Guns In Our National Parks: Part V

The debate on allowing guns in our National Parks has been heating up of late.  President George w. Bush is a big advocate for overturning an almost 100 year old law to allow guns back into our National Parks, with a valid permit and some regulations regarding how they can be carried.  Since GWB only has a couple more months in office, this debate is starting to heat up as many people are wondering if he will actually overturn the National Park gun laws, or wait and let the next Presidency decide.

I have followed this issue quite closely for almost a year now.  You can tell by the title of this post that this is the fifth part to a series of posts on this very issue.  You will be able to get the backstory momentarily, as well as the links to those previous articles.

Before we get to that point, though, there have become a couple more issues to recently come to light about allowing guns back in our National Parks.  Probably the biggest issue will be the next Presidency.  President-elect Barack Obama has been an advocate for MORE STRINGENT gun laws.  This would seem to conflict with now President Bush’s plan for this issue.  If Bush would sign this into law, it is very likely that Barack would overturn this issue.  Most of us know that Mr. Obama will be doing just that to many of George W. Bush’s other measures, so why not this one as well?

Read more

Guns In Our National Parks: Part IV

I have been following the recent debate about allowing guns in our National Park System. I have made a number of posts over the past couple of months on this issue. Being an Outdoors and Adventure writer, I have tried to take the middle road with a few hints along the way of where I stand. I have also offered up space to those whose opinions differ from my own.

One thing I really hate though is finding a website or blog that I have read over the course of the past year, who decides to make a very public and political jump in the complete opposite direction that I have. National Parks Traveler has been a great site for some very useful information related to our National Park Service-with great histories, articles, and ongoing news items related to our parks. So then, why go political, and why go with this issue?

For the quick answer, I would have to guess that the National Parks Traveler blog has a pretty good following. By all means it IS WAS a good site! I have used it on more than one occasion as a quick-point reference when writing about issues pertaining to our National Parks. I am sure many others have, as well.

By the look of a few comments on the site, it looks like National Parks Traveler may be losing the support of not just myself, but many others. When it pertains to politics, all of us have our own opinion. When those politics are brought forth in a public area, such as a website or blog, there is that chance of alienating a segment of the population that has been reading. There is no question that there will be a shake-down with this site.

While going through and doing my usual blog-run at the end of the night, I came upon this headline:

“Concealed Weapons Don’t Belong In Our National Parks”

Then I noticed the site and had to take a second look. Glad I did. Sometimes you don’t gain true meaning by a title. On this case, though, you get it pretty clearly.

Kurt Repanshek, the man behind the National Parks Traveler blog, is a former Associated Press writer. He doesn’t work for the National Park System, nor does he imply that he does. In his latest post (with the title found above), Kurt issues up a personal letter to Secretary Kempthorne. Here are just a couple of the statements being offered in the ‘letter’.

So why is it necessary to rewrite regulations that already allow gun owners to transport their weapons through our parks? True, those regulations require that the weapons be unloaded, broken down, and stored out of easy reach, but is that unreasonable? From here it seems as if only the self-righteous NRA, ever anxious to boost its membership, feels that the only safe national park is one where the visitors are armed and ready.

And of the Second Amendment:

Mr. Secretary, in arguing for this change of regulations, the NRA and more than a few of its members would have you believe that their 2nd Amendment rights are being trampled by the national park regulations. Really, Mr. Secretary, this isn’t a 2nd Amendment issue. No one is trying to deny folks the right to carry arms, although you couldn’t tell that by listening to the NRA. Nor are you denying that weapons can be prohibited in federal buildings, or that states – if they choose – can decide to prohibit them in the national parks within their states.

So this isn’t a 2nd amendment issue. If it’s anything, it’s a states rights issue. But where in federal law does it say that the states should make decisions about how national parks are managed?

