Anyone else see this BS at the Gun Show Today?

imported post

IndianaBoy79 wrote:

[SNIP]you wouldn't be breaking any law by keeping your weapon on your hip, but you may be in violation of some sort of trespassing statute if asked to leave and you refused.
My 2 cents...

Click to expand...

That's how they remove you in WA. They don't get you for a firearm violation, they remove you as a Civil or Criminal Trespass (if you arguewith them about it)for not complying with their rules as the lessee. That's what I was referring to in my post about how they're bypassing pre-emption (in WA) on county property leased to a private party.

Others said that in ID they can't bypass pre-emption by enforcing trespass rules for firearmsin that matter on public property. I'm curious to see if this gets resolved.

imported post

It would really depend on what the laws are concerning public access to public land during a private event. If the private party can legally ask you to leave, then they can ask you to leave for any reason. Unless there is some law that forces them to be open to the public, then I would think they can ask you to leave. The difference between this and the actual fair is that the fair is a state sponsored event.

At the store where I work, on private property, I can ask someone to leave for any reason, from the way you dress to the color of your skin, or because I'm in a bad mood or simply don't like you.

Anyone know a property rights lawyer in the area? Is there some law or ordinance that forces them to be open to the public? Do I have a legal "right" to be there at the private event, or am I simply given "permission" to be there by the private party renting the grounds? If I have a right, can't deny my gun; if I only have permission, then they can kick me off.

imported post

IndianaBoy79 wrote:

snip.....
At the store where I work, on private property, I can ask someone to leave for any reason, from the way you dress to the color of your skin, or because I'm in a bad mood or simply don't like you.

Click to expand...

Aaaaa. I don't think so, not without incurring potential liability.
http://people.eku.edu/palmerj/319/Federal Protected Classes and Laws.htm

Yata hey

imported post

Off topic, so I just sent you a PM.

imported post

Gun Shows have all sorts of people wandering around handling firearms. Not all of them adhire to the rules for handling weapons. In fact, some of them can be downright dangerous...



Jeff Cooper had an Accidental/Negligent Discharge at the S.H.O.T. show one year handling an 'empty' display Steyr Scout Rifle...so I guess it can even happen to the best of us.



I

imported post

Ok guys. I personally went Sunday, OC'd and refused to check in my gun at the door. I was nice and polite about it, and eventually asked that Ada County be called... basically cause the county won't look into it until there is a "incident" of sorts. Two deputies responded (I have nothing but positive things to say about how they handled the situation and their manner was professional and as it should be... helpful).
Basically, end result, the deputy promised to get back to me as this was a gray area in law. It is county land (and thus they can't prohibit firearms that are loaded or otherwise)... BUT it is leased to a private individual.

Later in the week I recieved word from the deputy that after the prosecuting attorney from the county looked at it, indeed a private individual CAN INDEED BAN/RESTRICT/LIMIT pretty much whatever they want (including loaded firearms) since, for the purposes of the lease, the property is treated as private property.

Like it or not, that's the legal opinion of the county attorney and that's how it would go down in court. Again, the two officers were top notch, professional and courteous, didn't disarm me or any BS like that... good interaction with them... they actually wanted to get to the bottom of the law.

Stay safe and lawful!

imported post

IdahoCorsair wrote:

Ok guys. I personally went Sunday, OC'd and refused to check in my gun at the door. I was nice and polite about it, and eventually asked that Ada County be called... basically cause the county won't look into it until there is a "incident" of sorts. Two deputies responded (I have nothing but positive things to say about how they handled the situation and their manner was professional and as it should be... helpful).
Basically, end result, the deputy promised to get back to me as this was a gray area in law. It is county land (and thus they can't prohibit firearms that are loaded or otherwise)... BUT it is leased to a private individual.

Later in the week I recieved word from the deputy that after the prosecuting attorney from the county looked at it, indeed a private individual CAN INDEED BAN/RESTRICT/LIMIT pretty much whatever they want (including loaded firearms) since, for the purposes of the lease, the property is treated as private property.

Like it or not, that's the legal opinion of the county attorney and that's how it would go down in court. Again, the two officers were top notch, professional and courteous, didn't disarm me or any BS like that... good interaction with them... they actually wanted to get to the bottom of the law.

Stay safe and lawful!

Click to expand...

Well it's not the result I wanted to hear, it was exactly what I was saying they could do... It's what they've been doing here in WA at the L&C gun shows.

Thanks for being the guinea pig on this one and thanks for being so tactful and mindful of your conduct when you went. It sounds like you have a cool head and know how to get results without being a nut about it. I'mvery glad that the LEO's who responded were professional.

I'm a bit disappointed at the end result, but it's what I figured would happen.

imported post

Have a serious question and problem with the methodology guys.

Why would you accept LE's or the county's word for an interpretation of anything?

