No appeal to CCW in Parks ruling

This is a discussion on No appeal to CCW in Parks ruling within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; The erosion begins: Tulsa World Hopefully the NRA appeal will gain some traction as Obama's folks could care less about individual rights....

Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: No appeal to CCW in Parks ruling

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member
    Array Chorizo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    SW Idaho
    Posts
    1,689

    No appeal to CCW in Parks ruling

    The erosion begins:

    Tulsa World

    Hopefully the NRA appeal will gain some traction as Obama's folks could care less about individual rights.
    21 years and 21 days, United States Marine Corps & NRA Life Member since 1972

    "The trouble is with the increasingly widespread problem of idiots prancing around out there confusing their opinions with actual facts." peckman28

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    43,795
    I'm getting kind of tired of this kind of crap...

    So many little pieces point to the big picture......there's a war brewing.
    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]

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array bandit383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Chorizo View Post
    The erosion begins:

    Tulsa World

    Hopefully the NRA appeal will gain some traction as Obama's folks could care less about individual rights.

    I think you need to read again:

    A spokeswoman for Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Friday that the department is not completely discarding the Bush rule. Instead, she said that officials intend to complete a comprehensive environmental impact statement that analyzes the possible effects of the Bush rule, as well as a range of alternatives.

    The review is expected to take several months at least. In the meantime, 26-year-old restrictions that had been in place before the rule change remain in effect.

    The National Rifle Association has filed a separate appeal of the ruling. A spokesman has said the group will pursue all legal and legislative avenues "to defend the American people's right to self-defense."

    Meanwhile, lawmakers who support gun-owners' rights have introduced legislation to reinstate the Bush rule. Bills introduced by Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, and Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., would allow citizens to carry concealed firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges.

    Erosion?? Seems the fight is only beginning on a number of fronts. Here is another revelation for you...many of the folks that work at the Interior department (and all the departments) also worked under the Bush Administration.

    Rick

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member
    Array Chorizo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    SW Idaho
    Posts
    1,689
    Rick, I read the article. I worked as a senior manager for the Dept of Interior for 5 years after retiring the the USMC. I quit after getting a belly full of the anti-bias that is ingrained in the agency.

    What they are doing is a full NEPA analysis (which is not required as a CATEX is already in place for Administrative Changes).

    What they will find is some trumped up reason that "Will Affect" the human environment and then decide not to implement the rule.

    What needed to be done is appeal the ruling and the appeal would have clearly overturned the erroneous ruling of the judge in this case, who clearly had no understanding of NEPA in the first place.

    And here is a news flash for you: the same people that worked under the Bush administration were Clinton appointees that were never cleaned out under Bush. What has changed is that all of the Plum Book" jobs are appointees that were quickly filled and the whole political atmosphere has changed. There is a rush to reverse any progress that was made under Bush and to lock in those changes as quickly as possible so as to have at least 4 years of precedent.

    I know the inner workings of Interior. Place your head in the sand if you like, but as you rationalize away what is going on, we are losing ground by the second.
    21 years and 21 days, United States Marine Corps & NRA Life Member since 1972

    "The trouble is with the increasingly widespread problem of idiots prancing around out there confusing their opinions with actual facts." peckman28

  6. #5
    Distinguished Member Array tinkerinWstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    1,263
    Why spend my tax money on an environmental study when we can just pass the legislation introduced?

    Unless there's another reason.....
    "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?

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array bandit383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Chorizo View Post
    Rick, I read the article. I worked as a senior manager for the Dept of Interior for 5 years after retiring the the USMC. I quit after getting a belly full of the anti-bias that is ingrained in the agency..
    You quit from a senior manager from anti-bias??? What, bias against right wingers??? Com'mon...I am sure there is much more to this story.

    Regardless...the Federal Government is expected to retire over 50% of the workforce in the next 5 years due to age (huge baby boomer bubble).

    As for loss of rights in seconds...name one that has been lost under this administration. I came name a few under the past one...but still waiting for the cards to fall. I worry more about the economy and jobs, taxes...then I do about losing gun rights.

    Rick

  8. #7
    Distinguished Member
    Array Chorizo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    SW Idaho
    Posts
    1,689
    Yes, I quit because of the anti-conservative, anti-gun, anti-grazing, anti-multiple use, anti-personal responsibility mindset that was ingrained in the agency.

    Rick, you seem to be an apoligist. And the first thing you do is to personally attack the messanger.... a very new age liberal tactic. Sure you are logging into the right forum?
    21 years and 21 days, United States Marine Corps & NRA Life Member since 1972

    "The trouble is with the increasingly widespread problem of idiots prancing around out there confusing their opinions with actual facts." peckman28

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array bandit383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Chorizo View Post
    Yes, I quit because of the anti-conservative, anti-gun, anti-grazing, anti-multiple use, anti-personal responsibility mindset that was ingrained in the agency.

