Obama and Company offer another Swipe at the 2nd Amendment

reply to post by macman


What about personal accountability when using a firearm in a park? Has that gone the way of the Dodo? Sings tell you in which direction you would be allowed to shoot so that the bullet you discharge don't end up embedding itself in some kid's spine or the side of someone's car or tent.

How is that an infringement?

We are not to make our national parks as dangerous as the olde wild west. This is not the OK Corral!

It's ether signs and pamphlets or a $50 Million lawsuit settlement that requires that park to be shut down for good with no third option. Are you willing to cost someone their job because some gun owner doesn't want to adhere to like 5 or 6 simple rules?

Safety of the campgoers who don't own a gun means nothing to you?

I've actually done negotiation work on behalf of The US Federal Govt and one thing you must learn and finally realize that when doing work like this is that you must constantly walk a very fine line that thanks to multi million dollar lawsuits gets thinner by the day. Answer yourself the following first "How do you develop a protocol that will benefit everyone equally without costing us anything?" before being quick to attack this plan!

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by macman

 

What about personal accountability when using a firearm in a park? Has that gone the way of the Dodo? Sings tell you in which direction you would be allowed to shoot so that the bullet you discharge don't end up embedding itself in some kid's spine or the side of someone's car or tent.

How is that an infringement?

We are not to make our national parks as dangerous as the olde wild west. This is not the OK Corral!

edit on 27-11-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

People practice personal accountability all the time without your coveted signs.

I love the dramatic tale of a stray bullet striking the innocent child.
Allowing your emotions to dictate how you rule your life will not provide success.
Sorry.
And the Wild West comparison is about the oldest anti talking point out there.
Please, revamp, renew and come back when you have something new.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


How did you proove me wrong? Provide what page it can be found on.

I have told you, there are signs posted on trail heads that say where its legal to shoot

They say you cant be near any campgrounds, buildings or camp sights.
They say you must be 200 yards away from any trail
They say you must have a solid backdrop.

If you get injured out there with those rules you would have to have the intelligence of a rock.

I shoot using public lands, I do not want that taken away from me and you have not provided one single valid point as to why I should not use these lands. GIVE ME JUST ONE.

What more do you want?
Your one of those people who wants the world to be padded so if you trip you don't get hurt.
You want signs like this.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by macman

 

It's ether signs and pamphlets or a $50 Million lawsuit settlement that requires that park to be shut down for good with no third option. Are you willing to cost someone their job because some gun owner doesn't want to adhere to like 5 or 6 simple rules?

Safety of the campgoers who don't own a gun means nothing to you?

edit on 27-11-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

So more use of the public funds to provide false security?
Can you say TSA???

The camping peoples rights are not infringed upon.

And even if they were, I guess the magical sign didn't stop anything.

The application of more rules, on for the public land restricts and infringes.
That is fact, just as the Sun rises in the East and sets in the West.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by macman

 

What about personal accountability when using a firearm in a park? Has that gone the way of the Dodo? Sings tell you in which direction you would be allowed to shoot so that the bullet you discharge don't end up embedding itself in some kid's spine or the side of someone's car or tent.

How is that an infringement?

We are not to make our national parks as dangerous as the olde wild west. This is not the OK Corral!

It's ether signs and pamphlets or a $50 Million lawsuit settlement that requires that park to be shut down for good with no third option. Are you willing to cost someone their job because some gun owner doesn't want to adhere to like 5 or 6 simple rules?

Safety of the campgoers who don't own a gun means nothing to you?

I've actually done negotiation work on behalf of The US Federal Govt and one thing you must learn and finally realize that when doing work like this is that you must constantly walk a very fine line that thanks to multi million dollar lawsuits gets thinner by the day. Answer yourself the following first "How do you develop a protocol that will benefit everyone equally without costing us anything?" before being quick to attack this plan!

edit on 27-11-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

There are already signs posted!!!

do you really think PAMPHLETS will make a difference?

this must be your impression of people "Well the sign says not to do this.. but ill ignore the sign.. OMG THE PAMPHLET GOD DOES NOT PERMIT ME, MUST NOT ANGER PAMPHLET GOD"

NOBODY will get hurt if everything stays the same! Your in a false state of hierarchy in this conversation, you believe you have provided valid points yet fail to see that none are valid beliefs and choose to ignore the facts that prove you wrong.

reply to post by macman


It is a worst case scenario that personally I'd rather not see happen!

The TSA would not be the securital agency but it would be the National Parks Service-US Dept Of The Interior/DHS!

reply to post by ConspiraCity


Pamphlets and signage will prevent disasters. They tell you in which direction you can shoot so that a stray don't end up in a ballpark or the campground.

It is you who is brushing to the side what I am saying as you don't want to be responsible when using a firearm in a national park.

200 yards with a trail to your back.

What about the kid who wandered away from his group and right into the line of fire who can't read nor understand the signage?

Still waiting for a valid reason for me to stop shooting on public lands.

Still waiting for a reply on how you think PAMPHLETS will change more then GIANT SIGNS that are already posted at trail heads!

reply to post by ConspiraCity


I am not trying nor attempting to stop you or anyone else for that matter from being able to enjoy shooting in national parks as I am pointing out what could happen and how nothing should be left to chance.

