Re: Guns!

Let the debate begin!

I always carry heat but have never had to display it much less think about using it. I'm more worried about stuff along Hwy 49, 140, 120, 41 etc. and other side roads than I am in a National Park.

But the idea that loosening the gun laws in the NP system would turn the parks into some kind of Wild West show is ridiculous.

OK so here are two links. Have fun. And don't touch my car.

http://www.gunguys.com/?p=1037
http://www.gunsandammomag.com/second_amendment/0507/

While I'm at it:

I once saw a guy changing the oil in the parking lot in front of an auto parts store. I think this was either in violation of a city ordinance or state law. Cops were going to remove him, until they saw his revolver in a holster (why anyone would change oil with a loaded sidearm would be my first question). In any case, instead of quietly asking him to stop, they came with their holster clips undone and made sure the guy didn't go anywhere near his gun. I still don't get why anyone needs a loaded gun while changing oil.

You know, I've never been in a situation where I thought a gun would be helpful.

Y P W wrote: "You know, I've never been in a situation where I thought a gun would be helpful."

I'm quite glad for your good fortune, Y P W.

In 1972, I knapsacked to Snag Lake in Lassen Volcanic National Park with my brother-in-law. We enjoyed the area for a few days, and were relaxing one night at our small campfire.

A man walked into our camp and blew our fire out with a shotgun blast. My brother-in-law and I jumped up and ran toward the lake. The man blasted our tent and gear several times. We ran into the lake, grabbed one of the thousands of floating logs that lined the shore, and paddled for all we were worth. The man followed us to the lake, stood on the shore, and fired at us. We were out over 200 feet, and the light shot splashed harmlessly around us. We called to the man and tried to reason with him. Sounds just like something Senator Obama would urge us to do today, doesn't it? Of course reasoning with him didn't work. He was nuts. He kept firing at us for maybe 15 minutes. Then he went back to our camp and finished destroying everything there.

Then it was quiet. We stayed out in the lake for a long time. Finally, we paddled ashore and jogged the 8 miles back to my truck in the dark. We got out of there and drove back to the peace, quiet, and safety of Oakland.

Three years later, I was up near the Big Oak Flat road with my brother-in-law and a friend. We were camping next to a dirt road. A big car full of yahoo-ing men stopped and surrounded us, shouting threats and challenging us to fight. We hadn't yet learned our lesson and had no guns. We drove the men away with ice axes. They returned a while later with another car full of whooping hoodlums. It took us quite a while with the ice axes to convince the men to leave us alone.

OK, Y P W, I'm not a violent person, but insist on my right to self defense. I think ice axes are an inefficient means of self defense. Since those two incidents, I don't travel, camp, or hike without a gun. If I'm out on the trail, I'm packing. I'm not worried about black bears. But I do know that there are some mean and crazy humans out there, and will defend myself if they attack me.

I don't wave my gun around or shoot holes in signs. I don't go into unsafe places because I have the gun. I don't shoot bears, snakes, cougars, squirrels, or trees. I don't swagger and brag about packing heat. The gun is just there, unseen, if I need it. You do not have to worry about it. It won't jump out of my gear and shoot you or your children. I won't let it sneak into your camp and rob you.

If you see no need for a gun, fine. Don't have one. But other people have had different experiences than you, and may feel differently. The guy changing his oil sounds like one of those. You didn't write that he was threatening people or shooting empty oil cans. He sounded like a peaceable chap to me.

My wife and all our children handle guns safely and are excellent shots. They never show our guns to other people or play with them. When we camp near you, you will never know we are armed -- unless we are attacked.

I hope you relax and cut other people some slack. Don't let Senator Feinstein do your thinking for you. Stand up like a man and think for yourself. And I really do hope your good fortune continues.

---

Doug Parr

DougParr wrote:

> If you see no need for a gun, fine. Don't have one. But other
> people have had different experiences than you, and may feel
> differently. The guy changing his oil sounds like one of those.
> You didn't write that he was threatening people or shooting
> empty oil cans. He sounded like a peaceable chap to me.

However - he was doing something illegal - changing the oil in a publicly accessible parking lot. I don't know about all cops, but most who notice someone committing an illegal act AND carrying a firearm tend to be wary.

I have never had a problem with people who feel they need to have a firearm for self-defense purposes in the home. I feel differently for myself, but that's a personal preference.

