Clermont County Sheriff encourages fair to **violate law**

[pk47]

Congrats! Well done.

I saw in the photos they have another sign that says "No patches or colors allowed on premises" - to what does that refer? I can't have a jacket or a hat with a patch on it??

They apparently have trouble with motorcycle gang members at non-Fair times, some open carrying.

I mentioned (in a P.S.) that it probably wouldn't withstand a First Amendment challenge, but I've got enough RKBA battles to fight, so unless the two subjects intersect more deeply, I've done my part by mentioning it. Reality is reality.

You know, one has to avoid having one's wife terminate his existence because one spends too much time on gun matters!

Thanks, I see what they were trying to do. First time I've heard of or seen a sign like that. I wonder if it would survive a challenge as well.

[Brian D.]

Signs prohibiting colors, patches, etc. are not uncommon at privately owned bars and such. But seeing them on government property... that's a new one for me.

[schmieg]

Signs prohibiting colors, patches, etc. are not uncommon at privately owned bars and such. But seeing them on government property... that's a new one for me.

My guess is that there is some intelligence indicating that a couple of rival biker gangs are or were intending to attend the fair at the same time and the sheriff took proactive measures. Maybe not the correct ones though.

[Chuck]

Great job!
Love the video!
Kudos to all!

Did anybody get to keep the sign as a souvenir ?

[techguy85]

This is what I get when I don't read the forum regularly enough. I've been having such a bad few months that I might have gone there to see if they would arrest a legally blind man open carrying.

[3FULLMAGS+1]

Bet Mr Schmidt couldn't wait for the day to be over.

Having to cut that sign off of the fence that they probably just put up was priceless.

The sheriff should of been made to stand there with him while he did it.

Good job to all involved !

Who puts metal signs up with Zip Ties!

Seems to indicate that they didn't intend for the ban to be permanent.

Zip ties to me say it was a recent and or last minute decision, but, ya, that too !

[3FULLMAGS+1]

Great job!
Love the video!
Kudos to all!

Did anybody get to keep the sign as a souvenir ?

Not that it's a GOOD thing, but , unfortunately, there are plenty more "souvenirs" out there to be had.

[BB62]

Two weeks ago, I didn't post the remainder of my communications because things were getting hot and heavy, I expected Ohio Gun Owners to enter the picture (because the deadline had passed), and I was getting ready for vacation.

I will do so now in subsequent posts.

So, to follow along, here is a link to an e-mail I sent in the early morning hours of Thursday, 7/25/19: viewtopic.php?f=27&t=93487&start=15#p4400742" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BB62]

At 8:53 AM, Thursday, July 25, 2019, I received the following e-mail (some contact/addressee info was removed for posting purposes) from the Chief Deputy (second in command) of the Clermont County Sheriff's Department, to which I responded with my thanks and a request that he update me if the position of his department changed:

Mr. Smith,

We have not corresponded, however after reading the exchange of emails which Captain Kamphaus has sent me, I felt compelled to forward to you a copy of my directive. I sent the below to all deputy sheriff’s employed by our Office.



Chris Stratton
Chief Deputy
Clermont County Sheriff’s Office
4470 SR 222
Batavia Ohio 45103


From: Stratton, Christopher
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2019 10:21 AM
To: DEPUTY-SHERIFF
Subject: Firearms

The below issue related to the Open Carry / possession of firearms at the Fair is currently under review by the Clermont County Prosecutor’s Office.

Until further notice, this Office is not enforcing Fair Board regulations related to open carry: ie; trespassing as discussed below.

If a written directive is obtained from the Prosecutor’s Office which contradicts my directive, I will advise all immediately.

If anyone working the Fair encounters an issue related to open carry, please contact Captain Kamphaus.

Do not hesitate to contact me directly if this needs additional clarification.




Chris Stratton
Chief Deputy
Clermont County Sheriff’s Office
4470 SR 222
Batavia Ohio 45103





From: Kamphaus, Paul
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2019 12:50 PM
To: DEPUTY-SHERIFF
Subject: Firearms

The Clermont County Fair Board has posted signs and published a restriction against firearms at the fairgrounds this year. The gates have been told to not sell tickets to anyone that walks up and is clearly carrying a firearm. They have determined that if it is brought to a Board Member that an individual is in possession of a firearm they will contact a deputy and put that person on notice that it is private property and their policy and ask them to leave. That individual will be escorted from the property. The Fair Board is our complainant for a criminal trespass complaint in case that individual refuses to leave. We will take a report and consider filing charges depending on the behavior of the individual. If you encounter someone with a firearm, notify a Board Member.

