Cincinnati WEBN fireworks, No Weapons

Cincinnati WEBN fireworks, No Weapons.

According to WEBN's website one of the prohibited Items at the fireworks celebration is Weapons.
http://www.webn.com/articles/2014-cincinnati-bell-webn-fireworks-487013/fireworks-faq-12501589/

The problem is the celebration is being held at Cincinnati public parks. WEBN said that the Cincinnati police told them weapons would not be allowed. But, the contract that the radio station signed with the Cincinnati Park Board states:

This Agreement is subject to and Contractor shall comply with all statutes, ordinances, regulations, and rules of the Federal Government, the State of Ohio, the County of Hamilton, the City of Cincinnati, and the Cincinnati Park Board, the terms and conditions of the Central Riverfront Permit Application, and the City of Cincinnati Special Permit Application.

Click to expand...

We all know that the Ohio Revised Code at section 9.68 makes clear that only the state can regulate the carry of firearms. And Ohioans for Concealed Carry, Inc. v. Clyde, 120 Ohio St.3d 96, 2008-Ohio-4605, makes clear the right to carry in public parks.

The wheels are turning to resolve this issue before the August 31, 2014.

It's interesting that you should post about this... Earlier this year, the son of the Hamilton County Prosecutor (where Cincinnati is located) was brutally attacked at a bus stop following the "Taste of Cincinnati". I didn't attend, but I looked at the website for the event and saw that weapons/firearms were prohibited.

Since the fireworks are coming up next week, this morning I decided to follow up with regard to the "rules" for WEBN Fireworks/Riverfest. I found a different page than you did (http://tinyurl.com/mve95m3), but sure enough, "Weapons of any type" are purportedly prohibited. I called around and found a "Specialist" in the special events section of the Cincinnati Police Department (CPD) who told me that a) yes, firearms were prohibited, and b) that since WEBN was renting the parks, they could do what they wanted.

It was clear between he and I that the law department would need to be my next point of contact.

Following up on communications I had with the law department earlier this year after the ToC event, I wrote back to the woman who had provided me with information, only to find that she was no longer worked there. So... I wrote to the City Solicitor and the Chief Prosecutor for Cincinnati. I put them on notice of my intention to carry at the event (much like I'd previously done for the Open Carry/Firearm Education walks at the University of Cincinnati and The Ohio State University) and asked them if there would be any attempt to cite me or remove me from the event for carrying a firearm.

We shall see.

This seems to come up every year but I've yet to see a copy of the "rental" agreement between Cincinnati and Clear Channel. Not sure such a document even exists.

Brian D. said:

This seems to come up every year but I've yet to see a copy of the "rental" agreement between Cincinnati and Clear Channel. Not sure such a document even exists.

Click to expand...

Oh, it exists!

if I could remember how to post such things, I'd post it here. In the meanwhile, check your e-mail.

BB62 said:

Oh, it exists!

if I could remember how to post such things, I'd post it here. In the meanwhile, check your e-mail.

Click to expand...

The file is to big to post.

my old home state. Well I don't think it's an issue as the prohibition is illegal and can't be enforced. Also can't be thrown out of a public park for breaking an illegal rule and if the attempt is made one is legally allowed to defend themselves from any attacks on their person.

rightwinglibertarian said:

my old home state. Well I don't think it's an issue as the prohibition is illegal and can't be enforced. Also can't be thrown out of a public park for breaking an illegal rule and if the attempt is made one is legally allowed to defend themselves from any attacks on their person.

Click to expand...

Trying to stop a miscarriage of justice. Trying to stop stupid cops from doing stupid things even though they know the law and have been properly informed of the law and informed of the policy.

color of law said:

Trying to stop a miscarriage of justice. Trying to stop stupid cops from doing stupid things even though they know the law and have been properly informed of the law and informed of the policy.

Click to expand...

Eventually they'll learn if you hammer it into them enough. I mean even animals can learn tricks so LEOs have to learn eventually.

BB62 said:

Following up on communications I had with the law department earlier this year after the ToC event, I wrote back to the woman who had provided me with information, only to find that she was no longer worked there. So... I wrote to the City Solicitor and the Chief Prosecutor for Cincinnati. I put them on notice of my intention to carry at the event (much like I'd previously done for the Open Carry/Firearm Education walks at the University of Cincinnati and The Ohio State University) and asked them if there would be any attempt to cite me or remove me from the event for carrying a firearm.

