PDA

View Full Version : guns in the park


lauxier
01-12-2009, 02:34 PM
a while back,someone sumitted a thread which said guns in the park would be allowed after Jan 1,2009.Can you carry guns in the park???

sammcdonald
01-12-2009, 05:00 PM
concealed only with a permit from tn or nc or states with reciprocal agreements with tn or nc...otherwise still no.

hw3
01-12-2009, 06:30 PM
Any clue if any contiguous or close states reciprocate with TN or NC? And does the weapon have to be carried concealled? Thanks, hw3

pmike
01-12-2009, 08:54 PM
This is a link to a site with information about concealed carry and reciprocal agreements between various states.

http://www.carryconcealed.net/reciprocity

Mike

sammcdonald
01-13-2009, 07:03 PM
must be concealed carry

Owl
01-21-2009, 01:20 PM
A good thing, this is - because these days you never know where the next psycho will strike.

flyred06
01-21-2009, 05:53 PM
I carry at home and if I am on the road but I have never dreamed of carrying in the mountains. Of coarse I have thought about carrying in Gatlinburg. Ha Ha. The mountains just seem like the one place on earth that trouble would not find you. But as they say the innocent just usually make victims.:frown:

Mark_Cathey
01-22-2009, 05:16 PM
I used to work for the DA's office in Elizabethton, TN and while I was there, we worked the prosecution of several good ol' boys who had seen some female AT hikers cross the road near Roan Mtn. and had followed them up the trail and raped them. I've always been an opponent of guns in the NPS, but now that I take my daughters into the backwoods, my perspective has changed somewhat. If I'm up there by myself, I wouldn't even think of it. When I have the two things I care most about in the world with me, that's a different story....

flyred06
01-22-2009, 05:38 PM
This is a all true but sad story on how our world is going. Where can we go to stop the madness. I do believe that some of the surrounding towns of that area are beginning to encourage the wrong elements to the family getaway of the smokies. To much on politics, back to fishing.

Dukee
01-24-2009, 02:10 AM
any truth to this getting axed by our new president?

Lumber_Jack
01-24-2009, 11:03 AM
Truth? yes. Reallity? maybe not so much. He has mentioned in campaign that he would try to abolish all hand gun carry permits. He may try, but I dont think he will succeed on that front.

flyred06
01-26-2009, 04:04 PM
I hope not. And the truth is we will just have to wait and see.


No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
Thomas Jefferson (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/t/thomasjeff125076.html)

fishingjunky
01-27-2009, 02:37 PM
must be concealed carry


In TN it does NOT have to be concealed as long as one holds the carry permit for TN. There is a great website with info for all your questions at http://www.usacarry.com/ I do not know about NC.. I'd have to look or research it and see. Of course.. the point in going armed is to protect yourself/family and I for one don't want the bad guy/evildoer to know I am armed. Just my opinion.

jmelrod
01-27-2009, 11:18 PM
I think our lawmakers (state & federal) will find it increasingly difficult to put more restrictions on gun rights in light of the recent US Supreme Court decision overturning the DC ban on guns. In any event, I do not think guns are the forefront of President Obama's agenda. Hopefully he is more concerned with the problems facing the US economy.

Mark_Cathey
01-28-2009, 04:05 PM
I was going to say that exact thing, JM. He's got a bunch of bigger fish to fry than to spend time thinking about this (one way or the other) right now.

flyred06
01-28-2009, 04:12 PM
I do not think he will attack this head on untill probably his 2nd term. However he could easily slip in increased taxation on guns and/or ammo to the point most people who do not own or at least own and practice can not afford it. But hopefully I am wrong. Either way I think total gun control would be at least 4 years away.

hw3
01-30-2009, 02:08 PM
Most policy makers pay scant attention to Court Decisions, unless the Court happens to hit not only the law correctly, but also a policy on which most can agree. Ths US Supremes latest, actually the only case directly addressing the essence of the 2d Amendment, is neither definitive nor final. One aspect is settled for now: it is not limited to militias. What that means in terms of regulation is and cannot be decided until further legislative/ regulatory measures are taken and tested against this case, as well as the wealth of case law addressing regulation vs. the outright ban struck down in DC. There is a faction in this country that favors the ban, which will not stand, but which will push wherever it can to regulate to the edge of a ban. I doubt it represents a majority of Americans, probably overwhelmingly the majority is opposed to tight restrictions. But that majority is on a spectrum, and while many favor absolutely no restrictions, most feel regulation either necessary, or that which they will not be affected by and indifferent. The bottom line is it will be necessary to wait and see what develops, and be prepared to either directly litigate, or to support those who so do, on either side. While a 5-4 Court might have gotten the law on the 2d Amd right, the unanswered issues, and an unclear policy and even more an unclear support, leave us to the future. Simple Country Lawyer

jmelrod
01-30-2009, 03:13 PM
I agree hw3. I think my post was a little optimistic. I'm not sure where the next "test run" case will come from. Maybe the new guns in the parks regulation?

jeffnles1
01-30-2009, 04:00 PM
While gun owners can never let our guards down, I do think the administration has their hands full with the economy and all of the bail outs and budget mess. It will be at least a year or so before they tackle anything like guns.

Right now, they need the broad based support and positive opinion the new President has. They're not going to go out of their way to anger any group, especially one as big and nebulous as "gun owners" which includes fishermen, hunters, target shooters, and the "milita" types. While the anti-gun groups try to paint gun owners with the same brush stroke and give the perception that we're all ultra right wing nut jobs, the policy makers, congress, and the administration knows the reality is we're much more main stream and they cannot afford to loose us just yet.

Jeff

jmelrod
01-30-2009, 05:03 PM
Nicely said Jeff.

Mark_Cathey
01-30-2009, 05:22 PM
I agree Jeff. Broad strokes can include political leanings too. My dad and granddad were both lifelong Democrats (being from the old South) and hunted their whole lives. Most everyone I consider a friend is a gun owner, regardless of party affiliation (or no affiliation). I don't think the anti-gun lobby holds much more sway with the administration (or the general public) than the militia groups did with the old one. I guess we'll see.

hw3
01-30-2009, 11:39 PM
Agree with what has been said re: new efforts at control. My points were general, and go more to our system of government and the fact that when there are strong feelings on either fringe, the center of mass of the bell shaped curve runs the risk of being overtaken by events at the margin. And do not doubt there will be attempts on the tighter restriction front, after all, what can the other fringe ask for but free machine guns? There is a common center, and it will prevail. There will neither be unlimited access to firearms, nor free AK47's. Simple Country Lawyer

Mark_Cathey
01-31-2009, 11:21 AM
I agree with what you're saying, HW. Let's hope that's the case.

Brian Griffing
01-31-2009, 11:39 AM
While gun owners can never let our guards down, I do think the administration has their hands full with the economy and all of the bail outs and budget mess. It will be at least a year or so before they tackle anything like guns. Jeff

Jeff, you are absolutely right. The Obama administration has its hands completely full right now undermining and weakening the military (repealing Don't Ask, and implementing a 10% DoD budget cut) and simultaneously emboldening our enemies (closing the dentention camps in Guantanamo Bay, announcing no harsh treatment of captured terrorists, and planning for a time-driven withdrawal from Iraq), all the while we are prosecuting a global war on several fronts against a desperate, fascist, nationless enemy willing to do anything to destroy us.

Frankly, I'd feel better if 2nd Amendment issues consumed more of his time.

snaildarter
01-31-2009, 01:35 PM
Come on, Brian, speak up. Don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel! :biggrin::)

Mark_Cathey
01-31-2009, 03:13 PM
Snaildarter- awesome name.
Man, if only you could have saved the Little T. That was a trouter's river for sure.

sammcdonald
03-23-2009, 07:11 PM
this from npca:

We have really big news! Late last week, a judge issued a preliminary injunction against the Department of Interior's (DOI) regulation allowing loaded, concealed firearms in parks.

Among other things, the court recognized that the Bush Administration "ignored substantial information in the administrative record concerning environmental impacts," and went on to say that the process was "astoundingly flawed." Consistent with concerns raised by NPCA and several park ranger organizations, the judge ruled that the DOI's process ignored the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), a law which requires the government to assess whether or not a proposed policy will have an adverse impact on the environment, including park wildlife, before finalizing it--which the Administration had not done.

Thousands of you wrote comments and sent letters to newspaper editors citing the Administration's blatant disregard of the law, and with your help, we were able to halt implementation of this flawed regulation.

Unsurprisingly, the National Rifle Association has filed an appeal, but NPCA will continue to advocate in the courts that the DOI should follow environmental laws before proposing changes to any policies that affect our national parks.

jeffnles1
03-24-2009, 02:13 PM
As always, I will obey the law. If it is legal to carry a firearm, I will do so. If it is not legal, I will not carry a firearm.

I do believe this ruling makes the parks a less safe place to be.

It is from those persons who have no regard for the rule of law that I wish to be able to protect myself. They will carry knife, gun, club and have absolutely no second thoughts or remorse about using these on myself or my family. There is no law that will prevent them from doing their deed as they ignore the laws of civilized society.

As fishermen, we are frequently in remote places and far off the beaten path. We are frequently at our cars near darkness when few others are around. We are sometimes distracted getting our gear back in the car/truck and having thoughts of a wonderful day out fishing.

For these reasons, we can quickly become a victim and a sad statistic.

Given the choice, I would far prefer the other guy being the sad statistic than my family or I.

Denying people the right to legally carry a firearm does nothing but enable criminals to be more free and bold in the conduct of their activity.

However, being a law abiding citizen, I will not carry a firearm into areas where it is prohibited by law. That means my wife, my son, and I are now just another easy target for those who have no regard for the law.

The way I see it, we are now all less safe than we were before. Unfortunately, that is the law of the land and we must obey the laws.

Jeff

MaryvilleJim
03-24-2009, 02:17 PM
I do know this. About 5 years ago a young lady was reading a book beside the river at Elkmont. My guess is she wished she had a handgun with her for the last few minutes of her life.

flyred06
03-24-2009, 02:57 PM
I have never worried about the four legged attackers. I always worry about the two legged critters that show up with alcohol or other substances in their systems.

Crockett
03-24-2009, 03:19 PM
So is it now illegal to carry if you have a permit within the park again after the court ruling the other day? If so what if you were on a multi-day backpack trip you would have started out legal but become illegal while you were out in the backcountry perhaps?

bugg
03-24-2009, 04:11 PM
i'm gonna have to agree with jeffnles and flyred on this one

lauxier
03-24-2009, 04:38 PM
I truly believe "guns in the park" would be trouble--trouble--trouble.GSMNP is a vacation place aka a Rest and Relaxation place--like it or not, there is lots of alcohol consumed in the park, in the name of R&R and Vacationing.Don't kid yourself,drunks love to shoot.The sound of gunshots in the park would be as polluting and alien as trash thrown along the streams.

flyred06
03-24-2009, 05:30 PM
Luaxier (if I mispelled I appologize). I some what agree with you, however, may I ask you a question? I travel on the road for around 4 hrs to get to the mountains. Then we may stay in pigeon forge or somewhere but get on the road to travel somewhere else. I carry a small firearm to protect my family while on the road. Now what is safer, keeping my firearm with (on) me or locked up in my suitcase when I go out to the park so someone could steal it. My resposibility in carrying a firearm is to make sure that it is safe at all times. That means in carry or storage. I agree some people would get drunk or worse and make a bad situation but those people are going to make those decissions no matter where they are. And really the sound of gun shots or carelessness most other people around would report that and they would be caught. Theat leaves it up to the laws to make the penalties high enough others will not chance it. Just my thoughts.:smile:

buzzmcmanus
03-24-2009, 06:00 PM
From my understanding, the National Park Service is trying to ban ammunition made with lead components from being in the park. The ban also includes lead fishing tackle, and is proposed to take effect in 2010. From what I read, you won't even be able to have these in your possession while on park lands. Short of handloading, can you buy ammunition for a typical carry gun that is made without lead bullets? Just curious. Looks like I'll only be bowhunting Big South Fork National Park starting in 2010. I have know idea what 308 non-lead shells would cost!

