Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Working Out the Details of Guns in National Parks
ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK, Colo. - Guns tend to bring out a black-or-white, yes-or-no stridency in American policy debate. Guns are bad. Guns are good. Guns are dangerous. Guns keep you safe.
The National Parks evoke equally deep emotional feelings - about place. Setting aside specific spots for the celebration of nature, or history, or spirituality, is an old tradition - as old as the Second Amendment.
Now those emotions are colliding.
A new law passed by Congress and signed by President Obama last week will allow guns in the parks and national wildlife refuges. Attached as an amendment to an overhaul of credit card rules, the law will take effect next year. Fine-print rules, allowing both concealed and openly carried weapons, are now being written at the Department of the Interior, which runs the parks system.
How gun owners and weekend warrior hikers can find accommodation on this new trail is only part of the story. Parks officials are also scratching their heads about how the new rules will affect enforcement of laws on things like gun permits, which vary widely and will still hold sway even on federal park lands, and wildlife poaching. Some people believe that the change will be immense, others that it will not be noticeable at all.
One park visitor here was not sure what to think.
"Gun rights are gun rights, but do you need them in a location like this?" said Russell Lahrmann, a dentist from Industry, Tex., near Houston, who was hiking on Tuesday on a trail around Bear Lake with his wife, Lisa, and their 8-year-old son, Luke.
Mr. Lahrmann said he owns guns - they are just part of life in Texas. But in coming here, he said, glancing around at the blue lake with the towering mountains behind it, it would not occur to him to want his weapons.
"It'd be like carrying around a bowling ball - you could do it, but why would you?" he added. "I don't feel unsafe here."
Park rangers and volunteers said they were not sure whether gun possession in the park would increase or not when the new law takes effect, partly because they have no idea how many visitors are illegally carrying concealed weapons now. Hardly anyone is ever caught, though current law requires owners to lock or store their guns in a trunk or glove box while in the parks.
"If a person is going to bring a weapon in here, they'll do it whether there's a law or not," said Major Sansam, a seasonal volunteer at Rocky Mountain National Park, the seventh-most popular in the system, with about 2.8 million visits last year.
Law enforcement of illegal hunting is another area of some confusion. Under current law, carrying or transporting a loaded weapon in plain sight is considered probable cause to stop a visitor as a possible poacher. The elk population, in particular, is huge at Rocky Mountain. After the new law, hunting will still be illegal, which means rangers will have to catch people in the act.
Scot McElveen, president of the Association of National Park Rangers, said an officer would have to "see somebody shoot at wildlife or catch them standing over the carcass."
The chief ranger at Rocky Mountain, Mark Magnuson, said his officers were already taught to act as though any visitor could be armed, so the new rules might not mean much in terms of training or preparation. Still, he said, it will probably be in a ranger's mind when he or she is called to respond to rowdy or drunken campers at night, or meets a hiker alone on a backcountry trail.
"People don't leave their problems at home when they go to recreate," Mr. Magnuson said.
An equally thorny question involves state jurisdiction. Under the federal law, existing state law will determine how the regulations work in each park. State laws can differ, so in parks that straddle state lines - like Yellowstone, spread across Wyoming, Idaho and Montana, and Death Valley, in California and Nevada - different laws may apply in different sections.
"What happens if there is a pursuit of someone with a firearm in a National Park and they cross state lines?" said Bryan Faehner, an associate director for the National Parks Conservation Association, a nonprofit group. "How are they going to know what state they are in?"
Colorado, like other states, also recognizes concealed weapons permits from some states but not others. A permit issued in Texas or Pennsylvania is valid in Colorado, for example, and would thus eventually be recognized in Rocky Mountain. But a permit holder from California or New York would still have to leave his or her guns locked away, because permits from those states are not recognized here.
Some visitors said the feel of Rocky Mountain, and the national parks in general, could change, and not for the better, if the sight of a gun on a backpacker's hip becomes common.
"I like the idea that there are places that are weapon-free," said Denise Larson, a school language instruction aide from Topeka, Kan., who was visiting the park with her husband, Will. "This should be one of them."
Other visitors said that rules should be uniform and that if a person had a valid legal permit, federal park land should be no different from any other place.
"I don't see any problem," said Ken Pike, a retired automobile dealership worker from Garland, Tex., near Dallas. Mr. Pike said he owns guns, but did not have a permit to carry a concealed weapon. "If I did, I'd carry it anywhere I went, as long as it was legal," he said.
Dan Frosch contributed reporting from Denver.
- Posted in

10 Comments so far
Show AllReminds me of Zymurgy's First Law of Evolving System Dynamics:
"Once you open a can of worms, the only way to recan them is to use a bigger can."
