Grijalva is right – let the merit of the two issues rise or fall of their own accord

This past week, an amendment to allow guns in national parks and wildlife refuges was attached to the Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights in the U.S. Senate.

Congressman Raúl M. Grijalva, Chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands objects :

Credit card reform should not come through the barrel of a gun  – Grijalva News Release 5/15/09 :

“When it comes to credit cards, doing the right thing and playing by the rules just doesn’t work because the companies are engaging in unfair and deceptive practices.

“And this past week, members of the Senate did the same thing, adding an unrelated and dangerous amendment to the credit card reform bill, without any real debate.

“There is no reason to be tacking on irrelevant provisions to “must-pass” bills. Knowing that the President has said he wants the measure by Memorial Day, it’s a cheap way to sneak in provisions that should be fully and openly debated on their own merits.

Tagged with:
 
avatar
About The Author

Brian Ertz

11 Responses to Grijalva blasts the attachment of unrelated legislation allowing guns in national parks onto Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights legislation

  1. avatar Ron Kearns says:

    I agree; the measures must be separated. As a former USFWS LEO, I am not necessarily against the gun measure, and although some of the provisions need revision, I do not consider it “dangerous.” Although I am a Republican, I vote for Mr. Grijalva and he is a good congressional representative.

  2. avatar Virginia says:

    Anyone who visits national parks on a regular basis knows that allowing loaded guns in the parks is a ridiculous idea and all of the “democratic” senators who back this attachment to a credit cardholders bill of rights need to explain how the two are related. WTF? I will be contacting Grijalva to thank him for his rational thinking and the other knotheads for their irrational thinking.

  3. avatar mikarooni says:

    Grijalva should be occupying Salazar’s office. In the case, of Yellowstone as an example, there can be only one remotely conceivable reason to carry a firearm into The Park and that’s to be able to shoot at people urinating into the geysers.

  4. Democrats have learned that they lose when they favor gun control.

    Republicans have learned this is about the only thing they can win on at the present time. So, we are going to see more and more of this, I’m afraid. Senator Coburn will probably ofter an amendment that patients can carry their guns into surgery when the health reform plan comes up. 😉

  5. avatar paulWTAMU says:

    While I support each measure, I fail to see how they’re related…I wonder if we could ever pass a law/Cons’t amendment banning this sort of thing? Lumping unrelated laws together pisses me off.

  6. avatar ProWolf in WY says:

    I think it is amazing how people are so paranoid that Obama will take away their guns and think they have a duty to carry them everywhere. Like there aren’t other things the president has to worry about.

  7. avatar Ron Kearns says:

    Virginia, ProWolf et al.

    Daily, we citizens observe the corruption with which government public ‘servants’ and congresspersons are capable. Furthermore, I know from direct personal experience the corruptness of some people within the USFWS, including law enforcement officers who have the power to deprive other citizens of their life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, sometimes without due process. Ultimately, the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is *one* of several potential great equalizers against tyrannical State and/or Federal governments.

    I will write more on this topic later, although please never assume that people who support—or do not oppose—the right to carry within NPs and NWRs as paranoid of Mr. Obama’s potential ‘gun grab’ or that their ideas are ridiculous. Realize too, that Mr. Obama has already broken several pledges, the most egregious to date involves his violation/reversal regarding FOIA requests (Jan. 2009) that many who read this blog know are critical instruments to ensure open, accountable government.

    Therefore, governmental autonomy without public participation and process is an aspect against which we must be ever vigilant, whether emanating from the executive, legislative, or judicial branches of State or Federal governments.

    Perhaps others here might review the proposed law and posit their specific concerns for further discussion.

  8. avatar Craig says:

    ProWolf in WY Says:
    May 16, 2009 at 2:48 PM
    I think it is amazing how people are so paranoid that Obama will take away their guns and think they have a duty to carry them everywhere. Like there aren’t other things the president has to worry about.

    Well maybe if you read any of the things they are trying to pass you would be surprised! You would think they would learn! When you try to take away the rights of law obiding citizens to own or carry guns you are going down the wrong path!!!!!!

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:

  9. avatar Craig says:

    I’ve carried a gun into Yellowstone for over 25 years and never had a problem! Broke down, unassembled, not loaded but accessible. What’s the big deal?

  10. avatar ProWolf in WY says:

    Craig, it is legal to carry a gun that way in Yellowstone. The sign in the north entrance says something like assembled and/or loaded firearms prohibited.

  11. avatar ProWolf in WY says:

    OK Craig, the paranoid comment might be a bit off, but I will still make the argument that it is not one’s duty as an American to have a gun and to carry it with them in all places. However, unless someone is making the slippery slope argument I don’t see why it is necessary to carry guns in national parks. I think you are asking for poaching when that happens.

Calendar

Quote

‎"At some point we must draw a line across the ground of our home and our being, drive a spear into the land and say to the bulldozers, earthmovers, government and corporations, “thus far and no further.” If we do not, we shall later feel, instead of pride, the regret of Thoreau, that good but overly-bookish man, who wrote, near the end of his life, “If I repent of anything it is likely to be my good behaviour."

~ Edward Abbey

%d bloggers like this: