More "sensible" gun legislation, moving forward!!!

[virginia mountainman]

The Department of the Interior has now published a
proposed rule change for the National Park Service!

The proposed rule change is as follows for National Parks:

"A person may possess, carry, and transport concealed, loaded, and
operable firearms within a national park area in the same manner, and
to the same extent, that a person may lawfully possess, carry, and
transport concealed, loaded and operable firearms in any state park,
or any similar unit of state land, in the state in which the federal
park, or that portion thereof, is located, provided that such
possession, carrying and transporting otherwise complies with
applicable federal and state law."

The proposed rule change is as follows for National Wildlife Refuges:

"A person may possess, carry, and transport concealed, loaded, and
operable firearms within a national wildlife refuge in the same
manner, and to the same extent, that a person may lawfully possess,
carry, and transport concealed, loaded and operable firearms in any
state wildlife refuge, or any similar unit of state land, in the state
in which the national wildlife refuge, or that portion thereof, is
located, provided that such possession, carrying and transporting
otherwise complies with applicable federal and state law."

http://federalregister.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2008-09606_PI.pdf

[iverglas]

1. okay, I give up

Why?


Firearms in a national wildlife refuge ... there's just something kinda dotty about that ...

[Testament]

2. Probably because of criminals...

or animals hell bent to kill you, or, maybe because some of us are tired of people being charged with crimes of possession when there is no intent to commit crime.

[iverglas]

4. well that made sense

some of us are tired of people being charged with crimes of possession when there is no intent to commit crime.

Ta. Explains everything.

Truly, it does.

You're not the boss of me ... about sums it all up.

[Testament]

8. You once again miss the whole point...

What I said there is in reference to the people that have been charged who didn't know they had a gun on them, and weren't going to go in there and kill people. So tell me this, why would someone intent on murdering, robbing, raping, or doing whatever criminal act in a park, is going to not carry a firearm simply because the rule say so?

[iverglas]

10. okay, I know you're kidding me now

people that have been charged who didn't know they had a gun on them

Forgive me ... but who gave these incredibly stupid people a gun in the first place?


So tell me this, why would someone intent on murdering, robbing, raping, or doing whatever criminal act in a park, is going to not carry a firearm simply because the rule say so?

Why in dog's name would I tell you why that would be so, when I never said it to be so???

Bizarro world, the whole place.

[Testament]

11. Here we go again...

Forgive me ... but who gave these incredibly stupid people a gun in the first place?

No one necessarily gave them a gun, the likely bought it with their own money. However, you calling them stupid is just not nice, or needed. It is not difficult to forget you have a gun on you, especially with deep body carry or off body carry.

Why in dog's name would I tell you why that would be so, when I never said it to be so???

Bizarro world, the whole place.

Because you want the ban to stay in place and those criminals are a major factor as to why the ban is a bad idea. It does nothing to restrict them because of their intent to commit a crime, but it does a lot to restrict someone who doesn't want to commit a crime, but wants to be able to defend themselves from an attack.

[iverglas]

13. no, really, you can't fool me!

I *know* you're kidding.

you calling them stupid is just not nice, or needed. It is not difficult to forget you have a gun on you, especially with deep body carry or off body carry.

Obviously we're talking about someone soooo intelligent s/he just ... well, I know there's some explanation for it. Absent-minded professor syndrome, I guess. Forget to lock the front door ... forget there's a pot boiling on the stove ... forget there's a pistol stuffed down deep in yr pantaloons ...

No, no, really, you can't fool me. I'm not quite *that* gullible!



Why in dog's name would I tell you why that would be so, when I never said it to be so???
Because you want the ban to stay in place and those criminals are a major factor as to why the ban is a bad idea.

Okay, now you're not even trying.

You start out with people who don't know they have firearms attached to or dangling from their bodies.

Then you try to get me to explain why someone intent on murdering, robbing, raping, or doing whatever criminal act in a park, is going to not carry a firearm simply because the rule say so, when I never said anyone wasn't going to do that, and was never even talking about any such person.

And now you say something about me wanting the ban to stay in place blablabla ... when actually, I never even said any such thing, did I? Not my national wildlife preserves; no plans here to be in one, and even less inclined now, of course.

Is it fairly common for people to go off on treks into national wildlife preserves (or hell, the highways that run through them) with the intent of murdering, robbing, raping or doing whatever criminal act? Strikes me as labour-intensive work with somewhat low rates of return, myself. But then there's obviously just a whole lot I'm failing to grasp here, eh?