In any case, having a loaded firearm in the large majority of NPS administered areas (parts of some National Preserves may be different) is against the law. Same goes for California State Parks (they specifically mention that firearms must be rendered inoperable when transported). It's definitely illegal in Yosemite save an exception for a animal pack leader (supposedly one reason would be to dispatch an injured riding/pack animal). There are plenty of places where you could carry a loaded weapon legally, such as most Forest Service or BLM areas.

> My wife and all our children handle guns safely and are
> excellent shots. They never show our guns to other people or
> play with them. When we camp near you, you will never know we
> are armed -- unless we are attacked.

Then by all means do so where it's legal. Get a CCW permit if it's stashed on your person.

> I hope you relax and cut other people some slack. Don't let
> Senator Feinstein do your thinking for you. Stand up like a man
> and think for yourself. And I really do hope your good fortune
> continues.

Senator Feinstein actually has a CCW permit.

Bottom line is guns are illegal in Yosemite; if you can't function without a gun, the answer is simple...don't go to Yosemite. Laws are never perfect for all situations, we all need to make concessions in the interest of getting along with the masses. If you choose to ignore which laws don't please you, you're no better than the guy who ignores the law and robs a bank because society has shortchanged him and he can't get a job (or so he thinks).

Some people have attitudes that tend to put them in positions of "needing" a firearm, "needing" to fight, etc. The percentage of people who get into situations to which the only good solution would be to have a gun and use it is extremely low; I've never been in one, and frankly don't know anyone who has.

A friendly (genuine) smile at someone who may look intimidating to you, or whose life style you don't agree with, can do wonders. A defiant "wadda YOU want" look can make you need that gun you claim to need. There are always exceptions, and if you meet a serial killer on the trail the gun may not do you any good if he gets the advantage.

What makes you think the guys causing the trouble aren't thinking exactly what you're thinking..."I need it for protection, there are a lot of nuts out there and they're after ME! I'll show 'em..."

DiFi has nothing to do with the reason most of us don't carry a gun, and carrying a gun or paying heed to DiFi has nothing to do with being a "man". In fact, in the case of the gun, an argument could be made for just the opposite.

But again, if you're uncomfortable enough without a gun that it bothers you, simply don't go to places they're not allowed, easy enough.

Gary

Pretty scary to read how many people think they need to carry a gun. Guns kill, period. We're no longer living in trapper days. Guns don't belong in the wilderness, let alone the national parks. And, please, Realist, the spelling is Mt. Rainier. Talk about the killing there, if the killer hadn't had a gun in the first place, no one would have been dead.

everybody knows .. don't mess with (the) park service .

Lucrativ wrote:

> everybody knows .. don't mess with (the) park service .

Sort of explains the combination of shotgun and assault rifle (locked down in plain view) I've seen as part of the LE ranger vehicle.

However - I can think of a couple of marijuana growing operations that were busted in the past few years. I'd think that they'd typically be stashed away from any heavily used trails, but you never know. They've been busy with a lot of these operations. I also hear the Forest Service had a bit of a problem with pot growing in the Appalachians too.

http://www.nps.gov/yose/parknews/marijuana2007.htm
http://www.nps.gov/pore/parknews/newsreleases_20060912_marijuanaremoval.htm

best selling books (and urban legends) have been written about some yosemite incidents . i'd make it a point to not do anything illegal there .

I just don't see the point in loosening the gun laws in the National Parks. Why? To appease the gun lobby?

Reading similar posts on other hiking boards I think it's a bit disturbing at how many find it necessary to pack a gun when hiking. A couple of folks I've had respect for in their knowledge of hiking/mountaneering have admitted they carry a gun, and for me, it just kills the respect I had for them...I guess it seems a bit paranoid and irrational. Considering how many things can go wrong in the wilderness, and how few of them happen that would really be helped by having a gun, it's sort of pitiful to see folks thinking they need a gun to be safe.

I was raised in a hunting family in Colorado, and when we moved west and I got older, was uncomfortable going camping etc. without the ole rifle in the trunk. Never needed it, and eventually I realized it wasn't necessary. Haven't brought it along in many, many years and don't plan to.

I suppose if you're in grizzly country there's a bit of comfort in packing a gun along, but in reality the best way is to avoid the confrontation in the first place. It's somewhat similar to the bear pepper spray issue; it may offer some sense of security, but in reality has its own pitfalls. One can always find specific cases where "if he'd-a had a gun, etc.", but deaths in Yosemite are overwhelmingly caused by things a gun won't help.

