You are here

Senators Pushing To Allow Concealed Weapons in National Parks

Share

Should national park visitors be allowed to carry concealed weapons?

There's a move under way in the U.S. Senate to have Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne reverse the National Park Service's ban against the public carrying concealed weapons in the national parks.

This is a highly charged issue, as long-time readers of the Traveler well know. The latest push is being led by U.S. Senator Mike Crapo, an Idaho Republican. Mr. Crapo says the Park Service's ban needs to be overturned in part because different land-management agencies have different rules on concealed carry and that can be confusing to gun owners. The senator also claims the prohibition infringes gun owners' rights.

In a somewhat related matter, Texas officials who want to sell the Christmas Mountains, a nearly 9,300-acre range near Big Bend National Park, are resistant to selling the land to the Park Service because of its ban on weapons.

Comments

Your lack on understanding confounds me. You must live in a shell and never be exposed to the real world if you don't believe the necessity of self defense and firearms. Maybe you will turn up as one the the "lone hikers" found to be the victim of crime on a hiking trail with no way of defending yourself. I hope for your sake that you are not caught in the same circumstance as Meredith Emerson, recently murdered while hiking in NC. I'm sure she did not understand the need for firearms either.


I must assume your comments were pointed in my direction due to your poor reference to my user ID. The only item that should confound you is your and many other posters to these gun issues lack of original thought regarding methods of self-defense. It seems as though without your guns you're totally out of your element, which doesn't bode well for you in times of true crisis when one is forced to respond in an emergency with quick thinking and actions rather than brute force. The sad truth of the matter is that if and when one of you is finally confronted with an armed person intent on doing harm, your weapon will be of little use since they will already "have the drop on you" as the saying used to go. Generally, in this type of encounter, the person who "displays" first has neutralized the other party most effectively, to the point of relieving you of your "protection", if you should be in possession of such. That's the cold reality of these encounters, which is never told by the NRA. What logic do you follow that because your piece is "concealed" that you'll be any more safe than would anyone else? Is it the general consensus that unless your gun is visible you're assumed not to be carrying? Is it also conventional wisdom that dictates you won't be assaulted prior to your ability to utilize your weapon? Do any of you really believe that these creitons give a rat's ass if you're armed or not? The chances of you escalating your attacker's norepinepherine level to an most unfavorable conclusion by them detecting your arms are now far greater, since they feel you were out to do THEM harm and thereby why would they not seek to end the perceived threat to THEIR lives?

And just exactly what in your lack of critical thinking skills would make you assume that I and others like myself are not equipped to defend ourselves, just because we make the conscious effort to NOT carry the extra burden of firearms? Speaking strictly for myself, I have no issues with one of these lower-intellect morons "relieving" me of my chosen method of protection. That's actually what I'm counting on if such an incident were to occur. Go ahead, take it......by all means, open it! That will serve as your last action on God's earth, and provided I'm still alive, yes, I will indeed sleep soundly at night knowing there's one (or more) less of them in the world. If I'm not still alive, 1-for-1 is a fair exchange, and since I'm not trying to set any longevity records, I could care less. I like my plan much better. It's lighter to carry, doesn't look dangerous and I don't have to be concerned with being accurate. Simple and fool-proof, what could be better? I can't be responsible for the fact that you didn't think of it first and chose the hard way.


As a veteran in a wheelchair I always carry my concealed weapon because you just never know who wants to do you harm. This includes are national parks. I have very few options if me or my family were in danger. I wish I lived in Lone Hikers world but I dont I live in reality.


Dear Lone Hiker. I live in Cody wyoming and something that big city folks do not understand because they have been brainwashed for years now is that the honest concealed weapons permit holders are not your enemy! These folks have been through complete background checks and are found to be quality citizens and are the most decent patriotic folks I have ever known. Do you really believe that criminals don't travel into National Parks? Do you really believe that while camping in one of these parks no one in the very same campground is already carrying weapons, and that a percentage of these folks aren't of a criminal mind set? One more thing, you either believe in all of the constitution or you believe in none of it! You cannot pick and choose which rights you wish to believe in. You may not agree with all of them but as a true American you must stand up to protect them. I do not believe that the 1st amendment was written to protect Hollywood scum bags from bad mouthing our country and putting porn on cable T.V. but I have to stand up for the 1st amendment as an American and you and others need to do the same for the 2nd. What you do not seem to realize is that if we loose one of our amendments others will follow and the it will be to late. You and your children are completely safe being around concealed weapons permit holders. In fact, if something were to happen these same folks may save your life and the lives of your family. not the other way around.


Yes, bear spray works. I live in Wyoming and know this. What you need to understand is that this is not about bears. This is a right of the people and if you are afraid of the honest man who carries a gun [then] you are afraid of freedom and should think about moving to Europe.


Dear Anonymous:

what is it about a certain strain of opinionators who seem to say THEIR opinion is simply about freedom, and everyone who disagrees should just leave the country?

Is it the SIMPLICITY of it, and the inability to recognize the complexity of the situation? Or is it the inability to tolerate any opinion but their own, and to seek a country with people exactly like them? Will these people remain wracked in anxiety as long as they can identify the possibility of any other point of view? And when they achieve such beautiful uniformity in the USA, will they be content to stop here, or find causes of anxiety and instability throughout the world??

Now, tell me again, what is your idea of freedom? You can use the little words, it will be ok.


Dear Anonymous:

I was thinking about your comment " this is not about bears.. . . this is a right of the people. . "

You make this sound as if a Right does not have a practical basis. All the points were put there in the constitution because they actually MEANT something and were NEEDED.

Did you hear the Mayor of Chicago rant about the Supreme Court Decision and the rule of law? He seemed to be saying that we have come a ways in our civilization, it was now a body of law, and individual guns alone are no longer required to create 'order.' I think, originally, guns were permitted, among other reasons precisely because of bears and the peoples' need to protect themselves. Also because at the time, we had no standing army.

Times change. Oliver Wendel Holmes said dishonestly crying "FIRE" in a crowded theater was not free speech. so, just how many theaters do you think actually existed when the Framers wrote "congress shall make NO LAW . . " abridging free speech? Do you think Holmes was right to place the original provision in the context of the current reality?

Rights exist in the real world. They are not abstractions.

I just read the thread about the kid being tossed by the bison. I was thinking: what would have happened if the parents had a gun? If they had a gun, "honest" or not, I hate to think what would have happened next.

Unless you are seeking the right of revolution -- are you?? -- there is no practical basis in today's world for guns in parks. The discharge of weapons, inevitable if guns are permitted, compromises the peace and quite for people and wildlife that are essential to a national park.


Your statistic "crimes of passion by pissed off drunks and other bodily injuries directly attributable to the card carrying (and other) gun owners of our land. " is simply not true. Those types of crimes are commited by people not legally carrying a weapon. Please get your facts straight before you start spouting that off. There are very very few incidents of people licensed to carry being involved in shootings at all, and even less where any criminal behavior is involved.

Your arguments show a serious lack of maturity as well. "Keep that stupid machine away..." wow you sound intelligent. Please if you are going to be involved in this kind of a discussion be an adult about it. Not a deliquent.

I would encourage you to show me any specific instance where a legal concealed weapon carrier illegally used his weapon to shoot someone or something in public. Good luck, you will need it.

Thanks for your input, it was not useful or tasteful, nor did it argue your point very well. Please review some tips on debating before speaking again.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.