Starting with how someone could NOT KNOW s/he had a firearm on his/her person ...

I'm never gonna quite come to grips with that one, I'm afraid.

[facepalm]

12. deceptive term

"Firearms in a national wildlife refuge ... there's just something kinda dotty about that ..."

Many places that are considered "inside a wildlife refuge" are not what one would ordinarily think of as "inside a wildlife refuge." Like an interstate highway that passes through a wildlife refuge on either side.

The problem is that people are getting arrested for carrying their guns when they aren't even aware they live near a wildlife refuge. These are very easy laws to break unless you are intimately familiar with the boundaries of all the local federal and state property around you.

[SteveM]

22. Some NWRs already allow firearms in connection with hunting...

While this fact does not directly impinge on the proposed laws, it does show that firearms are not a foreign presence in a "refuge." I have for several years hunted an NWR in Texas where two endangered species (as well as various oaks and other flora) are threatened by an over-population of whitetail deer and feral hogs.

[bossy22]

3. as much as i see no need to carry a firearm in an national or state park

i see no urgent need to ban it

i find it silly to say "no you can't carry in a national park" but you can carry in your grocery store.

if a problem does arise from this- reinstate the ban, but if it doesnt let them carry their guns

[gorfle]

6. Just so.

i find it silly to say "no you can't carry in a national park" but you can carry in your grocery store.

Just so. CCW permit holders already carry their firearms nearly everywhere else and certainly in more crowded places than state parks.

[iverglas]

7. hey, we agree there

i find it silly to say "no you can't carry in a national park" but you can carry in your grocery store.

I honestly can't begin to imagine living in a world where people take guns to go grocery shopping. Honestly. Bizarro world. Can't begin to imagine it.

[Politically Homeless]

15. Re: hey, we agree there

I honestly can't begin to imagine living in a world where people take guns to go grocery shopping. Honestly. Bizarro world. Can't begin to imagine it.

You've obviously never been to Arizona. No permit is necessary to openly carry a gun here, and it's not uncommon.

[iverglas]

16. you're right

... and I thought Texas was bizarre 20 years ago ...

Nope. Still can't imagine it. And that's fine with me!

[gorfle]

17. Besides...

Besides. If you are going to the trouble to get a CCW permit, you are basically going to carry your pistol every time you leave the house.

It would be as hard to imagine a CCW permit holder not carrying his weapon as it would be a police officer.

[Politically Homeless]

20. Re: Besides...

Besides. If you are going to the trouble to get a CCW permit, you are basically going to carry your pistol every time you leave the house.

That's why open carry is so great. There are guys like me who only want to pack heat occasionally and don't really want to go to the trouble of getting a CCW. This provides us the opportunity to do so. You just strap it on and walk out the door.

I usually only wear a pistol when I have to go out alone late at night when the streets are deserted. I figure that my chances of being the victim of a violent crime anytime else are virtually zilch.

[gorfle]

23. I'm not a big fan of open carry.

While I don't mind if others want to open carry, my problem with open carry is that it opens up the potential for people to be confrontational just to see what you will do. You know, the, "Come on, tough guy! Whatcha gonna do? Pull out your gun?!?"

Also you might not want everyone to know that you carry a firearm, as it could have repercussions against you by people who disapprove of your carrying a firearm. Is your boss anti-gun? You'd hate to run into him at the grocery store with your iron strapped on, eh?

If I was going to carry I would want to carry concealed.

[Testament]

24. You know, we hear a lot about open carry's "problems"...

However, very seldom do they come to pass. People don't try to start fights with you, afterall, you have a gun, and it's a lot easier to draw a gun in the open, than from concealment. Also, if/when an incident occurs with the police, a lot of people from across the state (in good open carry states like VA or AZ) support you. As for your boss, I would assume that if a person is in that kind of situation, they will know it, but I can't imagine that it could be a good work environment if the boss will give you a hard time for something lawfully do in your off hours.

[gorfle]

26. Problems with open carry.

However, very seldom do they come to pass. People don't try to start fights with you, afterall, you have a gun, and it's a lot easier to draw a gun in the open, than from concealment. Also, if/when an incident occurs with the police, a lot of people from across the state (in good open carry states like VA or AZ) support you. As for your boss, I would assume that if a person is in that kind of situation, they will know it, but I can't imagine that it could be a good work environment if the boss will give you a hard time for something lawfully do in your off hours.