But who would want a gun in Yosemite? If you can't get by in a place like that without a firearm it's pretty sad. Perhaps the change they're proposing is only for certain areas, hopefully that's the case (I guess I could read the articles, but for some odd reason I expect a biased view from those links...8^).

---

Gary
Yosemite Photo Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/roberthouse/yo

F-ing wonderful.

This is why when people always ask my wife and I
"aren't you afraid in the wilderness?"
We always respond. "We feel safe as long as we don't see other people."
"bears, mountain lions, rattlesnakes... whatever... no big deal...
Neanderthal man... then we start worrying... he's probably thinks he needs a gun"

well said Gary.

Here's the rule for Yosemite:

http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/weapons.htm

Quote

Weapons/Firearms

The possession, use, or discharge of a firearm in Yosemite National Park is prohibited, to include pellet and BB guns.

Weapons may be transported through the park, provided that they are unloaded, broken down or cased, with ammunition kept separate from the weapon, and securely stored in your car or hotel room.

You may not carry the weapon.

And from the Superindendent's Compendium for 2008 (note that a permit is required):

Quote

36 CFR § 2.4 – WEAPONS, TRAPS, AND NETS
(d)(2) A permit is required to posses a weapon, trap or net. The Superintendent may issue a
permit to carry or possess a weapon, trap, or net under the following circumstances:
• To persons in charge of pack trains or saddle horses, emergency use is meant solely for the use
of dispatching injured stock.

Hiya,

I just can't imagine feeling the need to carry a gun in the wilderness and just can't fathom the need to carry guns in Yosemite.

Now, there may be some places where carrying a gun is justified. I have heard that there are some areas on the AT where it may be justified as a self defense measure. Heck, I suppose I could even see it in parts of Alaska where the consequences of even injury are very high.

Trust me, I'm not even approaching anti-gun, but IMHO, they have no place in America's wilderness. There are plenty of places where those that feel the need to pack heat can all go and hang out together.

---

holz

holz wrote:

> Hiya,
>
> I just can't imagine feeling the need to carry a gun in the
> wilderness and just can't fathom the need to carry guns in
> Yosemite.

I just haven't seen any need to have a weapon for self-protection purposes in any of the wilderness areas I've visited. Most people seem to be there to have a good time.

> Now, there may be some places where carrying a gun is
> justified. I have heard that there are some areas on the AT
> where it may be justified as a self defense measure. Heck, I
> suppose I could even see it in parts of Alaska where the
> consequences of even injury are very high.
>
> Trust me, I'm not even approaching anti-gun, but IMHO, they
> have no place in America's wilderness. There are plenty of
> places where those that feel the need to pack heat can all go
> and hang out together.

Well - hunting and plinking are legal in many (possibly most) USDA Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management areas - including Congressionally declared wilderness. I have heard of problems with National Forests near NPS areas. Some unscrupulous hunting guides would take hunters into places like Grand Teton NP (I heard Evel Knievel did this before he became a professional daredevil) for an easier kill.

I figure I'll probably come across a hunter or plinker one of these days. I'm not sure exactly how to act, but hopefully it'll be a responsible party.

I VERY much agree with Doug and think you gun opposing citizens have lived very pleasant and sheltered lives. I've lived in Los Angeles my entire life and have witnessed senseless crimes because of stupid homo sapiens who think they have a GOD given right to do as they please! Well that isn't the way this world works and us hard working (law abiding citizens) need to stand up for our personal safety and those whom we care for most. I know this is a tangent from the current discussion on the legalities of guns in Yosemite but i TRULY THINK AND FEEL that its in our best interest if a reliable weapon (such as a hand gun) was allowed to be carried it would offer everyone just a little more peace of mind. Suppose you cross a cougar on a hiking trail. What exactly are you gonna do without a gun? Lets try a knife; are you gonna stab it? Good luck on that one... Lets try a stick; are you going to poke it into leaving you alone? I wouldn't bet my money on it. A fog horn you might suggest; Lets scary it away with a LOUD noise, hmmmm... that didn't seem to work and it seems i've aggravated the hungry beast further... Well thats were I think the safety comes and the aid of a gun can potentially save your life. Lets say we shoot off a round to scare the cougar away, "damn.. that didn't work and its still coming towards me" another warning shot closer to its perimeter" "THAT DID IT". The point of my almost seemingly pointless ranting is that a propelled projectile can offer you a much better defense and chance of SURVIVAL against both human attackers as well wild life. So get off your moral high horse and face the real world people. People like you are the reason our world is sooo EFFED UP to begin with. You let others decide for you and you soak up all the idealistic SHI* they feed you.

