New Attempt at National Park Carry

[waynesan]

Senate Backs Allowing Loaded Guns in National Parks - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com

Senate Backs Allowing Loaded Guns in National Parks

Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma sponsored the amendment, which would restore a Bush administration policy allowing loaded guns in national parks.

WASHINGTON -- The Senate has approved a measure that would allow people to carry loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.

Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma sponsored the amendment, which would restore a Bush administration policy allowing loaded guns in national parks.

A federal judge blocked the policy in March. The Obama administration said it would not appeal the ruling. The gun amendment was attached to a bill imposing restrictions on credit card companies. The amendment was approved 67-29.

[Guest TargetShooter84]

Great, I'll start carrying it to the GSM park this weekend when I go on hikes.

[Guest bkelm18]

Great, I'll start carrying it to the GSM park this weekend when I go on hikes.

I would not recommend that. Just because the amendment (not a park rules amendment, an amendment to a bill in the senate) was approved, doesn't mean it's law now.

Edited May 13, 2009 by bkelm18

[Guest TargetShooter84]

Oh ok....for some reason, I thought I heard it was already signed into law by the Governor? Maybe it was for something else....?

[Mike.357]

the governor has no say over what happens in a national park anyway.

This would be federal business.

[Wingshooter]

Awesome!

I shouldn't get my hopes up, but I am glad to see that this issue is not going to just fade away and be forgotten. I hope it makes it back into law. I only got to carry in GSM once, but I liked it.

Thanks for the update.

[Guest nraforlife]

We will see...

[Dobervol]

Well, it appears that our own wonderful LAMAR! (remember the dumb bumper stickers?) is the only GOP senator who voted against the Nat. Park carry bill. Sen. Alexander votes against guns in national parks | No Silence Here | knoxnews.com

It's time for him to go.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

Time to email him and let him know how we feel about this.

[E4 No More]

I've already informed him that I won't be voting for him again because of his bank bail-out vote. What else do I have to incent him to do right?

[ukerduker]

His response from Knoxnews.com:

"I have consistently been a strong supporter of Second Amendment rights, but this legislation goes too far - further than President Reagan, further than President Bush, and further than Tennessee law."

He's a strong supporter? Goes too far? I guess he doesn't understand the "...shall not be infringed" part of the 2A. I sent my email:

Senator:

Your recent vote against guns in our national parks is discouraging. You have once again placed yourself on the wrong side of an issue. You first voted for the bailouts of our banks and now this. It's apparent that you are not representing my views. I will not be voting for you in the 2010 elections. I will also encourage my friends and family to do the same.

[Guest nraforlife]

RINO...

[GLOCKMEISTER]

I sent every Tennessee FFL an email about this... as far as Im concerned he's outta there come election time.

[Falcon1]

the governor has no say over what happens in a national park anyway.

This would be federal business.

Actually, both the original Department of Interior rule and the Senate amendment to the legislation specify that state law must stipulate that carry is legal in such areas. Currently, Tennessee law does not. So the Governor could have some say over it.

[Mike.357]

Falcon, you are correct of course, I was wrong!

[Guest SUNTZU]

Figures.

[OngoingFreedom]

I've already informed him that I won't be voting for him again because of his bank bail-out vote. What else do I have to incent him to do right?

Ditto! My vote was sitting next to your vote last November, though it didn't do any good...

[RRMan03]

Lamar is for Lamar. His only reason to be in Washington is to be there again.He does not and has never represented the views of Tennessee. Of course I am sure the Rebublican party will pick a follow my lead candiate to replace him. And everybody wonders why we are losing the battle. I am not a rocket scientist but I have spent a night a the Holiday Inn.

[Oh Shoot]

Lamar is for Lamar. His only reason to be in Washington is to be there again.He does not and has never represented the views of Tennessee. ...

Amen.

From the time he left the governorship his only goal was to be POTUS. Every other position he has taken only to keep his hand in and his ass in the brightest spotlight he could find.

He brought the Univ. of TN to its knees during his brief and uncaring reign, and it has never really recovered from state legislative funding reprisals against his malfeasance.

Lamar's idea of his average constituent is that of a smelly ignoramus who doesn't know how badly he's being screwed.

"Lamar is for Lamar" sums it up pretty well.

- OS

Edited May 14, 2009 by OhShoot

[Guest Spuds]

How you gonna vote against Alexander? You'll have to find someone to whup up on him in the primary, 'cause most any demoncrat facing him in the general election would be worse. Not saying Alexander ain't bad, just that there are degrees of badness.

