TexasCHLforum.com

Folks,

Just Got a reponse back from the DPS about the complaint I filed:

<SNIP>, thanks for the information. Currently we are working a massive
case on Platinum Security. We will add these issues to our list.

Douglas Whitworth, Sergeant
Texas DPS

-----Original Message-----
To: PSB_DallasComplaint
Subject: Platinum ESI at State Fair of Texas

Since Penal Code 30.06 has been modified to prevent premises owned or
leased by government entities from denying entry to CHL holders, carry
to the State Fair (situated in a high crime area) has been common.
Until now, a discreet display to the gate attendant/screener was
sufficient to either be admitted or quietly escorted to the posted
police officer to verify the credentials. Though exceeding the
Government Code (Sec. 411.205) many CHL bearers (myself included) have
conceded to display or credentials as it has been discreet and no
personal information was divulged.

This year the Platinum ESI personnel will, when presented with the
credentials, single out the bearer and take them aside. They are then
subjected to scrutiny by a "supervisor" and personally identifiable
information including name, address and DOB are collected on a Steno
pad. When asked, the gate personnel could not account for what happens
to the information after this step. Refusal to disclose this
information will (and has) result in an embarrassing "conference" with
other supervisors. These "meetings" in front of the public are riddled
with open disdain for the CHL bearer and ultimately entry is denied
unless the information is submitted. Further attempts to garner
assurances of the security and/or destruction of the gathered
information has resulted in evasive and discourteous treatment. Further
any assurances as to the security, dissemination and destruction of this
information has been refused.

My complaint has three main tenants:

1) This singling out and removal from line of a CHL bearer exposes one
as being armed and violates the letter and intent of the law concerning
concealed carry of weapons.

2) The gathering and storage of of private information on CHL bearers
far exceeds any possible authority for the display of credentials and
privacy protection afforded CHL bearers. (GC 411.205 and 411.192).

3) With no clear assurance or accountability, the potential for
harassment or identity theft is massive if the information gathered thus
far is not securely destroyed and as a result is improperly disseminated
and/or "stolen".

I respectfully ask that your office investigate, censure or take
appropriate action to prevent further abuses and to insure the
destruction of private information they have already gathered.

Thank You,
Name Removed

I think the DPS response is echoing their policy on what information is considered publicly available. I.E. the number of chl holders, distribution (# per county) and demographics (gender, age brackets). I don't think it means they can gather information FROM CHL holders nor should they have access to information that is identifiable.

I wonder what it would cost for us to collectively retain an attorney and make this a huge stink naming the State Fair of Texas Association, City of Dallas Parks and Recreatiion Department, DPD and Platinum Security (and maybe DPS for not enforcing the regulations concerning CHL carry and information gathering) as co-defendants.

I know for a fact that Dallas, can not absorb another hit from a law suit, they would either have to fight it or capitulate. The threat of negative publicity to all other parties should be enough to force them to rethink their "legal" opinion.

The mention of small groups getting their rights honored on this thread is true but common to each one was a loud noise. I think the TV crew idea was a good one as well.

I don't have a lot of money but I could throw in a couple of hundred...time 3-400 CHL holders is a 60K retainer...ought to be pretty attractive. I don't know where to look for the right kind of attorney, perhaps Charles or someone who has at least some organizational skills can sniff this out.

ELB wrote:<SNIP>
This is very interesting (aside from upsetting). As I recall, the state fair used to actually do this, and was forced to change their policy after some protest and pointing out the parts of the law that forbid governments banning CHL carry (with certain exceptions), due to the fact that the fairground is government property. <SNIP>

Exactly! They know they are skirting the law here. It is obvious that if they could ban concealed carry outright, they would. They are hiding behind this "private entity" nonsense, and the lawyers facilitated it with their decision. They are either a private facility or not. If they were so sure of their position they wouldn't have compromised on the LEOs being the one to take information. If they were truly a "private" entity they would post 30.06, leave the screeners in place and be done with it. This is a form of harassment to discourage CCW, plain and simple.

I am afraid that without legislation or a court decision we are at an em passe. If we can somehow rally all chl holders to not attend and communicate to the fair why the numbers have been impacted, maybe they would re-consider. Come Monday, I will be writing or otherwise communicating with Chief Kunkle to ensure he is aware his ODOs at the fair are being compelled to collect personal information from CHLs and no other class of entrant.

