Recent comments

  • Brady Campaign Sues Interior Department over Concealed Carry in National Parks   5 years 35 weeks ago

    "The Bush Administration's last-minute gift to the gun lobby, allowing concealed semiautomatic weapons in national parks, jeopardizes the safety of park visitors in violation of federal law," said Mr. Helmke. "We should not be making it easier for dangerous people to carry concealed firearms in our parks."

    Seeing as people who don't have clean records can't get a concealed carry permit or legally own a firearm and that people who don't have a clean record and having a history of disregard for the law more than likely will disregard a ban on concealed carry as well who would a law banning concealed carry anywere make things safer for other than the guy who disregards the law? Who are these gun lovers? Most of these people visiting these parks are nature lovers and people who love their families likely visiting the parks with their families. I just don't understand why everyone wants to take away a non-felon's else's legal right? I mean, if you commit even so much as a misdemeanor of domestic violence you cannot lawfully own a firearm so that part is already taken care of. What in the world have I ever done to you concerning a firearm? The legal right is there? Why do you want to take it away? If someone postures, threatens, and shoots without being confronted with the danger of life or limb they lose their gun rights. Easy as that, now what do we do about the people who don't care about the law? That's a tough one. Can we do like the Brady Campaign does and file a lawsuit? If I or a family member become a victim of violence because the law was followed on our side of things and were left without the means to protection to include local law enforcement should we just sue both the state, police, and in some cases such as this the federal government?

  • Yellowstone National Park: Poster Child For Goofy Gun Laws   5 years 35 weeks ago

    This is what happens when you have too many cooks with their hands in the pot. It happens to many laws that cause federal law to bump heads with state laws. One reason why the overabundance of lawyers in this country can stay in such high income brackets.

    My husband is a retired federal agent, and as such was issued a federal firearms carry permit, good in all 50 states as well as US territories. I'm sure there will bet yet another set of rules that will apply to his particular situation.

    I never should have passed up going to law school.

  • Commentary: What Would An Economic Stimulus Package for the National Parks Buy Us?   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Honestly, agree with its value or not, Depression-era CCC projects are still standing in a lot of park sites, providing facilities for decades and decades and decades.

    By the same token Hitler's autobahns are still standing and have provided solid service to the German motoring public for decades and decades and decades. Ain't national socialism great?

  • Yellowstone National Park: Poster Child For Goofy Gun Laws   5 years 35 weeks ago

    The second Amendment is an individuals right to CCW, or for that matter open carry of a fire arm, it is the law of the land. These so called laws and impediments that require permits and registrations etc are violations of that law, simply put they can not exist while the second Amendment exists, states can not take away from individual rights, nor can any other part of the gov with out so amending the Constitution.
    I have carried for a long time. I have thank god never had to use my gun against man or beast, there have been times when I thought it could come down to it, but I have never taken it out.
    So why do I carry? Why do I carry something I have not had to use, or may never have to use? Because if I am so unfortunate as to be in a situation where it is my last choice, I have the right in that moment to make that choice. Much for the same reasons Noah built the Ark before the rains came, you can not use what you do not have.
    I find it so very odd so many people are so alarmed by guns. Guns are very simple, yet many in our society enshroud them in myth, and mystery, proclaim "guns are dangerous and no one should have one" When this same person will get behind the wheel of thier ford or chevy or BMW talk on the phone, roll slowly through stop signs...all the while operating the single most dangerous piece of equipment in the country, one with far more energy than my 44 revolver, one that when he/she, hits some one calls it an accident, when negligence is far more likely.
    Guns are tools, no different to me than the hammer or screw driver or chain saw or truck. The command respect and practice. No more, or less than any other activity. In the end they are a right, most other things in life are not. So instead of wondering if your fellow American is carrying gun, wonder if he/she might have reason to use it, to help you if your in a bad way and you have not chosen to exercise your right. Wonder how it is possible the gov of the people is so grossly over paid, and in recent history managed to vote to pay themselves for life, when they have done little to support our Constitution. Bodies that raise property taxes on retired Sr's forcing them out of their "dream" retirements...or how gov robed social security and bankrupted our NAtion....na that is far to depressing. Live your life right, be good and kind to those you meet in hopes they return your kindness, and be ready for what ever the day has in store for you and Im sure we will all do just fine. Guns, food, water, snacks, smiles, good boots and sense of humor can get you through any thing, and for the things they cant there is always your MC with a 29% Apr default rate....that is prime +28% right now by the way (maybe we should come down on Washington and our corrupt leaders and tell them CC companies have no right to more than Prime +5%...but that could be to good to many folks....I dont care I live on cash and have for several years..but I still hate the gangster CC companies who think they have rights...never saw them in the Constitution).

