.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30832809/

Bill allows loaded guns in national parks
Congress is moving to restore a Bush administration policy

WASHINGTON - The Democratic-controlled Congress is moving to restore a Bush administration policy that allowed loaded guns in national parks.

The Senate voted Tuesday to allow guns in national parks and wildlife refuges, and the House could follow suit as soon as Wednesday.

The measure is included in a popular bill imposing new restrictions on credit card companies. Democratic leaders have said they hope to send a final version to the White House for the president's signature by week's end.The Senate vote is a stark reversal from what many gun-control advocates expected when a federal judge blocked the Bush policy in March. The decision reinstated restrictions that had been in place since the Reagan administration. The rules severely restrict guns in the national parks, generally requiring them to be locked or stored.

The Obama administration accepted the March 19 ruling, saying that the Interior Department would review the policy over the next several months.

That timetable changed quickly last week after Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn inserted an amendment to the credit card bill that would allow concealed, loaded guns in parks and refuges.

Amendment easily passed
To the surprise of many, the amendment easily passed, winning support from 67 senators — including 27 Democrats. Among those who voted "yes" was Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who had blocked Coburn's amendment from coming to the Senate floor for more than a year. Seven other Western Democrats voted with Reid to support the Republican senator's amendment, which allows a range of firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges as long as they are allowed by federal, state and local law.

Spokesman Jim Manley said Reid is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, adding that the guns in parks issue was a major concern for many Nevadans.

"The rules that apply to our federal lands are felt acutely in Nevada, where 87 percent of the state's land is managed by federal agencies," Manley said.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which sued to block the Bush policy, called the Senate vote reckless. The group called on President Barack Obama to demand that the gun provision be stripped from the credit card bill.

"Families should not have to stare down loaded AK-47s on nature hikes," said Brady campaign president Paul Helmke. "The president should not remain silent while Congress inserts reckless gun policies that he strongly opposes into a bill that has nothing whatsoever to do with guns."

Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., chairman of a national parks subcommittee, said the measure would make parks more dangerous and urged House Democratic leaders to strip the amendment from the final bill.

Described as 'gotcha amendment'
Grijalva called the measure a "gotcha amendment" aimed at demonstrating the power of the National Rifle Association. Still, he acknowledged, it is likely to pass, given the pro-gun rights majorities in both the House and Senate.

"It's uphill. We know that," Grijalva said at a news conference Tuesday.

Democratic leaders said there was not enough time to send the bill to a House-Senate conference committee — where presumably it could be removed without a vote — and still get it to Obama by Memorial Day as he has requested.

Chris W. Cox, chief lobbyist for the NRA, called Grijalva's comments offbase.

"The National Rifle Association doesn't set the legislative calendar, and certainly doesn't determine which amendments are allowed to be offered or not offered in either the House or the Senate," he said.

Coburn said the gun measure protects every American's Second Amendment rights and also protects the rights of states to pass laws that apply to their entire state, including public lands."Visitors to national parks should have the right to defend themselves in accordance with the laws of their states," Coburn said.

House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told reporters on Tuesday that the House could vote separately on the gun legislation. Doing so would allow each measure to pass, but Democrats who endorse credit card reform could still vote as they wished on the gun measure.

If the two measures are passed separately as expected, they would be rejoined before being sent to the president as a single bill, Hoyer said.
.

.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...hOk&refer=home


Last Updated: May 20, 2009 10:55 EDT

By Roger Runningen and Jeff Plungis

May 20 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama would sign legislation to curb credit-card fees even if it contains a provision allowing visitors to U.S. national parks to carry guns, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said today.

The Senate passed the credit-card measure yesterday. The House of Representatives has begun debating the measure and is scheduled to hold a final vote today.

Obama’s acceptance of the gun amendment removes an obstacle to the credit-card legislation becoming law.

Senator Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican who offered the gun amendment, said the provision is necessary to reduce crime in the parks. The amendment, approved on a 67-29 vote on May 12, would prohibit the federal government from barring weapons in national parks where they are allowed by state law.

