[Dead Corpse]

So where in the Constitution does it give the Federal government the power to make such a regulation?

Even gun grabbers like Roscoe affirm that the FedGov is prohibited from passing such restrictions.

This should go to court and these two guys should win.

[dirtboy]

So where in the Constitution does it give the Federal government the power to make such a regulation? Even gun grabbers like Roscoe affirm that the FedGov is prohibited from passing such restrictions. This should go to court and these two guys should win.

Until we get an affirmation from SCOTUS that the 2nd A is an individual right, that's a very uphill battle. And even then, landholders have the right to restrict weapons on their premises - a bar, for example, can prohibit guns. So the NPS could probably just say they were restricting guns as a landholder (I'm not agreeing with them, just debating the point).

[CyberCowboy777]

It is about "Common Welfare".

Reason '1' for anything the Feds do that violates an individuals rights and it is accepted by the courts.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

...This should go to court and these two guys should win...

Sure, like Emerson won. Like all the others have won.

[justshe]

So where in the Constitution does it give the Federal government the power to make such a regulation? Even gun grabbers like Roscoe affirm that the FedGov is prohibited from passing such restrictions.

And you think I am arguing a position because I posted the Regulation? I simply posted the pertinent National Park Service Regulation to address the difference in Federal lands (ie National Forests admin. under the Agriculture Dept) vs. National Parks (admin. under the Dept of Interior)---and the difference in the firearms regulations between the two.

I am sure you can find an appropriate receptacle for your assumptions re: my position on this issue.