GlockFan1954
Member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2009
- Messages
- 55
volokh.com
Which means we will have to wait until the Interior Department does its environmental impact statement under NEPA.
This whole decision was a farce - there is no serious argument that *handguns* would pose a serious risk to wildlife in parks. Or that concealed license holders are dangerous to civilians.
My understanding though is that NEPA and EISs are basically just an FYI requirement and have no real bite - as long as the interior department doesn't initiate rulemaking to change the rule we'll still get concealed carry in parks.
Which means we will have to wait until the Interior Department does its environmental impact statement under NEPA.
This whole decision was a farce - there is no serious argument that *handguns* would pose a serious risk to wildlife in parks. Or that concealed license holders are dangerous to civilians.
My understanding though is that NEPA and EISs are basically just an FYI requirement and have no real bite - as long as the interior department doesn't initiate rulemaking to change the rule we'll still get concealed carry in parks.