Utah Guns Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I got the following email and thought I'd share it. I apologize if something similar has been posted, but I can't keep track of where everything has been posted on this forum. I guess that's why they pay Jeff Johnson the big money :D

From the Utah Shooting Sports Council â€"
ONE MORE TIME - COMMENT NOW TO ALLOW GUNS IN NATIONAL PARKS

Anti-gun congressmen got the comment period extended from June 30th to August 8th. Since then, the Brady bunch and their anti-gun pals have been working overtime to flood the Department of the interior with opposition to allowing guns in National Parks.

Even if you sent comments, before, but ESPECIALLY IF YOU DID NOT YET SUBMIT COMMENTS, YOU NEED TO SEND A COMMENT IMMEDIATELY!!!

Follow the link below, then fill in as much of the personal info as you want to (at least a first name and state) then put a comment in the large block. Then click “next step” at the bottom of the page, and then click “submit” at the bottom of the new page.
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/c ... 648053d497
Here is a suggested comment to cut and paste into the comment block:

I support a rule change to allow law abiding citizens to transport, and/or carry concealed legal self defense weapons in National Parks. With the vast parts of this state controlled by National Parks, this will greatly improve individual safety and self defense options for me and my neighbors.

The proposed rule needs to assimilate state law in a similar manner as National Forests do for the lawful carry of weapons for self-defense. The rules for self-defense weapons in National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges and National Forests should be consistent with the laws of the state in which the Park is located.

Opponents to allowing guns in parks rely on hypothetical fears and scare stories like those raised against legalizing concealed carry in more than 30 states for the last 10 years. Such fears have been proven to be totally false.

Data shows that there are crimes and criminals in National Parks, and approval of the proposed change will allow me to defend myself and my family.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Jeff Johnson said:
Please comment if you haven't.
If you have commented once, please comment again.

The anti-gun groups are trying to overcome the lead we had in the comments.
Done.

DJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
542 Posts
DeeJay said:
Jeff Johnson said:
Please comment if you haven't.
If you have commented once, please comment again.

The anti-gun groups are trying to overcome the lead we had in the comments.
Done.

DJ
and done
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
Done.

That's quite an impressive list of government agencies. :shock: Our tax dollars at work... :|
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,757 Posts
Here's my submission (this is my third comment):

As a law-abiding citizen with a concealed firearm permit, living in a state with many national parks (which I visit annually), I strongly urge the Park Service to adopt either the current proposed rule or, even better, a rule modeled on the USDA rule applied to National Forests, which is simpler, clearer and has been proven with over 70 years of effective use.

I find it unconscionable that citizens are denied both their natural right of self-defense, and their constitutional right to keep and bear arms while visiting the beautiful national parks in this country. Although most (not all!) of the parks have relatively low rates of violent crime, the fact that it's relatively rare does nothing to comfort the women who are raped and the victims of violent assault. Those who have a predilection for crime, whether it's assault against another human or poaching, will carry weapons regardless. The law-abiding should be allowed the means with which to defend themselves.

In addition to the moral imperatives that should drive this rule change, there's also a legal reason to make the change. In the light of the recent DC vs. Heller opinion, the Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that banning firearms is unconstitutional, as is any law that requires them to be stored so as to be useless for self-defense. If this rule change is not implemented as a matter of policy, it will be forced upon the Park Service through the judicial system, imposing a great and needless expense on taxpayers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
295 Posts
Done. My comment was a hybrid of both swillden's and sculptingmyguns's. Constitutional rights for the win!

--Geoff
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,616 Posts
I've submitted my third comment too:
I'd like to write in support of changing the unconscionable policies that
prohibit lawful self-defense in National Parks. I'd also like to protest the
egregious step of extending the comment period for this rule change to cave in
to clearly anti-gun senators who hope that such an extension will give gun-ban
groups the opportunity to rally to oppose the rule change or to run out the
clock on this administration. This is outrageous.

The only problem with the rule change is that it doesn't go far enough. Many
states allow not only concealed carry, but open carry of a firearm for
self-defense. Although the proposed rule change claims to bring your policies
into line with state laws, this is obviously one example where the proposed rule
change falls far short.

Please change the wording of the rule change for National Parks to the following:

"A person may possess, carry, and transport loaded, and operable
firearms or other weapons within a national park area in the same
manner, and to the same extent, that a person may lawfully possess,
carry, and transport loaded and operable firearms or other weapons in
the state in which the federal park, or that portion thereof, is
located, provided that such possession, carrying and transporting
otherwise complies with applicable federal and state law."

And for National Wildlife Refuges:"

A person may possess, carry, and transport loaded, and operable
firearms or other weapons within a national wildlife refuge area in
the same manner, and to the same extent, that a person may lawfully
possess, carry, and transport loaded and operable firearms or other
weapons in the state in which the federal wildlife refuge, or that
portion thereof, is located, provided that such possession, carrying
and transporting otherwise complies with applicable federal and state
law."

Thank you,
Jeff Johnson
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,091 Posts
Just sent in my 2nd commit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,750 Posts
I sent my comment to the Dept of Interior.

Thank you for letting me submit my thoughts on the right to carry a firearm into
Federal Parks. I find the current policy of not allowing firearms in National Parks a
limitation to my 2nd Amendment rights. As a resident of the state of Utah I have
completed all of the necessary paperwork and passed the background checks to
allow me to carry a firearm for self protection.

I am a law abiding citizen and therefore should be allowed to protect myself
against criminals. Criminals do not obey signs like the ones that are posted at the
entrance to your parks. They are already there to break the law so a sign is not
going to stop them. The sign will only alert them to the fact that the law abiding
citizen, who does not have a firearm, will not be able to defend themself.

Because you cannot guaranteee my safety from criminals while I am visiting your
park I am asking you to take a look at your current policy and change it to remove
this limitation on my right to keep and bear arms.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top