An individual has made it known that it is his intention to challenge the Board’s ability to restrict his right to carry a firearm on that property. Be aware, be safe and remain professional.


Captain Paul Kamphaus
Clermont County Sheriff’s Office
4470 SR 222
Batavia, Ohio 45103

[BB62]

In the morning of Thursday, July 25, 2019, I received this from Paul Schmid, Fair Board member and attorney:

Mr. Smith:
There are so many points to address in your e-mails that it would be difficult to treat them all, particularly during this extremely busy week. I myself am working 19-hour shifts at the fairgrounds, personally supervising a staff of 18 careful and fair employees and minding the business of this organization and can only devote spare time to this dialogue at the moment.

Nevertheless, your communication raises points that I think ought to be responded to vigorously and in short order. As I stated previously, my primary and good-faith interest here, on behalf of my committee, is to create predictability in our interaction with law enforcement and the safest practical environment here for our visitors. My secondary interest is to defend myself personally, and in passing to defend the conduct of the Clermont County Sheriff and the Clermont County Prosecutor’s Office, who, despite your claims, have in my opinion conducted themselves with integrity and respect not only for the rule of law, but for you personally and your rights in particular. The disparagement and aspersions you cast on them are beneath you.

The disparagement and aspersions you have cast on me are in another category. In my opinion they are tantamount to libel, impinging as they do on my professional integrity and my conduct as a member in good standing of the Ohio bar. I insist that you retract these statements. You have published without justification or prior notice to important third parties, that I “seem willing to take part in law breaking for convenience.” I am not. You assert that I “engage in our countenance subterfuge, unlawful activity and/or threats of police action.” I do not. These writings are reckless, false, defamatory, and damaging to my personal and professional reputation. I protest.

I understand your reluctance to specifically address my questions about your intentions, but I do want you to be informed as to the state of our policy and the potential consequences that may occur in this uncertain environment, particularly with respect to specific clauses of applicable law, on whose interpretation we strongly differ, to wit:

You have made multiple references to the phrase “public property,” citing as authority ORC 5709.10. Your understanding of that statute is in error. The phrase you cite modifies not “property used as a county fairgrounds,” but rather solely “property of housing authorities.” Considering that the taxation structure of “public housing” could be easily misconstrued, an affirmative declaration of its nature as public property is specifically carved out to foreclose ambiguity. Other constituent property types included in the statute—e.g. “multi-level parking structures”—are obviously not “regularly leased” (as are public housing units). No reasonable reading supports applying the instant “public property” language of this statute to our fairgrounds. Regardless, the notion that “public property” cannot be trespassed upon with respect to the carrying of weapons is also profoundly incorrect—I sincerely hope you have not been advised to the contrary by any self-respecting lawyer. Both President Trump and Governor DeWine live in public properties: I doubt you’d attempt to carry at the White House or in the Governor’s Residence.

Out of clear blue July air, you seem to have created a novel legal concept vaguely linking the mere existence of “public property” to some mystical prohibition as to the posting of signs thereon. There is no such relationship or concept in law.
You postscript asserting that our “no colors rule” is a violation of the First Amendment. Without stipulating to any of your assertions, I will merely comment that time/manner/place restrictions on speech and restrictions on speech directly inciting violence are the basic stuff of first year law students nationwide. Your assertion is in error.

You have called on me to recognize that law and precedent are to be “worked with”: with respect, that is precisely what I am doing in these very communications with you and our authorities.

The claims you have made with respect to the Clermont County Agricultural Society’s status as a “public subdivision,” citing Justice Resnick’s opinion in Liming and its progeny are anything but “impeccable.” To peck at one detail, the two arms of the case seem to me to be at distinct cross-purposes as far as your argument is concerned. Assuming, for the narrow purpose of determining tort liability in the prosecution of government action, that agricultural societies (obviously including Greene but also probably including Clermont (although I emphatically do not stipulate to that point)), are governmental subdivisions, you have failed to follow the rest of the argument to its logical conclusion: if we are in fact a governmental subdivision for this much broader purpose, and we then properly act pursuant to our “governmental function,” then we enjoy sovereign immunity from tort liability. It is unlikely that you can have the cake of our being a political subdivision, and then eat away our immunity as well, at least on a reasonably clear matter of obvious visitor safety. Excluding a perceived weapons danger from a location crowded with heavy animals and small children would, we feel, easily pass Justice Resnick’s balancing tests in Liming and in other far more recent and authoritative statute and case law. And of course if we are not in fact a political subdivision but a private property owner, then ORC 2923.136(C)(3)(a) plainly controls. That point is, as you say, impeccable.

With respect to the preemption statutes, I personally find them stupid, pernicious, potentially malicious, and deeply un-American. The reversal of the “American Rule” which has informed American jurisprudence since time immemorial in these cases shifts the burden of responsible prosecution and testing of the law from a good-faith stance into a state that can only be described as moral hazard. The only beneficiaries are the most jaded members of the trial bar and judgment-proof pro se nuisance litigators who overburden the public with frivolous complaints and synthetic legal tests. I feel this does real damage to American and international common law and that these statutes should be done away with. I place a primary fault for this law on some members of our southwest Ohio delegation who have pushed for these measures. As you know I have treated of my concerns with the changing language of that statute earlier.
There is an interesting irony in all this: the very lawmakers who are responsible for these rules and policies are themselves frequent visitors to the fairgrounds. At a fair that has operated for 170 years the Republican Party and Democratic Party booths, in full electioneering mode, find themselves separated only by the historical society booth, presumably there to keep the peace between them. Our state delegation, of whom several in this jurisdiction are key advocates for provisions like ORC 9.68, and many candidates who wish to be part of that delegation, are literally on the grounds as we write. The fair and the fairgrounds are the deep-fryer of American democracy and the appropriate handling of these matters on our grounds is extremely important to us.

We appreciate you informing us of your intentions and would welcome additional details if you are willing to tell us, especially with respect to buildings you intend to enter. Our position at Clermont County Agricultural Society is one of respect for people legitimately trying to correct and improve our county, state, and country. I myself am personally a strong advocate for Second Amendment rights. In service of that position, it is our current policy, on the basis of multiple legal theories, and in the service of multiple prudential considerations, that open carry of firearms is specifically proscribed on our fairgrounds during the week of the Clermont County Fair. You test that theory in your discretion and at your legal risk. If you choose to do so, I am committed to keeping communication with you courteous and open and to working with you to make your protest as safe as it may be.

Very Cordially,
Paul Schmid, Gates Committee Chairman, CCAS
Paul A. Schmid, Esq.
attorney & counselor at law

[BB62]

After a careful assessment of the various representations and threats made by Mr. Schmid (which one should always do), I chose to ignore them and responded to the above note at ~2PM on Thursday, July 25, 2019:

Mr. Schmid,

I’ll see you tomorrow, Friday, July 26, 2019 at 11:30 AM.

In the meanwhile, you may want to look at page 118 of the attached PDF, the electronic version of the physical Clermont County Fair booklet which I picked up Sunday at the Fair. Note that the list has two parts, an unlabeled portion and one titled “Independent Agricultural Fairs”.

Then, as I did, call the Ohio Department of Agriculture, which, as stated below the listings, distributes them. Ask what the difference is between the two lists. No doubt you will be told what I was told: that the non “independent” Fairs are political subdivisions. Gee, what a surprise! (NOT)

Here is the same list, in a somewhat different format, directly from the Ohio Department of Agriculture’s website: https://agri.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/od ... s-brochure" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Cordially,

BB62

[BB62]

This Ohio Gun Owners Action Alert went out early Thursday morning:

Action ALERT: Gun Owners in Clermont County Need Our Help TODAY!

It’s no secret that Ohio has a terrible “preemption” statute.

Ohio’s preemption statute, ORC 9.68, is the statute that supposedly prevents local cities, counties or any “political subdivision” from creating their own gun-control laws, but it is terribly weak!

It is so weak, in fact, that anti-gun county officials down at the Clermont County Fair have decided to violate it and hang illegal signs at their entrances telling gun owners to disarm and notifying criminals that they’re “open for business” to violent crime:

(picture of signage)

As every gun owner knows, gun-free zones are where the majority of America’s deadly mass-killing tragedies happen, because only good people like you and me obey the law.

Even though they fully know this, the Clermont County Fair Board, the Clermont County Sheriff’s office, the Clermont County Prosecutor and the Clermont County Commissioners are willfully participating in the violation of state law in order to enforce their anti-gun agenda that defacto empowers violent criminals!

Jeff Smith, a longtime activist for gun rights in Ohio, is leading the effort to have these dangerous and illegal signs removed and has completed a very thorough write-up about the details here.

