[Oleg Volk]

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=32092&d=1133498693

Trying to keep it concise, yet informative.

Also considering adding an unarmed hiker to the image.

[deanf]

Is there supposed to be an image attached?

[torpid]

That is extraordinarily concise, yet not at all informative.




Perhaps a pic would help?
;)

[Oleg Volk]

Better now? For some reason, the image was visible to me but not to anyone else...
http://www.olegvolk.net/gallery/albums/arms/prey8949.sized.jpg

I am not really happy with it, looking for ideas on this topic.

[Car Knocker]

Actually, the Red X aptly describes National Park carry (picture a gun with a red x superimposed).

[Car Knocker]

Not better. No image.

[carebear]

I believe it is a poignant tribute to the ban on carry in national parks. The small red x marks the end of a thousand dreams of freedom.

[torpid]

I see it!

[Car Knocker]

OK, now there's an image!

[torpid]

I really like the gaping maw motif.

(Though a pic of that poor bear attack victim with no face from that video post a while back would work even better...) :uhoh:


.

[carebear]

Better now? For some reason, the image was visible to me but not to anyone else...

Did the image say anything to you no one else can hear? Cause mine do. :evil:

Text in red: (dress this up a bit at will all)

Carrying a weapon is shown to protect us from 2 legged predators.

Picture: (mugger? holstered pistol on hip of "city clothes"?)

It can come in handy for 4 legged ones as well.

Picture: (bear mouth? squirrel horde?)

Remove the ban on weapons in National Parks.

[torpid]

Perhaps-
"Guns gave us a fighting chance"?

And change "they" to "we"?

And add "YOU" after Federal law?

.

[Oleg Volk]

What I originally planned to do was to show wolves, bears, pumas and other large N.American critters who could consider humans edible. Trying to mold posters to fit available images really sucks.

[sm]

Weapons have always kept humans from being preyed upon.

Federal Law Restricting weapons in Nat'l Parks - Introduces more more Prey into the Park System.

[iiibdsiil]

I think the images look, ummm... I can't think of the word. I don't like the gun being in the mouth like that. It doesn't compare to most of the rest of your work. Looks ahh.... like a beginner did it, unprofessional.

Maybe a picture of a wolf or something doing that kinda motivated search/getting ready to attack, maybe with a kid playing close by?

[Oleg Volk]

As I said, not happy with it.

The rifle image was taken from an advertising shoot I did, the bear from the net and cleaned up. This is definitely work in progress, and I should really go to sketching these instead of wasting time in Photoshop.

[iiibdsiil]

Ya, I wasn't trying to be a prick or anything. I'm sorry if it came out that way. Just what I saw was wrong.

[4v50 Gary]

Can you crop the human hand & arm out of the pic. Just leave the gun "floating" with them big jaws in the background.

[Larryect]

I really like it

[Darrin]

Our permits allow us to carry a handgun and that permitted handgun is what we can't carry in parks. However, you have a rifle in your pic. Maybe you'd be happier with the image if a handgun was used?

I only bring this up since we can't 'carry' a rifle anywhere except at the range or at home, you may have more impact on 'stupid handgun permit restrictions' by changing your choice of weapon?

Using a rifle in the pic may give anti-gun folk the arguement, "Oh, great. Now they want to hunt in our parks anytime they want!"

Then again, you may be going for something else here and I'm missing it so far. *shrugs*

Just thinking out loud.

[Oleg Volk]

Rifles are OK in some places. But you might be right. A 44 maggie revolver might be more appropriate.

[Molon Labe]

I'm pretty sure there are no restrictions in National Forests. Is that correct? :confused:

[middy]

I don't know. It seems to me that fire, intelligence, teamwork, and pointy sticks fixed the humans-as-prey thing tens of thousands of years ago. It's commonly accepted that human predators wiped out a lot of the megafauna since the last ice age, before the bow and arrow were even invented...

Also, iiibdsiil and Oleg, wolf attacks on humans are exceedingly rare, practically unheard of in North America. I don't think a picture of a wolf would be appropriate.

[armoredman]

I like the idea. Last night four wild javalina stared me down at Traffic Control at work...well glad I was of my pistola, in case the swine decided to attck, which happens once a blue moon.
The mountain lion in Cali has killed many people, perhaps those jaws might be more appropo? Nonetheless, another thought provoking Image.

[Weimadog]

I don't think the image will win anyone over who is 'on the fence' on the gun issue.

To the non-hunter, the long gun makes it look like you are intentionally stalking Bobo Bear. Hunting in Natinoal Parks? Yikes!

The huge gaping maw makes the image look alarmist.

For me, a compelling image would be a bear, a mother bear maybe, who looks ready to attack a mother human and child. The mother human is ready to defend using a big handgun.

[middy]

For me, a compelling image would be a bear, a mother bear maybe, who looks ready to attack a mother human and child. The mother human is ready to defend using a big handgun.
OK, weimadog. You set that up and take the picture, then send it to Oleg. I'm sure he'll be happy to use it. :p

[RnR]

in an already text filled photo could be...

" Which specie is endangered? "

[TallPine]

Well Oleg, if you're going to show a rifle, I'd recommend a big bore lever action (more friendly looking to the masses, and more appropriate to defense rather than hunting) or even a pump action short barrel shotgun. A big revolver would be okay too.

As for composition, how about something like a family hiking on a trail and a bear poking his nose out through the bushes...? (I know, I know - you have to go take some pictures for that)

It also seems like you could make a double meaning out of a Don't Feed the Bears sign ....;)


As for me, I refuse to enter National Victim Disarmament Zone Parks anymore. There are plenty of other places on the National Forest that are less crowded.

[Pilot]

This issue really makes me sick. We hike in Rocky Mountain National park a lot and I have to leave my gun at home. I have a CCW, but can't even leave my gun in the car in a National Park. As far as I know, it IS legal to carry in a National or State Forest, but not parks. Guess we'll be hiking in forests from now on.

What is the penalty for carrying a firearm in a National Park, not that I'm going to find out, just curious.

[armoredman]

National Forests are AOK for firearms carry.

[Sinsaba]

Reduce (slightly) arm and rifle (maybe change to hand gun) along with jaws. Move them slightly to the left. Keep the slightly blurry background.

Take photo of woman being menaced by an obvious low life, blur it (a little), and put it behind the lettering in the lower right corner.

Just my $.02

[spacemanspiff]

maybe something like "many Americans don't get to enjoy the use of these resources because its against the law to carry firearms for protection in such areas".
i know, too wordy.


the question of carrying lawfully in state parks, national parks, and national forests never has clear answers. i cant keep straight where i cant have a gun period, where i cant have a concealed gun, and where i can have whatever i want.

so i tend to only go where i know i can be armed.

[mbs357]

The fact that the arm/gun and the bear's mouth is in focus looks a little odd.

[Phil Ca]

Carrying a CCW fiearm is not a major problem but using it to defend against a two or four legged critter would be the problem. In Yosemite Park there have been street gangs that have come up to cause problems from Fresno in the past. If a person were to defend oneself and family from these scum they would be charged with the additional federal crime for packing in the National Park. Nevermind that the gangs will not heed the regs or laws anyway. If I were hiking the high country I would certainly carry and just keep the firearm properly concealed.

[fletcher]

Does the rifle look twisted to anyone else?

[robertbank]

Anybody who hikes in the woods where bears abound unarmed is just plain nuts and I would not care what the law says. Being killed by a Black Bear is not an option to contemplate. I thought Bush & Co were going to clean some of this up for gun owners.

Stay Safe

[mete]

State parks too are in some states, like PA,off limits for guns ! It can get confusing.

[Standing Wolf]

The critter doesn't look entirely convincing. The Helvetica... Well, it didn't get to be the first choice of blind typesetters the world over by accident.

[g56]

I really like the gaping maw motif.

(Though a pic of that poor bear attack victim with no face from that video post a while back would work even better...) :uhoh:
.
+10!

[carebear]

so i tend to only go where i know i can be armed.

...and strip clubs. :evil:

[spacemanspiff]

it must be about time to drag you to the ABC ballet carebear.

whaddaya say?

[carebear]

Busy weekend, only home to change for a realtor ball tonight. Saturday's full too.

[nfl1990]

To the non-hunter, the long gun makes it look like you are intentionally stalking Bobo Bear. Hunting in Natinoal Parks? Yikes!

The huge gaping maw makes the image look alarmist.

For me, a compelling image would be a bear, a mother bear maybe, who looks ready to attack a mother human and child. The mother human is ready to defend using a big handgun.

I don't know about you but I don't want to defend myself against an angry grizzly with a pistol.

[TrapperReady]

I'd try to show a bit more of the bear's head. My initial thought upon looking at it was "That's one angry hyena." I also think a .44 magnum revolver would be a better choice.

[mnrivrat]

I'd like to see a hiker going down a trail with a dangerous animal looking down on him/her with snarling teeth as if they are getting ready to strike .

Then a national park sign with a handgun and an X across it at the beginning of the trail to indicate no firearms allowed.

Maybe something like "Who's lower on the food chain now ! - Giving up your right to be safe in our national parks"

[Oleg Volk]

Thanks all for the input, I'll work on this some more.

[akodo]

here's my take.

Why do you want to carry concealed in a national park? Protection vs bad humans or predator ?animals. Okay, sure, to a degree, both, but really part of the concept of concealed carry is that the two-legged animals won't know who can fight back and who cannot, and will think twice about attacking. (note, I am aware that open carry is also prohibited in national parks). And really, there are lots and lots of things you can do to prevent bear attacks, and the group that is most in danger of bear attacks are hunters, who are already armed (too long not hunting bears have taught them that gunshots are dinnerbells, hear a gun, go eat some elk guts...maybe chase off the hunter and eat some elk meat!) Hence, the poster should stress the use of weapons to ward of human menaces.

Maybe something like "Bears arn't the only unwanted guest that may show up in your campsite" or something similar stressing that thugs aren't just restricted to poorly lit parking ramps