Posted on 2/22/2008, 5:44:29 PM by Domandred
Fairfax, Va. - At the request of the Bush Administration and 51 members of the United States Senate led by Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID), the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prohibition of firearms on agency land will be revised in the following weeks. The National Rifle Association (NRA) is leading the effort to amend the existing policy regarding the carrying and transportation of firearms in National Parks and wildlife refuges.
“Law-abiding citizens should not be prohibited from protecting themselves and their families while enjoying America’s National Parks and wildlife refuges,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA chief lobbyist. “Under this proposal, federal parks and wildlife refuges will mirror the state firearm laws for state parks. This is an important step in the right direction.”
These new regulations, when finalized, will provide uniformity across our nation’s federal lands and put an end to the patchwork of regulations that governed different lands managed by different federal agencies. In the past, only Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Forest Service lands allowed the carrying of firearms, while National Park lands did not.
The current regulations on possession, carry or transportation of loaded or uncased firearms in national parks were proposed in 1982 and finalized in 1983. Similar restrictions apply in national wildlife refuges. The NRA believes it is time to amend those regulations to reflect the changed legal situation with respect to state laws on carrying firearms.
The effect of these now-outdated regulations on people who carry firearms for self-protection was far from the forefront at the time these regulations were adopted. As of the end of 1982, only six states routinely allowed citizens to carry handguns for self-defense. Currently, 48 states have a process for issuance of licenses or permits to allow law-abiding citizens to legally carry firearms for self-defense.
The move for regulatory change by the Administration will restore the rights of law-abiding gun owners who wish to transport and carry firearms for lawful purposes in most National Park lands and will make the laws consistent with state law where these lands are located. Fifty-one U.S. Senators from both parties sent a letter to the Department of Interior late last year supporting the move to render state firearms laws applicable to National Park lands.
“These changes will respect the Second Amendment rights of honest citizens, and we look forward to the issuance of a final rule this year,” concluded Cox.
I tend to agree with you on that!
Sometimes? LOL
-—I suspect there will be much heat, little light and much noise over this proposed change—and why should it take all year?
BTW, it’s federal land. Shouldn’t federal rules apply? To heck with California, New York and other liberal bastions. Impose the federal rules on federal land and be done with it. And make those rules comply with the U.S. Constitution and nothing else.
Oh no! People carrying weapons in National Parks??? It’ll be just like the OK Corral. We are doomed, I say...doomed.
</sarc>
Finally, they have done something to support the second amendment. I commend you Bush Administration.
“BTW, it’s federal land. Shouldn’t federal rules apply? To heck with California, New York and other liberal bastions. Impose the federal rules on federal land and be done with it. And make those rules comply with the U.S. Constitution and nothing else.”
I agree with your sentiments, but we have to learn from the libs. Incrementalism.... We get this law today and more tomorrow so eventually we get the second amendment back!
At least now we’ll be on par with the Mexican Drug cartels who have us out armed in the parks and forests.
http://towncriernews.blogspot.com/search?q=invasion+800+miles
(photos of armed illegal alien drug cartel encampments)
I believe you have a valid opinion there. I just refuse to acknowledge that we don’t have the Second Amendment today.
Bush’s solicitor general sent a breif to the Supreme Court regarding the D.C. case, and it suggested carve outs by municipalities were justified.
We’ve only been waiting a lifetime for the upcoming ruling, and our ilustrious president sought to blur the issue. Folks will have to forgive me for having steam coming out of my ears right now.
“Folks will have to forgive me for having steam coming out of my ears right now.”
Totally understandable. What I don’t understand is that I have posted many criticisms on here about Bush. A good example of one would be to criticize his justice department brief concerning Heller. However, I have posters on here saying that we shouldn’t be criticizing Bush and that we are the ones fracturing the conservative base. Like we are all supposed to follow after Bush or McCain like lemmings.
I will commend Bush when he does conservative things and when he is acting like a liberal gun grabber (like his Justice department amicus brief) I will be criticizing him vehemently!!!
I understand there are stupid liberal Obama koolaid drinkers. It saddens me to find out that there are Bush koolaid drinkers.
What is going on with President Bush. This is the second blow to second amendment rights in the past few months. Second Amendment issues was one of the items, up until recently, he stayed consistent on.
The Republicans want to stall until after the November election, then let the idea die.
I wrote my senator to see if he’d at least put his name on the bill as well. Sounds like it might not be needed, but probably good to put it on USCode so the next administration can’t just take it away on a whim in a year.
George Bush Administration?
Request? They're his employees. Tell them to do it and if they don't, FIRE THEM. Why in the hell does he have to request anything?
The move for regulatory change by the Administration will restore the rights of law-abiding gun owners who wish to transport and carry firearms for lawful purposes in most National Park lands
This is pretty much the opposite of what his admin's brief to DC said.
That pretty much covers my thoughts on it too. I will say that I am becoming more and more unable to defend Bush on even issues where he should be defended. I am sick to death of his idiotic sophmoric blunders and I have reached the point where I can only wish for him to be gone next January more than I can tell you. His Kosovo act is just one more in a string of ignorant moves that will cause problems all over the globe.
Either he is totally clueless, or he is sharing an agenda that I cannot sign on to.
Thanks, I had misread who did what.
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.