Visited a National Park Lately?

[One Shot]

Visited the Missions in San Antonio, which are managed by the NPS. On previous visits I did not notice the buildings posted with no guns allowed signs. I thought these signs are probably a result of the recent rule change on concealed carry in national parks. In this case, the missions themselves were not posted, but the visitors' centers, shops, etc. were.
Do you all think it's ironic the NPS believes they now need signs to remind us, the non-felon, law-abiding, trusted citizens allowed to carry in the the rest of the state? Further, if they didn't post these buildings in the past, then these signs are meant only for us, not the rest of the public, including those who'll carry whenever they want, not deterred by a sign. So, in effect, they're reminding those criminally carrying that we are probably not.

[Keith B]

Visited the Missions in San Antonio, which are managed by the NPS. On previous visits I did not notice the buildings posted with no guns allowed signs. I thought these signs are probably a result of the recent rule change on concealed carry in national parks. In this case, the missions themselves were not posted, but the visitors' centers, shops, etc. were.
Do you all think it's ironic the NPS believes they now need signs to remind us, the non-felon, law-abiding, trusted citizens allowed to carry in the the rest of the state? Further, if they didn't post these buildings in the past, then these signs are meant only for us, not the rest of the public, including those who'll carry whenever they want, not deterred by a sign. So, in effect, they're reminding those criminally carrying that we are probably not.

I think the thing is since the buildings are off limits to us, they feel they need to post them.

[One Shot]

But the buildings were off limits to us (and everyone else) BEFORE the rule was changed.
And there were no signs then.
I guess it just bothers me we're getting singled out.

[Keith B]

But the buildings were off limits to us (and everyone else) BEFORE the rule was changed.
And there were no signs then.
I guess it just bothers me we're getting singled out.

Understand. The new ruling probably is the reason they posted them. However, you can look at it that they are just a reminder so we don't forget to disarm before entering the building. As you said, we are the only ones that will follow the request anyway.

[Oldgringo]

Help me with this. We, CHL folk, can carry in the NPS but we can't carry in the visitor centers, gift shops, eating joints, etc. within the NPS. Is that what I'm reading here?

[gmckinl]

Help me with this. We, CHL folk, can carry in the NPS but we can't carry in the visitor centers, gift shops, eating joints, etc. within the NPS. Is that what I'm reading here?

No help needed. You nailed it by the way I read the regulations.

Don't forget to add rest rooms to the off-limits places There's another thread on this somewhere.

[Keith B]

That is correct. Any building in which federal employees regularly perform their duties is still of limits. It the restroom is attached to the visitors center or other admin building, then it is off limits too. Here are a couple of threads:

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... 23&t=22827" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... =9&t=22099" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Oldgringo]

WELL! If this ain't a fine kettle of fish!

I'm glad y'all brought this up. If we don't go broke first, we may RV a couple of western NP's this summer and I'd hate to have to go to the penitentiary for doing touristy things with a CCW.

[stevie_d_64]

WELL! If this ain't a fine kettle of fish!

I'm glad y'all brought this up. If we don't go broke first, we may RV a couple of western NP's this summer and I'd hate to have to go to the penitentiary for doing touristy things with a CCW.

I would hate to go to the penetentiary for doing what comes naturally...

"What are you in for?"

"I had to go wee-wee..."

Every two years people...We can fix this, but quick, in November 2010...

[ClarkLZeuss]

Do you all think it's ironic the NPS believes they now need signs to remind us, the non-felon, law-abiding, trusted citizens allowed to carry in the the rest of the state? Further, if they didn't post these buildings in the past, then these signs are meant only for us, not the rest of the public, including those who'll carry whenever they want, not deterred by a sign. So, in effect, they're reminding those criminally carrying that we are probably not.

I agree with you that this is the hidden message and the end result of what they're doing, but I don't think people who post these signs have that intent. I honestly believe that most people who put up "No Guns" signs don't use much more logic than "Guns are Bad." They don't take the time to really think it through. And the fact that they think everyone from Joe the Plumber to Joe the Mafia Hitman will obey their little signs and that self-enforcement is enough...well, that's just laziness, living in fantasy land.

[ELB]

Carry on NPS and Wildlife Refuge land was/is a victory. Next of course is eliminating the federal building ban... but that will require changing the composition of both congress and the whitehouse, I think. And perhaps doing it a chunk at a time, e.g. first buildings primarily devoted to servicing the public, like visitor centers and such.

I was out to the Grand Canyon lately, and visited that and some other federal park lands in the area. I did run into one interesting situation --- a large outdoor site for viewing archeologic ruins was only accessible by going thru a small visitor center -- you couldn't get to the outdoor area from the (outdoor) parking lot without going into a federal building. BOO!

So for the next step, I would target visitor centers and other areas that are not limited to strictly federal employees, places where Joe Citizen has everyday access.

(edited to correct fat-finger syndrome. elb)

[shipwreck]

Carry on NPS and Wildlife Refuge land was/is a victory. Next of course is elimating the federal building ban... but that will require changing the composition of both congress and the whitehouse, I think. And perhaps doing it a chunk at a time, e.g. first buildings primarily devoted to servicing the public, like visitor centers and such.

I was out to the Grand Canyon lately, and visited that and some other federal park lands in the area. I did run into one interesting situation --- a large outdoor site for viewing archeologic ruins was only accessible by going thru a small visitor center -- you couldn't get to the outdoor area from the (outdoor) parking lot without going into a federal building. BOO!

So for the next step, I would target visitor centers and other areas that are not limited to strictly federal employees, places where Joe Citizen has everyday access.

I posted a question about carrying in the Grand Canyon park, and someone directed me to this thread.

Good to hear it. Obama isn't in the process of reversing this, is he?

And, someone warned me about having a gun on an Indian Reservation. So, if I travel thru AZ to the Grand Canyon, I guess I have to be careful and not cut thru any reservations if I have a gun in the car?

[ELB]

I posted a question about carrying in the Grand Canyon park, and someone directed me to this thread.

Good to hear it. Obama isn't in the process of reversing this, is he?

And, someone warned me about having a gun on an Indian Reservation. So, if I travel thru AZ to the Grand Canyon, I guess I have to be careful and not cut thru any reservations if I have a gun in the car?

Here is the official word on carry in National Parks and Wildlife Refuges:

Title 36 -- Parks, Forests, and Public Property
Chapter 1 -- National Park Service
Part 2 -- Resource Protection, Public Use, and Recreation

Section 2.4 was amended by adding the following paragraph:

"(h) Not withstanding any other provision in this Chapter, persons may possess, carry, and transport concealed, loaded, and operable firearms within a national park area in accordance with the laws of the state in which the national park area, or that portion thereof, is located, except as otherwise prohibited by federal law."

Title 50 -- Wildlife and Fisheries
Chapter 1 - United States Fish and Wildlife Service, DOI
Part 27 Prohibited Acts
Subpart D Disturbing Violations: With Weapons

Section 27.42 Firearms, was amended by adding the following paragraph:

"(e) Not withstanding any other provision in this Chapter, persons may possess, carry, and transport concealed, loaded, and operable firearms within a national wildlife refuge in accordance with the laws of the state in which the wildlife refuge, or that portion thereof, is located, except as otherwise prohibited by federal law."

Here is a link to the Department of the Interior press release announcing the final rule:
http://www.doi.gov/news/08_News_Releases/120508.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here a link to the DOI's final rule, with the language I quoted above, plus all the other governmental overhead that goes with it (25 pages of text to implement two, nearly identical, one-sentence additions the the CFR!)
http://www.doi.gov/issues/Final%20Rule.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If it is a national park or a national wildlife refuge, you can carry your concealed handgun (except in federal buildings) as long as the state in which the park or refuge land lies in also allows concealed handgun carry. For AZ and the Grand Canyon, that's a big 10-4 good buddy.

I know the Brady gang and some grossly misguided park groupies have tried to get Obama to roll it back, but it would have to go thru the same process that established the rule in the first place. I haven't followed up on this, but given the fact that the rule was requested by 51 Senators, that even Pelosi and Reid recognize that anti-gun legislation is poison, and the fact that Obama is so overwhelmed by his new job that he can't even properly deal with the PM of England gives me some hope that this is a detail his administration is not going to get to for awhile.

As for Indian Reservations, I dunno. I will say I drove all the roads I needed to travel to get where I was going, kept my concealed items concealed, and had a good time.

[dmac]

I renewed in the middle of February. The topic of NP carry came up, but unfortunately the instructor gave the class VERY BAD information. He told the class that they could now carry in ANY national Park in the US....clearly wrong. I asked him to clairify this. I asked, "So you're saying that I can now carry in...say...a NP in California?" He said yes. I asked for clarification again...pointing out that Cal. does not allow carry. He said that was true, but that theoretically, if I could get into the park without passing through Cal,then it would be ok. So I said, "so what you're say is, that if I could parachute into Redwood NP/NF, then I could carry my gun!" His reply? Yes! I suggested that he was incorrect, but he insisted then changed the subject. ouch...

[shipwreck]

I just need to google the dos and do-nots of carry in New Mexico and Arizona and I should be good. I think I'll also plot mny trip around indian reservations unless I find out otherwise.