Anyone Know the Status of CC in National Parks?

[K1500]

Does anyone know the status of CC in National Parks? I believe that was attached to a banking bill that passed, but I am not sure. If it did pass, what date does it start? Thanks.

 

[ispcapt]

Feb 2010.
Here's a previous thread:
http://smith-wessonforum.com/concealed-carry-methods-issues/75133-national-parks-laws.html

 

[K1500]

Thanks for the link.

 

[MWAG]

that'd be february 22 2010 to be exact. the state that the park is located in determines if you can OC, CC or both......
in georgia we can do both come 2/22/2010........

BTW it was supposed to take effect last year but it got moved to the feb 22 2010 date........

 

[Hook686]

Keep in mind, as MWAG points out, you must have a carry permit for the state where the National Park is located.

 

[K1500]

Keep in mind, as MWAG points out, you must have a carry permit for the state where the National Park is located.

I thought is was a carry permit that the state the park is located in honors. For example, if TN honors an IN permit, someone from IN can carry in the Smoky Mtn. Nat. park. Is this correct, or does it need to be a permit issued by the state the park is in?

 

[OHIOUP]

K1500, you have it right. A permit honored by the state the national park is located in would be required for concealed carry, beginning February 9th this year, I believe.

 

[OHIOUP]

thought I'd come back and add that the new law will allow open carry as well...according to the state law's where the park is located. this adds to the complexity of the responsibility firearm carrying citizens have to be aware of. for example, what effect would Michigan's requirement for handgun registration have on open carry rights for residents of other states visiting a national park located in michigan if they don't have a ccw license?

 

[Sprefix]

I believe in the Constitution of the United States. I believe in the Second Amendment. Getting a license is fine(I have a CCW). I believe the Second Amendment is my right to carry anywhere I may see the need to possibly defend myself. If there is a guarantee that no person or animal shall ever try to harm me or mine, then I may reconsider my carrying in a National Park, the woods, the trails, the grocery store, the bank, the backyard, etc. I have the intelligence to carry discreetly and the God given right to choose when and where I will do it. I don't need some person that does not know me to OK me a permit to do something based on a fee or a fee-based course to "show" I'm capable. The people that "think" they can do this but are irresponsible will exercise poor judgment and pay the penalty. Think of this for those of you that may dis-agree with what you have read, If you are carrying "concealed", then who would know you were carrying in a national Park or otherwise? If you feel you need to (brag) about the fact that you are carrying, you should do some soul-searching so you don't end up in trouble. By the way, My state of residence is OPEN CARRY. Praise God!! Sprefix

 

[SSN]

Sprefix, I agree with you in principal and would carry anywhere I believe I need to. As a practical matter, permit I have and obey the 30.06 signs and other rules here in Texas.

 

[Sprefix]

I wanna play fair....

Sprefix, I agree with you in principal and would carry anywhere I believe I need to. As a practical matter, permit I have and obey the 30.06 signs and other rules here in Texas.

I want to be "legal" and follow the letter of the law. I try to make every effort to stay legal. I probably should have stated that when I knowingly "skirt" the law, I am prepared to pay the penalty set by the law should I be "caught". What I am not prepared for is someone to affect my life negatively due to me not being able to defend myself or others. This is a "personal choice" and not meant to persuade anyone else to do the same. You know what value you put on your life and the lives of those you love. Good, bad, or otherwise, this is my choice. Good luck in your choice......Sprefix

 

[self protection]

So is it Feb 22 or Feb 9. Feb 9 is my birthday and I usually spend it in a National park fishing in Utah. I hope its the 9th as that would be a nice Bday present

 

[OHIOUP]

I was wrong when I posted the February 9th effective date. The bill was signed into law May 22, 2009 and goes into effect 9 months later...Feb 22 should be the day.

 

[MWAG]

as i said before, legal national park carry goes into effect february 22, 2010. the state laws for carry will be the laws enforced in any particular national park located in that state. reciprocity follows for each different states laws. licensing requirements are according to the state in question.......

so.............if you're in the state of georgia and you want to carry at kennesaw mountain national battlefield park, then you must be licensed to carry by the state of georgia or any other state that is reciprocal with the state of georgia. the carry laws for the state of georgia apply at all national parks in georgia. the state of georgia recognizes open or concealed carry for said licensees.

i think that about does it for national park carry...................

 

[MSgt G]

Federal Eye - National Parks Gun Law Takes Effect in February
Open carry is not part of the plan for US Park Service rules.

"Permission to carry a firearm into a park and the actual restrictions on such possession will vary by state, since the new federal law is governed by each state's firearms laws."

Yes, open carry IS a part of the plan for US Park Service rules if the particular state allows open carry, such as Georgia.

 

[ispcapt]

There is no current draft. It's long past the draft stage. It's been voted on, passed, signed, and is now law to go into effect 02/22/10 Public Law 111-24 Section 512. That is the final version. There is no mention of concealed carry in the law. It is specific in that the individual must comply with the laws of the state in which the park/refuge is located. It will depend on what the individual state law says.

