Group Assails Coburn Gun Law for National Parks
A group of retired U.S. Park Service employees is warning that visitors at national parks will soon be seeing handguns and rifles at the nation’s parks because of a law sponsored by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Muskogee, last year.
The law, which goes into effect in less than two weeks, will allow people to carry firearms in parks located in states that permit the carrying of concealed weapons.
Coburn’s controversial amendment was included on a bill to put new restrictions on credit card companies. Here’s a quote from Coburn from last May:
“It’s not about guns. It’s about states’ rights — being able to determine what’s best for them. And it’s about the Second Amendment. It’s not about bureaucrats telling Americans when their rights are going to be taken away.”
And here is the press release about the law taking effect:
TUCSON, AZ.//February 9, 2010//Assault rifles on Mather Point overlooking the Grand Canyon? Handguns on the Filene Center concert lawn at Wolf Trap in the Washington, D.C. suburbs? Shotguns at Lamar River Valley in the backcountry at Yellowstone National Park, the world’s first national park?
These are just some of the things that Americans can reasonably expect to see in national parks across the U.S. as of February 22, 2010, when a dangerous new gun law will go into effect in our nation’s national park areas. To mark this unfortunate development, the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees (CNPSR) is highlighting what visitors may soon experience in 11 representative national parks.
An amendment to the Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights Act of 2009, authored by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), and promoted by the NRA, passed by the Congress and signed into law by the President on May 22 of last year, permits park visitors to possess firearms in national park areas consistent with the laws of the state in which the area is located.
This is a significant departure from long-established, common-sense gun regulations that allowed visitors to possess guns in parks only if they were stowed out of reach and unloaded.
Doug Morris, a member of the CNPSR Executive Council and a former law enforcement ranger and park superintendent in the NPS for many years, said: “We believe that the public should be aware of the consequences of Coburn’s amendment. While federal law prohibits the carrying of guns in any federal building where federal employees work on a regular basis, in many states there are few, if any, other prohibitions.”
While scores of national parks will be impacted to one extent or another, CNPSR highlighted the following 11 parks to show the range of likely harms:
Yellowstone National Park (WY, MT, ID): In the world’s first national park – Yellowstone, while watching Old Faithful erupt you could be in the company of other park visitors wearing holsters and hand guns. In the evening campfire circle, you may sit next to someone who can legally carry a shotgun or rifle to that special place. Anyone hiking in the backcountry can openly carry guns, increasing the risk to other hikers and park wildlife.
Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts (VA): Virginia’s gun laws are very permissive. The grounds of Wolf Trap, including the “lawn seating area,” will be open to people carrying firearms.
Grand Canyon National Park (AZ): Arizona’s gun laws are very permissive and while standing on Mather Point, enjoying the breathtaking view of the canyon, you could see another visitor with an assault rifle slung on his shoulder. At your campsite in the park’s campground, you could see guns prominently displayed in the campsite next to you.
Mesa Verde National Park (CO): Colorado law is very permissive about open carry of firearms except in some cities. During your visit to Cliff Palace, you could be listening to the ranger’s interpretive discussion while standing next to someone with a handgun and holster prominently displayed.
Gettysburg National Military Battlefield (PA): Pennsylvania is also a very permissive state relative to gun laws. During your tour of the battlefield, you could encounter other visitors legally carrying rifles – and not the historic kind.
Carlsbad Caverns National Park (NM): At the evening bat flight program and even on the cave tours, you could be joined by others openly carrying firearms. As you wander through the park’s restaurant and gift store, looking for a bite to eat or a souvenir to buy, other visitors might be seen legally carrying firearms.
Everglades National Park (FL): Florida’s gun laws are more restrictive, so you are not likely to encounter others openly carrying guns while walking on the Anhinga Trail as you enjoy some of the most spectacular wildlife and bird sighting anywhere.
Statue of Liberty National Monument (NY): New York’s gun laws are very restrictive, and visitors to the Statue are protected by laws prohibiting the open carrying of firearms.
