Because they just haven't managed to do enough venal, pointless, stupid shit to make the entire nation quake in fear, the Bush administration has added one more pointless, dangerous, and gratuitously evil act.
WASHINGTON, DC, December 5, 2008 (ENS) - For the first time in 25 years, people will be able to carry loaded, concealed weapons in national parks and wildlife refuges under a new rule approved by the Bush administration today.
The new rule overturns a 25 year old regulation that required guns in parks to be unloaded and placed where they are not easily accessible, such as the truck of a car.
Now, a person can carry firearms concealed and loaded at 388 of the country's 391 national park sites if that individual is authorized to carry a concealed weapon under state law in the state where the national park or refuge is located....
The new rule was approved despite concerns raised by every living former director of the National Park Service, several ranger organizations, retired superintendents, and thousands of national park visitors.
This isn't about taking a gun through a park or wildlife refuge en route to somewhere else, a not uncommon occurrence in some places, in the West particularly, where the fastest route from one place to another is through a (formerly) federally protected area. You could already do that, as long as the gun was unloaded and safely stowed someplace that wasn't easily accessible, like the trunk of your car.
No, this is about give one last big ol' wet smooch to the NRA, for no good goddamned reason.
And there were some damned good reasons for the ban, which was enacted in the Reagan administration, That's right, Ronald Reagan knew it was a stupid idea to let armed people into national parks. One reason is that park rangers, like any authority figure, are targets of assault, and have become increasingly so. Consider this report from 2004:
WASHINGTON, DC, September 1, 2004 (ENS) - Attacks, threats, harassment against National Park Service rangers and U.S. Park Police officers reached a all-time high in 2003, according to agency records released Tuesday by an association of federal employees, keeper of the country's only database documenting violence against federal resource protection employees. At the same time, "scores" of park law enforcement personnel have been reassigned to desks, rangers say....
"Law enforcement officers in the National Park Service are 12 times more likely to be killed or injured as a result of an assault than FBI agents – a rate triple that of the next worst federal agency," said Randall Kendrick, executive director for the U.S. Park Rangers Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police.
The National Parks budget has been constantly shrinking and more of the money has been targeted toward fire fighting. That means fewer and fewer rangers and staff having to cope with more and more visitors, along with helping law enforcement. It's in that capacity where rangers have generally been killed. Now they not only have to worry about going into a dangerous law enforcement situation and getting hurt, they have to worry about every interaction with a park visitor who may or may not be carrying.
But while the parks are dangerous places for employees, they're one of the safest places for visitors, at least as far as crime is concerned. Statistically, you have a 1 in 708,333 chance of being a victim of violent crime in a park or refuge. Yes, that's "struck by lightening" territory.
There's also the whole wildlife management aspect of this that's just insane. Now all those yahoos who get their thrills taking potshots at the picture of a cow in cattle crossing signs will have access to real, live targets. Targets that, because they've lived in refuges consider humans just animated parts of their landscape, not predators to be avoided at all costs. The only thing standing between these vulnerable creatures, from chipmunks to bison, and idiots with guns is a $12 pass.
All of which is why 77 percent of Parks and Fish and Wildlife personnel, active and retired, thought that this was a really stupid idea and told the Department of Interior so. There's also the issue that, once again, the Interior "violated the procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in failing to adequately examine the foreseeable impacts of the relaxed gun regulation."
I'm not a huge gun fan, but I understand their utility in many situations. I've known women who have concealed permits because they have stalkers, and I'm glad they have the means of protecting themselves. I know and respect lots of hunters (though I have to admit the bow hunters are higher on my list, using a bow and arrow really evens out that playing field).
So this isn't about gun hate. It's about the fact that these people are so wildly committed to their ideology of wrecking that they'll find any excuse to put it in play. "How could we make the country more dangerous, more paranoid, and more damaged?" "Well, we could allow loaded, concealed weapons to be carried in National Parks." "Brilliant!"