The Down Range Forum

Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: mudman on March 19, 2009, 06:43:19 PM

Title: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: mudman on March 19, 2009, 06:43:19 PM
   Judge in Washington over turns National ccw rule. Brady gushishs. On MSN
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: Fatman on March 19, 2009, 06:58:54 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29781541/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29781541/)

Round 1. Expect her lone decision to be appealed and then overruled.  The challenge was obviously filed on the antis home field.
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: Ping on March 19, 2009, 08:45:51 PM
Sorry, just saw that you started this. This absolutely disgusts me and I will not longer visit a National Park. Ignorance is taking over the land and they are not keeping up with the signs of the times. The sign is "bad". Disgraceful and I am sure Teddy Roosevelt would feel the same way!!!!
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: TAB on March 19, 2009, 09:13:41 PM
It was not over turned... its a TRO( temperay restraining order)
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: fightingquaker13 on March 19, 2009, 09:48:37 PM
It was not over turned... its a TRO( temperay restraining order)

Seriously no need to get get upset. A TRO is almost always granted pro forma if a plaintiff can bring forward a prima facea case that a rule is in violation of either statue or previous court ruling. It doesn't signify one way or another. It just says that the opponent has an argument; retreat to your corners, and we'll hold a hearing to go over the evidence. IF a case can be made there, and standing established, then a trial may occur. But at this point, a TRO is basically (though imprecisely) just like showing probable cause. The antis have it because for years upon years, the rule was no undissasembled guns in the parks (for fear of poaching). This IS a legitimate state interest that goes to the very reason the parks were established, as conservation zones under TR, when native game was being hunted to extinction. Add to this that ccw permits are STATE issued and the parks are under federal soveriegnty,and the antis have a legit legal (if not moral) case. This wil be complicated and will probably NOT be decided on 2A grounds. The issues involve federalism and are a lot broader and murkier than just ccw. It doesn't mean we shouldn't weigh in, just understand that this is about more than just guns.
fightingquaker13
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: jaybet on March 20, 2009, 10:20:59 AM
Although I admit that I am not all that "outdoorsey"...I would not ever enter a wilderness area where I am not at the top of the food chain without substantial hardware to protect myself. The argument once again is stupid. I would not "poach" animals with my sidearm and my sidearm would not "Increase danger to park visitors" as the environmental and Brady assholes state. The fact is, CCW holders are more than likely the MOST law abiding citizens in the country. Silliness prevails, as usual.
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: MikeBjerum on March 20, 2009, 10:26:00 AM
Although I admit that I am not all that "outdoorsey"...I would not ever enter a wilderness area where I am not at the top of the food chain without substantial hardware to protect myself. The argument once again is stupid. I would not "poach" animals with my sidearm and my sidearm would not "Increase danger to park visitors" as the environmental and Brady assholes state. The fact is, CCW holders are more than likely the MOST law abiding citizens in the country. Silliness prevails, as usual.

Being too lazy to do the research myself ... Just because I can't carry my .357 or .45 concealed, can I carry my 500 mag in a holster?  In bear country I'd much rather have the 500 anyway ... Beats the hell out of jingly bells and pepper spray  ;D
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: shooter32 on March 20, 2009, 10:35:29 AM
Being too lazy to do the research myself ... Just because I can't carry my .357 or .45 concealed, can I carry my 500 mag in a holster?  In bear country I'd much rather have the 500 anyway ... Beats the hell out of jingly bells and pepper spray  ;D

Beats the hell out of anything... that's for damn sure ;D
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: MikeBjerum on March 20, 2009, 10:43:33 AM
Beats the hell out of anything... that's for damn sure ;D

Our local daily paper ran this story yesterday, and it is gone today.  I was surprised by the number that thought it was rediculous not to allow concealed carry.  However, to this day I get shocked by the numbers that still cling to the idea that without concealed carry around they are safer and there will be no guns.  The sheep will not accept the idea that the bad guys will do what they want, when they want, where they want.

I had a discussion with one of our Pastors last week.  I told her the guy that was going to help at a service was a retired Chief of Police from the community where he lives.  She was concerned that he might carry until she realized I said he was retired.  It totally went over her head that retired or not he might still carry.  Then she noticed a look on my face and said you don't bring a gun in the Church ... You haven't brought a gun to Church ... Don't tell me if you bring a gun to Church.  All I said to her was the worn out phrase "Concealed means concealed, and you will never know if I'm carrying unless you are around when it is needed."  She followed up with "Do you have one now ... Don't tell me!"
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: shooter32 on March 20, 2009, 10:49:39 AM
Our local daily paper ran this story yesterday, and it is gone today.  I was surprised by the number that thought it was rediculous not to allow concealed carry.  However, to this day I get shocked by the numbers that still cling to the idea that without concealed carry around they are safer and there will be no guns.  The sheep will not accept the idea that the bad guys will do what they want, when they want, where they want.

I had a discussion with one of our Pastors last week.  I told her the guy that was going to help at a service was a retired Chief of Police from the community where he lives.  She was concerned that he might carry until she realized I said he was retired.  It totally went over her head that retired or not he might still carry.  Then she noticed a look on my face and said you don't bring a gun in the Church ... You haven't brought a gun to Church ... Don't tell me if you bring a gun to Church.  All I said to her was the worn out phrase "Concealed means concealed, and you will never know if I'm carrying unless you are around when it is needed."  She followed up with "Do you have one now ... Don't tell me!"

