Why would you bring a gun in a national park?

[mvccd1000]

(Note: this may not be a national park, it may only be state or county. Luckily the gun wasn't smart enough to tell the difference.)

http://www.kpho.com/valleynews/27682440/detail.html">Rabid Bobcat Attacks Dogs At Campground

MESA, Ariz. -- Arizona Game and Fish officials confirmed a bobcat that attacked a couple of dogs at a campground has tested positive for rabies.

The incident happened last Thursday at Seven Springs Campground near Bartlett Lake.

Officials said the campers reported that the bobcat wandered into their campsite, then got into a fight with two of their dogs. One of the campers got in the middle of it to separate the animals and then shot and killed the bobcat.

Two campers were either bitten or scratched in the scuffle, though it’s uncertain whether the injuries were caused by the bobcat or the dogs. They have been advised to get rabies shots.

Don't those campers know that only bad things can happen if they bring a gun into bambi's home? Think of the children! Gun owners are 44x more likely to be shot by their own gun in a national forest. Don't ANY of these warnings get through to these people?!? (Yes, I'm poking some fun at some of the silly warnings against guns in national parks. Obviously, there ARE valid reasons for guns in parks. I'm glad the government has stopped infringing on that right.)

[TheWraith]

1. Don't know if it's a federal park, but according to Google it was built by the CCC.

So the odds are pretty good that Seven Springs Campground is federal land.

Around here, it's black bear, coyotes, and a few cougars. (Technically, cougars or mountain lions are extirpated in New York State. That status hasn't bothered the surviving cougars one bit.)

[Katya Mullethov]

11. I was once accosted by a Cougar in Corpus Christi Texas

But I have long since lost that youthful glow .

[PavePusher]

25. Ah, but did you escape unmolested....

or were you eaten?

[RSillsbee]

28. Possibly the cougar was eaten?

I have eaten cougar before and found it quite tasty

[PavePusher]

33. Ditto...

If prepared right it can be quite tender and succulent...

[krispos42]

43. Ah, so it's a SOCIALIST park

:scared:

[Tunkamerica]

2. one of the few legitimate uses for a gun. how many times have you been attacked by a rabid bobcat?

and how many guns do you have?

[Remmah2]

18. Not just limited to rabid bobcats.

Could be rabid skunks, raccoons, wild dogs, 4 legged cougars, bears, eastern coyotes, pack of coyotes, western coyotes, feral cat, possum, wolves, domestic dogs which have been bitten...



Not to mention humans with ill intent who have no respect for life or liberty.

Snakes are cold blooded and do not contract rabies, however if my dog or kids were to innocently cross the path of one then I would consider it reasonable to have a firearm to use as required in the situation.

I have not run across many rabid trout.

[Ken Burch]

3. You're assuming that you'd be able to tell that the animal was rabid BEFORE it bit you.

or that you'd have the drop on a charging bobcat.

Still, I'd rather not have to explain why the bullet I aimed at a possibly dangerous animal hit a couple of Cub Scouts when I missed.

You can recover from rabies. You may NOT recover from having the deaths of innocent kids on your head.

[Travis_0004]

5. Wow

First off all, I don't care if an bobcat has rabies or not. If its charging me, I'm shooting at it.

Also, The odds of you hitting a pack of cub scouts is slim as can be. I'm 6-2, so any animal I'm aiming at, I'm aiming down, since they are shorter than me. Its easy to see what you are aiming at, and what is beyond your target.

[Tejas]

6. In your scenario, the Cub Scouts get eaten.

At least you're okay and that's what counts.

[Remmah2]

19. I have taken Cub Scouts hiking before.

I fear Cub Scouts more than rabid bobcats.

[cleanhippie]

22. Oh NOEESSSS!!! The CHIIIILDREEEN!!!!!

:rofl:

[Ken Burch]

29. Better than Guns uber Alles.

At least my theory saves lives. Yours just acts macho for the hell of it.

[cleanhippie]

30. Your "theory" is about as valid as creationism.

:rofl:

[Ken Burch]

31. I didn't actually do anything to deserve your derision.

It's not inherently silly just to disagree with you.