Governmental entity's position on things are frequently determined by officials either that are ignorant, have an axe to grind or are just doing it because that is the way they have always done it. G*d knows we have seen enough suits in Va. and Pa. to demonstrate this fact.

What would your response be if the county leased a park to a private entity (excuse being that they could maintain it cheaper) and then the lessee said no guns or ammo? I'm sure you'd holler and scream, "You cant do that. In fact this happened in Richmond with city streets in a housing community regarding non-residents - it didn't hold up in court.

What is the difference? I'm asking this as a serious question. I am not up on your laws and state preemption application but is seems more logical to research same than to take a LEO's response.

Really not trying to flame anybody on this one. We have the same condition at gun shows in Va. but the difference is that the shows (the ones which I have personal knowledge) are all held at privately owned facilities - not state, city or county owned.

I'm really jealous of your wide open spaces and the opportunity that provides for enjoying your favorite form of recreation.

Yata hey

imported post

The County Attorney, the same as the Attorney General givesan opinion on what is legal and what is not. The LEO then uses that interpretation/opinion to decide how to enforce a law or regulation. Neither one can actually make laws or issue a ruling on a law but rather just what they think. When you are arrested due to their interpretaion you will then have to fight it in court to get a different ruling. You possibly may have to appeal all the way up to the Supreme Court.

If the CA says that it is ilegal to carry in that location then it means the police will arrest you and the county prosecutor will try you in court. If the judge rules differently then fine but you will have to get the judge to do that.

Opinions from AG's are just like opinions from your favorite lawyer, an opinion. Only the opinion of the judge actually means anything but you can't get a judge to give an opinion until you are charged and tried.

Opinions from a LEO re just his opinion and may not be based on what the other LEO do or what the CA or AG have said. He may say what his department's policy is or just his.


An example may be where several years ago in SC a man was charged for passing a school bus by a Highway Patrolman. The man argued that he should not be charged as he was passing in an area separated by a concrete median and was legal according the the SC Drivers Handbook. He took it to court and the judge riled that the handbook was just like a AG opinion and was not law therefore he was found guilty. He appealed to the SCSC and was still found guilty. This was evne thogh the SC drivers handbook plainly said that he was legal and no one disputed what the book said, only that it did not follow the law. The handbook was changed. So just because the AG or a lawyer tells you something it does not carry weight in court.

imported post

Hmmm...I think a judge might disagree, because it is a principle in law that the laws of the state of Idaho are presumed to be incorporated into every contract, which means that the state's pre-emption laws would be incorporated into any lease between the county, which does not have the authority to ban handgun carry at the fairgrounds, and the lessee, the gun show promoter. It is also a principle in law that the county does not have the authority to contract with others to perform acts it does not have the authority to do itself. Methinks this Ada County deputyprosecutor didn't factor these basic tenets into his opinion, and gave an answer the Ada County Sheriff wanted to hear. Wouldn't mind running these notions by the same deputies and asking them to pass them on to the county deputy prosecutor with a request for reconsideration and a written opinion, would you?

(Yes, I am...and not on TV)

imported post

I agree. I have several years of experience with real estate appraisal. You don't own land, you own rights to use land. You can lease to someone else whatever rights you own. The county does not own the right to ban firearms, therefor they can't lease that right to someone else. It would be like me trying to lease my neighbors car to you.

This still does not mean they can't have you removed for trespassing. I'm more interested in what the law says about my "right to public access". If I have a right to be there, they can't have me removed for otherwise legal activity. If not, then the firearm discussion may be a moot point.

imported post

Let's do the homework. Can anyone provide citations for the assertions either of the county prosecutor or the opposing viewpoint?

I've looked through the Idaho Statutes and have not yet found anything relevant.

I'll keep up the search...

imported post

55-101.Real property defined.Real property or real estate consists of:1.Lands, possessory rights to land, ditch and water rights, and mining claims, both lode and placer.2.That which is affixed to land.3.That which is appurtenant to land.

As far as any Idaho statute backing up my claims, I'd have to do more than a cursory inspection. You hold a title to land rights though (or rather your bank holds the title if you don't own your property outright). That title spells out what rights you have to that land. It's impossible to sell or rent out a right I don't have.

I do have several real estate books. The problem is, property laws are a mess of court decisions, common law, and local restrictions. I'll try to take a closer look when I get home tonight, but what I explained above is the BASIS for real estate rights.

Google bundle of rights
http://www.google.com/search?q=bund...=com.ubuntu:en-US:unofficial&client=firefox-a

imported post

Arguing about whetherthey are allowed to "ban" firearms on the fairgrounds during their gun show or simply have a policy saying you will be refused admittance and summarily trespassed if you do not unload is a waste of time.

The end result is that they will always be able to refuse you admission to the show if you don't play by their rules which are in place to reduce the likelihood they will be held liable for damages in the case of a negligent discharge.

