For all, including Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, who thought the rules change concerning carrying concealed weapons in national parks would simplify life, Yellowstone National Park is proving the case of some of what's wrong with that rule change.
The problem, you ask? One park, three states, three different sets of gun regulations. Indeed, apparently Idaho has some of the least restrictive gun laws in the country when it comes to honoring another state's concealed weapons permit, while Wyoming has reciprocal agreements on concealed carry with 23 other states, Montana with 40.
Cory Hatch of the Jackson Hole News & Guide points out that while a gun owner from West Virginia could legally enter Yellowstone in the Bechler region in the park's southwestern corner, which spills over into Idaho, once that individual crosses into Wyoming they'd be breaking the law since Wyoming doesn't honor West Virginia's gun permits. But if that same individual made it quietly up to Mammoth Hot Springs, which is in Montana, they'd be legal once again.
Beyond the state laws, Yellowstone officials still are trying to sort out exactly what is a "federal building," which are off-limits to guns. While it's obvious a visitor center is a federal facility, how are lodges -- which in most cases technically are owned by the federal government but run by concessionaires -- categorized?
And what about trailhead restrooms? If the later is off-limits to guns, what will an armed hiker, who just came off the trail, do with their weapon if they want to use that restroom?
While Secretary Kempthorne applauded this rule change as a step towards simplifying gun laws in the parks, Yellowstone's situation would seem to run contrary to that interpretation. And, of course, there are other parks that span multiple states: Death Valley, Great Smoky Mountains, Natchez Trail Parkway. Blue Ridge Parkway just to name four.
Comments
The second Amendment is an individuals right to CCW, or for that matter open carry of a fire arm, it is the law of the land. These so called laws and impediments that require permits and registrations etc are violations of that law, simply put they can not exist while the second Amendment exists, states can not take away from individual rights, nor can any other part of the gov with out so amending the Constitution.
I have carried for a long time. I have thank god never had to use my gun against man or beast, there have been times when I thought it could come down to it, but I have never taken it out.
So why do I carry? Why do I carry something I have not had to use, or may never have to use? Because if I am so unfortunate as to be in a situation where it is my last choice, I have the right in that moment to make that choice. Much for the same reasons Noah built the Ark before the rains came, you can not use what you do not have.
I find it so very odd so many people are so alarmed by guns. Guns are very simple, yet many in our society enshroud them in myth, and mystery, proclaim "guns are dangerous and no one should have one" When this same person will get behind the wheel of thier ford or chevy or BMW talk on the phone, roll slowly through stop signs...all the while operating the single most dangerous piece of equipment in the country, one with far more energy than my 44 revolver, one that when he/she, hits some one calls it an accident, when negligence is far more likely.
Guns are tools, no different to me than the hammer or screw driver or chain saw or truck. The command respect and practice. No more, or less than any other activity. In the end they are a right, most other things in life are not. So instead of wondering if your fellow American is carrying gun, wonder if he/she might have reason to use it, to help you if your in a bad way and you have not chosen to exercise your right. Wonder how it is possible the gov of the people is so grossly over paid, and in recent history managed to vote to pay themselves for life, when they have done little to support our Constitution. Bodies that raise property taxes on retired Sr's forcing them out of their "dream" retirements...or how gov robed social security and bankrupted our NAtion....na that is far to depressing. Live your life right, be good and kind to those you meet in hopes they return your kindness, and be ready for what ever the day has in store for you and Im sure we will all do just fine. Guns, food, water, snacks, smiles, good boots and sense of humor can get you through any thing, and for the things they cant there is always your MC with a 29% Apr default rate....that is prime +28% right now by the way (maybe we should come down on Washington and our corrupt leaders and tell them CC companies have no right to more than Prime +5%...but that could be to good to many folks....I dont care I live on cash and have for several years..but I still hate the gangster CC companies who think they have rights...never saw them in the Constitution).
This is what happens when you have too many cooks with their hands in the pot. It happens to many laws that cause federal law to bump heads with state laws. One reason why the overabundance of lawyers in this country can stay in such high income brackets.
My husband is a retired federal agent, and as such was issued a federal firearms carry permit, good in all 50 states as well as US territories. I'm sure there will bet yet another set of rules that will apply to his particular situation.
I never should have passed up going to law school.
