Coburn Amendments 1067 and 1068, both of which are currently pending to Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act, would ensure that law-abiding visitors to National Park Service (NPS) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) public lands can possess firearms in accordance with federal, state, and local law.

• Congressional Leadership Have Blocked Consideration of This Measure Repeatedly for Purely Partisan Political Reasons

• Gun Bans On Federal Property Were Enacted By Unelected Bureaucrats Without The Authority Of Congress

• No Other Federal Land Agency Has Enacted Anti-gun Rules Similar To The National Park Service and Fish and Wildlife Service

• This Legislation Will Protect Law-abiding Citizens Without Threatening Natural Resources Or Wildlife


For decades, regulations enacted by unelected bureaucrats at the National Park Service (NPS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) have prohibited law abiding citizens from possessing firearms on some federal lands. The enactment of these rules pre-empted state laws, bypassed the authority of Congress, and trampled on the Constitutional rights of law abiding Americans guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

This legislation enables Congress to belatedly weigh in on this important matter.

This legislation would ensure state gun laws and citizens’ Constitutional rights are honored on federal lands by prohibiting the Department of Interior from creating or enforcing any regulations prohibiting an individual, not otherwise prohibited by law, from possessing a firearm in national parks and wildlife refuges in compliance with and as permitted by state law.

This legislation would prohibit federal bureaucrats, activist judges, and special interest groups from infringing on the right for law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families in national parks and refuges. This legislation does not affect current hunting and poaching rules in national parks and refuges.

While the Department of the Interior (DOI) finalized regulations permitting the possession of firearms in national parks and refuges in accordance with state law over a one-year time period, several anti-gun groups have successfully sued[1] the Department of the Interior to prevent this rule from being implemented for the time being.[2]

An activist judge blocked the final gun-in-parks rule because the Bush Administration did not conduct an environmental impact analysis of the rule change. Such an analysis was not conducted because the rule change neither authorized the discharging of conceal carry weapons, nor the poaching of animals.

DOI decided not to appeal this ruling, and is, instead, conducting a lengthy environmental review before it makes a final determination on the rule change.[3]

Even if this rule, allowing visitors to carry concealed firearms in accordance with state law, is reinstated, future Administrations or activist judges could repeal these regulations without Congressional approval. Unelected bureaucrats and judges should not continue to have the ability to revoke a constitutional right of law-abiding Americans. Passing this legislation will help ensure that such a comprehensive gun ban may never again be enacted by unelected officials.


Congressional Leadership Inappropriately Blocked Consideration of This Measure Repeatedly

Members of Congress have repeatedly attempted to bring up this measure for a clean, fair vote. Unfortunately, Congressional Leadership has gone to extreme lengths to avoid having a straight up-and-down vote on this measure.

On December 19, 2007, Majority Leader Reid entered into the record the following unanimous consent agreement:

“UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT--S. 2483 -- (Senate - December 19, 2007)”

“Mr. REID. ‘Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to Calendar No. 546, S. 2483 , the energy lands bills, at a time to be determined by the majority leader, following consultation with the Republican leader, and that when considered, it be considered under the following limitations: that the only amendments in order be five related amendments to be offered by Senator Coburn; that upon disposition of all amendments, the bill be read a third time, and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill.’

“The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. ‘Without objection, it is so ordered.’”[4]

This agreement permitted five related amendments to an omnibus bill that included dozens of bill that modified national park service lands. The parliamentarian ruled legislation allowing for firearm possession in national parks in accordance with state and federal law was related and in compliance with Senator Reid’s requirement. Instead of honoring this agreement, however, the Majority Leader pulled the entire bill from the floor and reintroduced a nearly identical measure to technically “honor” the unanimous consent agreement without allowing for a vote on related firearm legislation.[5]

Repeated attempts to bring this bill to the new bill were thwarted. Consequently, a version of this bill was included at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee markup along with a package of lands bill. This amendment was adopted as a stand-alone measure by an 18-5 vote[6] with the understanding that this bill would be included with the package of lands bill approved during the same markup. Despite a letter signed by five Senators on the Committee asking the chairman of the committee, “to honor this agreement and the bipartisan will of the Committee by including S. 3499 in the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2008,”[7] this measure was excluded yet again.

When Members of the House of Representatives were close to forcing consideration of the Protecting Americans from Violent Crime Act as an amendment to this year’s Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (almost identical to the 2008 bill), Democratic leadership in the House and Senate coordinated to pull the bill from the floor in the House and add the entire bill in the Senate as a replacement to a previously passed House bill on designating a battlefield as a historic site. While Democratic leadership in the Senate had already managed to block a vote on the Protecting Americans from Violent Crime Act, by enacting this maneuver, the House leadership was also able to block any amendments from being considered in the House.[8]

Last attempts to add firearm legislation to the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 proved unsuccessful.

This amendment seeks to finally ensure a vote and passage of this legislation.