  • Yellowstone National Park: Poster Child For Goofy Gun Laws   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Sounds to me like the "training" for CCL holders touted by some proponents of concealed carry failed to address good techniques for securing his "piece".

    Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good - or competent.

  • Commentary: What Would An Economic Stimulus Package for the National Parks Buy Us?   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Back on topic -- one thing I do want to point out is a lot of NPS sites are also in areas that don't have much else in the way of economic development other than tourism, and tourism does suffer during economic downturns. So rehabilitation of parks could be a good thing for those areas, help keep some people employed, help keep some hotels, restaurants, bed-and-breakfasts, and the like from going under. And let's face it, most parks need a lot of work.

    Honestly, agree with its value or not, Depression-era CCC projects are still standing in a lot of park sites, providing facilities for decades and decades and decades.

    ================================

    My travels through the National Park System: americaincontext.com

  • Yellowstone National Park: Poster Child For Goofy Gun Laws   5 years 35 weeks ago

    CENTERVILLE, Utah - The man escaped with a few cuts to his arm, but the toilet made out much worse.

    Police say a man's gun fell out of its holster while he pulled up his pants after using the bathroom at a Carl's Jr. restaurant Tuesday. The gun fired when it hit the floor and shattered the commode.

    A few shards of porcelain cut the man's arm, and a woman in an adjacent restroom who was frightened by the noise reported she was having chest pain. Both people were checked at the scene and released.

    Police say they confiscated the 26-year-old man's firearm while they review the incident. The man had a concealed weapons permit. No charges are being filed.

    ---

    Rick Smith

  • Commentary: What Would An Economic Stimulus Package for the National Parks Buy Us?   5 years 35 weeks ago

    They may protest but how many will be using their own money?

  • Commentary: What Would An Economic Stimulus Package for the National Parks Buy Us?   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Come on, Bemis, how many real socialists are regular readers of NPT? And how many of us spell our country's name "Amerika"? The Pell deadbeats will protest your exaggerations.

    Rick Smith

  • Yellowstone National Park: Poster Child For Goofy Gun Laws   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Actually, anonymous, the point is whether park visitors will be familiar with what state they're in and what laws apply. Is there a sign along the West Boundary Trail delineating the Wyoming-Idaho border, or one along the Black Canyon of the Yellowstone Trail to denote the Wyoming-Montana border?

    More so, under the old rule things were much simpler. Visitors could not carry guns, concealed or otherwise, in the parks, period. Visitors knew it. Rangers knew it. If a ranger saw someone with a gun, they knew that individual was up to something illegal. Under the revised regs, it's not exactly that simple any more.

    As for the laws of the state the LE is operating in, in Yellowstone's case then the rangers would have to know which other 23 states Wyoming has reciprocal agreements with on concealed carry and which 40 Montana has agreements with.

    Regardless of whether you support the change in regs, how anyone can describe the new rule as simpler than the old one is baffling.

  • University Researchers Suggest Solution To Yellowstone National Park's Bison Problem   5 years 35 weeks ago

    The war on elk and brucellosis in Montana has just started.

    Elk were just killed near Gardiner. http://www.kxmc.com/News/319754.asp

    This is an important and unprecedented development and a rather stupid move when it comes to building public support. Let's see these so called elk groups like Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd speak up against this; no doubt, they will be silent because they only care about killing wolves, not protecting elk. But, let's see.

    Jim Macdonald
    The Magic of Yellowstone
    Yellowstone Newspaper
    Jim's Eclectic World

  • Yellowstone National Park: Poster Child For Goofy Gun Laws   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Surely it is not asking too much that our LE rangers know the most relevant laws for the states they are likely to operate in, and know what state they are in when in a border area? I would have thought this was standard practice. Else, how can they call for assistance in case of need? How can they assist other local LE agencies when asked?