We shall see.

Click to expand...

F.Y.I. this years theme is Retro 80's. Sooooooooo, maybe you should consider that when choosing what your going to carry that evening.

BB62, ask our friend gutshot how they dealt with this in Kentucky a few years back. As I recall, Louisville has a similar fireworks festival on public property along the Ohio River, a couple of weeks before the Kentucky Derby. According to discussions from back then, the private entity that threw the shindig had similar rules against carry during the event, until gun rights advocates down there made them remove those prohibitions per statewide pre-emption laws.

Hopefully we can use ORC 9.68 in the same fashion, although I don't know if it has enough "teeth" to cut into these silly "rental agreements".

Brian D. said:

BB62, ask our friend gutshot how they dealt with this in Kentucky a few years back. As I recall, Louisville has a similar fireworks festival on public property along the Ohio River, a couple of weeks before the Kentucky Derby. According to discussions from back then, the private entity that threw the shindig had similar rules against carry during the event, until gun rights advocates down there made them remove those prohibitions per statewide pre-emption laws.

Hopefully we can use ORC 9.68 in the same fashion, although I don't know if it has enough "teeth" to cut into these silly "rental agreements".

Click to expand...

Yes, gutshot is a good and knowledgeable friend, and yes, KY's preemption is far superior to Ohio's, but I think 9.68 will suffice because the rental agreement is an albatross for the city.

Today, since I have gotten no response to my first notice, and in order that dismiss the claim that "Our spam filter ate your e-mail!", I and a witness hand-delivered a second notice to the recipients of my first e-mail on the subject: Cincinnati's Solicitor, Chief Prosecutor, and Chief of Police. The notice repeated my intention to carry, open and/or concealed, one or more firearms in and around the event locations of Riverfest/WEBN Fireworks.

The fact that I have gotten no response to my first notice, which was verified as received says to me that either a) the powers that be are scrambling to come up with some way to legally stop such an act, or b) they realize that they have no legal way to do such a thing and think that I will be deterred by their silence. Riiiiiiight.

If anyone else would like to join me at the event, please post here or drop me a PM.



P.S. - Earlier I mentioned attacks at the Taste of Cincinnati earlier this year, where a similar illegal prohibition on weapons was also advertised. Here's a link to the story of one of those attacks: http://tinyurl.com/kfca2lq or for those who like the long version: http://www.wlwt.com/news/witness-at...cutors-son-raciallymotivated/26235556#!bIbNsL

BB62 said:

Today, since I have gotten no response to my first notice, and in order that dismiss the claim that "Our spam filter ate your e-mail!", I and a witness hand-delivered a second notice to the recipients of my first e-mail on the subject: Cincinnati's Solicitor, Chief Prosecutor, and Chief of Police. The notice repeated my intention to carry, open and/or concealed, one or more firearms in and around the event locations of Riverfest/WEBN Fireworks.

The fact that I have gotten no response to my first notice, which was verified as received says to me that either a) the powers that be are scrambling to come up with some way to legally stop such an act, or b) they realize that they have no legal way to do such a thing and think that I will be deterred by their silence. Riiiiiiight.

If anyone else would like to join me at the event, please post here or drop me a PM.



P.S. - Earlier I mentioned attacks at the Taste of Cincinnati earlier this year, where a similar illegal prohibition on weapons was also advertised. Here's a link to the story of those attacks: http://tinyurl.com/pnhe83g or for those who like the long version: http://www.wlwt.com/news/hamilton-co-prosecutors-son-assaulted-downtown/26218816#!bHN172

Click to expand...

I wonder if you can file for a declaratory ruling ? Somewhere ...

It appears that notice has been given. The city will have a tough time denying they didn't know that someone was going to carry into the park. I can tell you the agreements, contract and application does not mention one word about weapons. The application clearly said no alcohol at the event. Of course no alcohol because park rules prohibits alcohol in the parks.

Give it a day and lets see what happens.