There, you get the jest of it.  Kurt Repanshek also goes on to mention that the Interior Department is in the midst of a “Public Comment” session, where input is being asked of the public on this very issue.  He asks that if you haven’t made your voice heard, that you had better do so before the June deadline.

I would really be interested in hearing a rebuttal to the message that National Parks Traveler is offering up on it’s latest posting.  Perhaps Michael Bane, or that of Steven or Tom Remington (President and Vice-President of U.S. Hunting Today Magazine, respectively) or even that of the NRA, itself.  I am actually kind of upset, now, that I have supported Kurt’s site for quite some time, without knowing his political position, unfortunately, now I do know that position and will be taking him out of my Links page.

Many newer readers to this site are stopping by through my recent affiliation with both, The Outdoor Bloggers Summit and Skinny Moose Media.  Both of these affiliations support hunting and fishing, as well as a general enjoyment of our great outdoors.  Even throughout these two networks, there may be a few differing opinions on this issue, but I would love to hear some of your voices concerning the Guns in National Parks saga.

I am taking the first stand and deleting the National Parks Traveler from my Links page.  If politics are an issue, then to each their own, but likewise, I also have a choice in what I support and the message that I bring.  If you are big enough to make the stand, more power to you, Kurt, but likewise, our support will likely go to where our beliefs are, and it’s not at National Parks Traveler.

Perhaps Kurt needs a few more comments from our side of things.  Go read the article and leave your thoughts.  If it helps, mention that I sent you.  As well, Kurt did offer up one light of encouragement.  That encouragement comes in the form of opinions that are still being listened to from the Interior Department until June.  If you believe strongly on this issue, as I do, I highly recommend heading over THERE and voicing your opinion.  It still isn’t to late to make a difference!

More Reading Material From The Adventurist on this issue:

• Don’t Weaken National Park Gun Rules
• Don’t Weaken National Park Gun Laws–A Reader’s View
• Guns in National Parks?  What’s Your View?

Guns in National Parks? What’s Your View?

The debate for less restrictions on gun laws in national parks has been going on for well over a year. Some say that an increase in weapons in the park system could spark more crime, but gun lobbyists say that it is only right that they should have the same laws in national parks as they do on the streets. Plus, if concealed weapons are allowed, lobbyists actually say crime might drop if everyone is allowed to carry.

Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne is looking for public input on this very issue. Over the next few days a list of new ‘proposed rules’ allowing guns in the national parks will be posted. The National Rifle Association and 51 senators have urged a review of current statutes in regards to gun laws in national parks. They say that current rules should come in accordance with state statutes on this issue, rather than seperate rules and regulations for different areas.

This is all bound to spark even greater debate in the outdoors circles and will force the issue to get a closer look at the public’s input. Dirk Kempthorne’s list of rules will be up for 60 days. During that time, the public is urged to show their support for, or against, the newly proposed gun laws by commenting.

These new rules will be placed on the federal register at www.doi.gov

The Outside Blog states the the newly proposed rules would allow the public to carry concealed weapons in National Parks and Wildlife Refuges, if the states in question currently allow this practice on public lands-of which, 48 of them do.

With the National Rifle Association and 51 Senators backing this new proposal, it will be interesting to see exactly how much of the public supports these new measures. Backpacker Magazine, who will be running the results of a poll on this exact same topic in their next issue, has already publicly released the results saying that 74% of their readers oppose these new measures, while 26% agree. It is not known to myself how many took part in this poll.

What is known is that for any thoughts on this issue you may have, the government is now looking to hear from you. What are your thoughts on this issue? Should the public be allowed to carry concealed weapons in the National Parks? What are your reasonings? Make a comment and let us know!

Don’t Weaken National Park Gun Laws–A Reader’s View

Editor’s Note: The following article is in response to a post I made concerning the US Government and the relaxation of gun laws in our National Park system. There has been great debate over this issue in the public, and in an effort to gain insight on both sides of the issue I have decided to Post Bill Starks’ nice comments on their own merit. It is well put together, with facts supported by the source, which makes it easy on my part. Thanks Bill for allowing me to put this up!

