Clermont County Fair Gun ban

[transfusion]

So the Clermont County Fair Grounds in Ownesville Ohio is trying to ban citizens from being able to defend themselves at the county fair again this year.
I was there today to set up my vendor booth and brand new signs were placed at all the entry's and I was verbally told that I could not carry on the grounds this year.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

If there are signs posted, AND you were informed verbally, that sounds to me like they're doing a lot more than "trying" to ban guns.

I'm not from Ohio. Does Ohio have state preemption? Can the Clermont County Fair Grounds ban firearms?

 

[rickyrick]

I didn’t know that there was a county fair in which guns were allowed, I guess I always erred on the side of caution.

 

[BBarn]

I believe Ohio courts have ruled that carry can be prohibited in some public buildings, but cannot be prohibited outside in public places. Would be worth checking. I do know that in previous years some Ohio county fairgrounds removed the signs in outdoor areas and from some buildings after being "educated" on state statutes and verdicts in applicable court cases.

 

[YARDDOG(1)]

I think, Not for sure a WAG, Non profit are exempt ; ) PS In FLA they are
H/D

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I think, Not for sure a WAG, Non profit are exempt ; ) PS In FLA they are
H/D

1. Non-profits are exempt from what?

2. Florida law doesn't apply to Ohio.

According to www.handgunlaw.us, Ohio state law includes the following provision regarding signage:

Signage prohibiting concealed handguns.
(A) Each person, board, or entity that owns or controls any place or premises identified in division (B) of section 2923.126 of the Revised Code as a place into which a valid license does not authorize the licensee to carry a concealed handgun, or a designee of such a person, board, or entity, shall post in the one or more conspicuous locations in the premises a sign that contains a statement in substantially the following form: "Unless otherwise authorized by law, pursuant to the Ohio Revised Code, no person shall knowingly possess, have under the person's control, convey, or attempt to convey a deadly weapon or dangerous ordnance onto these premises."

Section 2923.126(B) is the list of statutorily prohibited places:

(B) A valid concealed handgun license does not authorize the licensee to carry a concealed handgun in any manner prohibited under division (B) of section 2923.12 of the Revised Code or in any manner prohibited under section 2923.16 of the Revised Code. A valid license does not authorize the licensee to carry a concealed handgun into any of the following places:

(1) A police station, sheriff's office, or state highway patrol station, premises controlled by the bureau of criminal identification and investigation; a state correctional institution, jail, workhouse, or other detention facility; any area of an airport passenger terminal that is beyond a passenger or property screening checkpoint or to which access is restricted through security measures by the airport authority or a public agency; or an institution that is maintained, operated, managed, and governed pursuant to division (A) of section 5119.14 of the Revised Code or division (A)(1) of section 5123.03 of the Revised Code;

(2) A school safety zone if the licensee's carrying the concealed handgun is in violation of section 2923.122 of the Revised Code;

(3) A courthouse or another building or structure in which a courtroom is located if the licensee's carrying the concealed handgun is in violation of section 2923.123 of the Revised Code;

(4) Any premises or open air arena for which a D permit has been issued under Chapter 4303. of the Revised Code if the licensee's carrying the concealed handgun is in violation of section 2923.121 of the Revised Code;

(5) Any premises owned or leased by any public or private college, university, or other institution of higher education, unless the handgun is in a locked motor vehicle or the licensee is in the immediate process of placing the handgun in a locked motor vehicle or unless the licensee is carrying the concealed handgun pursuant to a written policy, rule, or other authorization that is adopted by the institution's board of trustees or other governing body and that authorizes specific individuals or classes of individuals to carry a concealed handgun on the premises;

(6) Any church, synagogue, mosque, or other place of worship, unless the church, synagogue, mosque, or other place of worship posts or permits otherwise;

(7) Any building that is a government facility of this state or a political subdivision of this state and that is not a building that is used primarily as a shelter, restroom, parking facility for motor vehicles, or rest facility and is not a courthouse or other building or structure in which a courtroom is located that is subject to division (B)(3) of this section, unless the governing body with authority over the building has enacted a statute, ordinance, or policy that permits a licensee to carry a concealed handgun into the building;

(8) A place in which federal law prohibits the carrying of handguns.

