Urgent National Park Anti Letter

Urgent National Park Anti Letter

This is a discussion on Urgent National Park Anti Letter within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Send in your support for carry. I recevied this today from the enemy. Dear Thomas, The Gun Lobby Wants Loaded Guns in National Parks. Please ...

Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Member Array tabsr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    282

    Urgent National Park Anti Letter

    Send in your support for carry. I recevied this today from the enemy.

    Dear Thomas,

    The Gun Lobby Wants Loaded Guns in National Parks. Please take action!

    For some reason, the gun lobby things it's a great idea to let people carry loaded weapons in our national parks. Never mind that* most people feel safer when guns are not present. Never mind that national parks are actually quite safe places to be already.

    The current policy, which allows unloaded and securely stored guns in parks, is smart and sound. it protects the safety of visitors and also protects the rights of gun owners. But recently, the Department of Interior, under pressure from the gun lobby, has decided to change the regulations with regard to guns in parks. The new regulation would allow people with state conceal/carry licenses to carry guns within national parks (if* the state in which the national park is situated allows people to carry firearms in state parks).

    Sound confusing? It is. Sound necessary? it is not.

    Allowing loaded guns in parks poses a threat to wildlife, park visitors and park rangers. As required by law, the Department of Interior has opened up the regulation change process for comments from the public. Those crazy about their guns (and little else) will be submitting thousands of comments fueled on by the gun lobby. Please don't let them be the only ones commenting! Submit your comments TODAY and tell them to keep the current regulations in place!

    THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO DIRECTLY AFFECT PUBLIC POLICY. TAKE ACTION BEFORE JUNE 30!

    Thank you!

    There are 3 ways to submit comments:

    Go to the web site for the National Parks Conservation Association. Use their form to comment.


    OR

    Go to the Department of Interior and submit your comments directly. Use the points below but personalize your comments as much as possible.


    OR

    Send a letter directly to the Department of Interior, Public Comments Processing, Attn: 1024-AD70; Division of Policy and Directives Management; US Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Suite 222; Arlington, VA* 22203. These letters are worth their weight in gold. Use the points below, but personalize the letter as much as possible.


    Points to make when commenting:

    They are trying to fix something that isn't broken. Parks are safe -- some of the safest places in the world -- and the current regulations are working well. According to the National Park Service, the probability of becoming a victim of a violent crime in a national park is 1 in 708,333, which is less likely than being struck by lighting during one's lifetime.
    The regulations would vary from park to park depending on the state in which they reside. This creates a patchwork of regulations that would be confusing to visitors and park rangers, especially in parks that reside in more than 1 state. Current regulations are consistent in all parks, across all states.
    Many families and visitors, particularly those from other countries, will not like the idea that other visitors are carrying firearms while sharing interpretive programs, hiking trails, campsites and eating facilities.
    With easy access to a loaded gun, some people might be tempted to poach wildlife or shoot at bears or other animals. Harm to wildlife and human visitors may increase.


    CSM relies on donations from supporters to operate. If you value the work we do and can help us out, please visit our web site at

    Citizens For A Safer Minnesota -- What's New... and donate now.
    "Politicians and Bureaucrats, depend very much on the complicity of their victims, and like criminals, are flummoxed when we don't play the victim role."


  2. #2
    Member Array okgr8outdrs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    35
    "According to the National Park Service, the probability of becoming a victim of a violent crime in a national park is 1 in 708,333, which is less likely than being struck by lighting during one's lifetime."

    Winning the lottery is less likely than being struck by lightning, but that doesn't stop miilions of people from buying lottery tickets.
    Jeff
    Preparing the way...Straightening the path.

  3. #3
    Distinguished Member Array SixBravo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Prescott, AZ
    Posts
    1,692
    According to the National Park Service, the probability of becoming a victim of a violent crime in a national park is 1 in 708,333, which is less likely than being struck by lighting during one's lifetime.
    I'd like to see the raw data on this. I'd also like to know what your chances are of being the victim of ANY crime in National Parks are. How about animal attacks, too. What about backpackers that run into nutjobs on backcountry trails and are never heard from again? I've crossed paths with people before that have made me glad I was packing more than a backpack. It only takes one instance to ruin your day. Like I've said before.. if you get way the hell out into the backcountry and something happens, its only you, your tools, and your wits that will dictate weather you sink or swim.
    The Gunsite Blog
    ITFT / Quick Kill Review
    "It is enough to note, as we have observed, that the American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessential self-defense weapon." - Justice Scalia, SCOTUS - DC v Heller - 26 JUN 2008

  4. #4
    Distinguished Member Array morintp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    1,233
    We have at least 2-3 different threads with the raw data for parks. They base it on the overall number of visitors over the course of the year giving a minor percentage.

    One thing I noticed with the data is that they do a straight calculation from the visitor number as if it's a standing population figure and compare it to the murder rate in other places as if it was an apples to apples comparison. In reality a visitor to a national park is only there for a short period of time. If you take the time factor into account, the population number they use would drop drastically, raising the percentage to be in line with some of our most dangerous cities, if not worse.

