Tammany Trace Carry (Banned)

[SpeedRacer]

Go jogging today OC style

But it's illegal for me to open carry since I have my CHP.

 

[stinkysix]

I ride it now and then with either a p32 or glock in a kydex neck holster.

 

[sraacke]

While it is illegal for someone to "just walk off the street" and carry a firearm in a church, it is possible now for a private citizen (with the blessings of the leader of the church and the required training) to carry in the church.

Just to be clear it's Not illegal. There are no laws against carrying in church except for conceal carry. Someone who is not conceal carrying (ie open carrying) can indeed just walk off the street and carry a firearm in a church as long as the leader of the church doens't have a problem with it. No special training required.

 

[03protege]

Good update.

I would love for St. Tammany Parish to buy me a new motorcycle. . .

That is exactly what this looks like to me.

 

[Kraut]

nor shall it affect the authority of political subdivisions to prohibit the possession of a weapon or firearm in certain commercial establishments and public buildings.

I'm betting that they see this part about "public buildings" to apply to public properties in general under their governance, and figure no one will ever raise enough fuss about it or no judge would rule so tightly as to exclude the Trace.

 

[oleheat]

Maybe people would feel a little more at ease if they'd take a more hardline approach towards making the trace safer- like posting signs banning murders, stabbings, muggings, rapes, robberies, and animal attacks on the property.

That might turn the trick.

 

[biggin215]

The best response they had back about carrying on the Trace had to be: "we have many schools and churches within 2,000 feet of the trace and according to the law, no weapons are allowed within this area."

Um... August 15th of last year, this law became invalid. Now carry is only prohibited ON THE ACTUAL property... am I right? So, as is to be expected, they don't even know the current laws.

 

[SirIsaacNewton]

Maybe people would feel a little more at ease if they'd take a more hardline approach towards making the trace safer- like posting signs banning murders, stabbings, muggings, rapes, robberies, and animal attacks on the property.

That might turn the trick.

Or just ban all unauthorized penetration - that covers shootings, stabbings, and rape as well as giving us our gun rights back. Since they are ignoring the limits to their authority and proceeding to screw us in an unauthorized fashion.

 

[mb504]

I did a podcast about this yesterday.

http://guntalk.libsyn.com/bonus-podcast-more-no-shrug-policy-in-action-

Tom, Thanks a lot of "jumping into the fray"

I have had a couple (polite) email exchanges with a two council members today, so we might see some action on this.

 

[oleheat]

Or just ban all unauthorized penetration - that covers shootings, stabbings, and rape as well as giving us our gun rights back. Since they are ignoring the limits to their authority and proceeding to screw us in an unauthorized fashion.

Tripping them up with their own words- I like it!

 

[ta2d_cop]

It would seem so but good luck convincing the LEO called to the report of a man with a gun. You may beat the charge but you probably won't beat the ride.

Hate to be the bearer of bad news and burst your bubble, but not all LEOs in St Tammany are "jack booted anti-gun thugs". In reality, you have about a 50-50 shot on arrest, but the DA woud probably drop the charges.

Personally, I have handled "guns on the trace" calls, as well as guns in city parks calls. I have never made an arrest bassed on that fact alone. Thats the good thing about discrestion. Most LEOs around here will be rational about it as long as you are not a dick about it and start preatching to them about your constitutional right to cary based on this and that.............. If you take that approach you are amost guarenteed to get hooked.

If you simply express your lack of knowledge of the rules (not laws, there is a diference) and express your desire to protect yourslef, as the trace does go throught some remote areas and bad neighborhoods (along Hwy 36) you should be ok. You may get a summons, but that beats a trip to Booo-Boo's Bed-n-Breakfast.

You may want to check the St Tammany Parish Code of Ordinances and see if there is a specific code addressing the Trace and the carry or possession of firearms. Its on the web at the parish's site.

