Obama administration legally defends "guns in parks rule"

[Redneck with a 40]

I know its shocking, but the Obama administration is defending the guns in parks rule change. This from a guy who is anti-concealed carry, very ironic.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/17/politics/washingtonpost/main4805192.shtml

 

[MaterDei]

The Obama administration is in such disarray that nothing would surprise me anymore.

 

[KevinAbbeyTech]

So does this mean I can carry my .22 revolver in the Grand Canyon this summer?

 

[misANTHrope]

Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign, said in an interview that he did not understand why the new administration was defending a rule that embodied "bad policy and bad procedure."

Reading statements like this just warms my heart. I get entirely too much enjoyment out of people pouting when they don't get their way.

 

[Tommygunn]

Meh.
From what I hear the current administration will pretty much defend the status quo in situations like this.
Kongress gets onto it and pushes for it to be reversed... it will be.

 

[rbernie]

They defended it on procedural grounds. They didn't have much choice, really, lest they cut off their nose to spite their face.

They'll figure out how to recind it properly, I'd wager.

 

[VPLthrneck]

It's a cover tactic, he won't issue any executive order or tell the Park Service to change the rule; but if his buddies in Congress should pass a bill changing this, you can almost guarentee he'd sign it. Truthfully I'm surprised someone didn't put this in the porkulous bill.

 

[expvideo]

It is good that Obama's first interaction with the Brady Bunch was in favor of gun owners. Regardless of what his permanent stance is on guns, it gives our side some momentum when our liberal president says "no" to the Brady campaign. They thought they would have an anti-gun puppet, and it looks like they were wrong. It's a small victory and it doesn't promise anything for future stances, but heck, I'll take it!

"It is hard to tell who is calling the shots on this at this point," Helmke said. "You're raising the level of risk in the parks, and the chance that people will use the parks less than they have in the past."

lol. I refused to visit national parks until this measure was passed... did they consider that?

 

[misANTHrope]

It's a cover tactic, he won't issue any executive order or tell the Park Service to change the rule; but if his buddies in Congress should pass a bill changing this, you can almost guarentee he'd sign it. Truthfully I'm surprised someone didn't put this in the porkulous bill.

Congress has no authority to change the rule under the current system.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

I may chronologically have been the first person legally to carry in a National Park.

Ah, Acadia.

 

[#shooter]

It is a power thing. Obama may or may not like the rule, but he does not want to set a precedent that any rule changes he makes will be reversed willy nilly just because some tiny group doesn't like it.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

It's about time he stood up to Pelosi.

Even though I'm not exactly convinced yet, hopfully this is what the rest of his presidency will be like.

 

[Frog48]

The Obama administration is in such disarray that nothing would surprise me anymore.

Agreed, they're in total a state of confusion. Its a case of "the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing".

 

[HeavenlySword]

hehe

interesting

 

[Marlin444]

I don't understand why this is even an issue. It's not like someone who was going to carry a concealed gun in the NP's was going to be stopped by the threat of a fine. People have been carrying in parks the whole time and nothing bad happened and nothing is going to change from that. When you are in the backcountry, help is DAYS away...

 

[Krazeehorse]

He probably didn't read the bill. There's a lot of that going around you know.

 

[Prince Yamato]

I think this might be bigger than most people think. No, I'm not ever going to paint Obama as pro-gun, but it might reveal that he is somewhat impotent when it comes to doing anything about current gun laws. Perhaps his administration is formulating a "don't rock the boat" policy.

 

[jerkface11]

Why worry about rocking it when they're trying to run it aground.

 

[Dokkalfar]

hmmm... this almost seems to be him trying to get gun owners on his side until hes sure he can get the legislation through. And someone said Congress has no authority iin parks? not to be rude, but congress has no authority to half the pies they have their fingers in. Why should they let a silly little thing like a Constitution stop them from what they want?

 

[misANTHrope]

I think that about the most one can read out of this is that the new administration isn't willing to stick their necks way out on this issue. That is, Helmke clearly wants the ban gone by any means necessary, whereas Obama is saying, "Look, we're going to examine this in an appropriate and legal manner before acting."

Doesn't mean he's in favor of the new rule, just means he's in favor of going through established procedures to change it. (or leave it alone)

 

[leadcounsel]

Quite frankly what he says and does have been proven time and again to be inconsistent and quickly swayed...

How about the car czar he was going to appoint?

The transparent governing...?

Working with Republicans...?

When he attacks ALL CCW it won't matter what he said about the parks...

 

[Duke of Doubt]

He knows he's already on the ropes over his ridiculous bailout socialization. The working class around here, and there are a lot, don't like it or him any more. I've helped in my very small way to see that happen. Move against guns now, and he's done in his first month. Lame [d]uck.

 

[James T Thomas]

wolf in sheep's clothing

I'm old and wary.

I just get suspicious, and wonder "what's up?"

What is going on that we are not aware of?

This is so unlike; well you know.

 

[richyoung]

Were one to actually follow the Constitution, the federal parks could not exist.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Where in the Constitution are National Parks prohibited?