Gordo, Get Your Gun
Why visitors to our nation’s parks might be packing heat with their granola.
October 1st, 2008
Letters to the Editor • Inbox0 comments
October 1st, 2008
The Weekly Fix • Our Spin On 7 Days of News 1 comment
October 1st, 2008
The Money Side of the Street | Some Oregon lawmakers took big bucks from Wall Street in flush times.3 comments
October 1st, 2008
Political News That’s Always Credit-Worthy | Meet the Oregonians who now back McCain after supporting Clinton.13 comments
October 1st, 2008
Trucked-Up Politics | Merkley and Obama say NAFTA is killing U.S. manufacturing. WW goes to Mexico to see what it’s doing there. 5 comments
October 1st, 2008
Obsession | Who’s obsessed with whom? 2 comments
October 1st, 2008
Rogue of the Week • You Can’t Spell “Obsession” Without The O. | A new way to spark reader interest: Distribute a DVD that PO’s subscribers.13 comments
October 1st, 2008
Murmurs • The Whatever-Happened-To Edition1 comment
October 1st, 2008
Browse the Beaver State | Web encyclopedia aims to be the go-to site for all things Oregon. 1 comment
October 1st, 2008
Cover Story • Jail Junkies | Who knows more about stopping property crime: Kevin Mannix or an ex-addict who stole 1,000 cars?14 comments
![]() Bam-Bi: Sen. Gordon Smith supports packing heat in national parks. |
[February 20th, 2008]
You can’t shoot wildlife in U.S. National Parks. And you can’t shoot your companions—no matter how often they sing that same Celine Dion song on the hiking trail.
Yet U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) is one of 47 United States senators who think you should be able to carry a loaded firearm while gazing patriotically at Crater Lake or Old Faithful. Imagine it: “Don’t blow, or I’ll shoot!”
According to a Dec. 14, 2007, letter to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne from 39 Republicans and eight Democrats, a movement is again afoot to repeal a ban on firearms on all lands belonging to the National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
In liberal Portland and the Willamette Valley, Smith’s endorsement of the ban’s repeal is making him an easy target for most of his wanna-be challengers in the 2008 election, including Independent John Frohnmayer and two Democrats running in the May primary: activist Steve Novick and Eugene real-estate broker Candy Neville.
“This isn’t the Wild West, this is the 21st century,” Neville says. “We need responsible gun control.”
A third Democratic candidate, House Speaker Jeff Merkley, isn’t so ready to take aim at the letter.
Current regulations, which date back to the Reagan administration, do allow unloaded and inaccessible guns to be carried across these public lands. That means someone driving through Yellowstone National Park wouldn’t have to toss her gun out the window before crossing the park, so long as she had the necessary permits and was following all other gun-control laws. (Even then, it wouldn’t be a good idea to litter.)
Smith thinks the rules should be even more permissive.
“These regulations infringe on the rights of law-abiding gun owners, who wish to transport and carry firearms on or across these lands,” reads the five-paragraph letter he co-signed. “Such regulatory changes would respect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners, while providing a consistent application of state weapons laws across all land ownership boundaries.”
As of Feb. 15, the Interior Department had not responded to the letter, according to a Smith spokesman.
Three candidates hoping to unseat Smith call bullshit on the proposed lifting of the ban anyway. At the same time, each knows that beyond the borders of the left-tilting Willamette Valley they must appeal to some voters who get both ballots and National Rifle Association membership cards mailed to their homes.
“I oppose it for two reasons,” says Frohnmayer, a former National Endowment for the Arts chairman who supports the Second Amendment, but calls the proposed change a “distraction.” “First, there isn’t any evidence that the present regulations are not working. The second is that the reason for not having firearms in the parks is for the protection of wildlife.”
Novick called the proposal “extreme” and “just plain silly,” even though he says he’s not an anti-gun candidate.“This is not some liberal regulation that has recently been put in place,” Novick says. “I don’t think the gun owners of Oregon are clamoring to charge into Crater Lake National Park with guns at the ready.”
Merkley spokesman Matt Canter points out an exception exists that allows hunting on some federal fish and wildlife land in Oregon,.Canter also points to Democratic support for the proposal from the likes of Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), who endorsed Merkely.
Merkley “would have to discuss the issue further with these Democrats before he would move to make weapons more accessible,” Canter says.
RECENT COMMENTS ON “Gordo, Get Your Gun”
So, the one idiot running for office states that "the reason for not having firearms in the parks is for the protection of wildlife."
Guess no one finds it odd that she is...
Many law-abiding citizens carry firearms with them in their vehicles. It is legal in most places if they follow the "rules". Many of these folks camp on isolated forest roads where there is ...
If you're worried about wildlife, just change the restriction to apply only to guns that have legitimate sporting purpose -- but let us carry loaded those weapons that were designed with no legitimate...
The comment above about crime, especially the dope growers and nut jobs, is right on the money. Some of our national parks and monuments, especially along the southern border, are so full of drug smu...