    Rick, you seem to be an apoligist. And the first thing you do is to personally attack the messanger.... a very new age liberal tactic. Sure you are logging into the right forum?
    Hell...don't even know what an apoligist is...will have to look that one up.

    As for attacking...right, I guess questioning the message is construed as attacking...that sounds like, uh, wait, its coming...yep...a liberal thought. You sure...uh, nevermind.

    More power to you...but you leaving I'm sure fixed the problem...not. One thing that is needed is people willing to fight from within. You left a void to be filled by perhaps someone that doesn't carry the same focus you might have. That is sad.

    You talk of loosing rights in seconds...you didn't answer my question. What has been lost? Lastly...gee, you could of at least fought from within to not lose those rights.

    Rick

  10. #9
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    Get it done

    Quote Originally Posted by tinkerinWstuff View Post
    Why spend my tax money on an environmental study when we can just pass the legislation introduced?
    How many here have already written/emailed their Senators and Representative?

    We need to build a firestorm of emails and letters, not just complain to each other!

    I have.

    And followed up on the non-response.

    The Honorable Rick Boucher
    106 North Washington
    Pulaski, Virginia 24301

    Dear Sir;

    Did you receive the message I sent using the “E-Mail the Congressman” link on your web site?
    Original message follows:
    “This email is to request your help in restoring the right to self-defense in
    National Parks & Wildlife Refuges.
    “Please contact the Department of Interior and urge them in the strongest terms
    to implement the January 9, 2009 weapons regulation.
    “The court has given the Department until 4/20/09 to answer questions and/or
    take actions to restore our right to self-defense. If you find that DOI is not
    on a time line to conduct the environmental analysis that the Court requested,
    please find out which of the other options the Court provided to DOI to
    maintain the January 9, 2009 weapons regulation will DOI have completed by
    4/20/09. I also request that your office please advise me of DOI's response.
    “Finally, I request that you to support and vote for HR 1684 which will codify
    the new regulations.”
    Have you been able to find out if the DOI is on a time line to conduct the environmental analysis that the Court requested?
    If so, have they indicated what assumptions they are using to analysis the environmental impact of carrying concealed?
    I carry concealed on average of more than 10 hours a day – i.e., 3650+ hours a year. In the last few years, I have not fired other than at a range (on National Forest Service land, by the way) or while hunting. Therefore, even had I spent all that time in the NPS there would have been no more impact that my footprints being minutely deeper that were I unarmed. How many discharges are they assuming per visitor-hour?
    I would think that given the location of the Blue Ridge Parkway this would be an important issue for your constituency. There are many local roads, which cross the Parkway, at grade and without any clear demarcation of the “Park” boundaries. The January 9, 2009 weapons regulation was a major improvement in the former confusing and unnecessary regulation that denied the right to self-defense in National Parks & Wildlife Refuges and subjected many of your supporters to unintended violations of the old regulations.
    In addition, a Park official has told me that even roads that cross with under/overpasses are also entering and leaving the “Park” and are subject to NSP rules and regulations. I regularly use such roads as US 460, US 220, US 58, US 52, and I-77.
    Dear Senator Warner

    With all due respect, Sir, I do not see how your office's email below responds
    directly to my request for your help in restoring the right to self-defense in
    National Parks & Wildlife Refuges by contacting the Department of Interior.

    Did you contact the Department of Interior and urge them in the strongest
    terms to implement the January 9, 2009 weapons regulation?

    Your assurance that you do not support laws or regulations that infringe on
    the Second Amendment Constitutional right of law-abiding citizens to keep and
    bear arms would seem to suggest that you will act to allow law-abiding
    citizens with concealed carry permits to carry on National Parks & Wildlife
    Refuges, as we can in the National Forests. Is that so? If so, have you been
    able to find out if the DOI is on a time line to conduct the environmental
    analysis that the Court requested?

    If so, have they indicated what assumptions they are using to analysis the
    environmental impact of carrying concealed? I carry concealed on average of
    more than 10 hours a day - i.e., 3650+ hours a year. In the last few years, I
    have not fired other than at a range (on National Forest Service land, by the
    way) or while hunting. Therefore, even had I spent all that time in the NPS
    there would have been no more impact that my footprints being minutely deeper
    that were I unarmed. How many discharges are they assuming per visitor-hour?

