Lower Merion To Amend Carrying In Parks Ordinance

[Devrbd]

I don't live in Lower Merion Township, but saw the below proposal on MyPublicNotices as of April 8th. I've listed the current ordinance and proposed amendment.

Current Ordinance

§ 109-16. Firearms; fireworks.

No person except authorized members of the Police Department shall carry or use firearms of any kind in a park.

Proposed Amendment

AN ORDINANCE To Amend The Code Of The Township Of Lower Merion, Chapter 109, Parks And Playgrounds, To Change The Designation Of The Recreation Director And The Recreation Committee Of The Board Of Commissioners To The Parks And Recreation Director And The Parks And Recreation Committee; To Regulate The Carrying Of Firearms In Township Parks Without A Permit, Unless Exempted;

http://pa.mypublicnotices.com/Public...e&AdId=1848853

[billamj]

This is probably a result of the change to federal law allowing the carry of firearms in national parks as long as the state allows it. If they didn't change their verbiage they would be in violation of both state and federal law instead of state alone.

[thefirstndsecond]

Please provide contact information so we can contact those in control and let them know they would be in violation.

[Devrbd]

This is probably a result of the change to federal law allowing the carry of firearms in national parks as long as the state allows it. If they didn't change their verbiage they would be in violation of both state and federal law instead of state alone.

I'm glad some townships are on top of it. I did a quick search of Whitemarsh and Whitpain Township ordinances and they both prohibit the possession of firearms in the park.

[tl_3237]

This is probably a result of the change to federal law allowing the carry of firearms in national parks as long as the state allows it. If they didn't change their verbiage they would be in violation of both state and federal law instead of state alone.

The Federal change has nothing to do with it. The Coburn Amendment (16 USC 1a-7b):

(b) Protecting the Right of Individuals To Bear arms in Units of the National Park System and the National Wildlife Refuge System.--The Secretary of the Interior shall not promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an individual from possessing a firearm including an assembled or functional firearm in any unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System if--

(1) the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from
possessing the firearm; and
(2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the
law of the State in which the unit of the National Park System
or the National Wildlife Refuge System is located.

It only affects DOI's rulmaking authority and only in NPS/NWRS areas. It has no effect on a state's (or subvision's thereof) laws.

[gnbrotz]

Call me a pessimist, but I'd like to see the actual wording of the proposed change. A few things just from the notice give me pause.

First, it clearly says the purpose of the change is "to regulate the carrying of firearms", which they are preempted from doing "in ANY manner" by 6120.

Next, the proposed changes apply to "carrying....without a permit, unless exempted". Depending on the actual language, this could very easily attempt to regulate open carry. Based on the specific exceptions listed in 6106, I typically do not fall under any of them while visiting a local park. This means that for the purposes of licensing, I am not exempt. Separately, I open carry, which does not require a license, but is not specifically "exempted" in the licensing statute.

Again, it's impossible to say without seeing the revised language, but we do know that even when municipalities understand they need to make a change, their lack of familiarity with the laws and limits placed on them can result in a "revision" that is still not in full compliance with state law.

[thefirstndsecond]

Dr. gnBrotz - you are well verse.

It will take me a couple of times to read and understand what the hell you guys are talking about between state, federal and the laws.


Could you explain a little more clearer. I thought the federal law for for federal parks in the states? Yes/No?

[gnbrotz]

Could you explain a little more clearer. I thought the federal law for for federal parks in the states? Yes/No?

The recent change in federal law applied to National Parks. It has no bearing on any state or local parks. The two laws I noted are both state laws. Since the state legislature has established that they are the controlling authority over the possession and carry of firearms, local municipalities cannot make their own regulations. If they do, and actually enforce them, they risk both civil litigation for violation of rights and criminal prosecution for violating 6120 (preemption), which is a criminal offense, though getting prosecutor do actually file charges is another matter.