Government Land Grab to Restrict Guns?

While all of us have been watching our elected officials rush the most expansive spending bill ever in our history, other things are going on, believe it or not.  The stim-u-less bill was hastily voted on on Friday, the 13th, because we are in such a “crisis”, then sat for 4 days before the President signed it amid much hoopla and, incidentally, more spending.  At an estimated $57,000 per hour to use Air Force One, the new president flew to Denver, CO to sign this “crisis” spending plan.  It would be almost funny if it wasn’t so dire….but I digress.

SB 22 has been going on.  Senate Bill 22 is a bill proposing to vastly increase the number of acres to be put under government control in the hands of the Park Service.  What’s so bad about that?  Well, for one thing, it increases federal control of public and private land.  And NPS land is under a strict gun ban.  Some see this as not only a land grab, but as further restrictions on gun use.  It also seems that this particular bill is made up of 150 separate pieces of legislation that couldn’t pass on their own merits.  But Senator Reid has lumped them all together and pushed it through the Senate in January with a vote of 73-21.  In the Democratic House, measures have been taken so that there can be no amendments or alterations made to the bill.  It would go from there directly to the President’s desk.  Read a more in-depth description of this bill here. I think I will put a link on my sidebar too.

What I find so bizarre in all of this is #1.  Government keeps wanting to take away private property rights.  This has been going on so much in the last few years, that I find it particularly scary.  #2.  I have a hard time understanding the mindset of those who want to take away guns from the law abiding citizens. For years, I have listened to reports of young women who have gone missing in national parks…they don’t come back alive.  What if they were allowed to carry a weapon to protect themselves?  Maybe they would have a chance.  Consider Australia’s recent dis-arming of its citizens one year ago. Their crime rate has gone up.  The criminals don’t participate in turning guns in…they keep theirs.  They understand (even if the nanny state doesn’t)  that an unarmed public is ripe for the pickings with little or no consequences for themselves.  This just does not make sense.  Is it yet another symptom of the nanny state’s mindset that “we can take care of you”? Aren’t we actually ceding ground to the criminals when we disarm the law abiding citizenry?

I don’t think I will be doing any hiking in a national park anytime soon.  And that’s a shame.  It’s hard for this law-abiding citizen to really believe that our elected officials make plans to put us in more danger, but that is certainly the way it appears.

Hmmmm….maybe with all the new state sovereignty initiatives going on, the states affected by this will “just say no”.

UPDATE 3/20/09–This just happened this week.  Apparently, in federal district court in D.C., anti-gun advocates have applied for and received a temporary restraining order against implementation of the new rule allowing concealed carry in national parks and wildlife refuges.  Read about it here.

4 thoughts on “Government Land Grab to Restrict Guns?

  1. Thanks for writing about this Kathy. With so much going on, I can’t keep up with all of it! This seems to be a two-fold attack, on both private property and the 2nd A. Our Bill of Rights is under attack from the radicals, all at once. Perhaps to divide our attention and keep us unfocused and unorganized?

    Boy, we are going to be busy for the next four years. I have hope that 2010 will bring some relief.

    Back last year there was a move by my Senator Coburn to lift the restrictions on carrying legally in national parks. I’ll have to look to see how that turned out. I thought I had heard that Bush had lifted that restriction, but that it only applied if you were in the state that had issued your permit.

    This is a very good post. I’m going to link to it from mine.

  2. ConservativePup,
    Bush did lift that restriction right before leaving office. However, Obama put a hold on all things recently passed when coming in to office for “review”. This was one of them, so I’m not sure if it is actually legal to carry in parks yet.
    Was it only for the state that issued the permit, or was it for any state recognizing reciprocity too?

  3. The NP gun ban was not a law that was lifted. It was set to expire, and was allowed to, much to the chagrin of the Brady Bunch, who attempted a suit to stop the expiration. I am a member of several pro 2nd sites, and have not heard of Obama putting a hold on the issue. So far as I know, it is now legal to carry in a NP, as long as you are in compliance with the state law the park is in. If the state allows reciprocity with your permit, you should be golden. Obviously, you should do your homework before traveling, and this has only been my impression.

  4. It sounds like there is some confusion about this issue. I lifted my information for this post from the link given above. I would have to look up all my sources again, but I believe there may have been some allowance to carry if you live in the state of the national park, thereby coming under state law? Someone correct me if I am wrong on that.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s