I fear for wildlife's sake. And I imagine there will be accidental shootings too.

I always felt completely safe in our great national parks. now i do not. people with loaded guns - WHAT A BAD IDEA!!!!

I am a single female and usually travel alone. Knowing that it is now legal for people to carry a concealed weapon in national parks does not make me feel safer! Quite the contrary. I realize there are those who would carry them anyway, law or no law. But now it is okay for them to do so legally. What about my rights? My rights to feel safe when I travel alone?

Such is the name of progress -- and the credit card reform does nothing for the people with the credit cards, only the banks who hold the power over those cards.

Where are the rights of the American people!?

I'm glad and yes it will make me feel safer and on the right side of the law now.

I dont feel any different (safe/not safe). They have always been permitted in National Forests etc...

There has always been the chance someone on the trail or camped next to me has a concealed weapon. I dont think about it.

We have to try to remember there are responsible gun owners. I am a single female and will feel much better being able to carry my firearm. Those who pose a threat I'm sure were already carrying them anyway....

Aside from whether anyone has the legal right to carry a firearm in the parks, the issue raised is whether I feel safer on any public lands where people are carrying guns. Over decades of experience in outdoor recreational activities, I only carried a gun to hunt during one of those years. I never felt more safe when encountering those with guns, for whatever purpose, on federal park, federal forest, or other public lands. As an unarmed Forest Protection Officer in remote wilderness areas, I had several situations in which a person with a concealed or drawn weapon, including a knife, used the weapon for purposes of posturing or intimidation during a conversation. In at least one situation where a man drew a concealed weapon that he said was to protect him from bears, I suspected that he subsequently shot his toe off if he ever did see a bear. Based on my own meetings with many bears and people, I have always felt safer among the bears than among the people, armed or unarmed, in the forest.

I want the bad guys to believe that I am armed and willing to defend myself. Whether or not I carry a gun, this is a good law in my opinion. (Maybe I will pack some heat.)

A person with a concealed weapons permit has to go through a safety training course, has to show proficiency in gun safety, handling and shooting, and has to take an exam just to apply for a CPL permit. That person then has to apply with the local Sheriff department or county clerks office, get fingerprinted and have a criminal check ran through the state police and the FBI data bases. The person applying for the CPL also has to be cleared of any mental deficiencies, then has to go in front of the local gun board before they can be approved of a CPL. It is the person that is not licensed that you and I should be concerned about not the person that legally has a CPL(concealed pistol license)!

In light of the evidence revealed in the comment above mine, I think this rule is fine. Everybody who will bring a gun into a national park as a result of this rule is mentally stable, not a crimminal, and generally people who I'm not worried will kill me in my sleep. I can see why guns make some people nervous, but I don't think this rule will HARM safety.

I agree with Douglas. I've never so much as touched a gun but I don't see how the repeal of this ban makes a difference. Someone who had malicious intent would have brought a gun in and attempted their goal anyway, regardless of a ban, and it seems to me that allowing them just makes things easier for the responsible, careful gun owners who now don't have to worry about breaking the law if they have theirs with them.

As I have said before, Americans need to take control of their finances and eliminate all credit cards!
We have become as addicted to plastic as we have foreign oil. Go back to paying cash for everything, and you will be restoring more than your financial integrity, you will be reestablishing a small measure of privacy that you have lost through the banks tracking your every purchase (and thereby your whereabouts) through your use of their credit and debit cards. CitiBank, BOA, CityGroup, etc get us on the hook, then we're in their power. So far it's still OUR choice. They can't force us to use their cards... YET..., but they will soon try by passing legislation that would make it necessary... like putting Social Security benefits onto bank cards so that the recipients are forced to use their banks. But most of us still can choose NOT to use credit cards if we have the self discipline. Try it! It's amazing how liberating it is to not have a Visa or MasterCard or Discover bill coming in the mail every month!!

Gun free zones are very dangerous because criminals know their victims can not defend themselves. Statistics show that folks that legally carry guns are less likely to commit crimes than other. It shows a 7 to 1 less likely. To legally carry a gun, in addition to know guns, I was finger printed, provided two photos, investigated by the local sheriff department, took the required safety training which included legal responsibility and confrontation avoidance, and demonstrated firearms proficiency. States with extreme gun control have the highest crime. Examples of New York, California, Chicago and Washington D. C. are the murder capitals of the United States. If you will carefully read the reports, gun free areas have higher murder numbers because the victims are powerless to defend themselves. Law enforcement personnel appreciate the person with a legal carry license.

