East Stroudsburg violating preemtion law

[Sig556]

Hello ,
This is my first post here. I've often visited this forum to get answers about pa gun laws.

Tonight I visited the Dansbury park with my family. I noticed that there was a sign stating that it was illegal to possess a firearm within the park. This got me a little worried because I was in fact CC at the time. Our car however was parked about a mile away and we had just walked there with our 2 year old so I decided that I wasn't turning around to go back to the car.
My questions are: could I in fact get in trouble for ignoring the "no firearms"sign. If I did get in trouble with the police.. would the charges get thrown out in court because it violates the preemtion clause?
Is anyone else on this forum from the Stroudsburg area who would like to help me strike down this preemtion violation?
This violation really bothers me because after doing some research tonight, I now realize that ALL parks in the borough of east Stroudsburg have this "no gun law "

Thanks

[JenniferG]

East Stroudsburg is in violation of preemption and should be notified immediately to remove the sign.

[Statkowski]

The offending borough ordinance is East Stroudsburg Borough Code, Chapter 114 (Parks and Recreation), Section 114-2 (General Rules and Regulations), Subsection A (16). http://ecode360.com/12387620

You need to send a letter to both the Borough Council President (Roger L. DeLarco) and the Borough Manager (James S. Phillips), 24 Analomink Street, East Stroudsburg, PA 18301.

Point out that their ordinance, dated 11-5-2002, is in violation of 18 Pa. C.S. § 6120 (Limitation on the regulation of firearms and ammunition), dated 10-18-1974, some 28 years earlier. http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI...1.020.000..HTM

Point out that although they may regulate the discharge of firearms within the borough, and especially in parks, they may not in any manner regulate the lawful possession of firearms.

[Sig556]

The offending borough ordinance is East Stroudsburg Borough Code, Chapter 114 (Parks and Recreation), Section 114-2 (General Rules and Regulations), Subsection A (16). http://ecode360.com/12387620

You need to send a letter to both the Borough Council President (Roger L. DeLarco) and the Borough Manager (James S. Phillips), 24 Analomink Street, East Stroudsburg, PA 18301.

Point out that their ordinance, dated 11-5-2002, is in violation of 18 Pa. C.S. § 6120 (Limitation on the regulation of firearms and ammunition), dated 10-18-1974, some 28 years earlier. http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI...1.020.000..HTM

Point out that although they may regulate the discharge of firearms within the borough, and especially in parks, they may not in any manner regulate the lawful possession of firearms.

Thank you for this information especially for providing me with the specific ordinance info. I will work on mailing them and update this thread with any new development on this matter.
Question. It is my understanding that they can't enforce this law. Is this true? Should I be worried about CC in these parks in the future?

[Bang]

^^^ Not if your two-year-old distracted you while entering and you never saw the sign.

[Exbiker]

http://ecode360.com/documents/EA0636...arch=discharge firearms

New from 2015. Just didn't get to the sign.

[Jhaydeno]

Question. It is my understanding that they can't enforce this law. Is this true? Should I be worried about CC in these parks in the future?

They can enforce it all they want. In fact, they can enforce laws that only exist in their minds too! It will be up to you to point out the discrepancy to the officer, and then to the DA and judge should the officer not care. That's one reason I keep the consolidated statutes 6106, 6109, and 6111 on my phone: so I can quickly point out to a 'misguided' LEO the laws he should be following ( I'm way to dumb to have them memorized).

[bigandy1966]

I would bet even then some police officers wont believe it, even seeing it in print. "I'll just arrest you anyway because this looks like (I think it should be) illegal and I'll just let the courts sort it out."
I think in some cops minds, Citizens who KNOW the laws, and KNOW their rights are just as bad as jailhouse lawyers. The "Some cops" don't realize their little lack of knowledge creates a life changing event in peoples lives, and there are circumstances where the legal system even then, can and does fail utterly when they go before some equally ignorant or agenda driven liberal political hack appointee. You have to remember, cops and judges also have political alignment, and in the case of a liberal judge, being hard on gun owners while being soft on career criminals is part of the way they advance through the power system.

[Sig556]

http://ecode360.com/documents/EA0636...arch=discharge firearms

New from 2015. Just didn't get to the sign.

What is different about this ordinance versus the current ordinance?

[R L Suehr]

What is different about this ordinance versus the current ordinance?

Looking at it. It only prohibits discharge of guns, not possession.