BB62 said:

Today, since I have gotten no response to my first notice, and in order that dismiss the claim that "Our spam filter ate your e-mail!", I and a witness hand-delivered a second notice to the recipients of my first e-mail on the subject: Cincinnati's Solicitor, Chief Prosecutor, and Chief of Police. The notice repeated my intention to carry, open and/or concealed, one or more firearms in and around the event locations of Riverfest/WEBN Fireworks.

The fact that I have gotten no response to my first notice, which was verified as received says to me that either a) the powers that be are scrambling to come up with some way to legally stop such an act, or b) they realize that they have no legal way to do such a thing and think that I will be deterred by their silence. Riiiiiiight.

If anyone else would like to join me at the event, please post here or drop me a PM.



P.S. - Earlier I mentioned attacks at the Taste of Cincinnati earlier this year, where a similar illegal prohibition on weapons was also advertised. Here's a link to the story of one of those attacks: http://tinyurl.com/kfca2lq or for those who like the long version: http://www.wlwt.com/news/witness-at...cutors-son-raciallymotivated/26235556#!bIbNsL

Click to expand...

I'll be there somewhere. Where are you meeting and at what time?


Mike

ps1mhd said:

I'll be there somewhere. Where are you meeting and at what time?

Click to expand...

Good, a patriot steps up! I haven't finalized that location yet, but will PM you when I do.

Thank you!

If they have a written agreement, doesn't R.C.2923.126(C)(3)(a) apply?

(a)... a private person or entity leasing land or premises owned by the state, the United States, or a political subdivision of the state or the United States, may post a sign in a conspicuous location on that land or on those premises prohibiting persons from carrying firearms or concealed firearms on or onto that land or those premises.

Click to expand...

Or will the agreement not be considered a "lease"?

MyWifeSaidYes said:

If they have a written agreement, doesn't R.C.2923.126(C)(3)(a) apply?

Or will the agreement not be considered a "lease"?

Click to expand...

They wish! Someone undoubtedly be along shortly to address your question fully. In the meanwhile, see the next post.

At this point I have given notice to CPD, the Cincinnati Law Department, the Hamilton County Prosecutor and the Hamilton County Sheriff of my intention to carry one or more firearms, openly and/or concealed, at and during the event. Upon further consideration, it's become clear to me that the City of Cincinnati, or at least those in positions of influence in the Cincinnati Police Department (and apparently aided by the Law Department) have decided to engage in a game of legal "chicken".

They expect me and others to be cowed by their non-responsiveness - their silence. The problem for them is the legal doctrines of "silence is consent and "admission by silence".

The next step is to do what I have just done - post an event to Facebook inviting legally armed people (SIDEARMS only, please) to join me at the WEBN Fireworks, aka "Riverfest". The event can be found here: https://www.facebook.com/events/605792739533573

This is not the end of my attempts to persuade those in positions of authority and influence to do something other than what they've already done: to make it appear by website postings, by signs at event entrances, and by the presence of police officers at the gates, that they have the legal right to promulgate or enforce illegal rules.

I imagine some old geezer will be along to put a finer point on it, but here is a question that was posted on the Facebook event page, and my answer to it:

Question: Help me out here. I thought WEBN rented/leased the space which would make their prohibition legal. Am I wrong on this count?

Answer: Glad to help you Mike. WEBN has neither rented nor leased the space. They have use of it under multiple conditions and because they have an approved "Special Use Permit".

One of the conditions in the of agreement (section 1A) between WEBN and the city is that "The event shall be gated but must be **free and open to the general public**" (my asterisks) - so it's a PUBLIC event, not a private event.

At a private event, WEBN could impose various restrictions upon quantity, identity and behavior of the people attending - but this is a PUBLIC event.

Another condition of the agreement is in section 8 of the agreement, entitled "Compliance with laws and policies". That part says "...Contractor shall comply with all statutes, ordinances, regulations and rules of the Federal Government, the State of Ohio, the County of Hamilton, the City of Cincinnati and the Cincinnati Park Board, the terms and conditions of the Central Riverfront Permit Application and the City of Cincinnati Special Permit Application".

So WEBN has to comply with various laws, including ORC 9.68, and 9.68 as well as at least two Ohio Supreme Court cases make it clear that public parks, when open to the PUBLIC, are places where one who can legally possess a firearm can carry.