NPS to allow guns in National Parks

[johnhens]

The National Parks Service will allow guns to be carried in the National Parks in the US.
http://www.doi.gov/news/08_News_Releases/120508.html

[Nick]

Wow, I just read the entire federal regulation hoping to find exceptions for parks like IR and found none. I predict we will see a wolf shot by some paniced pistol packing hiker within a couple of years. This is nuts. I'm going to check MI's CCW law to see if there are any limitations to carrying in State or National Parks.

Nick

[fonixmunkee]

I can't believe this. I'm not really sure why anyone would want to bring a gun, anyway ("security" would be a convenient excuse, but really is that true?).

Do you think that Isle Royale can hang a sign at Windigo that says "ISLE ROYALE BANS GUNS ON THESE PREMISES" like they do at the mall?

[johnhens]

Perhaps this may sound naieve, but I have always assumed most of the folks who come to Isle Royale were of the mind that they were here to enjoy Nature etc on its terms and the need for personal protection was not necessary. I have hiked through a lot of the National Parks and to a less extent, National Forests and have never wished I had a gun. If it got to the point I felt I did need a gun, I would like to think I would stop going. As for those who feel the need to carry a gun, that is their personal choice-me, its extra weight I don't need to carry!!!

[fonixmunkee]

johnhens, that's my sentiment too. Plus, who wants to lug a heavy gun around, anyway?

[Nick]

OK guys, I'll preface this with the following disclaimer: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE, IS NOT TO BE TAKE AS SUCH, AND IS NOT TO BE RELIED UPON AS LEGAL ADVICE. IF YOU WANT A LEGAL OPINION, CONTACT AN ATTORNEY IN YOUR JURISDICTION.


Michigan Compiled Laws: 324.504 Department of natural resources; rules for protection of lands and property; certain rules prohibited; orders; violation as civil infraction; fine. (3) The department shall not promulgate or enforce a rule that prohibits an individual who is licensed or exempt from licensure under 1927 PA 372, MCL 28.421 to 28.435, from carrying a pistol in compliance with that act, whether concealed or otherwise, on property under the control of the department.

This is the law as it relates to state parks. An attorney general opinion I read indicated that National Parks could limit the carry under the Code of Federal Regulations and he cited the section of the CFR. That may be a moot point give the new CFR we've been discussing.

As far as putting up a sign that says "No Guns on Isle Royale," that would not fly, especially in light of the Heller Decision earlier this year.

I really don't think that they had IR in mind when they passed this.

[johnhens]

I was hoping you would chime in with an update!!!

[hirkeukvic]

Honestly, who thought this would be a good idea? I can probably make guesses (the current administration being what it is), but I won't. Ugh, nobody cares about nature anymore.

[johnhens]

I wonder what the Queen and Voyageur's as well the Seaplane's response to this will be?
I wonder if the potential for an accident with a gun on board would raise their Liability exposure?
Any thoughts Nick?

[Nick]

I suppose that the Queen and VII, being private operations, could limit firearms on their vessels. I'm not so sure about the Ranger since it is part of the NPS and adopting that policy might be seen as a way for the NPS to circumvent the policy. Since all these vessels are common carriers, I am not sure what the DHS and TSA will say about this. Also, I wonder if there will have to be TSA screening at the seaplane dock to avoid hijacking. This whole thing is nuts. I could possibly see the need for this regulation at some of the parks that have issues with bear attacks, etc. in the past, or even back country assaults, but IR? It would be interesting to pull the crime data for the Island. I suspect there were a few thefts, some alcohol or drug problems, but I bet the violent crime was non-existent. One of the rangers lives up near my cottage in the UP. I might try to give him a call next time I'm up there and get his take.

[johnhens]

Nick,
Most of what I have heard of involves illegal fires, no permits, rowdy boaters (in the past), people singing bad show tunes, thats about it.
I don't recall any instances where there was anything close to violent behavior.
It will be interesting to see what others come up with!!!

[johnhens]

http://www.miningjournal.net/page/conte ... l?nav=5006

[fonixmunkee]

I like that article you posted regarding the superintendant's comments. Hopefully some one WILL file a lawsuit to block the new policy.

Also, very good point regarding the VII and the seaplane possibly blocking the firearms from coming aboard. Never thought of that. It helps having lawyer folk on the boards!

-Sent from my Verizon BlackBerry

[Nick]

Nick,
Most of what I have heard of involves illegal fires, no permits, rowdy boaters (in the past), people singing bad show tunes, thats about it.
I don't recall any instances where there was anything close to violent behavior.
It will be interesting to see what others come up with!!!

The way I look at it, those show tunes put the wolves on notice that the area was marked by a new Alpha Male in the territory. Also, Bunny Foo Foo should be thankful for the protection. I won't take all the credit though, that high pitched whining from the King of the Phase 10 Losers cleared the entire campground on more that one occasion!

Can you call a tantrum after losing 10 games straight "violent behavior?"

Look out, everyone, it's starting again!

[Nick]

The National Parks Conservation Association is considering litigation. Nothing has been announced yet.

http://www.npca.org/who_we_are/