Nationl Park and Gun carry showdown

Status
Not open for further replies.
In 40 years as a ranger, manager and superintendent of national parks from Alaska to North Carolina, Doug Morris says he never responded to a crime that would have been prevented had a visitor been carrying a concealed weapon.
Click to expand...

So that means what, he just never responded to anything?

That must be the case because I'm no ranger, just a guy who loves to go hiking and camping and I have, with my own eyes, witnessed the aftermath of at least one crime that -could- have been stopped easily, another that WAS stopped by someone who was armed (illegally, but thank God she was armed at the time) and a couple of "wildlife adventures" where the animals couldn't rightly be called "criminals" (aggressive bear, rabid raccoon) but where a firearm sure would have been of significant help!

Welll folks, the comment period is still open so PLEASE COMMENT!
(there are more than 1,200 comments posted online so far and the majority are pro but we need to keep hitting this issue from all sides!)

comments can be submitted online HERE for RIN #1024-AD70

or

Public Comments Processing,
Attn: 1024–AD70; Division of Policy
and Directives Management; U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service;
4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222;
Arlington, VA. 22203.

or hand deliver to...
4401 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 222,
Arlington, VA. 22203.
 
Oops, forgot to show my own comment as an example...

Current regulations and restrictions on firearms lean heavily on the law abiding (who are being punished exactly why again?) and have little effect on criminals (you know, those folks who ignore the law) and rules that do this are fundamentally unjust and must be repealed.

I respectfully request that the National Parks Service stop treating myself and other law abiding citizens as de-facto criminals and begin to respect the rights of the American people by amending the regulations to match the state in which the National Park resides.

Additionally any future laws should have stronger consideration for where the burden is placed and should focus on the criminal and lawbreaker and not simply be a "feel good" blanket smothering the innocent along with the guilty.
Click to expand...
 
As a U.S. senator, after receiving nearly $10,000 in campaign funds from the NRA, he voted against the 1993 Brady Bill, which requires a waiting period and background checks for handgun buyers. He also brought Michael Bogert, a onetime assistant general counsel at the NRA, to Interior to act as his counsel.

The NRA enlisted Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, Kempthorne’s successor as Idaho’s junior senator, to write a letter to the secretary seeking a revision of the gun regulation. The Dec. 14, 2007, letter was signed by 51 senators to whom the NRA has collectively given at least $618,033 in congressional campaign funds in the last 10 years, according to federal election records placed online by the Center for Public Integrity. Those who signed the letter included such pro-gun stalwarts as Republican Sen. Larry Craig, Idaho’s senior senator and a member of the NRA’s board for more than two decades, and Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, a former NRA board member.
Click to expand...



Because the money's the important issue, not the infringement on Constitutional rights.

I like how it's about safety or it's always been this way, if it's unconstitutional, then it must change.

I'm sure if it was about anti-gun, they wouldn't be talking about how much the Brady Campaign contributed.

.
 
The Dec. 14, 2007, letter was signed by 51 senators to whom the NRA has collectively given at least $618,033 in congressional campaign funds in the last 10 years
Click to expand...

If you do the math, this works out to $1,211.83 per senator per year. Obviously pro individual rights senators are pretty cheap.

What a misleading statement, even for the media.

Sincerely,

Prof. A. Wickwire
 
Any guesses about if this is going to pass?
Click to expand...
Of course it will pass. If not this time then the next time because a bunch of us are badgers and will not quit until we've worn them down!

Anyone else who joins in to help just speeds the process up <grin>.
 
Can't tell you how many emails I sent to Bill Frist about this issue when I was a registered voter in TN. Strangely, he never emailed me back:cool: Not long after my last email a young girl was mauled to death by a black bear in east TN. Although they were not in a national park at the time the incident could have just as easily occurred in the GSMNP.
 
What a piece of propaganda.

The "poll" divides the Pro-rights answers up into three categories and the anti-rights into one. As a result a quick glance makes the antis look like they are waaaaay out in the lead.

In fact if you add up the pro-rights responses they total 61% of the poll vs the 39% anti.

Have to admit, it's a nice bit of psychological ploy there to make the anti position "appear" powerful.

Psychology.gif
 
I fully expect they'll forget to add up the 3 pro categories and just report the 39% con as the biggest chunk of people.

What we really need is a bear to get a hold of a senator or congressman in a national park. Then we'd get some common sense talk about folks being able to protect themselves! I'd feel bad for the bear, though. :)
 
Here's my comment:

I would like to comment about the proposed regulations governing the carrying of firearms in national parks.

Criminals, by definition, do not obey the law. They will carry in national parks regardless of what the law says.

Dangerous animals, such as bears, wolves, cougars and rabid animals of all kinds, are already armed - though with teeth, claws and sometimes great size and strength.

Decent, law-abiding citizens attempting to enjoy a part of their national heritage - a part that their taxes have been used to reserve and maintain, I might add - currently have no means of protecting themselves against criminals or threatening animals. I don't buy the argument that a ranger or other law enforcement personnel will save them - because these public servants cannot be everywhere at once ("When seconds count, the police are only minutes away").

I strongly believe that regulations should allow those individuals with a legal concealed carry license, or the ability to legally carry openly, to carry in national parks. Self-defense is the most basic of rights - as the Supreme Court recently ruled - and to deny that right to someone visiting our national parks is ridiculous. I personally refuse to visit any place where I am forbidden to protect myself and family against reasonably forseeable threats and there is not a high probability of an armed officer of the law immediately available for this purpose - and with regard to our national parks, this is a big shame, as I'd like to see them and show them to my children.
Click to expand...

Regarding the poll, it looks to me like the pro-carry vote is winning 44-39, with an additional 17% voting to allow state law to apply (and most states have concealed carry. Basically, we're winning by about 60-40.
 
I don't think it will do any good. They are going to run out the clock on this one until after the election :(

But at least I tried:
Re: 1024-AD70

I support and encourage the change to make firearm regulations in National Parks & Monuments, etc follow the laws of the state in which the park is located rather than the current restrictions.

US Forest Service and BLM lands follow state firearm laws, and there is no reason that national parks should be different. As a Montana resident, I can carry a handgun openly or concealed all over the state. I do not suddenly become a dangerous or irresponsible person if I enter a National Park.

Furthermore, the US Supreme Court has recently affirmed the right of individual citizens to keep and bear firearms for defensive purposes. The current National Park firearm regulations are in violation of this right.

<my name>
Montana, USA
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
MSNBC Guns in the National Parks poll
Replies
16
Views
1K
Dan Forrester
D
W
  • Locked
National Park Carry Vote Delayed:Not Enough Votes Says GOP Sen.Coburn
Replies
21
Views
2K
Smurfslayer
S
W.E.G.
  • Locked
VA-ALERT: MSNBC Article on National Park Ban!
Replies
0
Views
272
W.E.G.
W.E.G.
W
  • Locked
House Democrats Oppose National Park Carry
Replies
12
Views
589
Don Gwinn
D
M
  • Locked
Good News on Right to Carry in National Parks
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
Fisherman_48768
F
Back
Top