Dumb Rule: Feds Ease Gun Ban In Parks
The Interior Department revised a Reagan-era regulation Friday that now allows persons to carry concealed firearms in some national parks and wildlife refuges.
It is a dumb rule observed from personal experience which will be described later.
According to the Associated, the rule allows an individual to carry a loaded weapon in a park or wildlife refuge — but only if the person has a permit for a concealed weapon, and if the state where the park or refuge is located also allows loaded firearms in parks.
The previous regulations enacted by the Reagan administration required that firearms be unloaded and placed somewhere that is not easily accessible, such as in a car trunk.
The National Rifle Association hailed the rule change. “We are pleased that the Interior Department recognizes the right of law-abiding citizens to protect themselves and their families while enjoying America’s national parks and wildlife refuges,” said Chris W. Cox, the NRA’s chief lobbyist.
Bill Wade, president of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, said: “This regulation will put visitors, employees and precious resources of the National Park System at risk. We will do everything possible to overturn it and return to a commonsense approach to guns in national parks that has been working for decades.”
The park rule will be published in the Federal Register next week and take effect 30 days later, well before President-elect Barack Obama takes office Jan. 20. Overturning the rule could take months or even years, since it would require the new administration to restart the lengthy rule-making process.
I travelled in a motorhome throughout the northern states in 1990-91 spending numerous nights camped in state and national parks. I carried a .22-caliber rifle stored in an upper cabinet.
Only once did I observe the old rule enforced by park rangers. Teen-agers lining up beer bottles for target practice firing pistols was a common event.
The holidays of July 4th, Memorial Day and Labor Day were the worst and most dangerous. Drunken adults would fire pistol shots in the air, at squirrels and deer.
On July 4th, 1990, at a state park near Jamestown, North Dakota, the husbands of two couples travelling together argued over some senseless issue. One grabbed his pistol and fired it near the foot of the other.
I tried to be peacemaker and asked the gun-toting drunk to put down his pistol. Instead, he aimed it at my chest. I backed off just as park rangers who heard the early shot came to the rescue.
The NRA can say what it wants. Putting guns in the hands of teenagers and drunken adults is a recipe for disaster even in the confines of an open wilderness.
cross posted on The Remmers Report
opinions powered by SendLove.to
9 Responses to “Dumb Rule: Feds Ease Gun Ban In Parks”
“Putting guns in the hands of teenagers and drunken adults is a recipe for disaster even in the confines of an open wilderness. “
How many teenagers do you know have concealed carry permits? What about firearms makes adults suck down booze? No offence but anecdotal evidence is crap. More anti-gun bs without a real basis. My state is a shall issue state and with a permit I have a right to carry in my state. If you want to limit any of my rights please have a good reason and sound basis for doing so. Gun crime did not go up with concealed carry, it went down but crime was trending down, permit holders don't go on drunken rampages. Why would going to a park change this? None of the things you state would be legal under the rule change. It just seems like a “I don't like guns”, for others anyway since you felt the need to have one yourself.
I agree with EEllis. Such people should not be allowed to have concealed weapon permits. I don't own a gun, but if I did I would be offended by your assumption that I must just own it to get drunk and fire them randomly. The vast majority of gun owners are responsible, and the few that aren't should not be allowed to carry them. Should we not allow people to drive because some people drink and drive?
By your logic, we should not allow concealed weapon permit carriers to carry weapons anywhere. We wouldn't want to put guns in the hands of teenagers and drunken adults anywhere, right?
Jerry – you are obviously too biased to see anything other than your bigoted world-view.
Go have some chardonnay and kill someone in a drunk driving accident. That is the Liberal way instead of guns, right?
I'm sorry but these comments are far worse than any points in the original post. When a guy says that he's not sure that concealed weapons in national parks is a good idea because of some dangers he's encountered in the past from people not using guns responsibly, including one time when someone pointed a gun right at his chest, that's hardly something that deserves the retorts it has received, calling the person or the post biased, bigoted, hypocritical, full of anti-gun BS, …. What the —–? How could he be anti-gun when the post discusses the gun he owns? Why is it bigoted to worry about gun safety when at one point in time he might have died because of irresponsible gun use? Where the heck does this Liberals like to get drunk on pansy wines and kill people by driving drunk thing come from?
Now, could the post be wrong? Yes, of course. Why not just state what's wrong instead of attack, attack? Unfortunately, all three commenters arguing for gun ownership come off as quick to the trigger here.
pacatrue,
My issue is that Jerry equates concealed weapon permit carrier, who have gone through training and the vast majority of which are responsible (just as the vast majority of drivers are responsible), with teenagers and drunken adults shooting at random. That is blatantly false and I stand by my original comment.
That's exactly what I did. I re-read my comment and did not see anything that could be interpreted as an attack on Jerry. But if my comment was offensive, I apologize and I did not mean it to be anything more than a rebuttal of the points he was making.
Paca what has his anecdotal account to do with concealed permit holders? Nothing. So why would that effect the decision to allow permit holders to be allowed to carry in parks in their own state? None of the events mentioned would become legal so why should we care? If it did have some bearing I still say anecdotal evidence is BS and if someone wants to post then maybe they can try and have some real evidence or an argument that is on point at least.
AR, where do you get off calling Jerry “bigoted”? Get a grip dude.
I have mixed feelings about this rule. As someone who has grown up around guns, I'm comfortable with firearms, but I also know how much more relaxed the process is for granting CCW permits these days. For example, I know people who can legally carry concealed weapons who aren't exactly what I would call emotionally mature, and frankly I was a little surprised they were able to get permits.
On the other hand, I'd be interested in knowing the stats for the numbers of people who carry a firearm illegally in national parks as compared to those who carry legally. I'm not a paranoid person, but if I was going to be making an extended hiking/camping trip with my wife or girlfriend in some remote areas, I believe I'd feel more comfortable carrying a concealed weapon.
As I said, I have mixed feelings about this rule.
JS I can understand the conflicted, but lets look at it. It only allows firearms as permitted by the state the park is in. So by that if it bothers you you may be in the wrong state. Really though why “overrule” the state as far their laws go? You still are still in their state right?
[...] Dumb Rule: Feds Ease Gun Ban In Parks [...]