Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 1/6/2005 3:14:14 PM EDT
Virginia Citizen's Defense League (VCDL) - probably the most successful pro CCW organization in the country is petitioning the DoI to consider allowing CCW holders to be allowed to carry in National Parks. Right now, they are looking for GROUPS (not individuals) to sign on to their petition. Please pass this on to your local/state clubs or organizations. Maybe ARFCOM would be able to sign up too.

VCDL is one hell of an organization - this isn't some shot in the dark attempt, they really have their stuff together, so this is well worth your time.

------------------------

LAST UPDATE: 1/5/05

www.packing.org/news/article.jsp/9912/
www.vcdl.org/new/Petition_for_Rulemaking.pdf

Do you want to carry in National Parks in your state (assume no state law against it)? Please read on!

VCDL has finally got a Petition for Rule Making (PRM) ready to present to the Department of the Interior. Unlike writing letters to the Department of the Interior or signing regular petitions, all of which the DOI can ignore, the PRM will force the DOI to consider allowing permit holders to carry in National Parks. They will have to hold a public comment period. I will advise when that happens, as then we will need lots of comments sent to them by everyone on Packing and elsewhere.

For now we need as many national and state organizations to sign on to it as possible. We are NOT looking for individuals to be a petitioner – but individuals should contact their state and national organizations to encourage them to sign on to the PRM ASAP. I will update the end of this message with those organizations who have signed-on as I receive them.

National and state gun organizations: print out the entire petition so you can read it and fill in the last page. You can then either fax the last page to me at: 804-739-8376

Or you can mail the last page to me at:

Philip Van Cleave
VCDL
5509 West Bay Court
Midlothian, VA 23112-2506

I will be sending this in around February 1st, 2005 – so please get the signed pages to me as soon as possible.

Thanks!

Here is the link to the PRM:

http://www.vcdl.org/new/Petition_for_Rulemaking.pdf

Organizations signed on to Petition for Rule Making:

Virginia Citizens Defense League, Virginia
Johnstown Rifle and Pistol Club, Pennsylvania
Menoher Sportsmen's Club, Pennsylvania
Grassroots South Carolina, South Carolina
Maryland Shall Issue, Maryland
Washington Arms Collectors, Washington state
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, National
New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, New York
New Jersey Coalition for Self Defense, New Jersey
Gun Owners of Utah, Utah
Hollow-Point Defense, Arizona
Alaska Machine Gun Association, Alaska
Community Association of Firearms Educators, Maryland
Virginia Gun Owners Coalition, Virginia

Organizations committing, but not yet signed on to PRM:

Montana Shooting Sports Association, Montana
Kentucky Firearms Foundation, Kentucky
NCGUN, North Carolina
Douglas Ridge Rifle Club, Oregon
SAFR, Michigan

Here is the link for Petition for Rule Making for Department of the Interior.

www.vcdl.org/new/Petition_for_Rulemaking.pdf

Link Posted: 1/6/2005 3:15:28 PM EDT
[sheeple] If you want to carry a gun in a national park, you should become a park ranger. Why do you need a gun anyway? [/sheeple]
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 3:35:29 PM EDT
bump, this is important
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 3:44:55 PM EDT
Awesome.  I am surrounded by National Parks.  I'll forward this to my state rifle and pistol association.
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 3:46:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AdrianUSP9:
bump, this is important


No kidding.

What the hell good is a "right to keep and BEAR" if you can't have it on your person?
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 3:55:56 PM EDT
Good for you! Keep up the pressure...they will feel the heat, believe me...but the Parkies are staffed with a miserable group of ultra-left wing liberals and will not give in to this easily nor take  to this lightly.

I wish you and this cause much luck!
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 4:35:03 PM EDT
The language they are using is a little strange.
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 4:49:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2005 6:41:36 PM EDT by AdrianUSP9]

Originally Posted By imposter:
The language they are using is a little strange.



How so?
Link Posted: 1/6/2005 7:09:23 PM EDT
bump
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 2:40:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2005 2:55:39 AM EDT by imposter]
Late night bump.


Originally Posted By AdrianUSP9:

Originally Posted By imposter:
The language they are using is a little strange.



How so?


This is the language they use:

Notwithstanding any other section of this chapter, the possession, carriage and use for defensive purposes of firearms or other implements designed to discharge a missile capable of destroying animal life shall not be construed as a violation of this section except to the extent Federal, State, Territorial, or a Federal District law is violated.

The first clause seems unecessary.  And who cares about the ability to carry implements designed to discharge a missile?  Get a gun.  If you are carrying around a bow or a crossbow or an ATGM, I would be suspicous that you are up to a little more than protecting yourself when a gun is a better alternative.  And if your firearm has to be able to "destroy" an animal, does that mean you need to carry a LAW missile, because there is no way my Glock is going to "destroy" anything bigger than a mouse.  "Destroy" does not appear to be defined in the NPS regs, and in its usual usage it means more than to just kill or hurt.

It seems like it would be better to say something like "Concealed firearms may be carried and possessed as authorized by state law."

It would still be illegal to carry inside the visitor's center or even the restrooms.  18USC930.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 3:52:25 AM EDT
Forwarded
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 2:18:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By imposter:
Late night bump.


Originally Posted By AdrianUSP9:

Originally Posted By imposter:
The language they are using is a little strange.



How so?


This is the language they use:

Notwithstanding any other section of this chapter, the possession, carriage and use for defensive purposes of firearms or other implements designed to discharge a missile capable of destroying animal life shall not be construed as a violation of this section except to the extent Federal, State, Territorial, or a Federal District law is violated.

The first clause seems unecessary.  And who cares about the ability to carry implements designed to discharge a missile?  Get a gun.  If you are carrying around a bow or a crossbow or an ATGM, I would be suspicous that you are up to a little more than protecting yourself when a gun is a better alternative.  And if your firearm has to be able to "destroy" an animal, does that mean you need to carry a LAW missile, because there is no way my Glock is going to "destroy" anything bigger than a mouse.  "Destroy" does not appear to be defined in the NPS regs, and in its usual usage it means more than to just kill or hurt.

It seems like it would be better to say something like "Concealed firearms may be carried and possessed as authorized by state law."

It would still be illegal to carry inside the visitor's center or even the restrooms.  18USC930.



Good point, the wording is a little funny. I suppose buildings would still be no carry zones since they're federal buildings, huh? Well, if I could carry everywhere else I'd either lock the gun in the car, or avoid the visitor centers all together. Though it would be nice to carry in the visitor's centers - most of my concerns come from wildlife, or being robbed in the middle of nowhere - I dont think visitors centers are an attractive place for a criminal to commit a crime.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 6:06:30 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 7:20:46 PM EDT
Bump.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 7:21:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/8/2005 7:23:52 PM EDT by imposter]
Bump.

Edit: oops, double-tap.  Or is that a double-bump?
Top Top