SUN EDITORIAL:

Keep those guns packed

Current push to change rule on guns in national parks makes no sense

Monday, May 5, 2008 | 2:05 a.m.

National parks are among the safest places in the country, which is why there is no good reason to allow their visitors to carry loaded, concealed weapons.

But that isn’t stopping half of the U.S. Senate and Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne from pushing for a rule change that would allow many visitors to be armed as they hike or cruise through national parks.

This year Kempthorne received letters from 50 senators — 41 of them Republicans — requesting a loosening of gun restrictions in the national parks. The letters’ wording was drafted by Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, who told the Associated Press there was no particular reason or incident that led to the sudden push.

“It’s more a matter of, why not?” Crapo said. “We’ve got a guy who’s a Westerner as interior secretary. He certainly understands these issues.”

Kempthorne served as governor of Idaho and as a U.S. senator from that state.

There may be no particular reason to support the change, other than catering to voters who oppose any and all gun control measures, but there are plenty of reasons to oppose the change, say people with years of experience managing national parks.

The Association of National Park Rangers, the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees and the U.S. Park Rangers Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police are among the groups opposing any change.

The current rule allows licensed gun owners to bring their guns into the parks, but the guns have to be packed away so they are not immediately accessible.

This rule was adopted 25 years ago to cut down on target shooting, killing of animals for sport, stray bullets that hit campers, impulsive gunplay and poaching in national parks — all of which had become serious problems. There is agreement among the various national parks advocacy groups that the rule has worked extraordinarily well.

Without any better reason than “Why not?” to work with, Kempthorne is wrong to be proposing any change.

Discussion: 6 comments so far…

By saladin

5/5/08 at 8:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

As a legally armed citizen, why is it I lose these rights upon entering a National Park?

All of the reasons stated "target shooting,poaching ,etc" are already illegal, banned etc. Someone engaging in these acts are criminals by conduct.

Add to this the multiple wild animal attacks that we have experienced in the past year and I feel that this makes the case for allowing firearms in these area's.

The US Park Rangers, Hummmm? Bet they carry firearms don't they ? But that is "just in case they need them". If the National Parks are so safe, why ?

The writer needs to research the high incidence of violent crime (drug manufacturing,growing) that appears to be taking place in these "Gun Free Zones"that are our National Parks!

Is it too simple a concept to use the exsisting Laws of the States the these areas are located in? Naw, that makes too much un-common sense!

To quote an old saying:
"Why do I Legally Carry Concealed ?"
" I can't fit a cop in my pocket"
By dan_wild

5/5/08 at 1:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

In "Keep those guns packed" we read "...there is no good reason to allow their visitors to carry loaded concealed weapons." What we have is some individual exercising their First Amendment Right of freedom of Speech, or of the press in order to continue to Deprive the People of their Second Amendment Right to keep and bear Arms.
A 'good reason' is Not a requirement or prerequisite to exercise Constitutional Rights. I suggest that those individuals and groups who wish to undermine the Rights of the People move to some other country as soon as possible.
By Johnathan_Abbinett

5/5/08 at 7:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

I don't need to meet someone else's definition of a "good reason" to carry my weapon - it's my 2nd Amendment Right to do so for any reason I deem adequate!

Obviously the unamed delusional writer of this "editorial" doesn't live in America in 2008!

Given the rising crime, as well as the possibility of wild animals, I'm going to carry my weapon whenever I feel it's necessary to be prepared to defend myself, loved ones - and the naive, idealistic, unarmed pacifist around me!

If you've never been face-to-face with a Bear, well, you probably don't realize how well armed Bears are? Just so you know they have really big, sharp claws (the size of human fingers), as well as really, big, sharp teeth - and they are very big and very, very strong - and amazingly fast on their feet! Only an idiot would go into any one of our National Parks unarmed!

