• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Oregon State Fair - current rules

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
Under the existing rules, from the official page, the prohibition on firearms does not apply to:

Subsection (8)(2)

2.
Exceptions to the above prohibitions are limited to:
1.
Weapons of OSF law enforcement officials and those carried by persons authorized by law
to carry them when carried in a manner authorized by law
;



While state fair personnel may not realize that their own rules specifically allow weapons that are lawful, they do. And since no CHL is required to openly carry, it would seem that open carry without a CHL (and loaded) is also "authorized by law" and therefore not prohibited.

HOWEVER:::::: Be very cautious of the "public building" restrictions for non CHL holders who are open carrying.

But if you don't push the issue, I'm guessing they'll try to turn you away hoping you don't know the law and THEIR OWN RULES.
 
Last edited:

Dave H.

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2013
Messages
28
Location
Oregon
I was at the state fair last year was OCing and walked past a couple OSP, they just looked at me and nothing.
No one inside approached me in any manner.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
I was at the state fair last year was OCing and walked past a couple OSP, they just looked at me and nothing.
No one inside approached me in any manner.

I would think that if an OC'er had a problem it would be either,:

1) at the gate and some ticket checker sees the weapon and says "no firearms allowed".

or

2) some mommie type pulls a swatting action on the OC'er once inside the venue. They have publicly stated that this tactic should be employed, it has been employed in the past, and is likely to be done again.

Remember, the anti's think they are on some holy high ground in their hopolophobic state.
 

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
Under the existing rules, from the official page, the prohibition on firearms does not apply to:

Subsection (8)(2)

2.
Exceptions to the above prohibitions are limited to:
1.
Weapons of OSF law enforcement officials and those carried by persons authorized by law
to carry them when carried in a manner authorized by law
;



While state fair personnel may not realize that their own rules specifically allow weapons that are lawful, they do. And since no CHL is required to openly carry, it would seem that open carry without a CHL (and loaded) is also "authorized by law" and therefore not prohibited.

HOWEVER:::::: Be very cautious of the "public building" restrictions for non CHL holders who are open carrying.

But if you don't push the issue, I'm guessing they'll try to turn you away hoping you don't know the law and THEIR OWN RULES.


Isnt that a contradiction? By the very definition of public building the 2A is the standard. Private businesses can of course prohibit what they like and therefore not get a single cent
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
Isnt that a contradiction? By the very definition of public building the 2A is the standard. Private businesses can of course prohibit what they like and therefore not get a single cent

Here in Oregon "public building" is defined in the law for purposes of firearms carry and those without a CHL are prohibited from carrying "in or on" a "public building". Yes, the 2A says "shall not be infringed" and Oregon's Constitution says we have the right to carry for "defense of ourselves and the state". However, government owns the cops, the courts, and the jails, as well as manipulates the jury (try bringing up jury nullification).

That's not RIGHT but it is the system we must deal with. Particularly those who have neither the time, money, or inclination to become a test case.
 

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
Here in Oregon "public building" is defined in the law for purposes of firearms carry and those without a CHL are prohibited from carrying "in or on" a "public building". Yes, the 2A says "shall not be infringed" and Oregon's Constitution says we have the right to carry for "defense of ourselves and the state". However, government owns the cops, the courts, and the jails, as well as manipulates the jury (try bringing up jury nullification).

That's not RIGHT but it is the system we must deal with. Particularly those who have neither the time, money, or inclination to become a test case.

We already know the state statute is illegal and therefore void. Only thing to do in the absence of 10s of thousands of dollars is rely on numbers. You think the police would mess with 50 armed men in a state fair with thousands of people and witnesses? I doubt it. Not unless they want a bloodbath and i'm very sure they won't go that far. Or again not with so many people and witnesses in close proximity. They would know as soon as a single shot is fired, they will have 49 others, most of whom would open fire. Noo I can't see them trying it, corrupt as many of them are
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
We already know the state statute is illegal and therefore void. Only thing to do in the absence of 10s of thousands of dollars is rely on numbers. You think the police would mess with 50 armed men in a state fair with thousands of people and witnesses? I doubt it. Not unless they want a bloodbath and i'm very sure they won't go that far. Or again not with so many people and witnesses in close proximity. They would know as soon as a single shot is fired, they will have 49 others, most of whom would open fire. Noo I can't see them trying it, corrupt as many of them are

That could work, or backfire. I prefer to go about our "war" with the gun grabbers the same way they've been waging it for decades.....one little bit at a time. Picking off the fringes and then looking at the newly frayed edges.

With the potential for violence in the scenario you present, it would be far too easy to win the battle and lose the entire war. Far better to lose all the battles and win the war. Look at the TET offensive in Vietnam.......at almost every location the attacking forces were severely trounced.....yet through propaganda and political pressure.....things turned around and in the end, N Vietnam and its allies won the war....having won not a single major engagement.

Or look at the anti smoking campaign....a little here, a little there, and where do we find ourselves? Smoking remains legal but also so curtailed that in many jurisdictions you can't even smoke in a freakin Cigar Bar. All through a long term campaign of a little here and a little there.....just like the grabbers.

At this point, the grabbers and their ilk have had free reign within our schools, colleges, etc. for so long that there are large numbers of people who are simply all too happy to work on the machines and let government take care of them. We won't gain their support in large sweeping changes back to constitutional gun laws. And I fear that without changing some of those minds, we may well find ourselves in the minority. America is no longer an agrarian culture with 75% of the population living in rural environments....we are an urban culture with 75% of the population living in large cities and totally dependent upon government for their preservation.

Thankfully, it takes a very large majority to push through a Constitutional amendment.....say thank you Founding Fathers...... so we still have some measure of safety from the potential of ammending the 2nd amendment out of existence.

We must remain vigilant against new encroachments while simultaneously pushing back upon the encroachments allready made.
 

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
That could work, or backfire. I prefer to go about our "war" with the gun grabbers the same way they've been waging it for decades.....one little bit at a time. Picking off the fringes and then looking at the newly frayed edges.

With the potential for violence in the scenario you present, it would be far too easy to win the battle and lose the entire war.

If the Founding Fathers worried about that, we might still be part of Britain. We should never wish or seek war, but if it is thrust on us by others, we can and should find for our freedom. But I really don't think the Oregon State Fair is where the first shots to the second American Revolution will take place. Fact if you have a Constitutionally guaranteed right and all reasonable steps should be taken to ensure that right is not infringed upon. You as a citizen are what the founding fathers knew as the militia.
 
Top