The second amendment does not give you a right to carry a firearm wherever you want - it gives you the right to carry a firearm in your home and some other places.
For example, you do not have the right to carry a firearm onto my property.
Public property is more of a grey area - in the case of national parks we should come to some sort of agreement on what conditions are necessary for people to be carrying firearms. For example, no one questions that you do not have the right to carry a firearm into a federal courtroom.
You have the right to express outrage that the citizenry here discuss the issue and are examining the pros and cons, but I can’t take that outrage seriously. We have a duty as citizens to examine the pros and cons of such policy because it’s not as clear as the courtroom or home examples.
I lived in National Park Service housing for three years, and Washoe has apparently also. None of us are treating the National Parks as anything other than they are.
Since it’s public property, it’s not just your decision, it’s our decision (the “us” including you, of course .)
Well, yeah. Why can’t I be concerned about whether the person camping next to me has a concealed weapon? It’s safe to assume that if the law permits concealed weapons, more people will carry them? And that some of those people who may lawfully be carrying weapons may not be the most stable individuals.
Yes and no. I don’t feel the fear is groundless as long as their is gun crime. But, yes, if there is no rise in crime rates, against people or animals, on federal parks and conservation areas, then I will concede that the ban on loaded, concealed weapons in national parks and wildlife refuges has no teeth.
Golden Gate National Recreation Area, 2003-2005, plus a short stint in Yosemite.
In GGNRA, it was ex-army housing that had the exact same floor plan that my parents had lived in during their time in the army in Korea. Sadly, the current plan suggests taking that housing out in the next 5 yrs or so, which stinks for park employees - the San Francisco Area is expensive to live in.
I hope the housing in Zion was in at least as beautiful a place.
Come to think of it, my brother-in-law applied for an administrative position GGNRA in the early 90’s sometime. It was the cost of housing in SF that killed that plan. He and my sister joked about “his and hers cardboard boxes.” They’re divorced now, but he’s been happily ensconced in Olympic NP for several years now.
Are you concerned now? In my opinion, people likely to carry a gun into a park will carry them anyway. I don’t think that making it legal will increase the number dramatically. The ‘unstable individuals’ are probably the most likely to be the ones carrying already, so that won’t change.
To these people who don’t want to allow me to carry a gun to protect me and my family, I have a simple question. If your proposal passes, and I have to leave my gun at home whenever I go to visit (…fill in the blank) are YOU going to provide security for my family, or otherwise compensate me if I fall victim to a violent crime?
Well, I don’t think you could call it a *perfect *record, since officials have revoked CCW permits for firearm-related crimes, though admittedly very, very few. This is actually very compelling evidence that concealed carry is not the bugaboo many of us seem to think it is.
I have, but I will also note that the information isn’t easy to come by. In fact, Florida will not release personally identifying information on its licensees, by law. I would imagine many states are equally protective.* All I’ve got to go on is the expectation that the licensing division is effective in its investigation and administration of its license holders, i.e., that the bureaucracy does actually catch all incidents of illegal use by licensees and accurately reports such aggregate data. I’m not familiar with the revocation process, so I can’t be sure its applied consistently and effectively.
Would it have been better if I had used the term self-loading or double action weapon? Is it incorrect to believe that semi-automatic weapons can do more damage in a shorter period of time than revolvers bolt-action rifles? If I am wrong, it’s fair to educate me.
Because the default is that no weapon exists in the park until someone brings one into it. I’m just wondering what purpose semi-autos serve, outside of combat.
Perhaps it was an inadvertent non-sequitur. My impression is that if the NRA had its way, there would be assault weapons carried into every corner of the country solely because back in the 18th century it was de rigeur to be armed. I’m not fond of this limited reasoning. My statement, as it was given, has little to no relevance to this particular discussion and I revoke it.
Well, not necessarily. According to Florida’s CCW law, you don’t have to be a felon to be deemed ineligible for a firearm license. But yes, you are right, the article was irresponsibly vague and misleading.