Great Smoky Mountains National Park (TN and NC): This park is an example of one of the problems visitors will face with the new law. In North Carolina, there are few gun restrictions and visitors could be seen openly carrying guns. However, if you happen to be a gun-carrying visitor, you will need a “carry permit” when you cross into the part of the park located in Tennessee.
Mount Rainier National Park (WA): While hiking the famous “Wonderland Trail” you could encounter other hikers openly carrying handguns, rifles or shotguns.
Denali National Park and Preserve (AK): While riding on an NPS-licensed bus operated by the park concessioner on a day-long trip on the “park road” (the only way to get into the heart of the park other than to hike) you could be sitting next to someone with a handgun in a holster.
Bill Wade, chair of CNPSR’s Executive Council and former superintendent of Shenandoah National Park said, “This is a sad chapter in the history of America’s premier system of heritage areas. On the heels of the Ken Burns documentary about the importance of national parks to America and after a year of increased visitation to parks despite a poor economy, this law will have a chilling effect on how visitors behave in national parks. A feeling of safety and security will be replaced by wariness and suspicion. This diminishes some of the “specialness and reverence” our citizens have long accorded to their national parks.”
While many states, and therefore the national park areas in them, will soon allow individuals to openly carry firearms, most states are much more restrictive about concealed-carry, and most require a permit to do so. Visitors with a permit from one state may or may not be able to carry a concealed gun into a national park in another state, depending on reciprocity agreements. Similarly, visitors who have “long guns” in vehicle racks traveling from a park in one state to a park in another state will have to understand the differing state requirements.
Members of CNPSR strongly opposed this new law for several reasons:
1) More guns in national parks increase the likelihood of shooting at wildlife and some historic resources, such as prehistoric petroglyphs.
2) More guns in parks increases the risk to rangers.
3) More guns in parks increases the risk to visitors in places like campgrounds where disagreements, often fueled by alcohol, sometimes occur.
4) National parks have always been hospitable to visitors from around the world and are seen as “sanctuaries” where people could get away from the routines, threats and risks they face in their daily lives. But more guns will change those perceptions.
5) Until now, one regulation pertaining to firearms applied to all 392 areas in the National Park System. But now each of those areas will be subject to the laws of the state in which it lies. This is likely to lead to significant confusion by visitors traveling though parks in a number of states.
6) Federal buildings in parks will now have to be signed to prohibit firearms and conceivably security devices will need to be used.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or follow this blog's RSS and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Perhaps, I’ve missed something? I thought this law applied to licensed CONCEALED HANDGUNS. Which, by definition, must remain concealed, unless used to protect one’s life. Draw it, even show it, and you’d better have a good reason, under penalty of law. Can’t use it to protect your property. No such thing as a lawfully “concealed rifle.” Licensee can’t enter the park armed, unless licensed WITHIN THE SAME STATE where the park is situated. Are the rest of us at such heightened risk, whenever we leave the a National Park? Silly.
No, it’s not solely concealed. The Coburn amendment does _not_ restrict it to concealed only, but allows whatever the State law for the location in question allows.
Oh my God. The sky really IS going to fall!
I just cannot believe that anyone would believe that the right to bear arms could possibly trump my right to feel safe, and more importantly, my right not to be offended by seeing those horrible guns!
I think I will keep to the south side of Chicago … where guns are sensibly banned and no one has guns.
this article is total fearmongering to the uninformed.As usual,changed laws protecting the rights of citizens brings out the blathering idiots predicting gun battles and law abiding citizens suddenly going berserk. If you have such unreasonable fears–stay home.
It seems that these retired Park employees are upset that American citizens can now enjoy the same freedom in National Parks that the citizens outside parks have enjoyed for many years.
The same citizens will be carrying firearms in National Parks that carry them on the streets and in the grocery store every day. You are around these people every day. Are you scared of them now?
This is a lot of whining about nothing! A law abiding citizen legally carrying a firearm in a National park is no different, just because they come into a park.
The only people who need to fear citizens with fireams are the criminals. Why are you scared?
Let’s see if I can summarize what the CNPSR elitists are saying: “Somehow, parks will be more dangerous because citizens who are currently safely carrying guns outside the parks under existing state laws will somehow become a threat upon crossing the park boundaries.” What BS!