    Data doesn't lie, but statistics can say anything you want them to...

  5. #5
    Member Array GettingOld2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    232

    This very topic was my conversion

    This is the letter I sent in:

    Recently my wife and I were descending a curving trail in a park when in the
    distance, we spotted four people and three dogs. The dogs were running loose
    in violation of leash laws, but that didn't concern me. I'm used to dogs and
    have never had a particular concern about them, until that day! The dogs
    spotted us and tore off for us barking and growling, oblivious to the owners
    calls of , "No, No!" Suddenly, my wife and I were back-to-back with our
    hiking sticks, fending off two Dobermans and a Pittbull as they snapped and
    lunged at us for the approximately thirty seconds it took for the owners to
    catch up and physically restrain them.

    We were fortunate that day, because the fact was that had the dogs fully
    committed, we simply could not have stopped them with a couple of sticks!

    Since that day, my opinion of concealed carry has changed as I learned about
    the realities verses the scare hype. First of all, "gun free zones" are no
    such thing. They are simply "defense free zones". Anyone can, and often does
    as I've learned, carry a concealed weapon whether it's legal to do so or not.
    They do so to protect themselves from threats of all types. Many feel the
    threat is great enough to justify breaking the law. The law itself makes no
    sense in that it specifically targets only those people that have been
    trained and licensed to handle a concealed weapon. It does not deter in the
    least those that are criminals or otherwise irresponsible. It simply creates
    a defense free zone to make easy victims available.

    Scare mongering about kids at concession stands and alcohol availability is
    just that, scare mongering. There are already laws against mixing guns and
    alcohol. There are already laws about "Brandishing". These laws are
    independent of parks vs non-parks and no one is suggesting changes in these.

    Arguments about stealth hunting are nonsense as well. Anyone foolish enough
    to try to hunt with a concealed weapon is not someone who has a LICENSED
    concealed weapon. The proposed rule change is only for the "Licensed". No
    rule is going to impact the unlicensed idiot!

    Parks have a pretty good record of safety. Making them "defense free zones"
    does not enhance that safety, it degrades it. Consider the facts fairly.
    Throwing out irresponsible criminal scare stories as an argument against
    trusted and vetted license holders misrepresents and does a disservice to
    everyone.

  6. #6
    Member Array tabsr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    282

    Smile Statistics

    While earning my degree, many years ago, in mathmatics, My math professor stated that "there is truth, lies and then statistics".
    "Politicians and Bureaucrats, depend very much on the complicity of their victims, and like criminals, are flummoxed when we don't play the victim role."

  7. #7
    Senior Member Array rmilchman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    790
    Quote Originally Posted by tabsr View Post
    While earning my degree, many years ago, in mathmatics, My math professor stated that "there is truth, lies and then statistics".
    Statistics aren't lies, they just don't tell the entire truth

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array tns0038's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,163
    Dear XXXXXTNS:

    Thank you for contacting me regarding the possession of firearms in National Parks. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to respond to your concerns.

    On December 14, 2007, I joined a number of my Senate colleagues in signing a letter to the Secretary of the Interior regarding transporting and carrying firearms on federally-managed lands. Current regulations prohibit individuals from possessing a firearm on lands managed by the National Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service. Other federal land management agencies, such as the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service allow transporting and carrying of firearms on these lands in accordance with the laws of the host state. These inconsistencies in firearms regulations for public lands are confusing, burdensome, and unnecessary.

    For these reasons, I support an exception to the current regulations allowing law-abiding citizens to transport and carry firearms consistent with state law where the National Park Service's administrative sites and the National Wildlife Refuges are located. Such regulatory changes would respect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners, while providing a consistent application of state weapons laws across all land ownership boundaries.

    When our Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution, they included the Second Amendment to guarantee people the right to keep and bear arms. This is a fundamental part of our American identity, and I will work with my Senate colleagues to ensure that this liberty is protected for all law-abiding citizens.

    Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. If you have any additional questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. In addition, for more information about issues and activities important to Florida, please sign up for my weekly newsletter at United States Senator Mel Martinez :: Welcome.

    Sincerely,

    Mel Martinez
    United States Senator
    I just got the above email from one of our states Senators. I already knew he signed that letter, but I'm staying on top of them until the restrictions in Federal Parks are changed.

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 FAQ
    By swinokur in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: January 29th, 2010, 09:11 PM
  2. Anti-gun letter to the editor in anti-gun newspaper
    By cyberdogg in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: May 19th, 2009, 12:25 AM
  3. National park parking lot
    By wlynn in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 29th, 2008, 06:51 AM
  4. 47 Senators Sign Letter On National Park CCW!!!!
    By ExSoldier in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: February 16th, 2008, 02:48 PM
  5. National Parks Carry - URGENT ACTION
    By Scott in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: March 7th, 2007, 04:49 PM

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors