Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > General Topics > Concealed Carry & Self Defense
o

Notices

Concealed Carry & Self Defense All aspects of Concealed and Open Carry, Home and Self Defense.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-29-2010, 08:49 PM
walnutred walnutred is offline
US Veteran
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,450
Likes: 785
Liked 3,030 Times in 1,002 Posts
Default So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,

Does that include National Parks in the City of DC? Personally I'd like to see DC made the test case for National Reciprocity. It's a city not a State, so it is not a States Rights issue. Since in theory DC is jointly held by all States DC should have to accept any States CCW permit.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-30-2010, 12:55 AM
cshoff's Avatar
cshoff cshoff is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Central Missouri
Posts: 871
Likes: 54
Liked 95 Times in 54 Posts
Default

What we now have is commonality in law with the jurisdiction in which the national park is located. If the controlling jurisdiction (city, state, or county) in which the NP is located allows CCW, then it's allowed in the NP under those same local, state, or county laws that are already in existence. While your point is a valid one (IMO), it is not reality.
__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-30-2010, 07:40 AM
ispcapt ispcapt is offline
US Veteran
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 1,147
Likes: 300
Liked 2,303 Times in 614 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cshoff View Post
What we now have is commonality in law with the jurisdiction in which the national park is located. If the controlling jurisdiction (city, state, or county) in which the NP is located allows CCW, then it's allowed in the NP under those same local, state, or county laws that are already in existence. While your point is a valid one (IMO), it is not reality.
To clarify a bit more, it's more than just if the state allows CCW in that particular state. The carrier must be able to legally CCW in that state. What that means is if you have a CCW from your state, you travel to another state but your CCW permit is not recognized by that state and you can't carry in that state then you also cannot carry in the national park.
NP carry is not a blanket "OK to carry in every national park." You first have to be legal to carry in the state first.
__________________
183rd FBINA
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-30-2010, 07:43 PM
MSgt G MSgt G is offline
US Veteran
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Northwest Georgia
Posts: 5,124
Likes: 8,481
Liked 1,231 Times in 429 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ispcapt View Post
To clarify a bit more, it's more than just if the state allows CCW in that particular state. The carrier must be able to legally CCW in that state. What that means is if you have a CCW from your state, you travel to another state but your CCW permit is not recognized by that state and you can't carry in that state then you also cannot carry in the national park.
NP carry is not a blanket "OK to carry in every national park." You first have to be legal to carry in the state first.
And to clarify even more, it doesn't necessarily have to be concealed. You go by the laws of the state where the park is located. Here in Georgia we can carry open or concealed, thus those who can legally carry in Georgia can carry either way in the national parks we have.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-01-2010, 04:48 AM
walnutred walnutred is offline
US Veteran
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,450
Likes: 785
Liked 3,030 Times in 1,002 Posts
Default

Which is why I think DC would make a good test case. All copies of the regs I've found refer to National Park CCW mirroring the State that the park is located. DC is NOT a State. Same logic behind why DC was chosen for a test case in DC vs Heller. I'm sure that a test case could have been brought in Ill, NJ, or NY, but they are States and it might have been a little tougher.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-01-2010, 08:21 AM
ispcapt ispcapt is offline
US Veteran
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 1,147
Likes: 300
Liked 2,303 Times in 614 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walnutred View Post
Which is why I think DC would make a good test case. All copies of the regs I've found refer to National Park CCW mirroring the State that the park is located. DC is NOT a State. Same logic behind why DC was chosen for a test case in DC vs Heller. I'm sure that a test case could have been brought in Ill, NJ, or NY, but they are States and it might have been a little tougher.
You really need to read the statute. Not sure what you plan on testing and on what grounds. The statute is pretty clear where it applies. There would be nothing "a little tougher" in IL, NJ, or NY because the statute is clear in where it applies. The bill does not grant anything to states. What the statute does is prevent the Dept of Interior from enacting any laws prohibiting firearm possession in NP and NWR property. All the statute says is whatever applies in the particular state apply also to NP/NWR property within that state.


MSgt G is correct altho the OP specified CCW in his initial inquiry. If a state allows open carry then whatever is allowed by that particular state where the NP/NWR is located. However, be very careful that the particular state also doesn't have a clause in their statute prohibiting carrying of any kind in any kind of park. Where OC/CCW might be legal in most of a state that state could also have prohibitions against carrying in parks, government property, places that charge admission, etc.

