Obama Defends Bush Rule on Permitting Guns in National Parks

WTF Cat.jpg
Paul Helmke
on learning
of the DOJ's
decision!

Y'know, folks, I hate to cast a pall on all this doom and gloom, but here the Obama administration had an opportunity to oppose concealed carry with virtually no political repercussions, and chose, instead, to support it! :eek:

Could it be that the Obamanation isn't 100% evil after all? :rolleyes:
 
Y'know, folks, I hate to cast a pall on all this doom and gloom, but here the Obama administration had an opportunity to oppose concealed carry with virtually no political repercussions, and chose, instead, to support it!
Click to expand...

While I'd like to believe that the power of gun owners is so immense that someone who once voted to convict a man for shooting an intruder in his own home despite the Willemette ban on handguns has suddenly seen the light, I think a more likely explanation is that Obama has a lot of other things going right now and DOJ did what DOJ normally does - defend administrative regulations whether they were passed this year or 50 years ago. I doubt Obama even knows of the decision, one way or the other.

I'm glad it fell out the right way in this case; but this is a long, long way from the administration making a conscious decision to support concealed carry. However, if that ever happens, I'll be sure to give them credit for it.
 
slightly confused

shooting in the parks is not allowed, right? poaching is not allowed. The guns, AND ammo were allowed, if unloaded and stored. SO, just how would allowing you to have ammo inside the gun, and on your person, impact the environment?
 
Interesting topic. The entire premise of the OP is primarily political. Obama.

Obama's record is replete with support for gun control. He voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. He desires a new assault weapons bill. He opposed the approval of Supreme Court justices who held that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to keep and bear arms. In between all of his attempted gun-grabbing, Obama now wants to study the environmental impact of guns on national parks. Get ready for a major lead-kills-animals claim. If Obama truly supported Bush's pro-gun legislation, he'd would have simply said that he supports the legislation and fought the silly anti-gun lawsuits.

'Common-sense, gun safety' legislation. Now that's Obama change you can believe in. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Get ready for a major lead-kills-animals claim.
Click to expand...
Bingo. Last year, OSHA tried to pass the 1910.109 standard, which would reclassified ammunition under their rules for explosives. The effect would have been that you could not have ammunition in the same place that firearms are discharged.

Yes, you read that right.

Fortunately, it was taken off the table when it was exposed for what it was. Still, somebody had the idea, and it was a sneaky one. A backdoor ban like this, based on "health" or "environmental" issues could possibly fly.

Bear in mind, lead is, "known to the state of California to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm."

I doubt anyone's going to try for an actual "ban" on guns or ammunition, if only for the potential political fallout. A "save the environment" regulation can do just as much harm, without being a "ban."
 
Watch what Obama DOES not what he SAYS. That will tell all. He is the master of saying something then voting or signing the opposite into law.
Click to expand...

I agree, e is a politician. Now that we have identified what job description he falls under we can progress forward:)
 
Gun Control is about as important to this administration as saving the spotted owl.

Those were early 90s platforms. You guys are kinda living in the past. The Dems saw that gun control lost them congress for over a decade, and the era of school shootings is over -- that is, the intense media focus on them. I'm sure they still happen but they aren't as emotionally riveting these days.

'bama is the type of guy who wants to go down in history as turning the US around.. which currently involves the economy and foreign affairs. They don't give a rat's behind about guns right now. Maybe in 4 years they might.. but not right now.
 
Bingo. Last year, OSHA tried to pass the 1910.109 standard, which would reclassified ammunition under their rules for explosives. The effect would have been that you could not have ammunition in the same place that firearms are discharged.
Click to expand...


My area of expertise is explosives. I know some of the folks involved in this issue. SAAMI and the Institute of Explosive Makers asked for that regulation. When the draft regulation came out their member companies had a total hissy fit.

I tried to tell the NRA-ILA that it was all one big red herring issue, to no avail.

BTW: Do some research on the guns in parks rule. Find out that the onerous rule was put in place by the Reagan administration.
 
Though I must say I'm glad that people get up-in-arms when they get wind of this stuff.. I'd much rather people OVERreact to perceived 2nd Amendment threats than not react at all...

Though all this hoarding of ammo recently seems a bit strange.
 
Don't you see it....

He has discovered that gun owners/buyers are his new ace in the hole. We are the only ones stimulating the economy currently. We will make him pro-gun one way or another!
 
Last edited:
Obama Wants Two Terms.

Obama may very well have learned from Clinton what damage can be done by taking a stance on guns that is too far left. Obama, in addition to having more pressing issues on his plate, may want to wait until he wins a second term to go after gun rights. Of course, he may then sabotage the next democrat in line to run, but would he really care? He doesn't like Hillary all that well in the first place. :D

He had to soften his stance on guns compared to his previous record to placate the union members and rural democrats, as well as some moderate republicans. That was a politically calculated move on his part which certainly helped him in his campaign and to win the election. It's too early to toss those people under the bus.
 
Fremmer Wrote:

In between all of his attempted gun-grabbing, Obama now wants to study the environmental impact of guns on national parks. Get ready for a major lead-kills-animals claim.


That's a humorous statement. We've been using lead (as in bullets) to kill animals for hundreds of years. As long as you limit and/or regulate hunting in National Parks there should be no issues with "lead-kills-animals". I know what you're trying to say. Lead can kill animals when injested by animals, which is why we went away from lead shot. But to think there will be widespread "lead exposure" for animals in parks because they allow carry of handguns with permits would look ludicrous on their part. Still, stranger things have happened in Washington.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top