National Park Carry Vote Delayed:Not Enough Votes Says GOP Sen.Coburn


PDA






Winchester 73
April 13, 2008, 02:14 AM
As was feared ,they are just not enough votes in the Senate with its 60 vote rule to get this deal done right now.Short and not so sweet from GOA.

http://www.gunowners.org/a041108.htm

Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
(703)321-8585
Friday, April 11, 2008
Gun Owners of America alerted you on Tuesday to the looming battle over Senate legislation that will determine whether or not you will be able to carry a gun on lands controlled by the National Park Service.

The showdown has been postponed until later, as Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma (who had planned to offer the pro-gun amendment) determined he didn't have enough votes. Senator Coburn does plan to find another vehicle to offer his amendment at a later date. So please stay tuned

If you enjoyed reading about "National Park Carry Vote Delayed:Not Enough Votes Says GOP Sen.Coburn" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
kd7nqb
April 13, 2008, 02:18 AM
sorry to hear it, I suppose its better than a vote that fails right?

Winchester 73
April 13, 2008, 02:28 AM
carebear put this notice in my thread in Activism late yesterday.
I did not see that until after I started this new thread.
Sorry,carebear.

rocinante
April 13, 2008, 08:50 AM
I thought they had changed earlier this year deciding the carry rules in federal land would follow what was the state laws.

csmkersh
April 13, 2008, 09:21 AM
I thought they had changed earlier this year deciding the carry rules in federal land would follow what was the state laws.

No. what happened is 50 Senators sent a joint letter to the Park Service requesting the change. Here's the NRA press release:

Bush Administration to Propose New Rule Regarding Right-to-Carry in National Parks

Friday, February 22, 2008

Fairfax, Va. - At the request of the Bush Administration and 51 members of the United States Senate led by Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID), the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prohibition of firearms on agency land will be revised in the following weeks. The National Rifle Association (NRA) is leading the effort to amend the existing policy regarding the carrying and transportation of firearms in National Parks and wildlife refuges.

“Law-abiding citizens should not be prohibited from protecting themselves and their families while enjoying America’s National Parks and wildlife refuges,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA chief lobbyist. “Under this proposal, federal parks and wildlife refuges will mirror the state firearm laws for state parks. This is an important step in the right direction.”

These new regulations, when finalized, will provide uniformity across our nation’s federal lands and put an end to the patchwork of regulations that governed different lands managed by different federal agencies. In the past, only Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Forest Service lands allowed the carrying of firearms, while National Park lands did not.

The current regulations on possession, carry or transportation of loaded or uncased firearms in national parks were proposed in 1982 and finalized in 1983. Similar restrictions apply in national wildlife refuges. The NRA believes it is time to amend those regulations to reflect the changed legal situation with respect to state laws on carrying firearms.

The effect of these now-outdated regulations on people who carry firearms for self-protection was far from the forefront at the time these regulations were adopted. As of the end of 1982, only six states routinely allowed citizens to carry handguns for self-defense. Currently, 48 states have a process for issuance of licenses or permits to allow law-abiding citizens to legally carry firearms for self-defense.

The move for regulatory change by the Administration will restore the rights of law-abiding gun owners who wish to transport and carry firearms for lawful purposes in most National Park lands and will make the laws consistent with state law where these lands are located. Fifty-one U.S. Senators from both parties sent a letter to the Department of Interior late last year supporting the move to render state firearms laws applicable to National Park lands.

“These changes will respect the Second Amendment rights of honest citizens, and we look forward to the issuance of a final rule this year,” concluded Cox.

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=10651

The simple answer is, "It ain't gonna happen." The Park Service is riddled with anti-gunners.

