National Park Carry to be Announced This Month

This is a discussion on National Park Carry to be Announced This Month within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Decision expected on rule about guns in parks | TheNewsTribune.com | Tacoma, WA Decision expected on rule about guns in parks JEFFREY P. MAYOR; jeff.mayor@thenewstribune.com ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: National Park Carry to be Announced This Month

  1. #1
    Member Array waynesan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    144

    National Park Carry to be Announced This Month

    Decision expected on rule about guns in parks | TheNewsTribune.com | Tacoma, WA
    Decision expected on rule about guns in parks


    JEFFREY P. MAYOR; jeff.mayor@thenewstribune.com
    Last updated: November 6th, 2008 12:40 AM (PST)

    The Department of the Interior is expected to announce this month its decision regarding changes in rules governing guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.
    When he visited Mount Rainier National Park for the Oct. 10 opening of the new Jackson Visitor Center, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said the announcement would be made soon.

    “We’re going through the process. We anticipated we’d get a lot of responses, and we did,” Kempthorne told The News Tribune.

    At the end of April, the department proposed a change that would allow people to carry a concealed firearm in a national park or wildlife refuge if the individual is permitted to carry a concealed weapon and is authorized to do so on similar state lands in the state in which the national park or refuge is located.

    The department received 130,000 to 140,000 comments on the proposal, said Chris Paolino, deputy director of communications for the department.

    “That’s on the higher end for comments but not extreme. By contrast, we received nearly 300,000 comments on proposal relating to a narrow change in Endangered Species Act regulations,” Paolino said.

    “The majority (of the comments) support leaving the current rules in place,” said Sean Smith, Northwest regional director for the National Parks Conservation Association, which opposes the changes. “In other words, the public comments support the current firearm restrictions, not the NRA’s proposed changes.”

    The debate began last December, when 47 U.S. senators wrote Kempthorne asking that him to review the existing laws and allow citizens to transport and carry firearms consistent with state law where the National Park Service’s sites are located.

    Current regulations require weapons to be temporarily inoperable or stowed so they are not easily accessible.

    The NRA, which pushed for the change, argues park visitors have the right to protect themselves against wild animals and people. It also argues the existing law is confusing because it differs from regulations allowing loaded weapons on other federal recreation lands.

    Groups such as the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, the Association of National Park Rangers, the Ranger Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police and the NPCA oppose any change. They say allowing guns in parks and refuges will only put people and wildlife in danger.
    While the rule may not change in our favor, I don't think I would consider the opinions of those quoted above as a true assessment of the situation as it is.
    Man, I hope this change goes through before January 20th.
    Raising children is like being pecked to death by a chicken every day.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array tns0038's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,118
    Considering 47 Senators what it changed, I would hope the park service will make those changes.

    And accredit the bad emails to the typical tree hungers, who are afraid of there own shadow.

    Thanks for keeping us posted...

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array tinkerinWstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    1,263
    I was wondering about the status of this and combed the net last week looking for an update. Thanks for sharing.
    "Run for your life from the man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper's bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another-their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun."

    Who is John Galt?

  5. #4
    New Member Array TriggerFingr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    12
    I take it this over rides active and retired LEOs? What about HR 218 ?

  6. #5
    Member Array Stranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    102
    I remember looking at many, many pages of comments and a massive majority was for lifting the ban. There was maybe 1 against lifting the ban to every 20 for lifting it. This was before they extended the comment period...something just doesn't add up.

  7. #6
    Member Array past60's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    74

    National Park Carry to be Announced This Month

    The math doesn't make sense. If less than 140,000 people commented, that means less than 70,000 were in favor. Given the importance of this topic to most of us and assuming that there are 2 million CCW's in the country (?), that means that only 3.5 percent of us responded. That doesn't seem realistic.

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array Supertac45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Michigan's U.P.
    Posts
    3,657
    Considering the recent election, this topic is dead. That was the reason for the delay on a decision, CCW will not be happening in National Parks. Just me.
    Les Baer 45
    Sig Man
    N.R.A. Patron Life Member
    M.C.R.G.O.

  9. #8
    Member Array Erik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    415
    ^ That's my read on the matter.
    God, country, family.

  10. #9
    Member Array sohmdaddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Posts
    17
    I didn't know it was up for consideration, I wish I could have sent an email.

  11. #10
    Member Array dogrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    E/Cntl Fla.
    Posts
    169
    Quote Originally Posted by TriggerFingr View Post
    I take it this over rides active and retired LEOs? What about HR 218 ?
    Yep, it over rides LEOSA............but, I well recall when several local judges decided that no LEOs would carry in their court......Our response was an unequivocal "well, then you are on your own.......we will NOT attempt to intervene in an armed confrontation in your court".......Had the sum effect of really angering them but didn't result in any change.......Frankly, my reaction'd be the same with an ongoing assault on a park ranger...........disarm me and you'd best have no expectation of any help from me!

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array FlyboyLDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    864
    Quote Originally Posted by Supertac45 View Post
    Considering the recent election, this topic is dead. That was the reason for the delay on a decision, CCW will not be happening in National Parks. Just me.
    Yep, it is dead. I would say his appointed members have already weighed in on the matter. So to all who voted for him - Happy Obama Day!

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array sgtD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,292
    Quote Originally Posted by Stranger View Post
    I remember looking at many, many pages of comments and a massive majority was for lifting the ban. There was maybe 1 against lifting the ban to every 20 for lifting it. This was before they extended the comment period...something just doesn't add up.
    perhaps the Brady's and the members of the other groups who are against it did some serious work during the extension period?
    When you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts & minds will follow. Semper Fi.

  14. #13
    HKR
    HKR is offline
    Member Array HKR's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    around here somewhere
    Posts
    405
    Decision expected on rule about guns in parks
    JEFFREY P. MAYOR; jeff.mayor@thenewstribune.com
    Published: November 6th, 2008 12:30 AM
    The Department of the Interior is expected to announce this month its decision regarding changes in rules governing guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.

    When he visited Mount Rainier National Park for the Oct. 10 opening of the new Jackson Visitor Center, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said the announcement would be made soon.

    “We’re going through the process. We anticipated we’d get a lot of responses, and we did,” Kempthorne told The News Tribune.

    At the end of April, the department proposed a change that would allow people to carry a concealed firearm in a national park or wildlife refuge if the individual is permitted to carry a concealed weapon and is authorized to do so on similar state lands in the state in which the national park or refuge is located.

    The department received 130,000 to 140,000 comments on the proposal, said Chris Paolino, deputy director of communications for the department.

    “That’s on the higher end for comments but not extreme. By contrast, we received nearly 300,000 comments on proposal relating to a narrow change in Endangered Species Act regulations,” Paolino said.

    “The majority (of the comments) support leaving the current rules in place,” said Sean Smith, Northwest regional director for the National Parks Conservation Association, which opposes the changes. “In other words, the public comments support the current firearm restrictions, not the NRA’s proposed changes.”

    The debate began last December, when 47 U.S. senators wrote Kempthorne asking that him to review the existing laws and allow citizens to transport and carry firearms consistent with state law where the National Park Service’s sites are located.

    Current regulations require weapons to be temporarily inoperable or stowed so they are not easily accessible.

    The NRA, which pushed for the change, argues park visitors have the right to protect themselves against wild animals and people. It also argues the existing law is confusing because it differs from regulations allowing loaded weapons on other federal recreation lands.

    Groups such as the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, the Association of National Park Rangers, the Ranger Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police and the NPCA oppose any change. They say allowing guns in parks and refuges will only put people and wildlife in danger.

  15. #14
    Member Array Tenring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    72
    This entire subject got slow rolled until after the election by those wanting the restrictions left in place. They knew there was going to be a new Administration and knew what it was likely to look like.

    No bureaucrat in his right mind is going to risk his job by approving relaxed rules now it's clear this viciously antigun Administration is taking control. They take the names of their enemies and act on them. Nobody is going to want to go against them on this issue.

    The 2nd Amendment is going to get deep sixed again by the clever maneuverings of the Left.
    "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that . . . it is their right and duty to be at all times armed. . . ." Letter from Thomas Jefferson to Justice John Cartwright (June 5, 1824)

  16. #15
    Ex Member Array DOGOFWAR01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    WYOMING
    Posts
    562
    The Park Rangers and whomever else are worried about their job security not the Citizens or the U.S. Constitution or the Second Amendment.

    They voted for their pocket book just like most did last Tuesday.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. National Park Carry Law
    By REVMAN in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: April 1st, 2010, 12:29 PM
  2. National Park Carry FAQ
    By swinokur in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: January 29th, 2010, 09:11 PM
  3. National Park Carry ?
    By jfl in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: November 18th, 2008, 04:52 PM
  4. National Park Carry OK?
    By VTFatBa*d in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: July 4th, 2008, 10:47 PM
  5. national park carry...eh??
    By katipo in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: May 26th, 2007, 12:04 PM

Search tags for this page

ccw in mount rainier national park
,
concealed carry and rainier
,
concealed carry hr 218 in national parks
,
concealed carry in mount ranier
,

concealed carry in mt. rainier 2013

,
firearm restrictions at mt. rainier
,
is it legal to carry a concealed weapon in mt rainer
,
is it legal to carry in national park?
,
is it legal to carry my 357 in mount rainier national parks
,
mount rainier consealed weapons
,

mount rainier national park concealed carry

,
mount rainier national park concealed cary
,
mt rainier national park concealed carry
,
mt rainier national park consealed carry
,
national park concealed carry decision
Click on a term to search for related topics.