can i carry into a national park or not?
- Thread starter ganymede
- Start date
- Status
9MMare
Member
Hotels like the Ahwahnee (in Yosemite) host both accommodations, restrooms, restaurants....and then visitor centers and info desks and administrative offices for federal employees. Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties.
Many other Nat Parks have similar lodges and hotels that provide federal services and staff federal employees as well.
It will require a decision...it may not be 'complicated' once they decide how to handle this. I havent read yet however, how they will...so it's not quite so cut and dried as you make it out. I'm sure they've worked it out...I just havent read it anywhere yet.
As for the rattler...if you have time to draw, you have to time back up. Please. And if your child is unable to respond to you telling them to do so, they are too young to be unattended. If they are that close...you have to draw and aim and be damned sure you dont hit your kid....they are better off backing up. Rattlers dont chase people.
See....again, people may use this new law as an excuse to kill wildlife. The chances that you have to kill that rattler to save yourself rather than retreat are about 1%...if that.
The only time people are bitten by rattlers is when they dont see the rattler...(or see one and dont move or let it leave)
Many other Nat Parks have similar lodges and hotels that provide federal services and staff federal employees as well.
It will require a decision...it may not be 'complicated' once they decide how to handle this. I havent read yet however, how they will...so it's not quite so cut and dried as you make it out. I'm sure they've worked it out...I just havent read it anywhere yet.
As for the rattler...if you have time to draw, you have to time back up. Please. And if your child is unable to respond to you telling them to do so, they are too young to be unattended. If they are that close...you have to draw and aim and be damned sure you dont hit your kid....they are better off backing up. Rattlers dont chase people.
See....again, people may use this new law as an excuse to kill wildlife. The chances that you have to kill that rattler to save yourself rather than retreat are about 1%...if that.
The only time people are bitten by rattlers is when they dont see the rattler...(or see one and dont move or let it leave)
9MMare
Member
I have a friend who manages the visitor centers at Zion Nat Park...I should ask her what their plan is. She's most likely gun-friendly, but the decision wont be up to her either way.
Vern Humphrey
Member
In Arkansas, it's illegal to shoot rattlers. In fact, our Department of Fish and Game some years back did a deal with Texas -- we gave them our surplus wild turkies and they gave us their rattlesnakes, which were released about 5 miles from where I am right now.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
That's sort of the point anyway isn't it?
Vern Humphrey
Member
You could say that. The rattlers were released on private property. The property owners were not notified.
NavyLCDR
member
Avenger29 said:
TexasRifleman said:
Not to us: www.opencarry.org
In all states except for Alaska and Vermont, carrying a concealed firearm is NOT exercising a right. It is using a privilege that you have paid a fee to the state in order to engage in.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
Oh I get it, I'm just stuck with the Texas restrictions.
If we're having a purely Constitutional conversation this whole Credit Card rider shouldn't exist and we shouldn't have to worry about "mirroring" the state requirements in the first place.
But we're in reality for now.
blue_ridge
Member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2009
- Messages
- 222
I can't see why anyone would begrudge the right to concealed carry. I mean, even if you are a left wing liberal congressman who wants everyone to hand over their paychecks directly to the government to be redistributed by federal authorities, I would think your favorite type of gun owner would be the one who completed the required training, completed the required paper work, completed the required background check and has to abide by the law to maintain their carry permit! This is the gun owner who says, "okay, I'll play by your silly rules tp re-assure anyone and everyone that I am a law abiding citizen". The Sheeple must be dumber than the sheep we've named them for.
Some of the people in the open carry states are saying they intend to OC. I'm just saying that until everything gets straightened out at the park level, try to be discreet as possible.
Believe me, I am not happy that in many states one is forced to carry concealed or go without. I think it should be a manner of personal choice as to OC or CCW, but again, reality is what it is.
Still, this isn't an OC vs CCW thread, so let's not sidetrack it, please.
Vern Humphrey
Member
Right. And in reality, things are getting better for gun owners.
We owe Bill Clinton a lot* -- he was the one who attributed the Democrats' loss of the House and Senate to the NRA. And in the process converted the 2nd Amendment into the third rail of politics -- very few politicians want to touch it anymore.
* Sarcasm.
OK, from reading the thread I now understand that we can carry in National Parks (in February) and National Forests. However, I live adjacent to what's called a National Recreation Area, which I believe is managed by the National Park Service.
For purposes of firearms carry is a "recreation area" the same as a "park" or a "forest"? Or something different altogether? The terminologies have me baffled. Thanks.
For purposes of firearms carry is a "recreation area" the same as a "park" or a "forest"? Or something different altogether? The terminologies have me baffled. Thanks.
9MMare
Member
Seriously? Can I ask what 'program' this was?
dmazur
Member
I thought National Recreation Areas were administered by the Department of Interior and would (probably) be considered same as National Parks...
but -
So this is a fine mess. Best I can offer is the agencies involved are going to have to sort this one out.
but -
So this is a fine mess. Best I can offer is the agencies involved are going to have to sort this one out.
Vern Humphrey
Member
Just a normal deal with Fish and Game.
9MMare
Member
There's no change in carrying in National Forests....they are completely different from National Parks and are not administered by the Nat. Park Service. National Forests are supposed to be multi-use areas.
All the different natural areas have different laws and regulations, based on why they were established. A Nat Rec Area will have more 'public-friendly' guidelines. BLM lands, for ex., have completely different guidelines.
The Nat. Parks and fed. wilderness areas have the most restrictions because they were established to protect natural resources in their natural settings. This includes all native flora and fauna and other park features/resources.
I suggest checking out the rules and regs for any of the areas you plan on visiting. Or at least checking them out at the entrance or visitor center.
9MMare
Member
The new law affects National Parks...laws affecting the other natural areas havent changed, to my knowlege. And the National Park Service, which administers Nat. Parks, is part of the Dept. of Interior. NPS administers the Nat Rec Areas too, so they may covered....but I dont know their original policy on guns.
Yeah...gotta love the beauracracy.
And thus...not quite so uncomplicated.
Last edited:
9MMare
Member
This is not directed at you, however I dont see how releasing any wildlife on someone's private property without their knowlege or permission is 'normal' or acceptable.
That's why I wondered if you had a name for that program or management strategy.
ARKANSAS GAME AND FISH COMMISSION CODE BOOK said:
Rattlesnakes are not listed as endangered by the US DoI nor by the Arkansas Game & Fish Commission as far as I can determine, nor are they game animals, nor are they migratory birds. Therefor, it appears that they may be shot if they "pose reasonable threat or endangerment to persons or property."
There may be other relevant code, of course; this was the closest thing I could find.
ozarkgunner
Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2009
- Messages
- 250
I was reading something in another thread that lead me to a California statutes website. And it list places you could carry and not carry. It listed state parks, that as long as the weapon was in your vehicle, tent, campground spot, etc, you could poses and carry a gun, even if they are normaly banned in the park. So as long as you are in "your area" you can carry and defend, but not out hiking.?
RETG
Member
They can change any facts as pertaining to Federal Buildings and their description thereof. They can require concealed only, bypassing a State that allows open carry. Whether this will happen or not is another matter.
As to method of carrying, I do not believe I made any comments other than you will not be able to carry a rifle or other type of long gun.
No, the Coburn amendment has not stripped away NPS or DOI authority on regulation of firearms. It mandates that the NPS allow a person with a permit; issued either by the State the park is in or by a permit that is recognized by said State, to be allowed to legally carry a concealed weapon into that park.
If it was as you state, and the DOI and/or NPS had no authority to regulate the carrying of firearms into the park, then they could not prevent someone from carrying into a building (unless so stated by the State the park is in), and they could not prevent someone from carrying into other locations inside the park. (Not sure, never checked, but I believe some parks will prevent carrying into caves. I know this was looked at, but have no idea what the decision was or will be. Cave in particular was Mammoth in KY, which is located in a very gun friendly state. Again, not sure what went down.)
Primarily, my post was more informative and thought some of you would like to know that contrary to liberal press reports, the NPS did not find it concealed weapon carry unfavorable in most categories.
In addition, no matter what the law, no matter who passes the law, the DOI and all other Federal agencies are required to research and develop their own final decision. In most cases it is a waste of time and taxpayer money; however, they have to do this to cover their a$$es. If Bush had done this years ago, when first in office, we would not have needed the Coburn amendment in the first place. His change to the code of federal regulation would have been legal and not been thrown out by a judge.
Yes and no. Read the Coburn amendment. The NPS is to follow the guidelines as set up by the State. This is the same as the NFS and BLM have followed. IF they State adds it to their law that you cannot carry into a National Park, then the NPS will regulate the park as it is written by that State into law.
Most States in their laws make a statement about carrying into Federal buildings. Why? If your statement was true, then why won’t people in NY be able to carry into a NP in NY? (Does NY have any NP?)
When NC first enacted their carry laws back, they had a prohibition against carry into a National Forest. This law was posted at the National Forests in NC on the bulletin boards at the visitor centers and on the kiosks located throughout the park. The NF rangers abided by this, and you had better not have been caught carrying into one of their parks. (I met up with a Ranger in one of the National Forests in NC back in either 03 or 04, outside Highlands, one day when changing a tire. He saw my SIG, and started to explain it was illegal to carry into a National Forest. He was very nice about it, and even nicer when I stood up and he noticed something on my belt, just in front of the holster.)
They have since rescinded this prohibition, and now the NF will recognize your permit if legal in the State of NC.
Possibly someone from North Carolina who was around when the concealed law was first enacted can step forward and verify this.
So, yes, a State if they write their laws to exclude a NP (or even NF or BLM) then the NP will follow that law.
Also a note. Since the NPS administers the majority of National Monuments, you will be able to carry into a National Monument. The BLM does administer at least one National Monument; Grand Staircase Escalante in UT, and you have been legal to carry their since the day it became a monument.
Last edited:
brboyer
Member
Wow, are you misinformed.
Federal facilities are defined in 18 USC 930(g)(1) DOI cannot change that.
The Coburn amendment makes no mention of permits.
The Coburn amendment makes no reference to concealed carry.
You post was not informative at all, you references a non-existent law and made incorrect legal claims.
The Coburn amendment prohibits the DOI form regulating firearms in any manner, if two simple conditions are met.
States cannot regulate any activity on Federal property, they have no jurisdiction.
I'll say this again: States cannot regulate any activity on Federal property, they have no jurisdiction.
It's really quite simple. If you are not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing the firearm and you can carry the firearm outside the gates of the NP, you can carry inside the NP, with the exception of Federal Facilities, because 18 USC 930 already prohibits that activity. It also defines very specifically what a Federal Facility is. DOI is not authorized to change that definition.
Note: The type of firearm handgun or long gun and the method of carry - open or concealed must comply with the state laws applicable where the individual is located.
DOI may not in any way regulate this, nor are they permitted to restrict the location in which one may carry: Caves, springs, meadows, prairies, campgrounds, etc (Note: see my reference to Federal Facilities above)
Some National Parks extend beyond state boundaries, so one must know what 'State' they are in. Even though they are not really in any State, because they are on Federal land.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
