I have recently had to make a decision at a chess tournament which I feel was the correct decision but would like to see how the USCF, and others, would respond to this decision.
A man I know wanted to have a gun present at a chess tournament for his protection citing Open Carry laws. Focusing only on this aspect, and not on the stuff that led up to this man feeling this was necessary (it wasn’t), here is the reasoning I used in denying him entry into my events:
(1) The USCF rules book says players cannot have an aid to playing the game. Aids include taking notes, electronic devices, and all manner of other things we all often discuss.
(2) A gun can be an intimidating presence to other players, especially those who are not gun enthusiasts.
(3) Thus, this can give a psychological advantage over your opponent.
(4) Therefore, as a TD, I ruled that this was unacceptable and I denied him entry.
I believe this was the right course of action completely, against this individual. But, I’d like to see if anyone else has run into this sort of thing or not?
UPDATE: Leaving the gun in his car was not an option to him. So separating him from the gun was indeed covered as a possible course of action but he would not allow this outcome to occur.
Making an assumption that google is correct (not guaranteed), you reasoning might not have stood up:
May carry openly without permit/license.
KRS § 237.110, which governs the issue of permits, also lists places where concealed carry is prohibited
KRS § 237.110 (17) authorizes private businesses to prohibit concealed carry on their premises (not open carry).
However, “facilities renting or leasing housing” are specifically prohibited from restricting concealed carry.
An interesting method used may have been:
not taking entry from the player (ethics clause 5.a with a rule that players may not carry weapons - though you then have to worry about ethics clause 5.h being cited against the organizer) (or 20G since the presence of a gun would be a constant distraction to some players)
prohibiting the armed player as a spectator if there were any objections (rule 20M1)
I haven’t done a survey of all state laws, but I don’t know of any states that have passed statutes that would prevent a landowner or lessee from excluding a person with a gun from the landowner/lessee’s private property. The right to exclude people from your property is simply one of your basic rights as a landowner. You don’t even have to have a reason.
The only exceptions arise from anti-discrimination statutes like the 1964 Civil Rights Act that bars discrimination in places of public accommodation based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
Open carry laws and concealed weapons permits usually address carrying a gun in a public place. They don’t apply on someone else’s private property. People do not have a right to be in your house, your business, or your club without your permission. The fact that they are carrying a gun does not change that.
But I am not a Kentucky lawyer, and Kentucky law might have some unusual statute, so you would have to check with a Kentucky lawyer, or a lawyer in your state, to know.
Several approaches are possible to avoid problems in the future:
Make it part of your publicity that guns will not be permitted in the playing area. You can cite 20G or Players’ Responsibilities on page 245 of the Rulebook concerning competing “in a spirit of good sportsmanship.”
This individual will very likely seem intimidating to other players. You could make an announcement before the tournament begins that any player who does not want to play this individual could sign a list to avoid playing him. His board will be placed well away from the other players. If no player is available for him to play, he will receive 0 point bye for that round. Giving him 1/2 point or full point byes for these unplayed games would be unfair to the other players as it would likely significantly affect the apportionment of prizes.
Contact your local police or district attorney concerning the law governing individuals who have concealed carry permits. They may have suggestions for alternatives to use which would make all of your tournaments safe for all players. There may be local limits and regulations governing this individual’s right. Allowing one player to impose his will, political beliefs, or whatever “rights” he think he has at the expense of others is unfair to other players and not conducive to the TD carrying out his own responsibility to provide proper conditions for all players. The TD responsibilities and discretion do not list how to deal with individuals with guns. A fair reading of this is that the organizer/TD have a responsibility to provide a safe environment.
If many players object to the presence of this individual and the atmosphere that is created, you may end up cancelling the event and returning the entry fees of the players. This is a worst case scenario to be avoided if possible.
This might sound silly, but I knew a TD who used to carry a gun to tournaments. Whenever anyone had a dispute about the rules, he would casually display his weapon. There were very few incidents at his tournaments as players were aware that he was “packing.” I am sure you do not want to carry a weapon as a deterrent.
If the law runs to this player’s side, and you as a TD object to being a part of the event, then the organizer will have to get another TD. If no TDs are available, then there will be no chess tournament. The gun nuts win another round. Hurray for the 2nd Amendment! (sarcasm) I don’t think there is case law that gives such wide an interpretation to the 2nd Amendment. There are always some limitations for the expression of this “right.” My own inclination is to not permit him to play; allow him to appeal, a process that could take months to resolve; accept the consequences of not permitting him to play. If he wins and you are punished for doing the right thing, then a great lesson has been learned.
As a Kentuckian I can tell you that property owners in our state have the ability to prohibit open or concealed carry on their own property. The open carry provision is strange in that while arguably you cannot prohibit it outright (that is not at all clear - the statues are basically silent on it) you can tell an open carry person to leave once they are on the premises. But there are plenty of businesses here with signs on the door indicating the carrying of any weapon is prohibited on the premises.
