A Case for Carry in National Parks

OK this title is misleading. I really should have titled it a case of why you should use our new law to carry a firearm in national parks. A man hiking in Olympic National Park was killed by a mountain goat recently:

Mr Boardman tried to shoo the animal away but it instead attacked him. After goring the hiker the goat stood over him, and had to be pelted with rocks by a ranger before finally moving away.

We have to remember humans are frail being compare to most wild animals; in a fair fight we rarely win. When hiking in the mountains, trudging through the jungle, or walking through the woods we are at the mercy of the animals who live there. As a race our dominating feature has never been our brute strength but our ability to construct and utilize tools. Although anti-gunners will try to convince you otherwise, a gun is a tool and it would have been the best object to have in this situation.

If you are able to legally carry a gun while out and about you should. Even in a nice neighborhood where you are 100% there is never ever crime (we in the gun community call this ignorance) a gun will give you means to protect yourself against four legged predators as much as two legged ones. You never know when a violence dog will make it’s way into your fine gated community.

And for those critics who claim there is absolutely no reason to carry a gun in national parks I urge you to read this linked article and tell me that after.

2 thoughts on “A Case for Carry in National Parks”

  1. Shouldn’t that ranger have shot the attacking goat immediately instead of pelting it with rocks? And after reading the article, it would seem the management was well aware that the animal was acting aggressively and instead of dealing with the problem, had toughened it up to the point that no regular (unarmed) person could be safe from this animal. I am also curious as to just what behavior makes it “known to be aggressive” yet short of “[reports of]incidents that would warrant killing it.” It sounds like a man is now dead because they refused to act decisively. Was it doing aggressive stuff that was cute, but not quite dangerous? And back to the original reason of the post, even if an armed citizen had been present and had killed or wounded the goat, imagine how badly the msm would have gored the shooter.

    1. Rangers are usually pretty apprehensive about killing an animal in a national park. By aggressive behavior I’m guessing it’s taunted people but hasn’t attacked them so far.

      As for the media goring the guy if he had shot the goat… I’d rather be gored by the media than a mountain goat. At least goring by the media heals in one week when everybody forgets about the story and continues watching American Idol again.

Comments are closed.