So You Did This!
Posted on 11/30/2006 9:58:07 AM PST by kiriath_jearim
Let’s see how many reasons there are to carry a concealed weapon into a national park.
Perhaps you might encounter a rattlesnake or some other potentially deadly critter that would pose a threat. Perhaps you were with an argumentative acquaintance who had pushed you to the limit in a discussion over, well, gun control. Perhaps a little paranoia had set in since you climbed out of bed that morning and you thought you needed a concealed weapon to ward off any attackers - real or imagined.
Surely there are others, but none of them are particularly legitimate. Yet, outgoing U.S. Sen. George Allen wants to put a cap on his one-term career in the Senate with legislation that would let visitors carry a concealed weapon into a national park.
Such weapons are now banned and they ought to remain banned.
Peter Hardin of Media General News Service detailed Allen’s last legislative hurrah in a story last week. He noted that the Virginia Republican wrote in a letter to the Virginia Gun Owners Association three days before the election that since the secretary of the Interior has refused to repeal the gun ban in national parks, he would introduce legislation to that effect in the lame-duck session of Congress.
With Democrats about to take over Congress, it is not likely that the controversial measure will gain approval in this session. If not passed, the bill would not carry over to the next Congress.
But that may not be necessary since Senator-elect Jim Webb, the Democrat who defeated Allen, has promised to submit a similar bill and will work for its passage. His proposal is no better than Allen’s.
While carrying or possessing loaded firearms in park areas is generally prohibited, some parks authorize hunting and do permit firearms during open hunting season.
Which is fine. But why the need to carry concealed weapons into a national park?
A National Park Service spokesman told Hardin that serious crimes against individuals in the parks are extremely rare and there is no data demonstrating a need for visitors to carry concealed weapons.
Spokesman David Barna said that allowing people “with minimal or no training to carry firearms in national park areas will not lower the already negligible crime rate.” He added that it could “increase the possibility of basic altercations turning into something much more serious.”
While the Gun Owners Coalition naturally supports the measure, many others do not, including Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. He said he hoped the bill would die in the Senate, adding, “I don’t think there’s ... any reason why we need this.”
He’s right. National parks are refuges for nature and open vistas and trails and creeks and streams. They are places where people can escape from the weary rush of life into a peaceful realm that’s quiet. They don’t need to have to be worried about whether the guy approaching on one of the trails is packing a concealed weapon.
And they won’t have to worry about that if the Senate does what it should do with Allen’s bill - consign it to the legislative ash heap.
Remember when the Charles Bronson "Death Wish" movies came out, about a vigilante? Crime dropped on the mere fear of copycat vigilantes.
Check all your lights
Carry your DL
Check your tires
Don't peel out
Don't street race
Don't drink and drive
Stay out of bar and street fights
Don't beat up your wife,kids or neighbors
Don't steal stuff
Don't smoke a cigarette in the car
Wear your seat belts
Don't argue with the Park ranger
Then nobody will have any reason to look into your car or your person.
someone needs to educate this hippie that guns ARE for peace.
The parks are rife with bad people who should not be there.
There is no cell signals in the parks. No 911.
The man is a limosine camper and a fool.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
Yeah, because no crimes such as muggings and rapes occur in parks. And of course parks are filled with police to protect you, and there are always lots of people around.
What a moron.
I once heard a repected, conservative pastor teach that Christians do not have rights if we are truly subjected to God's will. I wonder what some of our God-fearing founding fathers would say to that.
What about criminals who go there because they can find unarmed hikers who are miles from help?
I've had two incidents in National Forests that I needed a weapon. One was an attempting car jacking by two guys who had dumped a stolen car in the woods and another was a group of "Militia members" who insisted that we leave. I don't fear the animals nearly as much as the "visitors".
Only one matters. Second Amendment - US Constitution.
The author is an idiot.
Read the comments on the article at the News & Advance page (where the editorial comes from). They mostly mirror those here. Nice to see.
Gee - by the insertion of one simple word, the whole gist of the author's idiocy is revealed. Criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. Therefore, only law-abiding people are disarmed by this mental midget's attempt to frame the debate.
The reason why people need to be able to carry is simple... The police (including park rangers) have no duty to protect you. The criminals have no intention of obeying the law. And therefore, the disarmed law-abiding citizen is easy prey WHEREVER THE CRIMINALS KNOW THAT OPPOSING GUNS ARE NOT ALLOWED.
I'll stop now, before I write something that will get me in trouble...
WTH does "serious crimes" mean? Is a rape "serious"? How about strong-arm (violent) robbery? Armed robbery?
This is absolute crap.
Concealed guns are for peace too.
Not exactly true. The human population of national parks is made up, by and large, of people who traveled dozens or hundreds of miles to get there. They tend to be folks who travel in groups and are acutely aware of their surroundings (because they went there to soak it in and pay attention).
They're not like a typical office worker who's ambling down the sidewalk alone with his mind on other things and oblivious to a too-familiar environment. It's not a target-rich environment for predators. If you're a street thug, do you want to spend all day stalking a potential victim, or choose a street corner where a hundred a day come to you? And even if someone did manage to pull off a violent robbery, they would then have to escape over a number of miles through one of a few narrow exits.
Yes, there are a few "mountain men" like Cary Stayner who stalk tourists, but it's a statistically negligible threat compared to urban, suburban or even small-town crime. National parks are one of the safer environments you'll find from human predators. Non-human ... not so much.
All that said, I don't see any benefit in prohibiting concealed carry (if the surrounding state allows it, which I believe is part of Allen's bill). A concealed weapon doesn't put anyone ill at ease -- that's why it's concealed. Anyone wondering if the other guy has a concealed weapon should have that concern, whether the weapon is legal or not.
This hippie-dippy notion that wild places are "places of peace" needs a reality check -- unless communing with nature means getting up close and personal with a rattlesnake, a bear, a pack of wolves or a steep fall. For me, a lot of the appeal of being in the wild is the rush of being more alert and aware of everything, not the luxury of being less so. If you want to switch off, go to a resort or a spa.
For me, at least, the decision to carry concealed rather than out in the open is, at least in part, a matter of courtesy. Visible guns make some folks uncomfortable, and whether that's rational or not, when you're on vacation and encounter other folks on vacation isn't the time to get into it. If I'm carrying concealed, what they don't know won't hurt them, and I know I won't.
By way of a small compromise, I offer this: Let state law on concealed carry apply inside National Parks (and preserves, and forests, and wildlife areas, etc.) Impose serious penalties for anyone who draws, points or fires such a weapon without being able to demonstrate a good reason. That would assuage the folks who are afraid of drunken plinking or arguments gone out of control, but without burdening the vast majority who have never flashed, brandished or fired a weapon.
As an aside, I picked up a competition air rifle stock for $10 from the stray parts bin at an Orlando gun store last weekend. I'm planning to make it a camera mount. It had no working parts, but because it's a match-grade stock, it's infinitely adjustable -- and has enough mounts that I think I could hook a tripod head and padded rails to hold a long lens.
Rifle-style camera mounts are great for wildlife photography, when you don't have time to set up a tripod but need more stability than hand-held. Catching deer on the hoof or birds on the fly, for example. But you want to be careful where you use them. I wouldn't advise using one to take pictures of the White House. The specialized versions run about $250, so if I can rig one together for about $50 in parts, it's a good deal aside from being a fun shop project.
As soon as I saw the title of this post I recalled several killings on the Appalachian Trail, but no specifics. Thanks for your post.
I'm sure I can think of more, but that's the short list of real hazards that justify carrying a firearm inside a national park.
I would have to disagree with that Pastor from a Biblical Standpoint.
God himself gave his people Freedom to live their lives within the confines of his laws (much as we do under our Republic).
Where was this reporter's editor when writing was discussed in grade school? How does one wrap one's wrists around a leash? Was the victim's last name "Gumby"?
Sorry for the sidetrack - but that sentence jumped out and hit me! (Ouch! ;-)
Agreed!
Gun rights are a drum the GOP should be beating as often as possible.
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.