SEC. 512. PROTECTING AMERICANS FROM VIOLENT CRIME.
(a) Congressional Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution provides that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed''.
(2) Section 2.4(a)(1) of title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, provides that except as otherwise provided in this section and parts 7 (special regulations) and 13 (Alaska regulations), the following are prohibited: (i) Possessing a weapon, trap or net (ii) Carrying a weapon, trap or net (iii) Using a weapon, trap or net''.
(3) Section 27.42 of title 50, Code of Federal Regulations, provides that, except in special circumstances, citizens of the United States may not "possess, use, or transport firearms on national wildlife refuges'' of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
(4) The regulations described in paragraphs (2) and (3) prevent individuals complying with Federal and State laws from exercising the second amendment rights of the individuals while at units of--
(A) the National Park System; and
(B) the National Wildlife Refuge System.
(5) The existence of different laws relating to the transportation and possession of firearms at different units of the National Park System and the National Wildlife Refuge System entrapped law-abiding gun owners while at units of the National Park System and the National Wildlife Refuge System.
(6) Although the Bush administration issued new regulations relating to the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens in units of the National Park System and National Wildlife Refuge System that went into effect on January 9, 2009--
(A) on March 19, 2009, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted a preliminary injunction with respect to the implementation and enforcement of the new regulations; and
(B) the new regulations--
(i) are under review by the administration;
and
(ii) may be altered.
(7) Congress needs to weigh in on the new regulations to ensure that unelected bureaucrats and judges cannot again override the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens on 83,600,000 acres of National Park System land and 90,790,000 acres of land under the jurisdiction of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
(8) The Federal laws should make it clear that the second amendment rights of an individual at a unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System should not be infringed.
(b) Protecting the Right of Individuals To Bear arms in Units of the National Park System and the National Wildlife Refuge System.--The Secretary of the Interior shall not promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an individual from possessing a firearm including an assembled or functional firearm in any unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System if--
(1) the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing the firearm; and
(2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the law of the State in which the unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System is located.

 

[MWAG]

There is no mention of concealed carry in the law. It is specific in that the individual must comply with the laws of the state in which the park/refuge is located. It will depend on what the individual state law says.

ispcapt,
maybe, just maybe, this will settle everything. i tried to settle it more simply in a previous post but apparently there are others who chose to ignore the fact that national park carry will be concealed or open carry, or both BASED ON THE FIREARMS CARRY LAWS OF THE STATE IN WHICH SAID NATIONAL PARK IS LOCATED.

it really makes no difference to me what the rest of you guys do or how you carry. i, as a resident of the state of georgia, will continue to carry my firearm openly including while visiting the national parks located in the state of georgia. now should i choose to venture beyond the borders of the state of georgia i will educate myself to the laws of the state to be visited and i will make sure that i conform to such whether i'm in a national park or not.................
MWAG

ps- is there an echo in here?

 

[ispcapt]

We're not talking about the law passed, we're wondering what the wording of the implementing Department of Interior Directive is going to be. Interior has not yet published their directives and until they do, none of the Parks can tailor them to their individual parks.]

Nope. Read the statute again. "The Secretary of the Interior shall not promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an individual from possessing a firearm including an assembled or functional firearm in any unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System if--"
The DOI has no requirement to issue any directive. It's not up to DOI. In fact the statute is very specific in that regard. Read that quoted part again and pay particular attention to the bolded part. It specifically excludes DOI from implementing anything.
It's whatever the state law is where the NP or Refuge is located. "(2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the law of the State in which the unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System is located. "
Even re-read what you quoted "Secretary of the Interior shall not promulgate or enforce any regulation..." That's about as simple as it can be worded.
Even your reference to the press release is very clear - there is nothing for DOI to implement. What does the last sentence of DOI's press release say? "Because possession of loaded weapons on national parks and wildlife refuges will be governed by varying state firearms laws once the new law is implemented,..." What's the bolded part say? It's very clear.
DOI cannot "promulgate or enforce" and "will be governed by varying state firearm laws".
I don't know what you're reading but if you're reading the law then you're definitely not understanding it. It's really not that difficult. Don't try to complicate something that isn't complicated.

 

[MWAG]

Nope. Read the statute again. "The Secretary of the Interior shall not promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an individual from possessing a firearm including an assembled or functional firearm in any unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System if--"
The DOI has no requirement to issue any directive. It's not up to DOI. In fact the statute is very specific in that regard. Read that quoted part again and pay particular attention to the bolded part. It specifically excludes DOI from implementing anything.
It's whatever the state law is where the NP or Refuge is located. "(2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the law of the State in which the unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System is located. "
Even re-read what you quoted "Secretary of the Interior shall not promulgate or enforce any regulation..." That's about as simple as it can be worded.
Even your reference to the press release is very clear - there is nothing for DOI to implement. What does the last sentence of DOI's press release say? "Because possession of loaded weapons on national parks and wildlife refuges will be governed by varying state firearms laws once the new law is implemented,..." What's the bolded part say? It's very clear.
DOI cannot "promulgate or enforce" and "will be governed by varying state firearm laws".
I don't know what you're reading but if you're reading the law then you're definitely not understanding it. It's really not that difficult. Don't try to complicate something that isn't complicated.

THIS........

 

[MWAG]

i see that my post from yesterday, about OKFC05 deleting all of his posts from this thread, has been deleted by someone.

now that's not playing fair.........