Tulsa State Fair - No Concealed Carry in any building

[bettingpython]

Basically local governments are trying to weasel around state preemption and if we let them get away with it then we allow diminishment of our 2A rights. So with a lack of fanfare that is typical of me I will contact my legislator and senator and detail my protest and politely inform fairgrounds authority that due to their interpretation and posting I, or my family won't be attending or spending any money at the fair this year. We don't do rides we like the exhibit halls and concert events, since we won't be allowed to carry then I'll just vote with my pocket book. Saves me a couple of hundred bucks.

In the grand scheme of things they won't care about my measly $200 but it's ok by me. It means less stress and aggravation.

 

[Dukester]

The law really does seem very clear here. I hate to admit it, but my interpretation of the statute is in line with theirs. I'd like to carry, but I will follow the law.

 

[inactive]

I guess I really don't understand why some seem shocked they are not suppose to carry at the fair? These are considered buildings, owned by the city, to conduct business with the public. Isn't that still directly addressed in the SDA statutes?? This was addressed last year in OKC from an LEO perspective and they were informed to enforce the SDA if anyone inside the buildings were caught with a firearm. Maybe I am missing something but I really don't see what the discussion is about.

The law really does seem very clear here. I hate to admit it, but my interpretation of the statute is in line with theirs. I'd like to carry, but I will follow the law.

But it isn't clear, at all. I don't consider a building at the fair, which is occupied by vendors, as a government entity doing business with the public. Now, buildings that house DPS to issue licenses, or Vital Records to sell birth certificates, or City-County Health Department to issue immunizations and flu shots and vaccination records, etc ad nauseum...? Those are clearly doing business with the public.

But a Fairground building that does nothing but houses a (private) food vendor to sell me a hot dog, and some other vendor booths? As bettingpython said, it doesn't pass the sniff test.

 

[Glocktogo]

Due to the vague wording of the statute, a test case to set precedent will be required before we know for sure. I believe the intent of the legislature is in line with Cards81fan's interpretation. Unfortunately, legislative intent isn't always delineated in the text of the law. My belief of the intent would get you a pass when dealing with me specifically (so long as you're not an asshat), but that's not universal and won't keep you out of legal jeopardy in other instances.

 

[Dukester]

How is it vague? It says "any business owned or leased by the city". If the city of Tulsa owns the building then it doesn't matter who is inside.

 

[copeje]

Due to the vague wording of the statute, a test case to set precedent will be required before we know for sure. I believe the intent of the legislature is in line with Cards81fan's interpretation. Unfortunately, legislative intent isn't always delineated in the text of the law. My belief of the intent would get you a pass when dealing with me specifically (so long as you're not an asshat), but that's not universal and won't keep you out of legal jeopardy in other instances.

I agree 100%. It isn't worth my time to take someone to jail for that. Assuming the person is polite and compliant upon interaction. However, not all LEO's may feel this way. They may take you to jail just to have something to do?

 

[inactive]

How is it vague? It says "any business owned or leased by the city". If the city of Tulsa owns the building then it doesn't matter who is inside.

Because the the fairgrounds are not a business, and fairgrounds are specifically exempt from restriction.

 

[Commander Keen]

How is it vague? It says "any business owned or leased by the city". If the city of Tulsa owns the building then it doesn't matter who is inside.

1. Any structure, building, or office space which is owned or leased by a city, town, county, state, or federal governmental authority for the purpose of conducting business with the public;

Complete reading and comprehension is very important.

 

[bryanherron]

1. Any structure, building, or office space which is owned or leased by a city, town, county, state, or federal governmental authority for the purpose of conducting business with the public;

Complete reading and comprehension is very important.

Yes, meaning any building, outhouse or campground that a City Government operates (where the city offices are) whether the city owns or leases that space. This does not mean if the city owns it and leases it out to some other entity for them to do business. Leased, as in the city does NOT own it and had to lease it, not that the city has leased it out. When we get our terminology straight and read it all in context it is very clear. The buildings at the fairgrounds are not subject to this rule in any way shape or form because there are no City offices full of City officials doing daily business with the public at the fairgrounds.

I think the fairgrounds are owned by the county, if you wanna get technical, but same rules apply. hehe

 

[Boehlertaught]

Due to the vague wording of the statute, a test case to set precedent will be required before we know for sure. I believe the intent of the legislature is in line with Cards81fan's interpretation. Unfortunately, legislative intent isn't always delineated in the text of the law. My belief of the intent would get you a pass when dealing with me specifically (so long as you're not an asshat), but that's not universal and won't keep you out of legal jeopardy in other instances.

A questions for you and other LEO's here. If a person is carrying concealed and doing a good job of it, and not doing anything illegal or doing anything else to attract attention. How would you know as an LEO to conduct a search of any person attending the fair? Could the LEO's at the fair simply conduct random searches? There's a part of me that says I doubt that will, or should, happen. As for the asshat thing. Hey man, that's your call. I personally don't want to be the test case you mentioned...I simply don't have the time and money for it and doubt the NRA or any other 2A rights group would come to your aid.