Question on County or Municipal Employee Carry Rights

[Shooter Patriot]

I am aware that in PA private employers may restrict the rights of employees to carry while working.

However can public employers such as towns and counties pass the same restriction?

"§ 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 componentswhen carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth."

Would "in any manner" include employment policies? It seems that in an area where anyone may carry into a township building, that the town shouldn't be able to restrict employees from doing so. I searched but could not find any caselaw regarding this.

Does anyone know of any case law regarding this matter?

[Walleye Hunter]

That is an interesting question, I look forward to hearing the answer(s).

[knight0334]

As an employer as a condition of employment, yes.

I don't know of any case law, but that would easily pass all the way up to the PA Supreme Court.

[Xringshooter]

I agree ^^^

The government entity could not tell you that you could not own, possess, transfer, etc. any firearms as a general rule, but as a matter of being employed by that entity, they can say that you cannot carry on the property. That said, I don't know about having a firearm locked in your vehicle while parked where you work, especially if it is a public parking area (allowing the public to go into the building, etc. to conduct business with the gov't entity).

[Mosinshooter762]

I still don’t follow how such a prohibition on the possession and carrying of firearms is not a regulation, as the law says, “of the lawful ownership, possession... or transportation of firearms... when carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth.”

I am a bit concerned that our accepting the logic that certain outright prohibitions by municipalities, of otherwise lawful conduct in this state, involving the possession and carrying of firearms somehow do not amount to regulation could open up a big Pandora’s box and swallow up the whole preemption statute. An argument related to this had been discussed a lot on this forum in the wake of a footnote in the court opinion for the Dillon vs City of Erie case. The footnote discussed the applicability of another state statute governing municipalities, parks, and the so-called property rights of municipalities.

[JenniferG]

With Johnny Doc's brother on the Supreme court and all the other leftists that got elected because gun owners don't care enough to show up when it's time to vote it doesn't matter what the law says it only matters what the PA Supreme says it says. Remember the "registration is not registration" ruling?

[105gunner]

I am aware that in P private employers may restrict the rights of employees to carry while working.

However can public employers such as towns and counties pass the same restriction?

"§ 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 componentswhen carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth."

Would "in any manner" include employment policies? It seems that in an area where anyone may carry into a township building, that the town shouldn't be able to restrict employees from doing so. I searched but could not find any caselaw regarding this.

Does anyone know of any case law regarding this matter?

I am not a lawyer so this is my best lay judgement. The words “in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition” seem to preclude any PA government entity for restricting the right to possess a firearm on the job and work premises. Why would condition of employment be exempt from the “in any manner stipulation?” Under PA law there a very few places you cannot legally carry a gun including private property that is posted since such signage does not have the force of law. A private employer can set any legal condition of employment it chooses, but county, municipal, etc governments seem to be restricted from. stopping possession of a firearm. I sure would like to know the correct answer to the OP’s question.

[Mosinshooter762]

I had to check to make sure this was not the ‘Moms Demand Action’ or ‘Everytown for Gun Safety’ forums. Every argument that has been made in favor of the disarmament of municipal employees at work is just as applicable against why the public in general shouldn’t carry protection. Or why teachers shouldn’t carry protection. I thought that experience has shown that the arguments against the public being able to legally carry firearms do not pan out. This is an example of the government regulating upon a preempted activity, and dare I say questioning and infringing upon a constitutional right.

[Statkowski]

Pretty sure this has already been through the courts (last year or so?). School bus driver or maintenance employee got fired. The court didn't go with the " on school grounds" issue but went with the "terms of employment" issue. LTCF or Section 6120 didn't even come into play.

[gnbrotz]

Pretty sure this has already been through the courts (last year or so?). School bus driver or maintenance employee got fired. The court didn't go with the " on school grounds" issue but went with the "terms of employment" issue. LTCF or Section 6120 didn't even come into play.

Was that person actually employed by a "county, municipality, or township"?

Around here, busing is done by private contractors, who would not be bound by preemption even if it did extend to employment scenarios, and school districts themselves are not bound by preemption either, though I think they should be. Any entity that can levy taxes is certainly "government".