National Park and Wildlife Refuge No Gun Signs in Florida

This is a discussion on National Park and Wildlife Refuge No Gun Signs in Florida within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Last week vacationing from Ohio I observed No Guns signs at the Ernest Coe entry to the Everglades National Park and on the way into ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17

Thread: National Park and Wildlife Refuge No Gun Signs in Florida

  1. #1
    Member Array Louis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    17

    National Park and Wildlife Refuge No Gun Signs in Florida

    Last week vacationing from Ohio I observed No Guns signs at the Ernest Coe entry to the Everglades National Park and on the way into the Canaveral National Seashore. Florida members, anyone know any special status for these locations?

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Member Array FastDraw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    589
    Quote Originally Posted by Louis View Post
    Last week vacationing from Ohio I observed No Guns signs at the Ernest Coe entry to the Everglades National Park and on the way into the Canaveral National Seashore. Florida members, anyone know any special status for these locations?
    I don't know why they are posted that way........ but am certainly interested as I visit Florida several times a year....... sooooooo what's the deal you Floridian gunnies???

    Be Alert and Stay Safe

    FastDraw

  4. #3
    VIP Member
    Array Miggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Miami-Dade, FL
    Posts
    6,258
    I am guessing they haven't had the chance to remove the signs yet
    You have to make the shot when fire is smoking, people are screaming, dogs are barking, kids are crying and sirens are coming.
    Randy Cain.

    Ego will kill you. Leave it at home.
    Signed: Me!

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array pogo2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Southwest
    Posts
    3,149

    Theory

    They are probably hoping that if Obama acts quick enough to reverse this new rule they won't have to remove the signs.

    I'm not kidding about this.
    Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the Peoples' Liberty's Teeth." - George Washington

  6. #5
    Lead Moderator
    Array rstickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Laurel, MD
    Posts
    21,379
    Are they NPS sites? Don't think the law pertains to Dept. of the Interior sites.
    Rick

    EOD - Initial success or total failure

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array Tally XD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Tallahassee, FL
    Posts
    1,827
    These signs should have been removed already. The ones that were posted at St. Marks Wildlife Refuge are now gone.
    I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.
    - Barack Obama Chicago Tribune, April 27, 2004

  8. #7
    VIP Member
    Array Miggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Miami-Dade, FL
    Posts
    6,258
    This is South Florida. I-595 had its speed limit increased from 55 to 65 mph 2 years ago. You still can see the old speed limit signs up.
    Broward Sheriffs Office blamed the change on the availability of AK 47s in the area
    You have to make the shot when fire is smoking, people are screaming, dogs are barking, kids are crying and sirens are coming.
    Randy Cain.

    Ego will kill you. Leave it at home.
    Signed: Me!

  9. #8
    Member Array Bannack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kalsipell, Mt
    Posts
    40
    Obama suspended this for now:

    Obama Faces Hurdles in Reversing Bush Regulations

    Obama Faces Hurdles in Reversing Bush Regulations - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com

    President Obama didn't waste any time freezing all of the pending regulations of the Bush administration.

    Almost immediately after Obama took the oath of office Tuesday, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel sent a memorandum to all agencies and departments, directing them to stop all pending regulations until a legal and policy review can be conducted by the new administration.

    But Obama's inauguration came too late to stop some of Bush's most controversial regulations from being finalized.

    "They were very successful at getting these controversial rules finalized before Jan. 20," said Rick Melberth, director of regulatory policy for OMB Watch. "This Emanuel memo doesn't deal with any of those."

    It's unclear how many rules and regulations the Emanuel memo applies to, but it could be hundreds, Melberth said.

    The Bush administration worked diligently to get its changes in place before Obama took over, moving into overdrive in the last year on a host of new regulatory proposals. In some instances, Bush advisers put the finishing touches on proposals in time to have them passed one day before Obama's inauguration -- federal law requires a 60-day waiting period before any major changes become law.

    Those rules included a "right of conscience" law that allows medical providers to refuse to offer any practice they find morally objectionable, including abortion and other reproductive-health procedures.

    Another regulation overturned a 25-year-old federal rule that severely restricted loaded firearms in national parks.

    Bush also revised endangered species regulations to reduce the input of federal scientists and to block the law from being used to fight global warming.

    Federal regulatory agencies like the FDA and EPA create rules and regulations necessary to institute and enforce major legislative acts such as the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, Clean Air Act or Occupational Health and Safety Act.

