Govt: Guns barred from national parks until Feb. 2010.....

[Junkdrawer]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Not so fast, gun owners. A new law allowing loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges will not take effect until next year, the Obama administration said Friday.

President Barack Obama signed the gun law without comment Friday as part of a measure creating new rules for the credit card industry.

A spokeswoman for the Interior Department said that because the credit card law won't take effect until nine months after it is signed, the gun measure also will be delayed.

Spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff said the Interior Department will follow Congress's directive and put the new firearms law into effect in late February 2010.

...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5itp2xFPxgQ4TTpiTFLZQrJpRTAXQD98BHRL81

Looks like sliding the amendment into the credit card bill has *ahem* unforeseen side effects....

[msongs]

1. when Dems control congress and white house this provision can be repealed.

oh wait, dems DO control the congress and white house. Oh wait, they have the most members, which does not mean CONTROL,
as it seems sometimes repubs are still running the place. Well thank gosh we have effective and strong people as speaker and majority leader lol.

Msongs

[vadawg]

2. why the hell so you want to repeal this, makes sense to be able to carry

if you cross into national park boundry if the state allows you to.

[KoKo]

10. You nailed it.......

:-(

[Pavulon]

13. Think that game is done. bamboozling

people with look good feel good law that fixes nothing does not work. At least people figured that issue out.

I would be all for some action that addresses root cause for gun violence. Mental health care reform and drug law to start, since that is how most of the bodies are stacked.

[TheWraith]

48. Plus poverty.

Poverty is the root that feeds the issues with drugs and gangs. Period. Switzerland has 600,000 fully automatic machine guns sitting in people's closets and attics, and they've got very little crime. Know why? Poverty, or the lack thereof.

[GKirk]

70. it's sad to think that

x number of dollars is all that separates me from a life of crime.

[Caliman73]

77. It isn't the X number of dollars...

It is everything associated with that X number of dollars. Also, being poor does not automatically mean you are going to have a life of crime. It is a matter of probability. The less money you have, the less resources you can secure and the less opportunity you have. Living in a poor urban area usually means more crowding, less privacy, substandard housing, less economic opportunity, poorer performing schools, etc... The higher the income, the better the services become and the greater the opportunities to make more income are. There are more affluent people who commit crimes, they tend to have better legal representation and are thus not punished as severely and not stigmatized as much. There are many factors that contribute to the decision to choose crime as a means of living, money, or lack thereof, tends to be one that is associated with crime.

[rwheeler31]

3. We need to fix this before it takes effect.

[aikoaiko]

9. I agree -- this bill and amendment should be enacted immediately.

:applause:

[konnichi wa]

20. Right. Nobody has ever been massacred in a gunfree zone.

:eyes:

[michreject]

52. How?

Do you expect a shift in power before next Feb? Those who voted for this will still be in office.

[walldude]

4. Yeah but he's going to take those guns away any day now...

:eyes:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

5. Who has been saying that?

[benEzra]

68. Well, the corporatists and MSM want him to, but he's shown himself smarter than that

as is evidenced by his signing this bill revoking the Reagan anti-gun rules.

[Cirque du So-What]

6. Recoilus interruptus

How will they fill the days until they're able to go into our national parks packin'?

[vadawg]

7. lol its their national parks too, and i think no one is going to repeal this

this is a shaved pig in a sleeping pag for any politician who tries to repeal it on a national stage.

[aikoaiko]

8. Plenty of more time for you and others to monger fear.

By and large, gun owners who go through the effort of background checks and paperwork to carry concealed weapons are not involved with gun violence. Why some people worry that that would change when crossing over into a national park is weird.

[votingupstart]

11. the regular gun owners are just like you and me - i have

no problem with a person who goes through the effort and requiremnts to get a permit to carry a gun - WTF do i care?

[katandmoon]

16. Because they can kill somebody with it? Maybe you or a loved one?

Although I know there is no comparison between guns and human life in Gun Worshippers World. Guns are the priority.

[votingupstart]

47. maybe they could - maybe they could not

but to say that just because there is a chance that something bad may happen we cannot trust anyone is a failure of the individual liberty. there is a chance that i will get hit by a drunk driver should i ban all cars? NO - i will put criminal penalties in place on the PERSON WHO COMMITS THE ACT. just like if a person yells FIRE in a theater, its not the english languages fault ITS THE PERSON.

people need to be held accountable for their actions.

[TheWraith]

49. You're more likely to be murdered by a police officer than a CCW holder.

Seriously--police officers have a higher rate of committing violent crime than do licensed concealed-carry gun owners.

