New op-ed at the NY Times blog: "These Guns Require Permits, So What’s the Problem?" [I would have picked a different title.]

Should people be able to carry concealed handguns with them in national parks? There are pieces by four other writers here. My piece starts of this way:

Massive majorities in the House and Senate, both Republicans and Democrats, voted to eliminate the gun ban in national parks. The new federal law is hardly radical, as it simply defers to state law. If a state allows people to carry permitted concealed handguns, permit holders can carry their guns in the national parks in that state.

Opponents worry about the possibility that permit holders will accidentally shoot others or use their guns to commit crimes such as poaching. But this isn’t the first time people have been able to carry
guns in national parks. They were allowed to do so for over two months this year, from January through March, and absolutely no problems were reported.

When concealed-handgun laws were originally passed, gun control advocates then also warned that permit holders would lose their tempers and there would be blood in the streets. . . . .

To be clear, the new law simply defers to state law on the ability to carry guns.