Posted on 04/24/2009 12:00:54 AM PDT by neverdem
A group of Western Republicans are searching high and low for an opportunity to push ahead with legislation to allow citizens to bring concealed weapons into national parks.
House and Senate bills would codify a Bush-era rule to allow visitors to carry concealed firearms into national parks and wildlife...
"This is not an environmental issue, this is a civil rights issue," said Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), one of the co-sponsors of the House bill, H.R. 1684 (pdf). "The Constitution trumps NEPA. Period."
In court filings late last week, Interior said it would comply with U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly's injunction but asked for Kollar-Kotelly not to issue a final ruling until it conducts the environmental analysis (Greenwire, April 20).
"The Interior can still do its review, but my intention is to proceed with our legislation," said Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), one of the co-sponsors of the Senate bill, S. 816 (pdf). "This continues to be a question that needs an answer."
--snip--
"We believe the Kempthorne rule was a common-sense correction to an outdated rule," said Chris Cox, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, noting that 31 states already allow concealed carry in their own parks and that Montana, Tennessee and Mississippi have similar proposals pending.
"An impartial scientific look at the rule would do nothing but confirm what the states have realized," Cox said.
Robert Levy, chairman of the CATO Institute's board of directors, noted that establishing the gun rule as law rather than as an Interior regulation would help guard the policy change from additional litigation. "There is considerable question whether the Interior Department should be passing the rules to begin with," he said. By establishing it as a law, "Congress can decide whether there needs to be NEPA review."
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I do it anyway, generally a .32 acp. Nice and small and light weight. I’ve been around cougars enough times to know they are there and it’s their turf. Also, I hike with kids, and you never know what kind of people you might meet. Safety First!! Who said that? Someone who knew that the Hell they were talking about. Unlike the majority of our current lot of politicos.
A snubnose .357 magnum, not all that big, but it speaks with a gread deal of authority.
Hm. I’ve always been of the opinion that any carry caliber should start with a 4 or greater.
I don’t disagree with you. Personally, I like a 10mm or a .45. But in relation to the Nat. Parks... I practice light-weight hiking techniques :-) My Colt .32 acp is military issue; only 300 were produced (gifts to officers), and it’s compact, well-balanced, and doesn’t weight a whole lot.
I generally don’t carry a revolver, though I have a few. The only snub nose I have is a 38 spec.. How’s the .357 Mag? Are they a little jumpy? I’m sure it’s great at close range. Have you tried it at 25 or 50 yards?
Maybe they should tell the feds to take a walk. Have the state take over the park. I’m afraid it is the only way people will have the authorities recognize people’s rights.
I heard that, back in the 'ole backpacking days I used to carry a 1911 on my trips with a magazine staggered with Ball and hollow points, after a couple of hikes it was replaced with a much lighter short barreled .357.
You can get stub nosed .357,s with a good barrel compensator system these days that pretty much keeps you in the zone.
I like my little colt mustang in .380...slips into my vest pocket and does not print and .380 is head and shoulders over .32.
When my .45 ACP lightweight combat commander would print, I carry a Walther PPK/S in .380 (9mm kurz). It's kind of marginal, but at least I have a spare magazine . . . .
my bad back prevents me from carrying anything heavier than my mustang which is in .380. (and no matter what the gun pundits say, I feel safer with it in condition 2 and I thumb back the hammer as I push the gun forward to aim)
...any gun carried, being better than the really good one that you refuse to carry because its too heavy.
If I had my druthers I would wear my 4” model 19 S&W in .357mag in a shoulder holster, but I need to get 4 disks repaird in my back first. My second choice being my bone stock, just like it was carried in 1943 when it was made, 1911A1 remington rand.
The problem with condition 2 is that in a lot of models it bypasses the hammer block. I don't know about the mustang.
I have started carrying a Sig-Sauer P245, it's DA and is a pretty good shooter (not as accurate as my 1911, but that's probably a practice/familiarity issue).
I feel that accuracy for carry guns is not too much of an issue as most protection situation fights, will be at very close distances.
I’m not sure what you mean by jumpy, it is a handful. It’s ok at 25 yards, it takes some practice to be any good beyond that.
I always toted my 1911 in condition 1. I like the Sig Sauer better because now I have a couple of rowdy dogs in tow as a general rule. Read too many stories about hunting dogs shooting their owners . . . .
Why ask PERMISSION to exercise a RIGHT? NOTE: The 2nd Amendment is SELF-incorporated to all government entities at every level. It is MORE ABSOLUTE than the 1st Amendment, or any of the others, because the wording forbids not only CONGRESS, but ANYONE from infringing on it. The 1st says “Congress shall make no law...”. The 2nd say “shall NOT be infringed!” Period! End of debate!
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.