[one-eyed fat man]

64. You could kill your whole family

with the cleaning supplies you keep under your sink. Some guy used a book of matches and half a bucks worth of gasoline to torch a club in New York and burn 89 people alive.

You don't need a gun to be a murderous SOB and a gun won't turn someone into a maniac that wasn't one already.

Heck, Charles Manson never killed anyone. He had a harem of lovestruck hippie chicks do it for him.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

73. So we should restrict everything that someone can kill somebody with?

[katandmoon]

14. Anyone who feels the need to carry a concealed weapon the same way I carry, say, my wallet,

everywhere, is IMO a mental case with a severe case of overcompensation for lack in other areas.

Your precious guns cannot make up for it though.

[vadawg]

18. there are many reasons some people carry, i have a loaded weapon on me 24/7

when i sleep i have my handgun close buy and a loaded shotgun in a closet, my wife even carries her concealed when shes cooking in the kitchen, the reasons why dont matter, but a lot of people carry for different reasons.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

29. LOL... The Dynamic Duo.

The reasons why do matter. I can (almost) understand having a gun nearby while sleeping, but what in life drives a person to carry a gun while cooking? Are you that afraid that someone is going to burst into your home? Do you not lock doors? Do you have a special waterproof holster for when bathing? I can only imagine the gun-related foreplay... ah, Sweetness. Perhaps you carry for work-related purposes, I don't know. Or perhaps you carry for the sheer sense of power, sort of like those pace car assholes who barely do the speed limit in the fast lane.

[vadawg]

30. dont be silly, when i shower the wife covers me with the 12 gauge and vice versa

to give you an idea, at the moment i have two active greenlights on me and my family that i know off, so we dont take any chances just in case.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

31. Wouldn't it be more fun to put the guns aside and shower together? (n/t)

[vadawg]

32. i think my post went over your head completely, the showering thing was sarcasm N/T

[WorseBeforeBetter]

33. Yeah, right... don't flatter yourself.

That's pretty amusing.

[vadawg]

35. you really have no idea why some people might have to be armed all the time do you

and obviously humour is not your strongpoint either, i guess sitting in a darkened room with only the light cast from your computer and an old teddy bear for a friend will just have to do for now.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

38. Lame retort. What's it like to live in fear of being a victim all the time?

That's what we "gun nannies" don't understand. What are you so afraid of?

[vadawg]

40. I am afraid of the people that i have to deal with so you dont have to

the reason you get to be self righteous and be able to say i dont need a gun is because people like myself go out every day and fuck with the scum of society and take the burden from you as much as possible. Then we get greenlighted and know that at any minute the scum might happen apon us, or someone might want to make a name for himself by doing some work.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

43. Ah, now we're getting somewhere.

And don't put words in my mouth.

[vincna]

86. I thought it was a scream - nt

[Joe Fields]

34. why are you so afraid?

[vadawg]

39. More prepared than afraid, though i fear for my kids and wife, im fatalistic extreme

i guess its a cultural thing in that i worry more about something happening to my kids etc than me, but i still am not going to be taken without a fight, and having a semi auto or shotgun is better than going hands on.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

41. Are you concerned about the effects of fear, worry and fatalism...

on your health? Perhaps that will kill you rather than some random attacker.

[vadawg]

42. problem is it may not be random, as i said i dont worry, etc

i fear that something may happen to my kids, but i come from a society that is very fatalistic, death is something that is commonplace, so i guess im not more worried now than when i was in the army just in a different way.

[aikoaiko]

19. Well, there is always time in your day to spread the hate, eh, kat?

:shrug:

[konnichi wa]

21. Ah, the obligatory penis reference. How clever.

Want to explain how you think you will disarm half of DU?

[GKirk]

71. Just like the in a debate

the first person who brings up Adolph Hitler loses so should the first person who makes a penis reference in a gun debate lose.

[alarimer]

53. I agree with this.

People should not be allowed to conceal their weapons. They should have to be carried out in the open where everyone can see what kind of paranoid asshole they are.

Gun nuts are paranoid assholes with *ahem* shortcomings, if you know what I mean.

[michreject]

56. It's not the shortcomings that's the problem

it's the over sized echo chamber.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

75. And people like you who are so obsessed with penis size are normal, eh?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

74. So a woman who is being stalked by an abusive boyfriend who has threatened her is overcompensating?

Of course no one I know carries their firearm everywhere except cops and soldiers.

David

[Pavulon]

12. Guess I will keep breaking that bitch for a bit longer..

backpacked allover the at, always carried a revolver. Heavy but worth it. shit almost 20 years now.

