Do you think this Ranger

[MichaelHarris]

or his family is happy about guns being allowed in National Parks? "A gunman in Mount Rainier National Park in Washington state shot and killed a ranger on Sunday" http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/01/us-death-ranger-idUSTRE8000I920120101

[friendly_iconoclast]

1. No way to determine if the gun was possessed legally or not from the link....

...thus no way to determine if your question is germane.
I await followups.

[Angry Dragon]

2. This ranger was a 34 year old woman

Married, 2 children, 2 and 4

[petronius]

4. I doubt if it matters to the OP. Tragic deaths are apparently just pawns in his regular

game of drive-by snark - I'm sure he didn't bother to read the article, and I'll be surprised if he returns to this thread. Some people are just so offended by the mere existence of the Guns group (not to mention the presence of pro-RKBA DUers) that they lose all sense of propriety...

[Tejas]

12. Hey, trolls gotta eat too.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

3. National parks are rather varied.

Some, like the park mentioned, contain certain dangers.

[DissedByBush]

5. I just looked up Google news archives

From 2000 to before Obama got into office, before he signed legislation allowing for legal carry in parks.

Lots of stories about park rangers being shot.

How did those guns get there if they were being illegally carried?

[ObamaFTW2012]

6. I am sure that HER family isn't happy

about her being shot by a criminal. We have yet to see if the weapon was legally brought into the park or not.

Don't let facts (or the lack thereof) get in the way of your huge assumptions and twisted logic. After all, tragic deaths-by-firearm must always serve YOUR agenda first.

[PavePusher]

7. I'd say the fact that there are criminals loose in our national parks....

Last edited Sun Jan 1, 2012, 10:40 PM - Edit history (1)

provides all the reason I need to be able to make my own choices about my personal security while in them.

Apparently, the Rangers will not be able to provide security.

My condolences to the Rangers family and I hope they catch this scumbag quickly and with no additional loss of innocent lives.

[rl6214]

8. My 17yo son just got done reloading 100 rounds of .40 cal

now he's working on some 9mm.

Wanted to do some .45 but don't have any bullets, guess I'll have to hit the gun store tomorrow.

[krispos42]

9. The law Obama signed pertained to concealed-carry, that is, handguns

And made federal parks rules on concealed-carry consistent with the state that the part was in.


The ranger was killed with a rifle, so equating this with the law signed a couple of years ago is about as honest as equating legalizing same-sex marriage with legalizing man-on-donkey marriage.

[rrneck]

10. I doubt they'd be happy

you are using this tragedy as an excuse to wallow in your own umbrage.

[slackmaster]

11. If equating lawful carry with criminal misuse of a firearm is all you people can come up with...

...you'll never make any headway with sensible people.

[aikoaiko]

13. Why don't you ask the family when you ask them permission to exploit her death.

The killer was evading police in connection with a shooting away from the park and had nothing to do with allowing firearms in National Parks.

[guitar man]

14. Do you think

...that a murderer would have given a shit whether it was legal or not to take a gun into the park?

[BiggJawn]

15. They found the scumbag

Looks like he may have died of exposure last night out in the woods.

[krispos42]

17. Now he's a scumcicle

Unfortunately, this is part of the legacy the pro-war side had left us. Battle-hardened veterans under enormous, sustained combat stress, without proper mental-health care.


Far too many deployments, far to much stress. Far more than in WW2, say.

"Occupation" duty, while not the straight-up combat associated with previous wars, was nonetheless just as stressful and trying. Foreign land ,foreign language, foreign culture, foreign religion, every person on the street a threat, every stalled car or pile of trash a booby trap, too damn hot, too damn dusty, and making shit pay while some private contractor worked his way into the top 1% DOING THE EXACT SAME THING the soldier was doing, only with less accountability and more immunity.

[oneshooter]

18. During WW2 many of our forces did not come home for 3-4 years.

In Europe leave was taken in England or western France, areas already taken from the Germans.
In the Pacific Australia, New Zealand, and captured areas were used a R&R areas. The ones who went home the most were sailors whose ships were due repair.
When you joined and/or were drafted it was for the duration of hostilities+6 months.

Oneshooter

[krispos42]

19. Yeah, but there was a lot of R&R time

You were "behind the lines".


In the case of Europe, we didn't even get boots on the ground until Sicily in 1943, a year and a half or more after we joined the war. And from D-Day to Germany's surrender was less than a year.

Lots of troops spent a couple of years waiting stateside or in England before seeing combat, too. We had to build up our troops and logistics for the invasion, while defending England and doing a strategic bombing campaign on German centers of industry.

And the French and British were friendly and thankful and not as far different from us as Iraqis. It's not like our troops leave friendly welcoming Saudi Arabia, go on the combat line for a month or two, then go back to Saudi Arabia to decompress and mingle in a friendly area.


Some of the units have been to Iraq 6 or seven times, and I believe each deployment is 6 months. That's a lot more combat-duty time than most places in WW2.

[X_Digger]

16. This is almost as good as your (black) 'white supremacist'.

Almost.