Let's not forget defense against being abducted by alien spacecraft or being attacked by hoards of marauding marmots.

Having backpacked and mountaineered in the Sierras for forty years, quite possibly the greatest threat that I have perceived to my well-being in the backcountry has been the possibility of running into paranoid, self-proclaimed, law abiding citizens.



Post Edited (07-12-08 04:31)

---

THE YOSEMITE POST
Voice of the Rocky Marmot Empire

Dear friends, in 60 years of camping, climbing, and packing in the wilderness I have never encountered alien spacecraft. Marauding marmots, yes, but never alien spacecraft.

Norman Clyde wandered into my camp one evening at chow time. He was sort of an alien, certainly a stranger among men. I treated him with hospitality and deference and coaxed several hours of good stories out of him. The guy was rather rotund and could really eat! He put away more chow than any bear I've known. I knew all his stories already. You probably know them too. But I heard them from Clyde! Guess that was worth a few pounds of food.

If alien creatures landed in my camp, I'd treat them the same way. Hospitality, kindness, cup of hot soup. If that didn't work, I'd treat them like black bears. Bang pots and throw sticks at them. Maybe get up and move away and let them have what they wanted. I'm not worried about meeting aliens, supermarmots, or black bears.

I've had many run-ins with bears. Almost always kept my food. Sometimes kept my dignity. A few times, I lost everything to a fat, grinning bear. No big deal. That's the way of the wilderness. Yeah, I've met paranoid, self-proclaimed law abiding citizens too. Jerks. Black bears and bull mooses in rut are nicer. But so what? I can walk away from jerks and bears.

However, what I wrote was not about jerks, Klingons, or bears. I HAVE had terrible encounters with bad buys in the outback who did their level best to terrorize me and perhaps kill me. I mentioned two of those meetings above. The attacks were real, not fanciful. They were terrifying, not ridiculous. The attackers were truly bad people, not Cat Womyn from Mars or marmots on crack. In one of the attacks, I ran away and jumped in a lake to save my life. It worked that time, but it may not always work. You know that. In one of the attacks, I defended myself with the only lethal force I had available -- an ice ax. Was I wrong to defend myself? Was I naughty to use an ice ax? If the ice ax was permissible, would I have been bad if I had pointed a gun? I don't ask these questions to generate ridicule about fearing trolls and balrogs in the woods, but to stimulate thought.

Remember, paranoia is an irrational fear, not a prudence that arises from multiple real experiences.

If you ever have the misfortune of being attacked by evil, violent people, I hope you at least have an ice ax within reach, and the fortitude to use it valiantly. And if you do so, I give you my word: I will not ricicule you for being paranoid, or having delusions about invaders from Ganymede.

I tell you these truths from experience: There are bad guys in the world. Sometimes, they go into the wilderness. They probably won't run from an ice ax. If you hold your ground and swing that ice ax fervently, they may leave. Maybe not. If you produce even a small gun, the bad experience is probably over. Be sure you don't shoot them as they run away. This is the wilderness, not the Wild West.

---

Doug Parr

Um... ya right...

If you see a cougar on the trail then you either:
a) are very lucky - enjoy it
b) got pounced on and st. peter is now confiscating your gun

you chance of either is slim to none...
for part 1 of b) I'd prefer a knife actually

If everyone carried a gun in the city then it would not be pretty.
... Oakland marks this day as their 100th random shooting...
Good morning, today is Janurary 4th, 2009

Unfortunately there are no laws against the right to bear children.

Hi,

Well, statistics don't lie.

The US is 24th on the list of murder rates. NONE of Western Europe with their gun control laws are above us. Period. Canada is #44 with about 1/4 of the rate of us here in the US.

I'm not implying that we need to make more gun control laws, but I do think there is a cultural problem that we in the US have when it comes to violence. I think there is a strong case for the ability for nearly anyone in the US to get a gun legally (and anyone at all to get an gun ILLEGALLY and very easily) plays a part.

Murder rates in Idaho, very low and nearly everyone owns a gun. Murder rates in Chicago and Wash DC, very high and nearly everyone owns a gun, but Chicago and Wash DC had (up until the recent supreme court case) the strongest gun control laws in the country. No correlation there either.

