The Waning Taste for Gun Control?

May 18, 2009 12:00 PM 4 comments

Share this Article

Author:

Tags:

The Wall Street Journal reports that a recent vote in the Senate overturned a 1983 law that forbid loaded guns to be carried into National Parks.  The most interesting point was that this measure didn’t get any press.  In fact, I didn’t know about it until I just read the story:

Amid so much other news, a Senate vote last week to allow loaded guns in national parks slipped under the media radar. The vote shows how the political cause of gun control is as dead as a mounted moose.

By 67-29, the Senate passed Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn’s amendment to let law-abiding visitors carry legal firearms into national parks. This overturns a 1983 federal rule requiring that firearms be kept unloaded and in an inaccessible place such as a trunk of a car. The provision (now part of credit-card legislation) protects Second Amendment rights, and it preserves the right of states to pass firearm laws that apply consistently, even on federal lands.

As recently as the 1990s, guns in parks legislation would have provoked a Congressional uproar. But gun control has proven to be a consistent political loser, and last year the Supreme Court cast doubt on state gun bans. No fewer than 27 Democrats voted for Mr. Coburn’s amendment, and the ayes included Majority Leader Harry Reid, who is up for re-election in Nevada next year.

Congressional liberals are furious, and are threatening to hold up the credit-card bill, much as they have held up Washington, D.C. voting-rights legislation to which Republicans attached gun-owner protections. Holding up both bad bills forever would be fine with us, but in any case it’s clear liberals have lost the gun control debate even within their own party.

If you legally own a firearm and if it is legal for you to carry that firearm in your state why should your rights stop at the gates of a national park?  As we all know, wild animals live in parks and when you’re out in the middle of nowhere hiking there can be dangers (from your fellow man, too) so why surrender your ability to protect yourself?  There have been many times I have been hiking deep inside a park and haven’t seen another soul in hours… what if I ran into a bear, mountain lion, or some freaked out guy?  Am I supposed to pray I survive?

Nice to see that gun control is starting to become a non-starter in Washington, D.C. and that the “liberals are furious.”  Who knows how long it will last, however.

Finally, a win for the good guys.

 

Did you like this article? Get new articles daily for free via RSS or Email.

 

4 Comments

  • Didn’t the Right wing claim that Democrats were gun-slingers? Well, here in Pennsylvania maybe. There is no rationale for denying a person who is licensed to carry and to limit this right in national parks. Anyone who believes these parks are free from dangerous freaks is delusional. And this from a Democrat!

    askcherlock’s last blog post..The Obama Recovery is Underway

  • I misquoted this. Obama actually said regarding residents of small town America that people “cling to guns or religion or apathy to people who aren’t like them…” Both Hillary and McCain laced into him for this remark. My apology for not stating it correctly.

    askcherlock’s last blog post..The Obama Recovery is Underway

    • Sure because Obama called them rednecks who bitterly cling to their guns and religion. No candidate should talk about voters this way and not expect to get pounded for it. What he said was just plain wrong.

      This is the quote:
      “And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Leave a Reply


*
CommentLuv badge

Trackbacks

Other News