The fact of the matter is, people will treat you differently, if only subconciously, if you are wearing a pistol on your hip. I personally don't want to be treated differently.

And I'm sure lots of people work for people who would give them a hard time for things they do in their off hours, lawfully or not.

[Firethorn]

25. If you're going to carry, carry everywhere

Why not? As the recent incident in Florida shows, criminals carry illegally in grocery stores.

If you ever happen to pass me in a grocery store, or for that matter the mall, gas station, or restaurant, I'll be carrying.

CCW holders don't generally go places where they fell there's an elevated chance of something happening. They carry in case of the random attack. Or, if they're being stalked(crazy boyfriend, perhaps), because an attack could occur anywhere.

It's kinda like 'why would you carry in a church?' - Because I remember reading about at least a half dozen attacks on churches in the last year alone. Why in a school? Do you even have to ask? There was a shooting(though nobody died) at a mall in my state not too long ago, and my state has a lower population than NYC.

[TPaine7]

9. Even if you buy into the whole

"you need to justify the exercise of your constitutional rights (but only with regards to gun rights)" idea, guns in parks would still make sense.

If you are hiking in the backcountry and need help, how will anyone find out? Are the rangers trained to spot buzzards circling your corpse? Do you need really good cellular coverage?

In National Parks the old saying "when seconds count, the police are only minutes away" becomes "when seconds count, the rangers are only days away." That's if you're lucky. If you get into trouble on the 2nd day of a 2 wk trip, they're more than days away.

[slackmaster]

18. Makes sense to me

Peoples' personal choices should be restricted in only the most limited of circumstances, and only for sound reasons.

[iverglas]

19. what I can't figure out here ...

Peoples' personal choices

In what sense is it, er, intellectually honest to refer to what people do in public, and most especially on public land, as a "personal choice"?

You know ... it could be my personal choice to poop in the park ...

But cereally. It's my personal choice to eat pizza for breakfast. If I choose to do it on the subway during morning rush hour, it just might not be quite intellectually honest to characterize it as a "personal choice" and pretend it has no other characteristics.

[slackmaster]

21. There are perfectly sound reasons to regulate excretory behavior in a park

As an experienced backpacker I assure you that you CAN poop in parks, but the manner and location of your dumps is regulated. In addition to the obvious short-term deleterious effects of unregulated crapping, many areas of national parks and forests are watershed for reservoirs. You have to be a certain distance from streams, bury feces to some specified depth with restrictions on the type of soil, use only unscented white toilet paper, etc. In Sequoia National Park backpackers are required to carry a specialized type of trowel that is marked so it can be used as a depth gauge. Within the framework of those regulations, the challenge is reduced to finding the place with the best view so you can enjoy your coffee and experience true quality time.



ETA I have heard that some parks, in more crowded areas, are now requiring backpackers to carry their waste out. But they can still poop in the park.

Someone with a license to carry a concealed firearm, carrying that firearm in a park, does not endanger the scenery, public water supplies, or anything else except perhaps the stray wannabe bandit. Use of the firearm is still regulated, as is carrying one (or taking a dump) in a shopping mall.

But cereally. It's my personal choice to eat pizza for breakfast. If I choose to do it on the subway during morning rush hour, it just might not be quite intellectually honest to characterize it as a "personal choice" and pretend it has no other characteristics.

I don't understand what would be offensive or harmful about a person eating pizza for breakfast, but if you were to light up a cigar on the subway I think people would have good reason to be bothered. That's why smoking on public transportation is regulated, at least in most places I've been.

[gorfle]

5. Just as it should be.

If a CCW permit holder can walk down main street with a concealed weapon, why not a state park?

[mvccd1000]

14. That ban was ridiculous.

A person who legally possesses a gun can drive through a state park or a national forest, but let them cross into a national park and they have suddenly become a criminal.

I could be driving along beautiful I-64 near Charlottesville, Virgina, but if I dare to get off on Skyline Drive to tour the Blue Ridge Parkway, I become a criminal.

It makes much more sense to have a consistent policy; if the state allows firearms in parks, the feds should, too.

If there ever did happen to exist a state full of people nutty enough to ban them, then they would be banned in the national parks, too.

Hopefully that day will never come to pass...