Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Senate backs allowing guns in national parks

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • tboyer
    Senior Member
    • Apr 2006
    • 632

    Senate backs allowing guns in national parks

    This appeared in SF gate, you may want to leave a comment.




    Senate backs allowing guns in national parks
    By MATTHEW DALY, Associated Press Writer
    Tuesday, May 12, 2009
    (05-12) 16:43 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --
    The Senate on Tuesday backed an amendment that would allow people to carry loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.
    Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., sponsored the measure, which he said would protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. The amendment allows firearms in parks and wildlife refuges, as long as they are allowed by federal, state and local law.
    "If an American citizen has a right to carry a firearm in their state, it makes no sense to treat them like a criminal if they pass through a national park while in possession of a firearm," Coburn said.
    Twenty-seven Democrats joined 39 Republicans and one independent in supporting the amendment, which was attached to a bill imposing restrictions on credit card companies. The amendment was approved 67-29.
    Groups supporting gun control, park rangers and retirees opposed the amendment, which they said went further than a Bush administration policy that briefly allowed loaded handguns in national parks and refuges.
    A federal judge blocked the policy in March, two months after it went into effect in the waning days of President George W. Bush's term. The Obama administration has said it will not appeal the court ruling.
    "This amendment is much more radical than the regulation promulgated by the Bush administration," said Bryan Faehner, associate director of the National Parks Conservation Association, an advocacy group that opposes guns in parks.
    If the measure becomes law "it would not only put park visitors and wildlife at risk, it would change the character and the peaceful and safe atmosphere in our parks," Faehner said.
    Faehner's group sent a letter to senators Tuesday stating that Coburn's amendment would allow individuals to openly carry rifles, shotguns, and semiautomatic weapons in national parks. "As a result, individuals could attend ranger-led hikes and campfire programs with their rifles at Yellowstone National Park and other national park treasures across the country," the letter said.
    Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, called the Senate vote reckless.
    U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly blocked the Bush rule because she found that the Interior Department had not done the proper analysis, Helmke said, "and now the Senate is basically rushing into this with little or no debate, and no analysis on what impact it will have on the people who use the parks and the wildlife in the parks. I think that's reckless."
    Sen. Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Banking Committee, said he hoped the credit card legislation would pass this week. Helmke and Faehner said they would try to get the gun amendment stripped from the bill before final passage.
    Originally posted by swat
    Too bad they caved in to the homosexual lobby and their agenda of destroying the morals of our society. Just like some of the "pink pistols" folks are trying to do to CalGuns!
    Originally posted by The Shadow
    Substituting the word "love" for getting sexual pleasure from someone of the same sex, is simply dishonest.
  • #2
    Vtec44
    Senior Member
    • Jan 2009
    • 2237

    This is getting insteresting. If I remember it correctly Yosemite specifically do not allow any type of firearms.
    "When chosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never tried before." - Mae West

    Comment

    • #3
      pullnshoot25
      Banned
      • Mar 2007
      • 8068

      Originally posted by Vtec44
      This is getting insteresting. If I remember it correctly Yosemite specifically do not allow any type of firearms.
      Yosemite and Yellowstone= two places I wouldn't feel comfortable without a firearm.

      Comment

      • #4
        BTF/PTM
        Senior Member
        • Jan 2008
        • 612

        Originally posted by pullnshoot25
        Yosemite and Yellowstone= two places I wouldn't feel comfortable without a firearm.
        You're not comfortable being anywhere without a firearm

        So it says the bill allows carrying in a national park IF it's allowed under state law. Doesn't that mean that for Californian's it would still be void?

        p.s. - when's the next UOC meet?
        Originally posted by DocSkinner
        Vote pro 2A, whatever affiliation.
        SO tired of people that seem intelligent and capable of rational thought blowing that image by somehow not thinking and being a blind, party-line voter, and somehow that is good.
        Originally posted by Bizcuits
        Reading an entire thread before posting is like listening to your spouses opinion during an argument. Who the hell would do that..

