Guns in national parks: Will you feel safer?
Will allowing people to carry guns in national parks make people safer?
Monday may bring a change in how you feel when you enter a national park or wildlife refuge. That’s the day a new law goes into effect that will allow people to carry firearms into national parks and refuges in states where right-to-carry laws exist. Oklahoma is one of those states.
(Read about it here: http://www.newsok.com/new-law-on-firearms-to-take-effect-in-oklahoma-parks/article/3441105?custom_click=pod_headline_politics)
I think there’s going to be two camps on this.
First, you’ll have people who will feel safer knowing they can be armed in these places, just in case they run into troublesome people or dangerous wildlife.
The second group will feel more unsafe. You’ll never know who is armed, and anytime there is a confrontation, firearms bring a whole new sense of alarm into the equation. Once you pull that trigger, there’s no taking it back.
There are stories of crime in National Park System, though they are pretty rare. Rarer still are animal encounters where predators or other large animals attack people. Neither has been a problem for me.
I’ve also hiked with people who brought a sidearm and didn’t feel uncomfortable with them, though in a backpacking scenario it just seemed like needless added weight.
But I know others will feel differently.
I’ve written about this topic before, and I’ve received a good number of responses from folks. Here in Oklahoma most people I’ve talked to think the right to carry a firearm is guaranteed by the law and is simply a precaution for those rare instances where deadly force might be needed for self-defense. A few others disagreed.
So how do you feel? Will you feel safer? Or do you think the law will make national parks less safe? Comment here or send me an e-mail. I’d like to know.
Bob Doucette
bdoucette@opubco.com
Thank you for joining our conversation on Out There. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
The only people with any reason to fear properly licensed, law-abiding citizens being armed anywhere, are those who would otherwise be inclined to prey upon previously unarmed individuals. There just aren’t any cases of licensed concealed weapons carriers causing any trouble, or abusing their weapons in any way. This is a lot of angst over a non-issue.
Yes I will feel safer. I also feel criminals will be less inclined to attack innocent people knowing weapons may be present.
I will feel much safer. I dont worry at all about anyone carrying a weapon that has a concealed weapons licence. I worry about the ones that are not licensed carrying firearms. At least I have hope of protection legally carrying my own rather than no protection at all. At least you have a chance to protect yourself and loved ones from some idiot(s) that may have robbery or rape in mind when you are in somewhat of a remote area.
Its about time !
A vicious attack by a bad guy is just as serious, regardless of whether it occurs inside or outside a National Park. Being able to carry a concealed weapon inside a Natl Park will not increase crime – in fact, it will very likely reduce crime.
“You’ll never know who is armed”
Do you know who is armed now? Just because there was a law didn’t mean people didn’t do it anyway.
Is Oklahoma turning so liberal that that question even has to be asked?Why fear a law abiding citizen that has been thru background checks by the FBI and OSBI and taken classes to be able to carry a gun?Why give scum of the earth criminals who don’t care if they can carry a gun in the parks or not the upperhand?This is a no brainer question from someone that needs to go back to nyc.
I think it’s a legitimate question, only because I’ve spent time in the backcountry and have calculated the need or desire to have a firearm with me. I don’t see this as a liberal or conservative question. It’s just a question. Personally, I don’t carry in Oklahoma because the potential benefits are outweighed by having to lug around dead weight that otherwise has no function for me. Others see it differently. But if I were backpacking on Wyoming, Montana or Alaska, it’s a different story.
“Should I have the right to protect my life, my family’s life and my property?”
Absolutely! While hiking in the backwoods might be one thing, how about loading a $40,000 bass boat loaded with thousands of dollars worth of gear late at night at some isolated boat ramp. Unfortunately this ramp is located in “Meth World” and all those cute little rods and reels can be sold untraceable by some cranker needing a fix. Desperate meth heads will do what they have to do for a fix, I know this due to years of law enforcement work. I plan on coming home safe and sound with all my gear, my grandkids and any friends that might be in attendance.
We don’t live in a perfect world, but if we hog-tie the law abiding citizens with the liberal passive response agenda, we will become pawns for those who could care less about law abiding citizens’ rights.
Signed…
Insured by Geico and Springfield Armory.
Finally, I won’t have to check my weapon at the entrance, and can leave it handy, where it belongs.
I will feel safer in the parks – not that I didn’t feel safe before, but wild animals are part of the point of a park, and wild animals tend to do wild animal things.
I generally avoid getting close enough to get myself in trouble, but that doesn’t mean I know where all the critters are all of the time.
Having the ability to defend myself and my family in the best manner available to me only seems right.
I haven’t heard of any shootings in the NP yet, so it must be a good thing.
Guns in national parks: Will you feel safer?
Yes, you bet I will!