Wed, 05/20/2009 - 8:54am — lambert
Way to go, Dems!
Advocates of gun rights are poised to win a Congressional victory that eluded them under a Republican president.
To the frustration and discouragement of many Democrats, House and Senate lawmakers and aides say it now appears likely that President Obama will this week sign into law a provision allowing visitors to national parks and refuges to carry loaded and concealed weapons.
Yay! I feel so much safer now!
Plus ça "change," plus c'est la même chose...
NOTE Odds on the first "camper shooting" story? One year? A decade?
Bookmark/Search this post with:
»
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[CSE]+#b94+
Front page
Comments
Six months
We're heading into prime camping season.
Blue Lyon
"But he had such a nice tent!"
And the children were always so polite...
Of course, what the Park Service could do is set up areas that were gun free, so people who didn't want to be walking around with other people wearing flak jackets or camo or long coats wouldn't have to. But no. Imagine the howling that would set up!
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
the nyt
might as well keep this in the clipboard permanently:
Democrat leaders are finally crying uncle and clearing the way for Congress to reinstate the Bush policy
I cannot believe Dems let this happen -- but then I cldn't
believe Dems would agree with Mitch McConnell about deleting funding for closing Gitmo. Harry Reid says he'll bring up funding when Obama has a detailed plan for handling where the prisoners go.
And I thought Montana wanted some of those prisoners to help fill one of its supermax type prisons.
We need Better Dems and More of Only Better Dems.
My first reaction was visceral--and why, why, why??? Why would Dems want to expose people going for a peaceful, quiet experience to possible drive-by shootings? or just the sound of gunshots?
Don't Dems get that if you rolled over and over pretty soon your just flat on your back, getting thinner and weaker with each roll?
I thought this was obvious.
There are enough drug-running operations using public lands (marijuana growers, meth makers) that allowing weapons on-site would be seen as a tacit placation of those drug-dealers, so they won't be hassled by ill-equipped Forest Service cops, or those cops won't face shootouts just by challenging a guy's right to carry. It's a capitulation that the Forest Service can't patrol or guard enough of the public territory so either druglords or tourists feel safe.
It's an admission of system collapse.