I feel that this law is carefully crafted to balance the needs of licensed concealed carry permit holders as well as the safety of park rangers, the general public and wildlife. Like the law enforcement rangers in National Parks, those of us that hold weapons permits pray we never have to use the firearm we carry. We also know that criminals, by their very definition, don’t obey the laws already on the books. We know that when “you least expect it – you’re elected”, and the chances of law enforcement being there to thwart the attack is slim to non-existent. I know, it has happened to me twice in the past 12 years. In both cases, my concealed weapons training and my wits enabled me to thwart the criminals’ intent without harm to myself, family members, and even the criminals. In both cases, I never had to use my licensed concealed firearm, but its presence gave me the needed confidence to act boldly and decisively.

Licensed concealed carry permit holders have been screened by law enforcement agencies to insure that they don’t have a criminal record, plus they have been trained as to the legal ramifications of deadly force law. They are trained to practice restraint in social situations as they know they are held to a higher standard of conduct by law enforcement agencies. They have also been tested to determine their marksmanship and weapons handling skills.

Highest regards;
James

BTW, your photo at the top showing the dude in the plaid shirt with his hand on the revolver is a photo designed to portray licensed concealed weapons gun carriers in a negative light. Unless I told you, you'd never be able to spot my concealed weapon.

Regards;

James

I am a single female and feel much more secure knowing I would have the means to defend myself, i.e. carry a weapon) in a remote area should the need arise. This could be especially important if one became lost or injured in a remote area. It is also naive to think that the "bad guys" do not carry weapons, law or no law!

I appreciate the comments by people who know something about the concealed weapons law. I cannot think of any shooting accidents or incidents locally or nationally that involved someone who had a concealed weapons permit. (The university professor who recently shot other faculty members I am sure did not have a concealed weapons permit, for example.) So I suspect that our discomfort and upset about this change is uninformed prejudice and not based on facts. I don't feel particularly comfortable with anyone having guns. I hate the amount of violence in the world. But this change (allowing people with a concealed weapons license to carry weapons in a National Park) does not constitute a big change. The unlicensed people who carry guns, whatever the context, are the folks who cause problems. People with a license most likely do not take their guns into buildings or areas where it is stated that they are not allowed to take firearms. People who are not licensed probably take their guns wherever they want to. I wish the Sierra Club question did not say anything about the Second Amendment in the poll. My feeling more or less safe has nothing to do with the Second Amendment but has to do with the specific laws governing the use of firearms.

I preferred the 1980s regulation barring firearms from national parks except those broken down or stored out of reach. It was a valuable tool in protecting the wildlife of the parks from poaching and in discouraging rash use of weapons. For many years during hunting season I haven't gone hiking anywhere except in national parks because they were a safer place.

Someone said he felt no differently; that guns have always been allowed in National Forests. Well, National Forests are QUITE a bit different than National Parks, which is why I frequent the latter. Hunting, trapping, and other destructive activities are allowed in National Forests; animals are nervous and hard to see. In National Parks, the animals are allowed to live in conditions closer to what has always been natural for them. They are more in evidence, and easier to see, which is why people come to National Parks in the first place. Gun nuts taking pot shots at the wildlife is going to change all that.

The thing that everyone seems to forget about human nature is simply "Laws keep good people Good". The bad apples that make you feel unsafe were packing heat whether they were allowed to or not. Now law abiding, good hearted and helpful citizens are allowed to carry them as well. Look at Australia for an example of good people vs. bad people when it comes to weapons.

I am one who carries legally and have no problem with me or other law abiding citizens carrying in our parks.

First, I must state that I have rarely hiked or backpacked in National Parks or on NPS-administered land, as I live in the Southeast where USFS-administered public land is more accessible to me. Still, hypothetically treating the backcountry experience as the same, the animal that potentially poses the most danger in throughout almost all public land is another human being (the arguable exception being the polar bear). Those who are dangerous, such as those responsible for violent crimes along the AT, don't concern themselves with the legal right to carry a weapon in a particular area. Since I do utilize primarily USFS lands, I am accustomed to seeing others carrying weapons, generally hunting arms, while I'm en route to the posted weapons-free "safety zone" surrounding developed Forest Service campgrounds and designated Wilderness Areas. As far as hiking and backpacking in general, I do not believe the number of guns is likely to increase on the backcountry trails of National Parks. Guns and ammunition are HEAVY additions to any load. As for areas accessible by vehicle, I believe those guns have always been as close as the glovebox.

