Guns In National Parks Amendment

[LuciferSam]

I wonder how many army, navy, air force, marine, coast guard and retired of such, policemen, firemen, national guardsmen and who ever else protects us shop at Walmart. I even wonder how many concealed weapons permit holders belly up at Walmart. I also wonder how many bubba walmart shoppers have died serving our country so you and I can eat our hotdogs (from Walmart) today. I believe that I would gravitate to the Bubba at Walmart side. From reading a couple of posts on here(not yours) I know the Bubba's have a more level thought process.

Everybody shops at Wal-mart from time to time, however I don't consider members of our miltary, police and fire to be Bubbas by and large. I don't consider all gun holders to be Bubbas. For me the term Bubba is never a compliment or a positive label. Sorry!

 

[steyou]

now i understand...everyone's overreacting like me. i see your point, but i think many who are panicking are mixed up by the confluence of bad economy/new administration. all those folks who have served and seen the rest of the world should know things will stabilize here....without guns in yosemite.

You are not overreacting. You are just passionate which is good for conversation. Without guns in Yosemite,well, agree ti disagree. Hope you have a great day.

 

[steyou]

Everybody shops at Wal-mart from time to time, however I don't consider members of our miltary, police and fire to be Bubbas by and large. I don't consider all gun holders to be Bubbas. For me the term Bubba is never a compliment or a positive label. Sorry!

Bubba has positive and negative connotations. I use it with a positive connotation. There are plenty of Bubba's in our service personnel, negative and positive.

 

[wrobert]

I have seen some news blips that Obama has signed the bill. Where is the closest National Park anyway?

 

[30ashopper]

leave 6thgen out of it if you wish to qualify a personal attack. 6thgen can more than carry the weight. you, on the other hand, sound like me 20 years ago. you'll learn inflexibility isn't the path. now go buy some 44 magnum shells, the leninists want your wallet.

You're right, that was an innapropriate post. My apologies.

 

[Lady D]

Yes, it is a reason and a damn good one.

We outlawed carrying guns in national parks in 1930 to combat poaching.

No dangers exist in our national parks that you would need to carry a gun for - thus there is no reason to change this rule and allow you to carry one.

Park rangers carry sidearms for law enforcement purposes, not for protection from marauding wildlife.

I do not think people are worried as much about the four legged predator obviously as they are the two legged variety. We spent a couple of nights at Chickasaw State Park a few days before Christmas a few years ago, no one else was there staying in any of the other 11 cabins. We were down in the cove with no one else around. And people would come riding through by the cabins that lived farther down the highway. Don't think for one minute that they are not capable of committing crimes. Everyone is capable of that, just not everyone would do such a thing, and they are out there, everywhere. If you did not have a gun with you, how would you fight off someone that sneaked up on you when in your tent, or broke into your cabin. By the time you call the Park Ranger, or 911, it could be too late. I'm all for it.

 

[Winnie]

I have seen some news blips that Obama has signed the bill. Where is the closest National Park anyway?

Gulf Islands National Seashore - Okaloosa Island

 

[Geo]

For me, the issue is not the issue...

For me, the issue is that a reversal of existing gun legislation was stuffed into something completely unrelated and seems to have passed (or is ready to) but not on its own merit. Someone (I think Shopper) said he believes bills should all be standalone. Totally agree...

 

[Geo]

I am often labelled a liberal or a democrat here. But believe it or not, I formulate opinions on an issue by issue basis. Gun control is a tough one for me. I don't hunt and at present- I don't own a gun. But this is a personal choice. It seems to me that the constitution preserves the right for citizens to have guns. Some would argue this is muddy and wasn't intended for Joe Sixpack. I personally believe it isn't all that muddy and that our founders did indeed write this for Joe...

I do believe not just any Joe should be able to carry. There should be rigorous standards in place. And I do not believe that any Joe's right to have a gun should automatically include automatic weapons/military assault rifles. But I don't know where/how to draw the line. But one should be drawn...

I believe it is silly that some Joes are stocking up on ammo because Obama is in office and/or because "things are about to get bad". But my thought is if it is their right to do it then it matters not that I think it is silly. So stock up, Joe. It's your right...

If the constitution says a Joe can have a gun within US borders then I haven't seen any data to support how that right is/should continue to be negated within a park that is within US borders.

But per my previous post, the legislation shouldn't be added into legislation mostly related to Credit Card companies and their policies...

End rant...

 

[LuciferSam]

I'm on the fence about this one. In a park you are living in a rural community where there isn't enough law enforcement to stop or deter crime. On the other hand if everybody in the park were armed, that wouldn't make me feel safe either. No matter what, if you spend time out in the wilderness, youre assuming some risk. I guess metrics could be applied if this passes. See how the number of new accidental shootings compares to the number of murders before the bill was passed. That would just give an overall idea of how much safer the parks have become statistically. As far as rights, I don't think anyone has an automatic right to have a gun at a National Park any more than he has a right to enter without paying.