More PSH From Philly Media

Now they are freaking out about the National Park Rule Change.

Since the rule wouldn’t apply to every national park, the provision could also create confusion among the well-armed vacationing public.

Besides, what’s the point?

Federal parks already are some of the most crime-free settings in the nation. Introducing gun-slinging tourists into the mix isn’t going to improve safety.

I don’t even have the energy to refute this crap anymore.

14 thoughts on “More PSH From Philly Media”

  1. >>I don’t even have the energy to refute this crap anymore.

    Their game plan is simple: to relentlessly “get their message out” and any and every opportunity.

  2. Good lord….the Philly MSM has truly pulled out all the stops. Their anti-gun and anti-gun rights screed has moved from commonplace to incessantly regular. Keep up the good fight, Sebastian! Their strategy is to wear us out….don’t let them do it.

    “Kempthorne … [is] also responding to the gun toters who argue that visitors would be much safer if everyone were allowed to pack heat inside the national parks.”

    Don’t they just love straw men…they are so easy to push over.

    Their take: “This proposal is just another diversion from making progress on sensible gun-control laws that truly could keep Americans safer.”

    My take: This proposal is another significant step in restoring second amendment rights that truly could keep Americans safer.

  3. Philly is a textbook case of the inmates running the institution. It could only follow that failed D.C. police chief Charles Ramsey finds a new home there to continue his slide to the bottom.

    The “gun issue” for these people is yet another way to divert attention and exempt those responsible for their savage and un-civilized lifestyles.

    Check the archives of those Silly Philly papers and you will find stories of white people that have been murdered, by and for, the sport and amusement of black thugs.

  4. The GOOD news is that these naysayers are not very well-informed, which probably explains why they fear everything about guns. They also go with emotion, not logic.

    I just checked the comments page concerning the rule change for concealed-carry in National Parks. More than 6,000 comments have been posted. You can read page after page of comments SUPPORTING the rule change. But you will have extreme difficulty finding a comment that is AGAINST the proposed rule change.

    They just can’t find out WHAT to say, or they can’t figure out how to make a comment.

  5. Fred,

    Where did you see these 600 comments? On DOI website or the Philly Inquirer?
    Not being registered on that website I did not see a comment section.

  6. Sebastian’s software won’t allow me to post the direct link.

    Go to www dot regulations dot gov. Search for FWS-R9-NSR-2008-0062. Click on the “docket ID” link. You’ll figure it out.

    There are now more than 6500 comments….not just 600.

  7. I mailed my comment to Public Commemts and emailed it also. However I would like to encourage people to comment but ask for a broader interpretation.
    Do not make it dependant on states regulation in state parks. Many states do not allow open or conceal carry in parks. Plus we want to allow open carry and not dependant on a CCW permit. Many of us lives in states like Maryland where that is not possible.

    Anyone of age should be allowed to carry open or concealed in Federal Lands. The Federal gov’t has the most restriction not to infringe our right to keep and carry arms. The reason I ask for concealed is if someone wasnt to put gun in backpack or fanny pack. Some like to have it acessable on hip without having to cover it up so also want open carry allowed.

    This new regulation is too narrow

  8. RAH:

    Thanks for commenting.

    With all due respect, I think that the rule has been proposed and it will be institutued, or not. I am not sure that the rule can at this point be changed or amended. Not sure, though. Maybe someone knows for sure.

    But I can tell you one thing…we are not going to get unlicensed, open carry in National Parks any time soon….and certainly not in one fell swoop of a rule change. Myself? I’d like to OC inside the Daley Center in downtown Chicago. But realistically, that isn’t going to happen any time soon. I guess it never hurts to get the message out…so on that I see your point.

    This proposed rule is a good step in the right direction.

  9. Carl,
    Thanks for the reply. However the public comment is just for that reason. Back on the 70’s before James Watt did this regulation there was open carry in parks. We used to do it.

    PA, VA, WV, KY,DE all allow open carry. Push now while we have chance. It can not hurt if people request open carry without a permit. The logic is the same.
    The worst is that they keep to the language proposed. I do not want to have to go thriugh this again for the next 30 years to gets us back before this regulation was put in place. Besides it is conceivable with a good Heller decision that the Fed gov’t will be restricted on banning carry provisions at all.

  10. Good post, and I agree with you Sir…in both principle and substance. That is what those comments are for.

  11. How does one “sling” a handgun? I’ve got slings on my SKS and my 10/22, but not on my pistols. Am I missing something?

  12. Bruce, you are missing a bit of history regarding some pretty common vernacular.

    “Gunslinger” is a term dating to the teens or 20s of the 20th century. It’s just another term for gunfighter, gunman, or pistoleer. It was used to describe both good guys and bad guys in westerns (movies), but usually has a bad or negative connotation. Usually the bad guy is the “gunslinger”…though the sheriff could be described as such.

    So the Philly media used it to cast a negative light on someone carrying a gun in a national park. They are likening them to the gunfigthers of the old west….quick to draw, quick to shoot, deadly, etc.

    The term of course has nothing to do with the sling (carrying device) you might attach to a rifle, or shotgun.

Comments are closed.