If a person just assumes they can carry in any national park they could end up with a boat load of legal problems and possibly even a felony arrest which would eliminate any future gun ownership.
__________________
183rd FBINA

Last edited by ispcapt; 10-01-2010 at 08:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-01-2010, 11:57 AM
watchmanjimg's Avatar
watchmanjimg watchmanjimg is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 276
Likes: 2
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walnutred View Post
Which is why I think DC would make a good test case. All copies of the regs I've found refer to National Park CCW mirroring the State that the park is located. DC is NOT a State. Same logic behind why DC was chosen for a test case in DC vs Heller. I'm sure that a test case could have been brought in Ill, NJ, or NY, but they are States and it might have been a little tougher.
Actually, a test case along the lines of Heller was brought in a state and decided on June 28th of this year. It's called McDonald v. Chicago.

Last edited by watchmanjimg; 10-01-2010 at 12:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-01-2010, 12:25 PM
11B Lifer 11B Lifer is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 681
Likes: 6
Liked 442 Times in 136 Posts
Default

Back when we were trying to pass Prop. B in Missouri (CCW) the State Police in an adjacent state indicated they would stop every Missouri plated car and arrest the occupants if there was a gun in the car. We got CCW thru a few years later-I no longer have to travel thru that state to see relatives-So much for reciprocity.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-01-2010, 12:29 PM
OKFC05 OKFC05 is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 8,158
Likes: 3,604
Liked 5,199 Times in 2,172 Posts
Default

Quote:
Since in theory DC
But in fact DC will put you in jail for felony carrying and the case will go to the Supreme Court in a couple of years, maybe.
__________________
Science plus Art
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-01-2010, 12:53 PM
walnutred walnutred is offline
US Veteran
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,450
Likes: 785
Liked 3,030 Times in 1,002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by watchmanjimg View Post
Actually, a test case along the lines of Heller was brought in a state and decided on June 28th of this year. It's called McDonald v. Chicago.
But DC vs Heller came first. I suspect the idea of a test case was being considered for a while and for some reason it was decided the test would be in DC. Unless McDonald and Heller were very wealthy they could not have taken a case to the SC without outside funding. Whoever was providing that outside funding would have helped decide the sequence of the cases and would have had logical reasons for doing so.

So if the State that a NP resides in determines CCW or OC in that NP what State do the NP's in DC reside in? DC is NOT a State and does NOT have the full rights of a State. Adjoining States are a toss up as to firearms laws being an improvement. VA would be good but Maryland would not help. At least in my case because Ohio has reciprocity with VA.

Yes, I know what the status quo is in DC. There are not only bad laws but bad interpretations of laws.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-01-2010, 01:20 PM
watchmanjimg's Avatar
watchmanjimg watchmanjimg is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 276
Likes: 2
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walnutred View Post
But DC vs Heller came first. I suspect the idea of a test case was being considered for a while and for some reason it was decided the test would be in DC. Unless McDonald and Heller were very wealthy they could not have taken a case to the SC without outside funding. Whoever was providing that outside funding would have helped decide the sequence of the cases and would have had logical reasons for doing so.
You hit the 10-ring there. Take a look at this:

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
Originally Posted by walnutred View Post
There are not only bad laws but bad interpretations of laws.
Another bullseye, but nothing new I'm afraid. One step at a time . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by walnutred View Post
DC is NOT a State and does NOT have the full rights of a State.
This is true. However, it has no bearing on the issue you raised in your original post. If I understand you correctly, you were asking whether CCW in national parks is now permitted in DC. The first response sums it up nicely:

Quote:
Originally Posted by cshoff View Post
What we now have is commonality in law with the jurisdiction in which the national park is located. If the controlling jurisdiction (city, state, or county) in which the NP is located allows CCW, then it's allowed in the NP under those same local, state, or county laws that are already in existence. While your point is a valid one (IMO), it is not reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by walnutred View Post
Personally I'd like to see DC made the test case for National Reciprocity. It's a city not a State, so it is not a States Rights issue. Since in theory DC is jointly held by all States DC should have to accept any States CCW permit.
I'd like to see this as well, but under what circumstances would such a test case arise? Sadly, at this time CCW is not a constitutional right and would need to be in order for national reciprocity to exist. Given the attitude of DC and other anti-gun communities in the wake of Heller and McDonald I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

Last edited by watchmanjimg; 10-01-2010 at 02:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-01-2010, 08:09 PM
camsdaddy camsdaddy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: GA
Posts: 221
Likes: 55
Liked 95 Times in 53 Posts
Default

I have wondered if the park thing went through. The last time I was at a function at the Plains High School (Carter's high school) in Plains Ga I noticed it was posted on all entrances.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-01-2010, 08:33 PM
Capt Steve Capt Steve is offline
US Veteran
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,663
Likes: 761
Liked 2,879 Times in 417 Posts
Red face

Having just returned from a trip that took us to 3 National Parks, Zion, Bryce and North Rim of the Grand canyon, I can assure you that you can and cannot CCW there. While it is legal you are limited in where you can go and how you get there. In Zion for instance, you can CCW but cannot enter any of the buildings (museums, visitors centers), as they are all posted no weapons (guns, knives etc.) and you cannot ride the trams that take you into the heart of the park. If you are carrying you really can't do much or go anywhere. Getting caught where you should not be would be a four alarm disaster. If I had been taking any long hikes I would have packed the MP9c and did keep it pretty much within arms reach while in camp but never did leave the campsite with it. You get the same warnings at all of the other parks.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-02-2010, 12:11 AM
cshoff's Avatar
cshoff cshoff is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Central Missouri
Posts: 871
Likes: 54
Liked 95 Times in 54 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ispcapt View Post
To clarify a bit more, it's more than just if the state allows CCW in that particular state. The carrier must be able to legally CCW in that state. What that means is if you have a CCW from your state, you travel to another state but your CCW permit is not recognized by that state and you can't carry in that state then you also cannot carry in the national park.
NP carry is not a blanket "OK to carry in every national park." You first have to be legal to carry in the state first.
No additional clarification was necessary. Whether you can or can't lawfully carry in a National Park is solely dependent upon the laws in the jurisdiction in which the NP is located. There are no if's, and's, or but's about it.
__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-02-2010, 12:13 AM
cshoff's Avatar
cshoff cshoff is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Central Missouri
Posts: 871
Likes: 54
Liked 95 Times in 54 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camsdaddy View Post
I have wondered if the park thing went through. The last time I was at a function at the Plains High School (Carter's high school) in Plains Ga I noticed it was posted on all entrances.
Schools are completely different than National Parks, and fall under entirely different statutes.
__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-02-2010, 08:12 AM
The Big D The Big D is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,462
Likes: 2,405
Liked 3,377 Times in 1,102 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cshoff View Post
Schools are completely different than National Parks, and fall under entirely different statutes.
Plains High School is part of the Jinmmy Carter National Historic Site; a component of the National Park System. Thus the signage and prohibitions on Plains High School. NPS regulations DO apply there.

The point being made by camsdaddy was "correct."

Be safe.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-02-2010, 08:26 AM
ispcapt ispcapt is offline
US Veteran
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 1,147
Likes: 300
Liked 2,303 Times in 614 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cshoff View Post
No additional clarification was necessary. Whether you can or can't lawfully carry in a National Park is solely dependent upon the laws in the jurisdiction in which the NP is located. There are no if's, and's, or but's about it.
What I was clarifying, expanding on exactly, because some people are unable to read and comprehend, is just because they read "NP carry is legal" they think they can now carry in any NP. Not so. The local NP supervisor fielded several calls after the bill was signed from people trying to argue that they could carry in the NP in IL. The superintendent explained to them carrying in NPs in IL was still not legal. But the callers wanted to argue and the sup said at least one said he was going to do it anyway because he was sure the sup was wrong. He went on to make the threat that if arrested he would sue and have the sup's job.
I've read other threads where people think because they have a CCW in one state that they're going to be OK carrying in a NP in another state. They don't bother to check to see if the state where they're going recognizes their CCW. They just assumed since they heard "carrying in NP is legal" that they can carry anywhere.
Where someone can get jammed up in a NP is where the NP is located in 2 or more states. In part of the park it may be OK to carry but then cross the state line within the park and it's not legal. People need to do their homework before carrying.
People read, sometimes, yet they don't understand.
__________________
183rd FBINA

