Limerick Township Violates Preemption!?

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by Statkowski

The Township Manager's email address is: rick@forkstownship.org

Ask for a copy of the town ordinance authorizing the posting of the "no firearms" sign at the township park. If you need a reason, just state you want to make sure you don't violate any township ordinance.

Why are you afraid of raising eyebrows?

All of your questions concerning "repercussions" would be spelled out in the township's ordinance. Concerning your LTCF, however, it would have no effect on it.

Once you receive a copy, post it on this site.

Suffice it to say, the township ordinance has no lawful authority under the Uniform Firearms Act. State law prohibits local municipalities from enacting such ordinances, and any such ordinances that were in existence when the UFA came into being were rendered null and void (which very well may be the case in Forks Township).

I don't want to raise eyebrows because: if no twp. law exists, I do not want one to be created because I bring a question to light. 2nd, I would not want anyone possibly singling me out (when I visit the park).

[Statkowski]

I don't want to raise eyebrows because: if no twp. law exists, I do not want one to be created because I bring a question to light.

Raising eyebrows is vastly overrated; been there, done that (I did it state-wide and beyond last November, even made front page of the Philadelphia Enquirer).

If the sign is posted, then something has to exist to authorize it. You are well within your rights to ask to see what authorized it. And, if not township ordinance exists, they can't create one since such is prohibited by state law.

2nd, I would not want anyone possibly singling me out (when I visit the park).

When visiting the park they wouldn't know you from Adam.

[GunLawyer001]

Originally Posted by Statkowski

The Township Manager's email address is: rick@forkstownship.org

Ask for a copy of the town ordinance authorizing the posting of the "no firearms" sign at the township park. If you need a reason, just state you want to make sure you don't violate any township ordinance.

Why are you afraid of raising eyebrows?

All of your questions concerning "repercussions" would be spelled out in the township's ordinance. Concerning your LTCF, however, it would have no effect on it.

Once you receive a copy, post it on this site.

Suffice it to say, the township ordinance has no lawful authority under the Uniform Firearms Act. State law prohibits local municipalities from enacting such ordinances, and any such ordinances that were in existence when the UFA came into being were rendered null and void (which very well may be the case in Forks Township).

Before anyone goes charging into a public park carrying firearms, I need to point out that there's no binding legal authority in any Pennsylvania court that I'm aware of that states that a township has less right to post property it owns than your local Walmart does. There's a difference between a local ordinance that prohibits ownership of an AR-15 in your home or a handgun on the sidewalk, and the regulation of terms of use of property owned by the municipality.

Maybe our courts will find that the use of governmental power to prohibit handgun possession on government property is a forbidden act to "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" under 6120, or violates the prohibition of 53 PaCSA 2962 that "a municipality shall not enact any ordinance or take any other action dealing with the regulation of the transfer, ownership, transportation or possession of firearms."

But maybe not. Remember, keeping a list of every firearm purchased by make & serial number, with the name of the purchaser, somehow isn't a "gun registry" according to our supreme court. So finding that your local township can do what any other property owner can do, by posting a "no guns" sign at its front door, is not unthinkable.

[Statkowski]

Before anyone goes charging into a public park carrying firearms, I need to point out that there's no binding legal authority in any Pennsylvania court that I'm aware of that states that a township has less right to post property it owns than your local Walmart does. There's a difference between a local ordinance that prohibits ownership of an AR-15 in your home or a handgun on the sidewalk, and the regulation of terms of use of property owned by the municipality.

There's a BIG difference between Public property and Private property, especially if it's a Public Park that's opened to the public, with free, unfettered access to all.

§ 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.

Carrying a firearm for personal protection constitutes both ownership and posession, and townships may not regulate such. LTCFs authorize the concealed carry of a firearm throughout the Commonwealth. Open carry of same is likewise not illegal. If the Commonwealth says it's okay, then a township may not prohibit the carrying of such in any way, shape or form, period.

Writing a letter (or sending an e-mail) and asking for a copy of the township ordinance authorizing the posting of a no-guns sign is totally acceptable behavior and should not raise any eyebrows at all. Any township resident may, at any reasonable time (meaning normal business hours), ask to see the township's ordinances and obtain copies thereof, for whatever reason at all, without the government entity asking for a reason or restricting in any way the public's right to know.

[knight0334]

Legally, the township could post signs saying "No guns" - but they would bear no weight.

The UFA doesn't prohibit municipalities from posting signs of any sort, just from restricting the carrying, sales, etc of firearms. They can post a sign that says they are now Emperors of Earth - but it'd mean nothing.

[sojourner]

GunLawyer and Statkowski - thanks for bthe replies.

Gunlawyer - I understand a "no firearms" sign as not having the weight of law (meaning I can only be charged civilly). If I see the sign and then am found out, I should leave the premises without delay. If I do not, then I can be charged with trespass.

What I don't understand, is the difference between being on property of a private citizen who posts "no firearms" versus a township (or any non-state govt. entity). and then being found out, and then leaving right away.

If I bottom line this, I don't know if I have the intestinal fortitude to fight this publicly. What I am looking at is: since the possibility of being "made" on the property is almost nil, I will only be made if something goes sideways (or, unlikey, if something happens and someone sees me print).

In the case of the first time I am found out by LEO of the twp., will it have any negative repercussions on my ability to own, buy and especially carrry under LTCF in PA. I can pay a fine, but I do not want to lose my rights (or be a test case) as the first one blazing the path. If I am found out and then cannot visit the twp. property, then I am ok (as long as I can fight this without losing my rights).

GunLawyer - can you address my concerns in a reply?

Statkowski - I am sorry I am not as vocal/agressive/etc. on this issue as some would like. It is just the state of being I am in right now.

[GunLawyer001]

Originally Posted by sojourner

GunLawyer and Statkowski - thanks for bthe replies.

Gunlawyer - I understand a "no firearms" sign as not having the weight of law (meaning I can only be charged civilly). If I see the sign and then am found out, I should leave the premises without delay. If I do not, then I can be charged with trespass.

What I don't understand, is the difference between being on property of a private citizen who posts "no firearms" versus a township (or any non-state govt. entity). and then being found out, and then leaving right away.

If I bottom line this, I don't know if I have the intestinal fortitude to fight this publicly. What I am looking at is: since the possibility of being "made" on the property is almost nil, I will only be made if something goes sideways (or, unlikey, if something happens and someone sees me print).

In the case of the first time I am found out by LEO of the twp., will it have any negative repercussions on my ability to own, buy and especially carrry under LTCF in PA. I can pay a fine, but I do not want to lose my rights (or be a test case) as the first one blazing the path. If I am found out and then cannot visit the twp. property, then I am ok (as long as I can fight this without losing my rights).

GunLawyer - can you address my concerns in a reply?

There's always risk involved in challenging governmental authority. You can not safely assume that the courts willk agree with your interpretation of statutes, especially in a case of first impression.

It's my understanding that using the property of another in violation of clearly posted signs is criminal trespass. So handing out leaflets in the Walmart can get you arrested without a warning, because you already knew it was prohibited. And carrying a handgun past the "no guns" sign might have the same result.

You can argue the differences between public and private property owners, but until a PA court agrees with you it's just dangerous delusions. You can't logically debate your way to current firearms caselaw anymore than I can deduce the minimum nose gear size for a Piper Cub under the FAA regs without looking up the FAA regs. It's not a High School debate here, kids, a "no guns" sign isn't a nullity just because you say it is.

If my client were charged under a local ordinance that prohibited carry on municipal land, I would certainly argue preemption, I'd argue that State action is different than private property management, I'd argue that the PA Constitution imposes different duties on a township than on a Walmart. But the outcome isn't certain, and you can't ignore the signs and regs with impunity until a PA court agrees.

You can lose your LTCF for any reason that your county Sheriff finds to be a reflection on your character or reputation. Being found with a gun where you're not supposed to have a gun might be enough. Hanging with the wrong people has been held to be enough to justify revocation. Some Sheriffs routinely revoke whenever another police department asks them to revoke, and some departments ask for revocation whenever they have an argument with a citizen carrying a weapon. How enthusiastically pro-gun is your Sheriff?

[sojourner]

GunLawyer - Thanks for the reply. I am coming late to this thread and am not trying to argue anything. Just looking for input on possibly what can happen if carrying on twp. property that is posted. Your last post was helpful to me. Thanks.

[exceltoexcel]

Originally Posted by sojourner

I don't want to raise eyebrows because: if no twp. law exists, I do not want one to be created because I bring a question to light. 2nd, I would not want anyone possibly singling me out (when I visit the park).

there is a law... it's the first post

It has come to my attention that Limerick township might have an illegal rule regarding parks.

http://www.limerickpa.org/index.htm

Township of Limerick, PA
Chapter 114: PARKS AND RECREATION

ARTICLE I Rules and Regulations [Adopted 3-21-2000 by Ord. No. 209]

The following rules and regulations apply to all parklands owned or acquire by Limerick Township:

§ 114-2. Rules and regulations established.

E. Firearms or other weapons are prohibited.

Is this rule is illegal under the following section of PA law? Seems to me it is!

§ 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.

(a.1) No right of action.--

No political subdivision may bring or maintain an action at law or in equity against any firearms or ammunition manufacturer, trade association or dealer for damages, abatement, injunctive relief or any other relief or remedy resulting from or relating to either the lawful design or manufacture of firearms or ammunition or the lawful marketing or sale of firearms or ammunition to the public.
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit a political subdivision from bringing or maintaining an action against a firearms or ammunition manufacturer or dealer for breach of contract or warranty as to firearms or ammunition purchased by the political subdivision.

(b) Definitions.--As used in this section, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings given to them in this subsection:

"Dealer."
The term shall include any person engaged in the business of selling at wholesale or retail a firearm or ammunition.
"Firearms."
This term shall have the meaning given to it in section 5515 (relating to prohibiting of paramilitary training) but shall not include air rifles as that term is defined in section 6304 (relating to sale and use of air rifles).
"Political subdivision."
The term shall include any home rule charter municipality, county, city, borough, incorporated town, township or school district.

[ChamberedRound]

Excel,
Thanks for reminding people.

GunLawyer,
Thanks for re-stating what's been discussed oodles of times here.

For those late to this discussion, this thread was originally created to discuss the legality of the above Limerick ordinance as posted by Excel. This ordinance, if legal, would prohibit possession of any weapon in any municipal parks in Limerick. Although on the surface it seems to violate preemption, GunLawyer has repeatedly stated in this thread that there is currently no PA case law to support any position on this issue. So, the only solutions are:

- To fight City Hall (which Excel tried)
- To get arrested for carrying in a Limerick park, take the town to court (likely at great expense), and hope the court rules in favor of preemption, creating case law to support the UFA.

To anyone interested in this topic, I would HIGHLY recommend you read through the entire thread. Even if you never read through other threads from the beginning, read through this one. There's a lot of good information and discussion here, even some from practicing lawyers like GunLawyer and Rule10b5.