Good News on Right to Carry in National Parks

[K-Romulus]

Long road ahead . . .

First the NPS will have to figure out what the change will be, then it will have to assign some poor NPS lawyer to draft a regulation implementing these changes and get it approved through the NPS bureaucracy (incl. the Park Police), in consultation with various "interested parties" within the .gov (Interior, BLM, USDA, etc.)

Then the proposed reg gets published in the Federal Register for 30 days to solicit public comments before final approval. Expect numerous comments from the same parties that filed pro-DC briefs in Heller.

Then the comments will have to be addressed internally, to see if the proposed regulation should be altered or edited. Formal rebuttals/responses to the comments would have to be drafted.

Then the final regulation would have to be approved by whatever body in NPS has the authority to approve it.

The final regulation would then be published in the Register, along with the formal responses to the public comments.

We're looking at maybe six to nine months from today. Working in DC, I will be surprised if it gets done at all before 1-20-09.

 

[Titus]

Dave,

Thank you for your continuous work on this!

 

[ilbob]

We're looking at maybe six to nine months from today. Working in DC, I will be surprised if it gets done at all before 1-20-09.

If heller prevails, we would have a pretty good argument that carry on any federal land cannot be prohibited, regardless of local law.

 

[Winchester 73]

Serious question:

Can the next president order this change reversed when they take office?

Or would they just not touch it?

They won't touch it,IMO.Too politically damaging.

 

[thekomet]

we are winning on several fronts because we are right. political action is the way we can preserve our rights. we need to chip away at the anti--bill-of-rights legislation in any way we can. keep the pressure on congress, the senate, and the president.

 

[Smurfslayer]

NPS already knows what needs to change. I'm sure they've had this contingency planned for several months now. VCDL's petition does exactly what the Senators asked for, and is appropriately subservient to constitution, federal and state law on the topic of self defense firearms.

I've given up reading the tea leaves on this type of change, but I would like to point out to the readers here:

See what happens when you don't take the time to be concerned about government regulations? This has happened in all 50 states. In VA. they've used the "general grant of police power" and "general grant of authority to maintain public safety" to hide behind. If you look hard enough, you'll find the same nonsense in your state.

There have been efforts underway since 2002 to repeal this ban. Several VCDL members started working on this in 2004. It will be nice if the promised cooperation occurs. Make no mistake, the bureacracy at NPS -HATES- firearms and those who would carry them. Don't think this is over by a long shot. Now we're going to need steady pressure on DOI directly and via Congress to fulfill their obligation. Be ready.

 

[green-grizzly]

The NPS gave in once they realized their budget was not going to pass this year without a blanket repeal of the regulation included in the law. This way they can still manipulate the process and limit the right to carry as much as possible. It is similar to what the government is arguing should be done in Heller.

 

[Rumble]

For clarification, this simply means that National Parks will follow the same rules as state parks in whatever state it is located. So, for example, there will be no changes in Pennsylvania, since we cannot carry in state parks. Or will the National Park rules be more permissive in the even of a conflict between the two?

 

[Winchester 73]

Or will the National Park rules be more permissive in the even of a conflict between the two?

The NPS should rule the day.
And PA has to get rid of the silly no State Park Carry Law.
We finally managed it in Florida 18 months ago.

 

[F4GIB]

When the government is involved, there is always a catch.

From the 'net.

A List Member Comments:

I believe all your list members should know this. The announcement by the NRA and the Department of Interior will not, in a number of states, result in citizens being allowed to carry their state permitted concealed handguns in the national parks and refuges.

The letter from Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne states in part, "I have directed Lyle Laverty, who oversees regulatory matters for parks and refuges, to develop and propose for public comment by April 30 Federal regulations that will update firearms policies on these lands to reflect existing Federal laws (such as those prohibiting weapons in Federal buildings) and the laws by which the host States govern transporting and carrying of firearms on their analogous public lands." That means federal restrictions in national parks and refuges will duplicate the existing restrictions that exist in each state for that state's parks.

For example, here in California, a state Department of Parks and Recreation regulation (14 CCR, Chapter 1, Section 4313, Weapons and Traps) does not allow firearms in state parks, unless they are disassembled and inoperable. California concealed carry licenses are not honored by California state park rangers. Just another victim disarming zone, right?

The bottom line is that the new regulation, for a number of states, may actually result in more restrictions within national parks and refuges, not less. I strongly advise everyone to contact Secretary Kempthorne, as well as your U.S. senators and representatives, and request that the Department of the Interior allow the same firearms use in national parks as is allowed in state public places, not state parks. This would be much less restrictive, and would mirror what the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management did many years ago.

 

[Gray Peterson]

We don't exactly know what the regulation will be like, so it's too early to assume that the regulation will encompass state park bans.

 

[Smurfslayer]

The peitioners suggested regulation addresses all the NPS concerns as well as resulting in a better regulation for citizens from states where having a self defense firearm would be otherwise legal. We're looking into that issue this week.

 

[Wineoceros]

I'm trying to figure out the impact of this on Army Corps of Engineer lands that are open to the public for hunting and other recreational purposes, but am having a difficult time making heads or tails of it. Does anyone have any insight on that?

 

[30 cal slob]

PLEASE - somebody ask or tell ...

does this cover NATIONAL SEASHORES as well?

 

[Smurfslayer]

VCDL's petition would affect national monuments, seashores, parks & other park service managed properties. It's important that VCDL's petition moves forward, not some Parks crafted who-knows-what.

 

[Fisherman_48768]

Perhaps what the tax payers should do when we want something done is to do like the Feds do to the states: With hold the money until they come around to our way of thinking.