[SidDithers]

15. Is there anywhere that gun owners think should remain gun free?...

or should guns be allowed everywhere?

Sid

[aikoaiko]

23. I think a good case can be made to not allow gun posession in areas where security is critical

Court, jail, prison, etc.

[spin]

45. Of course, and most states prohibit concealed carry in the areas you mentioned...

For example, in Florida these are areas where carrying a concealed weapon is illegal.

Possession Restrictions

The following is a list of places where you are restricted from carrying a weapon or firearm even if you have a license. Please note that this is a simplified list. The places marked by an asterisk (*) may have exceptions or additional restrictions. See Section 790.06 (12), Florida Statutes for a complete listing.

o any place of nuisance as defined in s. 823.05
o any police, sheriff, or highway patrol station
o any detention facility, prison, or jail; any courthouse
o any courtroom*
o any polling place
o any meeting of the governing body of a county, public school district, municipality, or special district
o any meeting of the Legislature or a committee thereof
o any school, college, or professional athletic event not related to firearms
o any school administration building
o any portion of an establishment licensed to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption*
o any elementary or secondary school facility
o any area technical center
o any college or university facility*
o inside the passenger terminal and sterile area of any airport*
o any place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/apply.html

[Joe Fields]

36. When they assert that they need to carry in church, then the shark

has been thoroughly jumped.

[spin]

46. You can carry concealed in a Florida church...

This is a list of where you can't carry...

Possession Restrictions

The following is a list of places where you are restricted from carrying a weapon or firearm even if you have a license. Please note that this is a simplified list. The places marked by an asterisk (*) may have exceptions or additional restrictions. See Section 790.06 (12), Florida Statutes for a complete listing.

o any place of nuisance as defined in s. 823.05
o any police, sheriff, or highway patrol station
o any detention facility, prison, or jail; any courthouse
o any courtroom*
o any polling place
o any meeting of the governing body of a county, public school district, municipality, or special district
o any meeting of the Legislature or a committee thereof
o any school, college, or professional athletic event not related to firearms
o any school administration building
o any portion of an establishment licensed to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption*
o any elementary or secondary school facility
o any area technical center
o any college or university facility*
o inside the passenger terminal and sterile area of any airport*
o any place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/possession.html

I haven't attended a church service for probably 20 years, but I do know people who attend church on a regular basis and carry concealed firearms.

No big deal.

[ManiacJoe]

58. Most states allow carry in church.

That, of course, is reasonable given that churches are often places of criminal shootings.

[Merchant Marine]

65. God helps those

that help themselves, as the parishioners of Colorado Springs know. An armed security guard with a CCW stopped a gunman who had already murdered two people at a cemetery and two in the church parking lot. She stopped him dead with a center of mass shot.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/10/colorado.shootings/index.html

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

76. Because no one ever targets churches for act of violence right.

[quiller4]

44. I don't believe they should be barred anywhere. n/t

[ManiacJoe]

59. There is probably near universal acceptance

for prohibiting possession in bars/taverns and court houses.

After that, the restrictions tend to be nonsensical.

[Mari333]

17. i will visit as many national parks as I can before 2010

after that Im going overseas on vacation.

[konnichi wa]

22. Maybe visit some other gunfree zones like Virginia Tech. Nobody could ever be shot in those places.

:eyes:

[Mari333]

24. Ill take my chances in Cornwall

[vadawg]

26. yeah because no one ever gets killed there, when its your time to go, your gonna go

dosent matter where you are or what you are doing or how hard to try to avoid it. No point running away from the big bad guns. Probuably you will buy the farm in a combine accident now instead of a shooting.

[Joe Fields]

37. much less chance, for sure.

Your snarkiness notwithstanding, I DO prefer gun-free zones, as they are safer. But your obsession, as with many other Americans over guns will eventually force me to buy one for protection from the gun nuts, and I tell you in all honesty, I loathe you fucking gun nuts for that.

[TheWraith]

50. Actually, there's no evidence gun free zones are safer. Quite the opposite.

Simple explanation: someone intent on committing a crime doesn't care whether they're allowed to take a gun somewhere.

Point two, most mass murders occur in gun-free zones. Schools, churches, and community centers.

Further, you're clearly approaching the whole issue with a preconcieved mindset based on an emotional reaction, not on facts. The facts are that you're more likely to be the victim of a violent crime committed by a police officer than by a concealed-carry owner. It's the non-licensed people who you have to worry about, and they are NOT going to be stopped simply because they're sternly warned.