Furthermore, their insurance policy they have when they put the show on (and you can bet they have one) may specifically state that loaded firearms are not allowed and if a loaded firearm is on the grounds during the show the insurance policy is void.

There's a lot more to putting on a gun show than simply setting up a fewtables andbringing some guncollectors over to an open space where they can sell their stuff.

imported post

shad0wfax wrote:

Arguing about whetherthey are allowed to "ban" firearms on the fairgrounds during their gun show or simply have a policy saying you will be refused admittance and summarily trespassed if you do not unload is a waste of time.

The end result is that they will always be able to refuse you admission to the show if you don't play by their rules which are in place to reduce the likelihood they will be held liable for damages in the case of a negligent discharge.

Click to expand...

In that case I simply won't give them any business then.

imported post

Gee, all of the gun shows I've been to here in Nevada have those signs. What's funny is that security checks backpacks, bags, purses---but there's no frisk. I have a CCW and I just stroll on in with the weapon covered.

imported post

Eagleeye wrote:

In that case I simply won't give them any business then.

Click to expand...

That's always an option. Just remember they're not making policies like that because they want to screw with our rights. They're making policies like that because of liability risks for morons with ND's and because their event insurance probably only covers armed LEO's.

The other option is to walk up to the sign and make a point of unloading your firearm immediately in front of it, as well as in front of all of the other people going in. (And if you really wanted to, you could have a second weapon concealed. The worst they could do is trespass you if they somehow found out.)

imported post

Because this appears to be a generic sign with no reference to any minicipal, county or state law, I'd speculate that it belongs to the show promoter, who travels around the state and places it outside the entrance of whichever building they're using for the show. I'd further guess that it's standardized, and that many promoters use the same one in other states. Every facility, whether privately or publicly owned, requires the promoter to carry insurance fortheir show, regardless of type- gun, boat, hot rod, car, garden, etc. - and the insurance carrier probably requires such a sign specifically for gun shows, otherwise the insurer would refuse to provide coverage, or it would be so expensive the promoter couldn't afford it. Quite a catch-22, isn't it - a sign or no gun show, even though shows on publicly-owned property in Idaho, if not on property specifically designated as "no ccw or weapons," cannot legally require it as a condition of hosting the show.

Interesting how there's been a gun show for decades at the ISU Student Union building, yet there's supposedly a weapons ban on campus....

imported post

The ban only applies to students, just like at UI, BSU and WSU.

imported post

FOUND IT!!! THE ADA COUNTY ORDINANCE!!!

And guess what? The Ada County Deputy Prosecutor and Officer were WRONG! I won't say any more - you be the judge. Here's the text; link to source, with directions, afterward:

5-4-2: POSSESSION OF FIREARMS:



A. Short Title: This section shall be known and cited as the ADA COUNTY FIREARMS ORDINANCE.




B. Purpose: The purpose of this section is to prohibit the possession of a firearm in any public building, owned or operated by Ada County, and making such possession a misdemeanor violation, except in those circumstances where the individual carrying or possessing the firearm is a law enforcement official of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision thereof, a district court marshal, or an individual possessing a valid permit to carry a concealed weapon.




C. Definitions: All words and phrases used in this sectionshall be given their ordinary, commonly understood and accepted meanings.




D. Applicability Of Prohibition: This section does not apply to law enforcement officials of the state of Idaho, or a political subdivision thereof, to marshals of the fourth judicial district, or to an individual who possesses a valid permit to carry a concealed weapon, issued by the Ada County sheriff. In addition, the prohibition set forth in this section shall not apply to individuals in attendance at any organized firearm trading or sale exhibition conducted at the Expo Idaho facilities

E. Firearm Possession Prohibited, Penalty: It shall be unlawful for any person to have in his possession a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, while said person is within any public building, owned or operated by Ada County. Any person convicted of a violation of this prohibition shall be punished as provided by Idaho Code, section 18-113 as it may from time to time be amended and/or retitled. (Ord. 96, 9-17-1980; amd. Ord. 603, 1-30-2006)

First, go to Ada County Clerk's website here:

http://www.adaweb.net/Clerk/CountyCode.aspx

Clicking on the Ada County Code link takes you to an outside host site for the code:

http://sterling.webiness.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=447

Select "Public Health and Safety" in the box on the left, and scroll down.

I question whether the ordinance is even valid, given state pre-emption, and particularly where it would make a holder of a ccw license from another county subject to criminal penalties since his ccw license was issued by another county's sheriff.

Dollars to doughnuts this was written in the Vaughn Killeen days - he thought he was a king, not a public servant - but in a way it's a good thing he was such a b*tthead, because it was his refusal to issue ccw licenses and stupid ordinances like this that caused Idahoans to rise up and make Idaho a "shall-issue" state and enact the pre-emption laws.

So now we know where to point our deputies should the question ever arise again. Stay informedand have a great weekend!!