Let's GET REAL, most of us don't live in elaborate, gated communities with licensed armed guards and a private police force protecting us at home - and we don't have licensed and armed chaffuers and body-guards getting through traffic to a secured parking, and work in highly secured corporate headquarters with expensive security systems with trained and experienced security professionals watching over our every movement every moment!

Though all of us that are law abiding citizens, hope to never, ever have to draw our weapons, and would do so only under the rule of law as an absolute last resort - our weapons must be readily available to do so! The other 95% of us need our 2nd Amendment Right to keep and bear arms! Like the previous commenter stated, "I can't put a cop in my pocket!"
By Pourshot

5/6/08 at 3:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

I believe *A* (as in ONE) letter asking the National Parks to change their rules is up to 51 supporting senators now. Gee, a bi-partisan effort that includes over half of the senate. What a convenient fact to leave out!

The Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) has been working this issue for going on 6 years and has already filed a Petition for Rule Making that requested this change. All it asked was that the gun laws of the state you are in apply to the National Park property that (NP) that reside in the state that you are in so you do not, all of a sudden, find your self to be in a NP with your gun and thus a lawbreaker. This is a much bigger issue in Virginia where just driving down a road, making no turns, you can suddenly find yourself in an unmarked National Park. This is a self defense issue. The National Park service, after it denied the VCDL Petition For Rule Making 2 years after it was submitted, stated the NPs were / are safe, but about the same time several stories appeared where researchers we no longer going into some NPs based on the meth labs, pot farms, and drug mules that were using the NPs.

Yes, the NPs may be safe, but they are not perfectly safe. If you are not a crime victim the crime rate is 0%, but if you are a crime victim the rate is 100% no matter how many crimes there are in the park. Therefore I prefer to have my gun holstered at my side. The same as when I go to Walmart or Home Depot. Guns SAVE Lives!
By Poster7

5/6/08 at 9:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

Have you ever noticed that these liberals tell us that in the national parks there is not enough crime to warrant the law-abiding carrying a gun... and then tell us that inner-cities have too much crime to warrant the law-abiding carrying a gun?

These people simply oppose the 2nd Amendment of our US Constitution and will never trust law-abiding Americans. To them, government is our protector and our god.
By RAH

5/8/08 at 10:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

There is no logical reason to deprive citizens their Constitutional right to keep and bear firearms within National Parks. It is even possible that with a positive Heller decision that the Federal government would have no authority to rule on guns in Federal lands

It is ridiculous to deprive a Constitutional right because it would make it easier for rangers to know who the poachers are from other people carrying firearms. If a poaching incident happens then the rangers have to use proper investigative techniques to determine who did the poaching rather than assume anyone with a rifle or handgun is poaching.

Most of the people wanting to restore their right are for handguns for personal protection. Poachers do not use handguns generally to poach. If vandals shoot signs then they can be convicted of vandalism. There is no reason that they need to prevent lawful carry to reduce vandalism or poaching.

Though the author talks about odds, that is no comfort to Meredith Emerson this last January when she was attacked and held prisoner for 4 days and then killed. She fought her attacker but did not have a gun. If she had the she may be living today. So you think it is better for Ms. Emerson to die to make you feel more comfortable about people having defensive weapons in National Parks.

I recall that 2 women died at Snoqualmie Pass a year or so ago. The presence of meth labs and smugglers of drugs across the Southwest have been so bad that rangers are wearing armor vests and have told biologists that not to go to a park because the danger is so great.

There are increasing incidents of bear attacks in campgrounds and now that there are more cougars, they also have become a risk. The attacks are rare but why should a child die from lack of preparedness to make gun phobic people comfortable.

It is surprising that park rangers are now considered more at risk than FBI agents. Self defense is a natural right and it is morally abhorrent that you feel than people ought to be deprived of that right and possibly die to make you feel comfortable about the serenity of the National Parks

« Previous Ten Next Ten »

Live chat: Tuesday, noon PST; Chat with Krista Creelman; Problem Gambling Center executive director Krista Creelman will answer questions about gambling addiction from Las Vegas Sun readers from noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. ... Submit question