But that doesn't tell us whether or not Ohio Statute includes preemption, which would prevent lower governmental entities from enacting stricter regulations that what the State has enacted in statute.

 

[Bob Willman]

On the Ohio Attorney General's website there is a section under concealed carry which has court rulings concerning the law. Several years ago some county tried to ban concealed carry from it's fairgrounds and someone filed suit to challenge them. The court ruled that they could not ban concealed carry from the fairgrounds but they could in the buildings on the grounds.
It has been a while since I looked this case and I do not remember which county was involved but it is not hard to find on the website.

 

[Dwight55]

Actually, a mass emailing program to the sheriff (IIRC) resulted in the folks involved doing a bit of re-thinking.

Ohio has a serious preemption law on the books, . . . lawsuits were promised, . . . and they decided it was not worth the hassle.

Yayyyy, . . . a win for the good guys.

Also a big thumbs up and 10 points for the Buckeye Firearms Association which sent out the invitation to be a part of the answer by emailing the offenders, . . . not sure if they were the only ones . . . but whatever and however, . . . good guys won.

May God bless,
Dwight

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Ohio has a serious preemption law on the books, . . . lawsuits were promised, . . . and they decided it was not worth the hassle.

Good news, and thanks for the follow-up report. That's how preemption laws should work.

I only wish my state had preemption on firearms. I've had two attorneys tell me that we have "de facto" preemption, but you'd never know it by looking at various municipal ordinances from around the state.

 

[44 AMP]

I only wish my state had preemption on firearms.

there's a word or two missing here...preemption on firearms laws...

I've had two attorneys tell me that we have "de facto" preemption, but you'd never know it by looking at various municipal ordinances from around the state.

I don't know if my state has it specifically written in law, or if its just a principle adhered to when court challenges come around, but I know they do it.

Some years ago, Seattle passed a law more restrictive than the state law. Their lawyers told them they didn't have the legal authority to do so, but they went ahead and did it anyway. They got taken to court. They lost. The law was repealed. Didn't seem to matter much to the Seattle city council, after all, it was only taxpayer's money they wasted...

Various municipal ordinances often violate state, or sometimes even Federal law, and remain on the books, UNTIL they lose a court challenge.

Unless someone with "standing" and the wherewithal (funds) to bring a case to court, these things just slide on by.

 

[DashingDan]

Here in TX we are able to carry in the public areas of the police station and they provide lockers for the non public areas.

 

[rickyrick]

As the tragedy at the garlic festival in California has shown, seems pointless to make an open air type event a gun free zone without the security to back up the rule.
Saw a quote by the governor of California where he called the military style rifle weapons of mass destruction... I can’t directly quote him because there was foul language involved...
Meaning, more restrictions to follow.

 

[USNRet93]

As the tragedy at the garlic festival in California has shown, seems pointless to make an open air type event a gun free zone without the security to back up the rule.
Saw a quote by the governor of California where he called the military style rifle weapons of mass destruction... I can’t directly quote him because there was foul language involved...
Meaning, more restrictions to follow.

Rifle bought in Nevada and brought home to CA..legal..I wonder how Nevada will respond..if at all?

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Rifle bought in Nevada and brought home to CA..legal..I wonder how Nevada will respond..if at all?

Why should Nevada respond? The shooter had a legal residence in Nevada. The sale was legal in Nevada. The fact that the shooter violated California law by bringing an illegal firearm into California is California's problem, not Nevada's problem.

 

[USNRet93]

Why should Nevada respond? The shooter had a legal residence in Nevada. The sale was legal in Nevada. The fact that the shooter violated California law by bringing an illegal firearm into California is California's problem, not Nevada's problem.

Ah, thought he was a CA resident...