The Obama administration said last month it wouldn’t challenge a court ruling reinstating 26-year-old restrictions on guns in the parks. The ruling by a U.S. District judge blocked a Bush administration order allowing firearms that was backed by the National Rifle Association.

The gun amendment was attached to credit-card legislation sought by Obama that would require lenders to apply payments to balances with the highest interest rates first. It would also prohibit increasing a consumer’s rate on existing balances based on late payments to another lender, a practice known as “universal default.”

The House, which approved a version of the credit-card bill on April 30 by a 357-70 vote, later today will hold separate votes on the credit-card measure and the gun amendment.

To contact the reporter on this story: Roger Runningen in Washington rrunningen@bloomberg.net; Jeff Plungis in Washington at jplungis@bloomberg.net.

.

I am pleasantly shocked that this measure has a good chance of passing.

I think someone in Obama's camp started to see the warning signs and they figure this is a pretty nice bone to throw our side, that just might curb some of the saber sharpening. Kinda like when that abusive dog owner realizes the dog is starting to contemplate tearing his throat out and so the master tosses a T-bone with the meat still on it. Obama and Co. will get back to kicking the dog next week (or a lil while after this passes) but folks will be all docile cause "hey, they gave us National Parks Carry & this new abusive ammo tax (or what ever their next move is) is just give and take".

I don't like to see government increasing regulation on private business, regardless of the kick-backs we may get out of it.

Wrong answer, Chris.

The correct answer, if you care, is this:

"Damn skippy, Raul. We represent a hundred million gun owners, and we're one of the most powerful lobbies on the hill. Legislators listen to us both because we do speak for their constituents, and because if they fuck with us, they may not have a job next time around. God Bless America."

+1

The credit card industry will be forced down the same path that the mortgage industry was to some extent. They will either:
<ul><li>stop issuing as many cards to those who don't pay on time and have to pick up some slacking revenue by reducing the benefits I receive on my cards (1-5% cash back on purchases, coverage limits for fraudulent usage, etc).
or</li><li>continue issuing them for fear of civil discrimination suits, and when these card holders fail to pay, instead of collecting debt the old fashion way, will have recoup costs by reducing the benefits I receive on my cards ... </li>
</ul>

I guess though it's okay. After all, the credit card companies are evil and greedy and need to pay. Transitively, I'm evil for trying to save a couple bucks in cash back rewards, effectively stealing a small portion the revenue provided to the credit card companies by the downtrodden middle class who are being victimized by oppressive "short-term lending rates."

From CSM. I highlighted some of the text. There seems to be a bit of a conflict in what they're saying.



So evidently, based on CSM's statements, the Nat'l Park Rangers are managing to get their asses kicked in one of the safest places in America. How can the rangers possibly be the most assaulted group of federal officers in such an idyllic setting?

Now I have read else where that they are the most assaulted LE officers as a group. That tells me that Nat'l Parks aren't as safe as they say.

.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30843052/


Obama says he wants to sign the bill by Memorial Day now that it's passed the house and the Senate today.

.

I am SHOCKED by the positive media coverage this is getting. It is a well orchestrated effort by the Democrats and the segments of the media which agrees with them to fleece us, plain and simple. "Hey, look over here!!" [Waving gun rights around]

I swear, I have heard more mainstream coverage regarding this amendment to a bill than I have about the bill itself.

That's my take on it as well.

The anti-gun folks can say "I voted FOR guns!" one day and turn around the next and say, "I was forced to get to CC reform passed".

Not to mention the fact that, by extension, she is saying that guns have more of a place in urban settings, where the risks of crime are greater!

Don't you love the circular logic?

Over at Arms and the Law, someone pointed out that the language of the Coburn amendment is much less restrictive than the Bush administration's rule change:

We'll see a Obama federal credit card very soon. Then one can buy a Government Motors car with it

.
So this guns in parks doesn't start until 9 months from now, by default, since that's when the credit card bill takes effect?

.