One More Last Chance for Parks

[AlertsList at FirearmsCoalition.org (Firearms Coalition)]

*
One More Last Chance** for Parks*

You have another last chance to post comments about disarming 
law-abiding citizens in National Parks.  Take advantage of this 
opportunity and Post a Comment, even if you have already posted a 
comment before!  Be sure that your family members post comments too!  
The decision in the Heller case makes our position stronger and that 
needs to be brought out.  Politely demand that the National Park Service 
and the Fish and Wildlife Service stop denying Constitutional Rights. 

Adoption of the proposed regulations would be a first step toward 
constitutional compliance, but the Department of the Interior must go 
farther.  They should adopt the proposed amendment and then take the 
next steps to stop illegally restricting the open carry of personal 
defense firearms.  They need to either adopt a blanket policy against 
any firearms possession restrictions on any property administered by the 
National Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service -- or any other 
federal agency for that matter -- or at a minimum adopt state firearms 
laws in the same way that National Forests and BLM lands do.

A couple of anti-gun Senators were able to get the Department of the 
Interior to extend the comment period on the proposed regulations from 
June 30 to August 8 as a delaying tactic in hopes of drumming up more 
opposition to the proposed rules.  The Brady's have been busy 
encouraging people to send in negative comments and many gun groups -- 
unhappy with the limitations of the proposal -- have been urging 
unfavorable comments.  We must not let this opportunity for a major 
improvement pass us by.  Encourage the adoption of the proposed 
amendment and urge further action.

Don't wait!  Get your comments in now! 

To submit a comment, follow this link:

*http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=090
000648053d497*
or
*http://tinyurl.com/66frtt* 

            Either of those links should open a page on Regulations.gov 
with, "Document Details" as the title and, "Docket Title  General 
Regulations for Areas Administered by the National Park Service and the 
Fish and Wildlife Service"

            Go to, "Add Comments" and click on the little yellow 
balloon.  That will open up a comment form.  All fields on the form are 
not required.  Fields marked with a # are going to be publicly displayed 
so don't put information in those fields that you don't want the world 
to see.  If you don't know what to put in a field or you're 
uncomfortable sharing that information, just leave it blank.

            For the comment section, encourage the adoption of the 
proposed amendment, but also let them know that you would like to see 
restrictions further eased.

            Below is the comment I sent in.  You are welcome to copy it 
or use it as a guideline for your own comment if you'd like.

*Regarding Rulemaking Proposal, Reference Number 1024-AD70, here are my 
comments:*

*As a frequent visitor to National Parks and Wildlife Refuges, and as a 
regular commuter through **National** **Battlefield** **Parks** and 
Parkways, I strongly support the proposed changes to regulations 
regarding firearms on lands administered by the NPS and FWS.  The 
current regulations are not only bad policy -- placing law-abiding 
people at risk of arrest and prosecution for having available the means 
to protect themselves - they are also patently unconstitutional.  *

*While not perfect, the proposed amendment is a step in the right 
direction.  It could be easily improved by simply striking the word 
"concealed" from its text.  Many gunowners do not have concealed carry 
permits -- whether as a matter of conscience, government limitations, or 
a financial issue -- and many do not own a firearm suitable for 
concealed carry.  It is wrong to deny these people their rights.*

*I am also concerned about the qualifying language concerning adoption 
of the laws of host states regarding firearms regulations.  The language 
referencing comparable state lands should be stricken completely.  This 
amendment should, at a minimum, simply adopt the firearms laws of host 
states in the same manner that National Forest and **BLM** lands do.  
Ideally -- and constitutionally -- there should be no firearms 
possession restrictions on any federal lands.
*

*As a bare minimum I ask that you adopt the proposed amendment as 
written.  *

*If possible I would prefer to see the word "concealed' struck from the 
amendment along with the language about comparable state lands.*

*Ideally, I would like to see the entire section of the regulation 
dealing with possession of weapons, traps and nets, deleted and replaced 
with language which addresses criminal behavior rather than simple 
possession of tools.  *

*Respectfully submitted,
            Jeff Knox*

Please don't delay.  Submit your comments NOW while you're thinking 
about it.  Also please forward this alert to everyone on your e-mail 
list to encourage them to submit comments as well.

The Park Service needs to be totally overwhelmed with support for the 
right to keep and bear arms on federal lands.  If they are not 
overwhelmed by support for the current proposal, they are likely to try 
to drag this process out in hopes of a new administration taking the 
regulations in the opposite direction.

Yours for the Second Amendment, 

Jeff Knox
            Director, The Firearms Coalition
            www.FirearmsCoalition.org
 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailapp.modwest.com/pipermail/fcalerts-list/attachments/20080730/74
cb2be8/attachment.htm