    Obama has said he would work to reverse the rule changes. But because these rules took effect before he was sworn in, he cannot simply kill them with the stroke of a pen. Presidents have the power only to revise regulations without the approval of Congress before they are passed into legislation.

    Obama will either have to restart the lengthy rulemaking process, or rely on Congress to reverse the changes of Bush's finalized regulations. A spokesman for the White House could not be reached Wednesday.

    Lawmakers could introduce new legislation or use the Congressional Review Act, a legislative tool passed by the Republican-controlled Congress in 1996, to bring new federal regulations under scrutiny. Bush used that law in 2001 to kill a Clinton-era rule designed to prevent repetitive motion injuries in the workplace.

    The most politically expedient option for Obama is to have Congress vote on new legislative proposals, Melberth said, describing the CRA as a "nuclear option" because it prevents lawmakers from delaying or killing proposals.

    The CRA "really creates a partisan process, and I think legislation by Congress that would overturn this rule is politically more palatable to Congress," he said. "And I think that's why they would more likely turn to that."

    Bush isn't the only president to push major rules, known as "midnight regulations," before his successor's inauguration. Other recent former presidents who used the rule-making tool included Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush.

    Eight years ago, Bush sought to reverse some late-term actions of Clinton, who in his final 20 days in office issued 12 executive orders, including directives on migratory birds and the importation of diamonds from Sierra Leone.

    Bush also had his chief of staff, Andrew Card, issue an order blocking Clinton regulations that hadn't taken effect. According to a 2002 General Accounting Office report, 90 final rules had their effective dates delayed.

    When asked why presidents issue midnight regulations, presidential historian Douglas Weade told FOXNews.com, "Because they get away with it. And it goes under the radar screen. It's overwhelmed by news of the incoming president. Presidents are always good at timing."

    Weade said presidents like to make risky, partisan decisions on weekends when there is less news and fewer reporters covering the news.

    "This is the ultimate weekend," he said.

    I have not seen anything about it here in Montana, but the word all over the net is that the National Park Conceal Carry was put to a halt. Even though it was passed into effect on Jan 9th Obama has frozen this from taking place.
    10mm Rocks

    Never argue with an idiot. They'll only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array AllAmerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Chesterfield, Kakalaki del Sur
    Posts
    2,403
    I dont think he can stop what has already been put in place. This is about pending legislation.

    The park deal is a done deal. Were good to go for now as I understand it.
    My Music: www.reverbnation.com/dickiefredericks
    New tunes added.
    "The Double Tap Center Mass Boogie. Learn it, know it, love it, shoot it. Good guys should live, bad guys not so much. " - Ted Nugent 09

  11. #10
    Member Array Bannack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kalsipell, Mt
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by AllAmerican View Post
    I dont think he can stop what has already been put in place. This is about pending legislation.

    The park deal is a done deal. Were good to go for now as I understand it.
    I would think the same thing as you, but these articals online are making it confusing. We need to check with the NRA and or call our National Park Headquarters.

    The way I read the National Park Carry is that it became effective Jan 9th 2009. We here in Montana want to be carrying in Glacier and Yellowstone National Parks come spring time.

    POST EDIT:

    This is all I can find at the NRA ILA web site.

    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Fe...d.aspx?id=4331

    Obama Administration Halts Pending Bush Regulations

    Friday, January 23, 2009

    NRA-ILA has received many recent inquiries regarding the new Obama administration's order to all federal agencies and departments to halt all pending regulations until incoming administration staff can review those regulations. In particular, members are concerned about the order's impact on the new rule governing the concealed carrying of firearms in national parks.

    In a statement issued only hours after Obama took office, the White House said, "This afternoon, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel signed a memorandum sent to all agencies and departments to stop all pending regulations until a legal and policy review can be conducted by the Obama administration." (You can view a copy of the memo on-line at http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-s...ory-review.pdf).

    The tactic of halting pending orders is commonly used by incoming administrations to delay so-called "midnight regulations" enacted by the outgoing president during the time period between the election and Inauguration Day.

    While it is common for an incoming administration to make such an order, it does not appear that this action would affect the new parks rule.

    The orders outlined in Emanuel's memo would suspend or delay three kinds of rules:

    1. Proposed and final regulations that have not yet been submitted for publication in the Federal Register;

    2. Proposed and final regulations that have submitted, but have not yet been published; and,

    3. Final rules that have been published, but have not yet taken effect.

    The new parks rule does not fall into any of these categories. The rule was published in December 2008, and took effect on January 9, 2009. To repeal the rule, the new leadership at the Interior Dept. would have to publish a new proposed rule, take public comment on it, and eventually publish a new final rule.