Very well done!! You said all the right things in the right way. Hopefully she will never find out.
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: fightingquaker13 on March 20, 2009, 10:52:19 AM
Our local daily paper ran this story yesterday, and it is gone today.  I was surprised by the number that thought it was rediculous not to allow concealed carry.  However, to this day I get shocked by the numbers that still cling to the idea that without concealed carry around they are safer and there will be no guns.  The sheep will not accept the idea that the bad guys will do what they want, when they want, where they want.

I had a discussion with one of our Pastors last week.  I told her the guy that was going to help at a service was a retired Chief of Police from the community where he lives.  She was concerned that he might carry until she realized I said he was retired.  It totally went over her head that retired or not he might still carry.  Then she noticed a look on my face and said you don't bring a gun in the Church ... You haven't brought a gun to Church ... Don't tell me if you bring a gun to Church.  All I said to her was the worn out phrase "Concealed means concealed, and you will never know if I'm carrying unless you are around when it is needed."  She followed up with "Do you have one now ... Don't tell me!"


In fairness, I don't carry in church either. I don't even know if is legal in Fl. (I probably should). I just choose not to. I figure if I believe enough to go in the first place, that it shows disrespect to the Boss to bring a weapon. Thats just my choice, not a reccomendation, but I get where your pastors coming from.
fightingQUAKER13
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: MikeBjerum on March 20, 2009, 10:57:38 AM


In fairness, I don't carry in church either. I don't even know if is legal in Fl. (I probably should). I just choose not to. I figure if I believe enough to go in the first place, that it shows disrespect to the Boss to bring a weapon. Thats just my choice, not a reccomendation, but I get where your pastors coming from.
fightingQUAKER13

Think about what I said  ::)

Did I say I carried or not  ::)

What I'm doing is using that recent situtation to demonstrate the reaction of some to the idea of guns ... They have no idea.
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: Hazcat on March 20, 2009, 10:58:33 AM
FQ13,

It's legal in FL.
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: fightingquaker13 on March 20, 2009, 11:09:55 AM
M58
Sorry. I didn't mean that as a slam on you, its just that I wanted t make the point that some folks who think carrying a gun to one venue is inappropriate are not necessarily anti-gun. I don't know your pastor so I don't have clue what her position is. I also know that in a situation like the one in Aurora Colorado, where some nut shot up an Evangelical youth hostel after making anti-church statements, I'd have been carrying so much hardware I'd clink when I walked in on Sunday,just as the parishioners did at the church where he was shot. As I said, not a slam, just understadning that we can't always assume that there is a correlation between a persons personal choices and how they vote.
peace

fightingquaker13
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: ericire12 on March 20, 2009, 02:59:53 PM
once again there will be no accountability for activist judges.
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: Matthew Carberry on March 20, 2009, 05:27:19 PM
This isn't judicial activism, there was no interpretation of statute or Constitution involved.

Go reread fightingquaker's post about what constitutes a TRO.  However I might dislike it, the judge was nowhere near out of line.
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: Fatman on March 20, 2009, 07:15:16 PM


In fairness, I don't carry in church either. I don't even know if is legal in Fl. (I probably should). I just choose not to. I figure if I believe enough to go in the first place, that it shows disrespect to the Boss to bring a weapon. Thats just my choice, not a reccomendation, but I get where your pastors coming from.
fightingQUAKER13

Only if you're a bad guy and intend to do evil things with it.  If you carry for the good fight and protection from said evil, I'd like to think God would look favorably on you for being a willing sheepdog among His flock. My two cents in the collection plate.
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: tombogan03884 on March 20, 2009, 07:47:11 PM


In fairness, I don't carry in church either. I don't even know if is legal in Fl. (I probably should). I just choose not to. I figure if I believe enough to go in the first place, that it shows disrespect to the Boss to bring a weapon. Thats just my choice, not a reccomendation, but I get where your pastors coming from.
fightingQUAKER13

God helps those who help themselves, why should he waste his time on the others ?
A man is trapped in his house during a flood
Someone comes along with a 4 wheel drive pulls up to save him, He replies "no thank you, GOD will save me"

The water gets higher and a boat comes along to save him, But again he replies "no thank you, GOD will save me"

The water keeps rising until he is on the roof and a helicopter drops a ladder to him. But again he replies "no thank you, GOD will save me"

The man drowns. When he gets to Heaven he asks GOD "Why did you not save me?
GOD answers "I sent a truck, a boat, and a helicopter!"

If there's no metal detector at the door, I'm carrying .
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: Rastus on March 20, 2009, 08:26:43 PM
Only if you're a bad guy and intend to do evil things with it.  If you carry for the good fight and protection from said evil, I'd like to think God would look favorably on you for being a willing sheepdog among His flock. My two cents in the collection plate.

I'm going to roll with you on this one Fatman.  I don't read anywhere in The Book where it says we are supposed to be door mats.  My pennies thrown in with yours.........
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: tombogan03884 on March 20, 2009, 08:33:40 PM
http://bible.cc/luke/11-21.htm

When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace:
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: Ping on March 20, 2009, 08:43:21 PM
Blessed are the peacemakers.
Title: Re: No ccw in nat. parks
Post by: ismram on March 20, 2009, 09:25:21 PM
Only if you're a bad guy and intend to do evil things with it.  If you carry for the good fight and protection from said evil, I'd like to think God would look favorably on you for being a willing sheepdog among His flock. My two cents in the collection plate.
Well said Fatman!