·11250 Waples Mill Road · Fairfax, Virginia 22030 ·800-392-8683
Posted on 04/29/2008 8:15:33 PM PDT by neverdem
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 This is an important step in the right direction, and we applaud efforts to amend the out-of-date regulations.”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.
Our National Parks are probably full of guns anyway...the right of normal visitors to carry is rational for their own defense. The Nat. Park Service is incapable of providing a ‘gun free’ nat. park system now. Other public lands are full of marijuana gardens with armed guards now in the Southwest and Hawaii. It will do no harm, and will probably do good to allow this to come about. The right of citizens to carry arms in their own defense is quite necessary as law enforcement is not apparently in the crime prevention business...only in the business of after the fact response. Successful armed defense reports are surfacing in news reports with increasing frequency as they have not been reported in the past. This proposal recognizes the good that can come from an armed citizenry. Towns with armed citizens have lower crime rates. Imagine a peaceful Chicago with everyone armed.
Identified terrorists in Israel are quickly dealt with. We do not have enough law enforcement to do the job now, and, citizens will gladly perform as they do in Israel if the time comes here for such to be necessary.
bump for later
In the time it takes to dial 911 an intruder can be neutralized by an armed citizen.
dialing 911 means the crime has already been committed, and there are victim(s). Police respond after the fact.
How can anyone consider this scenario to be police protection? Obviously there is no deterrent to criminals just because there are police on the streets somewhere.
The armed citizen has the ability to stop criminal acts before they gain momentum. On the spot protection is something the police can never provide citizens. It is naive to believe otherwise.
Addendum: Try dialing 911 in a National Park in the backcountry. No bars? Too bad.
IMHO, hiking through country which has larger animals such as moose and bear without a firearm is daft, Timothy Treadwell's advice notwithstanding.
National parks in Alaska will be safer now.
You’re right- you don’t want to get “Treadwelled”!
As a former back country resident of Alaska, Montana and Wyoming, I'm far more concerned about the possibility of attack by moose or elk than bear, so long as I take reasonable precautions.
And recall, of course, the wisdom of the line from the 1963 Alan Funt tune Hello Muddah, Hello Faddah...with which the late Mr. Treadwell was presumably not familiar:
Take me home, oh Muddah, Faddah;
Take me home, I hate Grenada.
Don't leave me out in the forest where
I might get eaten by a bear....
Kempthorne proposal would ease ban on guns in national parks
By MATTHEW DALY – 14 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne proposed new regulations Wednesday that would allow people to carry a concealed weapon in some national parks and wildlife refuges.
The new rules would allow someone to carry a loaded weapon in a park or wildlife refuge only if the person has a permit for a concealed weapon and the state where the park or refuge is located allows guns in parks, Kempthorne said.
The proposal would overturn a 25-year-old regulation that has restricted loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges. The regulations require that guns be unloaded and placed somewhere that is not easily accessible, such as in a car trunk.
"The safety and protection of park and refuge visitors remains a top priority for the Department of the Interior," Kempthorne said in a statement.
The proposed rule change would incorporate current state laws authorizing the possession of concealed firearms "while continuing to maintain important provisions to ensure visitor safety and resource protection," he said.
Park rangers, retirees and conservation groups protested the plan, saying it will lead to confusion for visitors, rangers and other law enforcement agencies.
"This is purely and simply a politically driven effort to solve a problem that doesn't exist," said Bill Wade, chairman of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees.
There is no data to suggest that the public would be served by allowing visitors to parks to possess concealed handguns, Wade and other critics said. They cited statistics showing that national parks are among the safest places in the country. The probability of becoming a victim of a violent crime in a national park is 1 in more than 708,000 — less likely than being struck by lightning, the groups said.
"This proposed regulation increases the risk to visitors, employees and wildlife rather than reducing it," Wade said.
Interior Department spokesman Chris Paolino said the rule change would give great weight to state and local laws. In Washington, D.C., for instance, which has a lot of national park land, guns would not be allowed since the city has banned handguns.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., called the rule change confusing.
"This change makes no sense. It would create an incoherent, ineffective and inconsistent patchwork of policies," she said, noting that in some cases, rules would be different within the same national park. For example, Death Valley National Park is in both California and Nevada. California prohibits loaded and accessible weapons in state parks, while Nevada does not, Feinstein said.
"So which state law would apply at Death Valley National Park?" she said. "This sort of inconsistency would be an open invitation to poachers, would be almost impossible to enforce and would seriously place public safety at risk."
Paolino said that in a park that straddles more than one state, the law would differ depending on where a person was.
"When you are in the part of the park that allows concealed weapons and carry of those weapons within a state park, you will be allowed to do so in a national park," Paolino said. "When you cross the state boundary, those laws would change, depending on which state you venture into."
Kempthorne's announcement follows letters complaining about the gun restrictions from half the Senate — 41 Republicans and nine Democrats. The lawmakers called the existing guidelines confusing, burdensome and unnecessary.
The public has 60 days to comment on the new proposal, which was published Wednesday in the Federal Register.
On the Net:
Interior Department: http://www.doi.gov/
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.