.jpg)
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly
Don't get me wrong.
US District Court for DC Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly might have gotten the law exactly right when she temporarily reversed the administrative repeal of the National Park gun ban on the grounds that the Department of the Interior "abdicated their Congressionally-mandated obligation to evaluate all reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts, whether authorized by the Final Rule or not" [under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) at 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.].
But does this opinion pass the giggle test?
The new regulation merely permits the carriage of loaded handguns - not discharge of any ammunition from them. Millions of Americans now routinely carry handguns in public in virtually every city and park in America, as well as in National Forests and on lands managed by Bureau of Land Management.
Negligent discharges are extremely rare, as are discharges in defense of self or others.
Could a few dozen or so possible bullets per year fired onto the 84.4 millions of acres of National Park lands possibly justify mandating environmental studies?
OK, let's think about this.
Arming park rangers?
What if Department of the Interior (DOI) Secretary Ken Salazar decided that Park Rangers, currently unarmed, should start carrying side arms on DOI lands near or adjacent to the Mexican border due to rising violence from Mexican drug gangs. Would Salazar first have to conduct an environmental study before Rangers could be armed?
Desegregating federal schools?
Another hypothetical. What if on federal lands there existed racially segregated schools. And the federal administrator of those schools decided that this segregation must be ended by busing students around so as to comply with Brown v. Board of Education. Would this action also me subject to injunction until an environmental study on the impact of bussing is completed?
These hypothetical results don't pass the giggle test. Neither does the result in Brady Campaign v. Salazar. Gun "carry" is a constitutional right said the Supreme Court in DC v. Heller. The number of rounds which could reasonably expected to be discharged as a result of the National Park regulation change is statistically insignificant when divided over 84.4 million acres of DOI administered lands.
But if Judge Kollar-Kotelly is correct and NEPA precludes the executive from changing federal policy to respect constitutional rights based upon a mere peppercorn of environmental impact, then Congress needs to change NEPA.
For more info: See OpenCarry.org and DC Gun Rights Examiner.
Check out other Gun Rights Examiners:
- Atlanta: Self defense is harmful to the environment
- Austin: Is Three Oakland cops killed by parolee: Death by government?
- Charlotte: Is Obama trying to end armed airline pilot program?
- Cleveland: Fox news in Ohio covers open carry of a firearm
- DC: DC Councilmember Mendelson's defense of DC gun registration stretches truth beyond breaking point
- Denver: Economics 101: guns and monkeymeat
- Los Angeles: Ya gotta wonder, Part III: Guns in Parks .. or not
- Milwaukee: One year ago today, DC v. Heller
- Minneapolis: 'From my cold dead hands' and gun-owner apathy
- National: National parks gun ruling is judicial activism, not justice
- Seattle: Blocking CCW in national parks helps anti-gunners suppress the truth
- St. Louis: An alternative to 'guns at work' laws
- Wisconsin: Why does your health data get reported
Comments
Clearly, the intent is NOT to "preserve the environment." A government that is spraying us all daily with toxins and heavy metals (yes, people. look up at the sky once in a while!) is certainly not concerned our environment. No, the intention is to cow us all into submission. If we cannot be disarmed, then the next best thing is to make a law that intimidates us - through the implied threat of fine and imprisonment - into not using our guns, presumably even in self-defense.
Can I still use lead sinkers for fishing ?
That ladies an idiot. Carrying in national parks is under the CHL/CCW rules, you can't discharge your firearm in national parks unless it's a life and death situation. What does she think we'll be out there plinking in the parks?
This is an abuse of the legal process, and this judge needs to be impeached.
Mike, it's not that she thinks we'll be plinking--it's that she thinks we'll be poaching.
Seriously. Her opinion cited "opportunistic poaching" as the potential environmental impact.
Sorry, NO! She doesn't believe that. She believes we should be slaves. That's what she believes.
Poaching is just another excuse to support this judge's anti 2A agenda. Poaching ANYWHERE is already against the law, and yet it happens anyway. WHY?
CRIMINALS DON'T CARE ABOUT LAWS. Why do you think they are called criminals? DUH!
But this is all part of the liberal push and desire for power and control over others. And to make that happen we have to be disarmed so that we can't stop them or defend themselves. They need us to be helpless victims so that they can grow government to come to our 'rescue'.
I assure you, NPS rangers are armed. I think Rangers on the Mexican border tend to keep their rifles handy. It's a dangerous world down there.
So, a rape victim must request an "environmental impact study" before attempting to defend herself against some criminal???????
just read the court documents and you will be shocked. Before reading the documents, I had no idea of how underhanded the brady group really is. Good reason to learn how the system works and how we the people need to learn from such groups and face them with the knowledge of how they work. Get involved, contact your politicians and be heard. 80 million strong, use the power of numbers and send the message to the gravy train riders in washington who do not want their ride to end. That is the only way to get their attention as this is the real reason MOST of them are up there... certainly not for us. Continue to support the politicians that display a true desire to serve us and get rid of the ones who display that they want to serve themselves and the chosen few.
What is not been mentioned here is that much of the "poaching" on NPS land is done with bow and arrow along the borders of these lands. The bow is silent and does not draw attention of park rangers that might be within hearing distance of a gunshot. Small game can be taken with air rifles, also quite silent.
I want to know when an injunction is going to be filed against stupid people making environmental policy before proper environmental impact studies are done on the stupid people. I mean, come on! Idiocy has a terrible impact on the environment.
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!