What Liberals are saying about CC in National Forest

[Red Hat]

I ran across this just a few minutes ago. You have to read this. I was the first to comment on her article. A true anti gunner!
http://www.kansascity.com/281/story/...ml#recent_comm

My comment:

What a bunch of mumbo jumbo liberal spewing! The reason for this change is to allow law abiding Citizens that exercise their 2nd Amendment rights by legally carrying a concealed weapon from having to stop before entering a National Forest, unload their weapon, lock it in a lock box then after a few miles leaving the area having to stop and get their weapon, load and holster it. Most states allow Concealed Carry in State Forest, Reserves and wildlife areas. Guess what, no poaching by by anyone carrying a Revolver or Pistol. No Bambi trophies and no one is getting shot at while on a picnic or camping. The same old liberal bias was said when States started allowing CC. Crime will increase, shootouts would be rampant and no one would be safe. Wrong in all counts. The Police Officers Association and Sheriffs Association now state that it has been beneficial, crime has dropped in every state that has CC and all the worries the had didn't come to pass. Before you write an article about something you know nothing about you should check the facts and see what the the law is for. All it's doing is correcting a denial of a Constitutional Right!

[ecocks]

Every now and then some assistant newspaper editor has time to write and post some Loony-Tunes idea which particularly exemplifies irresponsible journalism and lack of research. How normal also to to blindly make assertions that we, the citizens, cannot be trusted, even with our constitutional rights. Yes, we NEED some one like them to protect and watch over us. How disappointed you must be at the lack of all your predicted shootouts between armed vigilantes on the streets. How wonderfully you "fawn" over the poor image of "taking down a Bambi." Obviously you did not bother to read the proposed change but merely skimmed an anti-gun, alarmist summary. Rifles and shotguns are not covered under this change and would remain prohibited (to protect Bambi).

The truth is that legally licensed/permitted carriers, who have already been checked by the appropriate law enforcement authorities would be allowed to carry their weapon(s) while visiting or transiting the park. Presently, they have to stop at the edge of the park, unload and secure their firearm, visit or travel through, stop on the other side of the park and then reload and holster their firearm. In areas with National Forrests, public highways and extremely large, non-contiguous parks, such as the Natchez Trace in MS, Arapahoe Forrest in CO and others, this is especially onerous due to the starts and stops of park property.

And by the way, the reason the National Rifle Association was behind those laws "which the organization pushed for," was because there is a group of people who kept attempting to foster legislation to implement national gun laws which are in direct contravention of our 2nd Amendment rights. If you truly believe this should be repealed, then quit playing and actually try to implement the process used to secure the freedom of slaves, experiment with prohibiting alcohol, grant women the vote, address gender/age/racial discrimination and so on. Why don't you? Because you know it won't pass through the ratification process. The Constitution is clear, but the anti-gun groups feel this is too important to trust to the process set out by the founders of our country.

[Red Hat]

Fantastic ecocks! I wish I could write like that! I wonder how long they will let our comments stay on the site...:)

[The Gunny]

I posted a comment in a similar vein. I am not sure it will get posted hwoever I did post.

One thing I would like to point out though this legislation affects only National Parks NOT NATIONAL FORESTS. While the true jewels of nature are contained in national parks there are vast tracks of wilderness and national forests that allow carry on their lands. Many get them confused or think they are the dame thing however they are not.

[PascalFleischman]

"Taking down a Bambi" ? What a joke! Bambi was a fawn for most of the movie...a yearling at best. I'm gunning for Bambi's dad! And when I do, it's with my .30-30, at my hunting camp, during gun season....what a liberal idiot.

[Red Hat]

I posted a comment in a similar vein. I am not sure it will get posted hwoever I did post.

One thing I would like to point out though this legislation affects only National Parks NOT NATIONAL FORESTS. While the true jewels of nature are contained in national parks there are vast tracks of wilderness and national forests that allow carry on their lands. Many get them confused or think they are the dame thing however they are not.

You are correct Gunny! That's what I get for posting at 2:30 AM in anger. My mind was on a train of thought but the words didn't click. BTW, all of the comments are still up on the site. What a surprise...

[ecocks]

Love it, the rating wars have begun. Some folks click 5's others are jumping on and starting to pop a few 1's - predictable. Comments should just stand on their own (IMHO).

[ecocks]

I was only on my first cup of coffee. It was an hour or so later when I realized I had said Arapahoe National Forrest which is misspelled AND administered by the National Forest Service, not the National Park System - my bad. I should have cited Rocky Mountain National Park rather than Arapahoe National Forest. And "Forrest" is the proper name (as in F. Gump) while "Forest" is the proper word for a large grouping of trees. Better post a correction to my earlier comment before some observant anti nails me. Ugh!

[HK4U]

I gave them my 2 cents worth.

[Sheldon]

I gave them my 2 cents worth.

Ditto she is an a typical liberal.