Casinos

[calmp9]

Originally Posted by t11spanner

Thank you for the update. I would leave, if asked. I would rather just go, and be able to come back sometime rather than make a scene and be asked never to come back.

Same with Wally World. They have no sign, I was in there last night, (only because its the only "department" store in Winnemucca!) and the "door" person saw the butt end of my pistol sticking out of my leather vest (it shifted when I got off my motorcycle), and he did not say a word. But if they asked me to leave, I would.

Just my $.02.

Mike made it very clear to us on this point in his class. I think Wal-Mart is aiming this at the open carry guys. They have a right to open carry, but the majority of the public doesn't see it that way. I post in the open carry forum and I have found that Wal-Mart has been more aggressive when they see firearms. Personally, I have not had the opportunity to open carry in Nevada yet.

If asked to leave I would leave also. It would teach me to better conceal my firearm. If nobody sees it, nothing happens.

[h2ojunkie]

Originally Posted by netentity

Casinos and the real estate they are on are prohibited per NRS 202.265 if they have a child care facility. This is predominately the Station Casinos. You'll know which one's because they will have "Kids' Qwest" signs.

IANAL - however, the statute reads "1. Except as otherwise provided in this section, a person shall not carry or possess while on the property of the Nevada System of Higher Education, a private or public school or child care facility, or while in a vehicle of a private or public school or child care facility:"

The only portion of a casino that would be considered a child care facility, is the actual portion of the property leased by kidsquest.

The same way kidsquest's lease does not extend to the casino floor and they couldn't take a group of the kids they are watching and run around the casino floor with them (because that area is under the casino license), the rules of NRS for a child care facility would also not extend to any portion of the casino that is not licensed to the child care facility.

As long as you don't enter the area leased by kidsquest, you are not violating the statute.

[netentity]

Originally Posted by h2ojunkie

IANAL - however, the statute reads "1. Except as otherwise provided in this section, a person shall not carry or possess while on the property of the Nevada System of Higher Education, a private or public school or child care facility, or while in a vehicle of a private or public school or child care facility:"

The only portion of a casino that would be considered a child care facility, is the actual portion of the property leased by kidsquest.

The same way kidsquest's lease does not extend to the casino floor and they couldn't take a group of the kids they are watching and run around the casino floor with them (because that area is under the casino license), the rules of NRS for a child care facility would also not extend to any portion of the casino that is not licensed to the child care facility.

As long as you don't enter the area leased by kidsquest, you are not violating the statute.

That's where I'm going to have to disagree. The definition of property includes everything on the assessed parcel of land.

It is therefore illegal to possess a firearm in the parking lot or common areas of a child care facility, K-12 school or university. If you expand upon this definition, the entire real estate the casino a prohibited area as you have to walk through the casino area to get to the child care facility just like you have to walk through the parking lot. There is no special case taken for accomodation facilities as defined under NRS 432A.0205.

We all know that it is illegal for persons under 21 to be in the gaming area per NRS 463.350. The gaming or bar area defense would probably be a good defense in court for being in that specific area, but what about the other common areas of a hotel casino that are not restricted to persons 21 or over; mall, shops, arcade, movie theatre, food court, restaurants, buffet, parking garage, bowling alley, restrooms, etc.

NRS 202.3673.6(b)(2) makes the distinction between the portion of a public building that is lease or occupied except for K-12 schools, universities and child care facilities.

You dealing with prosecutory and responding LEO descretion with this ambiguous statute. Under the letter of the law, yes the entire casino is prohibited. Would you get arrested or cited? If you're concealing probably not because of the simple premise of it being out of sight and out of mind. Is there plenty of legal room for you to be a test case? Absolutely. Also keep in mind that the entire State of Nevada is in revenue generation mode. The State has an incentive for someone to be a test case.

The best thing to do is to make sure Assemblyperson Kirkpatrick is not reelected and have this prohibited area removed or revised so CCWs honored within the State of Nevada are exempt.

[netentity]

Originally Posted by Canis-Lupus

Good place to hang out waiting for a flight, 10 min drive close to Spokane Airport by shuttle, taxi or your car if U R a Spokanite 'homie' like me.
That's about it for us in a nut shell..

Apples and oranges. Drinking establishments for 21 or over are prohibited areas in WA per the RCW so that's why they have it like Fort Knox there. Well what's a casino? A drinking and gaming establishment for persons 21 or over.

A CCW would be useless in NV if gaming areas and establishments that serve alcohol were off limits. It's easier to get alcohol in Nevada than water.

I also laugh when I travel out of Nevada and with the exception of LA and some of the MO casinos I just shake my head and laugh being from Vegas, "You call that a casino? The corner pub by my house has a larger gaming area."

