Township Will Not Update Park Laws to Allow Firearms

Quote:

---

Quoting PADriver13

---

cdwjava - 18 Pa.C.S. § 6120: Limitation on the regulation of firearms and ammunition
(a) General rule.--No county, municipality or township may in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition components when carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth.

So as I read this, no township may in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession...not prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth. So, therefore, since the State does not make it unlawful to possess a firearm in a park, no municipality or township can have that as a law either?

---

But, the laws of the Commonwealth DO prohibit unlicensed carrying of a concealed firearm.

However, while I have not read the whole of the statute, it might be possible that OPEN carry is a legal possibility under state law. That does not mean it might be permissible everywhere, however. Private businesses can still restrict firearms as can private residences and there are likely no state laws prohibiting the carrying of a firearm inside of a business or other person's residence.

Ultimately, it is not what YOUR interpretation of the statute might be, but the court's. You can either carry in violation of the ordinance and if arrested gather your pennies and make a court fight out of it, or, you can inquire with the local police or municipal government to get their take on the application of the law so as to avoid any problems.

Thanks, cdwjava. While I understand what you are saying - I think you are missing the mark a bit.

We aren't discussing how the State already control firearm possession, etc. Open carry or concealed carry (w/ a LTCF) are the same thing. We also aren't talking about private businesses, who can ban whoever, for whatever reason, from entering their property. We're talking about public space that is funded and maintained by public funding.

I also understand it's not my interpretation, but that Court's. In my opinion, how can the Court disagree? The UFA says no local municipality may regulate in any manner that is not prohibited by the State. Since the State does NOT ban firearms in State Parks, and there is no provision in State Law prohibiting firearm possession in local parks, a Township cannot enact (or enforce) a law that (related to this specific situation) does not already exist.

After doing some more research, it appears that the PA Uniform Firearms Act was enacted in 1972. The two parks I am referring to in my Township did not exist until at least 1980, therefore, wouldn't the park laws prohibiting firearms but null and void right off the bat? That would negate the argument about the law changing and local ordinances not being corrected to conform. If these dates are correct, it would appear that the UFA already existed and was enacted BEFORE the parks were even created.

You are assuming that you are reading and interpreting the law correctly. You may not be. Too many people read a single statute and assume that there are no other regulations or defining case law that might come into play. This is why I suggest that you ASK the local police or the city - perhaps the city attorney. If you do not get a definitive answer from them, you might find yourself charged with a crime even if you might ultimately prevail down the road.

I'm also missing the part of the UFA where it says that local government cannot restrict where you might carry a firearm. Perhaps you can tell me what section contains this information?

Quote:

---

Quoting free9man

---

Pretty much. Or if you have a lot of money, talk to an attorney about a preemptive suit.

---

There's no point to filing a suit trying to compel a local unit of government to change an ordinance based on its alleged preemption by state law, as it has no duty to change its ordinance. It may be possible, assuming that the plaintiff can establish standing, to get an order enjoining the enforcement of a preempted ordinance.

There's a recent case addressing an effort to enjoin a municipality from enforcing an ordinance prohibiting firearms in public parks. The reviewing court found that the plaintiff had standing to bring an action challenging the ordinance, but noted,

Quote:

---

Quoting Dillon v City of Erie

---

Not raised by the City is Section 3710 of the Third Class City Code, Act of June 23, 1931, P.L. 932, as amended, 53 P.S. §38710, which provides, in pertinent part, that the City "shall at all times be invested with the power and authority to adopt suitable rules and regulations concerning the use and occupation of [its] parks and playgrounds by the public generally...." It could be argued that the City may be empowered under that grant of power from the State to regulate the possession of firearms in its parks pursuant to its proprietary power to control conduct that takes place on its property rather than through an ordinance of general application enacted pursuant to its general police powers. Similarly, Section 11.215 of the regulations of the Commonwealth's Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, 17 Pa. Code §11.215, generally prohibits "[p]ossessing an uncased device, or uncasing a device, including a firearm,... that is capable of discharging or propelling a projectile..." in state parks, subject to a number of enumerated exceptions.

---

I expect that the trial court will be addressing that issue on remand, and that the application of that statute will be revisited on appeal when the issue is ripe.