[konnichi wa]

57. I'm not a fucking gun nut. And anyone who would broadbrush people with such an insulting

term is a sick sonofabitch. I've owned guns for 57 years and never had any inclination to join the NRA but about a year ago, thanks to people like you, I finally did. If you think that disqualifies me as a Democrat, report me to your boss at Jerry Foulball's 'Liberty' University.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

28. That's my plan as well -- take my tourism dollars elsewhere.

And let them know that I'm doing so. I take 1-2 active (hiking/biking) vacations per year and my only consolation is that I doubt I'd cross paths with some of the fat fucks I've seen waiting on line for gun shows. It's the principle that really bothers me -- nothing is sacred anymore. Hospitals and churches, anyone?

[michreject]

51. I wrote my rep and thanked her.

I let her know that because of this law being passed that I will now take my money to spend in National Parks, not elsewhere. I camp several times a year. Now I won't have to spend 35.00 a night for a camp site. I'll save money and be safe.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

54. Safe from other campers with guns?

Better yet, other campers drinking and carrying loaded weapons? That's always a winning mix.

[michreject]

55. Safe from thugs

goons and miscreants who would wish to do me harm. I have no fear of the legally armed person. They choose to obey the law.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

62. So in this gun utopia of yours, legally armed persons never...

commit crimes, accidentally shoot anyone (including themselves), or just *snap* and maim/kill someone. Only "thugs, goons and miscreants." What a perfect world you live in. Wasn't a child shot dead at a gun show as his father and an experienced handler supervised? Actually, I read that his father was reaching for his camera. Good times.

[X_Digger]

63. Never? No.. less often even than cops, though..

I know Florida and Texas produce reports on their CHL holders' criminal activity.

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/convrates.htm

Regarding the CT boy who was shot, three people were charged with involuntary manslaughter-

http://celebgalz.com/christopher-bizilj-fleury-guiffre-spano-charged-with-bizilj-death-video/

Three men were charged for the death of a 8 year old boy, Christopher Bizilj, of Ashford, Conn. Christopher Bizilj accidentally died because the gun he was firing recoiled and he could not control it. There was no certified instructor to assist Christopher Bizilj at the exhibition booth where visitors treid out firearms. Christopher Bizilj was shot in the head by the 9mm microsubmachine gun.

Edward Fleury, Pelham Police Chief, was charged with involuntary manslaughter because he owns COP Firearms & Training, the sponsor of the Machine Gun Shoot and Firearms Expo. Christopher Bizilj died at a booth in the Expo.

The automatic weapon was brought to the Expo by Carl Guiffre of Hartford, Conn., and Domenico Spano, of New Milford, Conn., These two men also were indicted.

[Euromutt]

81. You missed that part about state law applying, didn't you?

See, I don't know how it is in your part of the world, but in my state (Washington) being in possession of a firearm while being legally "under the influence" (except in your own abode or fixed place of business) will probably get you nailed on a gross misdemeanor charge for "unlawful carrying or handling," resulting in the loss of your Concealed Pistol License (if you have one), probably in tandem with the confiscation of the firearm in question.

I have to marvel at the state of mind that thinks that decriminalization of a particular activity necessarily means that that activity will be completely unregulated, and any and all dangerous behavior associated with it will be completely legal. I've heard people argue against legalization of marijuana because "we'll have people driving their cars stoned, and surgeons operating stoned, and air traffic controllers working stoned"; yeah, just like there's nothing to stop people driving, or surgeons operating, or air traffic controllers working while drunk.

I keep seeing arguments of a similar nature being made about making firearms in parks subject to state firearms law; merely allowing firearms to be carried in National Parks will mean it will be perfectly legal to engage in dangerous behavior with those firearms even though such behavior is illegal outside National Parks.

[joshcryer]

79. Have you actually used your national park? I mean, other than the paved road tourist camps...

...I'm talking back dirt roads with little sinage and a necessity for a map.

If you have then you'd know that half the signs have bullet holes in them in many National Parks.

Illegally mind you.

But they're there.

The law changes nothing.

[joshcryer]

78. You are a liar. Those "fat fucks" are everywhere in our nations National Parks.

So I don't believe you that you go anywhere near the National Parks.

[Euromutt]

66. You'd better go now

According to your profile, you live in Michigan. That's a "shall issue" state, so there's a greater likelihood of coming into contact with a person carrying a licensed concealed weapon while going about your daily business than while occasionally visiting a National Park.

Let me ask you a question that gets asked fairly frequently of the gun owners on this board: why are you so scared?

[one-eyed fat man]

82. If you were ever in a National Park before 1986

folks had guns. All this does is go back to the rules as they were before James Watt was Secretary of Interior.

