PDA

View Full Version : Dept of Interior: New Rule Proposed to Allow CCWs in Nat'l Parks & Wildlife Refuges


Paladin
04-29-2008, 3:52 PM
http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=10978

U.S. Department of Interior Proposes New Rule Regarding Right-to-Carry in National Parks

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

Fairfax, Va. - The U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), through the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, today issued a proposed rule to amend regulations prohibiting firearms in National Parks and Wildlife Refuges. The National Rifle Association (NRA) led the effort to amend the existing policy regarding the carrying and transportation of firearms on these federal lands.

“Law-abiding citizens should not be prohibited from protecting themselves and their families while enjoying America's National Parks and wildlife refuges,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA chief lobbyist. “Under this proposal, federal parks and wildlife refuges will mirror the state firearm laws for state parks. This is an important step in the right direction, and we applaud efforts to amend the out-of-date regulations.”

The proposed rule was filed today and will be published in the Federal Register tomorrow, and can be found online at: http://federalregister.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2008-09606_PI.pdf. It provides sixty days for public comment.

These new regulations will provide uniformity across our nation’s federal lands and put an end to the patchwork of regulations that governed different lands managed by different federal agencies. In the past, only Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Forest Service lands allowed the carrying of firearms, while lands managed by DOI did not.

The current regulations on possession, carry or transportation of loaded or uncased firearms in national parks were proposed in 1982 and finalized in 1983. Similar restrictions apply in national wildlife refuges. The NRA has long held that amendments to those regulations were needed to reflect the changed legal situations with respect to state laws on carrying firearms.

As of the end of 1982, only six states routinely allowed citizens to carry handguns for self-defense. Currently, 48 states have a process for issuing licenses or permits to allow law-abiding citizens to legally carry firearms for self-defense. Two states do not require permits, 38 states have a “shall-issue” permit process, and eight have a discretionary process for issuing permits.

This move will restore the rights of law-abiding gun owners who wish to transport and carry firearms for lawful purposes on most DOI lands, and will make federal law consistent with the state law in which these lands are located. Fifty-one U.S. Senators sent a bipartisan letter to the Department of Interior supporting the move to make state firearms laws applicable to National Park lands and refuges.

“These changes respect the Second Amendment rights of honest citizens, and we are pleased that the Department of Interior is recognizing the authority of state right-to-carry laws,” concluded Cox.

-NRA-

Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America's oldest civil rights and sportsmen's group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation's leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military.

Paladin
04-29-2008, 4:03 PM
Just getting to this point has been a long fight, and now the comment period begins.

A question for those who know Administrative Law: Could this change in policy (and necessary rules) have been implemented by an Executive Order ("Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool." -- Paul Begala)? If so, why wasn't it?

hawk1
04-29-2008, 4:23 PM
All of which means nothing to most of us in California with this langauge;

This move will restore the rights of law-abiding gun owners who wish to transport and carry firearms for lawful purposes on most DOI lands, and will make federal law consistent with the state law in which these lands are located.

Paladin
04-29-2008, 4:38 PM
All of which means nothing to most of us in California with this langauge;

If "Arbitrary & Capricious Issue" falls in the PRK w/one knock-out blow (e.g., Heller and a few follow up cases), that's great. If it "dies a slow death of a thousand cuts" (increasing issuance in "Reasonable Issue" counties, TBJ nuking the major urban anti stronghold counties/cities, increased unloaded (or possible post-Heller legal loaded) OC, replacing a few anti sheriffs w/pro sheriffs, etc.), that's alright too.

ETA: Of course, I would MUCH PREFER our "Arbitrary & Capricious Issue" system fall sooner rather than later.

As for me: I am not attached to my city or county. Moving to a Reasonable Issue county is definitely an option for me. If more gunnies did that, the Reasonable Issue counties will get safer and more prosperous and the "Arbitrary & Capricious Issue" counties will get even worse due to flight of law-abiding citizens/taxpayers -- poetic justice in my book. ;)

ETA: As for our state parks forbidding loaded weapons: this proposed change in fed parks regs is important for ALL Californians w/FL or UT non-resident permits when we visit fed parks in other states that allow recognize FL/UT permits and allow CCWs in their state parks -- we'll soon be able to defend ourselves in fed parks in those states too.