The change to allow licensed concealed carry is a good one.

However, I see no need to restrict carry in state forest recreation areas at all, differently than in other areas of the state such as public streets and shopping malls.

Certainly unsafe handling of firearms that presents a clear danger to other persons or their property is and should be illegal everywhere, not just in state forests. In certain areas any firing of a gun for any reason, or pointing a gun at another person in any location for other than necessary defense purposes, is unsafe. And, shooting animals contrary to game management laws is, again, illegal everywhere, no exception needed for state forests.

I don't know what is meant by a "recreational area", as I would consider a designated shooting range to be a recreational area. Apart from areas where shooting would be inherently dangerous, there are other forest areas where shooting, including target shooting and hunting when allowed, are proper activities. Presumably the modified paragraph does not apply to these areas?

As long as there are differences between populated and unpopulated or restricted access areas, someone must decide which areas are unsafe for all firearm shooting. Possibly the "recreational area" designation is the means by which this distinction is made, and I have no objection.

But firearms possession and use of any nature that is safe and proper in general is also safe and proper in state forests under similar circumstances and should not be banned just because the location is a "state forest recreational area". This especially applies to handgun holstered open carry by those who do not have concealed carry licenses but treat their firearms in the same safe manner as those who do.

Sincerely, Benjamin McLeod -  Reston, Virginia