Open carry cannot be prohibited in publicly owned outdoor spaces, while concealed carry requires a permit. So one can walk down the street openly carrying any legal weapon here.
tough situation. as much as i respect a person’s right to bear arms, i would have to think it would have some psychological impact on an opponent. would have ruled as you did.
A while ago I advocated (and still do) a USCF designation of family friendly for tournaments. This would mean that rounds would complete prior to a specified time, dress, language and conduct codes would be strict and be enforced, the event would be no smoking, and alcohol free, and now I guess we can add firearms free.
While laws certainly vary, it is my understanding that practically everywhere it is more permissible to openly carry a weapon than have it concealed. It seems odd at first as someone who is visible carrying a weapon is more intimidating than one who is not. In the case of the tournament if nobody knew he had a gun than he’s not as intimidating as the guy who sits at the board with a gun on his hip. In actual reality, of course, someone who has a hidden gun is much more dangerous as you don’t know to watch out for the potential crazy lunatic.
Of course, either way, I don’t see any good reason to carry a gun (open or concealed) at a chess tournament. The only exception may be an off-duty police officer who may be required to carry with him. Even then I wouldn’t like it, but at least there is a reasonable expectation he’s not a crazy lunatic.
Assume the location and local/state laws allow open carry. Otherwise, openly carrying is against USCF Code of Ethics.
If open carrying is legally allowed, a denial could be based on 20G Annoying Behavior (is this guy going to shoot me if he gets mad over losing?), or Player’s Rights and Responsibilities 5.7. “That conditions…be…conducive to good competition.” Competition is sport. I can’t think of a sporting venue that allows guns for those who are not law enforcement.
Specifically, I am not debating the laws. I am also a gun supporter, though not an enthusiast, and i do not own a gun. But, I am fine with people owning them and carrying them. I am looking to see if I am within USCF guidelines in general.
The concept behind this question for me is just that guns do not have any purpose in a chess tournament (beyond law enforcement as stated) and can have a negative impact on players. All of my events, henceforth, have a policy against guns, whether or not they are open carry or concealed.
In the case that brought all of this up, the man wanted to have a bodyguard, or companion of sorts, show up with a firearm for his protection. It was unclear whether this man would actually be playing in the event. Thus, we’d have some guy there with a gun looming for the protective benefit of one player.
This was obviously not conducive to a good tournament environment for all other players and TDs.
Forget whether the guy and/or bodyguard is intimidating to other players. If this guy really feels the need for a bodyguard that someone may be out to get him, then perhaps it’s actually a hazard to the other participants.
You may wish to consider that concealed guns at tournaments by those licensed and certified can be and most often provides a far safer environment. The concealed carry laws in Texas have worked wonders in this regard.
In regard to those openly carrying firearms, I cannot imagine how this could be legal except to those in law enforcement, and highly specialized industries.
Texas grows closer to lifting its long time ban on open carry, and the CCL laws work. OTOH, this has been a real discussion in Colorado chess. We are yet…to my knowledge…to have any incident or any player/spectator actually try to open carry. But it’s been a discussion.
Colorado is generally open carry in all but one county (Denver), and each county has a tangle of different laws regarding restrictions (schools, govt buildings, ability for business owners to restrict weapons, etc.). The answer to the question often comes down to not only which municipality you’re in, but which part of town, block, side of the street, or which building you’re in. If this were a Facebook relationship, it’d be “Complicated.”
Rather than particular tournaments or directors, a Club (or even better, State Affiliate) could formally adopt a USCF Event Code of Conduct for their club or state. The Code of Ethics covers this for the USCF in general, but a club/state version can reinforce the Federation Code by elaborating on questions specific to your environment (such as open carry, if it’s a question). That allows directors to point to an authority with no need to justify the request through the rulebook.
Yes I agree with the point that it can be a hazard to other players (potentially). The sentiment is that if the person ever shows up with a gun, everyone is going to leave in silent protest. But then the event doesn’t happen and the man in question does what he set out to do: scare people from playing.
We decided that if this happens and we have to leave more than once in silent protest, we will submit a petition to the USCF ethics board to uphold a ban of this individual just at events under my affiliate. If every keeps leaving due to him showing up in this manner, it is disruptive to the event.
Ok, Kevin, lets use this example. What if one of the nuts is armed. By the way, the illegal
carrying of firearms is nothing new. Would it not be idea to have another parent, perhaps,
who also was carrying, certainly legally, who could possibly offer some aide in a massacre situation?? Hot heads quite frequently do not obey whatever laws society has in place.
Concealed carry most often, according to published statistics provides the best defense against such nonsense.