And bobcats rarely charge anyway. In most human v. animal situations, the animals stay the hell away from us...mainly because they know WE'RE the crazy ones.

[cleanhippie]

32. No one has derided you at all.

Your post I responded to was an emotional plea about "the children" and your response to me was a display of ignorance of the scientific method.

[Ken Burch]

46. Actually, it was simple logic, not emotional at all.

National parks are places where a lot of people are in close vicinity to each other. From a logical standpoint, the more people in a given area, the greater the probability that some will be unintentionally hit by any bullets or shotgun shells someone happens to fire.
And, since national parks are often frequented by families, children are among those most likely to be hit, especially since they're prone to unpredictable behavior and carelessness.

Also, visibility isn't always the best in such places, given the terrain, which further adds to the risk. And, since the bulk of people visiting national parks will not be assuming they're walking into a potential shooting area, few are likely to be wearing "safety orange".

I'm fine with people hunting in areas specified for that purpose. It's just that there's serious risks involved in bringing guns into national parks. And it's absurd to imply that you HAVE to be able to take them there just to preserve the Second Freaking Amendment. Face it, nobody's ever going to take your guns away.

[petronius]

49. Couple of comments on your analysis: the proximity of people is generally lower in

the park than outside - and since as far as I can tell the new rules on NPs simply brings them into accord with the rules for the state outside the park, your argument is thus actually backward.

Second, 'carrying' and 'shooting' are not synonymous - so nobody would be walking unaware into a "potential shooting area" any more than they are every time they step out the door. Since the risk to a bystander of a stray round from a legal carrier outside the park is essentially nil, there's no reason to think it would be different in the park...

[PavePusher]

58. Wow. Do you think it's just raining bullets in Parks?

Or that they are any more crowded than your average urban area? (And then only at the visitor centers. Have you actually been outside the main parking/picnic areas of any Parks?)

How are the "risks" of guns in Parks any higher than the "risks" outside Parks?

P.S. Generally no hunting in N.P.'s.....

[Katya Mullethov]

61. The risk occurs when they finally ...happen to shoot

Apparently shoot happens .

[rl6214]

50. "they know WE'RE the crazy ones."

Yes you are

[Euromutt]

80. So you just answered your own question

Yes, bobcats, and other predators for that matter, rarely charge humans. So we can reasonably assume that if one does, it's rabid. QED.

(Cougars and black bears generally won't attack you unless they mistake you for food, grizzly bears if they think you're a threat.)

[rl6214]

48. "Guns uber Alles."

Moronic

[Ken Burch]

52. What the hell else would you call this push to have specific rights to carry guns everywhere

when the Second Amendment already covers that?

There was never, for example, any good reason to fight for the right to carry concealed in bars. There's a reason they made people check their shooting irons at the door at those Wild West saloons.

Gun rights are NOT in jeopardy in this country. They never will be. And with the amount of nuclear weapons and other government ordinance, you couldn't win an armed struggle with the Feds anyway so it's pointless to even fantasize about it.

[PavePusher]

59. You seem to know nothing about Civil War...

or guerilla/asymetrical warfare.

And do you really think Federal forces would use nuclear weapons inside the borders of the U.S., against it's own Citizens? Speaking of "fantasy"....

[petronius]

63. But it's not about "specific rights" - it's about removing prohibitions on a right that are not

justified by facts. Your framing is turned upside down here...

[Straw Man]

26. Yeah, I have no problem with being bitten by a non-rabid bobcat.

It's a small price to pay for a safer America. And if it does turn out to be rabid, I'll just get the shots. I'm insured.

The Brady Campaign says, "Take One For the Team." I hear they give plaques for that now.

[Ken Burch]

53. A non-rabid bobcat, in all liklihood, would avoid humans

They don't just leap out and attack you for the hell of it.

[Straw Man]

71. In that case, we'll get along fine.

Just to confirm, then: a person WOULD be able to tell if it's rabid before it bites? Because that's not what you implied here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=407237&mesg_id=407286

So if it attacks, it's probably rabid and should be shot?