The Park Service immediately countered with this press release:

PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: February 22, 2008
Contact: Bryan Faehner, NPCA, 202.223.6722, ext. 155

National Parks Conservation Association Says NRA Effort to Weaken National Parks Regulations Risks Visitor, Wildlife Safety
Under Pressure, Administration Reopens National Park Regulations Requiring Guns be Unloaded


WASHINGTON, D.C. - America’s leading voice for the national parks, the nonprofit National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), today expressed profound disappointment that the Bush Administration, responding to intense political pressure orchestrated by the National Rifle Association, has decided to re-open 25-year-old regulations governing firearms in the parks, risking the safety of visitors and wildlife. These reasonable regulations, updated during the Reagan Administration, provide that firearms carried into a national park unit where hunting is not permitted must be unloaded and stowed.

"Today’s action is alarming. Overturning Reagan-era rules that struck the right balance between the rights of gun owners and the safety of families and wildlife is a blow to the national parks and the 300 million visitors who enjoy them every year," said NPCA President Tom Kiernan. "It is truly unfortunate the National Rifle Association has chosen this issue to flex its election year political muscle."

In December, Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne received a letter spearheaded by the NRA and signed by 47 members of the U.S. Senate, demanding that firearm rules that apply in national parks and national wildlife refuges be overturned, and that state firearms laws be applied instead. The letter misstates current law, erroneously stating that the regulations violate Second Amendment rights by prohibiting people from carrying guns into national parks, when in fact all they require is that firearms in a visitor’s possession be unloaded and put away while within park boundaries. Four additional senators signed a letter to Sec. Kempthorne in February. As a follow-up to the senators’ letter to Sec. Kempthorne, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) filed an amendment and later introduced a freestanding bill directing the Secretary to overturn the regulations. The issue was also raised when Sec. Kempthorne testified before the House Natural Resources Committee this month about the Administration’s 2009 budget.

Originally written in the 1930s to prevent wildlife poaching, the parks’ firearms regulation was carefully revised during the Reagan Administration to be as narrowly restrictive as possible, while also assisting park personnel to prevent unlawful killing of wildlife. NPCA believes the current regulations strike an appropriate balance between the rights of individuals to possess firearms under state and federal laws and hunt in areas of the National Park System where it is permitted, and the safety of national park visitors and wildlife. NPCA will express its views in the public comment period, but highlighted a few of them today.

Park safety and enjoyment: We believe that enabling individuals to carry loaded guns in national parks will alarm families visiting the parks, and heighten the possibility for deadly visitor conflicts.

New responsibilities for overtaxed park rangers: In a post-9/11 environment, where the safety and security of our national parks and visitors is pre-eminent, park rangers will now have to be alert to the fact that individuals are carrying loaded guns in the parks. The potential for conflicts to become deadly could increase, and park rangers would likely view visitors with loaded weapons suspiciously. Moreover, burdensome new enforcement responsibilities will be added to an already strained ranger corps and budget.

Increased opportunities for wildlife poaching: A genesis for the Park Service’s original firearms regulations, wildlife poaching is still a serious concern in our national parks, causing the decline of nearly 30 species. Poachers could operate with impunity because rangers would lack the authority to question individuals about their loaded weapons.

Deferring to state laws creates confusion: The Federal Government has a unique responsibility to set the rules for and manage our national parks. This is to ensure the safety, protection, and enjoyable experiences of nearly 300 million visitors annually. Deferring to divergent state laws, some of which permit loaded weapons and others that do not, will result in confusion for rangers, and visitors who travel to the parks from every state in the nation, and from countries around the world.

The Bush Administration today announced that it would publish its draft, revised regulation by April 30, 2008, in the federal register.

"The existing regulations were adopted after a thorough review, and we will be diligent in insisting that any proposed change undergoes the same thorough, legal procedural review and allows for public input," said Kiernan. "We are convinced when the review process is complete, it will show the existing regulations are not unduly burdensome but are limited, reasonable, and necessary to enable park rangers to carry out their duties of protecting the millions of families who visit our parks every year, and the wildlife that inhabits them."


http://www.npca.org/media_center/press_releases/2008/gunsinparks_022208.html

Maybe after the hogs have been fed---

Car Knocker
April 13, 2008, 01:01 PM
The Park Service immediately countered with this press release:
Sorry but that's incorrect. The press relese you posted was from the National Parks Conservation Association, an "independent, membership organization dedicated to protecting the park system."

