Enemy Email Today

[tabsr]

Email today from the Enemy, must be worried.

The Gun Lobby Wants Loaded Guns in National Parks. Please take action!

Allowing loaded guns in parks poses a threat to wildlife, park visitors and park rangers. As required by law, the Department of Interior has opened up the regulation change process for comments from the public. Those crazy about their guns (and little else) will be submitting thousands of comments fueled on by the gun lobby. Please don't let them be the only ones commenting! Submit your comments TODAY and tell them to keep the current regulations in place!

THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO DIRECTLY AFFECT PUBLIC POLICY. TAKE ACTION BEFORE JUNE 30!

Thank you!

There are 3 ways to submit comments:

Go to the web site for the National Parks Conservation Association. Use their form to comment.

Points to make when commenting:

They are trying to fix something that isn't broken. Parks are safe -- some of the safest places in the world -- and the current regulations are working well. According to the National Park Service, the probability of becoming a victim of a violent crime in a national park is 1 in 708,333, which is less likely than being struck by lighting during one's lifetime.
The regulations would vary from park to park depending on the state in which they reside. This creates a patchwork of regulations that would be confusing to visitors and park rangers, especially in parks that reside in more than 1 state. Current regulations are consistent in all parks, across all states.
Many families and visitors, particularly those from other countries, will not like the idea that other visitors are carrying firearms while sharing interpretive programs, hiking trails, campsites and eating facilities.
With easy access to a loaded gun, some people might be tempted to poach wildlife or shoot at bears or other animals. Harm to wildlife and human visitors may increase.


CSM relies on donations from supporters to operate. If you value the work we do and can help us out, please visit our web site at

www.endgunviolence.com and donate now.

 

[FieroCDSP]

Allowing loaded guns in parks poses a threat to wildlife, park visitors and park rangers

Assuming that all of the people carrying guns are criminals, perhaps. But they're not, so one of the rangers might get away. :banghead:

 

[Robert Hairless]

Allowing loaded guns in parks poses a threat to wildlife, park visitors and park rangers.

Much less dangerous if the wildlife is required to take gun safety courses.

A greater danger is allowing vehicles powered by internal combustion engines in parks. The exhaust fumes are poisonous to all wildlife, park visitors, park rangers, and screwballs who want to control other people.

Once again, though, I am flattered to be part of something so grand as "The Gun Lobby" just because I joined a membership organization open to everyone. That's the best $35 a year I've ever spent: it gives me instant status. Anyone else who wants to be part of "The Gun Lobby" can do it by joining the NRA right now: https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp

 

[hso]

So they've provided us instructions on how to comment. Kind of them, but now what do we say?

Groups that claim to be acting in the public interest by opposing citizens with carry permits issued by their state somehow feel they have to lie to the public about what allowing carry in National Parks represents. They contend that wildlife, monuments, park staff and the public will be endangered somehow if the most law abiding citizens, permit holders who spent considerable sums of money to spend days of their time and filled out endless paperwork to be subjected to a government background check, somehow are untrustworthy. Odd that the very people that went to so much time and expense to comply with the law would be expected to "shoot up the place" once they crossed the park boundary. (For those of you that have difficulty determining if sarcasm is in use, please note this is a prime example.) Carry permit holders should be allowed to carry their firearms while in National Parks just as they do anywhere else in the state the park lies.

 

[Funderb]

good comment, HSO. Very nice.

 

[Robert Hairless]

Many families and visitors, particularly those from other countries, will not like the idea that other visitors are carrying firearms while sharing interpretive programs, hiking trails, campsites and eating facilities.

Perhaps the United States of America could have both a National Parks System and an International Parks System.

That way visitors from other countries could go to the International Parks , where they could get only the ideas they like. They could be protected from seeing the American flag, for example, and never even hear about the U.S. Constitution or anything else they might not like. Every entrance to an International Park could have an attendant who asks each visitor from another country to say exactly what ideas he or she might not like. Then everyone else in the park could be instructed on what to do to satisfy each visitor's prejudices.