Getting a list of vendors is a good idea as well. Does anyone know how we might go about this?

I'm done with the fair, at least until they change policy and I will be writing everyone I can think of. Carpal tunnel, here I come.

Added in Edit: I will be interested in seeing how the senators and DPS PSB people respond. Monday dawn's a new day.

srothstein wrote:

Commander wrote:So using that logic, the Cinemark Theater where I went last weekend can start demanding my CHL and recording my information; the restaurant where I ate that night can start doing the same....they're both "private property"

Yes, they both can do so right now and you would have the same option there as at the state fair. Say no and leave the property or comply. There is no law forbidding their doing so, and being real private property (as opposed to the state fair being on government owned property), they have an even stronger claim on what they can do by policy.

A private property owner can post, under authority of PC 30.06. IF it is discovered I am carrying in violation of PC 30.06 I can be charged with criminal trespass. They can also, as a private property owner deny me entry or compel me to leave for any reason. There are some limitations based on protected classes for property owners that otherwise allow public access. CHL is not a protected class.

Even the law follows logic to some extent. The law narrowly defines who, and under what circumstances a credential can be demanded, anything else exceeds the authority of that law . Now at my house I can say explicitly who can enter and under what circumstances. If I otherwise allow public access, the law allows me to post 30.06 signage, provide effective notice orally or in writing (presumably if I discover someone is carrying against my policy) but it does not authorize me to force a public declaration of my CHL status or whether or not I am armed. If I make a policy forbidding all weapons, then I would as a matter of course set up controlled entrance.

Access to public (government owned) facilities is just that, public. The law (Yes PC 30.06) defines that a CHL holder cannot be denied entry to a premise owned or leased by a government entity. Adding policies that predicate my entry to that property supersedes the authority of law. The collection, retention and dissemination of private information on CHL holders is again, narrowly defined. The DPS is the only agency authorized to collect this information and except for a few exceptions must protect the privacy of that information.

There is an obvious fallacy in the logic of the people who claim that they will only show their CHL to a police officer. The State Fair is the perfect example of why. They cannot post 30.06, but can bar anyone not licensed from entering while armed and are using metal detectors. They do not need to haev peace officers at every gate (I know they do, but there is no requirement for it). The security guards could legally and properly deny you entry for refusing to show them you CHL.

Can you cite the relevant law please, I have failed to find it. What I have found is that in the case of amusement parks, they are either posted and/or have all entrances controlled by metal detectors and have law enforcement officers on location. If they are posted they have to have controlled entry, but if they have controlled entry it serves as effective notice under PC 30.06(a previous AG opinion I believe).

The security guards at the fair have no authority (and I've worked similar positions) to deny entry beyond what the law allows. They have no authority to determine whether or not you are "legally" carrying your weapon. They do upon discovery of a weapon have the authority to involve police (which by coincidence are handy). Submission to wanding and/or display of a CHL is a concession on the part of the public. That is why private security does the wanding, as opposed to LEO, it would be unwarranted search of a person otherwise.

The collecting of information is wrong and possibly dangerous to you. As far as I can tell, it is legal as of this point in time.

I must disagree, the collection, storage use and dissemination of any private information by any organization, public or private, is closely regulated at state and federal levels. Any use of gathered personal information, including use and security of that information is to be published or is subject to audit by state and federal authorities. That is why the AG's CPD is looking into this and why I have filed complaints with senators Hutchison and Cornyn.

Further, the collection, storage and dissemination of CHL information is reserved for the DPS and is further restricted in how they use it. So specifically collecting CHL information if you are not DPS is not legal, especially if the submission of that information determines if I will be allowed access to a public property or not. They can say "We would like your information, pretty please," until they are blue in the face, but to restrict my access to a public (government owned) premise exceeds any reasonable extrapolation of their authority. Thus a complaint has been filed with the DPS PSB.

I don't like the compromise of collecting it with their word on shredding it (I don't trust them any further than they trust me - trust must work both ways). I am still in favor of a law forbidding anyone from collecting personal information off a driver's license, ID card, or CHL. It should be written in such a way as to allow you to waive your right to privacy but no one could deny you any benefit for not consenting to the collection.