Don’t Weaken National Park Gun Laws

By Bill Starks

The proposed rule change to allow the legal carrying of weapons in National Parks in direct response to a citizen’s letter writing campaign to their respective senators. In response, Senator Crapo wrote a letter to the head of the Department of the Interior, Kirk Kempthorne. The letter was signed by over 50 senators. Mr. Kempthorne’s response can be found HERE.

Those of us that wrote letters to our senators are fed up with being disarmed in a potentially dangerous environment while we are allowed to legally, with a permit, carry firearms virtually everywhere else.

I have personally encountered various illegal activities as well as many dangerous animals on the trails in Washington’s National Parks. I was lucky enough to see both before they saw me and high tail it out of there since I was obeying the law and did not carry my firearm with me in the parks. Do you really think that changing the rules will encourage criminals to carry in the Parks? News flash, they already do. Illegally.

This is not just about Washington either. I’m sure you’re aware that many of our Nat’l Parks butt up against the Mexican border and is home to or a thoroughfare for illegal immigrants who, as I’m sure you know, aren’t always the most law abiding bunch as evidenced by their mere presence on US soil. A quick search can turn up plenty of stories like this one.

If you want to trust your safety and your life to a Ranger miles away, be my guest. No one is forcing anyone to carry a gun or even visit the Parks. If your life means so little to you that you would turn over your most effective means of defending it to a stranger that you most likely wouldn’t be able to call to for help anyway, go right ahead. Notably, the Supreme Court stated about the responsibility of police for the security of your family and loved ones is “You, and only you, are responsible for your security and the security of your family and loved ones. That was the essence of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in the early 1980’s when they ruled that the police do not have a duty to protect you as an individual, but to protect society as a whole.” The police have no legal duty to respond and prevent crime or protect the victim. What? Does that sound surprising?

The only person responsible for your safety is you. You feed yourself, clothe yourself, keep yourself sheltered, and keep yourself alive. No one else is responsible for this. That is why I carry a gun, because no one else should have to run to my rescue. It’s the same thing in a national park. I want to go to the park and enjoy myself, have a good time with my family, roast some hot-dogs and enjoy the outdoors. I want to do it without fear of bears, cougars, rapists or murderers, and I don’t want to have to wait three hours for a park ranger if I find myself in danger (and without cell phone reception). It’s not because I want to be able to go shoot up our national parks, it’s just because I want to be able to enjoy myself without putting myself in a helpless position. I’ll take responsibility for my own safety and that of those who are with me, thanks.

A gun is just a piece of survival gear in the wilderness as far as I’m concerned. Did you know that firearm is part of the state required survival equipment for Alaskan Bush pilots? Those who know wilderness know a gun is a very useful tool when it comes to being attacked by creatures with four legs, or two.

While neither the U.S. Forest Service nor the National Park Service keeps precise statistics about crime on federally protected lands, officers and rangers say that crime appears to be on the rise in the backcountry. Between 2002 and 2007, there were 63 homicides in national parks, 240 rapes or attempted rapes, 309 robberies, 37 kidnappings and 1,277 aggravated assaults, according to National Park Service statistics.
The article can be found here:

Statistics of people harmed in national parks by crime or wildlife are not justification for carrying guns, sure. I carry a gun with me every day, everywhere I go. I don’t shoot people, or have any intention of shooting people. Most people wouldn’t guess that I have a gun. I don’t carry it because I’m going somewhere dangerous and I’ll need it, I carry it because I am responsible for my own safety.

If you think our Nat’l Parks are safe havens, free from crime and bastions of peace and harmony with nature, you obviously don’t get out much. Just ask Julianne Williams, Carole Sund, daughter Juli, Silvina Pelosso and Laura Winans. Oh wait, you can’t. They were murdered in a National Park!