        Comment

        • #5
          sgtlmj
          Junior Member
          • Mar 2009
          • 89

          I lived in Florida for a while, and the Everglades is a Nat'l Park. Basically the entire bottom part of the state is a no-carry area. Imagine that, in a place with critters that will eat you and drug runners that will feed you to said critters.
          Glock Armorer, Colt LE AR15/M16 Armorer
          FFL/SOT

          Comment

          • #6
            JDay
            I need a LIFE!!
            • Nov 2008
            • 19393

            Faehner's group sent a letter to senators Tuesday stating that Coburn's amendment would allow individuals to openly carry rifles, shotguns, and semiautomatic weapons in national parks
            There they go trying to make semiautomatic into a new evil catch phrase again.
            Oppressors can tyrannize only when they achieve a standing army, an enslaved press, and a disarmed populace. -- James Madison

            The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms. -- Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87 (Pearce and Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

            Comment

            • #7
              dfletcher
              I need a LIFE!!
              • Dec 2006
              • 14772

              Originally posted by tboyer
              Groups supporting gun control, park rangers and retirees opposed the amendment, which they said went further than a Bush administration policy that briefly allowed loaded handguns in national parks and refuges.

              If the measure becomes law "it would not only put park visitors and wildlife at risk, it would change the character and the peaceful and safe atmosphere in our parks," Faehner said.

              Faehner's group sent a letter to senators Tuesday stating that Coburn's amendment would allow individuals to openly carry rifles, shotguns, and semiautomatic weapons in national parks. "As a result, individuals could attend ranger-led hikes and campfire programs with their rifles at Yellowstone National Park and other national park treasures across the country," the letter said.

              Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, called the Senate vote reckless.
              The article is a bit unclear - as in, did a group of old folks come out to oppose the bill or did a an old folks organization such as AARP oppose the bill? I've always heard AARP was antigun, which always struck me as a bit odd
              GOA Member & SAF Life Member

              Comment

              • #8
                N6ATF
                Banned
                • Jul 2007
                • 8383

                attached to a bill imposing restrictions on credit card companies
                LOL that's one hell of a rider.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Glock22Fan
                  Calguns Addict
                  • May 2006
                  • 5752

                  Published today

                  See also the article I posted here.
                  John -- bitter gun owner.

                  All opinions expressed here are my own unless I say otherwise.
                  I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

                  sigpic

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    gunsmith
                    Senior Member
                    • May 2004
                    • 2028

                    notice how they continue to lie

                    "Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, called the Senate vote reckless.
                    U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly blocked the Bush rule because she found that the Interior Department had not done the proper analysis, Helmke said, "and now the Senate is basically rushing into this with little or no debate, and no analysis on what impact it will have on the people who use the parks and the wildlife in the parks. I think that's reckless."

                    The analysis was a environmental impact study, that is what Judge Kotelly used to block it, not some vauge "study on what impact on people"

                    I like this bill better, it means we do not have to have a CCW!

                    Open carry is legal in CA Nat forest, if this passes it will be legal in Yosemite.

                    Thank God I do not have to wait years for some sanity!
                    NRA Life Member

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Timberline
                      Banned
                      • Jan 2009
                      • 426

                      Originally posted by N6ATF
                      LOL that's one hell of a rider.
                      Thas how we make laws 'round these parts. What you canna get directly, you get through clever manouvering.

                      Not that the process yields good law, mind you.

                      Comment

                      • #12

                        Originally posted by gunsmith
                        no analysis on what impact it will have on the people who use the parks
                        I wish there was some analysis on the impact of his exercising his first amendment rights in so vile a manner. It makes this person want to projectile vomit. Fortunately I'm in a hospital right now so there's a puke basin waiting....

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Vtec44
                          Senior Member
                          • Jan 2009
                          • 2237

                          Originally posted by gunsmith

                          Open carry is legal in CA Nat forest, if this passes it will be legal in Yosemite.

                          I'd love to see the reaction of those cute German girls to my leg holster.
                          "When chosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never tried before." - Mae West

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            MudCamper
                            Veteran Member
                            • Mar 2007
                            • 4593

                            Originally posted by BTF/PTM
                            So it says the bill allows carrying in a national park IF it's allowed under state law. Doesn't that mean that for Californian's it would still be void?
                            No. UOC would be legal, and in many areas LOC would be legal.

                            Comment

                            • #15

                              Originally posted by Vtec44
                              I'd love to see the reaction of those cute German girls to my leg holster.
                              Most people wear their holster on the OUTSIDE of their hips, but feel free to wear it as you see fit.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              UA-8071174-1