In my years with St Tammany I didn't really know (or care about) the rules on the trace, other than it closed at sun-down. That was good PC to jack up crackheads in the abita area back in the day along hwy 36. Police enforce laws, not rules, that a civil issue; however there are clauses in cary laws that do require you to follow rules against cary on private propery but I would not consider the Trace provate property, therefore, The state law permitting cary in a park would apply. Thats how this LEO sees it.

 

[ta2d_cop]

When I was a deputy and they first opened, they did not want to give us the padlock keys to the locked bollards at Hwy 59, Dove Park and Lonesome Rd entrances. The employees (volunteer), mopeds, signs, etc are all owned by the foundation and not the parish, all 501C3 org operating on Parish land.

They still don't want to give the Deputies and City Police keys. Thats why we all have bolt cutters (thanks to 3206). I keep every lock I cut off. Got about 25 of em by now!

And you were right, most LEOs dont care about the trace rules. And as far as Deputies knowing parish ordinances, if it aint the leash law, thay probably dont know about it. That was the only one I knew.

 

[mb504]

Hate to be the bearer of bad news and burst your bubble, but not all LEOs in St Tammany are "jack booted anti-gun thugs". In reality, you have about a 50-50 shot on arrest, but the DA woud probably drop the charges. ...

I don't think anyone ever claimed that the police are out to get people carrying on the Trace. It's just that the Ordinance is in contradiction to state firearm preemption law. Yes, even if by some strange chance someone was arrested for violating it, it would most likely be thrown out of court. Then the Parish might open itself up to a lawsuit. I really don't want my tax money going to "buy someone a motorcycle" when the Ordinance could just be removed from the books.

All my (very rare) interactions with police of any sort in St Tammany have shown them to be very great guys. They don't freak out when you hand them a CHP card and inform them of a weapon. They have all been very level headed and professional.

 

[Tom Gresham]

I have a request of Bayou Shooter members who are in St. Tammany Parish. Please contact your parish council member and ask him or her to help correct the mistake made in writing the ordinance for the Trace. The parish ordinance is in conflict with state law. All they have to do is remove the reference to guns, and they will be in good shape. But, we need a lot of people calling and emailing all the council members.

Here's a list of them. http://stpgov.org/leadership_parishcouncil.php

Next step is to get on the agenda of the council and have all of us show up.

There are other steps after that, but I'm hoping we don't have to go there.

Please contact your council member and politely ask that they correct this flawed ordinance.

 

[Tom Gresham]

FWIW, here's what I sent to all St. Tammany Parish Council members five weeks ago. Feel free to use or change it as you feel necessary.

==================================





My wife and I moved to St. Tammany Parish almost a year ago -- in part to be
near our new granddaughter -- and have recently become aware of a parish
ordinance which puts us and many others at risk of being illegally
arrested. This ordinance also may well put St. Tammany Parish at serious
financial risk should someone be arrested for violating an ordinance which
is illegal, and which the Parish knew was not valid.



I'm writing to ask your assistance in removing this ordinance from the
books, and putting St. Tammany in compliance with state law.



Specifically, the portion of St Tammany's ordinance No. 94-2024 which
prohibits the carrying of firearms on the St. Tammany Trace is at odds with
state law which preempts cities and parishes from passing this sort of
firearms regulation.



The state regulation which applies:



§1796. Preemption of state law

A. No governing authority of a political subdivision shall enact after July
15, 1985, any ordinance or regulation more restrictive than state law
concerning in any way the sale, purchase, possession, ownership, transfer,
transportation, license, or registration of firearms, ammunition, or
components of firearms or ammunition; however, this Section shall not apply
to the levy and collection of sales and use taxes, license fees and taxes
and permit fees, nor shall it affect the authority of political subdivisions
to prohibit the possession of a weapon or firearm in certain commercial
establishments and public buildings.



Clearly, state law preempts the parish from passing this sort of gun control
measure. Unfortunately, it's possible that a law enforcement officer might
not know that the ordinance in question is not valid, and might arrest a
citizen who is lawfully carrying a firearm for her protection while on The
Trace.