Last edited by ispcapt; 10-02-2010 at 08:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-02-2010, 09:40 AM
Faulkner's Avatar
Faulkner Faulkner is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Arkansas Ozarks
Posts: 6,264
Likes: 7,266
Liked 33,980 Times in 3,679 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 11B Lifer View Post
Back when we were trying to pass Prop. B in Missouri (CCW) the State Police in an adjacent state indicated they would stop every Missouri plated car and arrest the occupants if there was a gun in the car. We got CCW thru a few years later-I no longer have to travel thru that state to see relatives-So much for reciprocity.
Certainly this one not your neighbor to the south . . . I'm guessing it was an adjacent state to the to the east.
__________________
- Change it back -
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-02-2010, 08:33 PM
ispcapt ispcapt is offline
US Veteran
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 1,147
Likes: 300
Liked 2,303 Times in 614 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Faulkner View Post
Certainly this one not your neighbor to the south . . . I'm guessing it was an adjacent state to the to the east.
If he's referring to IL since IL ,KY, and TN are the only states adjoining MO to the east, then it's pure BS. The IL State Police never made any such statement either publicly or non-public. Such a comment is nothing more than pure internet BS rumor spread by those who don't know but will believe anything some knucklehead will tell them. It just shows the ignorance level of some people who will believe pure hocum and why snake oil salemen are so successful, because people will be that kind of stuff without any basis of truth.
__________________
183rd FBINA
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-03-2010, 07:39 PM
cshoff's Avatar
cshoff cshoff is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Central Missouri
Posts: 871
Likes: 54
Liked 95 Times in 54 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big D View Post
Plains High School is part of the Jinmmy Carter National Historic Site; a component of the National Park System. Thus the signage and prohibitions on Plains High School. NPS regulations DO apply there.

The point being made by camsdaddy was "correct."

Be safe.
Any facility which falls under the federal definition of a "school" under "Sec. 4141 Gun Free Requirements" is subject to the provisions of the "Gun Free Schools Act". That definition is:

Quote:
(f) DEFINITION- For the purpose of subsection (d), the term school' means any setting that is under the control and supervision of the local educational agency for the purpose of student activities approved and authorized by the local educational agency.
The presence, or lack thereof, of a National Park is irrelevant.
__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-03-2010, 07:48 PM
cshoff's Avatar
cshoff cshoff is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Central Missouri
Posts: 871
Likes: 54
Liked 95 Times in 54 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ispcapt View Post
What I was clarifying, expanding on exactly, because some people are unable to read and comprehend, is just because they read "NP carry is legal" they think they can now carry in any NP. Not so. The local NP supervisor fielded several calls after the bill was signed from people trying to argue that they could carry in the NP in IL. The superintendent explained to them carrying in NPs in IL was still not legal. But the callers wanted to argue and the sup said at least one said he was going to do it anyway because he was sure the sup was wrong. He went on to make the threat that if arrested he would sue and have the sup's job.
I've read other threads where people think because they have a CCW in one state that they're going to be OK carrying in a NP in another state. They don't bother to check to see if the state where they're going recognizes their CCW. They just assumed since they heard "carrying in NP is legal" that they can carry anywhere.
Where someone can get jammed up in a NP is where the NP is located in 2 or more states. In part of the park it may be OK to carry but then cross the state line within the park and it's not legal. People need to do their homework before carrying.
People read, sometimes, yet they don't understand.
I understand your sentiment, but I don't think it's really added any clarity to the subject.

The bottom line is that the only correct answer to the question is that you MUST check the laws in the jurisdiction in which the NP is located. You can have two different National Parks within the same state, and the "can's" and "cant's" can be totally different. The laws of the controlling jurisdiction are the only thing that really matters.
__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-03-2010, 07:51 PM
camsdaddy camsdaddy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: GA
Posts: 221
Likes: 55
Liked 95 Times in 53 Posts
Default

Plains High School was a school. Until the NPS took it over it was just an abandoned building. Its a building that was a school sort a like Carter was a peanut farmer. By name I guess they both are but neither have class. I figure it would fall under museum. They have pagents and plays but for the most part its just a museum of where he (and many others) went to school
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-03-2010, 09:43 PM
The Big D The Big D is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,462
Likes: 2,405
Liked 3,377 Times in 1,102 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cshoff View Post
Any facility which falls under the federal definition of a "school" under "Sec. 4141 Gun Free Requirements" is subject to the provisions of the "Gun Free Schools Act". That definition is:



The presence, or lack thereof, of a National Park is irrelevant.
Your last statement is quite incorrect; it is relevant. It is NOT a school any longer. As the National Park Service is not in the business of running schools the inclusion of Plains High School within the National Park System obviously indicates it's no longer used for its original purpose. i.e. a high school.

There are many, many facilities within the National Park System that are no longer used for their original purposes. For example, Springfield Armory no longer makes guns and is chock full of them yet you cannot tote your personal gun inside as it is now Springfield Armory NHS.

Be safe.

