Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Commentator Agrees with OpenCarry.org on National Parks - the State Analogous Property Rule Should b

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    http://tinyurl.com/635l9z

    New West Missoula, Montana
    By Bill Schneider, 9-04-08

    LET'S FOCUS ON ISSUES THAT REALLY MATTER
    Don't Waste Energy on Rule Allowing Concealed Guns in National Parks
    Election-year politics is maddening, but let the gun lobby have "this
    important step in the right direction," becuase it really doesn't
    matter. What matters is the long-term health of our national parks.

    A lot of people are hot and bothered about the Bush administration's
    proposed rule to allow concealed weapons in national parks, but
    practically, is this really worth our time and effort?

    Yes, it's maddening to tolerate such low-end, election-year politics
    spurred by the National Rifle Association (NRA), but I say give the
    gun lobby this hollow victory, so we can spend our time and energy on
    issues that could really help our national parks instead of worrying
    about something that's already happening and hasn't caused any problems.

    Last year, after efforts to attach the loosening of the 25-year-old
    regulation that restricts but does not ban taking firearms into
    national parks as a rider on a must-pass bill failed, the new strategy
    became the administrative rule-making process, which is currently
    underway. The comment period ended August 8, and the Department of the
    Interior, which includes the National Park Service (NPS) and U.S. Fish
    and Wildlife Service, received more than 100,000 comments. Obviously,
    these comments, even if 99 percent opposed to the new rule, won't
    matter, which is the case with most "public involvement" exercises.
    The Bush administration is obligated to do make "this important step
    in the right direction" for the NRA. Even with widespread opposition,
    you can bet your last bullet that our lame duck will approve the rule
    before he leaves office with his tail between its legs.

    As I've said in a past column on the subject, people who believe so
    strongly that they always need a gun to protect themselves from bears
    and perverts are unlikely to leave it home when they go to a national
    park. Instead, they illegally take concealed weapons into national
    parks. Rangers know this happens, but do nothing to stop it. What
    could they do? Search every car? Have rangers ever searched a car for
    firearms at any national park entrance station? For many years, this
    has gone on, and has it been a problem? No. The national parks have
    traditionally had very low crime rates, and that's unlikely to change
    when the new rule goes into effect.

    Will backpackers start taking big handguns and stub-nosed shotguns
    with them? Not likely. Backpackers are the type of people who count
    out their vitamin pills and drill holes in toothbrushes to save
    weight. You think they'll throw a three-pound revolver in the pack
    when they know the chances of needing it are as close to zero as you
    can get.

    (Interestingly, ten years ago, I went on a nine-day backpacking
    adventure in Gates of the Arctic National Park in Alaska, and the NPS
    actually recommended we take a shotgun with us, which we declined to
    do, primarily because nobody wanted to carry it. And alas, we returned
    safely.)

    The proposed rule has been totted as "lifting the handgun ban" in
    national parks, but this exaggerates what the rule does. Park visitors
    can already take handguns and all other legal firearms into national
    parks, but they must be dissembled, unloaded and inaccessible (such as
    cased in the truck of the car). This regulation was put in place in
    1983 by none other than a NRA darling, Republican Ronald Reagan, and
    under the reign of terror of Secretary of the Interior James Watt.

    As currently proposed, the rule would be extremely confusing, so let's
    fix that problem before it becomes NPS policy. Right now, it only
    applies to national parks in states that allow concealed guns in state
    parks.
    Among western states, that includes Alaska, Arizona, Colorado,
    Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and Wyoming, not California,
    Idaho, New Mexico, Texas or Utah. (But you gotta think laws in those
    states will be changing fast after this new rule hits the books.) Gun-
    toting tourists will have to be on their toes as they travel from park
    to park--or, get this, parts of parks! National parks like Yellowstone
    and Death Valley cross state lines. In Yellowstone, for example, you
    could only carry your gun in the Montana and Wyoming parts, not the
    Idaho part. Ditto for Death Valley, which crosses the California/
    Nevada border.

    So, let's forget the state park requirement, and just let people have
    their guns in all national parks.
    In the meantime, the greens can
    concentrate on more important issues like getting adequate funding for
    national parks, making parks more affordable and accessible, trail and
    road maintenance, and improved interpretation. These and other issues
    related to the long-term health of our national parks need all our
    time, money and energy.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    I'm pretty much on their side for what they want in the last paragraph. If the DOI lets me carry I'd be inclined to get more involved in getting those measures passed.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    longwatch wrote:
    I'm pretty much on their side for what they want in the last paragraph. If the DOI lets me carry I'd be inclined to get more involved in getting those measures passed.
    Watch it Bub!! You're starting to sound like a politician. :what:

    hehehehe

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Virginia USA, ,
    Posts
    1,688

    Post imported post

    Nothing worse than making a wrong turn and committing a FELONY!

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    hsmith wrote:
    Nothing worse than making a wrong turn and committing a FELONY!
    What felony?

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    longwatch wrote:
    I'm pretty much on their side for what they want in the last paragraph. If the DOI lets me carry I'd be inclined to get more involved in getting those measures passed.
    +1
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    390

    Post imported post

    Wait, Idaho doesn't allow carry in state parks??

  8. #8
    Regular Member AZkopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    673

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    Will backpackers start taking big handguns and stub-nosed shotguns
    with them? Not likely. Backpackers are the type of people who count
    out their vitamin pills and drill holes in toothbrushes to save
    weight. You think they'll throw a three-pound revolver in the pack
    when they know the chances of needing it are as close to zero as you
    can get.
    s'funny, when I backpack, the one thing I carry that I don't 'weigh out' is my gun.

    I don't know any (non-granola) backpacker who isn't 'packing'.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Virginia USA, ,
    Posts
    1,688

    Post imported post

    longwatch wrote:
    hsmith wrote:
    Nothing worse than making a wrong turn and committing a FELONY!
    What felony?
    Isn't carrying a firearm in a National Park a felony? Or am I mistaken :-x

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    hsmith wrote:
    longwatch wrote:
    hsmith wrote:
    Nothing worse than making a wrong turn and committing a FELONY!
    What felony?
    Isn't carrying a firearm in a National Park a felony? Or am I mistaken :-x
    Cite to authority my friend, what does the code say?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •