wk, (5/19/2009 8:57:44 AM)

It wasn't three years ago that congress passed sweeping legislation to prevent consumers from bankrupting these credit card debts. Now they are trying to swing the balance the entire other way. It really makes it very clear that congress knows very little about economics but are running our country into the ground.

BettyRubble, (5/19/2009 11:49:22 AM)

Most of these morons in Congress couldn't get a passing grade in a basic economics class. The Lib's intentions are clearly slanted to lessen personal responsibility in our everyday lives & make the citizenry more dependent on govt'.
Unfortunately, they may be setting us up again for future terrorist attacks.
Perfect example: Last week, the Vitter amendment to the credit card bill was introduced that would have mandated that US banks verify the ID of any person who is NOT a citizen or national of the US before they were permitted to open a credit card account. The amendment was defeated by a vote of 28-65. With the help of 10 RINO'S and without a single yes vote coming from the Dems, Bank of Amexico & others got what they wanted regarding facilitating documents similar to those used by many of the 9-11 terrorists that allowed them to fund their activities on US soil.

FromTheHeart, (5/19/2009 12:16:41 PM)

I agree with Echos statement...people should live within their means.

Democrat, Tulsa County (5/19/2009 6:40:36 PM)

Why would Coburn do such a sneaky thing as this. He should have written his bill as a stand-alone measure. That way he could put every member of Congress on record as either supporting the bearing of arms in our national parks or opposing the practice. I thought that this was the kind of back-door, business-as-usual politics that Coburn abhors. I guess even a Doctor can catch "Potomac Fever." So much for our citizen-Senator.

Hijinx, (5/19/2009 6:46:19 PM)

I see we have all the reliable shills for banking interests here bemoaning this legislation just like they do everything else.

Look at credit card bills from 20 years ago. The rate was about 12-15 percent on the cards I had. It was the scandalous cards at 19.8. Moreover, there was no such thing 20 years ago as a default rate or companies raising your rate based on your other relationships with the bank. The grace period was also 30 days, compared to 20 today. The junk fees (late, over-the-limit, forex) were lower. And consumers were NOT paying the same rate. There was a wonderful diversity of card issuers and rates (almost all fixed) available.

Change is coming in February anyway this just stop the loan sharking sooner.

Oh, and Coburn is grandstanding idiot!!

jess, (5/19/2009 7:00:32 PM)

Democrats wouldn't want us to protect ourselves. Remember, when seconds count, the police (or park rangers) are only minutes away. They will show up however, to take pictures of the crime scene and began their investigation. Of course, you will already be dead.

redbeard, Stillwater (5/19/2009 7:31:59 PM)

Target practice at the Grand Canyon anyone?

I'll bet the park rangers are going to LOVE people walking around a park carrying loaded semi-auto weapons.

More grandstanding from the Republicans.......

Democrat, Tulsa County (5/19/2009 7:55:52 PM)

redbeard:

In an earlier story on this topic,(Coburn's gun amendment for parks decried, 5/17) an advocate of public gun-toting named Daniel Day Simpson claimed that park officials always give him their blessing to enter national parks with every member of his party armed. These right-wing liars don't care if their "stories" make no sense. They just say what they feel like saying, regardless of how idiotic they sound. Imagine national park rangers approving of "Joe Citizen" violating the law and at minimum, putting the ranger's job at risk. LOL!

LarryM, (5/19/2009 10:14:24 PM)

Redbeard, Coburn's amendment would allow states to regulate how law abiding citizens can carry firearms in parks within their borders. No one is at any more risk from legally armed law abiding citizens in a National Park than they are from legally armed law abiding citizens at your local Wal-Mart. And, legally armed law abiding citizens are not suddenly going to start blasting away in National Parks anymore than they do at Rib Crib or taco Bell.
Of course, this law would have no effect on armed criminals since they are going to go armed and do what they want to regardless of any law.

Democrat, Tulsa County (5/20/2009 6:13:08 AM)

It is a bad idea to allow state laws to dictate gun policy on federal lands. Going all the way back to the case of McCulloch v. Maryland, the federal government has taken care of its superior position within our union (supremacy clause of the Constitution) by not allowing state laws to have effect over federal jurisdiction.

Michael Phillips, Tulsa (5/20/2009 6:45:07 AM)

"Under the Coburn language, Pierno said, park visitors would be allowed to attend ranger-led hikes and campfire programs while carrying loaded shotguns, rifles and semiautomatic weapons." This is a ridiculous claim. I don't know of a single state that allows Conceal Carry License holders to carry shotguns and rifles.
This proposal was implemented administratively by the Bush administration in early January. It is being held up by a court challenge right now. Before it could have been considered it went through about a years worth of public hearings around the country which were attended by many more pro second amendment advocates than gun control advocates.
LarryM, thank you for your accurate comment. The need for conceal carry is greater in National Parks than at Wal-Mart in my opinion, because there are never any wild animal attacks in Wal-Mart.

ol feller, Small Town (5/20/2009 7:42:01 AM)

• According to the National Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service, in 2006 there were 16 homicides (including one manslaughter charge), 41 rape cases (including two attempted rapes), 92 robberies, 16 kidnappings, and 333 aggravated assaults. These offenses only include homicides and other crimes handled by national park and refuge law enforcement, but don’t account for the homicides and crimes other law enforcement agencies processed. (From Sen. Coburn's website.)

I see no reason that, if you have a carry permit from your state that you cannot carry the weapon for self defense in your states national parks. The horror stories about shootouts on the trails, or poaching of wildlife are from the same people that predicted, shootouts over fender benders and blood in the gutters 6 inches deep, when concealed carry was passed in Oklahoma. These "Experts" have been proven wrong so many times one wonders why anyone listens to them.

Phil # 3, Yukon (5/20/2009 7:48:33 AM)

Jess gets it. So does LarryM and Michael Phillips; few others. Of course the American people have a right to keep and bear arms which would include public lands yet some feel the need to overturn certain parts of the Constitution while keeping other parts intact, enlarging others or creating "rights" that are not even mentioned in the Constitution.
Think about it. The right to keep and bear arms is specifically stated yet abortion on demand is not (there is no specific right to privacy) yet a woman can have an abortion but she can't carry a firearm without permission. Something is very wrong with America.

justiceawaits, Claremore (5/20/2009 8:01:13 AM)

Democrat is right, Coburn should have introduced this as a stand alone bill.This sounds like a stall tactic to me to protect the banks profit margin.

Loophole, (5/20/2009 8:12:08 AM)

I agree people should live within their means. Credit card companies should not issue cards to noncreditworthy people and make up the default losses from bill paying customers. As for the gun amendment, with law enforcement obsolete, people now have to protect themselves, and that means with firearms if necessary.

Angry Citizen!, Bluejacket (5/20/2009 8:27:17 AM)

Oh, so this is why they have a law against guns in parks, because people were going on ranger led hikes with semi-automatic weapons? Politics of fear rides again~! There are actually people who buy into this garbage-

Ayo, T-Town (5/20/2009 8:46:50 AM)

This is not the first time Coburn has used this backdoor tactic. Rip him a new one. I mean shread him. This is BS.

Our NP's are overloaded in the summers and city people sure do some stupid things when they get in nature. The Park Rangers stay busy, and I wouldn't want them to have to contend with some nut with a gun who shoots a bison just because he was too stupid to follow the park guidance of staying back away from the animals.

I doubt anyone on the hiking trail has an assualt rifle, but people are stupid. Let's leave loaded guns out of the hands of park tourists.

Navin Johnson, (5/20/2009 9:04:23 AM)

If it's a National Park it should be a federal law, not a state law.

TheLastWord, (5/20/2009 9:12:28 AM)

Some of you gun nuts are trying to make it sound as if this bill is for concealed carry license holders - it is not, it allows guns within state law, so yes, you CAN carry a shotgun or semiauto rifle without a license.
oh yeah I'm REAL comfortable with the thought of toothless Bubba and his boy walking BEHIND me on a hiking trail with their shotguns.

Angry Citizen!, Bluejacket (5/20/2009 9:17:47 AM)

ThelastWord-

Your unreasonable fear of something that doesn't happen, is not a valid basis for the seizure of my liberty.

Homeplate2, Porum (5/20/2009 9:21:35 AM)

As pro-gun Democrat, finally Coburn does something I agree with.

H_Harl, (5/20/2009 10:21:06 AM)

thelastword...you know lots of "toothless bubbas" do you? what kinda croud do you hang around with?

TheLastWord, (5/20/2009 11:04:23 AM)

To Angry Citizen; your name and avatar prove that my fear is not unreasonable.

To H_harl; I don't know them personally but I see them all the time drooling in the gun section of Walmart. The people I hang with know how to spell.

Samuel-Adams, Bixby (5/20/2009 11:16:52 AM)

The statements about carrying shotguns, rifles and assault rifles are bogus. The bill does not say that anyone can carry these weapons in a national park. It simply says that anyone who has a concealed carry license will be permitted to carry their TOTALLY CONCEALED and LOADED weapon into a national park. The discharge of that weapon would only be in a case of self defense, not just sitting their picking off hikers. You anti-gun people amaze me at the ridiculous statements you make and how you dramatize the situation to scare everyone. If the liberals in this country would let us really punish some of these scumbags we might have a lesser need for getting concealed carry licenses. Let's talk about all the illegal aliens in the California national parks who ARE carrying AK-47's and growing dope on our Federal lands. The media never seems to write about this problem.

TheLastWord, (5/20/2009 11:57:38 AM)

Sam, (and others) where are you getting the 'only concealed carry license' stuff from??

I think your confusing this with the Bush era rule that tried to allow only concealed carry in parks.

From the amendment:
(b) Protecting the Right of Individuals to Bear arms in Units of the National Park System and the National Wildlife Refuge System.--The Secretary of the Interior shall not promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an individual from possessing a firearm including an assembled or functional firearm in any unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System if--

(1) the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing the firearm; and

(2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the law of the State in which the unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System is located

I find the word concealed or license nowhere in the amendment.

Yes, toothless Bubba and his boys may bring the shotguns.