GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-07-2007, 20:01   #1
Ridgeway
Senior Member
 
Ridgeway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: KY
Posts: 1,046
Send a message via AIM to Ridgeway
natchez trace parkway...legal to carry?

Spent the last couple days in Jackson apartment hunting.
As most of the nicer complex's are in the Ridgeland area it necessitates traversing Natchez Trace Parkway.
I glean that this is a national park, creating a ccdw quandry for me.
The signs to it from the expressway are brown to signify that it's a park. I know carrying in the park itself would be prohibited, but if carrying on the road itself is a no no, how can one get home? Must I disarm and break down the firearm each time I approach the parkway, or can I travel the roadway (again to/from my apartment)?

ty
Ridgeway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 08:12   #2
Cliff Cargill
Senior Member
 
Cliff Cargill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 318
Nope, it's a felony. Separate the gun from the ammo. I had to drive through there on my way to an out of town match about ten years ago. I took my guns apart and put them in a plastic bag just to be sure.

Hope this helps.
__________________
Cliff Cargill-Mississippi Glocker #112
NRA Firearms Instructor (1992) (Rifle, Pistol, Shotgun, Home Safety, Personal Protection) www.nrams.com
NRA Life (1991)
USPSA Life (L-1610) ICORE Life (LMS1972)
Cliff Cargill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 08:18   #3
OXCOPS
Senior Member
 
OXCOPS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: AZ
Posts: 44,106
The Trace is not a state roadway, but instead a federal park. Federal park rules apply.
OXCOPS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 08:30   #4
NoloContendere
OAF Lawyer
 
NoloContendere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,044
I will put an email in to Senator Ross to see if it matters that you are carrying in your car and not on your 'person.'

It should matter that the gun is in your car, but, i'll try to find out.
NoloContendere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 09:07   #5
OXCOPS
Senior Member
 
OXCOPS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: AZ
Posts: 44,106
Quote:
Originally posted by NoloContendere
I will put an email in to Senator Ross to see if it matters that you are carrying in your car and not on your 'person.'

It should matter that the gun is in your car, but, i'll try to find out.
Not according to the NPS LE ranger on the Trace I talked to.
OXCOPS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 10:30   #6
Ridgeway
Senior Member
 
Ridgeway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: KY
Posts: 1,046
Send a message via AIM to Ridgeway
hmm, bummer that will be a hassle


ty for the info
Ridgeway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 11:20   #7
NoloContendere
OAF Lawyer
 
NoloContendere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,044
Quote:
Originally posted by OXCOPS
Not according to the NPS LE ranger on the Trace I talked to.
yeah, i hear ya... just wondering what the intent of the legislature was. and if it is like we think, then perhaps we can get it changed.
NoloContendere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 12:11   #8
OXCOPS
Senior Member
 
OXCOPS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: AZ
Posts: 44,106
Quote:
Originally posted by NoloContendere
yeah, i hear ya... just wondering what the intent of the legislature was. and if it is like we think, then perhaps we can get it changed.
Can the state legislature do anything about a federal park? I am sure they could formally ask the NPS, but I doubt that would get anywhere.
OXCOPS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 13:26   #9
NoloContendere
OAF Lawyer
 
NoloContendere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,044
Quote:
Originally posted by OXCOPS
Can the state legislature do anything about a federal park? I am sure they could formally ask the NPS, but I doubt that would get anywhere.
well, since the 2A only covers the fed. govt., perhaps we can challenge it on that. Lemme see what I can uncover.
NoloContendere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 14:00   #10
sweetatergal
Senior Member
 
sweetatergal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: In the South
Posts: 9,259
From my understanding you can't even carry in the vehicle unless gun is unloaded and ammo is seperate "area" of vehicle. Hubby was down in Jackson Alligator hunting last September and 2 of his buddies were in a seperate vehicle, pulling the boat, when he got stopped on the Natchez Parkway. When MHP saw the gun in the glove box (he opened it looking for his registration) she wigged out on them, went around to the passenger side of the vehicle, grabbed the gun, unloaded it, threw gun back in glove box and threw ammo in back of truck. Then let them go.

Does that help any?
__________________
Never underestimate the power of a Southern Belle Temper Tantrum
sweetatergal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 14:15   #11
Ridgeway
Senior Member
 
Ridgeway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: KY
Posts: 1,046
Send a message via AIM to Ridgeway
Quote:
Originally posted by sweetatergal


Does that help any?
Seems like it not only effects ccdw then but also just going to & from the range.
Perhaps it's worth it to drive down a few more miles to grab another on ramp to I55.