What’s really upsetting these retired rangers is that the Park Service rangers will no longer be able to set up “gotcha” roadblocks and arrest hunters and other citizens as said they traverse a couple of miles of Federal Park property while carrying their firearms in the manner prescribed by state laws. Oh, and if the number of crimes committed against citizens on remote park property should happen to drop, it would reflect badly on the job those retired rangers had been doing.
You mean that citizens rights according to the second amendment are being honored? That is just ludicrous!
I thought this was our (the peoples) country? I thought that our rights were not to be infringed upon?
2nd amendment-”A well regulated Militia
(That first part refers to military which I would include police and rangers: Key words REGULATED MILITIA…NOT REGULATED PEOPLE)
, being necessary to the security of a free State(Militias are to keep the state FREE state=citizens or people who are to be free to carry…get it?)
, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. (This part refers to THE PEOPLE Key words SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED UPON!)
This part of the bill of rights came about after a 2 year war was fought BY THE PEOPLE. The framers knew at this point how important it was to KEEP and BARE ARMS! It does not get any clearer. Miliitas need to stop thinking they are the only ones experienced and responsible enough to carry. They carry to protect our right to carry. They are there to protect our rights (ALL OF OUR RIGHTS.) Including the right to bare arms. MILITIAS are regulated, not THE PEOPLE.
Perhaps they’d care for a little dinner with their whine. Gun control isn’t so much about guns as it is about control. CNPSR can go pee up a rope, they seem to forget that they were employees of the very people they want to disenfranchise.
A bunch of retired, Scooter Store customers, are all wee weed up over guns in the NPS? They are all bent cuz they ain’t got the power and respect outside their own little ant hill, like they had when they was packing a badge AND a gun.
Arguing with these folks is like trying to find a good time on a 60+ cruise to nowhere.
Ignore them, time is on our side and they will be gone soon.
“I think I will keep to the south side of Chicago … where guns are sensibly banned and no one has guns.”
You ARE kidding, right? Chicago’s South Side lacks for guns? Good grief! Kindly then, post your home with a “gun free zone” sign and stay there.
“A group of retired U.S. Park Service employees is warning that visitors at national parks will soon be seeing handguns and rifles at the nation’s parks because of a law sponsored by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Muskogee, last year.
No, I beg to differ. You won’t be seeing a freaking thing! Unless you intend to cause death or sever bodily injury to someone, and that someone happens to be armed. Then, yeah, you’re going to see a gun and a whole lot more.
This is nothing more than the same old rhetoric people cry when states pass concealed carry laws. “Wild west”, “shootouts in the streets”, yadda yadda yadda, whine, whine, whine, cry, cry, cry.
If you don’t like it, England doesn’t let people carry or even have guns. You’ll find it to the east, across the Atlantic. Oh wait, how’s that working for them? That’s right, criminals still have guns. Enjoy your gun free zone over there.
Gun control… give me a break!
I am Hiking the Grand Canyon in March and I will be carrying a gun. It is our natural right or unalienable right as the forefathers of this great nation refer to them, they are rights which are not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of a particular society or polity. Natural rights are universal, different from legal rights that are culturally and politically relative. I really don’t need a law to tell me I can carry a gun. A greater power, be it god or nature, whatever you prefer, is what gave me the right to keep and bear arms. No one or no Government can take that away. Be forwarned anti-gunners, I carry and there are millions like me. In Arizona, we can open carry so maybe I will take my AR to the Canyon.
This article says “These are just some of the things that Americans can reasonably expect to see in national parks across the U.S. as of February 22, 2010, when a dangerous new gun law will go into effect in our nation’s national park areas.” Give me a break! This is just a batch of anti-gun hogwash and ranting. Guns have been allowed in all National Forests and most State Parks for many years without any of the dire consequences portrayed by this progressive prophet of doom.
Gun control is a loser and they know it. If gun control worked Chicago, New York City and Washington,DC, would be safe cities. They are not!
The retired national park employees need to find something else to whine about.
