Give Your Opinion on Right To Carry in Parks

Link to NRA article

I would like to encourage those of you who believe as I do to make your opinion known to the government. Simply put, it is an abomination that we cannot carry in parks and on other types of public land. Let's be loud enough to get the "change" we need!

[yt=This]XE5pGeCUM-Y[/yt]

If no one can carry a firearm into the park, who do you need defending from?

Yet, if everyone is allowed to carry a firearm into the park, how do the rangers tell the law-abiding citizens from the criminals?

I believe because it's about a political decision involving guns, while Camp Wordforge is generally for "Guns are fun" threads.

That's great Jenee, except for the fact that criminals are using the public parks for things like growing drugs now. Go hiking, bump into something you shouldn't, and you're dead - unless you're armed.

If you can guarantee everyone in a park is disarmed, good for you. But you can't.

Also, your question about how rangers tel law abiding citizens from the criminals?

Well, it's simple: Law abiding citizens obey the law. Criminals don't.

You're joking, right?

No - she really is that clueless/naive/clevertrollish.

If firearms are not allowed in the park, you've got a 50/50 chance of taking them out or defending yourself without the end resulting in somene's death.

That would be alot easier to enforce if no one was allowed to have one.

And you can tell by just looking at them

That guy in the red shirt - he must be a criminal.

Why do you think I'm joking?

Has there really been an example of someone getting gunned down in a park by someone growing drugs there?

In all of the parks in TN that I've been camping, the rangers don't enforce the "no guns" law anyway. They just look the other way for the most part. In fact, I had one tell me that you'd be stupid not to have a gun because of bears.

Shoes, Jenee really wants to know why you think she's joking.

I'm also wondering if you've camped in the UN Biosphere and carried?

What does a law banning guns have to do with no one being able carrying? The type person you might need defending from is the type person who's most likely to ignore any such ban in the first place.

The criminals would be the ones...you know...committing crimes.

I used to work at a state park in Michigan. There were deer and ... other wild animals - the occasional raccoon trapped in a dumpster were bitches to get out.

The deer would stand in the middle of the road just daring you to do something cuz they know they're protected there.

There were campgrounds and beaches and hiking trails and acres and acres of just woods. and to this day, I'd feel much safer walking through there alone than I would in any city street. and I've never carried a gun outside the military.

For that last sentence, I'm glad.

I am so glad you're glad. You have no idea how much it means to me that you are glad. I couldn't be gladder about how glad you are.

I learned long ago there's no point in holding a discussion with you. It will be amusing to watch others do so.

So, lets say the park opens and as everyone is walking in, everyone is carrying a gun. No one committing a crime at this point, cuz, in your senerio, it would be legal to carry a gun into the park.

So, I ask, how does the ranger know which one to stop?

yes, I'm the one who can carry a discussion.

Thanks for starting this thread. Have a nice day.

Why at that point is the ranger stopping anyone? No one has committed a crime!!!

There have been a lot of disappearances around Cade's Cove, TN.

Now I'm gonna have that Steve Earl song stuck in my head all day.

Stop for what?

For... having a gun and obeying the law! The same way cops stop people with concealed permits for obeying the law! I guess Jenee isn't making the correlation between this and permit holding either.

Uh, the law is not about whether or not you can carry a firearm into the park. It is about whether or not you can do so legally.

When you come up with a way to make laws that make it impossible to commit crimes, rather than merely illegal and punishable, your statement will make sense. For now, it does not.

If "no one [is] committing a crime at this point," the ranger doesn't stop anyone. You don't stop people who aren't committing crimes. It's like asking, "If the speed limit is 70 miles an hour, and no one is going over 70, how do the cops know who to stop for speeding?"

Is that so hard to understand?

I didn't realize people carrying firearms into state parks was becoming a problem. Do you or the OP have any statistics. Is this a problem?

Clearly you see which vehicles have the highest possible speed and pull those people over.

Not that I'm aware of.

I guess it is. As it stands, if a ranger comes upon a park visiter and that person has a gun, the ranger knows he's up to no good.

If everyone is allowed to carry guns, the ranger doesn't know who is there to commit a crime until after it happens.

It's like this. I had a conversation with a conservation officer one day. He was relaying a situation in which he'd watch a guy pull off the road, slide over to the passenger seat, raise a rifle, take aim and shoot a deer - out of season.

I asked why he waited until the deer was shot before he acted. He gave me much the same response as I'm getting here.

So, under this proposed law change, rangers would have to wait till a criminal shoots a park visitor before he can take action.

Is this really what you want?