Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Court Decision Blocks Guns in National Parks
Rule issued in the waning days of the Bush administration is overturned
WASHINGTON - A judge on Thursday blocked a federal rule allowing people to carry concealed, loaded guns in U.S. national parks and wildlife refuges.
The decision by U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly halts a change in regulations issued in the waning days of the Bush administration and orders further review. She set an April 20 deadline for the Interior Department to review the rule and indicate its course of action in response to the injunction.
The rule, which took effect Jan. 11, and 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.
The Obama administration had said it was reviewing the Bush rule but had defended it in court.
A spokeswoman for Interior Secretary Ken Salazar declined to comment Thursday, citing the ongoing court case.
Restrictions adopted during Reagan years
The Bush administration issued the gun rule in December in response to letters from half the Senate asking officials to lift the restrictions on guns in parks, which were adopted by the Reagan administration in the early 1980s.
The rule went further than a draft proposal issued a year ago and would have allowed concealed weapons even in parks located in states that prohibit the carrying of guns in state parks. Some states allow concealed weapons but also ban guns from parks.
Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, one of two groups that sued to block the rule, called the judge's ruling a victory for the people.
"We're happy that this headlong rush to push more guns into more places has been slowed," he said.
Bryan Faehner, associate director of the National Parks Conservation Association, which also brought suit, said he was extremely pleased.
"We're especially glad to hear that the court is agreeing with the park rangers and the public who are concerned that there will be negative impacts from the (now-overturned) regulation and increased likelihood for opportunistic poaching of wildlife and increased risk of violence to the public."
NRA backed the Bush rule change
The National Rifle Association had pushed for the Bush rule change, saying law-abiding citizens had the right to protect themselves and their families while enjoying America's national parks and wildlife refuges. The previous regulations were inconsistent and unclear, the NRA said.
A group representing park rangers, retirees and conservation organizations protested the Bush rule change, complaining that it could lead to confusion and increased danger for visitors, rangers and other law enforcement agencies.
- Posted in
13 Comments so far
Show AllThank you President Obama.
Stupid judge. Now how am I supposed to defend myself in the park if a very nasty bear or wolf is about to attack me or my lovely wife ?!?!? Banning guns especially in parks is just plain retarded. We voters in Tulsa take these events very seriously.
I think it is far more likely that armed people in parks would shoot each other or take pot shots at wildlife than defending themselves against wildlife. I've noticed that people who are into the gun culture are much more paranoid in general than people who give no thought to having weapons with them at all times. Most people using the park system are not preoccupied with being killed by wildlife.
My park ranger friend who deals with law enforcement is very apprehensive about people being allowed to carry guns. She said it's a terrible idea to allow armed people in.
Handguns are never necessary, and unless the user is skilled or lucky, are only going to make the grizzly bear madder. You will be mauled before the bear succumgs to the wounds. Instead, there are pepper sprays, designed to disable and disorient grizzly bears.
I've witnesses the effect of pepper spray on humans, as cops frequently use pepper spray on peaceful protestors. If the grizzly is subjected to the same degee stinging and temporary blindness, it will easy to get away, and the life of this magnificent animal is spared.
As far as other animals, those sensationalized mtn. lion attacks are extremely rare, so rizzly bears present the only animal hazard in US national parks. In the lower 48, grizzlies are only a potential hazard in Yellowstone and Glacier National parks, even there attacks are rare if the hikers take a few precautions.
---USAn---
This is a Travesty supported by the same idiots who have encouraged and glamorized violence in media and ignored its proliferation in homes, schools and communities, to blame its spread on guns instead of acting out by people.
There will never be a time when this government can survive the assault on second amendment rights that makes law abiding citizens who do not wish to be victims or criminals make such a choice.
This injunction is Unconstitutional, short-sighted and dangerous.
It is also based on the lies and propeganda of the Brady Bunch and others, who had better prepare for an onslaught of home made explosives, acid attacks, and knife attacks that the same criminals and nut jobs our society is mass producing will use instead of guns.
Only difference is, those of us who know that guns are a beautiful tool for self protection and collecting, for the protection of our familes and homes and indeed our nation, will be criminalized too.