The less someone has to worry about the better!

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by ConspiraCity

 

Pamphlets and signage will prevent disasters. They tell you in which direction you can shoot so that a stray don't end up in a ballpark or the campground.

It is you who is brushing to the side what I am saying as you don't want to be responsible when using a firearm in a national park.

200 yards with a trail to your back.

What about the kid who wandered away from his group and right into the line of fire who can't read nor understand the signage?

edit on 27-11-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

The signs say have a good backdrop, It's obvious you haven't shot or you would know what a back drop is.. A backdrop is a large mountain or hill that is fired into. The rule of a good backdrop assures that the bullet is not traveling towards trails or camp sights.

I'm very responsible when I shoot and so is every other gun owner.

So once again i'm still waiting for a valid point.. because your yet to provide a single one.

reply to post by ConspiraCity


It is apparent that you obviously follow and read all signage but the individual I am referencing is those that do not and simply do not care.

That is all apart of gun safety.

What about the cases whereas someone decided to shoot in the direction whereas a backdrop exists for? The Park Rangers are there in a second asking q's!

In cases like this nothing shall be left to chance.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


And all i'm saying is that a pamphlet will not change those people. There is no reason to change anything.

It's illegal to drink and drive but people still do it, so should we ban driving all together?
No, we punish the people who don't abide by the rules that enforce common sense.

The same case is for shooting, the rules are in place at the signs.
If a park ranger catches you firing you where you shouldn't, your gonna get hit with a massive fine.

reply to post by ConspiraCity


That could be amended to "That if you are caught discharing a firearm in a national park in the direction of campgoers you will be subjected to siezure of your weapons and face arrest on site along with a hefty ($10,000+) fine"! Take the fine money and reinvest it back into the park to improve it.

Could something like that be agreed upon? Tighten and stricten the laws.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by ConspiraCity

 

That could be amended to "That if you are caught discharing a firearm in a national park in the direction of campgoers you will be subjected to siezure of your weapons and face arrest on site along with a hefty ($10,000+) fine"!

Could something like that be agreed upon? Tighten and stricten the laws.

edit on 27-11-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

if your firing into people.. trust me... it ain't gonna be pretty. you will likely get all of those charges even now.

reply to post by ConspiraCity


True, but a dictatorial like policy needs to be in place, the hope is that you never have to use it but need it harsh enough to clearly spell out what could happen if some idiot oversteps and do trust that there is some idiot out there somewhere living amongst civilized society who will means it's not a matter of "if" but "when".

Park Rangers have the authority to detain and arrest on site as a national park is deemed Federal land which makes it under the direct jurisdiction of The US Federal Govt!

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


We have gotten along perfectly fine without these rules in place. If we try to anticipate every trouble in life we will forget about actually living, the moment we fear is the moment we're enslaved by it. Negative events are an inherent element of human life, we should not get rid of the whole tree to prevent the one bad apple that will eventually come.

He who sacrifices liberty for protection, deserves neither.

reply to post by ConspiraCity


It's better to air on the side of caution then to get blindsided by some idiot who thinks the rules don't apply to him as unfortunately idiots in society do exist as they vote, pay taxes and (GULP!) have kids.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by macman

 

It is a worst case scenario that personally I'd rather not see happen!

The TSA would not be the securital agency but it would be the National Parks Service-US Dept Of The Interior/DHS!

edit on 27-11-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

SO, to sum up your idea of how the world should be.
Signs and Fences stop bullets.
Create new laws so the false sense of security continues for the people that are too dumb not to stumble between an active firing line and the shooter that I guess can't see the large human form walking in the line of fire.

Please, I beg you, please please please, say in your house.
If you happen outside, you may get hurt, as there are not signs to warn you of every possible bad thing out in the world.

And what the hell is this?

The TSA would not be the securital agency but it would be the National Parks Service-US Dept Of The Interior/DHS!

There is a gap between what is typed, and what you comprehend.
You want more Govt Control and more Govt agencies, like the wonderful TSA.

Yeah, maybe we can have scanners before entering the Public Land. Maybe we can the anal cavity search to!!

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by ConspiraCity

 

Pamphlets and signage will prevent disasters. They tell you in which direction you can shoot so that a stray don't end up in a ballpark or the campground.

It is you who is brushing to the side what I am saying as you don't want to be responsible when using a firearm in a national park.

200 yards with a trail to your back.

What about the kid who wandered away from his group and right into the line of fire who can't read nor understand the signage?

edit on 27-11-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

So, the sign is magic?
Or, I know, it must be a robot sign. When the person walks by it, the sign transforms into the parent robot, and tells the dummy to stop, or they might get hit by the magic bullet, since you know, the person doesn't hear the loud booms of gunfire.

And the kid that wonders away? I think they have a bigger issue then wondering in the line of fire. And I guess that the people shooting must be blind. As they can't see a human form walk between them and the targets.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by ConspiraCity

 

It is apparent that you obviously follow and read all signage but the individual I am referencing is those that do not and simply do not care.

edit on 27-11-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

Yep, and signs will magically force others to do the same.

A forceful sign, I guess.
Please go back to my comment about the robot signs. That is the only logical next step