New law. Guns ok in National Parks

The new law applies to only those who have legally applied for and been approved for a CCW or concealed carry weapons permit. The last time I checked, the permits were near impossible to get, require an extensive background check, and have to be renewed yearly at a cost of around $200.00.

Maybe in Cal permits are hard to get. In Utah, it's a 2 hour class, a shoot and fifty bucks. The only requirement is that you havn't been convicted of a felony, yet. The old west is alive and well. Try not to piss off Bubba (aka, Polygamist Al) while you're here. 

I am not anti gun, but I think the perceived "need" for a gun to feel safe in the wilderness (or in a national park) is not justified by the real risks.

Another way to put it: you're safer there than you are at home.

So, in my humble opinion, if you want to go hunting, more power to you. Bring me back some pig, please. But you're pretty darned safe without a firearm in the wilderness. And a firearm is way down the list of things that might keep you alive in a survival situation, after warmth, shelter, water, food, map, compass...

While this change in law will create more travelers with loaded guns in the parks I don't think the number is really going to increase much more than it already is at. The people who feel the need to carry loaded weapons do so regardless of laws. The ranger isn't right there all the time.

On a side note, so funny, I was reading the Cabela's 2010 Shooting catalog with Quinn (my son) this morning. He loves his Cabela's catalogs! So I come in the office to check my e-mail, get on here, see this thread, and Quinn says, " mommy, if I have a fishing pole AND a gun I will be much safer"  I thought this was ironic since I wasn't reading the topic out loud...

More guns = less crime. I'm never worried when I'm out hunting about honest gun owners. That is a different story when I'm down by 48th in Oakland. Vermont has one of the lostest crime rates (per 100K people) than any other state; you can carry a concealed guns WITHOUT a permit! When you leave California you can see the real America.

I am not anti gun, but I think the perceived "need" for a gun to feel safe in the wilderness (or in a national park) is not justified by the real risks.

Another way to put it: you're safer there than you are at home.

So, in my humble opinion, if you want to go hunting, more power to you. Bring me back some pig, please. But you're pretty darned safe without a firearm in the wilderness. And a firearm is way down the list of things that might keep you alive in a survival situation, after warmth, shelter, water, food, map, compass...

I have to disagree. I personally was escorted about A mile down A river by A huge Mountain Lion A few years back. I think she really tramatized me, all I had with me was A micro fishing pole. I think if I had A pistol on my belt that afternoon I would have felt much safer. Even if I didnt have to use it.Its A sense of security. Every time I go back I dont think I have A good time cause im constanly watching my back.. Maybe im just A puss! Just my two cents.

There are a lot of unsavory characters who continually reside/hide out in remote wilderness areas.

At least in cities there are other folks around.

I guess my only reservations to this are :
1-having some over-zealous gun carrier shoot me while hiking because of mistaken identity (unlikely, although after a week in the backcountry who knows)

2-folks with guns on them not acting in accordance with other, non-lethal wilderness practices since they are now armed. I fear the mortality rate of mountain lions & bears possibly increasing in this way.

In AK we usually urged folks not to carry guns on the sound, but instead to read the "safe camping in bear country" hand outs & act accordingly.
We only had blacks in the sound though. Deep in brown bear country I would certainly carry an unconcealed 12 gauge .
As for handguns & browns, just ask Mooch about "old groaner"

As for handguns & browns, just ask Mooch about "old groaner"

....after reading that story (Alaska Bear Tales by Larry Kaniut) I'd rather carry a can of hair spray and a bic lighter 

I am not anti gun, but I think the perceived "need" for a gun to feel safe in the wilderness (or in a national park) is not justified by the real risks.

Another way to put it: you're safer there than you are at home.

So, in my humble opinion, if you want to go hunting, more power to you. Bring me back some pig, please. But you're pretty darned safe without a firearm in the wilderness. And a firearm is way down the list of things that might keep you alive in a survival situation, after warmth, shelter, water, food, map, compass...

I have to disagree. I personally was escorted about A mile down A river by A huge Mountain Lion A few years back. I think she really tramatized me, all I had with me was A micro fishing pole. I think if I had A pistol on my belt that afternoon I would have felt much safer. Even if I didnt have to use it.Its A sense of security. Every time I go back I dont think I have A good time cause im constanly watching my back.. Maybe im just A puss! Just my two cents.

I gotta disagree also. Ifelt like a sitting duck all 3 of the hellish days I spent backpacking in Coe. The rattlesnake incident let us know we weren't in kansas anymore.  The mountain lion paw prints in the dusty fire road were larger than my hand.....and fresh. Hearing a boar give the death squeal as a mt lion picked it off was flat out freakin scary. Getting 3 hours of sleep at night cause you keep thinking the pigs cruising by the lake you're at are gonna wander in find some scrap of food that fell off someone's plate.....sucked also. 

I did not, in any way shape or form, feel safer there than at home.     

Two thumbs up     Better to have one and not need it, than to need one and not have it.
 
William_102

I get it, and I won't argue with your experience.

My experience is, I've spent a lot of time in the backcountry, including a PCT through hike (2600 miles) and a few seasons as a Ranger in the Ansel Adams wilderness. Quite a bit of adventuring overseas as well in places with toothy critters and no uniforms around. I have yet to have a violent encounter with man or beast, and even more telling, I don't know anyone who has.

So, I don't want to take your guns away. I just believe that we're safe without them. More so in the wilderness than the urban environment.

I don't want this to become a tiresome argument, so I'll bow out while I'm ahead, and I'll always grant you this: it's your choice.

Best,

Paul

I feel ya, Paul.  I don't generally feel the need to arm myself, but agree the option is nice.

So, I don't want to take your guns away. I just believe that we're safe without them.

Fair enough.  I don't even own a gun but the comfort level woulda been way up if we had one with us, especially after we seen them prints. I feel the same way when I'm diving with an ab iron vs when I'm diving with a gun.  I just feel way more exposed when I don't have something sharp and pointy at the ready.

Quite a bit of adventuring overseas as well in places with toothy critters and no uniforms around. I have yet to have a violent encounter with man or beast, and even more telling, I don't know anyone who has.

I know you don't know me but here goes. I was fishing as some private ponds that border Gloria grade (at the top) just east of Gonzales. I was maybe 3 or 4 pm and there were three of us. Two fishing and one with a shotgun hunting dove. We were all relatively close to eachother <400 yards apart. The hunter was not visible from the road just the two fishermen which included me. A sedan pulls up and 3 teenagers get out and jump the fence coming towards us (this is most unusual because it's private land). My buddy who was the property owner was closest to the teens and instead of asking them what they were doing he just bolted on a dead run to the truck. I'm like o.k. wtf is going on. Turns out the teens had a knife and were planning on using it until they saw the hunter with the shotgun. My buddy apparently heard them open the knife and then say "OHH S__t they have guns". They quickly left after that while we loaded up.

What would have happened if the hunter was fishing as well and not armed? There would have been a violent encounter that would have altered my friends lives and mine. No it wasn't public land or something violent happening but it was the best possible outcome of a very dangerous situation. My .02


-Tim