Sokorai acknowledged the open carry issue is one that opens the door to challenge the law, a vulnerability that lingers despite a 2011 review of the provision. It bans carrying and discharging firearms in parks without a “special permit”, which Lower Merion’s lawyer Richard Sokorai said refers to a concealed carry license.īut the ordinance also seems to ban openly carrying firearms, which doesn’t require a permit in Pennsylvania. The law otherwise merely reinforces provisions of Pennsylvania’s Uniforms Firearms Act, the township contends in court filings. If the township did enforce its ordinance, violators would face a $600 fine. Montgomery County Court ruled against the FOAC in August 2015, noting Abramson hadn’t been harmed by the ordinance or even cited under it. Township officials say they’ve never enforced it, even when several dozen others carried guns through Bala Cynwyd Park in protest a few days before the lawsuit was filed.īut the lawsuit argues the potential for harm is there, and that’s sufficient for at least one “prong” of the legal standard for the preliminary injunction being sought here. Abramson is named on the lawsuit along with Firearms Owners Against Crime President Kim Stolfer, who lives in South Fayette Township, 25 miles southwest of Pittsburgh.Ībramson hasn’t been cited for violating the ordinance. After the state Supreme Court decision, lower courts quickly dismissed cases against Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Lancaster outright because the NRA had filed them without a resident plaintiff.īut the case against Lower Merion Township continued because plaintiff Joseph Abramson lives in the township. The state Supreme Court later overturned Act 192 because of the way the legislature enacted it.Ībout 100 municipalities had already repealed their gun ordinances lawsuits were filed against a handful that didn’t. They’d have to win a federal lawsuit to get reimbursed, which their attorney Josh Prince said they will pursue at some point.Įffective in 2015, Act 192 allowed anyone to challenge a municipal firearms law, on the taxpayer’s dime, regardless of whether they’d ever set foot in the community let alone been cited for violating the ordinance in question.
Plaintiffs’ expenses are $50,000 thus far. WHYY thanks our sponsors - become a WHYY sponsor
0 kommentar(er)