That would be very useful, but difficult to produce if the licensing bureaus will not release information on its permit holders.
*Which leads me to the obvious question why is drivers’ license data public but concealed carry licensing is not?
There’s one failure mode you don’t seem to have considered – I’m guessing that the number of people injured accidentally by people plinking away in the woods or just mishandling weapons is going to go up. Although this usage probably remains illegal regardless of whether concealed carry is allowed or not, it’s likely that an increase in the number of handguns will also result in an increase in the number of accidents.
I got bit by centipede once while I was sleeping in my bed. I captured the centipede, threw him in a jar, and preserved him in a little rubbing alcohol. I did this because I had never been bitten by a centipede and wasn’t sure just how serious it could get. I figured if I needed to see a doctor about it then it might be helpful to know exactly what bit me.
I’m not an expert on snakes, venom, or the various kinds of rattle snakes in the U.S. If someone I know was bit by one I would kill the snake so that it could be properly identified. I’d take a photo if I had a camera handy.
Well, yes, as a matter of fact, I am, but the legislation brought the topic to the forefront of my mind.
I recently had a conversation with a customer at work about my desire to hike some of the AT. He informed me that if I decide to go, I should carry a gun in my pack because there are criminals that lie in wait along the trail who will follow you at a distance and attempt to steal all your stuff once you set up camp. I have to say it took me aback that this was the first thing out of his mouth about the AT. Once I got home, I tried to find information about this rampant lawlessness of the AT and predictably, there are a few isolated incidents, but it’s nothing akin to the hotbed of crime he portrayed it to be.
It’s got me thinking that I’m as much a potential victim when I’m filling up at my local gas station that has been robbed at gunpoint several times in the past year as I am while I’m hiking a trail in a state or national park. Incredibly, perhaps naively, I felt safer out on the trail because my perception was that it was relatively crime-free zone. I suppose I should be a bit more practical, but I don’t think I’d feel any safer carrying a gun, nor would I feel any safer knowing that other people on the trail were. Perhaps, I just view the wilderness as an idealistic escape from the violence of humanity all crammed together in cities and suburbs. Now, it feels kind of tainted. Is nothing sacred anymore?
Sigh Perhaps you are right. I hope you are.
Anyway, I do appreciate those who came to discuss this reasonably and not fly off the handle about differing opinions on gun control. I’m trying to wrap my mind around something that, given my background, simply makes no sense to me.
IIRC, rattlers are the only venomous snake west of the Rockies. If I’m wrong, feel free to bitch-slap me silly. If you kill an animal in a National Park, be prepared to incur the wrath of Ranger Bob. I still feel vaguely annoyed with myself for offing a spider and a mouse in Sequoia in ’89. If I could take it back, I would.
I recently had a conversation with a customer at work about my desire to hike some of the AT. He informed me that if I decide to go, I should carry a gun in my pack because there are criminals that lie in wait along the trail who will follow you at a distance and attempt to steal all your stuff once you set up camp. I have to say it took me aback that this was the first thing out of his mouth about the AT. Once I got home, I tried to find information about this rampant lawlessness of the AT and predictably, there are a few isolated incidents, but it’s nothing akin to the hotbed of crime he portrayed it to be.
[QUOTE]
Ahh…the old why does everyone need guns? There is virtually no crime. But I am worried about people with guns commiting crimes paradox. Never gets old I tells ya.
Rangers are the most assaulted federal officers according to this article. I heard the same thing from a ranger at Acadia last year, who was patrolling wearing a bullet proof vest, carrying a gun, a taser, and pepper spray. Places that have big summer camping areas often get quite rowdy and have their own active jails. I’m not sure if introducing concealed weapons will make things safer or not as a whole, but I can certainly see the point of wanting to be armed in those situations.
Personally, I go into the backcountry where this really isn’t an issue. Some folks do carry guns back there but no one seems to care as you don’t interact with others very often.
Sadly, nothing is sacred anymore; as I alluded to in a previous post about it once being normal for people to carry a gun while outdoors. Once upon a time it was normal; now it frightens people.