What does NPCA do?
NPCA works to address major threats facing the National Park System by gathering the information we need through our two centers, Center for Park Management and Center for State of the Parks, by keeping our eyes and ears to the ground in eight regional and six field offices, and by developing relationships on Capitol Hill and in the administration to counter legislation or policies that would adversely affect the parks. We also pursue solutions in the courts when other avenues fail us.

CBS220
April 13, 2008, 01:12 PM
Coburn is a good man, as far as I'm concerned. I think we can expect to see a bill or amendment on the subject before too long.

romma
April 13, 2008, 01:47 PM
A government of the Park service, by the Park Service and for the Park Service... They should just do the jobs the tax payers pay them to do...

Last I heard, we the People should decide these matters.

Right Wing Wacko
April 13, 2008, 01:58 PM
I don't know how it is in most states but in mine we have three major National Parks. There are major highways thru all three of them.

1. Mt Rainier National Park
State Route 410 to Chinook Pass - One of the routes to the eastern half of the state
2. Olympic National Park
US 101 - One of the Major Routes north/south thru the state (and in this case the COUNTRY
3. North Cascades National Park
State Route 20 - Major Route east/west across the mountains. Incidently a route that goes to one of the states major hunting areas.

To legally drive in these highways requires one to unload and pracitically dissassemble ones gun... almost as bad as DC!

WayneConrad
April 13, 2008, 02:24 PM
Right Wing Wacko, In Arizona, the freeways and state routes don't count, as long as you stay on 'em. As far as I recall. I'm surprised that's not the case for Washington as well.

So many laws for honest men to run afoul of. :(

misANTHrope
April 13, 2008, 02:36 PM
Deferring to state laws creates confusion: The Federal Government has a unique responsibility to set the rules for and manage our national parks. This is to ensure the safety, protection, and enjoyable experiences of nearly 300 million visitors annually. Deferring to divergent state laws, some of which permit loaded weapons and others that do not, will result in confusion for rangers, and visitors who travel to the parks from every state in the nation, and from countries around the world.

I do agree with this, but in a different direction. Rather than see them defer to state law, I'd like to see a uniform regulation be applied across all national parks, a regulation stating that carrying is OK. This regulation would not be pre-emptable by state law.

The real benefit of this for me would be that I could carry in national parks located in TN- whereas if they defer to state law, I'd still be banned, as parks are a prohibited location in TN.

lacoochee
April 13, 2008, 02:54 PM
Deferring to state laws creates confusion: The Federal Government has a unique responsibility to set the rules for and manage our national parks. This is to ensure the safety, protection, and enjoyable experiences of nearly 300 million visitors annually. Deferring to divergent state laws, some of which permit loaded weapons and others that do not, will result in confusion for rangers, and visitors who travel to the parks from every state in the nation, and from countries around the world.

Yet, this is done for National Forests and Federal WMA's. Thankfully we have very few National Parks/Monuments in Florida but it is still incredibly annoying.

Right Wing Wacko
April 13, 2008, 03:47 PM
From the North Cascades National Park Web Page:

No firearms are allowed in North Cascades National Park. In Ross Lake and Lake Chelan National Recreation Areas firearms are not allowed with an exception for legal hunting seasons with a permitted firearm and the required hunting license. When driving through the park complex (for example on State Route 20) all permitted handguns must be broken down and unloaded.


Note the addition to the two NRA's that are nearby and not part of the park. Even though they are not part of the park, they are still administered by the Dept of the Interior.


Olympic National Park has a different twist that I find interesting!