Somehow I doubt they will want to change the regulation, even though that section of the parkway is in the middle of a high pop. density area.
Ridgeway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 15:10   #12
OXCOPS
Senior Member
 
OXCOPS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: AZ
Posts: 44,106
Quote:
Originally posted by sweetatergal
From my understanding you can't even carry in the vehicle unless gun is unloaded and ammo is seperate "area" of vehicle. Hubby was down in Jackson Alligator hunting last September and 2 of his buddies were in a seperate vehicle, pulling the boat, when he got stopped on the Natchez Parkway. When MHP saw the gun in the glove box (he opened it looking for his registration) she wigged out on them, went around to the passenger side of the vehicle, grabbed the gun, unloaded it, threw gun back in glove box and threw ammo in back of truck. Then let them go.

Does that help any?

MHP doesn't run the Trace. Was it an NPS ranger instead?
OXCOPS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 15:39   #13
sweetatergal
Senior Member
 
sweetatergal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: In the South
Posts: 9,259
Quote:
Originally posted by OXCOPS
MHP doesn't run the Trace. Was it an NPS ranger instead?
It very well could have been and the guys just thought it was MHP. They originally got stopped for going too slow.
__________________
Never underestimate the power of a Southern Belle Temper Tantrum
sweetatergal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 19:27   #14
PARAGON
.
 
PARAGON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Jackson, MS USA
Posts: 257


Quote:
Originally posted by NoloContendere
well, since the 2A only covers the fed. govt., perhaps we can challenge it on that. Lemme see what I can uncover.
Personally, I think there are multiple angles to challenge it. First, it's intent was for hunting purposes: read the title
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/w...36cfr2_02.html

Secondly, it denies access to the 2nd amendment rights of US citizens, and, thirdly, it also conflicts with the castle doctrine that allows state citizens to defend themselves within their vehicles and the premise that their vehicles is an extension of the homes.

At the very minimum, a provision to allow persons with concealed carry permits to exercise this right could be had. Even an off-duty LEO not carrying out his lawful duties, riding on the Trace would be in violation of this provision.

Again, it's apparent is was placed to limit hunting situations, not personal protection. Something should be changed.
PARAGON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 20:10   #15
OXCOPS
Senior Member
 
OXCOPS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: AZ
Posts: 44,106
Quote:
Originally posted by PARAGON
Personally, I think there are multiple angles to challenge it. First, it's intent was for hunting purposes: read the title
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/w...36cfr2_02.html

Secondly, it denies access to the 2nd amendment rights of US citizens, and, thirdly, it also conflicts with the castle doctrine that allows state citizens to defend themselves within their vehicles and the premise that their vehicles is an extension of the homes.

At the very minimum, a provision to allow persons with concealed carry permits to exercise this right could be had. Even an off-duty LEO not carrying out his lawful duties, riding on the Trace would be in violation of this provision.

Again, it's apparent is was placed to limit hunting situations, not personal protection. Something should be changed.

Would the policy of a federal agency (NPS) trump the state laws permitting carry in your vehicle? I don't believe the Trace would be considered a traditional federal highway (i.e. Interstate system), but rather a road that goes through a national park.
OXCOPS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 23:05   #16
NoloContendere
OAF Lawyer
 
NoloContendere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,044
Ox,

Yes, the federal law would trump state law in this area. That's why when CA gives away a medical marijuana card, it's still a federal offense and they can prosecute it federally.

I will email Ross and see if he can give us some more advice, and perhaps, we can email Lott and Cochran and maybe get the ball rolling on a change.
NoloContendere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2007, 07:27   #17
PARAGON
.
 
PARAGON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Jackson, MS USA
Posts: 257


Quote:
Originally posted by OXCOPS
Would the policy of a federal agency (NPS) trump the state laws permitting carry in your vehicle? I don't believe the Trace would be considered a traditional federal highway (i.e. Interstate system), but rather a road that goes through a national park.
Yeah, exactly.

That's why one would have to lobby to have changes made to the provisions based upon rights of the state's citizens like I mentioned above.

In the case of the Trace, it's used as a travel route and it's illogical to assume that I would stop at Highway 43, remove my sidearm, unload it and place it in the vehicle in such a way to adhere to the NPS provision that was set out for hunting violators. Then travel a few miles and get back off at Old Canton Rd., stop and load my weapon and holster it once again.
PARAGON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2007, 17:20   #18
OXCOPS
Senior Member
 
OXCOPS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: AZ
Posts: 44,106
Well, the ranger I talked with said what most LEOs in this area say. "Out of sight, out of mind. If it's out of sight, I don't mind." Most will not give you any trouble over it, unless there is another reason for them to look closer.

However, that is a courtesy. Just because they chose to let you off the hook on it, doesn't mean the next guy will.
OXCOPS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2007, 17:21   #19
OXCOPS
Senior Member
 
OXCOPS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: AZ
Posts: 44,106
Oh, and....





"Damn The Man!"


OXCOPS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:33.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 944
214 Members
730 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42