[h2ojunkie]

Originally Posted by netentity

That's where I'm going to have to disagree. The definition of property includes everything on the assessed parcel of land.

It is therefore illegal to possess a firearm in the parking lot or common areas of a child care facility, K-12 school or university. If you expand upon this definition, the entire real estate the casino a prohibited area as you have to walk through the casino area to get to the child care facility just like you have to walk through the parking lot. There is no special case taken for accomodation facilities as defined under NRS 432A.0205.

]We all know that it is illegal for persons under 21 to be in the gaming area per NRS 463.350. The gaming or bar area defense would probably be a good defense in court for being in that specific area, but what about the other common areas of a hotel casino that are not restricted to persons 21 or over; mall, shops, arcade, movie theatre, food court, restaurants, buffet, parking garage, bowling alley, restrooms, etc.

While I do see your logic, NRS reads as:
NRS 432A.0205 “Accommodation facility” defined. “Accommodation facility” means a child care facility which is operated:
1. By a business that is licensed to conduct a business other than the provision of care to children; and
2. As an auxiliary service provided for the customers of the primary business.

A casino is not licensed to operate the child care facility, the license is held by KidsQuest which is a separate entity which leases a portion of the property. If the child care facility was owned and operated by the casino itself, i would tend to agree with you, but the fact that it is a lease of a specific area of property, by a separate entity would prevent this section of NRS from applying in this situation.

Originally Posted by netentity

NRS 202.3673.6(b)(2) makes the distinction between the portion of a public building that is lease or occupied except for K-12 schools, universities and child care facilities.

You dealing with prosecutory and responding LEO descretion with this ambiguous statute. Under the letter of the law, yes the entire casino is prohibited. Would you get arrested or cited? If you're concealing probably not because of the simple premise of it being out of sight and out of mind. Is there plenty of legal room for you to be a test case? Absolutely. Also keep in mind that the entire State of Nevada is in revenue generation mode. The State has an incentive for someone to be a test case.

The best thing to do is to make sure Assemblyperson Kirkpatrick is not reelected and have this prohibited area removed or revised so CCWs honored within the State of Nevada are exempt.

NRS 202.3673 Permittee authorized to carry concealed firearm while on premises of public building; exceptions; penalty.
3. A permittee shall not carry a concealed firearm while he is on the premises of:
(a) A public building that is located on the property of a public school or a child care facility

This is where it becomes a bit more confusing. You can not carry in a public building that is located on the property of a child care facility.

So, lets say the child care facility owns the property, and leases out a building on that property to a casino, this law would apply and you can not carry. However, in the situation we're talking about, the property is owned is that of the casino, and the child care facility simply leases a small part of that property. Therefore the part about "public building located on property of a child care facility" would not apply.

Of course, as you mentioned a cop having a bad day could simply arrest you and let the lawyers and judges sort it out. But the intent of the law is pretty clear to me, and a case easily won if the DA would even waste the time to attempt to prosecute it.

I'm sure if you were in there to rob the casino, this could be one of those extra charges they slap you with just because they want to hit you with anything they can think of, however if the only charge was for peacefully carrying a legal weapon, I doubt any DA would dare prosecute, and most certainly would not win.

Illegal or not, the one thing we can both agree on is there are a couple members of our elected state goverment that need to be shown the door and put an end to these silly laws in the first place.

[netentity]

Originally Posted by h2ojunkie

While I do see your logic, NRS reads as:
NRS 432A.0205 “Accommodation facility” defined. “Accommodation facility” means a child care facility which is operated:
1. By a business that is licensed to conduct a business other than the provision of care to children; and
2. As an auxiliary service provided for the customers of the primary business.

A casino is not licensed to operate the child care facility, the license is held by KidsQuest which is a separate entity which leases a portion of the property. If the child care facility was owned and operated by the casino itself, i would tend to agree with you, but the fact that it is a lease of a specific area of property, by a separate entity would prevent this section of NRS from applying in this situation.

Remember NRS 202.265 which is possession of a firearm while on the property of a K-12 school, university or child care facility. NRS 202.265 addresses possession of a firearm, period; open, concealed (with or without a permit) or vehicle carry. NRS 202.3673 addresses a permittee carrying a firearm in a prohibited area. If a permittee is carrying a firearm on the premises of a K-12 school, university or child care facility the permittee gets charged with two crimes; violation of NRS 202.265 and NRS 202.3673, a gross misdemeanor and a misdemeanor respectively. Also keep in mind that since these are weapon violations, your NV CFP will most likely be at least suspended if not revoked along with any other States you may have pending the final disposition of the charges. In some States it would forever bar you from ever getting a CCW. Some States have any weapons conviction as a forever prohibiting condition for getting their CCW.

