• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

National Park Carry: UPDATE

thorvaldr

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
263
Location
Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
imported post

hansolo wrote:
Would this only allow CC, or would it also allow OC?
Right now the amentdment says:

(b) Protecting the Right of Individuals To Bear Arms in Units of the National Park System and the National Wildlife Refuge System.–The Secretary of the Interior shall not promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an individual from possessing a firearm including an assembled or functional firearm in any unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System if–

(1) the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing the firearm; and

(2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the law of the State in which the unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System is located.

So, yes, you would be able to OC, just like anywhere else in CO (except Denver).
 

Dispatcher

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
311
Location
Virginia, , USA
imported post

hansolo wrote:
So what you said is not the current law, but is in the process of passing in the Colorado Congress?



This is a Federal law. It will allow the carrying of loaded firearms of any non-prohibited type to be carried into a National Park or National Wildlife Refuge. It will make both OC and CC legal as long as the state allows it.

Currently, you can only carry concealed in National Forests. Other Federal wilderness areas are off limits.


In short, it lets each individual state decide whether carrying is to be allowed or not, as it should be.
 

old dog

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
396
Location
, ,
imported post

Not too much of a shocker. Though Reid is a Democrat weasel, he's been fairly decent to gunowners.
 

old dog

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
396
Location
, ,
imported post

Why is he a weasel? Because he's a Democrat. That means he is, finally, in bed with Pelosi, Kennedy, Schumer, Feinstein, ad nauseum.

On the Second Amendment, he has often said the right thing but I simply can't accept that he is reliable. I'm afraid that his fidelity to American gunowners will prove fungible in the crucible of politics.
 

AWDstylez

Banned
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
2,785
Location
, Connecticut, USA
imported post

old dog wrote:
Why is he a weasel? Because he's a Democrat. That means he is, finally, in bed with Pelosi, Kennedy, Schumer, Feinstein, ad nauseum.

On the Second Amendment, he has often said the right thing but I simply can't accept that he is reliable. I'm afraid that his fidelity to American gunowners will prove fungible in the crucible of politics.


Then you're part of the problem.
 

thorvaldr

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
263
Location
Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
imported post

What AWDstylez is saying is that he wants you to ignore the fact that gun control is still part of the Democratic Party platform.

We can all point to democrats (mostly from Western states) who honestly don't want to take your guns and Republicans (Rep. Peter King [R, NY-3],Rep. Michael Castle [R, DE-0], Rep. Mark Kirk [R, IL-10],
Rep. Christopher Smith [R, NJ-4]), who do, but the big difference between Democrats and Republicans remains that a Republican can vote for your constitutional rights and still look cool in front of his friends.
 

American Rattlesnake

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Messages
281
Location
Oregon, USA
imported post

old dog wrote:
AWD, could you expand on that?
Not to put words in his mouth, but opposition to a politician simply due to party affiliation is kind of senseless. Oppose Reid due to his errors in governance, not because there is a "D" after his name.

For example, my congressman is a Democrat who has staunchly opposed every single spending bill that's come through this year and has gone on the record opposing gun control measures. He has also supported every measure intended to increase individual liberty at the national level thus far. I am impressed with this man due to the record of his votes. He has not let party affiliation sway his sense of right and wrong. He represents his constituency.

For what it's worth....
 

Dispatcher

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
311
Location
Virginia, , USA
imported post

hansolo wrote:
Dispatcher wrote:
Currently, you can only carry concealed in National Forests. Other Federal wilderness areas are off limits.
You mean National Parks? I currently carry in a all National Forests and State Wildernesses I enter.
There is a difference between State and Federal Parks.

There are also different classifications.

It is illegal to carry a loaded firearm into any National Park (Federal) or Federal Wildlife Refuge.

You can, however and strangely enough, carry a loaded firearm onto the premise of a National Forest, which is not a National Park or Federal Wildlife Refuge. Even hunting is allowed in National Forests.

State Parks and State Wildlife refuges are owned by the State and not the Federal government, which means Federal parks rules do not apply. Like here in Virginia, I can carry concealed in a State Park but cannot carry into a National Park in my own state, even though state law allows concealed carry....

In short, you cannot carry in a Federal Wildlife. You cannot carry in any National Park. You can carry in a National Forest.

What makes this thing so ridiculous is the fact that many National Parks are surrounded by or share a border with National Forests.

This means that you can be walking along concealed carrying hiking through a National Forest and you accidentally cross one foot over into the National Park..... you have just become a criminal. Does this make sense to anyone? It can't, it's senseless!
 

Dispatcher

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
311
Location
Virginia, , USA
imported post

MSC 45ACP wrote:
Out of committee and passed now???

Yes, the amendment has been passed and is now officially part of the Credit Card Reform Bill that Obama says we so desperately need.

It may yet be torn out though, this has yet to go through the House.
 

AWDstylez

Banned
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
2,785
Location
, Connecticut, USA
imported post

American Rattlesnake wrote:
old dog wrote:
AWD, could you expand on that?
Not to put words in his mouth, but opposition to a politician simply due to party affiliation is kind of senseless. Oppose Reid due to his errors in governance, not because there is a "D" after his name.

For example, my congressman is a Democrat who has staunchly opposed every single spending bill that's come through this year and has gone on the record opposing gun control measures. He has also supported every measure intended to increase individual liberty at the national level thus far. I am impressed with this man due to the record of his votes. He has not let party affiliation sway his sense of right and wrong. He represents his constituency.

For what it's worth....

^that

Parties are a joke. They both take your rights away, just on different ends. They've set you on fire at both ends and you're so pre-occupied withyour burning ass that you don't realize your hair is on fire too. That's the goal. Keep half the people looking one direction and half looking the other direction. Then no one sees the big picture and they spend too much time fighting amongst themselves to really change anything.
 
Top