    I would think that given the location of George Washington Memorial Parkway,
    Colonial Parkway, and the Blue Ridge Parkway this would be an important issue
    for your constituency. There are many local roads, which cross these
    Parkways, at grade and without any clear demarcation of the "Park" boundaries.
    The January 9, 2009 weapons regulation was a major improvement in the former
    confusing and unnecessary regulation that denied the right to self-defense in
    National Parks & Wildlife Refuges and subjected many of your law-abiding
    supporters to unintended violations of the old regulations.

    In addition, a Park official has told me that even roads that cross with
    under/overpasses are also entering and leaving the "Park" and are subject to
    NSP rules and regulations.

    I regularly use such roads as US 460, US 220, US 58, US 52, and I-77.
    Respectfully yours,

    David F. Hicks





    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Office of Senator Mark Warner" <donotreply@warner.senate.gov>
    To: <carla_dave_hicks@verizon.net>
    Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 12:41 PM
    Subject: Responding to your message




    Dear Mr. Hicks,



    Thank you for contacting me to share your views on gun control. I
    appreciate your thoughts on this important issue.



    I realize that there are very strong opinions on both sides of the
    debate around Second Amendment rights. I support public policies that
    ensure the responsible and appropriate use of guns, as well as efforts
    to reduce gun-related crimes through increased enforcement and
    background checks. I do not, however, support laws or regulations that
    infringe on the Second Amendment Constitutional right of law-abiding
    citizens to keep and bear arms.



    In the United States Senate, legislation on gun control generally falls
    under the jurisdiction of the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am
    not a member. Please be assured that I value the thoughts that you have
    shared with me on this important issue. I will keep your views in mind
    should any legislation on this matter come before the full Senate in the
    future.



    Again, thank you for writing. As we move forward in the 111th Congress,
    please continue to contact me with your opinions and concerns.




    Sincerely,
    MARK R. WARNER
    United States Senator
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  11. #10
    Member Array JungleJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So. Fla
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveH View Post
    I have.

    And followed up on the non-response.

    Sounds like someone needs to be removed from his position next election. That is one person I wouldn't mind seeing at the unemployment office

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,161
    U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly struck down the gun policy last month. She called the rule ... severely flawed and said officials failed to evaluate its possible environmental impacts ...
    Concealed carry has dramatic environmental impacts? Hm. Damn! That's something I never considered. Gee, and to think that all this time I was carrying in my town I was polluting it for all future generations. Wow, am I glad that someone has shown me the light, shown me the error of my ways.

    Not. Malarkey, baloney, bull puckey, #(^!%#*.

    If I were to estimate the environmental risk and threat that the carrying of defensive firearms into national parks represented, I would think the greater impact on the environment would come from the automobiles used by the janitorial staff at national parks. The environmental threat posed by carriers of defensive firearms can't possibly approach even that level. What, if faced with defending myself against a murderous human, my spent cartridges are going to choke a bear, or the powder deposits I wipe from my hands on the towel I throw in the garbage will somehow seep into the ground water and kill a million fish?

    Not.

    It's a bald-faced political ruse designed to fleece U.S. citizens of their rights, by any and all possible means.

    Time to write letters to my representatives, yet again, helping them to see the insanity and political bias that is evidenced in this ruling.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array Supertac45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Michigan's U.P.
    Posts
    3,657
    What did you really expect?
    Les Baer 45
    Sig Man
    N.R.A. Patron Life Member
    M.C.R.G.O.

  14. #13
    Ex Member Array PNUT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    913
    Environmental impacts ???
    That's got to be a joke. I'd be insulted to be asked to study the environmental impact in this case.
    The only environmental impact in question is lead poisoning of criminals.
    This judge is insulting our intelligence.

  15. #14
    VIP Member Array Tom G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    2,375
    Is this judge all there? this is the antis at work. no logic to their thinking.

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,745
    I think the environmental impact study is a great thing! The Brady bunch has said that they and a lot of other folks would boycott the parks while the rule was in place. Think of all of that pollution that is not going to happen because of CC being allowed! If this administration really wants to be environmentally friendly they obviously have to support CC in the parks!
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

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. FBI appeal (decision)
    By rhrocket22 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: April 30th, 2009, 10:03 PM
  2. Caryy in National Parks: Ruling
    By thinkat in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 5th, 2008, 04:08 PM
  3. PA Reject Gov's Appeal for Gun Control
    By 500Mag in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: November 21st, 2007, 12:38 AM
  4. Gun makers to appeal ruling that allows gun lawsuit to continue
    By glocksmygun in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: November 29th, 2006, 10:33 AM
  5. Need help on appeal...
    By CalCCW03 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: September 13th, 2006, 04:36 PM

Search tags for this page

blue ridge parkway ccw

Click on a term to search for related topics.