March 3rd, 2008 07:27 PM
USAToday anti-gun opinion
These people are clueless...read on:
Our view on gun restrictions: Keep parks free of firearms - Yahoo! News
Mon Mar 3, 12:21 AM ET
Suppose you bring the kids to Grand Teton National Park for a vacation and set out on a hike around Jenny Lake. Halfway around, you encounter an unfriendly hiker carrying a loaded 9mm semiautomatic pistol.
Still feeling like you're in an oasis of tranquility? Welcome to the national parks as envisioned by the National Rifle Association and its friends in Washington.
From its inception, the National Park Service has required that guns be unloaded and kept out of sight. This helps park rangers control poaching and makes parks a place of refuge for both people and animals.
But the NRA has other ideas. It helped persuade half the U.S. Senate to sign a letter to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne asking for a review of the ban on loaded weapons. The NRA and the senators want national park rules to match the rules in each state. So loaded guns could be carried openly at Grand Teton because that is Wyoming's rule for its state parks.
This, the NRA argues, would help visitors protect themselves from dangerous people and animals. Kempthorne, who appears to be taking the election-year gambit seriously, is to announce revisions by April 30.
Instead of listening to the gun lobby, which is also trying to weaken gun restrictions on college campuses and other off-limit domains, Kempthorne should listen to park rangers. Allowing gun-toting visitors into the parks, says the rangers' association, would cause more problems than it would cure.
Crime is a minor problem in national parks. In 2006, when the national parks drew 273 million visitors, there were 11 homicides. By contrast, Washington, D.C., with a population of about 600,000, had 181 homicides in 2007.
As for animal attacks, those are very rare, say the rangers, and in fact mace and bear spray are more effective against bears. Of more concern are poachers who raid the parks, particularly because bear parts are valuable on international markets. Looser gun rules would make them harder to catch.
Additionally, visitors unaccustomed to wildlife can misread an animal's intentions. An elk that snorts and paws isn't necessarily getting ready to charge, and a bear that rises on its hind legs is more likely to be improving its view than preparing to attack. But some armed visitors may not take a chance, endangering both animals and other visitors.
That very scenario played out at the Lodgepole Campground in California's Sequoia National Park when Doug Morris was chief ranger. A camper needlessly shot a bear, which then charged dangerously around the campground before settling down to die in front of a horrified family. The camper was cited for both having a loaded gun and killing wildlife, Morris said.
Contrary to what the NRA claims, changes are unlikely to make rules less confusing. How many Georgians know Montana's rules on allowing weapons in state parks? And what about parks that straddle state lines?
The National Rifle Association has every right to promote its vision of a society where practically everyone can carry guns anywhere. That doesn't mean the government has to listen.
This is my glock. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
March 3rd, 2008 08:17 PM
Seems their biggest fear is someone shooting an animal. Not a criminal shooting another human. I also noticed he didn't put how many assaults and rapes were included in the crime rate of National Parks. I guess a woman getting raped doesn't suffice lethal force.
March 3rd, 2008 08:38 PM
An unfriendly armed hiker...don't they call them criminals any more?
What a load of toro feces...
Stay armed...stay safe!
The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member[/B]
March 3rd, 2008 08:40 PM
I noticed the ad failed to mention that both the parks and Washington DC have almost total gun bans in effect. Hmm, advertising that there are 600K people in Washington DC and 181 homicides as compared to 273 million people and 11 homicides in national parks seems, to me at least, to justify allowing guns in Washington DC more than banning guns in national parks. OMO.
You gain strength, courage, and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You are able to say to yourself, "I have lived through this horror. I can take the next thing that comes along." . . . You must do the thing you think you cannot do. Eleanor Roosevelt
March 3rd, 2008 08:56 PM
As I was reading, I kept looking for the part that was going to keep the bad guy, uh I mean "unfriendly hiker" from having the gun in the first place. Oh that's right, they can't do that.
"The truth is not half as important as what people believe the truth to be." Napoleon
H&K USP Compact .40SW
S&W 66 .357
Colt Commander .45
March 3rd, 2008 09:03 PM
This caught my eye, too. Does the drooling moron - I mean journalist who wrote this not realize the hypocrisy of pointing this out? D.C. has a TOTAL BAN ON FIREARMS, for all practical purposes - even more restrictive than in National Parks...and yet, they have a massively disproportionate number of murders... Go figure.
