imported post
So I got to thinking about hitting up the fair this weekend. Being the LAC that I am, I decided to check up on any 'restrictions'.
From the county Website:
However it's the whole 'managed by the Fairgrounds Site Management Group' bit that gives me pause. The Event Center website states:
Since the grounds are not leased out to the FSMG, then it would stand to reason that a PNSPA vs Sequim situation would not apply. Indeed, they are being paid to run the facility, not payING for use of the grounds. Since one cannot generally delegate/bestow rights, powers or authorities to another that one does not possess themselves, logic would seem to hold that the states preemption would carry over from the County to the FSMG, yes?
Indeed State law specifically adresses Fairs:
RCW 70.108.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter the following words and phrases shall have the indicated meanings:
Can anyone here find fault with my logic?:?
So I got to thinking about hitting up the fair this weekend. Being the LAC that I am, I decided to check up on any 'restrictions'.
From the county Website:
Neither the Event Center website, nor the website for the Fair proper has anything to say about firearms. Now, given state pre-emption and the fact that the grounds are clearly "owned by Clark County" one would think that they would be in the clear to carry.The Clark County Event Center at the Fairgrounds is located just west of the I-5/179th Street interchange near Ridgefield, Washington. The property is owned by Clark County and managed by the Fairgrounds Site Management Group (FSMG). Quincunx manages the Clark County Amphitheater on adjacent property.
However it's the whole 'managed by the Fairgrounds Site Management Group' bit that gives me pause. The Event Center website states:
(my emphasis)Clark County contracts with the Fairgrounds Site Management Group to operate and market the facility.
Since the grounds are not leased out to the FSMG, then it would stand to reason that a PNSPA vs Sequim situation would not apply. Indeed, they are being paid to run the facility, not payING for use of the grounds. Since one cannot generally delegate/bestow rights, powers or authorities to another that one does not possess themselves, logic would seem to hold that the states preemption would carry over from the County to the FSMG, yes?
Indeed State law specifically adresses Fairs:
RCW 70.108.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter the following words and phrases shall have the indicated meanings:
(1) "Outdoor music festival" or "music festival" or "festival" means an assembly of persons gathered primarily for outdoor, live or recorded musical entertainment, where the predicted attendance is two thousand persons or more and where the duration of the program is five hours or longer: PROVIDED, That this definition shall not be applied to any regularly established permanent place of worship, stadium, athletic field, arena, auditorium, coliseum, or other similar permanently established places of assembly for assemblies which do not exceed by more than two hundred fifty people the maximum seating capacity of the structure where the assembly is held: PROVIDED, FURTHER, That this definition shall not apply to government sponsored fairs held on regularly established fairgrounds nor to assemblies required to be licensed under other laws or regulations of the state.
Can anyone here find fault with my logic?:?