  • Yellowstone National Park: Poster Child For Goofy Gun Laws   5 years 35 weeks ago

    And, of course, there are other parks that span multiple states: Death Valley, Great Smoky Mountains, Natchez Trail Parkway. Blue Ridge Parkway just to name four.

    Lake Meade National Recreation Area, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, Dinosaur National Monument, Hovenweep National Monument, Gulf Islands National Seashore, St Croix National Scenic Riverway, Fort Smith National Historic Site, Harper's Ferry National Park, Delaware Water Gap NRA, Gateway National Recreation Area...plus the patchwork quilt surrounding DC, Virginia, and Maryland...

    That this message didn't get out is either a failure on someone's part, or a resounding success on the NRA's part.

  • Yellowstone National Park: Poster Child For Goofy Gun Laws   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Actually, Jim, Yellowstone is not a unique circumstance. Some other parks have what is colloquially called "exclusive" Federal jurisdiction (though to be technically correct each actually has partial legislative jurisdiction but let's not get hung up over terms.) A famous example being the original portions of what is now Denali National Park.

    Under the Assimilated Crimes Act, in these areas (and in many others with concurrent Federal jurisdiction also) state laws that do not conflict with existing Federal statutes can be cited as Federal law for the purpose of criminal prosecution. But that issue is not in play here.

    Don't get wrapped around state law. The way the change in the regulation was written (quoted below) was that the carrying of concealed firearms is allowed by Federal regulation in accordance with the laws of the state. Accordance being defined as "in conformity."

    State law isn't being applied in the parks by this change. Our regulation is simply conforming our practice to what the state practices. Sort of. Allegedly.

    (h) Notwithstanding any other provision in this Chapter, a person may possess, carry, and transport concealed, loaded, and operable firearms within a national park area in accordance with the laws of the state in which the national park area, or that portion thereof, is located, except as otherwise prohibited by applicable Federal law.

    And Yellowstone has always recognized state boundaries within the park for a multitude of purposes. Applying Wyoming sales tax, for one. Deciding which state traffic codes should be adopted in any given area. Deciding which Department of Environmental Quality to consult with over water and sewage issues.

  • Yellowstone National Park: Poster Child For Goofy Gun Laws   5 years 35 weeks ago

    I thought Yellowstone National Park did not recognize state border lines within its boundaries since it was established as a National Park a decade and more before Wyoming, Montana and Idaho became states :-)

  • Yellowstone National Park: Poster Child For Goofy Gun Laws   5 years 35 weeks ago

    And, here is another thing - judicial jurisdiction in Yellowstone is in the federal court. I guess they are supposed to apply to state law to the federal regulation, but it seems to me there would have to be all kinds of complications involved with that. How do they figure out punishment, etc.? Yellowstone is a unique judicial circumstance. Does anyone know how that's supposed to work?

    Jim Macdonald
    The Magic of Yellowstone
    Yellowstone Newspaper
    Jim's Eclectic World

  • Commentary: What Would An Economic Stimulus Package for the National Parks Buy Us?   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Take from one to give to another. The mantra of modern democracy.

    It is the "positive thing" that Rick Smith claims Frank C can't comprehend. The fact that the government has no wealth of its own but can only confiscate it from productive members of society and redistribute it to others is a concept that seems to fall on mostly deaf ears in this forum. It seems that as long as this ill-gotten booty is used to "stimulate" a pet project or cause that NPT readers agree with the ends certainly justify the means. This is the very essence of our socialist present and a hallmark of the welfare/warfare state we have come to know as modern Amerika. It is derived from the same mob rule impulse that facilitates bloody war, bailouts of failed and corrupt corporations or the doling out of Pell Grants to slacking deadbeats.

    The distortions this kind of political chicanery causes to the natural flow of a free economy is constantly ignored as various interest groups fight over the use of this mis-allocated wealth. The fact that most readers of this site are dedicated to a socialist government model of park administration means that they have relegated themselves to being nothing more than just another competing mob attempting to steer loot to their particular area of special interest. H.L. Mencken's observation that "Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods" is as valid today is is was almost a century ago when it first appeared in print.

    Fortunately the end is near as the federal government is totally bankrupt and its creditors are about to stop lending it any more money by refusing to buy treasury debt which has been the fuel of the current reckless borrowing and spending spree. The Feds will try to print their way out of the predicament but that will fail miserably and the final day of reckoning will be upon it. By the way, that day is not too far in the future.