By contrast, Washington, D.C., with a population of about 600,000, had 181 homicides in 2007.
I hope USAToday is bombarded with folks pointing out the incredible stupidity of the author and the editors involved in this piece of bird-cage liner...
Just when I thout "journalists" couldn't get any more dumbererer....
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
March 3rd, 2008 10:54 PM
I'm glad they put up a sign that says GUN FREE ZONE. Now if they can teach the criminals to read, everything would be okay.....
Was it something I said?
Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.
March 3rd, 2008 11:12 PM
By contrast, Washington, D.C., with a population of about 600,000, had 181 homicides in 2007.
While Austin, Texas, with a population of over 700,000 people, homicides shot up to 30 in 2007 from a 2006 total of 20.
Some people just don't get it.
Last edited by P7fanatic; March 4th, 2008 at 01:00 AM.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson
"Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." -Michael Savage
GOOD Gun Control is being able to hit your target! -Myself
March 4th, 2008 12:06 AM
How would looser gun rules make pochers harder to catch? Those pochers have no gun rules.!
March 4th, 2008 01:50 AM
The "unfriendly hiker" with a handgun bit cracked me up to be honest, they always have this weird idea that if a restriction is removed the local populace will suddenly be overrun with blood thirsty maniacs. O_o
I'm sure the anti-gun crowd can find some valid points if they look hard enough, but for now they're content to sling garbage. It's pointless.
People do not lack strength; they lack will. — Victor Hugo
March 4th, 2008 03:48 AM
Quote: The National Rifle Association has every right to promote its vision of a society where practically everyone can carry guns anywhere.
Not True like most everything else said in the article. The NRA envision people legally carrying guns who are qualified, proficient, safe and law abiding. Not Criminals or an unfriendly hiker carrying a loaded 9mm semiautomatic pistol. Legal carring citizens tend to be polite and friendly out of necessity. Again they just don't get it and their ignorance leads them to mislead and exploit peoples fears.
Many would not be if they only new the truth.
There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
- General George Patton Jr
March 4th, 2008 04:52 AM
The premise is false.
Keep parks free of firearms
Disarm a person in the face of grizzly bears, and you have a walking, talking meal.
Disarm a person in the face of armed criminals plying their trades, and you have dead citizens.
Criminals already do carry weaponry and they do prey on citizens. A park is simply a pretty place with an ugly reality forced upon citizens. Since citizens aren't the ones commiting crimes, the only practical impact of such policies are that citizens no longer have the ability to defend themselves.
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
self defense (A.O.J.).
How does disarming
the number of victims?
Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.
March 4th, 2008 06:56 AM
This law will keep hikers safe.......
......hikers like Gary Michael Hilton. Remember him? Link to his story:
Man charged in Georgia murder may be linked to Florida murder - CNN.com
If gun were allowed to be carried lawfully in our parks this incident may have turned out bad...... for him.
OK, sarcasm off.
Bottom line, it ain't the bears I'm worried about. It's the 'wolves'.
Last edited by goldshellback; March 4th, 2008 at 06:58 AM.
"Just getting a concealed carry permit means you haven't commited a crime yet. CCP holders commit crimes." Daniel Vice, senior attorney for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, quoted on Fox & Friends, 8 Jul, 2008
(Sometimes) "a fight avioded is a fight won." ... claude clay
March 4th, 2008 09:15 AM
Again he proves our point. People who don't follow the rules don't care WHAT the rules are. Legally armed citizens are following the rules.
The camper was cited for both having a loaded gun and killing wildlife
March 4th, 2008 10:00 AM
I remember in the 90's there were two female hikers killed by a knife weilding killer in the Shenandoah National Park. They were staying in a tent on a hiking trail. I'm sure they wish they had been able to have a gun with them. So what idiot in the media says there is no violent crime in national parks and that honest citizens have no right to defend themselves? Even dishonest citizens have a right to defend themselves maybe not with firearms but they still have that right. The right to self defense is older than our Constitution, older than the Magna Carta, perhaps older than the Bible. It is a natural right from the dawn of time (the right of self preservation).
By JPCleary in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: March 30th, 2010, 09:37 AM
By critterhog in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: October 5th, 2007, 01:52 PM
By SIGguy229 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
Last Post: July 15th, 2007, 08:44 PM
Search tags for this page
anti-gun opinions and reasons
shenandoah hiker carring guns
usa today antigun
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors