The Interior Department has officially proposed allowing concealed firearms into some national parks and wildlife refuges. State laws against carrying loaded guns into parks would supersede the new rule: thus, for example, visitors to Death Valley National Park could tote a gun in the Nevada portion of the park, but not on the California side. As expected, opinions vary on the matter. Critics say that a person is more likely to be struck by lightning than to be a victim of a violent crime in a national park; the proposal, says Bill Wade of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, is "a politically driven effort to solve a problem that doesn't exist." Gun-rights advocates are, of course, in favor of the change. "[I]t just doesn't make sense to assume that there's some kind of mystical bubble around national parks where your safety isn't an issue," says Kevin Starrett of the Oregon Firearms Federation. The Interior Department will take public comment on the proposal for 60 days.
EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity
Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success
Comments
View as Flat
GoodCheer Posted 3:54 am
02 May 2008
I agree with this dude whole-heartedly. I am concerned about my safty in national parks. That's why I don't want people to have concealed guns. Seems pretty logical to me...
Permalink
edarnold41 Posted 4:11 am
02 May 2008
'I agree with this dude whole-heartedly. I am concerned about my (sic)safty in national parks. That's why I don't want people to have concealed guns. Seems pretty logical to me...'
Uh, have you done a check recently with your local drug-dealer's association? People who are into breaking the law, thus those who would be a threat to your safety, DON'T OBEY LAWS. That's why we call them criminals.
The only people affected by laws banning the possesion of firearms, under whatever the circumstances, are the law-abiding. If you wish to be a disarmed, helpless victim of crime, that's your right in a free society. Taking away the option of self-defense is not your right.
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 4:15 am
02 May 2008
Nor is it the right of the several thousand of innocent children who accidentally shoot themselves with their parent's handguns every year.
Permalink
krlk27 Posted 4:56 am
02 May 2008
Permalink
Pangolin Posted 5:30 am
02 May 2008
National Parks used to be on the short list of places you could go in the wilderness without being hazarded by gun nuts with automatic weapons in cammies. Ask any woman how she would feel about backpacking if she knew that guns were being allowed into the backcountry.
Permalink
usandthem Posted 2:35 pm
02 May 2008
I am not in favor of CONCEALED guns in national parks.The only people affected by laws banning the possesion of firearms, under whatever the circumstances, are the law-abiding. If you wish to be a disarmed, helpless victim of crime, that's your right in a free society. Taking away the option of self-defense is not your right. I can agree with this person.
There are going to be many battles in this country and the world over clean water and food.If you can not protect yourself.You will die!You may think that my thinking is radical.Read the news of the world and see that riots over food and water are becoming common.This will happen in this country also.You may say,Oh no not here,maybe Africa or Asia,but not hear.Don't delude yourself.You have to eat and have water and you will do what needs to be done. Watch the world news and see!!!
Permalink
TCWriter Posted 2:54 pm
02 May 2008
As much as people would like to believe otherwise, allowing loaded firearms in the National Parks will result in a less-safe environment -- for people and animals.
Permalink
jimhadden Posted 6:24 pm
02 May 2008
Humans who plan to prey on other humans should know that humans who go to National Parks don't have particularly valuable assets on hand.
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 6:28 am
03 May 2008
Permalink
mtvyfan Posted 1:34 am
06 May 2008
Unfortunately, many people who come to these parks can get bored and some consume alcohol and then you can actually see when some peoples brains turn off.
I have seen the aftermath when one group of jerks hacked at a live aspen tree with a knife until they practically cut it in two. And even in areas where guns are permitted, I've seen evidence of them shooting up trees, etc.
This is a very dangerous practice, I guess go ahead and allow guns if you must, but confiscate peoples alcohol at the park gates. I think if they had to choose between booze and packing heat, they'll leave the guns at home.
Permalink
greenfire8 Posted 11:02 am
10 May 2008
If you really want to do something to improve safety in parks and free up some of the rangers' time so they might actually get back to interpretive work w/ the public, consider the funding shortfalls that the Park Service is facing: 35% or $600 million per year ( http://www.npca.org/media_center/reports/analysis.html ). This doesnt include land acquisition shortages which have increased the complexity of management and left large gaps in parks open to potential development ( http://www.npca.org/landforsale/ ).
Permalink
ohyeah Posted 4:10 am
24 Jun 2008
Permalink