Nv CCW...Firearm qualification (How stupid)

[Lowjiber]

The back of my Nevada CCW permit lists each pistol by make/model/caliber/date, but simply states "REVOLVERS AUTHORIZED". In other words, I can only conceal the particular pistol that is listed, but may conceal any revolver. When I "qualified" (what a joke) on the range for my permit, I "qualified" with a single pistol (Para Ord/ LDA-CCO/.45 ACP) and one revolver (no data required).

While I have a ton of handguns, I got to thinking about a small, single-stack pistol that would fit in my jeans pockets...something nice to have along anytime.

So it turns out that I have to go to the range to "qualify" with a new pistol and then go to LV Metro to have the pistol added to the back of my permit....costing me additional time and money.

However, if I buy a new revolver (derringers count as revolvers) I don't have to do anything...no "qualification" or additional trip to LV Metro.

Here are questions: Does the above scenario not support my contention that "qualification" is a joke? Why would one have to demonstrate the ability to hit a target with a new pistol and not a new revolver?

BTW: For those not familiar with "qualification" in Nevada, the qualification standard varies greatly from one place/instructor to another. I was astounded how subjective and easy the "qualification" process really is.

[lukem]

I remember this when I lived there. I think their reasoning was that semi-auto's come in many different styles and formats where as revolvers mostly all work the same. Whether or not this logic actually makes any sense is another story. I'd like to see them get rid of Blue Cards all together. Since moving to Florida, I like being able to purchase a gun and be able to carry it right away if I want. I think it took me about 3 months to get everything together, take a day to go submit everything, and then wait for my new permit just so I could carry my Glock when I had bought one in Vegas.

[442js]

The back of my Nevada CCW permit lists each pistol by make/model/caliber/date, but simply states "REVOLVERS AUTHORIZED". In other words, I can only conceal the particular pistol that is listed, but may conceal any revolver. When I "qualified" (what a joke) on the range for my permit, I "qualified" with a single pistol (Para Ord/ LDA-CCO/.45 ACP) and one revolver (no data required).

While I have a ton of handguns, I got to thinking about a small, single-stack pistol that would fit in my jeans pockets...something nice to have along anytime.

So it turns out that I have to go to the range to "qualify" with a new pistol and then go to LV Metro to have the pistol added to the back of my permit....costing me additional time and money.

However, if I buy a new revolver (derringers count as revolvers) I don't have to do anything...no "qualification" or additional trip to LV Metro.

Here are questions: Does the above scenario not support my contention that "qualification" is a joke? Why would one have to demonstrate the ability to hit a target with a new pistol and not a new revolver?

BTW: For those not familiar with "qualification" in Nevada, the qualification standard varies greatly from one place/instructor to another. I was astounded how subjective and easy the "qualification" process really is.

Supposedly the reasoning is for this is that all revolvers load the same way, but each semi is different. I believe they tried to change the semi law to be like revolvers in 2009, but it didn't go through. Maybe in 2011 they will.

[OldOwl]

Yet if you took your driving test in a Chevy you're still good with a Lincoln.

[G50AE]

Yet if you took your driving test in a Chevy you're still good with a Lincoln.

Yeah, and if you took your motorcycle test in a Harley-Davidson, you are also OK on a Ducatti Monster.

[varminter22]

Until the 2007 legislature, we had to qualify with both semi-autos AND revolvers by make/model/caliber. In the 2007 session we obtained "any revolver" but the Chairman of the Assembly Judiciary Committee, Bernie Anderson, would NOT allow "any semi-auto" - in spite of support from the NV Sheriffs & Chiefs Ass'n.

In 2009, we tried again. A Billl Draft Request (BDR) was submitted - and the Legislative Counsel Bureau somewhow dropped the ball and failed to get the draft into bill form by the deadline.

Should have been no problem, right? No fault of the legislator who submitted the BDR. But NO, Bernie Anderson indicated he would not allow the bill to be heard in committee, so it got dropped.

The BDR will be back in the 2011 Legislative Session. AND Asm Bernie Anderson will NOT be back - he is term limited out! But who will be the next Chairman of the Committee? Only time will tell.

IF we can only get the bill heard in committee, I think we'll get it enacted - "Any Semi-Auto" just like we now have "Any Revolver."

[varminter22]

In reference to:

When I "qualified" (what a joke) ...

I can only say the law is what it is.

And maybe that is NOT a bad thing.

Personally, I am an advocate for Alaska/Arizona style law.

But Nevada law does require shooting qualification.

One may opine that the required qualification process is "too easy." And I'll agree it is quite easy for anyone that has done much (any?) handgun shooting. Great emphasis is placed on safety and handling.

And maybe that is the way it SHOULD be! One can debate the merits of a shooting qualification requirement, but since we do have a requirement, I believe our legislature was wise to NOT require long range accuracy, time requirements, etc.

After all, we are NOT taliking about hitting a rabbit in the head at 50 yards. We ARE talking about "up close and personal" defensive ranges. If, for example, an elderly person can safely handle the firearm, who cares if he/she cannot hit at long range or if he/she cannot shoot quite rapidly? Would you deny that person the right to self defense?

[1015811414]

Nevada Assemblyman David Bobzien is introducing legislation for the up coming 2011 legislative session that would make semi-auto handguns the same as for revolvers for Nevada CCW permits. He thinks the differentiation is silly. Tell your representatives and senators to cosponsor and vote for the bill to pass. I have also asked him to look into correcting Nevada law to bypass the NICS check each time you purchase a firearm if you carry a Nevada CCW.

Hans

[netentity]

The reason the statute is the way it is that when we originally went shall issue we could only carry two specific firearms. We then could carry any semi-auto or revolver we specifically qualified with once the number of firearms on your permit was revolved.

The reason the specific revolver qualification was changed in 2007 is was something that State Senator John Lee was able to get out of the assembly judiciary committee. The major obstacle to firearm legislation was former Nevada Assembly Judiciary Chair Bernie Anderson. If it wasn't for Anderson, we would have had any revolver and any semi-auto. You just qualify with one of each.

He's been term limited out. There are some anti-gun incumbents still in office. Most notable are the ones that slid the amendment to the child safety bill who are still in office. They will eventually be term limited out. The incumbent AG isn't all that pro-gun either.

[Lowjiber]

Thanks Everyone for your opinions and the education regarding the politics of the CCW law in my new home state. I came from Florida where a CCW permit did not distinguish between pistols and revolvers. I frankly was surprised at the Nevada laws, given that it's a western state and pretty much "gun friendly".