To the moon, Alice! To the moon!

kramden_powWASHINGTON—Ralph Kramden must have been a Democrat. For years he wanted wife Alice to beat Neil Armstrong to the moon. Or words to that effect. Now Democrat Representative Donna Edwards wants to commemorate one of the events.

If Representative Edwards from Maryland and Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas has her way, Ralph would have been able to take his wife there for their honeymoon (Pun intended, though poor). Edwards has submitted H.R. 2617, “To establish the Apollo Lunar Landing Sites National Historical Park on the Moon, and for other purposes.”

The act would establish a park on the moon protecting the artifacts from the various Apollo missions at the various landing sites. This is, of course, as constitutional as the parks systems within the United States.

The bill would allow the Secretary of the Interior to enter into an agreement with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to create the proposed park. The secretary will also be able to enter into an agreement with “a Federal agency to provide public access to, and management, interpretation, and historic preservation of, historically significant Apollo lunar landing site resources under the jurisdiction or control of the Federal agency.”

Funding? Not a problem. The bill allows:

The Secretary may accept donations from, and enter into cooperative agreements with, foreign governments and international bodies, organizations, or individuals to further the purpose of an interagency agreement entered into under paragraph (1) or to provide visitor services and administrative facilities within reasonable proximity to the Historical Park.

After all, the bill also allows it to be established with the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as a World Heritage Site.

This should provide a big boost to Sir Richard Branson’s Space Program.

Source: National Journal

You Can Now Bear Arms in a Post Office Parking Lot

A federal judge rules it is OK to bring a gun to a USPS parking lot, but not inside the facility. Fill in your ‘going postal’ pun here.

By Brian Resnick

Tab Bonidy was polite enough to ask before he brought a gun into a Colorado post office. In 2010 his lawyer sent a letter to USPS asking whether Bonidy would be prosecuted if he brought a firearm inside the facility or left one in his car while, let’s say, purchasing stamps. And he got a response.

According to Thursday’s ruling by District Judge Richard Matsch, the USPS legal counsel responded to Bonidy, saying, “Regulations governing conduct on postal property prevent (Bonidy) from carrying firearms, openly or concealed, onto any real property under the charge and control of the Postal Service.”

She was referring to Title 39 of the Federal Regulations, which dates back to 1972:

Weapons and explosives. Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, no person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.

Feeling his rights were being violated, Bonidy teamed up with the National Association for Gun Rights to file suit against this provision.

Read more at the National Journal