I fear that should someone be arrested for lawfully carrying a firearm for
protection, that arrest would put the parish in legal and financial
jeopardy. As a citizen who pays taxes here, I would not want to have my tax
dollars used to pay a judgment or settlement based on an ordinance which St.
Tammany Parish knew violated state law.



Will you help remove the provision of this ordinance which prohibits the
lawful carrying of firearms for personal protection while on the St. Tammany
Trace?



Thank you for your attention to this matter.

 

[jguilletjr]

On this page about Tammany Trace: http://www.tammanytrace.org/rules.shtml



Is the property owned by the St. Tammany Parish government by a "private non-profit"?

If it's owned by the parish, isn't this in violation of the state's preemption?

I know you can carry on State Parks now and I don't know of any other specified victim disarmament zone that would apply to the Tammany Trace.

Was going to take a walk on it today, but one thing my wife will want to have with her is her PDE (Personal Defense Equipment) (Yes, it looks a lot like a revolver).

I'm going to drop them an email about it, but if anyone knows a better contact I'd love to hear about it.

Concealed is concealed. I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

 

[owen502]

FWIW, here's what I sent to all St. Tammany Parish Council members five weeks ago. Feel free to use or change it as you feel necessary.

==================================





My wife and I moved to St. Tammany Parish almost a year ago -- in part to be
near our new granddaughter -- and have recently become aware of a parish
ordinance which puts us and many others at risk of being illegally
arrested. This ordinance also may well put St. Tammany Parish at serious
financial risk should someone be arrested for violating an ordinance which
is illegal, and which the Parish knew was not valid.



I'm writing to ask your assistance in removing this ordinance from the
books, and putting St. Tammany in compliance with state law.



Specifically, the portion of St Tammany's ordinance No. 94-2024 which
prohibits the carrying of firearms on the St. Tammany Trace is at odds with
state law which preempts cities and parishes from passing this sort of
firearms regulation.



The state regulation which applies:



§1796. Preemption of state law

A. No governing authority of a political subdivision shall enact after July
15, 1985, any ordinance or regulation more restrictive than state law
concerning in any way the sale, purchase, possession, ownership, transfer,
transportation, license, or registration of firearms, ammunition, or
components of firearms or ammunition; however, this Section shall not apply
to the levy and collection of sales and use taxes, license fees and taxes
and permit fees, nor shall it affect the authority of political subdivisions
to prohibit the possession of a weapon or firearm in certain commercial
establishments and public buildings.



Clearly, state law preempts the parish from passing this sort of gun control
measure. Unfortunately, it's possible that a law enforcement officer might
not know that the ordinance in question is not valid, and might arrest a
citizen who is lawfully carrying a firearm for her protection while on The
Trace.



I fear that should someone be arrested for lawfully carrying a firearm for
protection, that arrest would put the parish in legal and financial
jeopardy. As a citizen who pays taxes here, I would not want to have my tax
dollars used to pay a judgment or settlement based on an ordinance which St.
Tammany Parish knew violated state law.



Will you help remove the provision of this ordinance which prohibits the
lawful carrying of firearms for personal protection while on the St. Tammany
Trace?



Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Very good Tom. I see this kind of thing from the VCDL all the time in VA. Glad to see someone catch one in LA and locals doing right to get it corrected. I will call for LSA to get involved if we can't get this fixed by St. Tammany folks. Could you imagine the might of the LSA at a parish meeting. Would be exciting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[eman2k5]

They still don't want to give the Deputies and City Police keys. Thats why we all have bolt cutters (thanks to 3206). I keep every lock I cut off. Got about 25 of em by now!

And you were right, most LEOs dont care about the trace rules. And as far as Deputies knowing parish ordinances, if it aint the leash law, thay probably dont know about it. That was the only one I knew.

LOL, do you leave a card and a property receipt and where they can claim the lock ? hahahahahah