Quantcast
Conceal of Approval: Feds Endorse Guns in National Parks Print E-mail
Written by Dave Loos   
Friday, 02 May 2008

You have a 1 in 708,000 chance of becoming a victim of a violent crime in a national park -- there's a greater chance that you'll be struck by lightning instead. But the Bush Administration thinks those odds are too high, and their solution is to allow you to carry a concealed firearm next time you take a trip to the Grand Canyon.

Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne proposed the new regulation yesterday. It would overturn a 25-year-old regulation restricting loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges, enacted under that gun-hating liberal Ronald Reagan.

The proposal would permit park goers to carry loaded and concealed weapons if permitted by state laws in the state where the park or refuge is located. Interior officials said the change would clear up existing confusion and essentially defer to to state laws.

Seriously, what could possibly go wrong with this plan? Concealed loaded guns in national parks? Violent crimes are sure to go down.

Not exactly, say current and former national park employees. "This is purely and simply a politically-driven effort to solve a problem that doesn't exist," said Bill Wade, chairman of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees. Seven former National Park Service directors have also sent Kempthorne a letter saying this is a really bad idea.
Comments
Add NewSearch
MarkR   | 207.207.43.xxx | 2008-05-02 17:35:04
I don't see what all the big hubbub is about on either side.

Not sure if this is the reason why, in fact it may be apples and oranges, but one possible explanation is the state of Texas owns land that is located next to Big Bend Natl park, 9200 acres called Christmas mountain. The current G.L.O. commissioner recently nixed a plan to sell the land to the national park system because it wouldn't allow hunting on the land. My limited understanding is currently the only access to Christmas mountain is through Big Bend Natl Park and you still can't hunt on Christmas mountain. Why you ask? Again my limited understanding, but what I've gathered is because you can't get through the natl. park with a gun. This move might allow hunting on Christmas mountain. And if that is the case I'm all for it.


Need Another reason for concealed weapons?
It will help protect an innocent hiker from the people who illegally grow pot in national parks. http://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080430/NEWS01/804300334/1002
If you stumble upon a mad drug dealer that will up your chances of a violent crime in a national park any day. National Park Pot growers have been called the greatest threat to the national parks.

Concealed Weapons in national parks is not as crazy as you would have it appear.

Total visitors to national parks in 2006 272,623,980 http://www.nps.gov/faqs.htm according to your numbers that would be 385 violent crimes at national parks in 2006. Your right the odds aren't that great for a violent crime but 385 is not a number to sneeze at. before I did the math I would have guessed less than 100.
Reply | Quote
2 3
MarkR   | 207.207.43.xxx | 2008-05-02 17:41:18
fyi, your comment tool needs help or a disclaimer that it will cut off 1/2 of your comment if its to long.

This sux, theres a lot of good stuff missing in my previous comment. like using your numbers and coming up with 385 violent crimes at natl parks in 2006 and how illegal pot growers in national parks have been called the bigest threat to the national park system and public safety.
but I'm not about to write it all again.
Reply | Quote
1 0
Robbert   | 82.95.195.xxx | 2008-05-03 05:48:04
@MarkR.
The existing regulations would not prevent you from hunting after having driven throu a national park:
Quote:
guns must be "inoperable or packed, cased or stored in a manner that will prevent their ready use," according to Park Service regulations.

-- from the last link in the article.

In other words, you just need to either disassemble and later reassemble your gun, or you need to put a lock on it, which prevents you from ready use. No big deal.
Reply | Quote
1 0
Joe - Mr   | 202.83.81.xxx | 2008-05-06 01:14:22
Guns in NPs! are you people nuts? you actually think gun toting prevents violent crime despite all the evidence to the contrary? Try this, no guns in any public space unless you are a public official who requires such as part of your duties. You folk really frighten the civilised world with your gun madness
Reply | Quote
0 0
Jake - Other reasons   | 69.243.54.xxx | 2008-05-11 10:25:23
You may have forgotten to consider that many people carry them to protect them and their families from wild animals. Bears, alligators, or whatever else depending on the local geographics.
Reply | Quote
1 0
John Brinkley - Guns in the Parks   | 198.6.202.xxx | 2008-05-12 16:38:39
When Kempthorne was a Senator from Idaho, his colleague Larry "Wide-Stance" Craig proposed disarming public lands law enforcement officials, such as Fish and Wildlife Service LE Officers, BLM rangers, and so on. Kempthorne was all for this. Craig said people were "frightened" when they saw uniformed LE agents carrying sidearms.
Reply | Quote
0 0
Stan   | 67.41.148.xxx | 2008-06-18 01:49:09
First of all, I think the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees need to stay retired. They and so many other people blow this whole thing out of porportion.

Its not so you can shoot a bear if you or he crosses paths.
Its not so troublesome people can tote a gun.
It is not so idiots can target practice in the parks.

It is so a trained person With a carry permit may legally carry a fire arm and defend him or herself against an otherwise possible death.

If you were a thief, crook, criminal, rapist whatever, would you indiscriminately do your thing if you knew that the chance of the person you are about to assault may just be carrying and that you may just get your ass burned? Just knowing that law abiding citizens can, may and most likey be carrying would make you think twice. Criminals primarily prey on those who can not defend themself.

One city that told their citizense to buy and keep a gun for self defense (unless they didn't think they could use or not feal comfortable with it). The crime dropped to almost nil. The criminals moved out!!

Parks, even though safer than cities still have their problems too. There have been rapes and attempted rapes, theft, murder. By the time you call for help (and usually there's no cell service) and you tell him to hold up a minute so you can try to call while he waits to hold the knife to your throat--well, if you don't get the picture, your not human or a criminal).

Track records prove that those who have concealed carry permits are generaly safer and very law obiding citizens.

Think carfully about the following thought provokers:

1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

2. A gun in the hand is better than an officer on the phone (that is if you even have service).

3. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.

4. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.

5. If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

6. The United States Constitution (c)1791. All Rights Reserved.

7. 64,999,987 legal firearms owners killed no one yesterday.

8. Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety.

9. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.

10. Assault is a behavior, not a device.

11. Criminals love gun control; it makes their jobs safer.

12. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.

13. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.

14. You have only the rights you are willing to fight for.

15. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.

16. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.

17. If tools kill rather than people, then outlaw cars and all other transportation, as they also are tools.

Thanks for your time
Stan
Reply | Quote
1 0
Write comment
Name:
Email:
 
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img] 
 
 
 

Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved.
 
< Prev   Next >
[ Back ]

Hi, We're EnviroWonk

Yeah, OK, we can be the change that we want to see in the world. But unless powerful people in powerful positions want to be that change as well, nothing's going to change.

So now, finally, there's a place where you can go for news and analysis of politics from an environmental perspective.

Weekly Updates

RSS

rss