"Municipal Authority" subject to preemption?

[streaker69]

Neither. Working for anyone, their premises, their rules. I get that. I can't carry a gun IN my workplace, but I am allowed to keep one locked in the car AT my workplace.

Rumor has it that a person was removed from a CATA bus (State College) for open carrying a BB gun. On their website, it explains they are a Municipal Authority, etc, and their rules state "No weapons." In discussions with co-workers, the preemption question was brought up.

It's a BB gun, they're not covered by the UFA. So no preemption applies. As for things that are covered by the UFA, I doubt that they'd be able to enforce it against real firearms.

[Statkowski]

Again, if there's no regulation in Pa. Code, as there is with State Parks or Department of State facilities, then they can't prohibit such (i.e., State Forests).

[TechAlG]

As for things that are covered by the UFA, I doubt that they'd be able to enforce it against real firearms.

So, if a person were to get on a bus, open carrying a firearm, what relief would they have if they were refused a ride? I'm guessing something like this won't get changed unless (until) someone challenges it in court.

[knight0334]

Municipal Authorities are more like a public corporation than a municipality.