Posted on 12/28/2023 4:29:09 AM PST by marktwain
In 2010, President Obama signed a credit card bill he desperately wanted. Inside the bill was an amendment removing the provision against exercising Second Amendment rights in national parks. A few people were offended. How dare the Constitution be allowed to be in effect in national parks!
Some writers have claimed while it is legal to carry guns in most national parks, it is illegal to fire guns in the park (such as Yellowstone), even in self-defense. From yellowstonepark.com:
Yes, you can carry a gun in Yellowstone. But it’s illegal to fire it – even in self defense. And once you exit Yellowstone, you could be in one of three states, so it’s important to know the law.
This claim was recently repeated at Cowboy State Daily, embellished somewhat:
Sorry, but if you’re attacked by a grizzly in Yellowstone, it is against the law for you to shoot it. Reaching for bear spray could be your best legal option as you can’t even point a firearm at wildlife there.
Both of these claims are incorrect. There is no prohibition on shooting guns in self-defense in national parks. The key, of course, is the firearm has to have been shot in self-defense. Because grizzly bears are a protected species both inside and outside national parks in the lower 48 states, the requirements for claiming self-defense against a grizzly bear are the same inside of Yellowstone National Park and outside the park in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE).
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
Yes It is a common misconception pushed by the Anti’s of all types.
Question: Can I open carry a rifle while hiking in a national park? I would want power and range to defend against a bear attack.
The gun banners would rather that you ended up as bear scat.
If you can open carry the rifle in the state/states the park is in, you can open carry the rifle in the park.
Some states are quite restrictive, such as New Jersey or Hawaii.
Grizzly bears are a protected species. Humans are not.
This is how libtards would prefer it.
You don't have a law to turn this right on and off. It is inalienable.
I swear these liberals don't have a lick of sense. Putting them in any position of authority is suicide for individuals and nations.
What about national forests and other federal lands?
It depends on the state, for the most part.
I do not see a generic federal law forbidding carry in national forests.
The Army Corps of Engineers - has restrictions on some of the lands they administer, but there have been court cases which ruled against them. Some of them appear to be ongoing. They mostly cover levees, dams, and waterway infrastructures.
This attitude toward ovrall banning of owning and use of firearms should be stopped. Judicious use of arms shold be individually decided on a case-by-case basis, as are other dimensions of freedom of exercising life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
Like the old saying goes “better judged by 12 men than eaten by 12 hungry grizzlies”
Griz charges fast from short distances among brush. If your first rifle shot is a good one, lucky you. Otherwise, you might have time for three shots from a revolver before the bear is on you.
I prefer the latter.
I get your drift
If you were to take a shot at much of a distance you are going to have a hard time claiming self defense.
I don’t even care if it’s legal or not. Being alive is more important than avoiding prosecution for shooting an animal that is attacking me.
I live in Utah, which has Constitutional Carry (which every state should have). Most of the national monuments in the state say that carry is legal but you need to have rifles cased and pistols need to stay holstered. Fine. If they want to prosecute me for shooting an animal that is attacking me, fine. To me, being alive takes priority.
OK, I’m not going to shoot a bug or a small bird that gets after me but people don’t realize that rabid foxes, skunks, and other small critters can be a significant threat. I saw video of a rabid fox attacking a woman and that little 20-lb thing got downright nasty, shooting it with your 9mm pistol is totally appropriate. That thing latched onto her wrist. Not only was the bite itself fairly serious, she also had to get rabies shots.
The problem there is that you’re crossing the line from self-defense to hunting. I don’t think I’d want to be explaining that one in court.
Once you exit Yellowstone, you've got no worries. Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana all have Constitutional Carry. If you can pass a background check, you can carry with no worries. (I'm NOT saying that passing a background check is a hard requirement to carry in those states. I'm saying that you can carry if you're not a prohibited person--that yardstick is being able to pass a basic background check to obtain a license to carry. In other words, don't be a felon.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.