Speckleman5
03-24-2009, 08:46 PM
I thought lead weight was already banned.....

BlueRaiderFan
03-24-2009, 09:09 PM
I don't really feel the need to carry a gun (mace and a knife will do the trick), but I hate it that I pay taxes to support these parks and they try and tell me when and where I can carry a gun. It's a constitutional right. It should be none of their business, but once again, our rights are being undermined and we are left to sit by and watch it happen.

buzzmcmanus
03-25-2009, 06:57 AM
I thought lead weight was already banned.....

I know individual NP's like Yellowstone have banned it, but I don't think it's banned in the Smokies. I did a quick search and couldn't find anything, so if I'm wrong, someone needs to correct me. I'd hate to be supplying false information.

Brian Griffing
03-25-2009, 09:33 AM
Don't kid yourself,drunks love to shoot.The sound of gunshots in the park would be as polluting and alien as trash thrown along the streams.
I'm glad this was brought back to the forefront.
Lauxier, in response to your post: Why not just enforce laws as they exist everywhere else? If the Park can make it illegal to carry guns because some people may get drunk and shoot them, what's to stop other vacation destinations from banning firearms? Can all of Sevier County ban firearms? What about the city of Las Vegas? Or the entire state of Nevada?
If someone is drunk and negligently discharging a firearm, arrest them. Prosecute them. Don't tell me I can't have a gun because other people are jerks. That is precisely why I need a gun. That, and keeping the King of England out of my face.

Lumber_Jack
03-25-2009, 11:50 AM
Brian I couldnt have said it better myself. This whole law is treated like there is an ivisible bubble around parks where no bad can happen. Why do current laws cease to exist once you enter a National Park. And Im sorry the whole no lead ammunition rule is absolutle idiotic IMHO. First being able to carry a gun would not give you the right to discharge the gun at will. And seriously how much land could be contaminated with lead bullets, that would be illegal to disharge unless for self protection. Fishing weights I can understand to a small degree, but not ammunition. I dont feel strongly about this or anything...

PS I am a law abiding citizen, but Im going to carry. You can always get out of jail, cemetaries are not so easy.

lauxier
03-25-2009, 12:18 PM
I think you guys are both right--I know i keep a pistol in my truck when i go into the park.I'm not for gun control.I know it is our constitutional right to bear arms.I know most folks handle firearms carefully.If you are going to base an argument for firearms in the park on the ability of our court systems to prosecute target shooters,and public drunks then you have no base at all because the court system is lame and overloaded,these little crimes are of little or no importance to them...or do you mean prosecution should be done "In Park" by park officials?

Hatchie Dawg
03-25-2009, 01:51 PM
What sort of crime would it be to be caught with a loaded weapon in the Park? Serious? Not so serious? Just wondering. Would you lose your carry permit if caught?

jeffnles1
03-25-2009, 05:20 PM
What sort of crime would it be to be caught with a loaded weapon in the Park? Serious? Not so serious? Just wondering. Would you lose your carry permit if caught?

Well, the National Parks are federal juristiction. In most cases, firearms violations are felonies.

Jeff

jeffnles1
03-25-2009, 05:46 PM
I think you guys are both right--I know i keep a pistol in my truck when i go into the park.I'm not for gun control.I know it is our constitutional right to bear arms.I know most folks handle firearms carefully.If you are going to base an argument for firearms in the park on the ability of our court systems to prosecute target shooters,and public drunks then you have no base at all because the court system is lame and overloaded,these little crimes are of little or no importance to them...or do you mean prosecution should be done "In Park" by park officials?

I think the real issue is that people already carry guns in the park and there is already poaching of wildlife inside our parks. There is already "target shooting" going on.

I seriously doubt if allowing persons with a license to carry to take firearms inside the park will result in more "target shooting" or more poaching of wildlife. Most states, including Tennessee, require training and classroom time before the license is granted.

It's the drunks and the criminals who already have the guns in the park and are already doing these things. I cannot see how those who are licensed to carry firearms are going to create a problem.

Different points of view and it's those differences that make the world an interesting place to live.
Jeff