A group of Republican lawmakers is pressing the Army to loosen longstanding restrictions on firearms at recreation sites run by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, arguing the policy is out of step with other federal land agencies.
Led by Rep. Pat Fallon (R-Texas), the lawmakers on April 17 sent an open letter to Army Secretary Daniel P. Driscoll urging the service to finalize a rule that would allow individuals to carry firearms for self-defense on Corps of Engineers-managed lands.
According to the Corps’ website, the agency manages more than 400 lake and river projects across 43 states, as well as nearly 42,000 miles of shoreline, 7,825 miles of trails and almost 95,000 campsites. Collectively, these locations receive some 260 million visitors annually.
Fallon described the Corps as an “outdated exception,” noting that agencies like the National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management already permit firearms under certain conditions. As long as visitors comply with local and state gun laws, individuals are permitted to carry firearms for non-recreational purposes.
“Public lands form a complicated patchwork of jurisdictions with invisible boundaries that Americans cross every day,” Fallon said in a statement. Fallon called the Corps’ current policies on guns “arbitrary federal restrictions.”
The guns-in-parks provision in the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure (CARD) Act of 2009, a measure intended to protect consumers from unfair practices by credit card companies, went into effect in February 2010.
The provision overturned longstanding prohibitions on guns in national parks, but excluded parks governed by the Corps of Engineers.
Since then, gun rights advocates and lawmakers have been trying to extend gun rights on national lands — most recently, into National Park gift shops and visitor centers — and expand them to Corps of Engineers recreational sites through legislation, lawsuits and rule changes.
In the last year of the first Trump Administration, the Corps proposed reversing its rule prohibiting private individuals from carrying firearms for self-defense purposes, but failed to implement the rule before the end of presidential term.
The Biden Administration then imposed a regulatory freeze and ultimately shifted priorities.
While supporters of the rule change argue that “Americans shouldn’t have to navigate conflicting rules” to exercise their gun rights, opponents say allowing guns “in densely populated recreational areas and near critical infrastructure” would “pose significant risks to public safety.”
