Just in - court blocks rule allowing CCW in National Parks
This is a discussion on Just in - court blocks rule allowing CCW in National Parks within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; From the end of the article:
A group representing park rangers, retirees and conservation organizations protested the Bush rule change, complaining that it could lead ...
March 19th, 2009 10:11 PM
From the end of the article:
WAIT, WAIT, WAIT...WAIT A MINUTE!!!!!!!! I thought that ignorance of the law was not an excuse in court...and that mentality was a two way street...both of civilians and law enforcement (in this case, park rangers).
A group representing park rangers, retirees and conservation organizations protested the Bush rule change, complaining that it could lead to confusion
and increased danger for visitors, rangers and other law enforcement agencies.
WOW!!! Way to go folks!
March 19th, 2009 10:26 PM
Another case of one judge overriding the will of the people. They do it with guns, abortion, gay marriage, etc. I believe in checks and balances, but the judicial branch is OUT OF CONTROL and has been for years.
March 19th, 2009 10:32 PM
true, everything you said here is true
Originally Posted by archer51
she is a federal judge......I'd bet my next months wages that somebody from the administration/DOJ/somebody had some contact with her (outside the courtroom) concerning this case
......perhaps she's getting primed for an appointment to the next higher court......
Obama/administration in public: "we are defending your gun rights"
Obama/administration behind the scenes: "help us out here, we need to restrict the 2A rights of the people here"
Certified Glock Armorer
"I got a touch of hangover bureaucrat, don't push me"
Independence is declared; it must be maintained. Sam Houston-3/2/1836
If loose gun laws are good for criminals why do criminals support gun control?
March 19th, 2009 10:48 PM
I believe it but want to say "unbelieveable"
Grrrrr. Tactical Impact is on. Ill weigh in later.
March 19th, 2009 10:53 PM
Exactly correct. I am still amazed that so many think the Judicial branch of government trumps the other two. That is nonsense. The Judicial branch was designed to be the weakest branch of government, as it should be.
Originally Posted by be44321
It is interesting that many who espouse your view have no problem with judicial activism, thwarting the will of the public, when it comes to state gun control. Then, we hear support of court cases and hope against hope in an effort to overturn the will of the people. Double standard?
March 19th, 2009 11:00 PM
Which national gun organization do you belong to and how come they haven't overturn this decision already? I expect a solution from them before midnight. Thank you.
Originally Posted by f8lranger4x4
On other things. yes, this has to be fought, the text of the decision read and lawyers have to prepare the appeal. But we knew we are under a time of dire challenges.
You have to make the shot when fire is smoking, people are screaming, dogs are barking, kids are crying and sirens are coming.
Ego will kill you. Leave it at home.
March 19th, 2009 11:00 PM
Change, we can believe in.
"Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy
"A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing
March 19th, 2009 11:19 PM
Damm, here we go, it's started
EDC's Colt Defender 45 acp and S&W 442 .38
Springfield XD 45 acp
Ruger Super RedHawk .44 mag
mossberg 590 12 gauge tactical
March 19th, 2009 11:19 PM
--does this apply only to her federal court district?
March 19th, 2009 11:23 PM
But you can still carry concealed in a National "Forest" correct... just not in a National "Park".
March 19th, 2009 11:26 PM
Good thing they repelled this law. Just look at all the gun play in all the parks, that has occurred in the last 60 days
Man, I wonder were they are piling all the bodies?
HAPPY NEW YEAR
March 19th, 2009 11:32 PM
Originally Posted by archer51
Anyone wonder, why if Bush wanted to see this through he didn't do this long before the door slammed against his back on his way out?
Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
Texas CHL Instructor
Texas Hunter Education Instructor
March 19th, 2009 11:36 PM
I was taught it was supposed to be three equal branches of government. Of course, just because it's taught in school doesn't make it right.
Originally Posted by SelfDefense
"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?
March 19th, 2009 11:40 PM
The whining about a grand Obama conspiracy is just loony, and shows a decided lack in critical thinking skills.
Having said that, this may be a mixed blessing. I need to find an attorney. It is possible that as those with permits we are "interested parties" and could each, individually, file friend of the court briefs. If I can confirm this, I will do a template of said brief and we can all take part in this court proceeding. Won't that be fun?
Now, as for the mixed blessing aspect... It is my opinion that in this environment, gun related court cases that make it to the SCOTUS are a good thing. The NRA might disagree. I would like to see this one move up and be decided in terms of whether or not the previous rule was even constitutional, which I believe it is not.
Unfortunately, that might not be possible here. What's likely to be decided here is whether or not they broke the law in implementation. It's my understand that the only claim for this is on the grounds of Environmental Impact Statements -- which were not done.
More as I learn more...
The facts are indisputable. There is more data supporting the benefits of Conceal Carry than there is supporting global warming. If you choose ignorance, in light of all the evidence, in order to bolster your irrational fear of guns, you are a greater threat to society than any gun owner.
March 19th, 2009 11:41 PM
I think you would lose your bet
While that level of corruption certainly happens from time to time, it is very unfair to propose that this is what occurred in this case.
Originally Posted by 64zebra
Judges are not supposed to, and most take these prohibitions quite seriously because violating them can lead to impeachment and disbarment, confer with litigants outside the courtroom.
Maybe in Small Town somewhere over a divorce case. I just doubt it would happen in a Federal Court over litigation such as this.
Let's just not assume that the whole world is corrupt just because we don't like what someone decided.
We haven't even seen the text of the decision and don't know the reasoning. Heck, it might even be legally sound.
(I don't like the practical effect of the decision. I favor cc in the national parks, but that doesn't make the Bush administration's regulatory change legal. Heck, it might have been invalid on the most minor of procedural errors. We don't know yet. We need to see the actual opinion.)
By johnsonabq in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: March 1st, 2009, 08:01 PM
By Agave in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: December 8th, 2008, 08:02 AM
By shawn45 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: August 26th, 2008, 01:54 PM
By ronwill in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: September 30th, 2007, 10:19 PM
By Captain Crunch in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: July 29th, 2006, 01:29 PM
Search tags for this page
ccw in great sand dunes national refuge
law allowing ccw in national parks
sand dunes national parks and concealed carry
Click on a term to search for related topics.