Landscape Arch in Arches National Park, Utah (AP Photo/National Parks Service)
By now, everyone knows that the credit card reform bill is on its way to President Barack Obama's desk, where he is expected to sign it into law on Friday. Despite all the hoopla, it doesn't seem to be that sweeping in effect. There is no cap on interest rates, and the infuriating litany of fees and penalties may still be imposed, although they must bear some reasonable relationship to whatever services and infractions they represent. Who knows what that means? A summary of the changes can be found here. For all the griping and gloom and dooming from the banking industry, it doesn't seem the hugely profitable business will suffer much.
Still, the bill is significant in that it heralds a change from the Bush years, during which the rights of ordinary citizens were always subordinate to those of business and the special interests. And of course the rich.
One repercussion could include higher costs for borrowers who pay their balances off every month, including restoration of annual fees, elimination of rewards, and imposition of interest charges during the grace period, from the date of purchase to the due date of the billing cycle in which the item was bought. "Deadbeats," are how these borrowers are described by the credit card industry. An interesting twist of the term.
One unfortunate amendment to the bill, which reverses the 1983 Reagan ban on loaded guns in national parks and wildlife preserves, was passed by approximately 2/3 of both the Senate and the House - just short of a veto-proof margin had it been a separate bill. So much for responsible gun control legislation coming from the United States Congress. Not going to happen. Rules for guns will revert to the individual states in which the public lands are geographically located, so in some states, like California, loaded weapons will still be prohibited.
Gun enthusiasts have long sought to overturn the ban, and claim the usual 2nd Amendment rights and protection against crime and predatory beasts as reasons. As for serious crime, there have been an average of 450 cases of murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault per year in national parks over the last decade. For the United States as a whole, the comparable figure is 1.4 million. You can be the judge as to how dangerous our parks are.
Opponents to lifting the ban warn that opportunistic poaching of wildlife will obviously rise, and that many park visitors take refuge and comfort in the fact that thousands of strangers aren't wandering about toting firearms. I tend to side with this sentiment.
But gun control is considered political suicide these days, and few Democrats, and virtually no Republicans, dare broach the subject anymore. Guns and God are sacred in these United States.
Comments
He said - "an average of 450 cases of murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault per year in national parks over the last decade. For the United States as a whole, the comparable figure is 1.4 million. You can be the judge as to how dangerous our parks are."
but what he leaves out is that crime rates are judged by the number of crimes to the number of residents. And since the NPs have very few risidents it is actually a very HIGH crime rate. If you want to know the full story you should
See bighammer dot net slash timeline.html
for the real answer on the NP gun ban.
What the %@$!@$ does the Congress think it is doing by upholding an enumerated Constitutional right? Since when is following the Constitution part of their job description? Darn thosse guys; Darn, Darn, Darn.
Crime rates don't really matter to the victims of those 450 incidents.
Even if the parks were very safe, that's not sufficient justification for a gun ban. We don't live in a fascist society where things are illegal unless The State has in its mercy granted permission to do something. The burden of proof must always be on the party seeking to restrict a freedom to prove why such a restriction is Constitutionally justified.
Switzerland mandates training in assault weapons yet ironically their crime rates are low. Britain has draconian gun laws and violence towards the non-gun holder skyrockets. Our government goose-steps into foreign lands and lays waste, with bullets and bombs mind you, tens of thousands but nary a peep about that. Hmmmm.
I own guns, I hunt with guns, and I live near multiple national parks. I am determined to belief that it the state's agenda to decide what is best for its people, however I think brandishing loaded guns in NPs is ridiculous! You don't need to fire a gun were people go to hike, fish, atv, and not worry about a accidental shot hitting them or their family members.
TJ. The State, or States, make it their business to stick their nose into everything you do while you're paying them to DO it. But who said anything about waving guns in the air like crazed mad men? Cops are not responsible for protecting you, Supreme Court says so. They, the cops, are the equivalent of garbage collectors. They're there after the fact. Ultimately it is you who protects YOU. They just don't want you to in a place you've paid for.
"So much for responsible gun control legislation coming from the United States Congress." you say?
Sounds pretty darn responsible to me!
It does not MAKE you carry one for Gods sake!
its only 450 people, im sure they deserved it too.
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!