Local Improvements in Gun Laws

Gavel in Court

Firearms attorney Josh Prince recently sued Erie, PA when they enforced a local ordinance banning guns on some of their town property in violation of the state’s preemption law. While it may seem like a small effort for gun rights, it did apparently scare the leaders of a town 432 miles away into not only stopping a march toward banning guns on government property, but also repealing old laws in violation from the books. (h/t to Josh Prince)

6 thoughts on “Local Improvements in Gun Laws”

  1. Not according to one lawyer, who thinks the Erie case is “devastating” to gun owners in PA. Not sure how that makes sense, when it removes criminal penalties.

    1. I suggest you go to the linked thread and peruse that attorney’s posts. He is there under the name GunLawyer001. Specifically:

      We had a statute that clearly preempted local municipalities from enacting penal statutes against gun possession, and it arguably barred them from “policies” as well. Now it only bars the penal statute, like it did before, but there’s a signal that the statute will be held to be no bar against owner “policies”.

      1. Yes I am aware of what he said. But he is so clearly wrong. Before, we had municipalities saying they could enact penal statutes against gun possession, despite it being preempted. Now they can no longer do that. And we have a POSSIBLE way they could still do that (which Philly prior to this already said they were doing). Its something that hasn’t been tested in court- the court only signaled that a municipality could ARGUE that point.

        So we won by removing criminal sanctions, and maybe the worst they could do is a policy where they could ask us to leave otherwise its trespassing.

        He has no idea what a victory is. He probably thought Heller and McDonald were losses.

  2. They only listen when they’re facing unemployment. Thank you Mr. Prince for doing it the right way. We’ve been passive and polite for far too long.

  3. Why should any municipality be “scared?” What do any of them have to lose? As I’ve frequently put it (from personal experience) if you prove in court they have passed and enforced a grossly unlawful or even unconstitutional ordinance, they don’t have to so much as smack their foreheads with the heels of their hands and saying “Silly Us!” And they can (and very likely will) pass another one tomorrow and enforce it at their pleasure.

Comments are closed.