I apologize for the source. Its rather biased when you get down to it. Thing is, the AP article is pathetic and hardly has anything of value.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Lyle Laverty today announced that the Department of the Interior has finalized updated regulations governing the possession of firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges. The final rule, which updates existing regulations, would allow an individual to carry a concealed weapon in national parks and wildlife refuges if, and only if, the individual is authorized to carry a concealed weapon under state law in the state in which the national park or refuge is located. The update has been submitted to the Federal Register for publication and is available to the public on http://www.doi.gov.
Existing regulations regarding the carrying of firearms remain otherwise unchanged, particularly limitations on poaching and target practice and prohibitions on carrying firearms in federal buildings.
“America was founded on the idea that the federal and state governments work together to serve the public and preserve our natural resources,” Laverty said. “The Department’s final regulation respects this tradition by allowing individuals to carry concealed firearms in federal park units and refuges to the extent that they could lawfully do so under state law. This is the same basic approach adopted by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the United States Forest Service (USFS), both of which allow visitors to carry weapons consistent with applicable federal and state laws.”
On February 22, 2008, Interior Secretary Kempthorne responded to letters from 51 Senators, both Democrats and Republicans, as well as from the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Natural Resources Committee, urging him to update existing regulations that prohibit the carrying of firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges. In his response, the Secretary directed Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Lyle Laverty “to develop and propose for public comment by April 30 Federal regulations that will update firearms policies on these lands to reflect existing Federal laws (such as those prohibiting weapons in Federal buildings) and the laws by which the host states govern transporting and carrying of firearms on their analogous public lands.”
Changes in the final regulations from those originally proposed in April were developed as the result of public comments. In particular, comments expressed concern about the feasibility of implementing regulations which directly linked the carrying of concealed firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges to the ability of an individual to carry a concealed firearm on analogous state lands. The final regulations remove that potential logistical hurdle.
The existing regulations, as currently in effect, were adopted in 1981 for national wildlife refuges and in 1983 for national parks. Since that time many states have enacted new firearms policies. Currently, 48 states have passed legislation allowing for the lawful possession of concealed weapons.
“The Department believes that in managing parks and refuges we should, as appropriate, make every effort to give the greatest respect to the democratic judgments of State legislatures with respect to concealed firearms,” said Laverty. “Federal agencies have a responsibility to recognize the expertise of the States in this area, and federal regulations should be developed and implemented in a manner that respects state prerogatives and authority.”
Source: U.S. Department of the Interior
Associated Press Article
I must admit that I favor this ruling. This doesn't provide unrestricted carry of firearms in national parks and some national land. What it does it allow the state in question to regulate the issue (and in fact some states effectively ban concealed carry). Receiving a Concealed Carry permit is not an easy thing. You have to demonstrate a working knowledge of firearms and proper safety. You have to go through background checks. I believe some even require registration of the firearms.Ban on Concealed Carry at National Parks Lifted
Friday, December 05, 2008
By Matthew Daly, Associated Press
Washington (AP) - People will now be able to carry concealed weapons in some national parks and wildlife refuges.
The new Interior Department rules allow an individual to carry a loaded weapon in a park or wildlife refuge - but only if the person has a permit for a concealed weapon. The state where the park or refuge is located must also allow guns in parks.
The rule overturns a 25-year-old regulation that has restricted loaded guns in parks and wildlife refuges. The previous regulations required that guns be unloaded and placed somewhere that is not easily accessible, such as in a car trunk.
A lot of people are talking about self defense from criminals. I say whatever. I am concerned about wild life. I don't know about the national parks those people visit, but I live very close to Glacier National Park. We have a resident population of Wolves, Grizzly's, Mountain Lions, and Black Bears. We have bear maulings every year in the park and have had several fatalities over the years. My parents hike in the mountains in that park, a lot. Two summers ago my dad had almost 400 miles in the back country by the start of winter. They encountered 3 black bears and 4 grizzlies that year. One encounter was a mother grizzly and two cubs. She started growling at them. I ran into a black bear just this summer in the park, and I only went 4 times this year.
So my personal concern is over the wildlife, not being mugged. As such, I rather favor this ruling. My mother is rather pro gun control, except she likes it when my dad carries a pistol when they are outside the park. This news has her jazzed. She wants to get a concealed carry permit this spring so they can legally carry in the park.
Anyway, I see some possible backlash over this ruling change. I have no doubt that several groups will scream bloody murder. I can't blame them, and I can't exactly disagree with many of their arguments. It will be interesting to see how this changes when Obama enters office. He can only sign laws that congress sends him, but on the national parks he can change their rules through an executive order and change the new rules in a heart beat.
