• 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 Open Carry

Mainsail

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,533
Location
Silverdale, Washington, USA
imported post

From what I understand, in February 2010 (that’s three months from now!) firearms carry in the National Parks will be legal, and will follow the laws of the state where the park is located.

Please, if you don’t know the difference between a National Park and a National Forest or a Wilderness Area, please withhold your comments.

I’m sure there will be some serious learning curve to overcome and will likely be a few problems. What I’m interested in knowing is what are our rights in regards to contact with Park Rangers. Do Rangers in the National Park need reasonable articulable suspicion to detain someone for merely carrying a holstered handgun? We know that (at least in most states) the police and sheriffs need RAS to detain someone for openly carrying a handgun; mere handgun carry does not by itself arouse suspicion that the person so armed is committing a crime. I believe Game Wardens and the like do not need RAS, but I may be wrong about that. Do the Rangers follow those same rules?
 

Squeak

Regular Member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
827
Location
Port Orchard,
imported post

Do game wardens patrol Nat. land? I thought they only did state land. I could be wrong-Iwas just thinking. Gotta stop that thinking! Gets me into trouble!
 

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

I would wager that they all need RAS. Game wardens are allowed to contact you about a pistol if you are bow hunting, and I think musket hunting (I could be wrong on that one.) If you are not hunting then they have no RAS for a stop because a firearm is present. They have to follow the same laws and regs that any other peace officer does.

As far as Game Agents they do patrol in Nat'l forests. They would not be patrolling in a nat'l park as hunting is unlawful and would be responded to by a park ranger.
 

Bobarino

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
295
Location
Puyallup, Washington, USA
imported post

i'm pretty happy about this. now i won't have to disarm and disassemble when i go to my favorite campground on the Olympic Peninsula inside the Nat'l park. i also have some property right by Willapa Nat'l Wildlife Refuge and i like to go hike there too. it's about dang time.

Bobby
 

virgil47

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
90
Location
Tacoma, Washington, USA
imported post

Bobarino wrote:
i'm pretty happy about this. now i won't have to disarm and disassemble when i go to my favorite campground on the Olympic Peninsula inside the Nat'l park. i also have some property right by Willapa Nat'l Wildlife Refuge and i like to go hike there too. it's about dang time.

Bobby
I'd be careful in the Olympic National Park as it is a world heritage site and is primarily controlled by the U.N.
 

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

virgil47 wrote:
Bobarino wrote:
i'm pretty happy about this.  now i won't have to disarm and disassemble when i go to my favorite campground on the Olympic Peninsula inside the Nat'l park.  i also have some property right by Willapa Nat'l Wildlife Refuge and i like to go hike there too.   it's about dang time. 

Bobby
I'd be careful in the Olympic National Park as it is a world heritage site and is primarily controlled by the U.N.

The UN can make no laws restricting firearms within the boundaries of the US.
 

Gray Peterson

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
2,236
Location
Lynnwood, Washington, USA
imported post

virgil47 wrote:
Bobarino wrote:
i'm pretty happy about this. now i won't have to disarm and disassemble when i go to my favorite campground on the Olympic Peninsula inside the Nat'l park. i also have some property right by Willapa Nat'l Wildlife Refuge and i like to go hike there too. it's about dang time.

Bobby
I'd be careful in the Olympic National Park as it is a world heritage site and is primarily controlled by the U.N.
Where's the penalty flag image...dude, cite your source and cite your law.
 

tyguy808

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
346
Location
Not Here Anymore
imported post

virgil47 wrote:
I'd be careful in the Olympic National Park as it is a world heritage site and is primarily controlled by the U.N.


There is no measurable amount of land inside this country controlled by any other government entity,other than foreign consulates, even those are mostly just offices.
 

Mainsail

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,533
Location
Silverdale, Washington, USA
imported post

NRA News Release: http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=4901

Friday, May 22, 2009


On Wednesday, NRA-backed legislation to restore the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens in national parks and wildlife refuges passed in the U.S. House of Representatives by an overwhelming bipartisan majority of 279-147. Today, the measure was signed into law and, as specified in the legislation, will take effect in nine months, on February 22, 2010. This was a major repudiation of the gun control community's anti self-defense agenda....
 

Bo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
123
Location
, ,
imported post

Although many may go on ignorant of this new law,the soon-to-be lawful carry of firearms in this country's national parks by every citizen should be acknowledged for the milestone that it is ...

We are making forward progress, and I for one will be returning to the national parks for family recreation after years of a personal boycott due to the law that previously prohibited legal carry in the parks.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

tyguy808 wrote:
sudden valley gunner wrote:
Since Mt. Baker ski area is in a national forest, can I snowboard opencarrying? LOL.
Great question SVG! I'd do it if it were legal!!!!


The head security up there is a real *&%#. She tried to take my tag one time because she didn't realize I just saved her from getting her head beat in when she was harrassing this other guy I stepped in and told her to take her hands off of him or I would be a witness that she assaulted him first.

My guess is they can't kick us out of the park, but could take our tags if they have rules against it. We would just have to hike. Would be fun open carry on chair 8? LOL....

Hmmm makes me think Mt. Baker ski lodge is ran by the Mills family I wonder how they feel about the 2A.

P.S. they might be able to kick us out under that whole, managed by second party thing though? Not sure.
 

Hendo

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
114
Location
, ,
imported post

In regards to the change in the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Part 2) changing the possesion of firearms in National Parks - I understand this only applies to concealed carry. Open carrry continues to be illegal.

Yes?

Hendo
 

tyguy808

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
346
Location
Not Here Anymore
imported post

NavyLT wrote:
Hendo wrote:
In regards to the change in the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Part 2) changing the possesion of firearms in National Parks - I understand this only applies to concealed carry. Open carrry continues to be illegal.

Yes?

Hendo
The change in 36 CFR had an injunction against it by a Federal Judge and never really went into effect. That is what prompted Congress to pass the new law. The new law basically just does away with the National Park boundary. Whatever is legal outside the park, isNOW legal inside the park.

In fact the new law makes it illegal for the National Park Service to enact their own firearms restrictions.
Correction?
 

Hendo

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
114
Location
, ,
imported post

Hendo wrote:
In regards to the change in the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Part 2) changing the possesion of firearms in National Parks - I understand this only applies to concealed carry. Open carrry continues to be illegal.

Yes?

Hendo

I am not sure that this is the final language but it looks like it. I am surprised that the press reports several interpretations that this applies to open carry as well. The only reference to state laws are in the context of concealed carry.

I hope it does apply to open carry - comments, clarifications??



Hendo





IV. Section-by-Section Analysis

36 CFR Part 2

Section 2.4—Weapons, Traps, and Nets

Previously, Section 2.4 generally prohibited visitors from possessing an operable

and loaded firearm in national park areas unless the firearm is used for lawful hunting

activities, target practice in areas designated by special regulations, or other purposes

related to the administration of federal lands in Alaska. Under the final rule, an

individual may possess, carry, and transport concealed, loaded, and operable firearms

within a national park area in the same manner, and to the same extent, that a person may

lawfully possess, carry, and transport concealed, loaded and operable firearms in the state

in which the federal park, or that portion thereof, is located. Possession of concealed

firearms in national parks as authorized by this section must also conform to applicable

federal laws. Accordingly, nothing in this regulation shall be construed to authorize

concealed carry of firearms in any federal facility or federal court facility as defined in

18 U.S.C. 930.
 
Top