Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Puyallup Fair Carry?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    Puyallup Fair Carry?

    Now, let me start off by saying I have no intention of ever wading into that crowd, armed or not. However, it came up at work today and I’m wondering if the fair or the police could exclude you from the fair for open carry. It is a state fair, so I would think preemption would apply. I also think that even if it wasn’t illegal to carry, the police would do everything in their power, and even a few things not in their power, to keep you out.

    Thoughts?


    EDIT: Deleting superfluous white-space. Why does this forum do that?

  2. #2
    Regular Member just_a_car's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,558

    Post imported post

    I'm going to vote an opinion of "Legal".

    For the simple fact that even if they claim it's an outdoor music festival (since they do have concerts there, I saw Chuck Berry and Little Richard when I was younger), it's a state-sponsored and licensed fair, so it's excluded from the firearms-prohibited rule.
    B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
    KF7GEA

  3. #3
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    I was just out at the Puyallup Fair grounds for the Good Guys car show and was concealing the whole time. No problems.

    There is a "No Weapons" rule posted at the entrance however, so OC is most definately out.....legal or not, they wouldn't let you in, and I'm sure would call the PD if you pushed the issue.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    just_a_car wrote:
    I'm going to vote an opinion of "Legal".

    For the simple fact that even if they claim it's an outdoor music festival (since they do have concerts there, I saw Chuck Berry and Little Richard when I was younger), it's a state-sponsored and licensed fair, so it's excluded from the firearms-prohibited rule.
    The puyallup fair is not state sponsored or funded therefore it does fall under rcw 70.108. The only sticky point of that rcw is IF it falls under the clause about being licensed under other laws or rules. I believe that it is covered under 70.108 because it is run by an independantnon-profit org that receives no money from the state.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  5. #5
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    MODS! Can someone please merge these two threads?

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    Puyallup Fair is a private event, not for profit, and on private property.

    They can exclude.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Lonnie Wilson wrote:
    Puyallup Fair is a private event, not for profit, and on private property.

    They can exclude.
    Even the WAC (Washington Arms Collectors) gun shows only allows empty guns (AKA a rock)except for cops. So they can and do exclude guns.:X

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    The sponsorship, etc is moot. What matters is if the property it is held on is private or public.
    Lonnie says it's private. If so their rules will stick.



  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bellevue, Washington, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    Pa. Patriot wrote:
    The sponsorship, etc is moot. What matters is if the property it is held on is private or public.
    Lonnie says it's private. If so their rules will stick.

    Actually, that is incorrect.

    Safeco field is publicly owned, yet it is leased to the Mariners corporation. The corporation can set any policy it likes and we are required to abide by it or we can be asked to leave. (you can conceal if they don't know, but if they find out they can ask you to leave, yadda yadda...)

    ps. The Mariners do ban all weapons and have every right to do so as they lease the property and they maintain control of Safeco field-- First and Goal (Seahawks corporation) does the same thing with Qwest field and the exhibition center.

  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    joshmmm wrote:
    Actually, that is incorrect.

    Safeco field is publicly owned, yet it is leased to the Mariners corporation. The corporation can set any policy it likes and we are required to abide by it or we can be asked to leave. (you can conceal if they don't know, but if they find out they can ask you to leave, yadda yadda...)

    ps. The Mariners do ban all weapons and have every right to do so as they lease the property and they maintain control of Safeco field-- First and Goal (Seahawks corporation) does the same thing with Qwest field and the exhibition center.
    WA must be bass ackwards then. If it is public property then the leasee is irrelevant to most states preemption. What is the determining statute or case law that allows leasees to make otherwise preempted rules on public property in WA??


  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bellevue, Washington, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    Pa. Patriot wrote:
    joshmmm wrote:
    Actually, that is incorrect.

    Safeco field is publicly owned, yet it is leased to the Mariners corporation. The corporation can set any policy it likes and we are required to abide by it or we can be asked to leave. (you can conceal if they don't know, but if they find out they can ask you to leave, yadda yadda...)

    ps. The Mariners do ban all weapons and have every right to do so as they lease the property and they maintain control of Safeco field-- First and Goal (Seahawks corporation) does the same thing with Qwest field and the exhibition center.
    WA must be bass ackwards then. If it is public property then the leasee is irrelevant to most states preemption. What is the determining statute or case law that allows leasees to make otherwise preempted rules on public property in WA??
    I honestly don't know and am currently studying for my criminal law final (test is tomorrow) so I don't have time to look right now...