[rl6214]

47. Doesn't matter if it's rabid or not

I am not going to let one of my loved ones get mauled by a bear or a cougar.

[Ken Burch]

54. a bear whistle would take care of the problem.

Why does there have to be this fixation with taking guns EVERYWHERE? You've got to stop buying the NRA bullshit. Nobody is going to take the guns from you.

[X_Digger]

56. Yeah, tell that to Kevin Kammer..

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38465680/ns/us_news-life/

Montana wildlife officials identified the man killed in the early Wednesday mauling as Kevin Kammer, 48, of Grand Rapids, Mich. The bear pulled Kammer out his tent at the Soda Butte Campground and dragged him 25 feet to where his body was found, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks spokesman Ron Aasheim said.

[Ken Burch]

57. If the guy was in his tent, he probably didn't see the bear until it was too late

Sad that he's gone, but he might not even have been able to reach the gun.

[gejohnston]

76. black bears yeah

But grizzlies have been known to attack humans. Mostly women on their period or wearing perfume.

[Lasher]

72. Uh, rabies is almost always fatal

if post-exposure prophylaxis is not administered prior to the onset of severe symptoms. This is the reason Old Yeller had to be shot.

[MyrnaLoy]

4. Been to every single

National Park and so many state parks and ya know, I never had to defend myself against man nor beast. Are you suggesting I may need to start protecting my weenies?

[HereSince1628]

7. It's just the personal security argument...ye gotta be protected

from nature when you must be out in nature. The same argument is applied when you are in your home, in your car, walking on the streets of your in town, etc.

This isn't a statement about the national parks, it's about a perceived need.

[RSillsbee]

15. Maybe you should leave the parking lot

then get back to us

[Kolesar]

64. Insult other DUers

some instinct you have

[RSillsbee]

68. Please define the insult? NT

[cleanhippie]

23. You are right, there is not a lot of danger in the Visitors Center.

Unless one is trying to light off a .22 round with a lighter. Or something.

[Warren Stupidity]

8. If you can't tolerate the risk from the wildlife

stay the fuck out of the park.

[slackmaster]

14. Having a gun handy increases my tolerance for some kinds of risk

;-)

Opposable thumbs, strong cognitive skills, and hand-eye coordination. How do they work?

[Atypical Liberal]

16. So would it have been better, then....

If you can't tolerate the risk from the wildlife stay the fuck out of the park.

So for this couple and their dogs who did tolerate the risk, would it have been better if they did not have a gun?

[beevul]

60. If you can't stand the (perceived) risk from concealed and open carriers...

Stay the fuck home.

Goose, gander, and all that.

[YllwFvr]

66. Perhaps its not a fear of wildlife

But simply routine to carry

[jpak]

9. No - and guns should be banned from all national parks

yup

[GKirk]

20. This seems like the right time to ask you...

...where would you allow concealed carry? Or are you totally against it in any form.
I assume you aren't totally against gun ownership since I believe you said you own several.

So where is your line drawn?

[guardian]

27. You won't get an answer.

Some people can never be pleased. I bet you could melt down every firearm on the planet, and some people would still complain that 'evil gun metal' was being reused in the manufacture of cars and appliances. oooooops I forgot we can't have cars or appliances either, because they contribute to global warming.

[GKirk]

40. I think he will

I guess I'll see.

[DissedByBush]

55. The drug runners agree

They want to be the only ones armed as they stash drugs in and run drugs through our national parks.

[Kolesar]

65. that is hardly a consideration in the debate over guns in National Parks

you probably knew that. You just want a snotty rejoinder.

[X_Digger]

67. Been to a CA or AZ national park lately?

Here was one meth lab stashed in a state park next to a national forest-

http://www.azdailysun.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/article_6c97772c-b778-531c-abcc-5cdc18f87dcb.html

Heck, this one's Michigan..

http://www.dailypress.net/page/content.detail/id/529669/Local-drug-problem-reviewed.html?nav=5003

Kurt Morine and Mike Evans, both of the U.S. Forest Service, presented information about illegal marijuana grows and drug labs being set up on federal forest property throughout the country.

