Brady Campaign Sues to Stop Concealed Weapons in Federal Parks

I fear that this might work. I would think that this will depend upon the judge who hears the case.

WASHINGTON -- An anti-gun group is suing to stop a last-second Bush administration change that would allow Americans to carry concealed, loaded guns in most national parks and wildlife refuges.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence sued the Interior Department in federal court on Tuesday.

They want a federal judge to stop the elimination of a 25-year-old federal rule severely restricting loaded guns in national parks.

The previous regulation required that firearms be unloaded and placed somewhere that is not easily accessible, such as inside a car trunk. But in January, visitors will be able to carry a loaded gun into a park or wildlife refuge if the person has a concealed weapon permit and if state law also allows concealed firearms.

Labels: ,


Blogger Unknown said...

And as usual, the print and television reporters make it seem as though everyone, not just people who are already legally carrying concealed weapons, will be doing so in parks. That is the absurdity of it all.

If 100 people are walking around with legally concealed weapons, why would it matter to anyone that those same 100 people now have the opportunity to go to one more place, an infinitesimally small additional place? The argument against it is just plain silly.

12/31/2008 3:28 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

Two things:

I wish I knew what they were basing the lawsuit on.

I wish I knew why you think this might succeed.

1/01/2009 2:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've got a question: the Brady Campaign and other Gun Control Groups are constantly filing Lawsuits against anyone that would restore Rights, why do I never hear of anyone filing a Suit against them for their Socdialist assaults on the Constitution, and, more importantly, Law Abiding Citizens who have no intention of committing Crimes?

1/01/2009 11:39 AM  
Blogger Conservatarian said...

You can read the complaint on the Brady Campaign web sight. In my view the complaint is frivolous. Basically, it alleges that the regulation change should have required an environmental impact statement before adoption.

I hope the court award the government sanctions for frivolous conduct, but with Eric Holder Attorney General, don't be surprised if the government takes a dive on this one.

1/01/2009 7:16 PM  
Blogger Conservatarian said...

Additional Comment:

I hope the files to intervene and then files a Rule 11 motion against the Brady campaign lawyers. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 prohibits lawyers from filing frivolous actions.

1/01/2009 7:20 PM  
Blogger John Lott said...

Dear Conservatarian:

THe big problem with this lawsuit is that the new administration can cave on it, and I assume that is exactly the thought behind it.

1/01/2009 9:52 PM  
Blogger Chas said...

They have no more reason to sue to stop licensed CCW holders from bringing their guns into the park, than they have to prevent licensed drivers from bringing their cars into the park. It's especially absurd given that drivers are far more dangerous.

1/02/2009 2:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They'll do anything and everything they possibly can to take away your rights to protect yourselves.

Why don't these people ask themselves, ban guns from a national park and then can you physically stop someone from smuggling in a weapon to kill people? The answer obviously is no.

So the ban that cannot be enforced is plainly stupid and only a hindrance to the law-abiding.

1/03/2009 8:36 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home