Deciding that your life is not as important as potential environmental concerns:
A federal judge yesterday blocked a last-minute rule enacted by President George W. Bush allowing visitors to national parks to carry concealed weapons.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction in a lawsuit brought by gun-control advocates and environmental groups.
You can read Clinton federal bench appointee Killer [oops] -Kotelly's Memorandum Opinion here.
This has made the gunhaters over at the Brady Campaign very happy, along with their coalition of environmentalcase anti-defense extremists and government careerists. Still, what they have not addressed is something we've known, but not talked that much about--for years.
For instance:
U.S. Rangers, Park Police Sustain Record Levels of Violence
"Law enforcement officers in the National Park Service are 12 times more likely to be killed or injured as a result of an assault than FBI agents – a rate triple that of the next worst federal agency," said Randall Kendrick, executive director for the U.S. Park Rangers Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police.
And these guys are armed. What about you?
Or the two women hiking on the Appalachian Trail?
Or the "11 cases of homicide or manslaughter, 61 robberies and 35 rapes or attempted rapes" reported in 2006.
Or Chandra Levy, killed in Rock Creek Park?
And while most of us would not be as foolish as the honored Timothy Treadwell, the fact remains that animals sometimes do attack.
That's why the government itself admits:
Cougars are entirely capable of lethal attacks on people, and predatory attacks by cougars have occurred across the western U.S. and southwestern Canada over at least the last 50 years.
But perhaps I'm being unfair. After all, these are isolated incidents--over years. Sure I could find more. But all in all, national parks are probably pretty safe.
How many children died in school fires in this country last year? Would anyone seriously propose that we take that as a guarantee of statistical safety, and dismantle sprinkler and alarm systems as unneeded?
I have a thought experiment. Imagine Colleen Kollar-Kotelly and Sarah Brady alone together in the wilderness, having backpacked miles from the nearest ranger facility. Now imagine an immediate threat--one that's been stalking them with deadly intent--confronts them, confident it has the advantage. Imagine this threat is capable of outrunning them and overpowering them. Imagine this threat has savage murder on its mind. Imagine the only thing that will stop this threat is lethal force--or the realization that they possess such capabilities.
And they've come up short.
Imagine their only option is to plead and beg and cry and then howl in fear and pain when that doesn't work. It's happened to others, you know, and based on policies these two promulgate, it will happen to more. And they'd rather it did than the victims be armed.
Who, besides their tormenter[s], can immediately get to them? Who will be able to cover the hours and the miles and the trails to even find them, and this after mobilizing a search party, sending up helicopters...
If they scream, who is likely to hear them first?
The Park Rangers who oppose their being armed--or the Mexican drug cartel guys--the ones Eric Holder says are so dangerous they need to pass more laws to disarm you and me...?
Check out the latest from other Gun Rights Examiners:
Atlanta Gun Rights Examiner: Atlanta ammunition supply is severely constrained
Austin Gun Rights Examiner: Los Angeles Times: Renewed ‘assault weapons’ ban won’t help Mexico’s war against drug cartels
Charlotte Gun Rights Examiner: Is Obama trying to end armed airline pilot program?
Cleveland Gun Rights Examiner: Fox news in Ohio covers open carry of a firearm
DC Gun Rights Examiner: DC City Council afflicted by pistolgriphobia
Denver Gun Rights Examiner: Economics 101: guns and monkeymeat
LA Gun Rights Examiner: Ya gotta wonder why they want to take the guns at all, Part II.
Milwaukee: One year ago today, DC v. Heller
Minneapolis Gun Rights Examiner: 'From my cold dead hands' and gun-owner apathy
Feds assure Fox News armed pilot program is safe; 65 Dems will oppose AWB
St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner: An alternative to 'guns at work' laws
Wisconsin Gun Rights Examiner: Why does your health data get reported
Comments
David, here's my take from the liberal (but reasonable) end of this spectrum: I don't fear that gun owners will start shooting animals or people in the parks. I fear that people will stop showing up. Check out my column on this today (the system won't let me post the link, but search on National Parks Examiner).
Randi, I included a link to your column in the more info box at the bottom of this column.
Whether those fears that people will stay away should be deemed "reasonable" to justify limitations on my rights is not a point I cede. I say they are not.
If one uses that logic, then everywhere citizens are armed (and 48 states have some version of concealed carry provision) would become places people would avoid.
Further using that logic, only the Rangers, that is, the "only ones" would be considered competent and trustworthy to be armed. Welcome to Chicago.
From a purely selfish point of view, anyone who would be put off to visit a park because they fear armed citizens would be a net win for people like me. We're not responsible for their irrational reactions, but if they're going to have them, I'd just as soon they do it somewhere where I don't have to look at it.
Let's take it even a step further, David.
Those same folks that Randi fears would stay away because someone MIGHT be armed in a park will without a second thought expose themselves on a daily basis to literally thousands of their fellow citizens armed with machines of known deadly force, ie they go for a drive on the public streets.
I doubt that more than a very few folks are shot in a given year by ccw permit holders and most of those cases are a response to criminal activity. Drivers on the other hand put themselves at risk of joining the 40 or 50 thousand dead annually, most through no fault of their own.
Fear the small stuff and ignore the real dangers. Doesn't hardly seem sensible to me.
Man! Y'all are generous spirited. I can't get there from here. As for those folks who would stay away, I don't even want them in my country. I don't want to associate with, nor compete in the voting booth with someone who would be so viciously self-centered that they would sacrifice the rights, and security of everyone so they could indulge in a "feeling".
Forget national parks I don't wish them to be inside national boundaries. Playing to and manipulating their irrational fears over a very long time has eroded the inner strength of the citizenry and harmed the nation.
It's time they "felt" insecure, instead of demanding everybody actually be insecure.
"Imagine Colleen Kollar-Kotelly and Sarah Brady alone together in the wilderness, having backpacked miles from the nearest ranger facility. Now imagine an immediate threat--one that's been stalking them with deadly intent--confronts them, confident it has the advantage. Imagine this threat is capable of outrunning them and overpowering them. Imagine this threat has savage murder on its mind. Imagine the only thing that will stop this threat is lethal force--or the realization that they possess such capabilities. And they've come up short."
Hey! Don't you need a special parent's advisory on your website before you can post wet dreams?
Randi: You mean, like white people stopped showing up at integrated lunch counters and bus lines? Because peaceful people they were uncomfortable around were going to be there, peacefully exercising their rights?
Better recalibrate your liberal sensitivities, dude.
The only people who would stop showing up at national parks that allow concealed carry would be the same people who would stop showing up at an integrated lunch counter: Bigots.
Yes, I have but one thing to say. If the President some time puts into law, that no one should have a gun. When the law or who ever comes to get my gun. There will be a fight. The only way they will get mine is if I am dead.
The nerve of them uppity gun owners! If we let them carry guns in a National Park, whats next? My God! They might think they can marry your daughter.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!