U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-17-2012, 06:11 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 21,001,151 times
Reputation: 8620

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
What do you suppose the chances are that you need a gun in a National Park - or anywhere else, for that matter? If you feel the need for guns to protect your home or family, a much better choice would be to move.

The older I get, the less patience I have for the mindless American affinity for guns. We will never have a civilized society until we break the savage cycle.

Attack away, gun lovers, but know that I'm as conservative as anyone on this board on most major issues. It's just time we understand that conservative values need not and should not include saturating our communities with deadly weapons.
When I hike, I usually bring my pistol. I do that because I hike in extremely rural areas where there can be run ins with wild life that doesn't give a damn about hunting regulations.

So I think there is a middle ground here. Hunting rifles are for hunting, not self defense. I own hunting rifles, I'm a hunter. I don't bring them when hiking unless I'm on a hike/hunt, which I have been known to do on private property.

But I think that the all purpose gun ban goes a little far. A side arm for protection in remote areas of national parks is not a bad idea. Sure, a Grizzly won't be stopped by one shot with a .357, but it might be just enough to make them think twice about charging the rest of the way. I'd rather have some chance then none.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-17-2012, 06:30 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,936 posts, read 22,202,288 times
Reputation: 9020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
There are real concerns about people in national parks not being able to hike in all areas and visit them, because people are out there with guns.

National parks should be off limits to hunting. Plenty of private land and state parks for that.
This has nothing to do with hunting. The law against hunting in national parks was never changed. Guns can be carried in most national parks only for self-defense.

Rifles are more effective than handguns against large bears, and make sense in backcountry areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2012, 06:33 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 21,001,151 times
Reputation: 8620
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
This has nothing to do with hunting. The law against hunting in national parks was never changed. Guns can be carried in most national parks only for self-defense.

Rifles are more effective than handguns against large bears, and make sense in backcountry areas.
You can hunt on national park lands, in special areas

“Hunting in Mojave National Preserve?”
“I thought hunting was prohibited in national parklands…” Preserve staff often hear such questions, especially during the fall when hunters are afield pursuing quail, mule deer, bighorn sheep, and other wildlife. In general, National Park Service (NPS) regulations do prohibit hunting in national parklands—i.e., unless Congress specifically states otherwise in the unit’s founding or enabling legislation. In fact, as of today, hunting is authorized in 69 units of the National Park System. Where hunting is allowed, like in Mojave National Preserve, the NPS continues to provide a unique experience and support for an important American heritage and cultural value.

Mojave National Preserve - Hunting (U.S. National Park Service)

And you need a bigger hand gun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2012, 06:35 PM
 
668 posts, read 1,129,239 times
Reputation: 364
wasnt it Obama who signed the law that permits guns in national parks.
and if they change the just do not go to national parks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2012, 06:37 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,936 posts, read 22,202,288 times
Reputation: 9020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
You can hunt on national park lands, in special areas

“Hunting in Mojave National Preserve?”
“I thought hunting was prohibited in national parklands…” Preserve staff often hear such questions, especially during the fall when hunters are afield pursuing quail, mule deer, bighorn sheep, and other wildlife. In general, National Park Service (NPS) regulations do prohibit hunting in national parklands—i.e., unless Congress specifically states otherwise in the unit’s founding or enabling legislation. In fact, as of today, hunting is authorized in 69 units of the National Park System. Where hunting is allowed, like in Mojave National Preserve, the NPS continues to provide a unique experience and support for an important American heritage and cultural value.

Mojave National Preserve - Hunting (U.S. National Park Service)

And you need a bigger hand gun.
A National Preserve is not the same as a National Park despite the NPS managing them. There's a major difference. When Alaska's federal lands were divided up, for example, many of the lands were made into preserves specifically to allow hunting in them versus national parks which do not.

Ever hear of the advice given in Alaska to people who carry .44 magnum revolvers for bears? File the front site off so it hurts less when the bear shoves it up their butt. Seriously, handguns are ineffective against grizzly bears most of the time, and injured bears do not react the same as injured humans, it makes them more dangerous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2012, 06:40 PM
 
21,287 posts, read 11,520,139 times
Reputation: 12158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Roma View Post
Your feelings do not dictate where other people's rights begin and end. All of these things you mention are violations of the law. If someone is going to violate the law would they pay attention to a gun ban? A gun would be secured in a tent by keeping it under the owner's direct control IE: on his belt or in his possession.
I have no problem with guns in the hands of competent people. I think the Psych evaluations should be much more strict and a much more extensive background check.

I work with a guy who I know is nuts and he got a conceal and carry permit.

To me, that is an indication of what is wrong with handguns, not the guns but the process that puts these things into the hands of almost anyone.

You know, my old man was a Marine in WWII and maybe it's because he saw what guns do to a human body but he never allowed any guns in his house ever for any reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2012, 06:40 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 21,001,151 times
Reputation: 8620
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
A National Preserve is not the same as a National Park despite the NPS managing them. There's a major difference. When Alaska's federal lands were divided up, for example, many of the lands were made into preserves specifically to allow hunting in them versus national parks which do not.

Ever hear of the advice given in Alaska to people who carry .44 magnum revolvers for bears? File the front site off so it hurts less when the bear shoves it up their butt. Seriously, handguns are ineffective against grizzly bears most of the time, and injured bears do not react the same as injured humans, it makes them more dangerous.


Unlike the congressional acts that established national park areas like Yellowstone and Yosemite, the legislation that created Apostle Islands National Lakeshore provided for regulated hunting within park boundaries.

Apostle Islands National Lakeshore - Hunting (U.S. National Park Service)

National park, ugh
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2012, 06:41 PM
 
Location: southern california
55,491 posts, read 74,383,428 times
Reputation: 47886
then the only ones with guns in the parks will be the gangbang pot farmers and the rangers they have paid off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2012, 06:46 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,936 posts, read 22,202,288 times
Reputation: 9020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
Unlike the congressional acts that established national park areas like Yellowstone and Yosemite, the legislation that created Apostle Islands National Lakeshore provided for regulated hunting within park boundaries.

Apostle Islands National Lakeshore - Hunting (U.S. National Park Service)

National park, ugh
Again, not a national park at all. National lakeshores (and sea shores) are not national parks. Just because the NPS manages a site doesn't make it a national park. A national park is a very specific designation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2012, 07:50 PM
 
Location: Jewel Lake (Sagle) Idaho
27,184 posts, read 17,510,541 times
Reputation: 15393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
There are real concerns about people in national parks not being able to hike in all areas and visit them, because people are out there with guns.

National parks should be off limits to hunting. Plenty of private land and state parks for that.

Can someone please explain the "logic" that anti-gun people use? In case they missed it...murder is against the law. Well, at least it is everywhere I'm familiar with. A murder (as in the OP) is ignoring both the laws and societal moores against the taking of life. If someone is planning to commit the crime of murder, please make a case for why they would elect to pay attention to gun laws? Do people really think that a murder is going to see a no-guns sign and think "I better leave my gun behind...I might get in trouble"?

All gun control laws do is provide a safe work haven for criminals. OSHA for bad guys.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:58 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top