The law on collection of information is pretty succinct as it is, it just needs to be honored. A couple of last thoughts, I remember before CHLs and a couple of years following, no wanders of any kind were at the gates. That demonstrates that the local gang banger doesn't worry them, just the law abiding licensed CCW.

Also as I have mentioned before, this policy forces (I don't care if it is a LEO collecting the information) a public declaration of me being armed, this can be construed a either failure to conceal or carrying in a manner intent on inciting panic.

It is Draconian and dangerous and needs to stop...now.

3dfx,

I understand your conclusion but here is my logic. The authority to demand presentation of CHL and identification credentials is narrowly defined in 411.205. Thus, predicating my entry into a publicly owned facility on the display of said credentials is "demanding" their presentation, placing conditions on the entry to public property above and beyond state law. As I have mentioned in all of my communications, conceding to the discreet display of a CHL with no subsequent information being divulged, streamlines the process and thus doesn't "rub the pretty off of me". But let's be clear, displaying a CHL to a private security person is purely my option. There is also the potential that such display of a CHL declares to anyone who cares to notice that you are armed, singling out and discussing it verbally properly ensures that declaration. Conceivably, a DA with an agenda could prosecute (albeit with difficulty) for failure to properly conceal.

It is not unreasonable for them to wand people to help keep unlicensed persons from bringing weapons on site. It is not, therefore, unreasonable for someone to need to show that they are indeed carrying legally.

Reasonableness is a mercurial standard. Is it then reasonable to post wanders at the Library? The Water Department? How about Bachman Lake Park? I know, let's post private security screeners strategically on the sidewalks...wonderful.

The only time I need to prove I am carrying legally is in compliance with state law. I.E. display of credentials to notify an arresting officer (a traffic stop is an arrest), upon discovery and challenge of my being armed by a peace officer or magistrate. It is truly no one's business if I am carrying at all much less proving to their satisfaction that I am carrying legally. My willingness to flash an ID at a gate screener at the fair is not withstanding.

The gathering of information has brought all this to a head. Regardless of my (our) previous compliance with these "policies" does not negate the fact that they exceed the law in many aspects. This needs to be shaken out.

Okay, I have cotacted every one that the AG's office suggested. Here is the body of those contacts.

To Senator Hutchison

Senator Hutchison,

My family and I typically visit the fair 2-3 times a year. Under Texas' Penal Code 30.05 and 30.06, a premises that is owned or leased by a government entity cannot deny entry to a holder of a CHL.

Also, only a magistrate or a peace officer can demand display of the CHL and ID if the bearer is armed. The State Fair of Texas and its contract security Platinum have adopted a policy this year that when a CHL bearer presents his/her credentials ( a concession by most to streamline entry) they are singled out, scrutinized by a "supervisor" and their private and identifiable information is recorded on a steno pad. Not only is this insulting to law abiding citizens (no one else is singled out or scrutinized) but they are gathering enough information to facilitate harassment if improperly disseminated and identity theft when not accounted for.

The gate "supervisor" had no idea what happened to the information once gathered. I have contacted the director's office of the state fair and Platinum security and was met with evasiveness and discourteous responses. No one would account for or assure me the security and destruction of gathered information.

As the gathering of and use of private information is regulated federally, may I beg your indulgence in your office coming to bear and stop this nefarious practice and to garner assurance that the gathered information has been securely destroyed?

To Senator Cornyn

Senator Cornyn,

I am the holder of a concealed handgun license issued by the state of Texas and have been for many years, As I am sure you are aware; in order to be awarded a CHL in Texas you have to have had an exemplary record of personal conduct and in some areas, the requirements are more demanding than those required for peace officer.

Several years ago Texas Penal Code 30.05 and 30.06 were modified to close a loop hole in which local and county governments would deny access to their facilities by CHL holders. The language reads in part, "It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035."

Also, only a magistrate or peace officer can demand that a CHL bearer display their credentials if they are armed. (Government Code 411.205).

Previously, to enter the State Fair of Texas one had to only display their credentials discreetly to the wand handler and were then either waved through or expeditiously escorted to the posted police officer to verify. Presentation of credentials under these circumstances was a concession of many CHL holdrs as it expedited entry and no personal information was compromised.