In 2010, the U.S. Forest Service seized 3.5 million pounds of marijuana and made 400 arrests nationwide, he said. The year before, 3.6 million pounds of pot were confiscated and 600 arrests made in the U.S., Morine added.

Evans said the U.S. Forest Service does not have the resources - funding and personnel - to address this issue locally. He said the public needs to help by reporting illegal drug operations and grows. Hikers and hunters have often been the ones to come upon such activity, he added.

[PavePusher]

69. O reely?

http://www.nps.gov/orpi/planyourvisit/boarder-concerns.htm

http://www.nps.gov/orpi/planyourvisit/road-closures.htm

http://www.desertinvasion.us/articles/articles_opnm.html

http://www.npca.org/media_center/fact_sheets/security.html

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0110_030113_organpipeclynes.html


But hey, whatevah, right?

[DissedByBush]

74. You probably haven't been reading the news lately

But stashing stuff in forests and other out of the way places isn't new.

Remember the song "Smuggler's Blues" back in the 80s by Don Henley?

The line "They hide it up in Telluride" wasn't just made up.

I had a friend from there at the time who said the locals know not to go in certain areas of the surrounding mountains.

[gejohnston]

77. In western states like Wyoming, game wardens started arming themselves

in the past 30 years mostly because of drug runners.

[TheCowsCameHome]

10. Stay home and watch National Geographic if you're so insecure.

No sense risking life and limb to enjoy nature.

[petronius]

21. Good advice for all those trembling like aspens at the thought of maybe being near a gun

:P

[TheCowsCameHome]

41. Or for those trembling at the thought of going anywhere without a gun.

....which is more likely.

[petronius]

42. Here's a thought problem for you:

If one group decides to exercise a right based on a rational appraisal of costs and benefits (i.e. risk reduction), and another group opposes that right based on so-called common sense, imaginary bogey-men, and emotional responses, which group is best described as 'trembling with fear'?

Since the answer is obvious, I think you may want to consult a dictionary to clear up your erroneous understanding of the phrase "more likely"...

[TheCowsCameHome]

44. I really don't care if you carry or not, actually.

I choose not to live in fear of everything, real or imagined.

When you live in fear, you really aren't living at all.

[petronius]

45. Then we agree - glad to hear it!

:toast:

[Hoyt]

12. Just what we need, a bunch of gun toting Tbaggers cutting loose on bears, big cats, moose, raccoons.

Folks who promote guns in national parks -- or any public park -- should send a donation to Sarah Palin.

[DonP]

13. Yeah, well the law has been in place for about 2 years now

You let us all know as soon as that happens someplace.

You can file that one right beside the "CCW people will shoot up innocent bystanders" and "the police won't know who the bad guy is if they come upon a self defense shooting" urban myths

[PavePusher]

24. That horse become one with the dust quite a while back.

You should put down the stick, you're merely brandishing now....

[rl6214]

51. Yes, that article was all about tbaggers and sara palin

moronic

[Katya Mullethov]

62. I can see 'em now ,

.... bumping around like the players on a vibrating football game reenacting the hunting scene from Bambi with a battery of 105's .

Flechettes right ? You dont have to answer , we already know . And nobody is listening anyway .
It's just like that asshole that can pick the perfect ice cream for -any meal- , I am THE asshole that can pick the perfect projectile for -any hyperbole- .

[PavePusher]

70. Huh, I was thinking hyperbole-piercing rounds....

but maybe they violate the Illogic Convention...?

[RSillsbee]

17. Why would you bring a gun in a national park?

Why not?

[armueller2001]

36. Exactly.

My default state is carrying except where prohibited by law or employer policy. Why should I be disallowed from carrying at a park? What demonstrable, articulable reason is there to restrict that particular liberty?

[ileus]

34. guns kill bobcats...