    I am sure Lonnie knows off the top of his head so hopefully he can answer :-)

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Pa. Patriot wrote:
    joshmmm wrote:
    Actually, that is incorrect.

    Safeco field is publicly owned, yet it is leased to the Mariners corporation. The corporation can set any policy it likes and we are required to abide by it or we can be asked to leave. (you can conceal if they don't know, but if they find out they can ask you to leave, yadda yadda...)

    ps. The Mariners do ban all weapons and have every right to do so as they lease the property and they maintain control of Safeco field-- First and Goal (Seahawks corporation) does the same thing with Qwest field and the exhibition center.
    WA must be bass ackwards then. If it is public property then the leasee is irrelevant to most states preemption. What is the determining statute or case law that allows leasees to make otherwise preempted rules on public property in WA??
    There is a clause in 9.41.300 that states:

    (2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances:


    (b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to:

    (i) Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070 or exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060; or

    (ii) Any showing, demonstration, or lecture involving the exhibition of firearms.

    It is my understanding that if the property is leased to a private corp then they can, and alot do, have thier own set of rules restricting any and all weapons. There is nothing against the law if you carry but they can ask you to leave.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bellevue, Washington, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    joeroket wrote:
    Pa. Patriot wrote:
    joshmmm wrote:
    Actually, that is incorrect.

    Safeco field is publicly owned, yet it is leased to the Mariners corporation. The corporation can set any policy it likes and we are required to abide by it or we can be asked to leave. (you can conceal if they don't know, but if they find out they can ask you to leave, yadda yadda...)

    ps. The Mariners do ban all weapons and have every right to do so as they lease the property and they maintain control of Safeco field-- First and Goal (Seahawks corporation) does the same thing with Qwest field and the exhibition center.
    WA must be bass ackwards then. If it is public property then the leasee is irrelevant to most states preemption. What is the determining statute or case law that allows leasees to make otherwise preempted rules on public property in WA??
    There is a clause in 9.41.300 that states:

    (2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances:


    (b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to:

    (i) Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070 or exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060; or

    (ii) Any showing, demonstration, or lecture involving the exhibition of firearms.

    It is my understanding that if the property is leased to a private corp then they can, and alot do, have thier own set of rules restricting any and all weapons. There is nothing against the law if you carry but they can ask you to leave.
    Joe,

    Your analysis is absolutely correct, but the law you posted there has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the topic at hand. We are dealing with a private corporation banning weapons when they lease a public building. The law you have quoted deals with cities banning weapons on city property.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    joshmmm wrote:
    joeroket wrote:
    Pa. Patriot wrote:
    joshmmm wrote:
    Actually, that is incorrect.

    Safeco field is publicly owned, yet it is leased to the Mariners corporation. The corporation can set any policy it likes and we are required to abide by it or we can be asked to leave. (you can conceal if they don't know, but if they find out they can ask you to leave, yadda yadda...)

    ps. The Mariners do ban all weapons and have every right to do so as they lease the property and they maintain control of Safeco field-- First and Goal (Seahawks corporation) does the same thing with Qwest field and the exhibition center.
    WA must be bass ackwards then. If it is public property then the leasee is irrelevant to most states preemption. What is the determining statute or case law that allows leasees to make otherwise preempted rules on public property in WA??
    There is a clause in 9.41.300 that states:

    (2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances:


    (b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to:

    (i) Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070 or exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060; or

    (ii) Any showing, demonstration, or lecture involving the exhibition of firearms.

    It is my understanding that if the property is leased to a private corp then they can, and alot do, have thier own set of rules restricting any and all weapons. There is nothing against the law if you carry but they can ask you to leave.
    Joe,

    Your analysis is absolutely correct, but the law you posted there has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the topic at hand. We are dealing with a private corporation banning weapons when they lease a public building. The law you have quoted deals with cities banning weapons on city property.
    Well kind of. I see your point but it deals with municipalities creating laws that ban firearms in a city operated stadium or convention center. No where does it say that it has to be city property. It could be a private center that the city leases and operates. I think I may be over reading into the RCW though.

    Anyway back to the point at hand. I am going to have to find something that sets precedent because, as you pointed out josh it does not deal with public property that is privately leased.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    My two cents.

    The law says "Operated by".

    This is the reason why the Washington State Convention and Trade Center, which is jointly operated by the City of Seattle and King County, cannot ban guns by CPL holders (per RCW 9.41.300), but Qwest Field and Safeco Field can. The law says "operated by".

Posting Permissions

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