This year, the State Fair of Texas has adopted a policy of singling out CHL holders, taking them out of line and then a "supervisor" will write down a good deal of private information on a Steno pad including License numbers, address and DOB. The gate supervisor had no idea what happens to the information after its being recorded. Refusal to surrebder this information will (and has) result in an embarrassing episode of scurtiny by other supervisors, a public "dressing down" and ultimately denial of entry. Attempts to gather information as to the use, security and or destruction of this gathered private information were met with evasive and discourteous responses from both the State Fair of Texas and Platinum Security with no assurances given as to the security or destruction of the private information.

This process is humiliating to someone who has served the public their entire adult life and have earned the coveted CHL through maintaining a high standard of personal conduct. But what is a bigger concern in this matter and hopefully what your office will see the need to deal with is that; the "mandated" gathering of this information above any possible legal authority carries a massive potential for abuse of the CHL bearer and identity theft if the information is not destroyed and is improperly disseminated or "stolen".

Further, the singling out of CHL holders "outs" them to the immediate public and violates both the spirit and letter of the law for concealed carry weapons.

As the gathering and dissemination of private information is federally regulated, it is my prayer that your office will bring its authority to bear on this issue and stop the extortion of private information from your most law abiding citizens. Also, I ask that your office garner assurances of the secure destruction of the information gathered thus far.

To DPS PSB Office

Since Penal Code 30.06 has been modified to prevent premises owned or leased by government entities from denying entry to CHL holders, carry to the State Fair (situated in a high crime area) has been common. Until now, a discreet display to the gate attendant/screener was sufficient to either be admitted or quietly escorted to the posted police officer to verify the credentials. Though exceeding the Government Code (Sec. 411.205) many CHL bearers (myself included) have conceded to display or credentials as it has been discreet and no personal information was divulged.

This year the Platinum ESI personnel will, when presented with the credentials, single out the bearer and take them aside. They are then subjected to scrutiny by a "supervisor" and personally identifiable information including name, address and DOB are collected on a Steno pad. When asked, the gate personnel could not account for what happens to the information after this step. Refusal to disclose this information will (and has) result in an embarrassing "conference" with other supervisors. These "meetings" in front of the public are riddled with open disdain for the CHL bearer and ultimately entry is denied unless the information is submitted. Further attempts to garner assurances of the security and/or destruction of the gathered information has resulted in evasive and discourteous treatment. Further any assurances as to the security, dissemination and destruction of this information has been refused.

My complaint has three main tenants:

1) This singling out and removal from line of a CHL bearer exposes one as being armed and violates the letter and intent of the law concerning concealed carry of weapons.

2) The gathering and storage of of private information on CHL bearers far exceeds any possible authority for the display of credentials and privacy protection afforded CHL bearers. (GC 411.205 and 411.192).

3) With no clear assurance mor accountability, the potential for harassment or identity theft is massive if the information gathered thus far is not securely destroyed and as a result is improperly disseminated and/or "stolen".

I respectfully ask that your office investigate, censure or take appropriate action to prevent further abuses and to insure the destruction of private information they have already gathered.

Thank You,

If you would like to complain as well the email for the DPS PSB Dallas office is: PSB_DallasComplaint@txdps.state.tx.us

I guess I'm done with the fair this year, the police are now checking the "ze papers" but the offense is still going on.

Added in edit: Has anyone contacted Chief Kunkle and advised him that his ODO's are being compelled by their private security employer to gather information on CHL holders in violation of State law? He may have been insulated thus far.

The AG's office got in contact with me and basically made a split decision. They said that they have no jurisdiction on the "policies" of a local municipality or "private" entities such as the Non-Profit State Fair of Texas Association. It was their opinion I (we) need to keep working through the local government to resolve violations occurring on their property.

However they said that the possible improper use of private information was evident enough to forward to the Consumer Protection Division for investigation and that they may be contacting me to further pursue that issue.

So a mixed bag. I would have thought such a blatant violation of State Law by the City of Dallas (albeit by complicity) would have warranted a stronger response. Oh well, the city manager knows about both the email and the letter to the AG now, I sent information to the mayor's office (I could not find an email contact for Mary Suhm) and they have confirmed they have forwarded it to her office.

Gemini, any details yet?

Added in edit: J.D Wells is a member of this forum?!? Outstanding!