Gun Bans On Federal Property Were Enacted By Unelected Bureaucrats Without The Authority Of Congress

In 1936 the National Park Service (NPS) established regulations banning firearms in national parks. These regulations were updated in 1983 to allow for guns to be transported through national parks if they were unloaded and stored in the trunk of cars.[9]

In 1976 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) established similar regulations for federal refuges. These regulations were last updated in 1981.[10]

Congress has never endorsed or debated these gun bans.

Unfortunately, however, state laws permitting concealed carry of firearms were not recognized on federal land managed by NPS and FWS. Americans on these lands could not possess a loaded firearm in or on a motor vehicle, a boat or vessel except in specific circumstances. Firearms could only be transported in or on a motor vehicle, boat or horse if they were rendered temporarily inoperable, or packed, stored or cased in a manner that prevented their ready use.[11]

The penalties for violating the gun prohibition included a fine of $5,000 and six months in prison.

In addition to criminalizing law abiding citizens for exercising their constitutional rights, these regulations exposed the great threat of bureaucrats overstepping their authority – a threat that still exists.

These regulations and the corresponding penalties were established without any Congressional mandate or legislative approval.

It is troubling that government bureaucrats, single-interest groups, and activist judges could take away the rights of law abiding citizens guaranteed by the federal Constitution on federal property and without the consideration of the federal representatives of the people. The Supreme Court recently ruled that a complete ban on firearms is unconstitutional, yet federal bureaucrats have managed to completely ban firearms for over 70 years on all 83.6 million acres[12] of national park lands and for over 30 years on all 90.79 million acres[13] of FWS lands, except for hunting purposes.

A handful of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats and judges should not possess the ability to overstep the authority of the U.S. Congress, the Supreme Court, or the U.S. Constitution. “There was no legislative process – [NPS and FWS] bureaucrats arbitrarily terminated this Constitutional right.”[14]

No Other Federal Land Agency Has Enacted Anti-gun Rules Similar To The National Park Service and Fish and Wildlife Service

As a spokesman for the Department of the Interior pointed out in a press release,[15] both the Bureau of Land and Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest Service (FS) allow for the law of the state in which the federal property is located to govern firearm possession.

FS and the BLM have not experienced any difficulties as a result of allowing firearm possession.[16]

According to the BLM, “Laws and reg[ulation]s pertaining to concealing and carrying firearms are within [states’] jurisdiction and we only enforce them on public land if we have state authority by way of a local agreement. The BLM has some regulations on the use of firearms that pertain to specific areas, such as recreation sites and other areas that may be closed to shooting (but that does not make it illegal to possess a firearm in those areas).”[17]

If other land preservation agencies never had to enact regulations infringing on the second amendment – including one agency within the Department of the Interior – why did NPS and FWS, which are both within the Department of the Interior?

This Legislation Will Protect Law-abiding Citizens Without Threatening Natural Resources Or Wildlife

According to NPS and FWS, prohibiting citizens to carry legally-owned and registered firearms was necessary to prevent the poaching of animals living on NPS and FWS lands.[18] Anti-gun groups sued the Department of the Interior to repeal the implementation of the finalized rule change, claiming in part that overturning the gun ban will compromise the safety of humans and animals.[19]

The Department of Justice argued against the lawsuit, pointing out that the new rule “does not alter the environmental status quo, and will not have any significant impacts on public health and safety.”[20]

This legislation will likewise not enable or permit illegal hunting of animals on these lands. Other NPS and FWS regulations specifically governing illegal hunting will remain in place, ensuring that poaching will still be illegal.[21]

It will also not authorize the discharging of firearms or target practice in these natural reserves.

Proponents of these extreme gun restrictions have also claimed that the unconstitutional regulations are a necessary law enforcement tool against poaching and other crimes. They reason that if guns are outlawed in parks and refuges, law enforcement can use the possession of a firearm to prosecute would-be poachers.

In addition to the fact that the Second Amendment was not recognized by our founders to give law enforcement officers in national parks and refuges an additional tool to eliminate poaching, the fact that both BLM and FS have not “required” these additional regulations further proves these anti-gun regulations are unnecessary.

As the former Department of the Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne points out, “Since the [proposed federal regulations similarly] maintain existing prohibitions on poaching and target shooting, and carrying weapons in federal buildings, [it] would not cause a detrimental impact on visitor safety and resources.”[22]

This legislation would not void state and local laws that prohibit the possession of fire arms and do not provide state residents with conceal and carry permits. National monuments would still be governed by U.S. law that prohibits the possession of firearms at federal facilities,[23] and visitors to national parks in states with no conceal and carry laws would be required to follow state law.

By passing this bill, the Senate will be voting to increase the safety of families and discourage criminals from taking advantage of vulnerable families on federal lands managed by the Department of the Interior. Congress will also finally ensure that elected representatives, instead of federal bureaucrats, determine Second Amendment policies in this instance.