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.