Lackawanna County; new preemption violation 5/26/2010

[wa3ra]

It appears that the Lackawanna County Commissioners have commited a grave error, promulgating a preemption violation at their meeting today, May 26, 2010.

Adopting the Parks and Recreation Department Rules and Regulations. Speaker: Deputy Director for Parks & Recreation, William L. Davis

Comments made by Commissioner Munchak allude to the presence of a firearms ban in these rules.

Deputy Director Davis presents the proposed rules and regulations for all Lackawanna County Parks; apparently these rules BAN FIREARMS in the parks in clear violation of State preemption. The Commissioners voted unanimously to adopt those regulations

Video: http://lackawanna.granicus.com/Media...3&meta_id=3172

I have already contacted WNEP for a follow-up:

To Whom It May Concern:

You presented a story earlier this evening that suggested that the Lackawanna County Commissioners approved a set of Rules and Regulations for all county parks that prohibited the possession of firearms.

If that is so, the Commissioners have committed an illegal act, violating a State preemption of such regulations that myriad municipalities have found to their dismay that the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania upholds rigidly. The law is simply stated and unmistakeable in its meaning:

§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.

What strikes me as most unusual is that the people responsible for the rules and regulation signs just earlier this week agreed to cover up the unenforceable law until such time as the signs, sans firearms restrictions, could be replaced.

With the current financial situation in the county, PLEASE verify that the commissioners have NOT opened the county up to another lawsuit that they are doomed to lose.

Thanks for your attention to this matter.

contact information redacted.

[t1m0thy]

Go get 'em!

[cptrad]

I saw this on the 11:00 PM news tonight. It is very troubling that Corey O'Brien would vote for this. If he had voted for this 2 weeks ago, he would not have received my vote for Congress. In fact, I doubt I'll be voting for him in any future elections.

Very disappointing....

[Wild Bill Klinton]

I saw this on the 11:00 PM news tonight. It is very troubling that Corey O'Brien would vote for this. If he had voted for this 2 weeks ago, he would not have received my vote for Congress. In fact, I doubt I'll be voting for him in any future elections.

Very disappointing....

Why did it take this long???


WBK

[wa3ra]

All it took was a few phone calls; it has been changed no 'no discharging of firearms in parks', and that was already in process.

[HyDef]

Not quiet done yet.

The last sentence in section 11 of the new rules reads, "No unlicensed firearms or weapons are allowed in a park without the written permission of the director."

When will they learn?

[wa3ra]

I guess a few more calls or visits are in order. I wonder how they'd respond a a few blue-backs?

[HyDef]

Looks like their next meeting is June 9th. Don't know why they hold them at 10:30 AM. I guess to ensure most citizens can't be there.

This article has a link to the new park rules right under the picture.
http://thetimes-tribune.com/smoking-...parks-1.815677

[thefirstndsecond]

They do not need a discharge law either. There is already a law against that type of use.

[gnbrotz]

They do not need a discharge law either. There is already a law against that type of use.

And even if they feel they need to regulate discharge for some reason, they should include an exemption for discharging in lawful self-defense. Why in the world would they want to fine someone who justifiably used their firearm to defend themselves? If the answer is "We would never do that.", the including the exemption shouldn't be an issue at all, and if they do think that such action would be justified, the public should be made aware of this position so they can decide if these are the correct leaders to be in office.