In any case, for those of you that want to carry guns in our national parks, I hope you lose. While I'm sure that the majority of the people here are very skilled and would only use a gun properly, I'd just as soon have it such that no one carries a gun as the MAJORITY of the people won't do it right. Look at how many people go out in the wilderness each year completely unprepared!

Again, I'll take my statistical chance of getting mauled by a bear or a cougar over the drive to and from work each day anytime. Keep the guns out of our national parks!

---

holz

Well - I did look up the laws in California, and carry of a loaded firearm in a "public place" is illegal. There are a bunch of exceptions, and one's "campsite" is one of them, but the law seems to indicate that there might be different rules that might supersede this exception depending on the agency in charge.

This is a Yosemite forum, and at this time it is illegal for a member of the public to possess a loaded firearm in Yosemite (as with most NPS-administered areas) save one specific reason. As far as I know, this exception doesn't apply to someone camping in Yosemite or just walking the trails. If this doesn't agree with anyone, there are places where carrying a firearm is legal (I mentioned areas administered by the Forest Service and BLM). It's even legal to shoot in "Wilderness Areas" but apparently the Forest Service doesn't recommend it.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/eldorado/recreation/shooting/

Quote

Wilderness - Firearms are not prohibited in the wilderness but do not lend themselves well to the remote, quiet wilderness experience. Please respect others and keep your target shooting outside of the boundaries when possible.

Us reasonably responsible gun owners don't want to fight. We're wimpy.



There is no reason for the prohibition on guns in national parks. I understand why the rule is there, in many cases, people create litter. And guns are noisy and dirty and all-around icky. However, as Doug illustrated so eloquently above, would you shoot up someone's campsite knowing that someone might shoot back? Hmmm. Let's ponder that for a millisecond.

Need I bring up the beheading of a Yosemite naturalist a few years ago? She might be alive had she been able to level the field.

Out where I took this picture a few miles southeast of Fallon NV yesterday (7/12/08) there wasn't any litter, but it's not a place frequented by humans. And I picked up my empty bullet casings and brought them back home...to reload.

That's an old Stanley thermos, the vacuum lining got a small hole in it years ago and didn't work anymore. Not sure why I kept it all these years, but perhaps I saw into the future, knowing 7/12/08 would happen? LOL

The small vacuum leak turned into some suddenly bigger holes. I youtubed one of the videos, with me hitting the thermos on the second shot with the S&W .357 magnum handgun. Practice makes perfect! After that I proceeded to make several more holes with the handgun and with the .30-30 Marlin.

Here is the youtube video of this victimless crime:
Thermos gets a hole in it

Vince wrote:

> There is no reason for the prohibition on guns in national
> parks. I understand why the rule is there, in many cases,
> people create litter. And guns are noisy and dirty and
> all-around icky. However, as Doug illustrated so eloquently
> above, would you shoot up someone's campsite knowing that
> someone might shoot back? Hmmm. Let's ponder that for a
> millisecond.

That's what the guys with the large, numbered golden badges with the eagle on the top are for. You know - the well-armed men and women in the cars/SUVs (complete with 12 gauge shotguns and/or AR-15s) that look suspiciously like police vehicles?



> Need I bring up the beheading of a Yosemite naturalist a few
> years ago? She might be alive had she been able to level the
> field.

You can get into all the hypotheticals, but let's say. Most people I know don't want to carry a loaded firearm. If it's Nobody knows the exact details about how the Stayner thing went down. I've heard rumblings that he might have been hitchhiking.

Vince wrote:
> Us reasonably responsible gun owners don't want to fight. We're
> wimpy.

In general, people that go around making it a point to be prepared for a fight, want to fight.

> There is no reason for the prohibition on guns in national
> parks.

There is no viable reason to allow guns in national parks, other than to ease the paranoia of those who aren't comfortable without carrying a gun. National parks weren't developed for hunting, or for shooting people, so what's the gun for? The guys that are out to "get" you?

What a wonderful place parks would be with guns OK; the first loony that thinks someone else is dangerous whips out his gun, someone else shoots at him, and we're all dodging bullets shot by a bunch of paranoid fools who think they're protecting themselves and others.

ALL the people who carry guns are responsible, sane, and would never use them except when they are absolutely sure that it's the only alternative; then they would use them accurately and wisely. Just ask them, they'll assure you of that.

Or, maybe when some smartass comes into their camp and mouths off, but hey, he asked for it.

I understand why the rule is there, in many cases,
> people create litter. And guns are noisy and dirty and
> all-around icky. However, as Doug illustrated so eloquently
> above, would you shoot up someone's campsite knowing that
> someone might shoot back? Hmmm. Let's ponder that for a
> millisecond.

What do you do in the city, or at the beach? They can shoot up your beach blanket, do you carry a gun there too? A gun-wielding fool set on stealing, killing, or just showing that he's boss isn't going to check to see if you have a gun, he'll most likely shoot first and ask questions later. If he's just some scared guy wanting your wallet, maybe you can get the drop on him, but is that worth hauling a loaded gun around all your life? If he's a certified wacko and sees you going for your gun, it's unlikely to do you any good.

> Need I bring up the beheading of a Yosemite naturalist a few
> years ago? She might be alive had she been able to level the
> field.

If she'd have had 6 mean pitbulls with her, she might too. Or a big 4WD truck instead of that wimpy Yugo to run him over. Or, maybe none of that would have helped. What's your point?

A few years ago 4 of us were lounging around a swimming hole in a national forest. Guy rides up on a horse carrying a rattlesnake, asks "want a rattlesnake? They're good eatin'."

"Where'd you shoot him?"

"Just up the road"

"What'd you shoot him for?"

"It's a rattlesnake"

"Oh."

I'm sure in their minds, they were protecting all of us. I live in rattlesnake country, never been bitten, though I spend a lot of time hiking. I've never found it necessary or desireable to kill one, though I'd probably rather they weren't around where I am. In 62 years, I can't think of once when having a loaded gun easily available would have resulted in a better outcome of any situation I've been in.

There just may be a situation some day in a national park where the only way to save myself or family is to have a loaded gun there and ready. There's also the possibility (If I carried a gun despite the law) that I'll be in a situation where having a gun would have exacerbated a situation that would have otherwise ended up with no one getting hurt. Or maybe I'll win the lottery and go on one of those moon voyages. From what I've seen, the second instance is the most likely (or would be if I carried the gun), followed by the third, trailed by the first.

BTW, I'm not anti-gun; they have their place, both for protection or as a hobby; but people who think they can't get by in their normal day-to-day existence without the protection of a gun, I think have other issues, because most of us get by fine without one.

Gary

Sierrafan wrote:

> BTW, I'm not anti-gun; they have their place, both for
> protection or as a hobby; but people who think they can't get
> by in their normal day-to-day existence without the protection
> of a gun, I think have other issues, because most of us get by
> fine without one.

We have our proxies who are armed and (hopefully) professionally trained. You'll see them in vehicles like the following:

Quote
y_p_w
Sierrafan wrote:

> BTW, I'm not anti-gun; they have their place, both for
> protection or as a hobby; but people who think they can't get
> by in their normal day-to-day existence without the protection
> of a gun, I think have other issues, because most of us get by
> fine without one.

We have our proxies who are armed and (hopefully) professionally trained. You'll see them in vehicles like the following:

Hey YPW...you may be fine trying to negotiate with a half witted lunatic trying to victimze you while waiting for the police to save your sorry behind, but the rest of us will use these laws for what they were intended to do to: Protect Ourselves. If you think being vigilant about personal safety is paranoid, then I've got a green pasture for you to graze on with the rest of the flock that's going to be dinner for the wolf...safety in numbers right??? Yea...not.
Have a nice day in Fantasia.

Quote
Realist

Quote
y_p_w
Sierrafan wrote:

> BTW, I'm not anti-gun; they have their place, both for
> protection or as a hobby; but people who think they can't get
> by in their normal day-to-day existence without the protection
> of a gun, I think have other issues, because most of us get by
> fine without one.

We have our proxies who are armed and (hopefully) professionally trained. You'll see them in vehicles like the following:

Hey YPW...you may be fine trying to negotiate with a half witted lunatic trying to victimze you while waiting for the police to save your sorry behind, but the rest of us will use these laws for what they were intended to do to: Protect Ourselves. If you think being vigilant about personal safety is paranoid, then I've got a green pasture for you to graze on with the rest of the flock that's going to be dinner for the wolf...safety in numbers right??? Yea...not.
Have a nice day in Fantasia.

You said you were done.

---

Old Dude

Quote
Realist
but the rest of us will use these laws for what they were intended to do to: Protect Ourselves.

