Puyallup Fair CC ok?

tombrewster421 · Sep 14, 2011

jbone said:
[h=3]70.108.020
Definitions.[/h]
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.

(2) "Promoter" means any person or other legal entity issued a permit to conduct an outdoor music festival.

(3) "Applicant" means the promoter who has the right of control of the conduct of an outdoor music festival who applies to the appropriate legislative authority for a license to hold an outdoor music festival.

(4) "Issuing authority" means the legislative body of the local governmental unit where the site for an outdoor music festival is located.

(5) "Participate" means to knowingly provide or deliver to the festival site supplies, materials, food, lumber, beverages, sound equipment, generators, or musical entertainment and/or to attend a music festival. A person shall be presumed to have knowingly provided as that phrase is used herein after he has been served with a court order.
[1971 ex.s. c 302 § 21.]

Is Puyallup a "government sponsored fairs held on regularly established fairgrounds"

So under this definition; as long as they're not more than 250 over capacity, the Gorge is not classified as an "outdoor music festival" because it's a "permanently established place of assembly".

decklin · Sep 14, 2011

Ok, so who actually owns the Puyallup Fairgrounds? Is it Puyallup, Pierce County, or a private entity? I can't seem to find this info. Per RCW if it is owned by the City of Puyallup then we can legaly carry there. I carried there last year because I fear for my and my Wife's safety more than I fear authorities.

jt59 · Sep 14, 2011

decklin said:
Ok, so who actually owns the Puyallup Fairgrounds? Is it Puyallup, Pierce County, or a private entity? I can't seem to find this info. Per RCW if it is owned by the City of Puyallup then we can legaly carry there. I carried there last year because I fear for my and my Wife's safety more than I fear authorities.

That's zactly' the nubbin if the question. To my knowledge the fair grounds are privately owned and are not part of the city or county.

concealed means concealed! have fun

Ajetpilot · Sep 14, 2011

My wife and I went to The Fair on Monday, Military Appreciation Day. There are no metal detectors, no searches of handbags or backpacks. Just walk through the gate. Do what you have to do to protect yourself and your family. They are NOT preventing bad guys from carrying weapons into the fair.

fire suppressor · Sep 14, 2011

I have never been able to figure out who runs the fair either I have always just CC at the fair out of convince. Its not the best neighborhood at night and am not going to risk my life or my girlfriends by leaving it in the car

amlevin · Sep 14, 2011

fire suppressor said:
I have never been able to figure out who runs the fair either I have always just CC at the fair out of convince. Its not the best neighborhood at night and am not going to risk my life or my girlfriends by leaving it in the car

Let's start with this:

The Western Washington Fair Association, also known as the Puyallup Fair, is a private, not-for-profit, 501-C3 corporation. It receives no government subsidy, and pays city and state taxes.

http://www.thefair.com/utility/about-us/board_management.php

Seems pretty straight forward and clear, the "Fair" is private in all respects. Just a "non-profit" for Federal Tax purposes.

Wobbles · Sep 15, 2011

Wouldn't you only be able to be charged with trespass if you are specifically asked to leave? Not because you are in violation of their policy? Or am I incorrect in that assumption? And can someone point me in the right direction for this info, I can't seem to locate it

amlevin · Sep 15, 2011

Wobbles said:
Wouldn't you only be able to be charged with trespass if you are specifically asked to leave? Not because you are in violation of their policy? Or am I incorrect in that assumption? And can someone point me in the right direction for this info, I can't seem to locate it

Violation of their rules only carries the penalty of being asked to leave or possibly being escorted out by their "Security". Yes, if you refuse and remain after they have revoked their "permission" for you to remain, a trespass charge is highly likely as could a charge of Disorderly Conduct, depending on the audio volume of your arguments.

BigDave · Sep 15, 2011

Just reviewing the RCW's concerning Criminal Trespass and the differences of 1st and 2nd Degree, be it in a building or upon a premises.
We move to the defenses for this RCW and we find "(2) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises;"
By having the signage of no weapons allowed, is this a lawful condition to restrict access? Does this lawfully qualify as a condition of entry?

9A.52.070 Criminal trespass in the first degree.

(1) A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the first degree if he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a building.

(2) Criminal trespass in the first degree is a gross misdemeanor.

[1979 ex.s. c 244 § 12; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.52.070.]

9A.52.080 Criminal trespass in the second degree.

(1) A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the second degree if he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in or upon premises of another under circumstances not constituting criminal trespass in the first degree.

(2) Criminal trespass in the second degree is a misdemeanor.

[1979 ex.s. c 244 § 13; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.52.080.]

