I agree with the last few comments; I wish to articulate as such; patience over rides I wrote back about the inner city trauma nurse who evedently understands nothing about CWP

The attitude of the trauma nurse is understandable since they try to repair the damage done to a human from bullets. But the bullet and the gun is just the tool used b y the human. I really do not care about the bad person killed by gunfire, It doesn’t matter from gang warfare or not. I care about the innocent victim of bad people. I refuse to be that victim and believe in the right of self-defense. The best tool of self-defense for women and the elderly is the gun.

This is totally unrelated to carry in NP. The fact is that I already have the ability to have a handgun or rifle in NP as long as they are stored and ammo store separately.

Those that hate guns and focus all there negative feelings about damages from guns on the guns rather than the bad guy. They will feel that way no matter whether the carry is in the city or the park. Others do not feel that the parks and their neighborhoods require self-defense measures. I hope they are right. But the unfortunate fact is that death comes at inopportune times and places. And that has been by a murderer in parks, schools, and restaurants. The simple fact is that man does murder and wherever man is, the possibility of murder exists.

The isolation of the NP reduces the chances of rescue by another person and thus the victim is required to depend on him or herself for rescue. If that rescue is from a bad man then a gun is a useful tool. If the rescue is from a fall then other tools may be needed. Being lost the tools are whistles and cell phones. These risks exist and we plan for the contingency.

CCW holders plan for the human risk. Many others have no fears of the human risk. That is good. That means that most human interactions are positive rather than bad or malign

"The best tool of self-defense for women and the elderly is the gun."

Columbia, SC • June 9, 2008. A 4-year-old girl shot herself in the chest after grabbing her
grandmother’s handgun while riding in a shopping cart in a Sam’s Club store.

The best tool of self defense for women and the elderly is common sense; and possibly a course in self defense or a can of pepper spray.

If I have the right to conceal carry why should it be different in a park? Because I might shoot an animal?
No... it's all about the parkies. Parkies think it's their park when it actually belongs the people... and they
are our employees. Oh, I could go on and on but that about sums it all up. Friendly rangers have become
cops looking to violate happy tourists. And they do. Egos! Ladders to climb. Names to make. Retire with
the highest GS pay they can get.

It's our park! And I have a right to conceal carry. I'd hope that if I was unstable enough to be a hazard
in a park I wouldn't be permitted to conceal carry in the first place. It's all about parkies.

Can I get an "Amen"?

(I've worked in an Alaska national park, famous for bears, for 20 years. Yeah, you're probably guessing right.)

@cut and dry: The parks are not "ours". They belong to the wildlife. We are just the stewards. Everything people do there must be seen from the wildlife's point of view. And as the prevention of poaching mandates to keep out guns and the absence of guns is useful to prevent mis-perceptions of self defense against "dangerous" animals by guys who don't have experience in dealing with wild animals, the ban on firearms is the right thing to do.

Respectfully, that's your opinion and not mine. I don't poach. I don't even hunt. I don't have any interest in shooting
animals. I have more experience in bear country than the rangers do, in the park I work in. I know better than to
shoot a bear with my handgun but if my head was in the mouth of a sow I don't think a "hey bear, hey bear" would do.
I'm legal to conceal carry. I'm a responsible gun owner. My right to defend myself shouldn't be restricted because
of a few poachers a few thousand miles away. Your logic would also say then that cars should be banned from the
parks because someone might hit a deer. Alaska isn't the lower 48. Alaskans don't need to poach. The guys in Game
Management do a good job and everyone has a full freezer.

"Why do you want a gun then?" I was threatened by a tourist because of something someone else did. It was zero
fault of my own. I'm very passive. I have a right to protect myself. I'm not worried about bears. I know how to
stay safe in bear country. I'm still breathing. It was only one wacko in 20 years, but so what? That's all it takes.

It was the park service that buried a D9 Cat and a couple hundred barrels of fuel in our national park, not the gun owners.
Some stewards! And it wasn't the gun owners that ran natives off their land and claimed it. They'd been there for 4000
years, before the bears were. (considering the end of the last ice age and natural geological changes which changed
the land from a game migration route to a salmon filled river.) That was natural, bear management by the natives.
The bears didn't come until the parkies stole their land some 50 plus years ago. It's a wall-less unnatural zoo now.
I have a hard time respecting the "stewards".
(I'm not positive about the exact type of heavy equipment buried but it was buried.)

Alaska state law requires a firearm to be carried in an airplane as part of the survival equipment. Airplanes are allowed
in the national parks. Considering the vastness of Alaska and its national parks this law would have very little effect on
poaching. Again, freezers are full in Alaska, legally.

Anyway, nothing personal. We disagree and I'm OK with that. You're probably not in Alaska, unless you're a ranger.
Amen? (just kidding)

I've done a bit of reading here and by the looks of things the topic has veered a bit off course...but that's OK. I don't have a lot of time but would like to address a few snippets that I noticed. First, when guns get dropped they don't "go off" and kill people's daughters...I hope that sets your mind at ease. Your daughter is more likely to get hit on the head by a metior than she is from a stray bullet from a dropped gun.
Next, I'd like to comment to the person who worked in a hospital trauma ward. I believe you when you say you've seen people come in looking like cottage cheese from gun play and I'm sure you've got some images etched in your mind that might be hard to live with. I'd like you to consider this. The person that looked like cottage cheese was one of two types of people. He was either a perpetrator or a victim. If he was a perpetrator he apparently got what he had coming. If he was a victim then he may have very well benefited from having a wepon handy.
Humans (and animals) have been killing each other since the stone ages. I'm not saying that it's ok for a civilized society to do so...just saying it's the way it is. Before guns we were killing each other with arrows, rocks, clubs, axes, poison...etc...etc. It's not the weapon that's doing the killing...it's the person. If you want a safe society you should really stop being so near sighted by focusing on the gun and focus more on the people that feel the need to kill.
Two years ago my son was 8, we enrolled him in a state run hunters safety course and he turned out to be the youngest boy in the state to pass both the written and practical shooting test (yes, with real bullets). He's 10 now and is legal to get his own hunting license. He is the proud owner of two rifles and a bb gun. He has been (and continues to be) taught about the safe handling of guns. My 7 year old daughter is next in line.
I gotta run so I guess this is as good a spot to stop...for now.

Capt. Kirk;

You misread what "Whatruafraidof" wrote. He actually says that when the comb kills his daughter it won't discharge.
Could be a malfunctioning comb.

"Whatruafraidof (not verified)
On April 11th, 2009
Your comb won't accidentally discharge when if falls from your pocket and kill my daughter"