I don't think the issue is one of guns, so much as fear of other people encountered on the trail, whose intentions you can't know. There have always been peaceful people who have carried weapons on the trail. Bringing National Parks into the argument is, in my opinion, to introduce a false distinction into the conversation. Would you feel safer if you never saw the guns, or would you prefer that they be carried in plain sight?

Best,
Jeff

I've camped, photographed, backpacked, skied, and (in an earlier life) climbed in national parks and other areas for decades. I've encountered wildlife including bears. The places I've visited have ranged from urban parks to some of the wilder areas of Alaska where I've spent a total of a month.

I have never once felt the need to carry a weapon, and I have never once encountered a situation in which having one would have done me a bit of good. One reason that I feel safer in these places is that weapons are not part of the experience. I'll feel less safe knowing that the other folks in the campground may well be armed and prepared to use their weapons to get their way.

BTW, I'm not "anti-gun" or "anti-hunting" - I just think that there was no compelling reason for this change, and there are distinct and obvious reasons to understand that it was an ill-advised an politically loaded (pardon the bad pun) move.

Dan

I am so pleased to see so many in favor of this and in agreement with me. I am truly surprised ! Many of my associates think that the Sierra Club is a bunch of leftwing extremists. I can now put the extreme tag on them.

Yep antler poaching is a big problem and wildlife in parks don't know to run from people. Because of hunting, you don't find such big antlers on National Forests because the animals are killed before they can live long enough.
I also don't go out on these lands during hunting season. It's insane and I'm surprised more people aren't hurt.
Firearms in the parks are a bad idea.

As a teenager, I belonged to an ROTC-type organization associated with my middle-&-high school. Every year we took a shooting test in a concrete block building, with small .22 rifles. One year I did well, and was associated with the sharp-shooting group. We went out to local (military) rifle ranges and shot with World War II era rifles. I will never forget the time the bullets turned out to be ricocheting off a gravel bed by a creek, in totally unpredictable directions. Immensely dangerous.

Nor the time we all had an an excercise in a local open space area, with our World War I era rifles, and blanks. A couple of idiots carved wooden bullets! And someone was burned on the leg by the blast from a blank.

No, having weapons in a National Park (or any other area, for that matter), makes me feel LESS safe. And the murder statistics (compare the US with just about any country in Europe, for example) confirm that in an environment where guns are hard to obtain, murder is much less common.

I would be prepared to give up the new credit card rules (although I think they are a good thing) to get back to no guns in National Parks.

And how about a Constitutional Amendment to prevent such totally different things being put in a single bill.

In general I am against carrying concealed weapons anywhere. But it is true that bad people will carry guns illegally. Now responsible people who think they need this for safety are actually putting their lives, the lives of others, and the animal population at risk with possible accidents and heat of the moment events.

Bad people and good people carry guns; no argument there. I'm particularly worried about the stupid people who carry guns—licensed or not. Campgrounds are often hangouts for drunk partiers, Darwin-award-winners, as well as loose cannons who could be offended by the former to the point of rage. This just seems like more tragedy waiting to happen.

It's a recipe for murder. I think the alcohol and campsites is a good point. Why do people have to bear arms in a National Park for? If it's safety from animals, then don't go into National Parks to visit the animals protected there.

The main problem people seem to have with guns in national parks is that someone could murder you with one. But if someone has a gun and is prepared to use it on another person to get their way, they are probably a crimminal. Crimminals don't care about laws, so they probably already bring guns to national parks. The same goes for poachers. Ultimately, the dangerous people who are causing all the uproar are already armed and loaded...in the national parks! If you're worried about them, you're going to have to find a solution other than banning guns altogether. That has failed.

And, while it's true that there are fewer gun-related murders in other countries, they don't ban guns altogether. They keep guns out of the hands of people who are likely to use them to kill other people, but if you're sane and responsible you can still own a gun. So Europe really is not comparible to gun-free zones.

If you want to stop murderers from using guns, try preventing them from buying them in the first place, rather than restricting where they can bring them. The old rule didn't stop crimminals, and it didn't make us any safer.

For confrontations in camps, maybe if we armed our forest rangers and we had more of them, they could serve as a sort of police force for our national parks. That would solve the problem of loose cannons with itchy trigger fingers.

This new rule ONLY applies to people who possess a concealed weapons permit. If you do not have one it is still illegal for you to carry a gun into a national park.

The people that have concealed weapons permits must go through a rigorous background investigation and application process. Usually they are law enforcement officers.