Firearms may be transported on Park roads in vehicles, provided they are adequately sealed, cased, or otherwise packed to prevent use, and out of sight. Firearms are not necessary for protection from wildlife.

csmkersh
April 13, 2008, 06:55 PM
If anyone truly believes the Park Service will make changes in our favor, I've some ocean front property to sell 10 miles West of Phoenix.

jrfoxx
April 14, 2008, 05:31 AM
Quote:
Deferring to state laws creates confusion: The Federal Government has a unique responsibility to set the rules for and manage our national parks. This is to ensure the safety, protection, and enjoyable experiences of nearly 300 million visitors annually. Deferring to divergent state laws, some of which permit loaded weapons and others that do not, will result in confusion for rangers, and visitors who travel to the parks from every state in the nation, and from countries around the world.

Yet, this is done for National Forests and Federal WMA's. Thankfully we have very few National Parks/Monuments in Florida but it is still incredibly annoying.


I was thinking the same thing. Thier excuse is that it would be too confusing for park LEO's and visitors to know the laws of the state the park is IN, but it's NOT confusing for the parks rules to be entirely different from the laws of rest of the state that surrounds it? Thats so contradictory it makes my brains hurt!

slidelock15
April 14, 2008, 05:52 AM
I thought the administration was gonna throw us a bone and open up the parks with a presidential directive. That was what the NPCA was whining about. I remember Ms Pelosi was threatening to do something but I'm not clear about what. She cant pass a law without the threat of a veto. Whats she gonna do, hold up funding for the parks? The tree huggers would go nuts! Could somebody explain this to a poor hillbilly?

Oro
April 14, 2008, 12:52 PM
Yeah, like slidelock said, that press release bears no reality to the regulatory process going on to change the rules. It COULD be done through legislation passing both houses, but it doesn't have to. It is being done as a simple administrative rule change directed by the DOI. The Secretary of the Interior has instructed his subordinates to draft new rules making Park policy conform with the local state policy.

I think whoever put this press release together was just doing some scaremongering of their own. Here's the real deal linked below. Note especially the first link, Kempthorne's letter about how they (DOI/NSPS) are planning on changing the rules. This doesn't require a congressional vote - none was taken back in 1981 or so when the Reagan administration banned guns in National Parks (yes, it was the Reagan administration who did it, no vote taken or federal law made).

http://www.nraila.org/news/read/newsreleases.aspx?id=10651

LAR-15
April 15, 2008, 10:50 AM
I expect this proposal to come back up for a vote.

Most senators are hoping they don't have to vote on it during an election year

Pat McCoy
April 15, 2008, 01:22 PM
While a Senate vote to change the law would be nice, it is not needed as the Interior Department can change their rule at any time.

As you get old enough to purchase the "Golden Age" pass for National Parks and recreation areas, be sure to do so somewhere OTHER than a national park (BLM, Forest Service) and write a letter to Park Service letting them know what you did, and why. The majority of the $50 fee goes to the department that sells the pass, and putting a little financial pressure on the Park Service can't hurt.

romma
April 15, 2008, 02:00 PM
If anyone truly believes the Park Service will make changes in our favor, I've some ocean front property to sell 10 miles West of Phoenix.


Make it East of Phoenix and you got a deal!!

waynesan
April 17, 2008, 02:20 PM
While a Senate vote to change the law would be nice, it is not needed as the Interior Department can change their rule at any time.

A Senate vote would be nicer.
. Getting a vote in Congress to change the law would be much harder to overturn than a simple change in Park rules initiated by the Secretary of Int. And if Obama or Hilary is elected in Nov. you can be sure that the next Sec. of Int. will change that rule on his/her first day in office.

Smurfslayer
April 17, 2008, 02:36 PM
Institutional inertia would grind efforts to a halt. It can't be altered by E.O. as some claim and going through the Admin. process is an exercise in patience.

Frankly delay on this vote works in our favor. If the vote had gone down wrong, then DOI would spike the proposed rule change entirely with some trumped up ideas. So long as they're gridlocked, they have a little more motivation to act on our behalf.

If you enjoyed reading about "National Park Carry Vote Delayed:Not Enough Votes Says GOP Sen.Coburn" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!