A federal judge in Washington Thursday blocked enforcement of a Bush administration rule allowing people to carry loaded concealed weapons in national parks...Colleen Kollar-Kotelly was a Clinton appointee to the federal bench, so it's no surprise she's a subversive anti-gun activist.
...The suit was filed by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the National Parks Conservation Association and the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees. [More]
I'm sure the Brady's will be crowing. There will be a next step.
And ultimately, if we want to carry our guns anywhere, we will. It's simply a matter of do we want to badly enough.
Everyone has noticed the increase in trial balloons and probes on all kinds of gun fronts, right?
[Via Zachary G]
8 comments:
How do you block enforcement of a rule that allows something? If the rule says "X is allowed", then blocking enforcement does what? She's not rescinding the rule.
And ultimately, if we want to carry our guns anywhere, we will.
Amen to that,bro!
CIII
Yes, the probing attacks are markedly more numerous. I agree completely.
The attacks are numerous and increasing... but have you noticed that they are also increasingly irrational and the rhetoric is thinner all the time as well? They're not even trying to make much sense anymore.
Are they getting desperate? (grin)
Carry anyway, or stay away from places where carry is prohibited. Going unarmed is not an option for me.
I am a Park Ranger and support an individuals right to own weapons but I am against having guns in public parks for many reasons.
1. It will encourage illegal hunting.
2. It will require most Park Rangers to carry weapons and that will make us more like a police force and less like park rangers, less focus and money will be spent on keeping up the parks and public education.
3. Gang Violence in parks will rise.
4. Do you really want to look like the middle east having people flash there guns everywhere?
First, i don't see where the Brady Bunch have legal standing in this case. They are not harmed, nor responsible for enforcing the rule.
Second, national park policy is the job of the executive branch exclusively. Where does the court get power to oversee agency policies?
Third, robbaydj;
1. You assume that having a gun will encourage someone who has never hunted illegally to do so now?
2. Park Rangers do and should carry firearms.
3. Gang violence in parks will not change. They do not follow the law, which is why they are members of illegal gangs.
4. A reference to the wild west would be more appropriate. But we have a right to BEAR arms, not just to KEEP them.
It's pretty clear that robbaydj's post is tongue in cheek.
Obviously, people will suddenly start to poach with their 9mms because they can now carry concealed guns. In parks. (And not use rifles while trying to actually conceal their poaching.)
And of course Park Rangers will now have to "carry weapons" because law abiding citizens may carry guns. Everyone knows how law abiding citizens tend to routinely shoot it out with park service employees. Better carry those M4s for protection against Mr. mom.
And of course, gangsters will now start to visit parks armed - instead of unarmed - like they used to. Gang bangers are notorious for obeying gun laws.
And of course EVERYONE will be flashing their AKs all over the place like they do in the middle east.
Nice try, robbaydj, but you could have done better than to copy and paste hoplophobe talking points if you were really trying to purport to be against concealed carry in National Parks.
Pretty funny, though. But you did accomplish managing to illustrate just how idiotic the anti self-defense position regarding the whole guns in parks issue really is. Even if it was a transparent attempt.
Jeez, responding to an event of 19/03/2009, and a wrong response at that.
This is over, freedom and liberty won.
Post a Comment