You are here

NPCA Backs Call For Ban On Assault Weapons

Share

Four years after it lobbied hard against a proposal to allow national park visitors to arm themselves with firearms, the National Parks Conservation Association is backing a move to block assault weapons sales.

NPCA President Tom Kiernan last week called U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein's legislation to ban the "sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing" of a wide range of assault weapons one step towards making national parks safer for visitors and wildlife.

The senator's legislation if signed into law would not only ban 150 specifically-named assault weapons, but also "an additional group of weapons that accept detachable ammunition magazines and have one or more military characteristics," said Mr. Kiernan in a prepared statement. "The bill would also ban high-capacity ammunition magazines. If passed, this bill would apply to our national parks. The National Parks Conservation Association strongly supports it and encourages Congress to vote for it.

"Nearly four years ago, a law was enacted allowing guns in national parks, specifically authorizing people to carry firearms into national parks to the extent allowed under state law. We aggressively opposed the 'guns in parks' law which made it legal for people to carry assault weapons into many national park units. Some states also allow for open carry of such weapons," he went on. “National parks are places where families, wildlife watchers, recreationists, international travelers and so many others go to enjoy the scenic beauty, historical meaning and cultural diversity of our national heritage.

"Assault weapons have no place in the National Park System unless they are in a museum. We applaud and support Senator Feinstein’s effort to make our national parks safer for all visitors and wildlife.”

Comments

Well, once again it's been fun, but things have digressed so far away from the parks that we're shutting this one down. Any input on rebuilding the Newfound Gap Road?


he NRA spokesperson opened their mouth

Thats right - the NRA spokesperson hasn't ever talked before. No one knew their position before - (eyes rolling)

and what weapons are for civilian protection

The civilian protection envisioned by our founders was the protection from the government. Thus, they wanted the citizens armed on par (in not superior) to the government. And given the way our government is moving today, I think that is as relevant now if not more so.

BTW - Here is the position of the County Sherrifs of Colorado on the proposed gun legislation released today.

http://www.csoc.org/ppdocs/GunControlLegislation.pdf

Essentially identical to that of the NRA. I guess we must have a bunch of kooks as Sherrifs. Funny how they keep getting elected.


Thanks, rmackie. Very nice of you!

Also, regarding your experience concerning the legal system versus justice, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor gave a speech yesterday in which she said:

“You’re not God. Because hopefully, God is more merciful than sometimes you can be as a judge."

Quote available at this unpleasant website, with its intrusive popup ads:

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/01/28/supreme-court-justice-sotoma...


ecbuck, what happened is...the NRA spokesperson opened their mouth, and not everyone agrees with their position. The sheeple are the ones that think the NRA propaganda is gospel. I am not for removing all guns, but having better balance with background check, and what weapons are for civilian protection could be talked about without the NRA telling us what to think.


BTW Lee - Maybe we should ban private airplanes. After all nobody really needs one and there are more people killed in private airplane crashes than by "assault" rifles. In fact, more than by rifles of any kind. And it looks like the problem is getting worse.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-19/pilots-deadly-private-plane-cra...


Lee - maybe you should stop buzzing peoples houses by the airport.


my empathy is with the NPCA position, banning "assault" weapons in parks has my support

Unfortunately, that is not their position.


imtnbke, I to appreciate your very informative post regarding the 2008 "Heller" decision, thank you. I was involved in a class action suit (many years ago) by a group of NPS employees vs. the Secretary of the Interior, James Watt, over rental rates for government housing. We were meeting with our attorney at MacGeorge Law School (Sacramento, Calif), where he was also a professor. We had a couple of plaintiff officers who were pounding the table demanding justice in this dispute, no quarter given. I remember the professor telling us, "95% of those demanding their rights or justice in a court of law should be on their hands knees begging for mercy". It did give our group pause for consideration. I do not know imtnbke, but my empathy is with the NPCA position, banning "assault" weapons in parks has my support, but truly enjoy reading your arguments and comments on this listserve.


National Parks Traveler's Essential Park Guide