"Guns are good"
Staring at the sun corrects vision problems
"Guns keep you safe"
Drinking formaldehyde cures erectile dysfunction
all you people who think guns are bad are fools.
people make their own decisions and are responsible for them. if a student stabs another student/teacher in the neck with a pencil, will pencils become evil? would you ban them from schools because of their villainy?
and actually moondoggy drinking formaldehyde will cure E.D, because youll be dead and wont need the boner anymore.
I can categorically state that there have been no students stabbed to death by a pencil in any US school during the last 25 years. Can you say the same about students being shot to death by students with guns? Are you arguing now that all students should be armed? Your logic, unfortunately, is the same logic employed by the NRA when they claim that guns make America safer. The facts don't support it. 500,000 years of human experience have demonstrated that the only person who benefits from having a better weapon is the person who made the weapon. The guy who has the weapon sooner or later runs into a guy with a better one--R.I.P.
There is no logic in your comment, Gilgamesh. Reread it, especially the first, last and middle part.
Are you sure that's what you wanted to say? Think about it.
Think before you speak and you'll appear less a fool. Peace.
Funny how nobody ever asked me if I was carrying a gun - all through the many years and many parks I've visited over my lifetime. And I always carried a handgun. Always. Nobody at Yellowstone ever asked either - although they do yell at you for stepping off the walkways... This is a baloney question. If it really is about CCW - then it's a no-brainer. They are less than useless against animals (4-legged variety) - and more useful against the 2-legged kind just as a suggestion to leave me alone. You don't have to shoot anybody - few are dumb enough to challenge that dark empty bore staring them in the face. But I've NEVER met anyone like that in a national park - just once in a state park, and that was a park official with a big mouth. (I didn't shoot him either.) So let's get on to more serious matters, and leave such idiocy alone.
I really like the idea of maintaining some areas reality-free. That's why when I go out in my boat I never take a radio (it would disturb the mood)or any signaling devices (they could go off accidentally and hurt someone)or any life jackets(they scare the kids because they think we might sink). After all, 99% of boaters never need these devices anyway. I feel so safe when I'm out in the Gulf of Mexico with my grandchildren enjoying all that beauty that I just don't want anything to intrude.
I totally admire your attitude. I feel the same way about going into our nearby wilderness areas here in Montana. I don't bring a cell phone nor a GPS devise. I like to really feel that I'm away from the world of phones and other electronic gadgets and just experience the peace and quiet of nature as much as possible.
Actually, I was being facetious. I was trying to make the point that going out into the Gulf of Mexico without safety devices was as foolish as going out into the wilderness without the ability to protect one's loved ones. If one want's to risk their own life, that's somewhat their business, but not risking the safety of their loved one's.
Sure, nothing happens most of the time, but its like using a child-seat or wearing a seat-belt - most of the time it doesn't make any difference if you use one, but sometimes sh-t happens. I really wouldn't bet my grand-kids or my wife's lives just because I "felt safe" enough not to take any precautions. Unless you can predict the future, feelings are not something to bet your life on.
When we are out on the water, I take take every precaution possible to ensure their safety. When I'm out in the woods, I also think that one should not just depend on luck - the consequences of one time being unlucky are too great. I'm proud to be able to protect my loved ones if necessary, if need be with a firearm. I'd rather have one and not need it than need one and not have it.
I was wondering.
I wouldn't go out on the Gulf of Mexico without protection. Neither do I go into the woods without proper protection. You wouldn't go snorkeling without mask and fins. Whenever us humans travel into territory that's outside our habitats we risk serious injury or death from exposure to the elements.
It's one thing if you're just out on a raft 100 feet from shore on a calm day, or taking a short walk on a familiar trail. But I'm not stupid. I was a wilderness backcountry ranger for 4 years and am a lifelong backpacker and ski mountaineer. I've climbed several 14,000 foot peaks, dozens of lesser peaks and traveled in the backcountry for weeks at a time. I ski all winter in avalanche terrain and I'm not dead yet. Been skiing for 40 years now this year.
I'm a rock climber too, but I never climb without the necessary rope, harness, helmet, climbing shoes, chalk and hardware. It would be suicidal. There are free-soloists who climb certain very familiar routes without roping up, but I'm not one of them.
So I'm not suggesting to just go off doing something reckless, endangering your family. I wear a life jacket when I canoe, and a seatbelt when I drive. But when I go into the wilderness, I don't carry a phone, nor a gun. I bring along my dog or travel in a group. I don't have a GPS, but I do take a topo map, even in familiar terrain. And I have no beef against GPS units except the price. And cell phones usually don't work in the mountains anyway.
As for firearms. I live and travel in country where there are healthy populations of North America's largest land predators. Here's my little secret. Besides traveling with a dog. I have a ziplock bag with firecrackers and a lighter in a pocket on my hip belt. If a big bear or cat gets too curious, I'll light off a few firecrackers and scare the bejesus out of it. But I've never found a need to try it.
You sound like a good, responsible father, grandfather and husband, floridaguy. Kudos. Have a fun and safe summer! Watch out for Manatees!