Let's wake up and stop selling violent acting out in the media, permitting bullying in schools and in the workplace, and allowing black market violent economies of drugs and crime to be the only economic engines in the ghettos, enculcating a huge swell among teens and even families in poor working and the middle class corrupted by the spread of criminal enterprise.
Stop blaming the folks who can make a difference, sane responsible, defenders of democracy--we gun owners!
I sincerely hope the Supreme Court does not attempt to subvert the Constitution as this Judge has...what an irony: President Obama tries to unite us, and his minions find the one wedge that will rip us apart: destroying the Consititution in a feeble stupid attempt to stop the violence by blaming the tools for self protection that help to prevent it.
There will be a backlash against this administration and ILLEGAL INJUNCTION from people, even leftists like me who worked to get President Obama elected; all because of the control freak crazies that have given us a myriad of laws and no justice at all
Mendo Chuck
Thank You aminahyaquin . . . .
You said it very well . . . . Very well indeed.
If guns had no triggers or bullets, then it would be true that "people kill people". However, the enhancement of the capacity to kill is because of guns.
There is no point in having a gun unless you are intent on killing something,
or wounding something. Fearful gullible human beings with a short fuse or inability to act rationally who own guns of any kind are dangerous and should be controlled. How about lining them all up against a wall and shooting at them with those guns that don't kill people?
OK YOU AND YOUR WIFE OR GIRL FRIEND ARE HOME SLEEPING AND A CRIMINAL BREAKS IN TO YOUR HOME, AND COMES INTO YOUR BED ROOM WITH A GUN, BECAUSE CRIMINAL WILL ALWAYS GET THERE GUNS LAWS OR NO LAWS . AND HE POINTS HIS GUN AT YOU AND SAYS I AM GOING TO TIE YOU UP AND RAPE YOUR WOMEN. AND THERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN DO BECAUSE I NO GUN LAWS WOULD LET YOU HAVE A GUN TO PROTECT YOUR SELF. SO ABOUT A 1/2 HOUR AFTER HE DID WHAT EVERY HE WANT TO, THE COPS COME, AND YOUR WOMAN IS CRYING AND YOU ARE MAD IF ONLY I HAD A GUN I COULD HAVE PROTECTED MY FAMILY. AND MOST LIKELY IF THE CRIMINAL THOUGH YOU HAD A GUN IN YOUR HOUSE HE WOULD HAVE NOT BROKE IN, IN THE FIRST PLACE. HAVE GOOD NIGHT SLEEP.
First off, QUIT YELLING!!! Second off, learn how to PUNCTUATE. And third off, learn how to SPELL. And fourth off, use proper GRAMMAR. If you are representative of the concealed permit gun owners who want the right to carry in our parks, well, suffice it to say: I'm Scared.
I think if we allow legalized handguns in national parks, we should also let the armed drug cartels grow marijuana and cocoa plants in our national parks. To save the CIA the trouble of having to coordinate all those shipments for propped up dictatorships.
If you're that worried about being attacked by a bear, take a weapon that will wound it or scare it, at least. A nice rifle, a shot gun...who kills a mountain lion with a concealed handgun? You should have guns, lots of em if you want...but do you need one in the park, really? I don't think so.
Humans will have a right to have a gun when they can manufacture bullets from their rear ends. Until then its just a technology. You dont have a right to a technology. Gun nuts are just so nuts.
If you are worried about bears and wolves, try this simple simon. Stay out of the parks. Its their home, not yours. They arent asking to move into your livingroom.
If you want a forest, just restore the ones that you used to have in the cities.
Stupid humans and their belief in rights.
Guns are ok. Let them visit parks all they want to. Just dont let idiot humans in with them at the same time.
That is right Why would you have to let a husband protect his wife or a father protect hid daughter? Rapists just want to have a little fun. Thieves and murders are a minority To have a pistol would be denying them there fun also.
Why is everyone concerned with honest citizens with background checks carrying concealed weapons? It is the people that do not follow the laws you should be concerned about.
This decision only Disarms law abiding citizens, Not the ones that would do you harm.