Paranoid much?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25630796

---

Everything I know I learned from

Billy,

Put < your link > with no spaces on the link and it will be hot.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25630796

---

Old Dude

It appears the NPS cop cars are unmanned...

and chevvys...ick

Vince wrote:

> It appears the NPS cop cars are unmanned...

Uh. It's parked on a rather wide shoulder. Don't know about cops, but most people park their cars and get out to do assorted stuff. I guess they're also demonstrating how to properly park a car, because I remember the "bear jams" where the LE rangers were threatening to ticket cars parked on the road that didn't have all four wheels either on a marked shoulder or off the pavement.

> and chevvys...ick

I see more Crown Vics than anything else. Just like the cops back home. That photo was from a collection of police vehicle photos. I think that one was from Yellowstone. I don't recall the collection (it linked to that photo from a public gallery on another site).

I think the problem is Doug's brother-in-law. Hanging out with that guy is dangerous!

I've thought long and hard about this topic, and I believe that openly allowing firearms in the national parks will open the proverbial box to a lot more grief than we want.

I said "openly" because you have a very quiet option of taking the weapon along and using it for the sole purpose of defending your life or others. At that point, you will find out if a prosecutor truly wants to make an example of you. My best guess is that he won't if you have acted in the utmost good faith otherwise.

As for the man shooting the campfire and gear, crazies appear everywhere, and you need to promptly vacate when you encounter them.

Almost 4 years later, I'm reading the comments on the topic of guns in national parks and I almost feel sorry for the naysayers. Reading their comments 4 years later sheds a bright light on their immense ignorance and paranoia of guns and the law. Since the legislation passed in 2010, there hasn't been anymore violence, accidents, or trouble in the national parks that wasn't already occurring beofre the legislation was passed. The people here who denounce the need to carry a gun are outright ignorant, blind to reality, and frankly, live in a fantasy land. One guy here said that after much thought, he still couldn't figure out a reason why one would need to carry a gun. Really? Do these people even live on the same planet as the rest of us? Did you all forget about the Mount Reineer criminal who took his gun to hide in the woods after committing a crime in the city, then shot and killed a ranger? Or what about the 70 year old couple, who are avid, experienced hikers, who were attacked by a mountain lion in Prarie Creek Redwoods State Park in California...here let me make it easy for all you non-believers...here's a few website chronicaling all of the mountain lion attacks here in North America:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_cougar_attacks_in_North_America
http://www.cougarinfo.org/

As you can see there are TONS of documented cases of attacks that cost many people their lives. Just because YOU have been hiking for 40 years and have never had a scare, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Wake up and stop living this fantasy of fuzzy bunnies and purring kittens...you are in the WILD when you are out there! I respect your decision not to carry for your own protection...heck...I'll even hike 50 yrds down trail from you and let you be the bait. But don't trash our right to carry a gun when it's perfectly legal to. And if the sight of a gun on a law abiding citizen scared the hell out of you...then stay home....or move to Switzerland...either way...shut your pie holes.

I'm done.

Quote
Realist
Almost 4 years later, I'm reading the comments on the topic of guns in national parks and I almost feel sorry for the naysayers. Reading their comments 4 years later sheds a bright light on their immense ignorance and paranoia of guns and the law....

Just because we disagree with you does not mean we are ignorant. If you have to start your argument with a personal attack, then the argument can't be one with a rational basis.

I grew up in the ghetto and my town once had the highest murder rate per capita in the US. Never needed a gun then and will never have one. It was pretty easy even in the bad part of town to use common sense to avoid being murdered. I didn't walk around at night alone, didn't associate with criminals or drug dealers and took simple steps at home like a deadbolt and a porchlight. I had a pretty loyal dog back then too. I got into a couple situations that I was able to talk my way out of. If I had a gun I probably would have been shot in those situations. Even criminals would rather not kill you and have to hassle with death row and all that nonsense unless you give them a reason to do so like pulling a gun on them because you don't want to lose the 11 dollars in your wallet.

Now I do know more than 1 person that carry and they definitely are empowered and fantasize about getting a chance to "defend themselves. Gun toting citizens are the only thing I have ever feared in the wilderness. I've been backpacking for 40 years and never remotely felt the need for a firearm. Maybe people need to learn some outdoor skills so they don't feel the need to have to shoot their way out of million to one odds of a mountain lion encounter. Why would you want to carry that weight? Common sense is way more valuable for your safety. You are far more likely to die if you have a gun.

I will never own a gun. Don't need one.