Township Will Not Update Park Laws to Allow Firearms

My question involves criminal law for the state of: PA

I live in a small township and have now sent three different written requests to have them update their township park ordinances to conform to the UFA, and they will not respond to me or provide any guidance.

Currently, my Township bans all firearms in township parks. This is illegal, since PA since passed the Uniform Firearms Act, which essentially states that a local municipality cannot enact firearm laws that do not already exist at the State level. Therefore, since the State of PA does NOT ban firearms in parks, local municipalities cannot ban firearms in parks.

As a resident of this township, I like to go fishing in one of the local parks and also use the bike path that goes through several township parks. Since the township has blatantly ignored three written requests, what would the next step be in order to get my local Township to conform to the State laws?

Thank You

Edit - my written requests were sent to the Township President and all members of Township Council.

There's no requirement for them to rescind the law. The act only bans them from attempting to enforce it. The state act preempts any local regulation to the contrary.

so, what that means if you are charged with carrying a firearm in the park, you use the superior laws to defeat the charge. Sorry to say but that is how many of our laws are changed.

Do you already possess a permit to carry a concealed firearm in PA? If not, why do you think the law would allow you to carry one?

Quote:

---

Quoting cdwjava

---

Do you already possess a permit to carry a concealed firearm in PA? If not, why do you think the law would allow you to carry one?

---

Yes, I do possess a LTCF in PA. But regardless, open carrying requires no license or permit.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

so, what that means if you are charged with carrying a firearm in the park, you use the superior laws to defeat the charge. Sorry to say but that is how many of our laws are changed.

---

So what you are saying is that there is no requirement for the Township to change the existing laws to conform to state laws? Ok, so how do I legally use the Township facilities that I pay taxes for? Either disarm myself when attempting to use? Or carry anyway, see if there is an issue, potentially get arrested, and then fight the charge based on the fact that local law cannot preempt State law?

Quote:

---

Quoting PADriver13

---

Or carry anyway, see if there is an issue, potentially get arrested, and then fight the charge based on the fact that local law cannot preempt State law?

---

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

Thanks. Pretty much what I figured, but wanted other opinions. Can anyone explain to me why the Township is not obligated to update their ordinances that contradict State law? Just wondering why there isn't some requirement to ensure all ordinances conform and are correct.

Quote:

---

Quoting PADriver13

---

Thanks. Pretty much what I figured, but wanted other opinions. Can anyone explain to me why the Township is not obligated to update their ordinances that contradict State law? Just wondering why there isn't some requirement to ensure all ordinances conform and are correct.

---

because the requirement on them is no greater than it is on a state or the federal government. There are hundreds, if not thousands of laws on the books in various jurisdictions that have been ruled unConstitutional or otherwise invalid yet they still sit on the books, until a person is charged with the crime. Then the law is reviewed with the reason causing it validity issue and either removed from the books or modified such that it complies with the current rules in place.

Maybe I'm missing something in the law, but I don't see where it grants some grand and universal carry right or where it obligates cities not to restrict the carrying of firearms in certain places.

As for licenses, here's what PA law - the UFA - says on that:

6106. Firearms not to be carried without a license.
(a) Offense defined.--
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), any person who carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license under this chapter commits a felony of the third degree.
(2) A person who is otherwise eligible to possess a valid license under this chapter but carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license and has not committed any other criminal violation commits a misdemeanor of the first degree.

Is there some other area of the statute that contradicts this?

The UFA seems to have as its intent the uniform applicability of laws regarding permitted carry, not a preemption of other local regulations.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

because the requirement on them is no greater than it is on a state or the federal government. There are hundreds, if not thousands of laws on the books in various jurisdictions that have been ruled unConstitutional or otherwise invalid yet they still sit on the books, until a person is charged with the crime. Then the law is reviewed with the reason causing it validity issue and either removed from the books or modified such that it complies with the current rules in place.

---

Yep. Heck, in my city it's still a crime to spit on the sidewalk or the street, and to curse in the presence of a woman or a child. No effort has been made to remove these statutes even though they would be impossible to prosecute.

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?

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.