Cary Stayner was arrested in 1999 and charged with the murder of Carole Sund, her fifteen year old daughter Juli, sixteen year old Silvina Pelosso, and park employee Joie Armstrong, in the Yosemite National Park.
People should be free to exercise their unalienable, God-given, constitutional rights within National Parks, including the right to keep and bear arms and thus defend themselves if need be...therefore Sen. Allen is absolutely correct.
Do liberals really believe that potential murderers are worried about gun charges, or that they would bother applying for a permit to CC?
"Perhaps you might encounter a rattlesnake or some other potentially deadly critter that would pose a threat.... Surely there are others, but none of them are particularly legitimate."
I'm sure Timothy Treadwell thinks the same.
Oh yeah, he's bear poo now.
Does this apply to Fort Marcy Park? :-)
They guy carrying the legal concealed weapon is the GOOD guy. I wish these airheads would figure that out.
"worried about whether the guy approaching on one of the trails is packing a concealed weapon."
I am at peace with that. I will continue to be at peace when he pulls that gun out and shoots the knife-wielding thug who may try to rob me. Peace.
"Let’s see how many reasons there are to carry a concealed weapon into a national park."
Only one is needed.
One really good reason to allow guns in national parks is so that women can enjoy these spaces without having to organize a guy or 3 or 4 other women.
Remarkably, women sometimes like to enjoy these experiences in solitude. However, solitary women get raped, beaten, and killed in parks fairly often.
God may have made Adam and Eve but Colt made them equal.
Good for him.
This is another sign that somebody in the Democratic leadership has had a rush of brains to the head and tattooed the phrase "IF WE'D DEEP-SIXED GUN CONTROL SIX YEARS AGO, AL GORE WOULD BE PRESIDENT" on the inside of his eylids.
There are exactly none. However, there are reasons that one should carry in a national park. As thuggery has no boundary, neither should the constitutional right to self-defense.
Yes, when guns are banned in parks, only criminals will have guns in parks. Muggings will then be peaceful uncontested affairs and the Democrat Party's criminal constituency will remain unharmed and able to return to the polls in 2008.
One can never say that Democrats are not fiercely loyal to their criminal constituency, now can they? What a great bunch of team players!
Holy flipping crap. Didn't need to look past the first sentence.
People are already carrying concealed guns in parks.
Problem is: Right now it's only the bad guys. Right now there's absolutely no reason for them to refrain from pulling those guns out and disturbing your precious peace.
They don’t need to have to be worried about whether the guy approaching on one of the trails is packing a concealed weapon.
Who's "they"?
If good guys start carrying concealed weapons in parks, the only "they" worried about it will be the bad guys who are already carrying ...and morons like yourself.
If the bad guys are worried that the good guys are carrying, they'll be less likely to pull their own guns and disturb your presious peace.
Why is this so hard to get through your head?
Guns: bad (assuming I buy into your logic).
Guns in only the bad guys' hands: worse.
Once again. The govmnt wants us to think that it will protect us from predators. Of course, it won't. It has taken away our right to protect ourselves again.
The Roswell News & Space Watch
by Cletus Rattmann
Let’s see how many reasons there are to allow a free press in a civil society.
Perhaps you might encounter a conservative 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, criminal aliens. Perhaps a little paranoia had set in since you climbed out of bed that morning and you thought you needed a bad temper and an unrestrained press to ward off any attackers - real or imagined.
Surely there are others, but none of them are particularly legitimate. Yet, incoming U.S. Sen. Jim Webb wants to enhance his already crippled reputation with legislation that would let anyone write about anything, whether he approves or not. Such freedom is now nearly absolute but Webb and others (including Nancy Pelosi, Charles Rangel, Henry Waxman, and The Supreme Court) think that ought to be changed.
“The Constitution grants ‘freedom of the press,’ notes Webb, not ‘freedom of the internet or freedom of Fox News.’ There is no legal authority for those in either medium who make public things of which I personally disapprove.” Webb, and a small group of fellow legislators is even now working on a proposed Constitutional amendment to close this “press loophole,” as it is being referred to…
Parks have bears and we have a right to keep and arm bears.
The prohibition applies only to NPS National Parks, generally not to National Forests or BLM lands, etc. And most of those prohibitions are on ALL firearms, concealed or not.
Allowing concealed carry means you can carry under or over your jacket, without the concern that you're violating federal law by doing one versus the other. Antigunners can't comprehend the very simple relationship between a holster, a belt, and the length of one's jacket.
Actually this gives me hope. If you can be as stupid and uninformed as this writer is and get a gig writing editorials, maybe even I can get a paying job!
Rattle snakes? I was thinking maybe bears or dangerous humans. Why would they be any less necessary in a park than anywhere else?
This is a huge red herring.