Americans could go to the National Parks, which are supported by their taxes, and behave as a free people should be allowed.

 

[VPLthrneck]

hso-
thanks for link, and great message! Used that link to send off a short polite little pro-carry message.

If we use this to send them pro-carry messages it's a great way to get the "we don't want it" crowd to help us out. After all they send the message to the Parks dept, and Congressmen automatically, so no reason for us to search for contact info when they have it.
I noticed they had a note that stated "edit this message" I bet most of the wacko's go nuts and start cussing us "gun lobbyist."

 

[WDGF]

So they've provided us instructions on how to comment. Kind of them, but now what do we say?

Here's what I sent (mostly edited together from Alan Gottlieb's comments in the CCRKBA message I received in May, with a smattering from NRA.):

SUBJECT:
ATTN: 1024-AD70 - I SUPPORT the right of self-defense in national parks

I am writing in support of the proposed rule change to restore the rights of law-abiding gun owners who wish to carry concealed firearms for self-protection on Interior Department lands, and make federal law consistent with the state carry law in which these lands are located.

According to National Park Service data, between 2002 and 2007, there were 63 homicides in national parks, 240 rapes or attempted rapes, 309 robberies, 37 kidnappings and 1,277 aggravated assaults.

Citizens should not be required leave their right of self-defense at the gates of a national park or the boundary of a wildlife refuge. Millions of Americans, myself included, legally carry concealed for personal protection, and contrary to the rhetoric of anti-gunners, parks and refuges are not immune to crime.

This sensible rule change will NOT lead to increased poaching, reckless target shooting, or make parks more dangerous. This is the same nonsense that anti-gunners preach when they oppose state right-to-carry laws, and none of their wild predictions have ever come true. Studies indicate that concealed carry actually reduces violent crime.

Changing the rules to recognize the progressive changes in state laws over the past 25 years is both reasonable and responsible. Legally armed citizens have just as much right to enjoy national parks as anyone.

For what it's worth, I'm very much politically conservative, I'm NRA and I VOTE.

 

[Cave Dweller]

Contact info
http://www.fws.gov/laws/contacts.htm

Comments email
[email protected] <[email protected]>

I asked that anti rights organization for more contacts, Maybe they'll be dumb enough to help us out

 

[230RN]

But... but... the trails will run red with blood.

 

[bragood]

Anyone got any idea when this will be decided on?

 

[Shung]

I dont need no International Park !!!

I love your national parks, and I also payed my tax to view them !

And believe me or not, but I dont see any trouble if someone is armed in the wild.

I'd say that I would like to have had the same opportunity hiking around Yellowstone and the Grand tetons a couple of years ago-

 

[Standing Wolf]

They are trying to fix something that isn't broken. Parks are safe -- some of the safest places in the world -- and the current regulations are working well. According to the National Park Service, the probability of becoming a victim of a violent crime in a national park is 1 in 708,333, which is less likely than being struck by lighting during one's lifetime.

1. Leftist extremists always lie about numbers.
2. Even if recognizing the right of the people to keep and bear arms saves just one life, it's worth it.

 

[hso]

ST,

It's not that we need our guns while in the park, it's what do we do with them while we're there? Do we leave them locked in our vehicles to be stolen when some punk breaks into the car or do we keep them secure on our persons while we hike the backcountry? Do we stop at the edge of the park in the middle of the road and get out, take them off and put them in the trunk? If we have a permit then we should be permitted to carry them just as we do outside the border of the park instead of suddenly having to follow another set of rules.

 

[taprackbang]

Typical stupidity from the goofy, anti-gun utopians. Forget the fact that they cannot back up their ridiculous ideas with any real life examples. Guns and wildlife settings are synonymous.
"Just tell the bear to GO away and AFFIRM your rights as a NON-aggressive bystander."

Puhhllleezzz!!!!