PDA

View Full Version : Wanna shoot at stuff in Yellowstone?



bmack86
05-20-2009, 07:36 PM
Soon you'll be able to. What the hell?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090520/sc_mcclatchy/3237180

WASHINGTON Here's a list of stuff the typical American family can legally carry into national parks this summer: sleeping bag, toothbrush, change of underwear . . . loaded guns.
Thanks to a 279-147 vote Wednesday in the House of Representatives , visitors to the nation's parks and wildlife refuges will be able to carry weapons there if they abide by state weapons laws.
The bill is on its way to President Barack Obama , who faces a dilemma: Gun rights advocates attached the provision to a sweeping overhaul of the credit card industry, an initiative Obama strongly supports, so he has little choice but to let the gun section become law.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said only that Obama "looks forward" to signing the bill "as quickly as possible," and didn't mention the gun provision.
Gun control advocates howled Wednesday, but to little effect. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy , D- N.Y. , protested "the bill has been hijacked," and Rep. Maxine Waters , D- Calif. , maintained, "American taxpayers ought to be incensed."
Scot McElveen , the president of the Association of National Park Rangers , predicted that the measure would provoke problems at the parks.
"Members of the ANPR respect the will of Congress and their authority to pass laws, but we believe this is a fundamental reversal from what preceding Congresses created the National Park System for. Park wildlife, including some rare or endangered species, will face increased threats by visitors with firearms who engage in impulse or opportunistic shooting."
Nonetheless, the gun measure, which passed the Senate overwhelmingly earlier this month, had strong bipartisan support. In the House, 105 Democrats, most from Southern, Western and rural states, joined 174 Republicans in backing the measure.
Two Republicans, Reps. Michael Castle of Delaware and Mark Kirk of Illinois , and 145 Democrats voted no.
"This is one of those issues that breaks down regionally," explained Rep. Chris Van Hollen , D- Md. , assistant to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D- Calif.
President Ronald Reagan first required guns to be stored or inoperable in national parks 25 years ago, but last December, just before leaving office, the Bush administration overturned that rule.
That began a game of legal ****-Pong. In March, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly overturned the Bush rule, and the Obama administration said it wouldn't appeal.
That action spurred Sen. Tom Coburn , R- Okla. , to include the gun rule in the credit card bill. It wound up winning by an unexpectedly lopsided vote.
Coburn and his backers said that they didn't want, nor did they expect, people to be in danger of random shooters in national parks.
"It's really common sense," he said. "This is not about guns. What I want is gun rights. I want our constitutional rights to be protected."
Rep. Rob Bishop , R- Utah , said the measure was also a matter of self-defense.
"The real issue is that law-abiding Americans will no longer be treated as criminals" when they carry weapons, he said.
National Rifle Association officials argued that weapons are needed for protection in parks that are becoming increasingly dangerous. Asked why police couldn't handle criminal activity, Andrew Arulanandam , the NRA's director of public affairs, said, "At that moment when you're confronted by a criminal, it's between you and the criminal. Law enforcement cannot be there in position at any time."
Gun control groups said a new kind of danger would be lurking once the ban was overturned.
"Families should not have to stare down loaded AK-47's on nature hikes," said Paul Helmke , the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. He added that Obama "should not remain silent while Congress inserts reckless gun policies that he strongly opposes into a bill that has nothing whatsoever to do with guns."
Brady group spokesman David Vice suggested that Democrats were overreacting to gun rights advocates. Democrats still have bitter memories of losing congressional races in more conservative areas in the 1990s after being tagged as soft on guns.
Vice suggested that last year's results, in which Democrats won their biggest congressional majorities since the early 1990s, are evidence that those districts recognize the need for some limits on guns.
"We're trying to change that perception," he said, "but it's been difficult."

Madhatter
05-20-2009, 07:46 PM
good when i hike the PCT ill be able to bring a gun....yes there are bears and maybe crack heads that i might run into on the hike....and they parks where the only place i couldent carry one

SoulDischarge
05-20-2009, 07:52 PM
Our legal system makes no fucking sense.

Alchemy
05-20-2009, 07:56 PM
Our legal system makes no fucking sense.

Yeah, why is something about the credit card industry mixed with gun laws?

SoulDischarge
05-20-2009, 08:01 PM
I hear the latest health care reform bill has a clause about implementing mandatory National Backwards Day. I'm going to learn to speak backwards just in case.

indietron
05-20-2009, 08:04 PM
Im all for gun rights, but this is ridiculous.

National parks are supposed to protect endangered species and such :nono

TomAz
05-20-2009, 08:05 PM
keew txen taht no ssergnoc erofeb gniyfitset ma i

TomAz
05-20-2009, 08:05 PM
REPEAL THE 2ND AMENDMENT.

SoulDischarge
05-20-2009, 08:22 PM
keew txen taht no ssergnoc erofeb gniyfitset ma i

.ereht tou srednefed sdrawkcab tnatilim ytterp emos s'erehT .moT ,nam evarb a er'ouY

Hannahrain
05-20-2009, 08:26 PM
Billy Mays has been trying to convince me to purchase EroFeb for years.

