National Park Service, being a part of the USDA, might have a need to have their park rangers armed with those things. With all the drug growing in the national parks, and the associated criminal activity in those parks, and the ensuing confrontations & violence in those circumstances, I can believe that they may be justified in allocating those arms to the folks who have a REAL need to have them, in those circumstances. After all, aren't Texas Game Wardens afforded the function of law enforcement? Of course they are! And they do a stellar job! So why not arm the national version of our Game Wardens with the same tools to combat the violence that we see in Texas Parks?(if our Game Wardens don't have them, then they sure NEED them!) I have no problem with that. None at all. That's how I see it. If there is a different agenda there that I don't see.....well, I don't see it. I don't see a greater conspiracy there to limit, or infringe on, or curtail, or Heaven forbid, end the common citizen's ability or right to defend themselves. I firmly believe that will not happen. Nope. Never. And that's what I've garnered out of this conversation. So.....I say give it to them. As the thread has morphed into a fake contact lens debate, just let me say for those who have been blessed with good vision, and have never had to wear contact lenses, poorly made contacts, that you are blessed, but they DO actually present a significant eye health to the wearer. Ever had an eye abrasion because of a bad contact? Very painful! Like Holding your eyelids open, pouring sand in your eye and rubbing the sand into your cornea. It can cause blindness, or long term eye injury from which you would never recover. I know.....I've experience 2 of them. Thank GOD I had very competent ophthalmologists who treated me both times. And this was 50 years ago!
No, no fake contacts, just poorly made contacts. So I support the ban on the fake contacts. Or what ever you want to call them. It's a good ruling, IMO.That's all I have to say and I am unanimous in that decision.