    President Obama is about to preside over the end of an exhausted and depleted empire. It is time for those of us who love the parks to honestly look at other avenues of administration for the national park system. It would be wise to have that discussion now before its present owners auction them off in a fire sale the likes of which the world has never known.

  • Echoes of the Cold War in the Tropical Warmth of Everglades National Park   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Jim, your last sentence sums it all up.

    I think more than a few readers will agree that many of us are pack rats, unable to throw anything away. In the case of the Park Service and the Nike silo, it seems as if there's a little pack rat mentality going on. Too, I wonder if the lack of funds to adequately remove the footprint of the missile base wasn't the deciding factor on how the NPS should react to this unexpected "gift."

    Had the Everglades been a DOD property rather than an NPS property I think a strong argument could have been made for preserving the base for its historical nature. And if this particular base was the last of its kind I think a somewhat strong argument could be made for not removing it.

    However, I struggle to see the unique historical significance of the base, especially when out west they at one time had so many missile bases that some have gone into private ownership. In other words, the government couldn't wait to be rid of them.

    Though I'm not sure exactly where in the Everglades this base is located, in light of the environmental threats facing the Everglades and the resident flora and fauna, my vote would have been to raze this relic and restore the land.

  • NPCA, Park Retirees File Lawsuit to Halt Change in National Park Gun Rules   5 years 35 weeks ago

    RAH, it is better when you come to an argument that you are possessed with the facts. The regulation in place in 1976 was simply another of several change in existing regulations that had existed since the 1930's prohibiting loaded firearms in parks. One could fairly say that change weakened the existing regulations in place at the time - something you won't read in a NRA publication by the way.

    Also, possessing a loaded firearm in a National Park area is not, nor has it ever been, a felony, unless some other aggravating factor wholly unrelated to the administration of the National Park service is involved.

  • Brady Campaign Sues Interior Department over Concealed Carry in National Parks   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Concealed carry permit holders have been through a thorough background check and completed classes in gun safety and handling.

    If only that were true in all states, sadly it is not. There are states that do not require a permit at all, and no vetting nor training is either required nor expected before the legal carry of a weapon. Just sayin'...

  • Brady Campaign Sues Interior Department over Concealed Carry in National Parks   5 years 35 weeks ago

    Myself and most of my family do not go to your parks because not everyone is a law biding citizen because I am not allowed to carry concealed, you will find most criminals do not obey the law and are usually carrying a weapon you will find most convected felons have or do carry various weapons. Carrying concealed legally gives me or my family a 50-50 chance instead of a 100-0 chance in a bad situation.

  • Commentary: What Would An Economic Stimulus Package for the National Parks Buy Us?   5 years 36 weeks ago

    Frank never saw a government program he liked. It's useless to point positive things out to him.

    Rick Smith

  • Commentary: What Would An Economic Stimulus Package for the National Parks Buy Us?   5 years 36 weeks ago

    C'mon, Frank, not every cent (most perhaps, but not every) of taxes goes to waste...heck, if it weren't for Federal need-based student aid such as Pell Grants, I wouldn't be in college right now.

  • Commentary: What Would An Economic Stimulus Package for the National Parks Buy Us?   5 years 36 weeks ago

    Jees, Frank, I pay my taxes...

    You make it sound as if you have a choice. Try not paying them and see what happens.

    ...realizing that I get services for them.

    Services such as a $700 million embassy in Baghdad, hundreds of thousands of maimed and murdered Iraqis, bridges to nowhere, and a 80,700 pages long Federal Register.

  • Commentary: What Would An Economic Stimulus Package for the National Parks Buy Us?   5 years 36 weeks ago

    I definitely think that stimulus package money put into National Parks would be an investment. It would be an investment in the people employed on stimulus package projects, who would not otherwise be employed. It would be an investment in the future availability and desirability of our parks. It would be an investment in quality of life for our children and grandchildren. All investments do not have to have a monetary return, though even there I am sure that many projects will cost less if done now, rather than put off to inevitably be done later.
    Having said that, we should not spend money frivilously. Backlogged projects should be completed, maintenence brought up to date, before we even consider any new projects.