A friend and his girlfriend went camping on the Olympic Peninsula a couple of years ago. When they returned from their hike, their camp was gone. Someone stole it. This same friend was warned against driving to Alaska, as (he was cautioned) there are a lot of lonely stretches where people will follow travelers to rob them. (I’m not saying it happens; just that this is what someone told him.) There are a lot of people living on the margins; more nowadays, I think, than in times past. Heck, even in the olden days there were crimes. I read about a vagabond in Canada who traveled around killing people. Unless you’re someplace where there are no other people around, there are no crime-free zones. And you really shouldn’t trust you!
When you say ‘I suppose I should be a bit more practical, but I don’t think I’d feel any safer carrying a gun’, being practical doesn’t necessarily mean going armed. It means choosing your campsites carefully. It means not carrying anything you wouldn’t want to lose. It means having a Plan B. As someone who is decidedly Pro-Choice, I support the right of people to choose not to carry a gun. By the same token, there are people who will feel more comfortable armed. I’d guess a good percentage of them would know how to use them too.
It seems to me that one’s desire to not be around people who are legally carrying guns (notwithstanding that there will be armed people when it’s illegal) is lower on the hierarchy than a person’s desire to be able to protect himself or herself in extremis, and here’s why: Your fear is that a law-abiding citizen might ‘snap’ and start shooting, or else will be careless and cause injury. The carrying person’s fear is that someone will slash open his tent at night and at least rob him or her or, through intent or accident, cause bodily harm or death. I think that it makes more sense to fear the miscreant than the person who goes to the trouble of obtaining a permit.
Maybe you could explain what, in your view, differentiates a revolver from a semi-automatic pistol.
When I shoot an ordinary double-action revolver, the pull of the trigger rotates the cylinder, bringing a fresh cartridge into line with the barrel and hammer, and then releases the hammer, which strikes the cartridge and fires the round. In short: I pull the trigger and the gun fires. I can’t hold down the trigger to any effect; I must repeatedly pull the trigger to shoot – one trigger pull equals one bullet fired.
When I shoot a semi-automatic pistol, the pull of the trigger raises and then releases the hammer, which strikes the cartridge and fires the round. The recoil from the fired round causes the slide to spring back, ejecting the empty brass and moving a fresh cartridge from the clip into position; the slide then springs back into position. In short: I pull the trigger and the gun fires. I can’t hold down the trigger to any effect; I must repeatedly pull the trigger to shoot – one trigger pull equals one bullet fired.
So what is it that makes semi-automatics unacceptable to you?
Federal recreation areas ain’t exactly Disneyland. North Rim of the Grand Canyon generally gets about 25 – 30 forcible rapes reported every year. I know a lot of Rangers who won’t touch Yosemite with a ten-foot pole, my sister’s ex-husband being one of them. Statistically speaking, working in any NP along the US—Mexico border (Big Bend, Organ Pipe) is probably more dangerous than working for the LAPD, but that’s just a guess. As it stands right now, working in a commissioned capacity for the NPS is currently the most dangerous form of federal service. An NPS Ranger is fourteen times more likely to get killed on the job than an FBI agent. They handle felony car stops exactly the same way everybody else does: lights flashing, shotguns out, everybody out of the car and down on the ground. I’ve even talked to State Park Rangers who work in parks in and around LA County who won’t always go for the shotgun, but I can’t imagine an NPS Ranger in any of the larger parks not doing so. Yosemite has had its own jail for 40 years now, and during the peak season it’s generally filled to capacity. And the Rangers who subject themselves to these conditions do so for not much more than minimum wage. In the NPS, those guys in Maintenance who drive around in the truck and clean the restrooms make more money than the commissioned Rangers, who also happen to be the most erudite LEO’s it has ever been my pleasure to associate with. How many cops do you know who are devout vegetarians and have master’s degrees in environmental science? Forgive the unabashed swooning, but it’s not often that I get the chance to spout off on the subject.
.)
