Bag searches at the visitors center

John Winn

Major
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Location
State of Jefferson
Not disagreeing, just pointing out it seems silly to have to leave it in car, (technically it's illegal in the parking lot of a federal building, but it's rather safe from unwarranted search) when it's legal everywhere else in the park.

And realistically would say alot of vacationers travel armed, know from talking to other RV'ers alot of them do.
Well, that's just the facts. I think it was a compromise because for a long time firearms were absolutely illegal in national parks (and wilderness areas and in wild and scenic river corridors). With the advent of concealed carry in many states there was a push to make carrying in national parks legal (and consistent with state law). Hopefully the current administration has bigger fish to fry and won't re-examine the current law.

Everyone should try very hard not to become the new test case.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
Well, that's just the facts. I think it was a compromise because for a long time firearms were absolutely illegal in national parks (and wilderness areas and in wild and scenic river corridors). With the advent of concealed carry in many states there was a push to make carrying in national parks legal (and consistent with state law). Hopefully the current administration has bigger fish to fry and won't re-examine the current law.

Everyone should try very hard not to become the new test case.
The wording is it isn't allowed in Federal buildings due to "National Security".....but can't recall cases of armed robbery of a visitors center or a maintenance shed offhand.

But that was rather the point, their wouldn't be accidental test cases, if the law wasn't contradictory to most everywhere else.
 

John Winn

Major
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Location
State of Jefferson
The wording is it isn't allowed in Federal buildings due to "National Security".....but can't recall cases of armed robbery of a visitors center or a maintenance shed offhand.

But that was rather the point, their wouldn't be accidental test cases, if the law wasn't contradictory to most everywhere else.
I'm just saying it is what it is and the current law is a product of a different administration; pressing the issue now might be a poor tactic. I don't think there are any cases like you describe. It was just a preventative sort of thing; one might decide to gun down people in a federal facility so we'd best make carry there illegal (you know, a gun-free zone that prevents such things). Presumably the possibility that someone might gun down people out in the countryside somehow seemed less of a threat (thus my guess the change was a compromise).

Here's a link to a summary of the current law:

https://www.nps.gov/grca/learn/management/upload/Firearms-in-IMRparks2-2010.pdf
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
I'm just saying it is what it is and the current law is a product of a different administration; pressing the issue now might be a poor tactic. I don't think there are any cases like you describe. It was just a preventative sort of thing; one might decide to gun down people in a federal facility so we'd best make carry there illegal (you know, a gun-free zone that prevents such things). Presumably the possibility that someone might gun down people out in the countryside somehow seemed less of a threat (thus my guess the change was a compromise).

Here's a link to a summary of the current law:

https://www.nps.gov/grca/learn/management/upload/Firearms-in-IMRparks2-2010.pdf
Again I don't understand your obsession with test cases or pressing the issue.

My orginal point was having contradictory laws to the 2nd amendment or states right to carry makes accidental cases more likely, not less likely...........
 

John Winn

Major
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Location
State of Jefferson
Actually 2nd amendment and our history of being able to defend ourselves goes back a few administrations........like all of em.........
Of course. But 2nd Amendment law and policy has changed a number of times over the years. I don't want to get zapped here so will just say that under the current administration it's probably not a good time to test the waters. Leave it in the car and hope for the best is the way to go (or go bareback altogether for that day).
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
Of course. But 2nd Amendment law and policy has changed a number of times over the years. I don't want to get zapped here so will just say that under the current administration it's probably not a good time to test the waters. Leave it in the car and hope for the best is the way to go (or go bareback altogether for that day).
Again I don't see where anyone has advocated pushing anything or testing the waters.
 

