suntzu
Regular Member
imported post
BOHICA wrote:
The US National Parks are public lands yes--but under the governance of the US Dept. of the Interior. Which means the state has no control over the park.
I would not think local/state law enforcement would even have jurisdiction to conduct a traffic stop within the boundary of a national park, or federal reservation...It would be similar I think to having the North Carolina highway patrol conducting patrols on Ft. Bragg and doing traffic stops...I just don't think you will see it--although I could be wrong...
The Smoky Mountains are controlled by the DOI--which agreed to change the rules.
39-17-1302 (a) only covers STATE parks, or parks and recreation areas which are controlled by STATE, municipal, county or city governments....which the Smoky mountains definitely are not controlled by any of these--they are federally controlled lands. At least this is how it reads to me.
Tomorrow I will contact my State Senator and will ask him to check into this issue to see if the changes by the DOI will allow Tennesseans to carry into national parks here with a permit. I think this would be a good thing for others to do as well.
BOHICA wrote:
Here is the thing though--Yeah, I found his interpretation after I posted. At first I was pretty ticked off, but after thinking about it for a while and rereading his 2nd statement, I do believe he came to a logical conclusion. Assuming the precedent he cites in the 2nd paragraph on page 2 means what I think it means, courts have decided that the statutes are all one piece and shouldn't be read in sections. If I weren't biased towards the 2nd Amendment, there's a good chance I would have said the same thing.
The only possible loopholes that I can see are:
1. In the first paragraph (continued) on the 2nd page, he says that the legislature intended for it to be read as a whole. However, unless this law was passed after 2004 (when the precedent was set), the legislature couldn't have known whether or not the statute would be read as a whole or in parts.
2. In the 2nd paragraph, page 3, he states that the items listed as prohibited are not used in the course of hunting. I know that somewhere out there is someone who hunts and is able to afford a silencer and uses it to prevent hearing loss. Finding someone who does this (preferably more than one) would prove his interpretation wrong and possible open the statute up to looser interpretations.
3. It all depends on the definition of public parks - whether or not that's considered to be all-encompassing or if it only applies to state and local lands. Unfortunately, due to the nature of the word public - Webster's defines it as:
- I seriously doubt this we're going to be allowed to. :banghead:
- of, belonging to, or concerning the people as a whole; of or by the community at large
- for the use or benefit of all, especially supported by government funds
:cuss:
The US National Parks are public lands yes--but under the governance of the US Dept. of the Interior. Which means the state has no control over the park.
I would not think local/state law enforcement would even have jurisdiction to conduct a traffic stop within the boundary of a national park, or federal reservation...It would be similar I think to having the North Carolina highway patrol conducting patrols on Ft. Bragg and doing traffic stops...I just don't think you will see it--although I could be wrong...
The Smoky Mountains are controlled by the DOI--which agreed to change the rules.
39-17-1302 (a) only covers STATE parks, or parks and recreation areas which are controlled by STATE, municipal, county or city governments....which the Smoky mountains definitely are not controlled by any of these--they are federally controlled lands. At least this is how it reads to me.
Tomorrow I will contact my State Senator and will ask him to check into this issue to see if the changes by the DOI will allow Tennesseans to carry into national parks here with a permit. I think this would be a good thing for others to do as well.
