Firearms Allowed in National Parks and Wildlife Refuges
Posted by Lisa Carey
A change in federal law effective Monday, February 22, allows firearms in many national parks and wildlife refuges. People who can legally possess firearms under federal and state law can now carry those firearms into the national parks in that state. The new law (Sec. 512 of P.L. 111-24) was passed by Congress and signed last May by the President (National Park Service Press Release). This law applies to some of its most well known parks in the nation, as well as ones that span several states such as Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, Great Smoky Mountains, Yosemite and Rocky Mountain National Park.
What are the pros and cons of this new law and how can you share your thoughts, not just with us, but with your Senators and Representatives too?
According to the press release, the laws in parks will vary. Prior to this, firearms have generally been prohibited in national parks, except in some Alaska parks and those that allow hunting.
National Park Services director Jon Jarvis says, “For nearly 100 years, the mission of the National Park Service has been to protect and preserve the parks and to help all visitors enjoy them. We will administer this law as we do all others – fairly and consistently.”
Ok, so my question is, “Why?” I get the constitutional “right to bear arms.” I learned young about gun safety and target shooting. I could never get used to the idea of shooting an animal though. One answer suggested to me was, “To protect yourself.” Sure, in the Great Smoky Mountains you may have some bears hitting campgrounds for food. Why wouldn’t they, since humans are taking over their habitat and they are starving? Maybe we could do more to protect the animals from starving and extinction and we wouldn’t need to “protect ourselves.”
Jarvis also states, “Federal law continues to prohibit the possession of firearms in designated ‘federal facilities’ in national parks such as visitor centers, offices, or maintenance buildings. These places are posted with ‘firearms prohibited’ signs at public entrances. The new law also does not change prohibitions on the use of firearms in national parks and does not change hunting regulations.”
Cons to allowing guns in national parks and wildlife refuges:
-Bryan Faehner, associate director of the National Parks Conservation Association, said the law would place an unfair burden on park service employees, who will have to wade through a variety of state and local laws to determine whether visitors are breaking the law (AP Article Winnipeg Press).
-The National Parks Conservation Association also suggests that this new law will make it harder to catch and convict poachers. In the past you could tell by the ‘smoking gun’ in their hand, not you will have to find a dead carcass.
-Differing state restrictions make understanding the new law complicated, especially for parks situated in more than one state. David Barna, spokesperson for the parks system said, “The burden for the public rests with knowing what the law is in the state that you’re in, in a similar way that you have to know the automotive or marriage license laws of the state you’re in.” Park websites will provide links to state gun laws (Washington Post).
Those who advocate allowing guns in wildlife refuges and national parks argue:
-Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), who led congressional efforts to change the law, said that concerns about the law’s potential negative impact on parks are overblown; “I don’t expect anything major to come from this other than to restore the Second Amendment rights taken away by bureaucrats,” Coburn said. If states want to change their gun laws, he said, “It’ll be left up to the people and not the bureaucrats in Washington.”
-Others say, “People will be able to defend themselves.”
-”It’s a constitutional right to bear arms.”
-”Don’t punish everyone because you are concerned about poachers.”
According to recent park statistics:
-In 2008 there were approximately 275 million visitors to national parks.
-There were 3,760 reported major crimes, including five homicides and 37 rapes.
-No note is made in agency reports on which crimes involve guns.
-Crime in national parks is down.
Maybe, just maybe, there is a very good reason for having a gun in a national park. Maybe the campers next to you are kidnappers or rapists just waiting for you to fall asleep. Maybe a bear will come charging through the woods and attack you. But many federal facilities such as the post office, the bank, federal buildings, and courthouses are protected from gun carry and use; places which, as a regular person (and in a former life a paralegal) I would have thought I would need a gun to protect myself. But to allow guns in a wildlife refuge? Isn’t this the very place that animals and wildlife should be free from guns? Can’t we just for a few hours enjoy the nature that is given to us without having to carry our gun with us?
What do you think? Don’t just tell us, tell the National Parks Conservation Association who offers a way to either thank, or express your dissatisfaction with, your Senators and Representatives, depending on whether or not they voted for the provision. Use their website to find out how your Senator or Representative voted and let them know what you think.
3 Responses to “Firearms Allowed in National Parks and Wildlife Refuges”
-
Apollo Pallis says:
why bring a weapon unless you intend to use it?
In a national park you are not allowed to hunt, so that means no use for a rifle, and there are no muggers hiding behind trees so no need for a handgun. The constitutional rights concerning firearms are for this purpose. Otherwise we would carry firearms and blowup sex dolls (for those who utilise their constitutional right to own one)to church, and assuming you are old enough,to school. You also have the right to have sex, and the constitution does not prohibit you from doing it on the church altar. Does this mean that you have a constitutional right to do it? -
Mark says:
Why not let law abiding citizens carry a firearm? It was illegal before and there were still poachers with firearms. Why would we think any crime would increase because people that followed the law before and didn’t carry firearms are now carrying? Just because you have a legal weapon doesn’t mean you will use it for something illegal.
banks are not on any state or federal prohibited list for weapons(citizens with a CHL).