garand_guy
Regular Member
Blog post here, because I'm lazy and don't want to do all the HTML mark-up here.
TL;DR version
For such a minor change in light of the circumstances, it's plausible. If not, another grievance to lay against the BLM. I think there are a lot of pissed off Nevadans who hate the BLM enough to lend their support when they might otherwise be disinterested in gun stuff.
Your thoughts and input before I take it to a wider audience?
Cross posted, FYI
TL;DR version
- Rule is an administrative one
- Bureaucratic processes made the rule and can undo it
- Nat'l Parks and virtually all the other BLM land allows guns
- We can write letters to the BLM and bug our Congressmen to get the rule changed
For such a minor change in light of the circumstances, it's plausible. If not, another grievance to lay against the BLM. I think there are a lot of pissed off Nevadans who hate the BLM enough to lend their support when they might otherwise be disinterested in gun stuff.
Your thoughts and input before I take it to a wider audience?
Cross posted, FYI
Last edited: