jhodlof wrote:Most parks could probably benefit from hunting and thinning of the large game animals since only a few parks have large numbers of predators
This rule change doesn't affect hunting, only carrying a weapon. Since hunting would still not be legal within the park/monument boundaries, the reason for it would presumably be for self-defense.
the likelihood of lead shot being sprayed around by red necks at a campsite isn't too likley since those people won't be able to get very far in to the backcountry in their ATV's or pick-ups, and therefore would be in developed sites where people would just call the police on them.
More than just rednecks carry guns. I think the idea here, once again, is personal defense. I think this is especially pertinent for large parks and/or border parks. Xanterra isn't the most scrupulous with its background checks for its foreign employees at GCNP, nor is Aramark at some of its parks around here. I'm sure some domestic workers "fly under the radar" as well. We had people, on a couple occasions, try and break into the Peregrine Fund trailer at the South Rim.
Concealed begs a question: if it is concealed is it not noticeable to someone?
The rule change would allow for holders of CCW permits to carry a weapon in the park/monument. I don't recall that the rule change would actually force the weapon to be concealed, just that the person carrying it would have a CCW permit (which usually entails a fingerprint/criminal check by state law enforcement, and a weapons safety class). I think it is primarily to ensure that those that would carry in the park/monument wouldn't be "drunk rednecks" who would start blasting away at whatever took their fancy (excepting, of course, criminals who don't care about the law anyway).
If its being pulled out for legitimate reasons what difference does that make to people who object to them?
Don't know there, but then again, I'm not someone who objects!
When the need to actually have a gun in parks is so low, why is it so important to be able to tote around your gun everywhere you go?
Well, the Constitution says
Our Founding Fathers wrote:the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
so that sounds like a decent reason to me. Admittedly I don't think a gun is necessary everywhere, concealed or unconcealed, in a park or not. When I'm walking around town in Page, do I think I need to carry? Not really. At Natural Bridges, do I feel a pressing need to pack heat? Again, no, not really. But there certainly are places where it would be nice to have something "just in case," both in and out of the NPS system.
I think people who need their guns all the time are weird.
Some folks would think anyone who climbs Humphreys in the dead of winter is weird too.
All a matter of perspective, I guess. Like I said above, though, I am not someone who wants to or feels the need to carry all the time.
Most people are not very good with a gun, and would probably be worse in the odd situation where they would be shooting at someone.
That's one of the things that having a CCW permit involves; marksmanship and how to react under stress, so that if
the situation arises, the CCW holder is able to react appropriately and not put anyone in any unnecessary danger.
Can they still carry a knife? How easy is it to stealthily stab someone in the back?
Kinda unrelated, but not in HI for much longer. Pocket knives are being outlawed, as of January 2010. Hawaii Senate Bill No. 126.
Or, I can drive my car or large commercial vehicle in a park. How hard would it be to run over a large group of people with one of those, intentionally or otherwise?
Or load one up as a bomb, or simply push people over the edge of the Canyon, let loose rattlesnakes in the Visitor's Center. There are all sorts of ways folks who want to do ill can go about doing so, and hardly any of them would follow the law in any case going about doing so. You can't prevent everything, but why not be prepared in case you could
prevent one thing from happening?