USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by Army

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton


Topic author
RPB
Banned
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 8697
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:17 pm

USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by Army

#1

Post by RPB »

just in:

House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by Army Corps
By Pete Kasperowicz - 07/14/11 04:25 PM ET

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/h ... army-corps" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Altmire noted that he and Rep. Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio) have proposed a longer term solution to this problem, the Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act. A longer term answer would be needed, as Gosar's amendment would only apply to the next fiscal year, which begins October 1.
Last edited by RPB on Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm no lawyer

"Never show your hole card" "Always have something in reserve"

Topic author
RPB
Banned
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 8697
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#2

Post by RPB »

It'd be arrogant to say Twitter has an effect, but I was tweeting earlier today, and @GOPoversight and others follow me :)
Rep Bob Gibbs H.R. 1865, Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7800" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://therightofthepeople.org/h-r-1865 ... duced.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; #tcot #GOP #Libertarian
#p2

Rep Bob Gibbs @RepBobGibbs @Bob_Gibbs H.R. 1865, Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act
http://gibbs.house.gov/press-release/co ... efense-act" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dear Colleague Letter @RepBobGibbs @Bob_Gibbs H.R. 1865, Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act
http://gibbs.house.gov/sites/gibbs.hous ... %20Act.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
---------
Of course, since I'm followed by @DarrellIssa @ChuckGrassley @jasoninthehouse on at least one of each of their accounts, I suggested they also:
SRSLY defund #ATF let IRS collect Tax on tobacco alcohol firearms instead, save taxpayer money and LIVES #tcot #gop
I'm no lawyer

"Never show your hole card" "Always have something in reserve"
User avatar

Oldgringo
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 11203
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Pineywoods of east Texas

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#3

Post by Oldgringo »

Firearms, ands lots of them, are allowed on many USACE lands...during the various hunting seasons.

Topic author
RPB
Banned
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 8697
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#4

Post by RPB »

Oldgringo wrote:Firearms, ands lots of them, are allowed on many USACE lands...during the various hunting seasons.
yes, but no MPA guns are allowed on USACE parking lots in Georgetown city/county parks, etc etc etc and no HB 25 guns in boats on any of the USACE lakes and no CHL laws honored even a gun in a car by a CHL is illegal in a USACE parking lot when you go fishing at Lake Waco etc....

I actually figured this would be "test case" year for some unknowing poor guns in boats carrier on a usace lake thinking it was legal because Texas said guns in boats are ok when HB 25 goes in effect...
I'm no lawyer

"Never show your hole card" "Always have something in reserve"

RHenriksen
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 2058
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:59 pm
Location: Houston

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#5

Post by RHenriksen »

Great news! Hope Gibbs' bill is next.
I'll quit carrying a gun when they make murder and armed robbery illegal

Houston Technology Consulting
soup-to-nuts IT infrastructure design, deployment, and support for SMBs
User avatar

74novaman
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 3798
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 7:36 am
Location: CenTex

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#6

Post by 74novaman »

Oldgringo wrote:Firearms, ands lots of them, are allowed on many USACE lands...during the various hunting seasons.
Which makes it all the more ridiculous that they do not allow CHL carry there.
TANSTAAFL
User avatar

couzin
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1001
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 7:12 pm
Location: Terrell, Texas

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#7

Post by couzin »

74novaman wrote:Which makes it all the more ridiculous that they do not allow CHL carry there.
Obviously the passage of the law will correct the issue of no weapons (with State sanctioned authority), but one has to understand that it wasn't an arbitrary decision on the Corps part. It has more to do with the current Federal Regulation (36 CFR Part 327) specific only to US Army Corps of Engineers controlled lands as it was originally written in 1971, the Corps interpretation of the specific section on firearms (36 CFR Part 327.13), AND, most importantly, the Corps desire to protect its personnel at the parks/recreation/lakes/wildlife areas. While the National Park Service, US Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife, and all the rest, have armed law enforcement personnel, the Corps has a policy of no law enforcement and are unarmed regulatory enforcement (Rangers) only. There have been many assaults and several Rangers shot over the years. A few years back (2001) they supplied us with OCS and of course the hands on defensive training has became more intense. While the tendency may be to bluster on about personal freedoms and 2A rights - just remember these folks are still out there in some really remote places, not just in the campsite areas, and it is still dangerous out there. The Corps wisdom at the time of the writting of 36CFR327 was to simply treat the Federal land as a no guns (except legal hunting) area - there was never a consideration of the States move toward legal carry of firearms. We (current and former Corps employees/rangers) all know that the bad guys do not give a rip about some regulation and always assumed that any situation had some very bad potentials with it - especial when we come across some meth camp 15 miles from nowhere. Unless the Corps now starts an armed law enforcement program - danged few Corps Rangers will be taking those risks.
“Only at the end do you realize the power of the Dark Side.”