NRS 202.3673 Permittee authorized to carry concealed firearm while on premises of public building; exceptions; penalty.
3. A permittee shall not carry a concealed firearm while he is on the premises of:
(a) A public building that is located on the property of a public school or a child care facility

This is where it becomes a bit more confusing. You can not carry in a public building that is located on the property of a child care facility.

So, lets say the child care facility owns the property, and leases out a building on that property to a casino, this law would apply and you can not carry. However, in the situation we're talking about, the property is owned is that of the casino, and the child care facility simply leases a small part of that property. Therefore the part about "public building located on property of a child care facility" would not apply.

Flawed argument. It would be the physical location of the child care facility. There are a laundry list of inspections the city, county and State do for a business to obtain a license as a child care facility. The license is limited in scope to the physical location of business not all real estate owned by the business or parent company of the business. Business licenses are limited in scope to the physical location of the business except for mobile businesses.

Also keep in mind the definition of premises;

2. premises,
a. a tract of land including its buildings.
b. a building together with its grounds or other appurtenances.

Thus the real estate the K-12 school, university or child care facility is included.

Of course, as you mentioned a cop having a bad day could simply arrest you and let the lawyers and judges sort it out. But the intent of the law is pretty clear to me, and a case easily won if the DA would even waste the time to attempt to prosecute it.

The intent clearer to me. Assemblyperson Kirkpatrick and Smith want child care facilities to be identical to K-12 schools and universities. That's why they got lumped into NRS 202.265 under the guise of child safety last legislative session. Do you want to be the test case? I don't.

I'm sure if you were in there to rob the casino, this could be one of those extra charges they slap you with just because they want to hit you with anything they can think of, however if the only charge was for peacefully carrying a legal weapon, I doubt any DA would dare prosecute, and most certainly would not win.

Illegal or not, the one thing we can both agree on is there are a couple members of our elected state goverment that need to be shown the door and put an end to these silly laws in the first place.

Once we have case law on the issue or a legal precedence of a guilty conviction, it will take a higher court or the law to be repealed by the legislature to reverse that ruling. It is because of these ambiguities that you do not want to risk it. Once there's is case law on the issue, not even the AG can render a countering opinion on the issue as it's a different branch of the government; AG being executive, courts being judicial. It would take an act of the Nevada legislature, Congress, a higher State or federal court to overturn that ruling.

Case law is what also authorizes you to carry a concealed shotgun with a CCW in Indiana. The scope of Indiana's CCW statute was included to include longguns because a criminal was successfully charged and convicted for having a concealed firearm without a permit in his vehicle. The firearm was a shotgun. So until the IN legislature revises the CCW code or a higher court overturns that conviction, it is legal to carry concealed long guns in Indiana if you have the appropriate endorsement, license or permit to carry.

[h2ojunkie]

I still belive there is a clear difference.

Let's say for example a child care facility rents a small part of their property to a coffee shop for the parents to grab their morning coffee. I would say that would fall under the law.

I still belive the wording of the law does not exclude carry in a casino that rents part of the property to a child care facility.

You are right, this is something that would need to be flushed out in the courts through a test case. Do I want to be the test case, well not really.

However, will I stop carrying when I go play poker at the Texas...nope. If I end up in court, so be it. Not my prefered method but given the choice of going unarmed, or being the test case. I choose to be the test case.

[gdcleanfun]

Does the last sentence of this section of the statute, "If only part of the building is occupied by an entity described in this subsection, the term means only that portion of the building which is so occupied" make a difference in your debate?



Quote:

6. As used in this section:

(a) “Child care facility” has the meaning ascribed to it in paragraph (a) of subsection 5 of NRS 202.265.

(b) “Public building” means any building or office space occupied by:

(1) Any component of the Nevada System of Higher Education and used for any purpose related to the System; or

(2) The Federal Government, the State of Nevada or any county, city, school district or other political subdivision of the State of Nevada and used for any public purpose.

Ê If only part of the building is occupied by an entity described in this subsection, the term means only that portion of the building which is so occupied.

(Added to NRS by 1995, 2725; A 1997, 63; 1999, 2767 ; 2007, 1914 )
Reply With Quote
End quote.

[netentity]

Originally Posted by gdcleanfun

Does the last sentence of this section of the statute, "If only part of the building is occupied by an entity described in this subsection, the term means only that portion of the building which is so occupied" make a difference in your debate?

No, it means the portion of a building that is leased or occupied by a Federal, State of Nevada or political subdivision of the State of Nevada that is posted or has a metal detector.

To throw in a tangent, the owner of the building has a very good case for being exempt from that prohibition under implied landlord rights.

[Glock Fan]

Keep in mind that if it's "concealed" properly, nobody will ever know you have it.



gf