Georgian183

Private
Joined
Apr 17, 2021
One would hope a large national battlefield park has at least two to three armed park rangers on duty at all times, one of which should be stationed at the visitor's center unless an emergency erupts elsewhere in the park. As a current LEO (which will probably earn me the ire of some due to current societal norms), I carry any and everywhere legally possible while traveling away from home. I don't feel it is too much to ask folks not to carry inside federal buildings, as that has been SOP with federal buildings in general for quite some time now......maybe they just got around to enforcing it at the national parks. My wife and I visited Chickamauga back in April this year, and nothing was in place there at that time, but then again Gettysburg probably sees ten times more traffic.
 

pamc153PA

Major
Forum Host
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Location
Pennsylvania
I don’t usually go into the VC when I’m at Gettysburg, especially in the summer when I can use the restroom down at the RV/bus lot. Although I’m not against bag checks in general, that would be even more of a reason for me not to go in—not because I’m worried about my rights being violated, but because it would slow me down. I’d much rather spend more time on the battlefield.

Frankly, I don‘t carry a weapon, and have never felt the need for it—yes, I’m not stupid, I watch the news, and know that people are especially edgy and weird now, I’m not a pacifist, and I do care about my rights—but it never seemed to me personally to be a Constitutional right I had to personally use or I would lose. And on top of that, I would be the LAST person you’d want carrying a gun, safety-wise, believe me. If the NPS feels this is a good way to protect the visitors coming to the battlefield, fine with me—I just won’t be wasting any time in line getting my bag searched. Beside, my only “weapon” of choice is sarcasm. 🙂
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
One would hope a large national battlefield park has at least two to three armed park rangers on duty at all times, one of which should be stationed at the visitor's center unless an emergency erupts elsewhere in the park. As a current LEO (which will probably earn me the ire of some due to current societal norms), I carry any and everywhere legally possible while traveling away from home. I don't feel it is too much to ask folks not to carry inside federal buildings, as that has been SOP with federal buildings in general for quite some time now......maybe they just got around to enforcing it at the national parks. My wife and I visited Chickamauga back in April this year, and nothing was in place there at that time, but then again Gettysburg probably sees ten times more traffic.
Would think the primary purpose of bag searches is still looking for explosive devices as well. Metal detectors would be for guns.

Most amusement parks and major sporting events I've attended in recent years do bag searches for that reason, but don't question you about guns or pocket knives, nor have detector sweeps.
 
Last edited:

infomanpa

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Feb 18, 2017
Location
Pennsylvania
I don’t usually go into the VC when I’m at Gettysburg, especially in the summer when I can use the restroom down at the RV/bus lot. Although I’m not against bag checks in general, that would be even more of a reason for me not to go in—not because I’m worried about my rights being violated, but because it would slow me down. I’d much rather spend more time on the battlefield.

Frankly, I don‘t carry a weapon, and have never felt the need for it—yes, I’m not stupid, I watch the news, and know that people are especially edgy and weird now, I’m not a pacifist, and I do care about my rights—but it never seemed to me personally to be a Constitutional right I had to personally use or I would lose. And on top of that, I would be the LAST person you’d want carrying a gun, safety-wise, believe me. If the NPS feels this is a good way to protect the visitors coming to the battlefield, fine with me—I just won’t be wasting any time in line getting my bag searched. Beside, my only “weapon” of choice is sarcasm. 🙂
Right. It's a long walk from the far end of the parking lot to the VC in the summer. Thanks for the RV/bus lot tip!
 

snuffy19608

Private
Joined
Feb 26, 2013
Location
Reading. Pa.
I thought detectors were not allowed in NMP:D With everything that's going on its a wonder it not a full body cavity search:cold:

There WAS a long discussion on here awhile back about weather the VC is private property or not. I know the armed guards in navy blue are private, saw my first armed Ranger my first day there, he was in the VC and stopped to talk to the private on his way out.
 

Booklady

Sergeant
Joined
Mar 19, 2017
Location
New England
I don’t usually go into the VC when I’m at Gettysburg, especially in the summer when I can use the restroom down at the RV/bus lot. Although I’m not against bag checks in general, that would be even more of a reason for me not to go in—not because I’m worried about my rights being violated, but because it would slow me down. I’d much rather spend more time on the battlefield.

Frankly, I don‘t carry a weapon, and have never felt the need for it—...Beside, my only “weapon” of choice is sarcasm. 🙂
You are pretty good with a camera, too. :happy:
 
Top