    That action is certainly not out of the question--in fact it would come as no surprise if the anti-gun Obama administration attempts to repeal the rule. Of course, NRA-ILA would strenuously oppose and fight against any such attempt.

    We will continue to closely monitor the situation and report on any developments as they happen.
    10mm Rocks

    Never argue with an idiot. They'll only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array pogo2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Southwest
    Posts
    3,149

    National Park carry

    Here is the problem with the new National Park carry rule that was just enacted - it is a rule, not a law. The National Park Service is under the Department of the Interior, which reports to the President. The process for changing this rule is rather slow, involving various reviews and waiting periods. The Bush administration and Secretary Kempthorne went through this drill, however, and got the rule changed just before the inauguration of Obama.

    But the new President and new Secretary of the Interior have the power to change it back, if they wish to go to the trouble. Given Obama's view on guns, you have to know that he would like to do this. The question is - will he go to the trouble?
    Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the Peoples' Liberty's Teeth." - George Washington

  13. #12
    Member Array oldie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    West Central Florida
    Posts
    127
    IMHO there is a difference between FEDERAL PARKS and STATE PARKS. If I understand this correctly, the Federal Parks are where we can carry, but the State Parks in Florida are where we cannot carry as yet. If this is not correct, I would appreciate any feedback.
    "We have met the enemy, and it is us." Pogo Possum

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array cvhoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Louis View Post
    Last week vacationing from Ohio I observed No Guns signs at the Ernest Coe entry to the Everglades National Park and on the way into the Canaveral National Seashore. Florida members, anyone know any special status for these locations?
    IANAL & I'm not from Florida (disclaimer given). The signs being there actually doesn't surprise me at all. Remember, the change to the National Parks rules only permits licensed concealed carry holders to carry in the parks in states that recognize their license and subject to the rules of the state the park is in. For any National Park, but especially a wildlife refuge area like the Everglades, I'd not be surprised if the "no guns" signs never came down as they don't want you walking through with your 30-30, they just won't apply to licensed CCH.

    Hoss
    Sig 239 SAS 40 S&W / Sig 239 9mm / Kahr PM-9 / Walther PPS .40 / Sig P-245 / Ruger LCP
    Beretta Tomcat / Walther PPK / BDA 380 / Taurus 85 / Kel-Tec PF-9 / Am. Derringer 357

    NRA Life Member
    My Web Site

  15. #14
    Member Array SleazyRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Middletown, New York
    Posts
    41
    Originally posted by JBfromMontana:

    "The way I read the National Park Carry is that it became effective Jan 9th 2009. We here in Montana want to be carrying in Glacier and Yellowstone National Parks come spring time."

    I've hiked the backcountry of Glacier many times, the first time in the service of the NPS to conduct a grizzly bear survey. Most of my hikes have been multi-day sojourns into the most remote regions of the park. I've always felt uncomfortable being without a firearm in this type of environment; in fact, it seems madness to occupy common ground with grizzly bears completely stripped of the ability to defend onesself. (The thought of sharing common ground with humans is even more frightening!) The pending legislation is a welcome and sane change.

    I'm concerned, however, that the uninformed or unindoctrinated may panic and kill or injure a bear needlessly. As you know, most of the time a bear charges, it is a "false charge," that is, a charge to intimidate and not an attack. I'd like to hear your opinion of this, JBfromMontana, as I'm sure you are far more aware of local sentiment and grizzly bear lore than I.
    (I'm curious, and as an aside, what kind of handgun would one pack in Glacier?)

  16. #15
    Member Array Spike32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    SEVA
    Posts
    266
    For now Obama can't stop NPS carry. There are at least two pending lawsuits, but the Courts have not placed any injunctions (I don't know if the even could legally do so) on the regulations as of yet.
    You'll rock, with a 357 Glock

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 parking lot
    By wlynn in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 29th, 2008, 06:51 AM
  5. Park forced to take down no-gun signs
    By Fragman in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: October 26th, 2006, 09:45 AM

Search tags for this page

can you carry a firearm in st marks refuge
,
can you shoot in national parks in florida
,

concealed carry in the everglades

,

concealed weapon in florida federal wildlife refuges

,
concealed weapons national parks florida
,

everglades national park concealed weapon

,
everglades national park guns concealed permit
,

everglades national park weapons carry laws

,
federal law concealed carry national parks st marks wildlife
,
firearms in everglades national park
,
gun carry in everglades national park
,

weapons carry in everglades national park

Click on a term to search for related topics.