Also, the AG has added that I should contact Kay Bailey and John Cornyn as well as the DPS' office on private security regulation. Has anyone here already done that, if not I will...I might anyway...I'm still hot.

gemini wrote: I couldn't agree with you more. A very direct and well written letter. The attorneys that met today were DPS CHL attorney, City of Dallas attorney and attorney for the State Fair. They did come to a decision on what is required for entry into the Fair grounds. However, I do not have all the specifics at this point. I should have the specifics by tomorrow and will post them. I am very interested in the response of Greg Abbott. Believe me when I say, I understand completely your frustration in trying to get a straight answer from anyone associated with the Fair. Be it management, security, gate personnel, city council etc.

Thank you for your kind words. It was a huge step backwards and I figure if they are hit from all directions maybe it will sink in that their economics could be in danger.

I am interested in the specifics of the decision myself. I really appreciate your effort in pursuing this. I went ahead and sent Greg Abbott an email including the body of the letter, to expedite. If past experience with his office is any indicator, I would not be surprised to at least receive an email if not a phone call seeking more specifics.

Well, I've had it. I am posting the (edited) body of a certified letter going to Greg Abbott's office and an email I sent to the PR office after trying to get someone, anyone to tell me what they are doing with the information.

Letter:

October 8, 2009

To: Greg Abbott
Office of the Attorney General
PO Box 12548
Austin, TX 78711-2548

Fr: <SNIP>

Re: Collection of personal and sensitive information by State Fair of Texas employees.

Mr. Abbott,

I have had to contact your office before concerning credit practices and identity theft and have always found you and your staff responsive, courteous and committed to the protection of Texas' citizens. I have also learned that identity theft is one area in which you are extremely passionate about.
I hold a Concealed Carry Permit issued by the Department of Public Safety and my family and I typically make at least three trips to the State Fair of Texas located on the Fair Park property owned by the city of Dallas' Parks and Recreation Department. Carry of concealed weapons has been permitted there since Penal Code Section 30.06 (Criminal Trespass by a License Holder) has included language reading in part, “It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.”
Initially, as a CHL holder, I was singled out and even harassed by gate personnel and security supervisors. They would collect personally identifiable information on a form before permitting entry and often vocalized their disdain for licensed carry of weapons for self defense. I had filed a formal complaint with the fair's director and had contacted my attorney. The next year however the policy had changed and all that was “required” was display of the license to the wand handler and they would either wave you on by or escort you to the gate's posted officer to verify the license. Though the Government Code clearly states that only a magistrate or peace officer can demand display of the license if you are armed (Sec. 411.205); streamlining the entry process motivated me to allow the personnel to view the license.
This year, myself and several other licensees that I am acquainted with have been subjected to being taken aside, questioned about our licenses and have had detailed information recorded on yellow steno pads by minimally trained gate personnel. This information includes name, address, DOB, license number and phone number. If this information is refused, entry will be denied.
Attempts by me to gain information about the collection, storage and securing of this information has been met with evasiveness and discourteous by both the director's office and the security company. The gate personnel have no idea what happens to the information they record.
I am sure you are aware that CHL bearers have to maintain exemplary standards of personal conduct. As one who has spent their entire adult life in public service, first as a soldier and then as a firefighter, I find this harassment invasive and humiliating. What is more important and the reason I am contacting your office is that personal and confidential information is being “extorted” in order to prevent public embarrassment of a licensee and/or their family. It is being demanded beyond any possible legal authority and those that are gathering this information refuse to account for its use and storage. The potential for dissemination to those that would pursue and harass CHL holders as well as the ease of access by identity thieves is overwhelming.
Mr. Abbott, it is my prayer that your office can look into this matter and:

1)Compel the director of the State Fair of Texas, the security contractor and/or the City of Dallas to account for every piece of identifiable information collected on CHL holders and insure its secure destruction.
2)Take action that will stop the public harassment and humiliation of law abiding citizens simply because they posses a CHL and wish to access public property.
Thank you so much for your kind attention to this matter. You may contact me via my mailing address, my home phone number...<SNIP>

Sincerely,
CC:
<SNIP>, Attorney
Mary Suhm, City Manager, City of Dallas
Director's Office, The State Fair of Texas

Email:

Please note that as a holder of a concealed handgun license, I have had to maintain exemplary standards of personal conduct. Also I have served my entire adult life as a soldier or a fire and rescue officer. The singling out of CHL holders for the removal to the side of the line and the gathering of personal and identifiable information is both an insult to one who is held to a higher standard of legal responsibility and illegal.