But he needs your help, and it will only take a minute of your time!

We are asking gun owners from across Ohio to send a pre-written email to these jokers and put them on notice: pull down your illegal signs, or get sued into oblivion if some criminal goes on a shooting spree!

To send your email, please click HERE or click the image below.

Please help gun owners in Clermont County right away!


Alert link: https://www.ohiogunowners.org/action-al ... elp-today/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;




One of the County Commissioners responded to me and all others at 2:52 PM on Thursday, July 25, 2019:

Team,

I have received numerous e-mails today concerning the signs at the entrances of the Clermont County Fair (It is illegal to carry a firearm, deadly weapon, or dangerous ordinance on these premises). I have spoken with Sheriff Leahy and members of the Fair Board in an effort to resolve the volley of comments, questions, and clarifications surrounding our citizens 2nd Amendment rights and privileges. Although I am not a lawyer and I am not about to provide a legal opinion concerning these signs, I do believe that these sign restrict the rights of our citizens to open carry. I would respectfully request that these signs be removed and the issue resolved at the earliest convenience.

I respect each one of you and all of your comments. Your passion for this issue is commendable.

Sincerely,

Commissioner Painter

[BB62]

The above note caused a distinct change in tone from Mr. Schmid:

Commissioner Painter—

Your intervention, and that of our other county executives would be very welcome here. Needless to say, the risk of a civil rights infringement here is balanced by the important management concerns of our organization and the community partnerships we depend on for support, including our county law enforcement and prosecutor. As a party that holds a statutory future interest in our property, the commission ultimately is the most critical partnership we have and our ultimate backstop, and we take your concerns seriously.

I will take this advice to the board on behalf of the Gates Committee and recommend its adoption.

Very Cordially,
Paul Schmid, Gates Committee Chairman, CCAS
Paul A. Schmid, Esq.

[BB62]

In the meanwhile, there was the following back and forth between me and Mr. Schmid:

Mr. Smith—

Thanks for this information. Just to clarify respecting your entry: are you intending to purchase a ticket to enter the fairgrounds as you arrive? And if you’re willing to say, will you be entering by car or on foot? And again if you’re willing, which gate would you prefer to enter?

Very Cordially,
Paul Schmid, Gates Committee Chairman, CCAS
Paul A. Schmid, Esq.
attorney & counselor at law


My response:

Mr. Schmid,

I’m not that familiar with the area around the fair with respect to the parking availability situation. It’s my understanding that the entrance fee is $10, however I prefer free if it’s available.

On Sunday I came in at the entrance at Western & Plum, but I did so because my friend lives in from Clermont County and is familiar with the area. This time, I’ll try the same entrance, but again, I’m not familiar with the surroundings otherwise.

Now, on the off chance you’re asking in an adversarial manner, here’s some more reading material…

In response to the potential assertion that admission can be denied because there’s an entry fee, you may want to read Ohio Attorney General opinion # 2005-015: https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/get ... 5-015.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, on page 16 of the Ohio Attorney General’s Concealed Carry booklet, you’ll find the following “Ohio’s concealed carry laws do not regulate “open” carry of firearms. If you openly carry, use caution. The open carry of firearms is a legal activity in Ohio.”

AG’s CCW booklet link: https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Fil ... ws-Manual-(PDF" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)



Cordially,


BB62

[BB62]

Mr. Schmid's response:

Mr. Smith:

Thank you for the citations.

I am asking for planning purposes, clarity and, more specifically so that I do not inadvertently alter the unstated background facts on which the legal status of your action and our response may hinge. In short, I am asking as a courtesy to you.

As you are aware, the legal rights and responsibilities of citizens with respect to carrying guns in cars is very different than those governing pedestrians—hence my question about the vehicle. Your behavior inside a vehicle inside the grounds with respect to unlocking (or not), opening (or not) and/or transporting (or not) a gun case or other safety apparatus exists under its own legal framework, and for their safety law enforcement should be aware of which laws you intend to challenge and those which you don’t.

With respect to the ticket, the laws governing trespass, the potential agency liability of my employees, respondeat superior, and the legal framework afforded to invitees, and/or social guests with respect to premises liability are also implicated. I’d like to insulate as far as possible employees and other third parties who might be accidentally drawn into the situation. A little predictability will go a long way in service of that goal—hence I’d be glad of any details you’d care to provide.

Very Cordially,
Paul Schmid, Gates Committee Chairman, CCAS
Paul A. Schmid, Esq.
attorney & counselor at law