[spin]

35. Also national parks are not crime free zones ...

source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/02/28/GR2008022800363.html

[friendly_iconoclast]

37. No fair using factual data instead of common sense! n/t

[spin]

39. Actually I'm using factual data instead of emotion ...

it makes commonsense to carry a concealed firearm in a national park if you have a permit. The authorities are often far off and can't respond quickly and cell phone service may be spotty. While the odds aren't all that high, it is possible that you could find yourself facing a dangerous individual who plans to severely injure or kill you. And of course there are dangerous animals in parks such as the rabid bobcat mentioned in the OP.

[gravity556]

38. Not a national park-just a campground

And since the tourists love to come to AZ in the spring and since we're still in a drought, the critters like to come out of the hills and into the suburbs and campgrounds, looking for food and water. Normally not a problem, but in some areas, those wild animals (javelina, coyotes, bobcats) are also used to being fed by the snowbirds who visit all winter. Coyotes who have no fear of people (same for bobcats and javelina)and tourists who think that nature is like a freaking disney movie are a disaster waiting to happen-never mind a rabid animal.

CA is having some issues on some trails as well-a total ban on hunting mountain lions + urban and suburban sprawl has led to some pretty severe mountain lion attacks in the past few years. I would much rather explain to the rangers why I had a gun than bleed to death on some trail, hours from help of any kind.

[oneshooter]

73. Rabid humans. n/t

[provis99]

75. for the same reason you take a machinegun with you to the toilet.

In case a rabid bobcat jumps out from behind the medicine cabinet.

[gejohnston]

78. Why not? I can think of a few good reasons both sides agree on

[Euromutt]

79. Personally, I'm not overly worried about the wildlife

But a few years ago there, there was at least one gang of car break-in artists working over the trailheads in the National Parks in the Puget Sound area. They'd hit a trailhead parking lot and systematically break into and clean out every car. And if anyone had the bad fortune to show up and attempt to intervene, the prowlers weren't above threatening or using some serious violence. In at least one case, they had an armed lookout placed on the trail.

A friend of my wife's narrowly escaped being assaulted and raped in the Olympic National Park a while back, too.

Frankly, if I felt the urge to carry in a National Park, it'd be a firearm configured for use against two-legged predators, not four-legged ones.

[RamboLiberal]

81. Not a national park but this wilderness murder still haunts me

A Georgia hiker who was killed and decapitated in the north Georgia mountains, used her wits and her martial arts training to fight off her attacker for four days, desperately trying to save her life. Details of the last days of Meredith Emerson emerged in an interview with Georgia Bureau of Investigation Director Vernon Keenan by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Gary Michael Hilton confessed to the GBI that he killed and decapitated the 24-year-old University of Georgia graduate on a hiking trial. He gave details of the four days between the time he abducted her on the trail and when he killed her four days later.

http://crime.about.com/b/2008/03/24/meredith-emerson-fought-hard-to-survive.htm



Meredith's dog survived and was found wandering.

The POS Hilton also killed this couple on a trail.


Jack and Irene Bryant

And he killed this woman.

Suspected serial killer Gary Michael Hilton, 64 -- already serving a life sentence in Georgia for killing 24-year-old Meredith Emerson -- was convicted in Florida on Tuesday of also murdering 46-year-old nurse Cheryl Dunlap.

Though a deal was struck in Georgia that allowed Hilton to avoid the death penalty there in exchange for revealing the location of Emerson's body, he now faces the possibility of the death penalty in Florida.The Florida jury also found Hilton guilty of kidnapping and grand theft in conjunction with Dunlap's murder. Sentencing will be handled at a later hearing.

A headless and handless body was found in December 2007 in Apalachicola National Forest northeast of Tallahassee. Bones of what were believed to be the victim's head and hands were located in a burn pit at a campsite five miles away, believed to have been used by Hilton. The body was later identified as Sunday school teacher Cheryl Dunlap who disappeared Dec. 1, 2007. Hilton became a suspect in Dunlap's murder after he was arrested for Emerson's murder.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20110216/tr_ac/7872218_gary_michael_hilton_convicted_of_second_murder

If either Meridith, Cheryl or the Bryants had carried a firearm maybe they would have survived.