9A.52.090 Criminal trespass -- Defenses.
In any prosecution under RCW 9A.52.070 and 9A.52.080, it is a defense that:

(1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.52.070 was abandoned; or

(2) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises; or

(3) The actor reasonably believed that the owner of the premises, or other person empowered to license access thereto, would have licensed him to enter or remain; or

(4) The actor was attempting to serve legal process which includes any document required or allowed to be served upon persons or property, by any statute, rule, ordinance, regulation, or court order, excluding delivery by the mails of the United States. This defense applies only if the actor did not enter into a private residence or other building not open to the public and the entry onto the premises was reasonable and necessary for service of the legal process.

slapmonkay · Sep 15, 2011

In any prosecution under RCW 9A.52.070 and 9A.52.080, it is a defense that:

(1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.52.070 was abandoned; or

(2) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises; or

(3) The actor reasonably believed that the owner of the premises, or other person empowered to license access thereto, would have licensed him to enter or remain; or

(4) The actor was attempting to serve legal process which includes any document required or allowed to be served upon persons or property, by any statute, rule, ordinance, regulation, or court order, excluding delivery by the mails of the United States. This defense applies only if the actor did not enter into a private residence or other building not open to the public and the entry onto the premises was reasonable and necessary for service of the legal process.

I believe (3) would fit nicer. You purchase a ticket and are allowed through the gate. At that point I personally would believe that the owner of the premises or other person empowered to license access (ticket people and gate security) have licensed me to enter and remain on the premises while my ticket is valid. Only until my ticket become invalid or voided would it become trespass.

BigDave · Sep 15, 2011

slapmonkay said:
I believe (3) would fit nicer. You purchase a ticket and are allowed through the gate. At that point I personally would believe that the owner of the premises or other person empowered to license access (ticket people and gate security) have licensed me to enter and remain on the premises while my ticket is valid. Only until my ticket become invalid or voided would it become trespass.

I think you have missed the mark here, when you buy a ticket is to allow admission with the following conditions just as No Open Containers, Back Packs, alcohol and so on to include no weapons.
Possession of a ticket does not provide you to do as you please regardless.
If you are not allowed access for violating any of there rules, you do not get your money back when told or escorted to leave.

If (3) would apply as you are saying, how do you argue the point, they put up the no weapons signs? but you were the exception? Really?

I would prefer that the RKBA would be respected in all cases, unfortunately there not.

SpyderTattoo · Sep 15, 2011

BigDave said:
I think you have missed the mark here, when you buy a ticket is to allow admission with the following conditions just as No Open Containers, Back Packs, alcohol and so on to include no weapons.
Possession of a ticket does not provide you to do as you please regardless.
If you are not allowed access for violating any of there ( their ) rules, you do not get your money back when told or escorted to leave.

If (3) would apply as you are saying, how do you argue the point, they put up the no weapons signs? but you were the exception? Really?

I would prefer that the RKBA would be respected in all cases, unfortunately there ( they're ) not.

This is killing me. You had two out of three chances to get this right and missed on both counts. Go check out an English book at the library.

BigDave · Sep 15, 2011

SpyderTattoo said:
This is killing me. You had two out of three chances to get this right and missed on both counts. Go check out an English book at the library.

And this is the best you are able to do, amazing! You have added zero to the conversation.

Difdi · Sep 15, 2011

jbone said:
That would include no pocket knives if you are correct.

It would also, technically, include the bare hands of a professional boxer.

tombrewster421 · Sep 15, 2011

Difdi said:
It would also, technically, include the bare hands of a professional boxer.

No, those are classified as sporting goods.

SpyderTattoo · Sep 15, 2011

Lol, BigDave...

It's because this subject has been beaten to death. It has come up every time anyone mentions any WAC show that comes up. It has been made abundantly clear that the Puyallup Fair is private property and they can make whatever rules they want.

Really, do we have to go over all this again? It's more fun to correct your spelling than get involved in a subject that has been covered and covered and covered again...

Private property. Conceal your weapon. If you get caught you get kicked out. It's that easy.

Bill Starks · Sep 15, 2011

Spent over 5 hrs at the fair today. No issues CC'ing.

BigDave · Sep 15, 2011

So Spyder you do not feel you could be cited for trespass for ignoring their signage and only able to tell you to leave?

9A.52.090 Criminal trespass -- Defenses.
(2) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises;

I know some feel that you have to be told to leave after discovery, yet I do not think this is align with Washington State Law.
Just by posting the signage is a condition of your entry, purchased ticket or not.

And Spyder this portion has not be discussed earlier to my knowledge.

Why would any topic be given the opportunity to be explored? apparently Fire Suppressor has questions.

BigDave · Sep 15, 2011

NavyLCDR said:
I've always found posts like this humorous. Especially on forums frequented more by concealed carrying folks.... if the gun is concealed, I can't see how it COULD be a problem, other than with metal detectors or frisks.

Why would it be humorous? the same laws apply be it open or concealed. Granted if concealed the possibly of being noticed is very slim though could occur and if you were to use your weapon in a self defense, then at least you know where you stand.

jt59 · Sep 16, 2011

M1Gunr said:
Spent over 5 hrs at the fair today. No issues CC'ing.

Spent over 4 hours at the fair today. No issues CC'g

Puyallup Fair CC ok?

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Opt-Out Members

Campaign Veteran

Opt-Out Members

Regular Member

Opt-Out Members

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

State Researcher

Opt-Out Members

Opt-Out Members

Regular Member