Any concealed weapon carry has the responsibility to know the laws of the state(s) they are traveling through or in or suffer the consequences of being an idiot. For instance, when I travel from my home at Fort Campbell, Kentucky/Tennessee, yes I'm in the military, to my brother's home in New Jersey, I research the laws for all states I am traveling through so as not to be breaking the law. And, surprisingly enough, not all the roads I travel on are marked with a state welcome signs at the boarder and yet remarkably with the aide of this new invention called a map, (a graphic representation of the earth's surface as seen from above), or a GPS, I know what state I am in. It's amazing! My other remark would be that I guess since changing a law would be difficult we should just let the old law stand? Maybe it's the way I was brought up but I was taught not to avoid something or leave a wrong not righted simply because it would be to much trouble or difficult. I've carried concealed weapon for over 15 years. I've also walked around Iraq for more that 36 months carrying a loaded weapon everyday, all without incident. It seems to me gun apponents are grasping at any straw they can in order to defend the right to not bear arms. It' amazing that CCDW permit holders have been aloud to carry for years and years but now, all of a sudden, we are idiots and can't figure out how to carry legally in the holiest of holy state park.
(and how do police officer's remember all those laws and which states they have reciprocal agreements with? I guess the Ranger is not as smart as a "regular" police officer)
The point of conceled weapons laws originally was simply this: if you had a reason to have a weapon, you wore it openly for all to see. If you had a reason to hide your weapon, it was assumed you were up to mischief. Until the last few decades, concealing a weapon was illegal everywhere on the assumption that people who responsibly had a reason to have a weapon would wear it openly and only a crook would feel the need to hide it. That way if the police found some punk carrying, they had reason to check him out and possibly prevent some crime.
It doesn't have anything to do with the Second Ammendment, it has to do with your right to hide your weapon. In reality, gun advoctaes know that Americans are NOT comfortable with weapons in plain sight and would not welcome folks carrying openly, as few ever did, although this is widely legal in the US. Outside of TV news, where one or two scary events are found each night from a nation of some 300 million people, there is little need for anyone to carry a concealed weapon in daily life, especially in national parks, statistically some of the safest real estate in America. Leave the guns at home and enjoy your parks without making them yet another battleground in the gun control wars.
The is just belly aching about the NPS having to adjust to the rule. Prior to 1976 there was no problem, of course nobody opened carry in visitor centers Since this is for CCW only, NPS should presume that CCW citizens are no worse when carrying then they are when not, and treat all visitors the same, because they will not know who is and who isn’t. Most facilities should not be restricted and those that are posted should have a gun locker room like a secured coat check. Then when you go to the facility you declare your CCW and check the gun. When you leave get your gun. Not a big deal
As to the varying state laws I would enforce the most liberal state law. So if a CCW from Idaho, who get Idaho law throughout the park and only other CCW that has reciprocity with IDAHO has the same presumption. That would encourage that laws would standardized the most liberal gun laws.
This is just because the nanny state liberals in NPS over the last 30 years do not like citizens being armed. We really need to have the public get over this idea that a man with a gun is a criminal. Get rid of that underlying assumption and most of these problem fade.
I do agree that The new regulation is cumberson. I would have made CCW allowable in parks and the CCW holder has to abide by the states rules he has the CCW license from. So in NH where no CCW rules there are no rules for NK residents on CCW in NPS.
Of course DOI could make is simple and just allow CCW period, no recourse to states rules and also open carry. Just punish those who misues the gun, like vandalism or target shooting in the park etc.
Punish the action if a gun is misused and not make the gun the focus but the shooters actions to be the focus.
"Urban professional left-leaning elites." Now there's a label. Does one size fit all?
re: the comment by RAH:
A law enforcement officer's job would be a lot easier if he or she decided which laws to enforce - or ignore - but that's generally considered unacceptable performance.
I suspect many people would have some heartburn with the idea that laws from another state could override the laws of their own state. That's analogous to saying visitors to the US don't have to obey U.S. laws - just follow the laws of their home country.
Re: Beamis and "open carry" vs. concealed carry:
"Open carry" was tried a few years back in places with names like Tombstone and Dodge City. I don't recall from my history class that it worked out so well in terms of improving general law and order :-)
I suggest you check the real history of Tombstone and Dodge City and not the fiction that was written by the penny dreadfuls that popularized the gunslinger image.
Those places had very low usage of guns ceratinly compared to cities in todays age. Crime and criminal misuse of a gun in DC,Baltitimore, Philadelhia, Ocala, NY, Boston are just an example. The amount of gangland killings, drivebys and crime are very Big compared to Tombstone and Dodge City.