Help deciphering local weapons law

[wiringlunatic]

I was researching the weapons laws in a local town very near my home to determine what was legal for pest control there (pigeon issues) My wife looked up the laws online and read them to me. I had to read it myself to believe it. Here is the law:

No person shall, except in necessary defense of person or property, fire or discharge any gun or other firearm or any air rifle or air pistol within the Borough of Pennsburg.

Pretty straightforward so far, but here's where it gets weird:

No person shall, except in necessary defense of person or property, have, use, possess, operate, shoot, or discharge any slingshot or bow and arrow within the Borough of Pennsburg

Here is the link so you can double check my copying and see other details: http://www.pennsburg.us/Firearms.pdf

If I'm reading this correctly, it is illegal to shoot a gun or airgun within the town of Pennsburg PA but it is illegal just to own or hold a bow and arrow or slingshot unless you need it for self defense (personally, I'd find it amusing to watch someone try to CCW a bow ) Is this law really saying that bowhunters in the town of Pennsburg aren't allowed to own them or at least must store them outside of town? I know this seems absurd, but I've been nailed on technicalities before and try to know all the details of the law. Also, I figured you folks might find this entertaining. One other thing, could "defense of property" include destroying nuisance animals that are damaging it?

 

[Jim K]

That is exactly what it says. Very often such laws are passed because of some one-time affair, like some kid shot a the statue of Adolfuss Q. Fensterwalder (our noble founder) with a sling shot, and the town council rushed into session to "correct" the situation.

One approach is to find a friendly council member and simply ask what the law means and how/when it was ever enforced. Since it is hard to get a law repealed outright, I suggest having some alternative wording, like "No person shall discharge any firearm, air gun, gas powered gun, or shoot any slingshot or bow in a reckless manner or in a manner likely to cause death or injury, in the town of Pennsburg, except in necessary defense of person or property or in formal or informal target shooting at a safe range."

Sometimes, a quiet word will let the city fathers quietly change the law without arousing the nutcases on either side.

Jim

 

[Steve in PA]

That is an old borough law (circa 1977). The "have" or "possess" would not stand up in court.

There is case law that in short says, a municipality cannot ban hunting within its boundries unless the ban is on borough owned property, ie a park.

Could they ban you from shooting your bow in your back yard? I believe so. Laws allow municipalities to ban shooting firearms within its boundries. The exceptions you noted would be allowed. They could view the shooting of a bow the same way. A dangerous act.

Could they ban you from hunting on property that you own or have permission to hunt on? No, they can't.

 

[Jim K]

That is exactly what it says. Very often such laws are passed because of some one-time affair, like some kid shot up the statue of Adolfuss Q. Fensterwalder (our noble founder) with a sling shot, and the town council rushed into session to "correct" the situation.

One approach is to find a friendly council member and simply ask what the law means and how/when it was ever enforced. Since it is hard to get a law repealed outright, I suggest having some alternative wording, like "No person shall discharge any firearm, air gun, gas powered gun, or shoot any slingshot or bow in a reckless manner or in a manner likely to cause death or injury, in the town of Pennsburg, except in necessary defense of person or property or in formal or informal target shooting at a safe range."

Sometimes, a quiet word will let the city fathers quietly change the law without arousing the nutcases on either side.

Jim

Edited to add. Saying that it won't stand up in court may be true, but some innocent person might have to shell out a lot of money to a lawyer to prove that. Getting the law changed is an easier route in this case, I think.

J

 

[HOOfan_1]

I wonder if that has something to do with firearms preemption laws in Pennsylvania. Perhaps bow and arrow and sling shot are not covered by the preemption laws.

 

[Nickel Plated]

or shoot any slingshot or bow in a reckless manner or in a manner likely to cause death or injury.............except in necessary defense of person or property or in formal or informal target shooting at a safe range.

"I think I hear someone breaking in downstairs. Alright my one chance to pull out my bow and start recklessly firing arrows in ALL directions. I've waited YEARS for this opportunity, MY BODY IS READY."

Lol, might want to take another crack at rewording that one. Didn't come out so good.

 

[MedWheeler]

I wonder if that has something to do with firearms preemption laws in Pennsylvania. Perhaps bow and arrow and sling shot are not covered by the preemption laws.

This is how my city runs, too. When Florida passed its preemption law in 2005, the city was quick to announce it would cease enforcement of its tighter-than-state firearms regulations (known here as "ordinances".) But, since an air-powered pellet or BB gun is technically not a firearm, the city continues to all-but prohibit their use within the city limits.

 

[wiringlunatic]

I like the idea of recklessly firing in self defense -- that's an image I can't get out of my head -- and there are redneck locals around here who would do it! Anyway, I'm not familiar with what you mean by "preemption laws" What are they? I do not live in Pennsburg, but I grew up there, and I owned a slingshot back then (still do) Guess I was breaking the law without knowing it. What are your thoughts on the idea of shooting nuisance animals as "defense of property"?

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I'm not familiar with what you mean by "preemption laws" What are they?...

A preemption law basically says that the laws of a broader jurisdiction on a particular subject will supersede the laws of a narrower jurisdiction. With regards to firearms, it's pretty common for there to be a state law that says that firearms will be exclusively regulated at the state level, and any conflicting city or county laws will not apply.

These sorts of laws take a variety of forms and can be of various scopes. So in one State, all firearms regulation is reserved to the state, but in another State, certain matters may be carved out to be regulated locally.

 

[Ehtereon11B]

In Texas it is illegal to shoot a buffalo from the second story of a hotel. If that is not an example of knee-jerk legislation I am not sure what is.

In most areas there are pest animal regulations. For example the common seagull is not a game bird, or protected bird. But it is illegal to hunt. However in many states they are legal to kill if they are causing damage to property because their fecal matter is very damaging to structures. So most game wardens won't mind if you kill 100 or 2 because their droppings were ruining your barn.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

check very careful on legality of killing pigeons in any manner. check state and fed laws to avoid surprises

 

[wiringlunatic]

I did check on the legality of the pigeon thing with an officer of the Game Commission. He said that animals like rats, etc are not covered under game laws and thus can be destroyed without consequence and can even be shot legally with air rifles. Pigeons, he said, are listed federally as migratory birds even though the Pennsylvania Game Commission does not recognize them as a game animal. Thus, they can be destroyed without consequence, but air rifles are illegal. My issue with them is actually when they get into the second floor of an old building where items are stored. Air rifle is my first choice (quiet and not going to shoot through the roof) but after reading that law I thought perhaps .22 shotshells would be a better choice. Now, I'm not sure what to think. It is defending property by some people's definition, but I probably won't mess with it as the local police would be able to interpret that however they want to and I don't trust them to do it right.