Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Carry in the National Parks - Poll

  1. #1
    Founder's Club Member MudCamper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sebastopol, California, USA
    Posts
    710

    Post imported post

    http://www.aolnews.com/nation/articl...parks/19353107

    The article contains 2 poll questions. Hit em.

    "What do you think of the new rule allowing guns in national parks?"

    "Do you plan to carry a gun at national parks?"


  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    Thanks, voted in favor of pro-gunon both.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    NoVA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    431

    Post imported post

    Looking forward to Monday!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    , Florida, USA
    Posts
    184

    Post imported post

    voted and look forward to be carrying in the National Parks

    oh I carried last year for the few weeks we had

    sprat

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Provo, Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,076

    Post imported post

    We are behind in the poll! We need to get more activity on this.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    I wouldn't worry too much about the question, "Do you plan to carry a gun...."

    Right now the yes's are at 35%, that'smost likelyhigher than the precentage of people that actually carry everyday, anywhere else.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    Voted:It's a good idea& Yes

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    This poll is based on browser cookies and is of horrid programming. I can't stand polls like this, but I went ahead and voted appropriately anyway.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Culpeper, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    305

    Post imported post

    What do you think of the new rule allowing guns in national parks?

    It's a bad idea53% It's a good idea44% Not sure3% Total Votes: 5,070

    Do you plan to carry a gun at national parks?

    No54% Yes36% Undecided5% I don't visit national parks5% Total Votes: 4,789

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    I am always amazed when folks assert the notion that it is important to "feel safe" as opposed to actually being safe. Could it be a left-over effect of being the 31st-place winner in a class of 30 kids?

    I know that there is no absolute guarantee that I will "be safe" in a National Park or anywhere else, but I prefer to tilt the odds a bit more in my favor.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , Nevada, USA
    Posts
    716

    Post imported post

    I didn't notice any provision for comments, could that be so that you can't point out the lies in the article?

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    Lameness is afoot...

    To Hell With Not Being Armed

    I have just as much right to defend myself against bears and wolves as I do another human being.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    The Washington Post is already on this with for one a bunch of retired Park Service employees kvetching and moaning and various sources predicting a bloodbath - just as they did with the CHP "Shall Issue" laws.

    One thing we here in the Virginia part of the DC Metro Area have to deal with is that the United States Park Police patrol all the Federal parkland around here, and they are pretty darn authoritarian. There are going to be a BUNCH of run-ins wherein they will demand a "permit" for even OC and/or go for an illegally concealed weapons charge for a hip holster in a car without a CHP. And in that case, state precedent about what is "open" vs "comcealed" may not hold up in Federal court.

    Another thing is the "felony furlong"; that part of the GW parkway that crosses Boundary Channel and runs briefly through D.C. Plus, there are the Metropolitan Airports Authority Police, many of whom take a large view of their jurisdiction over "adjacent roadways" to an airport. Dollars to donuts one or two of these Barney Fifes try to apply "airport law" to the GW Parkway.

    This may get very interesting....

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    Alexcabbie wrote:
    One thing we here in the Virginia part of the DC Metro Area have to deal with is that the United States Park Police patrol all the Federal parkland around here, and they are pretty darn authoritarian. There are going to be a BUNCH of run-ins wherein they will demand a "permit" for even OC and/or go for an illegally concealed weapons charge for a hip holster in a car without a CHP. And in that case, state precedent about what is "open" vs "comcealed" may not hold up in Federal court.
    Interesting indeed. Aren't you still open for prosecution under the state? Since the crime occured in the state, the Feds may know that an open vs concealed will not hold up in court and ask the State Attorney General to prosecute. I don't know, but I assume this is possible.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    tekshogun wrote:
    Alexcabbie wrote:
    One thing we here in the Virginia part of the DC Metro Area have to deal with is that the United States Park Police patrol all the Federal parkland around here, and they are pretty darn authoritarian. There are going to be a BUNCH of run-ins wherein they will demand a "permit" for even OC and/or go for an illegally concealed weapons charge for a hip holster in a car without a CHP. And in that case, state precedent about what is "open" vs "comcealed" may not hold up in Federal court.
    Interesting indeed. Aren't you still open for prosecution under the state? Since the crime occured in the state, the Feds may know that an open vs concealed will not hold up in court and ask the State Attorney General to prosecute. I don't know, but I assume this is possible.
    As the federal park carry law, to my understanding, punts to state law by saying that carry in federal parks must be in compliance with state law, the federal district court will (I imagine) have to apply state law (including state court precedents) to make the determination as to whether one violated the federal park carry law. Federal courts frequently have to apply state law and state court precedents (for example, when bringing a case in federal district court based upon diversity of jurisdiction - i.e., citizens from two different states suing one another).

