Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 3:53 am

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 6 posts ] 
 Obama admin won't challenge court reguarding Natl Park carry 
Author Message
 Post subject: Obama admin won't challenge court reguarding Natl Park carry
PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:01 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:09 am
Posts: 1060
Location: Savage, MN
No surprise here.....

http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/43197962.html

Quote:
WASHINGTON - The Obama administration said Friday it will not appeal a federal court ruling that prohibits carrying loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.

Instead, the Interior Department said it will conduct a full environmental review of an earlier policy that allowed concealed, loaded guns in parks and refuges.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly struck down the gun policy last month. She called the rule, issued in the waning days of the Bush administration, severely flawed and said officials failed to evaluate its possible environmental impacts, as required by law. The judge set an April 20 deadline for the Interior Department to indicate its likely response.

The Bush rule, which took effect in January, allowed visitors to carry a loaded gun into a park or wildlife refuge as long as the person had a permit for a concealed weapon and the state where the park or refuge was located allowed concealed firearms. Previously, guns in parks had been severely restricted.

Kendra Barkoff, a spokeswoman for Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, said Friday that the department is not completely discarding the Bush rule. Instead, she said that officials intend to complete a comprehensive environmental impact statement that analyzes the possible effects of the Bush rule, as well as a range of alternatives.

The review is expected to take several months at least. In the meantime, 26-year-old restrictions that had been in place before the rule change remain in effect.

Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which filed a lawsuit to block the Bush rule, said he was pleased at the Obama administration's decision.

"Semiautomatic weapons have no place in the valleys of Yellowstone, on the cliffs of Yosemite or under the torch of the Statue of Liberty," he said.

Helmke said the government should not spend any more resources analyzing the old Bush rule, but added: "We hope and expect that the Obama administration will conclude that the rule can only make our parks more dangerous and should not be implemented."

In her 44-page ruling last month, Kollar-Kotelly called the rule-making process used by the Bush Interior Department "astoundingly flawed." She noted that officials failed to perform an environmental assessment, which calls for the government to take into account such factors as public safety and the "human environment."

Even without an appeal by the Obama administration, the court case is likely to continue. The National Rifle Association has filed a separate appeal of the ruling. A spokesman has said the group will pursue all legal and legislative avenues "to defend the American people's right to self-defense."

Meanwhile, lawmakers who support gun-owners' rights have introduced legislation to reinstate the Bush rule. Bills introduced by Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, and Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., would allow citizens to carry concealed firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges. Crapo's bill is co-sponsored by Montana Democrats Max Baucus and Jon Tester, Democratic Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln as well as Republican Sen. Robert Bennett of Utah. Two dozen House members — all but one Republican — have co-sponsored the House bill. Rep. Glenn Nye of Virginia is the sole Democrat to back the bill.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:22 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 1:46 pm
Posts: 845
Location: Saint Paul
Quote:
… or under the torch of the Statue of Liberty," he said.


How ironic that a Brady Bunch looney would state that a statue that obstensibly honors the liberties guaranteed by the United States Constitution is not a proper place to exercise one's Second Amendment guarantees.

By the way, that tripe composed by Emma Lazarus and inscribed under the Statue of Liberty is purely her opinion and certainly not law or public policy. She should have written "Give us your poor … in an completely legal and orderly fashion, obeying all immigration laws, rules, and regulations to the letter."


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:23 pm 
Senior Member

Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 2:43 am
Posts: 371
Location: Anoka, MN
I guess I will continue my standard of avoiding all National Parks then, as my Constitutional Rights don't exist there. Also means they won't be getting any extra money from me, from firewood, camping fees, or anything else I'd buy while there.

I'll stick to state-level and private campgrounds, as they treat me as a HUMAN BEING, NOT A SUBJECT.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 11:20 am 
Poet Laureate
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 11:36 am
Posts: 760
Location: Hutchinson, MN
Quote:
Semiautomatic weapons have no place in the valleys of Yellowstone, on the cliffs of Yosemite


Really.
I wonder if she could tell us, then, where those weapons have a place?

I thought they wanted them "off the streets"? Off the streets and into the wilderness cliffs, valleys, and forests, would be the logical extension of that statement. Oh wait...
Off the streets and into the smelter is what they intend. That's the "place" for those evil semiautomatics, after all. :evil: :roll:

_________________
It's not always easy these days to tell which of our two major political parties is the Stupid Party and which is the Evil Party...
But it remains true that from time to time they collaborate on something that's both stupid and evil and call it bipartisanship. -Thomas E. Woods Jr.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 2:07 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 6767
Location: Twin Cities
Quote:
Semiautomatic weapons have no place in the valleys of Yellowstone, on the cliffs of Yosemite


I could live with a revolver-only policy, I guess... :)

_________________
* NRA, UT, MADFI certified Minnesota Permit to Carry instructor, and one of 66,513 law-abiding permit holders. Read my blog.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:41 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:23 pm
Posts: 1419
Location: SE MPLS
Q_Continuum wrote:
I guess I will continue my standard of avoiding all National Parks then, as my Constitutional Rights don't exist there.

I'm more worried about George Washington Parkway, and other NPS-administered lands, than Yellowstone or Yosemite.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 6 posts ] 

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group