Sleepingrock
05-20-2009, 09:49 PM
You Americans are wacky

boarderwoozel3
05-20-2009, 11:07 PM
http://memegenerator.net/Thumbnails/457x457-Creepy-Cheney-if-it-doesn't-have-a-target-on-it-you-bet-your-ass-i'll-shoot-it.jpg

marooko
05-21-2009, 07:23 AM
you guys crack me up.

PotVsKtl
05-21-2009, 07:37 AM
Why shouldn't I be able to bring a gun into a park?

bmack86
05-21-2009, 07:47 AM
Now if someone accosts you with an assault rifle as you're climing half dome you'll be prepared.

frozen pilgrim
05-21-2009, 07:47 AM
****-pong sounds like a fun game.

marooko
05-21-2009, 07:50 AM
a lot of parks allow them as long as they are declared.

PotVsKtl
05-21-2009, 07:51 AM
Now if someone accosts you with an assault rifle as you're climing half dome you'll be prepared.

It's not about whether I need a gun in a park. Why, specifically, shouldn't I be able to bring it?

frozen pilgrim
05-21-2009, 07:54 AM
the argument against it is mainly the protection of wildlife. i.e. if you have guns and rare animals in the same place, someone's gonna shoot something they're not supposed to.

Hannahrain
05-21-2009, 07:56 AM
Those guys always ruin it for those of us that are only shooting the things we're supposed to shoot.

PotVsKtl
05-21-2009, 07:58 AM
the argument against it is mainly the protection of wildlife. i.e. if you have guns and rare animals in the same place, someone's gonna shoot something they're not supposed to.

Oh, so now I'm a thought criminal.

bmack86
05-21-2009, 08:05 AM
I just don't understand the impetus behind this. There's nothing you're allowed to shoot at in a national park, and, last I checked, rogue national park shooters aren't a huge concern. Mostly when you hear about people getting attacked by bears in Yellowstone and such, it's because they were being idiots and confronting the bears rather than letting them be.

You want a solid reason why you shouldn't be allowed to have a gun in a national park? Increased threat of noise pollution. That, plus the fact that the protected animal populations could be scared out of the protected zones by gun fire, putting them into unprotected area where they'd be at increased risk for hunting, poaching and other human intervention. Plus, there's just no reason to carry a gun into a national park. They aren't hunting zones, they're nature reserves.

Alchemy
05-21-2009, 08:08 AM
Oh, so now I'm a thought criminal.

We know what you're planning, Pot.

http://www.pikesoft.com/blog/media/2/20060727-minority_report_gestural_ui.jpg

Hannahrain
05-21-2009, 08:15 AM
After a cursory search, there appears to be no statement on the books about whether or not it's okay to carry harpoons into Sea World.

PlayaDelWes
05-21-2009, 08:17 AM
Why is this even a debate? It just goes to show you that our congresspeople are stupid. Somehow we need to refom who we vote for to incent smart people who know what they are doing to run for office. I have lost all faith in what takes place on Capitol Hill.

marooko
05-21-2009, 08:19 AM
http://www.seaworld.com/SitePage.aspx?PageID=115


Security Procedures
SeaWorld San Diego has increased security procedures, which may result in slight delays while entering the park. As a part of this process:

o All bags, backpacks, and packages are subject to inspection prior to entering the park.
o As a reminder, the following items are not permitted to be brought into SeaWorld for the safety of our animals and our guests: weapons, knives, any other type of sharp objects, straws, large hard or soft coolers, and any hazardous items or materials.
o Please leave any unnecessary articles secured within your vehicle to expedite your entry into the park.
o SeaWorld is not responsible for fire, theft, damage or loss of vehicle including articles left within.


it's not addressed specifically, but it is covered.

TomAz
05-21-2009, 08:23 AM
Why is this even a debate? It just goes to show you that our congresspeople are stupid. Somehow we need to refom who we vote for to incent smart people who know what they are doing to run for office. I have lost all faith in what takes place on Capitol Hill.

smart people who know what they are doing get real jobs to make real money.

this is "even a debate" because of the second amendment. which needs to be repealed.

Alchemy
05-21-2009, 08:24 AM
http://www.seaworld.com/SitePage.aspx?PageID=115


Security Procedures
SeaWorld San Diego has increased security procedures, which may result in slight delays while entering the park. As a part of this process:

o All bags, backpacks, and packages are subject to inspection prior to entering the park.
o As a reminder, the following items are not permitted to be brought into SeaWorld for the safety of our animals and our guests: weapons, knives, any other type of sharp objects, straws, large hard or soft coolers, and any hazardous items or materials.
o Please leave any unnecessary articles secured within your vehicle to expedite your entry into the park.
o SeaWorld is not responsible for fire, theft, damage or loss of vehicle including articles left within.


it's not addressed specifically, but it is covered.

Hannah always rounds the tips of her harpoons down, because she doesn't want to stab herself when she carries them in her pocket. So she's clear.

marooko
05-21-2009, 08:25 AM
fat chance. (not for you, alch)

was unaware. as you were, Hannah.

bmack86
05-21-2009, 08:26 AM
Pot, I understand the real impetus behind your interest. Jet Skis will probably be the next thing allowed in parks, and then you'll be able to fully enjoy Yellowstone or Yosemite or any number of national parks. And show the ladies who's boss.

marooko
05-21-2009, 08:28 AM
i would love to be bustin' caps while doing donuts on my jet-ski. fuck yeah!!

Alchemy
05-21-2009, 08:28 AM
smart people who know what they are doing get real jobs to make real money.

this is "even a debate" because of the second amendment. which needs to be repealed.

I would just amend the second amendment, instead of repeal it.



A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arm-s shall not be infringed.

to this:


A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep bears shall not be infringed.

marooko
05-21-2009, 08:30 AM
what if it eats my neighbors face? thats just gonna open up an entirely different can of worms.

TomAz
05-21-2009, 08:31 AM
your neighbor has worms in his face?

marooko
05-21-2009, 08:32 AM
doesnt yours? and who says its a he?

Alchemy
05-21-2009, 08:35 AM
what if it eats my neighbors face? thats just gonna open up an entirely different can of worms.

Oops, let me re-amend:


A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep bears shall not be in Fringe.

Now people can't have guns or bears. Especially in Fringe, because we need to keep Anna Torv safe.

marooko
05-21-2009, 08:36 AM
now we're good.

BROKENDOLL
05-21-2009, 09:01 AM
keew txen taht no ssergnoc erofeb gniyfitset ma i

.ereht tou srednefed sdrawkcab tnatilim ytterp emos s'erehT .moT ,nam evarb a er'ouY
This board needs a backwards thread! The posters would have to actually think as they typed, and the readers would actually have to read to be able to respond! Shit, it would be just like this new Yellowstone deal...Backwards, but controlled...


It's not about whether I need a gun in a park. Why, specifically, shouldn't I be able to bring it?
Can you say, "ANGER MANAGEMENT?"

PotVsKtl
05-21-2009, 09:22 AM
Being allowed to carry guns in national parks could theoretically lead a person to shoot a grizzly bear in the face. Being allowed to carry guns in public could theoretically lead a person to shoot another person in the face. They're the same argument. Neither is particularly interesting. I get a gun, the Constitution says so. It doesn't matter whether it's practical or sensible where I take it. What if I have to fight the tyrannical government at Old Faithful? America.

BlackSwan
05-21-2009, 09:27 AM
People need to stop bastardizing the 2nd Amendment.

marooko
05-21-2009, 09:33 AM
only that one?

humanoid
05-21-2009, 09:40 AM
I'm kinda hoping this leads to more Wild West style shootouts between the overabundant tourists in National Parks. Ya know, thinning out the herd

amyzzz
05-21-2009, 10:12 AM
Now people can't have guns or bears. Especially in Fringe, because we need to keep Anna Torv safe.
:rotfl

bmack86
05-21-2009, 10:36 AM
Being allowed to carry guns in national parks could theoretically lead a person to shoot a grizzly bear in the face. Being allowed to carry guns in public could theoretically lead a person to shoot another person in the face. They're the same argument. Neither is particularly interesting. I get a gun, the Constitution says so. It doesn't matter whether it's practical or sensible where I take it. What if I have to fight the tyrannical government at Old Faithful? America.

But the difference is, in a public place, you are free to comport yourself as an american with all the freedoms that come with that. National Parks, as they are nature reserves, necessarily have more restrictions on what you are allowed to do, to bring in and to interact with. That's the reason it's a reserve and not a shooting range. Those extra restrictions are there to keep it as pristine as possible.

I also find it funny that the republicans want to overturn a law that their idol, mr Ronald Reagan, first put into place. Isn't he still god for them?

marooko
05-21-2009, 10:42 AM
thats crazy that people might think differently about things.

PotVsKtl
05-21-2009, 10:45 AM
Reagan is an amorphous policy blob, they can pull justification for any position out of his spectre at this point.

SoulDischarge
05-21-2009, 11:04 AM
We should just get to the point and elect Rorschach test ink blots as public leaders.

PotVsKtl
05-21-2009, 11:12 AM
Freezer Pack / Snow Globe '12.

SoulDischarge
05-21-2009, 12:48 PM
I think Old Woman Getting Attacked By Crows/Nuns Climbing Mt. Everest have a more realistic tax reform policy.

SoulDischarge
05-21-2009, 12:51 PM
Oh wait. Those are the same tickets. Nevermind.

paganman7
05-21-2009, 01:13 PM
While I doubt that people who cary guns legally are more inclined to commit crimes, those who do cary guns scare the shit out of me.