Omaha city parks ban?

[Dan W]

Husker_Fan 

Have you read the AG's opinion from 2009?

http://www.ago.ne.gov/ag_opinion_view?oid=4133

Not exactly the question you're asking, but in the ballpark.

If further clarification is required we need to convince a State Senator to request the opinion

[Husker_Fan]

I have read it and think it's helpful, but the question I would want answered isn't in there.  Those questions were very specific to Omaha's registration system. The question I'd ask is:

"Does Neb. Rev. Stat. Sec. 18-1703 prohibit a city or village from regulating the possession or transportation of a concealed firearm on municipal property that is open to the public?"

"Did cities and villages have the authority to prohibit the permit holders from carrying concealed handguns into or onto a place or premises where the city or village is in control of the property as provided in Neb. Rev. Stat. 69-2441(1)(a)?"

"If so, was such authority revoked or otherwise impaired by the subsequent enactment of Neb. Rev. Stat. 18-1703?"

I'll draft a request with these questions and maybe we can see if one of the state senators would be willing to sign and submit it.

[AAllen]

Husker_Fan

I agree some clarification would be in order.  Once you have a draft of the "Question" I think I may know a Senator that we can get to formally ask it.

[omaharj]

After some thinking...... because the signs were put up before the  statute outlawing ccw banning by cities, perhaps all that is needed is Andy to call the Mayor's hotline and explain their oversight. Perhaps the signs would just be quietly taken down. Hopefully, they will see it as a lost cause and comply. I wouldn't get into the enforceability aspects or even have a discussion: just point out they forgot to take down the signs and go from there. One step at a time   RJ

[Husker_Fan]

I believe some of the signs went up after the change in the law.  The prohibition on guns on some of them is included in a list of rules including having you dog leashed and what hours the park is open.

Andy,
I'll shoot you something today or tomorrow.

[bkoenig]

Lincoln parks, (last I knew) are also Free Crime Zones. 

I don't recall ever seeing a sign at any parks in Lincoln.  Not saying they aren't there.  I could see them putting one sign at an obscure entrance and calling it good.

[NE Bull]

I thought I read somewhere the city 'banned' CCW in the parks. I will try and find the ordinance.

[AAllen]

I don't know about the parks but I know they have the trails posted.

[OnTheFly]

I don't recall ever seeing a sign at any parks in Lincoln.  Not saying they aren't there.  I could see them putting one sign at an obscure entrance and calling it good.

There used to be a Lincoln ordinance banning firearms in parks, but I can not seem to find it now.  Regardless, with the passage of the new state law prohibiting cities/towns from having laws more restrictive than state CCW law, the Lincoln ordinance would be null and void for CHP holders.

Fly

[Dan W]

There used to be a Lincoln ordinance banning firearms in parks, but I can not seem to find it now.  Regardless, with the passage of the new state law prohibiting cities/towns from having laws more restrictive than state CCW law, the Lincoln ordinance would be null and void for CHP holders.

Fly

The ordinance is still there, and would be null and void for CHP holders, but I don't think that will stop them from trying to post no weapons signs in the parks

12.08.200 Weapons Prohibited in Parks.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to possess or discharge, or cause to be discharged, within any park, any firearm, including, but not limited to, any pistol, revolver, shotgun, or rifle.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person to possess or discharge, or cause to be discharged, within any park, any air rifle, bow and arrow, crossbow, toy pistol, toy gun, slingshot, or any other air, gas, manually operated or spring operated gun, weapon, apparatus, or instrument designed or intended to be used for the purpose of throwing or projecting missiles of any kind by any means whatsoever, whether the instrument is called by any name set forth above or by any other name.
(c) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Director of the Parks and Recreation Department
may designate areas in certain parks and park facilities to allow various organized programs to engage in the activities described herein.
(d) The provisions of subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall not apply to duly
authorized Parks and Recreation Department employees or law enforcement officers acting in the course of their duty. (Ord. 17365 §1; June 29, 1998: P.C. § 12.08.120: Ord. 12600 § 1; June 25, 1979: Ord. 10868 § 1; July 23, 1973: Ord. 3489 § 30-112, as amended by Ord. 5775; July 12, 1954).

[JTH]

The ordinance is still there, and would be null and void for CHP holders, but I don't think that will stop them from trying to post no weapons signs in the parks

What is interesting is that when cities, posing as "business owners," post public parks and such, they really are attempting to regulate pistol carry which is illegal under state law. 

Just noticed that in Washington, cities lost this lawsuit---and I'm betting Omaha and Lincoln would also if it was pushed.  Anyone able to ask the Attorney General what he thinks about it? 

"In response, the city claimed the ban wasn’t a "law" or a criminal regulation, and that it was acting in its "proprietary capacity" as a property owner."   ---and they lost.

http://nraila.org/news-issues/news-from-nra-ila/2012/washington-supreme-court-puts-an-end-to-gun-ban-in-seattle-parks.aspx

[Dan W]

What is interesting is that when cities, posing as "business owners," post public parks and such, they really are attempting to regulate pistol carry which is illegal under state law. 

Just noticed that in Washington, cities lost this lawsuit---and I'm betting Omaha and Lincoln would also if it was pushed.  Anyone able to ask the Attorney General what he thinks about it? 

"In response, the city claimed the ban wasn’t a "law" or a criminal regulation, and that it was acting in its "proprietary capacity" as a property owner."   ---and they lost.

http://nraila.org/news-issues/news-from-nra-ila/2012/washington-supreme-court-puts-an-end-to-gun-ban-in-seattle-parks.aspx

I agree, the differences between a public road, a  public sidewalk, a public trail (right of way?) and a public park are nil.

How a city can ban CCW in one place and be prevented from banning it in the others is beyond me, and I strongly support action to overturn this practice.

We need to get a Senator to request the AG's opinion, and that effort has begun

[NE Bull]

I agree, the differences between a public road, a  public sidewalk, a public trail (right of way?) and a public park are nil.

How a city can ban CCW in one place and be prevented from banning it in the others is beyond me, and I strongly support action to overturn this practice.

We need to get a Senator to request the AG's opinion, and that effort has begun

Thank Fellas.