Beating him in the primary will be harder than it would be anyway, now that the media has figured out they can select our candidates for us, as with McCain.

I'm all for waterboarding "reporters" and "journalists" so that their true motives are exposed. Wouldn't that be grand?

[GLOCKMEISTER]

What sucks is the next election will possible be Alexander against Ford Jr.... then WT* do we do?

[Guest SUNTZU]

Throw the bums out.

[BBill_TN]

I recieved the following e-mail from NPCA yesterday urging their members to contact their Senators and Representatives to oppose loaded guns in National Parks....I urge you to instead let your Senators and Representatives know that they can trust law abiding citizens with firearms wherever they may go.

"UPDATE: Last Friday we sent you a very important alert about the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act (H.R.627), which holds a dangerous rider that will allow loaded guns in our national parks. Tuesday, May 19th, is our last chance to strike this rider allowing loaded guns in national parks!

Tomorrow, the National Parks Conservation Association is co-hosting a press event with Congressman Raul Grijalva, Chairman of the National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Subcommittee, requesting that President Obama work to withdraw this rider allowing loaded shotguns and rifles in our parks. You can support our event on the hill by taking action now.

This is our final chance to stop the guns rider. Tell your Senators and Representatives to oppose this effort to allow loaded guns in our national parks.

Please take action TODAY to help put a stop to this dangerous rider from becoming law!

*********************************

Dear William,<table style="border: 1px solid rgb(94, 151, 50); margin-bottom: 40px; margin-left: 20px;" align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" width="220"><tbody><tr><td>

</td></tr></tbody></table> What does credit card reform legislation have to do with national parks? We asked ourselves that same question. But the rules of the U.S. SenateSen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) attached a rider to the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act (H.R.627) that would allow individuals to carry loaded rifles, shotguns, and semi-automatic weapons in national parks if the firearm is in compliance with state law.

The Coburn rider overturns the existing, reasonable Reagan-era regulation that allows guns to be transported through national parks as long as they are unloaded and stowed away. Seven former Directors of the Park Service and current and former park rangers oppose the rider because they believe it will increase the risk of poaching and vandalism of historic resources, and put visitors at risk.

So in this difficult economy, when American citizens are looking to their Congress for economic reforms and relief, we see a bill hijacked by special interest groups like the NRA who are reckless in their determination to get loaded guns into our national parks.

Within the next week, the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives could be voting on this bill. Please tell your Senators and Representative that you’re fed up with political gamesmanship, and ask them to stop this dangerous rider from becoming law. Take action now! being what they are,

Thank you!

Thomas C. Kiernan

President

<hr>

This message was sent to you by the National Parks Conservation Association.

E-mail us at npca@npca.org, write to us at 1300 19th Street, NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20036, or call us at 800.NAT.PARK (800.628.7275).

Can't see this message? View it at the NPCA Web Site."

It would be nice if the NRA would send out nice little e-mails with Hypertext to make it as easy for us to communicate our side of the story.

<hr color="#aaaaaa" size="1" noshade="noshade">

Edited May 19, 2009 by BBill_TN
clarity

[analog_kidd]

That e-mail says the bill would allow loaded shotguns and rifles. Is that true? I thought it was just a loaded handgun, and only by permit holders.

[BBill_TN]

"allow individuals to carry loaded rifles, shotguns, and semi-automatic weapons in national parks if the firearm is in compliance with state law."

Could just be just liberal hype....but I guess if the bill reads as "what is legal in the state that the nat'l park is located in" then that would include long guns in states such as Florida that allows Permit Holders to posess long guns. (maybe TN soon?)

This is the liberal hype that caused me to let my Sierra Club membership lapse and to upgrade my NRA membership to Easy Pay Life. I don't mind someone arguing the other side of something, but their blatant attempt to inflame the issue very much irks me.

Their e-mails about the Interior Department Process to change the carry law the last year of the Bush Administration urged members to speak out against it, and when that didn't materialize, it was all of a sudden "midnight legislation".

In fact, their e-mail last year stated "we must keep guns out of our national park," and "the decision would allow loaded guns in our parks," but never mentioned the fact that it would be Handgun Permit Holders and not just everyone. But I guess in states such as Alaska, it would be everyone since you are not required to have a permit in a few states.....but that is a stretch and is along the same lines as our media outlets coverage of these issues.