This new law does not apply too every sportsman with a gun. Hunting and shooting still must occur in areas designated for such activities -- and that is not in our national parks.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVE A SUPREME COURT THAT IS ANTI-LIFE, ANTI-HUMAN RIGHTS, AND ULTIMATELY, ANTI-AMERICAN!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm going to ingore your bait on the topic of life and return to the conversation here... I don't assume that just because you are willing to go through a background check that you are a stable human capable of handling a firearm. What does concern me most is the random possibility of knuckleheads drinking around a campfire and a loaded pistol nearby.

It sounds to me like there are people that have been camping or hiking in a wide variety of parks and other public lands that are saying they will suddenly be scared going to a National Park now that permit holders can carry a concealed weapon there. Were you not scared in all those other parks where concealed carry was already legal?

There's talk of not wanting to go to National Parks any more because of it. Did it prevent you from going to virtually every other piece of public land prior to this?

If I remember the numbers correctly, here in SC you can't even have had six traffic tickets in the previous five years to qualify for a CWP. The requirements for obtaining a CWP are literally stricter than they are to become a law enforcement officer, and yet most folks have no qualms about police carrying a gun.

Honestly, I don't understand those that say they will feel less safe. There are people all around us every day that are carrying concealed weapons and I can't imagine anyone going around worrying about it all day every day.

And the whole thought of people taking pot shots at wildlife is just ridiculous on so many levels. As if a demonstrably proven law-abiding person is going to take out their (generally) very compact handgun to risk a heavy duty Federal Offense so they can attempt a really low odds shot at one of the animals they came to a National Park to admire doesn't even make sense.

This is a bad law and should be reversed. Anyone who has to carry a gun in a National Park is afraid of anyone, especially strangers. They are unstable and may use a gun for any reason, from being drunk to falling over a rock to think people are laughing at them. A least, if one is carrying a gun at the park entrance they should be required to show a permit.

FWIW, the National Park Service says that in 2008 (most recent year for statistics) there were 3,760 reported major crimes in National Parks, including 5 homicides and 37 rapes.

I am a single female and have had a permit to carry for several years. I camp and hike alone often and I have always carried a gun. I was at one park in the fall and actually had 2 men come up to me in my campsite and though nothing happened I felt better having my gun with me. I go to the range often and carry almost always. Realistically if you think the person in the campsite beside you did not have a gun b4 you are very naive. In my opinion as a single female b4 the law changed I would rather ask forgiveness than permission when it comes to my safety. National parks do not ask for character references on people that come into them and come to find out creepy dangerous people like nature too. By the way for all of you "no guns" people most gun violence committed in the US is not committed by permit holders. I can promise you that permit holders do not go hunting for wildlife with a hand gun. If we do go hunting it is with a weapon used for hunting and with a hunting license during "hunting season" in areas that hunting is permitted.

The right to bear arms has been a right b4 I even had a right to vote. It has been a right from the beginning and I do not want to lose it!

There is no reason to bring a gun into a National Park - they are sanctuaries for people and animals, and guns don't belong there. I've spent most of my 47 years hiking, camping, backpacking, canoeing, and otherwise enjoying our country's wild places; and like others above, I have encountered all manner of wildlife as well as a variety of humans... the humans were scarier. Especially those carrying firearms. I agree that there are many responsible gun owners out there, and most people with a concealed weapons permit probably fall into this category, but who can tell? There are a lot of cookoos out there too...

As for those who argue that guns help them feel protected from wildlife and the above-mentioned unscrupulous humans (probably more dangerous than the wildlife...)... These are valid concerns and I can relate, as I share them myself. I might even agree with your comments IF your gun was loaded and readily accessible at all times, since attackers (human or otherwise) rarely announce their assaults, and an unloaded weapon hidden in your pack or car wouldn't be much use.

However, I can't agree because I firmly believe that thousands of people walking around with loaded weapons can't possibly make the world safer... On the contrary - it puts everyone at risk. What if someone else got a hold of your legally registered, concealed, loaded weapon...like a child, or some knucklehead who's been drinking around the campfire and has a beef with someone? Lots of kids have accidentally shot themselves and others while 'playing' with a supposedly safely-hidden gun, and lots of attackers have used their victims guns against them. So are you really safer? Debatable... maybe against a mountain lion or a grizzly, but you 'd have to be mighty quick and have a pretty powerful gun.

So...no, I definitely do not feel safer with concealed weapons in the parks. Have to say that this issue never entered my head during our recent month-long trip to National Parks and wild places in Colorado, Wyoming and South Dakota - it will now. Life was easier when we only had to worry about the wildlife...