The State of Texas' Government Code Section Sec. 411.192 makes it clear that the Department of Public Safety (the state agency responsible for the issuance of CHLs and enforcement of the regulations pertaining to the carrying of concealed weapons) is required to maintain absolute confidentiality of records with few exceptions.

Also, it is illegal for access by a CHL holder to be denied to any facility owned or leased by a government entity, again with few and specific exceptions (Penal Code 30.06). There is no exception made in the statutes excepting a so-called "private" company that is utilizing facilities that are owned by a government entity. The State Fair Park, its buildings and facities are owned by the Parks and Recreation Department of the City of Dallas.

It is illegal for any local government (or those operating under the auspices of a local government) to impose regulations or codes that supersede those of the State of Texas.

The only persons with legal authority to demand display of the CHL and identification is a peace officer or magistrate and that is only when the bearer has the weapon on or about their person (Government Code Sec. 411.205). However, in the interest of streamlining entry and to prevent possible panic by gate personnel, I personally have no problem displaying my CHL and if the need is felt, being escorted to a police officer for verification. This is my concession and in no way able to be legally required by the operators of the State Fair.

Your personnel and by association the security contractors have adopted a policy of removing anyone from the line that presents a CHL and subjecting them to scrutiny by "supervisors" and forcing the choice of surrendering personally identifiable and confidential information to be recorded or denial of entry in violation of state law. Further, any attempts by me and other CHL holders to account for the storage, security and use of this sensitive information has been met with evasion and discourteous response on by those in the director's office and Platinum security.

Not only have you partaken in the illegal extraction of personal information, but your organization refuses to make any assurances that the information is secure and or destroyed after its undefined use. Not only have you been exposed to criminal liability but you have exposed your organization and the City of Dallas to massive civil liability should any of this information be disseminated without express permission of the CHL holder(s) or its misuse results in any incident of identity theft.


A certified letter has been sent to the Greg Abbott, Texas Attorney General as well as copies of that letter and this email being sent to my attorney and the City Manager's office. A follow-up letter will be forthcoming to the director's office as well.

<Signature>

CC:
<SNIP>, Attorney
Mary Suhm, City Manager - Dallas, Texas

Other letters are going out tomorrow.

gemini wrote:
Yes Sir, it was one of the gates off Fitzhugh....I guess. It was close to where the old trains are parked.

Hmmmm...I wonder if there is a common thread there. As Arte johnson used to say, "Veeeeeerrrrry Interesting, but stoopit."

I would not venture into that area of town without. Daytime, night time....anytime.

Agreed, the only time I really thought I was going to have trouble and have to use my CCW was down there.

Did they ever respond to your certified letter? I wonder who actually signed for it?

I had included my email addy as a means of contact and received a relatively generic "Thank you for contacting us..." and "we are sorry for any inconvenience, hope your future dealings with the fair are pleasant" kinda tripe. I wish I could recall who signed for it, but I would suspect a receptionist or similar member of their staff.

Interesting thread. I've carried out there for years...particulars and legality of all those years will not be explored. There was one particular year where I had some problems that escalated to the point where I wrote a certified letter and cc'd the city manager, an attorney and a consumer advocate. I am not saying that one letter had anything to do with it but the next year the supervisor in the golf cart went away.

I have been once this year and I had the CHL out when I was wanded and tried to show it to her, she glanced at it asked if I was an officer and said, "I don't need to know where you live." grinned and said have a nice day.

I would ask one question, which gate did you enter? It seemed even when the supervisor was running around in those days I would encounter delays and trouble from idiots if I:

1) Arrived later in the day, and...
2) Entered at one of the gates off Fitzhugh or Haskell...sooo...

I will be going again tomorrow, arriving around 9:30 and entering off Robert B Cullum by the museums or Music Hall. After all of the runs I have answered in that area though, the one thing I won't do is go unarmed.

BTW, as an aside, when CHL's first started going to the fair, violent attacks plunged. Then they started denying CHL's entry and they had two consecutive years of shootings on the grounds. Only an agenda can blind you to the implications.