RHenriksen
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 2058
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:59 pm
Location: Houston

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#8

Post by RHenriksen »

couzin wrote:Unless the Corps now starts an armed law enforcement program - danged few Corps Rangers will be taking those risks.
Great to hear from someone on the inside, thanks for sharing your perspective. Hope the ACE personnel get the opportunity/permission to defend themselves as well!
I'll quit carrying a gun when they make murder and armed robbery illegal

Houston Technology Consulting
soup-to-nuts IT infrastructure design, deployment, and support for SMBs

chasfm11
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 4136
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:01 pm
Location: Northern DFW

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#9

Post by chasfm11 »

couzin wrote:
74novaman wrote:Which makes it all the more ridiculous that they do not allow CHL carry there.
Obviously the passage of the law will correct the issue of no weapons (with State sanctioned authority), but one has to understand that it wasn't an arbitrary decision on the Corps part. It has more to do with the current Federal Regulation (36 CFR Part 327) specific only to US Army Corps of Engineers controlled lands as it was originally written in 1971, the Corps interpretation of the specific section on firearms (36 CFR Part 327.13), AND, most importantly, the Corps desire to protect its personnel at the parks/recreation/lakes/wildlife areas. While the National Park Service, US Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife, and all the rest, have armed law enforcement personnel, the Corps has a policy of no law enforcement and are unarmed regulatory enforcement (Rangers) only. There have been many assaults and several Rangers shot over the years. A few years back (2001) they supplied us with OCS and of course the hands on defensive training has became more intense. While the tendency may be to bluster on about personal freedoms and 2A rights - just remember these folks are still out there in some really remote places, not just in the campsite areas, and it is still dangerous out there. The Corps wisdom at the time of the writting of 36CFR327 was to simply treat the Federal land as a no guns (except legal hunting) area - there was never a consideration of the States move toward legal carry of firearms. We (current and former Corps employees/rangers) all know that the bad guys do not give a rip about some regulation and always assumed that any situation had some very bad potentials with it - especial when we come across some meth camp 15 miles from nowhere. Unless the Corps now starts an armed law enforcement program - danged few Corps Rangers will be taking those risks.
Thank you for your insight. As one who is intensely interested in the subject of CC on COE lands, I was reading this article. http://altmire.house.gov/index.php?opti ... &Itemid=48 on another thread closed as a duplicate. If I'm reading correctly, there are actually two bills.

H.R. 1865 – The Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act, - which has not yet passed and

An amendment to H.R. 2354, the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill, In this case, the funding for enforcement was denied by the amendment being passed by the House. I'm assuming that the overall Appropriations bill has passed or will pass.

Can you interpret this for me? I assume that the denied funding means that Rangers cannot be specifically tasked to seek out people with guns on Corp property. My expectation is that any Ranger, in the course of the performance of their other duties, could look for them and take action.

Thanks,

Chas
6/23-8/13/10 -51 days to plastic
Dum Spiro, Spero

Topic author
RPB
Banned
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 8697
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#10

Post by RPB »

HR 2354 is sorta bouncing around at the moment, dealing with budget cuts on other areas, it only affects one Fiscal year;
HR 1865 still needs to pass for a permanent solution http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.2354" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;:
I'm no lawyer

"Never show your hole card" "Always have something in reserve"

KD5NRH
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 3119
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:25 am
Location: Stephenville TX

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#11

Post by KD5NRH »

I'll say it again; the NPS doesn't go to war, and the CoE has no business managing parks.
User avatar

couzin
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1001
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 7:12 pm
Location: Terrell, Texas

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#12

Post by couzin »

chasfm11 wrote:Can you interpret this for me? I assume that the denied funding means that Rangers cannot be specifically tasked to seek out people with guns on Corp property. My expectation is that any Ranger, in the course of the performance of their other duties, could look for them and take action.
Beats me how this would be handled. Sorta like the police being told to catch burglars but ignore robbers. Gotta say this though - while serving as a specialist / ranger - I never went seek(ing)" people that I thought might have a gun. I had some yahoos that kinda worried me and had some threats, but never any major incidents.
“Only at the end do you realize the power of the Dark Side.”

chasfm11
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 4136
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:01 pm
Location: Northern DFW

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#13

Post by chasfm11 »

couzin wrote:
chasfm11 wrote:Can you interpret this for me? I assume that the denied funding means that Rangers cannot be specifically tasked to seek out people with guns on Corp property. My expectation is that any Ranger, in the course of the performance of their other duties, could look for them and take action.
Beats me how this would be handled. Sorta like the police being told to catch burglars but ignore robbers. Gotta say this though - while serving as a specialist / ranger - I never went seek(ing)" people that I thought might have a gun. I had some yahoos that kinda worried me and had some threats, but never any major incidents.
That is exactly what I expected. I believe that "most" COE employees are more interested in a DADT policy than enforcement of gun restrictions. If I'm not out there actively trying to bag animals out of season, I won't expect anyone to bother me.

But the real point is the legality. If I wanted to do things illegally, I would have gone to a pawn shop, picked up a gun and stuffed in the front of my pants, never worrying about taking tests or shooting qualification. I deliberately set out to stay within the legal framework and I'd like to continue that approach on COE property. It looks to me like this whole de-funding approach is simply to start the ball rolling in the right direction and has little to do with what is actually happening on a day to day basis on COE controlled land.
6/23-8/13/10 -51 days to plastic
Dum Spiro, Spero
User avatar

AEA
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5110
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:00 pm
Location: North Texas

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#14

Post by AEA »

:iagree:
Alan - ANYTHING I write is MY OPINION only.
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!

apostate
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2336
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 10:01 am

Re: USACE-House votes to allow firearms on lands managed by

#15

Post by apostate »

couzin wrote:While the tendency may be to bluster on about personal freedoms and 2A rights - just remember these folks are still out there in some really remote places, not just in the campsite areas, and it is still dangerous out there.
That seems like all the more reason to allow us to carry.
Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”