Americans – 1
Antis – 0
Kinda funny how they claim the park will suddenly be more dangerous. Will it be any more dangerous than outside the park where people already carry guns?
And if it hadn’t passed, would these guys spend the rest of their life inside the park where it’s supposedly safer?
“I think I will keep to the south side of Chicago … where guns are sensibly banned and no one has guns.”
Right! The south side of Chicago has one of the highest firearms murder rates in the country. GUN CONTROL DOES NOT WORK IN CHICAGO, D.C. NOR NEW YORK – Wake up! Maybe the next time you camp in a NP and some deviate tries to rape one of your kids you will be thankful for the citizen who is legally in possession of a firearm and comes to your aid.
1) More guns in national parks increase the likelihood of shooting at wildlife and some historic resources, such as prehistoric petroglyphs.
Doubtful. It would be illegal to do that and anyone that would, would likely carry the gun ilegally anyway.
2) More guns in parks increases the risk to rangers.
Anyone who would shoot a ranger isnt worried about the gun law in the first place. If there were a ban theyd likely still have it. You know, there have been cases where citizens saved an officer’s life with a legally concealed gun.
3) More guns in parks increases the risk to visitors in places like campgrounds where disagreements, often fueled by alcohol, sometimes occur.
I suppose…but doesnt that apply to everywhere? And isnt it already illegal to be in possesion of a firearm while under the influence of drugs/alohol? How many cases of people with concealed carry permits are there where they shot someone illegally? Very few. I think it would be much more likely that there would be cases of people legally protecting themselves and their families from wildlife and other visitors.
4) National parks have always been hospitable to visitors from around the world and are seen as “sanctuaries” where people could get away from the routines, threats and risks they face in their daily lives. But more guns will change those perceptions.
So? Big deal. Personally i think civilians should have concealed permits where no one even knows they have it. And this is what the law is about. Allowing people who have a permit to carry a weapon to do what the law allows them to do? The govt is recognizing them as a responsible citizen…why should there be restrictions? They may be more apt to shoot someone in one place than another?
5) Until now, one regulation pertaining to firearms applied to all 392 areas in the National Park System. But now each of those areas will be subject to the laws of the state in which it lies. This is likely to lead to significant confusion by visitors traveling though parks in a number of states.
So? The law is the law. Lots of them are confusing and thats why lawyers exist. It shouldnt be hard to find ot where guns are legal for carry.
6) Federal buildings in parks will now have to be signed to prohibit firearms and conceivably security devices will need to be used.
If someone wants to soot up the place is a law going to stop them? Schools are “gun free” zones and people take it upon themselves to kill people on occassion. Its a terrible thing…but maybe if we allowed concealed carry someone could have stopped them. Gun free zones are a joke. All that it does is tells a criminal that there will be no resistance.
You talk about your precious restrictions in the big cities…you realize that they have the most killings? Did you know that when the DC handgun ban was repealed killings went down significantly? Its been proven time and time again that restrictions do not deter crime.
Gun Control
A theory espoused by some monumentally stupid people; who claim to believe, against all logic and common sense, that a violent predator who ignores the laws that prohibit robbery, rape, kidnapping, torture ad murder of fellow human beings will somehow obey a law telling him he cannot own a gun”
“It’s not that our liberal friends are ignorant, it’s just that most of what they know just isn’t so”
Ronald Reagan
TRUTH BE TOLD…ANY… ALL AND ANY- LAW ABIDING CITIZEN IN ANY STATE, SHOULD NOT BE RESTRICTED TO CARRY OR CONCEAL A LEGAL FIREARM. Criminals, statisticly, are then afraid to commit crimes; History and well studied statistics in this country, have proved this without question, to be true. A more appropriate Question is…. Exactly Why does a Park Ranger need a firearm? Seriously, Do they really need weapons to write tickets? Do they get shot at all the time?
The more my government is afraid of me and my right to bare arms the more I’m afraid of my government and it’s employees.
So, the real world scares you? Like, the same gun carry rules that govern gun carry in urban areas from Pittsburgh to Seattle scare you because these folks will be in a National Park instead of the restaurant table across from you? Huh?