Be safe.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-04-2010, 12:58 AM
cshoff's Avatar
cshoff cshoff is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Central Missouri
Posts: 871
Likes: 54
Liked 95 Times in 54 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big D View Post
Your last statement is quite incorrect; it is relevant. It is NOT a school any longer. As the National Park Service is not in the business of running schools the inclusion of Plains High School within the National Park System obviously indicates it's no longer used for its original purpose. i.e. a high school.

There are many, many facilities within the National Park System that are no longer used for their original purposes. For example, Springfield Armory no longer makes guns and is chock full of them yet you cannot tote your personal gun inside as it is now Springfield Armory NHS.

Be safe.

Be safe.
My statement was absolutely correct. IF the facility meets the federal definition of a "school" as is prescribed in Sec. 4141 of the GFSA, then the presence, or lack thereof, of a National Park is irrelevant. Any facility that falls under that definition is subject to the Gun Free Schools Act, and there is no exemption to the GFSA for those facilities in the new National Park CCW language. Obviously, a facility that USED to be a school, but no longer is (even though it is still called one), would NOT meet the above mentioned definition.
__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-07-2010, 11:12 AM
walnutred walnutred is offline
US Veteran
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,450
Likes: 785
Liked 3,030 Times in 1,002 Posts
Default

Usually my reading comprehension is fairly good and I was referring to 36 CFR, pt 2.4, 4 (h) which states:

(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.

Note that the Federal regulations refer to the STATE that a NP or portion of the NP resides in. Not the county, not the city, not the township, not the parish, but the state.

DC is NOT a state and so according to Federal Regulations should have no jurisdiction over NP within it's boundaries concerning CCW. I THINK some of the NP in DC also adjoin Virgina, which is why I'm speculating VA State laws should prevail in those parks.

Now I did find a vague reference that in the final legislation three National parks were specifically exempted, but I've not been able to document which ones those are. Maybe NPs in DC were specifically exempted from the revised legislation. When I visited Arlington Cemetery yesterday, which I think is in VA not DC, I saw no firearms signs on the gate. But I don't know if Arlington Cemetery is a NP or military property.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-07-2010, 07:34 PM
The Big D The Big D is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,462
Likes: 2,405
Liked 3,377 Times in 1,102 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walnutred View Post
Usually my reading comprehension is fairly good and I was referring to 36 CFR, pt 2.4, 4 (h) which states:

(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.

Note that the Federal regulations refer to the STATE that a NP or portion of the NP resides in. Not the county, not the city, not the township, not the parish, but the state.

DC is NOT a state and so according to Federal Regulations should have no jurisdiction over NP within it's boundaries concerning CCW. I THINK some of the NP in DC also adjoin Virgina, which is why I'm speculating VA State laws should prevail in those parks.

Now I did find a vague reference that in the final legislation three National parks were specifically exempted, but I've not been able to document which ones those are. Maybe NPs in DC were specifically exempted from the revised legislation. When I visited Arlington Cemetery yesterday, which I think is in VA not DC, I saw no firearms signs on the gate. But I don't know if Arlington Cemetery is a NP or military property.
The Code of Federal Regulations specifically includes NPS lands within the District of Columbia. i.e. DC is essentially a "state" for the purposes of the CFR.

Be safe.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-09-2010, 12:58 PM
boingboing's Avatar
boingboing boingboing is offline
Member
So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks, So, now that we have CCW in National Parks,  
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Louseyana
Posts: 309
Likes: 4
Liked 165 Times in 46 Posts
Default

Wow, I'm glad I'm a cop. Even though I have a CHL (for buying guns), I can, by law, carry in all states. Two years ago my family and I were almost victims of an armed robbery in a NP but being observant of my surroundins and quicker on the draw I was able to squash any potential violence before it started. Did I get hassled? Kinda but nomore than what I expected. But as it was explained to me earlier this year, if the state the NP is in has recoprocity with the state your CHL is issued then you're good. If not, oh well.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bullseye, ccw, concealed, military, mp9c, sig arms, springfield

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Our National Parks! zzzippper The Lounge 14 07-09-2015 10:38 AM
CC in National Parks mudman bob Concealed Carry & Self Defense 4 01-01-2013 04:47 PM
CCW in National Parks & Utah State Parks Bud11 Concealed Carry & Self Defense 8 02-24-2012 10:52 PM
Do we carry in National Parks, or not? chubcobear The Lounge 8 07-12-2010 08:51 PM
National Parks Laws tiger27 Concealed Carry & Self Defense 15 01-11-2010 06:10 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:00 AM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)