So before you start filling your drawers at the thought of "OMFG!!!GUNZ EVERYWHERE!!!!" tell me about all the National Park gunfights before 1986? Some? Any? Since?

While you're expending all this acrimony and energy pole-vaulting over mouse turds, there are REAL problems that need addressing, like the economy, health care, regaining the freedoms stolen by the Patriot Act and dismantling DHS.

[sl8]

83. Are you sure about that?

I was looking online for references about this and so far these are all I've come up with:

A Brief History of National Park Service Regulations on Firearms
http://www.peer.org/docs/nps/08_12_2_brief_history_nps_firearm_regs.pdf

This basically says that the 1983 regulation change extended the firearms restrictions to recreation areas and added exceptions to the policy.
PEER isn't unbiased; they opposed the 2008 regulation change.

FIREARMS REGULATIONS IN THE NATIONAL PARKS: 1897—1936
http://www.nps.gov/policy/Firearmsregs.pdf

According to this, firearms were banned in National Parks as of 1936, except that sealed weapons were allowed with written permission.

Do you know of any other online references?

Also, Watt resigned in 1983.

[one-eyed fat man]

85. You are right. Watt changed the rules in 1983

The current regulations, adopted in 1983 under then-Interior Secretary James Watt, say visitors to national parks must render their weapons inaccessible. Guns do not have to be disassembled, but they must be put somewhere that is not easily reached, such as in a car trunk.

A fight over ban on loaded weapons in national parks Mar 4, 2008
Dicks called the effort to lift the ban on loaded weapons in the parks a mistake and vowed to "fight it all the way. If this ban was good enough for the Reagan administration and James Watt, why isn't it good enough now?". Watt was President Ronald Reagan's interior secretary when regulations involving guns in the parks were last revised. (Scripps Howard News Wire)

Gunning for parks Feb 26, 2008
It is easy to see the problems that officials were trying to fix when Interior Secretary James Watt no anti-gun liberal, he enacted the firearms restrictions in the first Reagan administration. Wildlife were being poached in what were supposed to be animal sanctuaries, and people were being endangered. (San Diego Union-Tribune -- Opinion)

Senators pushing to allow firearms in national parks Jan 14, 2008
The current regulations, adopted in 1983 under then-Interior Secretary James Watt, say visitors to national parks must render their weapons inaccessible. Guns do not have to be disassembled, but they must be put somewhere that is not easily reached, such as in a car trunk, said Jerry Case, the National Park Service's chief of regulations and special park uses. (Anchorage Daily News)

[-..__...]

25. Uhmm... yeah... so?

:shrug:

Bottom line... the Brady Campaign and other anti-RKBA drama queens lose yet another round in the gun control battle.

9 days... weeks... months... whatever.

We still have a victory in our win column and you have what?

:rofl:

[X_Digger]

60. They have..

bitter crow pie.

[virginia mountainman]

27. We pro-civil rights forces, need to keep moving...

Those of you that "blame the gun lobby" you need to look real hard at just WHO the so called gun lobby really is....

I give you hint...

It is NOT the NRA... Blaming the NRA is a simple minded cop out.

It is the voters, that give the NRA its power. It is ALL OF US, that write letters, make phone calls, and do the leg work, to get these "good works" done...

..We will continue..

[X_Digger]

61. This was expected.. gives states time to decide..

..if they want to allow national parks to have the same rules as state parks or not.

For all the panic that some tried to gin up ahead of this change, you'd think the world was going to end. *headshake*

[Euromutt]

67. Unforeseen side-effects indeed!

This legislation was introduced because the original Dept. of the Interior rule change got stymied in the courts. But the legislation that has replaced that rule change is much further-reaching: the original rule change would only permit licensed concealed carry of concealable weapons, whereas the new rule permits the carrying of any weapon in any manner that is in accordance with relevant state and local law. That means that in states that permit unlicensed open carry (such as Idaho, Montana and Wyoming), this will also become legal, and that means that anyone in legal possession of a handgun can carry it in Yellowstone (provided they do so openly), whereas otherwise you would not only have had to have a CCW permit, but one that those states honor.

Looks like the Brady Campaign shot themselves in the foot.

[Hoopla Phil]

69. Wow! I had not realized that. Good point!!!

[X_Digger]

72. Actually..

If you read the original DOI memo, the sense that you get from it is that it only covers CCW, but the DOI guidelines to the States Councils of Parks mentions this possibility.

[joshcryer]

80. It can actually be interpreted in all manners of ways. It can even be interepted to do nothing.

Since it doesn't preclude the Parks Gun Ban from being relevent.

Way too vague.

[Euromutt]

84. Last time I looked, Act of Congress trumped agency rule (n/t)