amendment. These words all mean the same thing: stop, Terry Stop*, detain, detention, detainment.
    Yes, that is understood. My issue with the county isn't over being stopped as it wasn't a law enforcement stop.

    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    If the meeting is not involuntary, it is differentiated by the words consensual encounter or sometimes just encounter, although technically an encounter could be either voluntary or involuntary.
    Correct and I should have used the words consensual encounter in the title. I apologize for that.

    Remember, this situation is not about being stopped or not. This is about an on going issue between myself and the county about publicly prohibiting firearms in the open areas of the county fair but allowing those 'in the know' to concealed carry, even in the buildings. If they had removed the signs by now, I probably wouldn't have open carried alone this week. The plan is to get things on record at the county commissioners' meeting on the 19th so they are put on notice. If they choose to do the right thing, then great. If they do not then public record will show that they were well aware of their violation of ORC 9.68. This could help myself or anyone else that decides to open carry at the fair or anyone that concealed carries and is busted because they aren't in the local 'club'. If the presentation ends up being good enough, other people could use it, if they choose, to challenge at their county fair.

    After they are put on notice in the record, if I am ever approached by law enforcement about open carrying at the fair; they will get "Am I being detained? Am I free to go?" and I've pretty much told the chief that when I went less than an hour or so later to show him proof of county ownership.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Citizen: Also, if you thought that I meant they were wrong in having a consensual encounter when I typed, "They were wrong but it is correctable, I think"; that's not what I meant. I meant that they were wrong about open carry being unlawful at the fair and about the grounds not being owned by the county.
    Last edited by JmE; 09-07-2012 at 12:12 AM. Reason: changed lawful to unlawful

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358

    It gets better

    - Probably perfectly normal for a county (and might even be required); all of the county commissioners are honorary members of the agricultural society. The commissioner always liked to play like he had no idea what they do, had no connection, etc. In the interest of full disclosure, he should have told me that he was a member, even if it is honorary.

    - Looking through the county records, I found a deed for a property that the AG society does actually own. It is not the fairground. The AG society has signed easements for its property(ies) as well, but nothing for the fairgrounds proper as far as I can tell so far. If they owned the fairgrounds, there would be deed(s) and at least easements. I'm going to check for county easements signed for the fair property. Just as there is no deed to the fairground in the AG society's name, there is no lease of any sort for them at that property. Per the ORC, if the county and the society purchase or lease a property together, there has to be a joint agreement drawn up. Undoubtedly, it would have to be recorded. Nothing, nada, so far!

    - The constitution and bylaws of the AG society are published in this year's paper (probably required by open records law). In them, they list all of the regulations. Alcohol and lasers are prohibited but, curiously, firearms are NOT prohibited anywhere in there.


    The more that I investigate, the more convinced I am that they knew full well that they couldn't legally ban firearms. Just my guess...

    I'd love to find a local court case where they invoked immunity from liability, find in the transcripts where they argued that they are a political subdivision, and then present that. Nothing like that is likely to happen as I wouldn't have time in the presentation.

    ETA: I used IE to view instead of FireFox (problematic with TIFF viewer) and see that they have signed some easements in the past decade but they use a different address for the property that comes up adjacent to the fairgrounds on web map sites.
    Last edited by JmE; 09-07-2012 at 05:42 PM. Reason: removed request for free TIFF plugin & easment info

  22. #22
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Quote Originally Posted by JmE View Post
    ...The more that I investigate, the more convinced I am that they knew full well that they couldn't legally ban firearms. Just my guess...
    You may be guessing about it - I'm not. Of course they know full well what the situation is. But, if they can bluff you out of exercising your rights, then by God, they're going to do so.
    Last edited by BB62; 09-08-2012 at 11:17 AM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358

    Sheriff responded to my email today

    The Sheriff responded to my email today as he's been on vacation. Although his office hasn't contracted security for the fair the past few years, he understands and is agreement. It's no surprise to me as he's been a pro-constitution guy ever since he took office. That's why he always gets my vote.

    So, the City of Hillsboro and the County of Highland shouldn't be an issue for lawful open carry. After addressing the county fair issue here, I guess it'll be time to branch out towards the surrounding towns (especially New Vienna Ohio) by informing them of the legality of open carry (and open carrying there, of course.)

    Anyone in the area that wants to team up, I'm all for company in this...


    ETA: I forgot to mention that the Sheriff was already aware of the Ohio AG's opinion on his own. He's an intelligent guy and one heck of a good Sheriff.
    Last edited by JmE; 09-10-2012 at 08:53 PM. Reason: ETA

  24. #24
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Good for you!

    Maybe you can get the Sheriff to talk to the police chief - and other police chiefs in the county?

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by BB62 View Post
    Maybe you can get the Sheriff to talk to the police chief - and other police chiefs in the county?
    That's a good idea. I don't have first hand knowledge but get the impression that the Sheriff goes his own way. It's been kind of an undercurrent that he doesn't play ball with the local 'club' so I don't think that they'd listen to him. It'd be nice if he could do sort of an informational thing for the police departments in the county but I suspect that many would ignore him and berate him in the papers; telling him to mind his own business and saying that he wants the county to become the "wild, wild west." In essence, he'd likely be wasting resources, i.e. "pearls before swine." (No pun intended)

    Thanks for your support and encouragement, it's made a difference for me.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •