Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Could tourists take guns into the White House?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ccharles000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-22-09 08:22 PM
Original message
Could tourists take guns into the White House?
Could tourists pack heat with cameras?

Not if Secret Service has anything to say about it. But a guns provision in the credit card bill President Barack Obama signs into law today touches pretty close to his new home.

Obama never really wanted the provision, but he wanted credit card reform on his desk by Memorial Day, so he let slide an amendment that allows people to bring loaded guns into national parks.

And the White House is a national park.

A spokeswoman for D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty was quick to note “the provision in the credit card legislation will not apply to the national parks in the District.”

But Washington has no law that specifically says no guns are permitted in national parks – and why would they? Until now they didn’t need one.

The amendment, tacked onto the credit card bill by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), permits gun-owning visitors to bring their concealed weapons with them as long as “the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the law of the state in which the unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22863.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-22-09 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. well i think every gun lovin, gun totin, god fearin
american should be able to take a gun where ever he -- or she -- damn well pleases.

fuck yeah.



:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-22-09 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'm pretty sure that one must abide by the conceal carry law of the land in which the park resides.
Edited on Fri May-22-09 09:08 PM by aikoaiko
I'm pretty sure DC doesn't give out carry permits.

Someone with more knowledge can correct or corroborate.

edited to add:

I did a little footwork -- see the bolded texts before freaking out or posting more disinformation. This politico article is classic anti-gun, anti-rkba fear mongering.


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/amendment.xpd?session=111&amdt=s1067

SA 1067. Mr. COBURN proposed an amendment to amendment SA 1058 proposed by Mr. Dodd (for himself and Mr. Shelby) to the bill H.R. 627, to amend the Truth in Lending Act to establish fair and transparent practices relating to the extension of credit under an open end consumer credit plan, and for other purposes; as follows:


At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. PROTECTING AMERICANS FROM VIOLENT CRIME.

(a) Congressional Findings.--Congress finds the following:

(1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution provides that ``the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed''.

(2) Section 2.4(a)(1) of title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, provides that ``except as otherwise provided in this section and parts 7 (special regulations) and 13 (Alaska regulations), the following are prohibited: (i) Possessing a weapon, trap or net (ii) Carrying a weapon, trap or net (iii) Using a weapon, trap or net''.

(3) Section 27.42 of title 50, Code of Federal Regulations, provides that, except in special circumstances, citizens of the United States may not ``possess, use, or transport firearms on national wildlife refuges'' of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.

(4) The regulations described in paragraphs (2) and (3) prevent individuals complying with Federal and State laws from exercising the second amendment rights of the individuals while at units of--

(A) the National Park System; and

(B) the National Wildlife Refuge System.

(5) The existence of different laws relating to the transportation and possession of firearms at different units of the National Park System and the National Wildlife Refuge System entrapped law-abiding gun owners while at units of the National Park System and the National Wildlife Refuge System.

(6) Although the Bush administration issued new regulations relating to the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens in units of the National Park System and National Wildlife Refuge System that went into effect on January 9, 2009--

(A) on March 19, 2009, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted a preliminary injunction with respect to the implementation and enforcement of the new regulations; and

(B) the new regulations--

(i) are under review by the administration; and

(ii) may be altered.

(7) Congress needs to weigh in on the new regulations to ensure that unelected bureaucrats and judges cannot again override the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens on 83,600,000 acres of National Park System land and 90,790,000 acres of land under the jurisdiction of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.

(8) The Federal laws should make it clear that the second amendment rights of an individual at a unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System should not be infringed.

(b) Protecting the Right of Individuals to Bear arms in Units of the National Park System and the National Wildlife Refuge System.--The Secretary of the Interior shall not promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an individual from possessing a firearm including an assembled or functional firearm in any unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System if--

(1) the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing the firearm; and

(2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the law of the State in which the unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System is located.

(As printed in the Congressional Record for the Senate on May 12, 2009.)



http://www.usacarry.com/washington_dc_concealed_carry_permit_information.html
Concealed Permit:
Carrying a handgun in the District is prohibited. All firearms are to be kept at one’s home or place of business. All firearms must be unloaded and disassembled or locked with a trigger lock except when kept at a registrant’s place of business or while being used for lawful “recreational” purposes. A D.C. license to carry a pistol is needed for one’s home or business and the pistol must also have been registered prior to September 24, 1976. Self-defense in one’s home with a firearm is therefore legally precluded.

Automobile carry:
Firearms not registered with the D.C. police may not be brought into the District.
Alcohol and Drugs:

Deadly Force / Castle Doctrine:
Washington D.C. Gun has no stand-your-ground law.

Open Carry:
Prohibited anywhere in the District.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-22-09 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
3. Why not? Nothing is absurd to the gun fetishists. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-22-09 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
4. I guess if you have a concealed weapons permit.....
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-22-09 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
5. I was wondering about the Jefferson Expansion Memorial (Gateway Arch)
big crowds down there in St. Louis.Just what they would need is a few people toting sidearms or maybe some AK 47s.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-22-09 08:44 PM
Response to Original message
6. I Have The Right To Have An Automatic Weppin in the White House
And a flamethrower.

And no gun-grabber can stop me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-22-09 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
7. If a family is camping in a large national park and has to rely on 911....
...as it's defense against attempted violence, it would not turn out well for them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-22-09 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
8. Exaggeration Is Not Useful

I don't see the need for this provision, but false propositions do not advance an argument.

It provides that the rules inside a national park are no more restrictive than those in the state where the park is located (in this case the "state" being DC).

In other words, the answer is clearly no.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
old mark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-23-09 05:22 AM
Response to Original message
9. I guess you guys only approve of specific parts of the Constitution.
Are you sure you are not Republicans in disguise?


I carry wherever I go, certainly would not expect to be allowed to have any type of weapon if I were ever to visit the White House - they are ever prohibited in any local Post Office by federal statute.
Not supposed to smoke in a Post Office, either.....


mark
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC