Had a case here in Az, Rineer v. City, on a city ban in parks. It
went off on the poor wording of the preemption statute (since
changed). Preemption statute just said that all city statutes must be
consistent with the state chapter on firearms laws (no concealed
carry w/o permit, etc.). It was meant to forbid any laws *beyond*
the state provisions, but on its face only forbade ones inconsistent
(presumably, a city code allowing CCW w/o permit, or possession by
felons). We argued intent derived from circumstances of passage, that
in practice it would render the law a nullity, and the court went
with the face of the enactment.
--
