I need your help.
The following link is to a Montana news article/opinion on carrying in national parks. The comments are being overrun by anti's. Please go there and submit your comments/arguments/clarifications.
http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2008/12/15/opinion/opinion38.txt#blogcomments
The following link is to a Montana news article/opinion on carrying in national parks. The comments are being overrun by anti's. Please go there and submit your comments/arguments/clarifications.
http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2008/12/15/opinion/opinion38.txt#blogcomments
Guns, parks and confusion: Ruling to allow concealed weapons only adds to misunderstandings - Sunday, December 14, 2008
At about this same time last year, 47 U.S. senators - including Montana's Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester - signed a letter to U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne asking for a change in the law governing guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.
“We appeal to you on this matter in the interest of Second Amendment rights and consistency in firearms policy across federal public land management agencies,” the letter stated.
See, as the rule was written, visitors could bring guns through national parks so long as they were unloaded and not readily accessible. That rule placed an undue burden on visitors exercising their Second Amendment rights, the senators argued, and was too confusing besides.
*
Last week, the senators got their wish when the Bush administration approved the rule change. Now, visitors wishing to carry weapons - and particularly, concealed weapons - through national parks and wildlife refuges will be expected to follow the rules of whichever state that park is located within.
This may indeed simplify things for park visitors familiar with the varying concealed carry regulations of all 50 states, or who don't intend to visit national parks outside their home state. For the rest of us, and especially for the park authorities charged with enforcing these new rules, the rule change will do exactly the opposite of what its supporters say it is intended to do.
That is, it makes the rules regarding weapons in national parks and wildlife refuges vastly more complex and confusing. See for yourself.
Old rule: No loaded guns in national parks.
New rule: Loaded, concealed weapons are allowed in national parks so long as the person carrying the concealed weapon has a concealed carry permit in the state in which that park exists, or if the permit is from a different state that recognizes the concealed carry regulations of that particular state, unless the park is located in more than one state - as Yellowstone National Park is - in which case the right to carry a loaded, concealed weapon depends on which part of the park you are standing in. And none of this applies to long guns, such as rifles and shotguns, which still fall under the old rule. Oh, and concealed weapons are not allowed in the three national parks located in Illinois and Wisconsin, which do not have concealed carry laws.
That's some simplification.
National parks have operated under the old rules since the 1930s. Visitors and park authorities alike are familiar with them. Now, park employees are faced with the task of educating the millions of folks who visit our national parks each year on the new rules - not only uninformed gun owners under the impression they may now carry loaded weapons in plain sight or without any sort of permit, but also the untold numbers of out-of-state and international visitors likely to be spooked by them.
“It's a total mess,” Will Hammerquist, of the National Parks Conservation Association, told a Missoulian reporter last week. “We've replaced one simple rule with this confusing quilt of rules, varying from park to park. It's an enforcement nightmare.”
That's a big part of why the rule change was not pushed or even supported by most of the poor folks who will be in charge of enforcing the new regulations. In fact, serious concerns have been raised by the National Park Service as well as several groups of park rangers, former park directors and retired employees, not to mention those park visitors who weighed in during a recent public comment period. It's worth noting that public comments opposing the rule change outnumbered those in support.
Visitors and rangers alike are worried that allowing people to carry loaded guns in national parks will increase violent crime and accidental shootings, not to mention the rate of poaching. The original ban against loaded guns arose all those years ago partially out of concern about the high incidence of poaching at Yellowstone.
We have made it clear before (editorial, Jan. 20) that we don't expect hordes of gun nuts to flood our parks, taking shots at every living thing. But the fact remains that this rule change will make it that much harder for park employees to identify and prevent a poacher or anyone else from doing harm until after the damage is done.
The National Rifle Association, which helped write the letter signed by our senators, argue that the rule is needed to protect our Second Amendment rights. But the right to carry a gun in national parks was never in question.
They also argue that the new rule is needed as a matter of safety, perhaps forgetting that the crime rate in our national parks is ridiculously low, even though such places see millions of visitors pass through. Similarly, the number of recent animal attacks can be counted on one hand.
Thanks to this rule change, national park authorities are worried about the safety of park visitors, wildlife and rangers while facing a massive education campaign, a regulatory nightmare and an enforcement impossibility.
