| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another Article on the Proposed National Park Rules |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory Morris, 5/1/08 10:33:42 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here.
I'm just using this one as an example, because they are all pretty much the same. Our side: "Its our right, and it makes sense that we be allowed to carry there, since we carry everywhere else." The anti-gun side: "Guns in parks will cause accidents and people will shoot wildlife." "Under the proposed amendment, visitors must have authority to possess loaded and concealed firearms on analogous state lands before they will be allowed to carry firearms in federal park areas and refuges." To those who say "more guns in the parks will cause more accidents, violence and poaching, all I have to say is: you are really, really thick, aren't ya? Concealed carry licensees aren't causing these problems elsewhere! Is there something magic about federal land? When I cross from state-owned land into federally-owned land, will I suddenly have the urge to draw my sidearm to shoot at spotted owls and bald eagles? How stupid can you get? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | [Comments are closed after a month.] |
| | < "Another One?" | | "Woo!" > |
|
|
|
|