    I'm not a litigator though.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Talking about Federal charges in Federal Court. Example: Larry Lawful is driving near Fort Marcy Park in Virginia and carrying his Bersa in a holster on his right hip. He is yanked over by USPP Officer Haywood Jablomi and his partner Officer Jack Hoff, for having a dirty license plate. Jablomi and Hoff approach from opposite sides, Hoff notices the weapon, shouts GUN, PARTNER! and both cops draw down and order Larry out of the car. After handcuffing Lawful "for your safety and ours" and assuring him he is not "at this time under arrest"; they then ask if he can produce a "pernit for that weapon".

    When Lawful informs Jablomi and Hoff that in Virginia no permit is needed for Open Carry, Jablomi responds that since they couldn't see the weapon before they approached, it was in their opinion "concealed by the car" and inform him that he is under arrest.

    When the case goes to trial, Lawful tries to cite Virginia precedent and common Virginia understanding as to what "open" vs "concealed" is, ONLY TO BE TLD BY THE JUDGE THAT ALTHOUGH STATE STATUTES ARE GUIDELINES AS TO WHAT IS PERMITTED WEAPON-WISE, VIRGINIA PRECEDENT AND PRACTICE ARE NOT BINDING ON THE FEDERAL COURTS :shock:

    Lawful is convicted of a felony and faces all the hardships that "scarlet letter" entails.

    You can bet something like this will happen sooner rather thn later. If you plan on driving the GWP heeled, get a CHP. I have been here since 1973, and believe me I know what the USPP are like.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    Alexcabbie,

    Per the line of cases including and following Erie RR v. Tompkins, state court precedents are supposed to be binding upon federal district courts when determining issues of substantive state law. That was a diversity jurisdiction case, but I imagine the same principle should apply to any application of substantive state law. Some appellate circuits have undermined this by declaring that they don't have to follow anything but state supreme court precedents (and not lower state courts). Where there is no state precedent, the federal courts typically try to make an educated guess as to how the state courts will come down on the issue... but don't always get it right.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    VA Lawyer wrote:
    Alexcabbie,

    Per the line of cases including and following Erie RR v. Tompkins, state court precedents are supposed to be binding upon federal district courts when determining issues of substantive state law. That was a diversity jurisdiction case, but I imagine the same principle should apply to any application of substantive state law. Some appellate circuits have undermined this by declaring that they don't have to follow anything but state supreme court precedents (and not lower state courts). Where there is no state precedent, the federal courts typically try to make an educated guess as to how the state courts will come down on the issue... but don't always get it right.
    No &^%*, Sherlock. That is exactly what I am worried about.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,098

    Post imported post

    Alexcabbie wrote:
    Talking about Federal charges in Federal Court. Example: Larry Lawful is driving near Fort Marcy Park in Virginia and carrying his Bersa in a holster on his right hip. He is yanked over by USPP Officer Haywood Jablomi and his partner Officer Jack Hoff, for having a dirty license plate. Jablomi and Hoff approach from opposite sides, Hoff notices the weapon, shouts GUN, PARTNER! and both cops draw down and order Larry out of the car. After handcuffing Lawful "for your safety and ours" and assuring him he is not "at this time under arrest"; they then ask if he can produce a "pernit for that weapon".

    When Lawful informs Jablomi and Hoff that in Virginia no permit is needed for Open Carry, Jablomi responds that since they couldn't see the weapon before they approached, it was in their opinion "concealed by the car" and inform him that he is under arrest.

    When the case goes to trial, Lawful tries to cite Virginia precedent and common Virginia understanding as to what "open" vs "concealed" is, ONLY TO BE TLD BY THE JUDGE THAT ALTHOUGH STATE STATUTES ARE GUIDELINES AS TO WHAT IS PERMITTED WEAPON-WISE, VIRGINIA PRECEDENT AND PRACTICE ARE NOT BINDING ON THE FEDERAL COURTS :shock:

    Lawful is convicted of a felony and faces all the hardships that "scarlet letter" entails.

    You can bet something like this will happen sooner rather thn later. If you plan on driving the GWP heeled, get a CHP. I have been here since 1973, and believe me I know what the USPP are like.
    If Hoff can see the weapon, it isn't concealed. Case is thrown out of court, twoofficers haveCivil Rights violations cases on their heads, and the Court, in an effort to avoid a heavier workload, decrees that requiring permits to conceal is Unconstitutional.

    Hey, a guy can dream, right?



    IANAL

Posting Permissions

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