Questions about carrying in Nevada and California - Page 4
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41

Thread: Questions about carrying in Nevada and California

  1. Quote Originally Posted by NDS View Post
    To get back to your OP. You are fine. Yes, NLV LEO have a history of abusing people and their rights, but that can happen anywhere. If you don't cause problems during a traffic stop you'll probably have no problems here either.

    Sorry your thread got polluted with the usual FUD -- this has been discussed here and other fora before. The situation in Nevada is changing and many don't try to keep up but are happy to post old news.
    I agree. Mountaingoat61, if it makes you feel more comfortable, print out a copy of the Nevada preemption statute. Nevada state law protects your right to carry your loaded firearm on your person or in your vehicle. The only portion of Clark County/North Las Vegas ordinance that was grandfathered by the state statute is the handgun registration portion, and that only applies to residents of Clark County AFTER 60 days of residency - so even the registration code does not apply to you.

  2.   
  3. Quote Originally Posted by NDS View Post
    To get back to your OP. You are fine. Yes, NLV LEO have a history of abusing people and their rights, but that can happen anywhere. If you don't cause problems during a traffic stop you'll probably have no problems here either.

    Sorry your thread got polluted with the usual FUD -- this has been discussed here and other fora before. The situation in Nevada is changing and many don't try to keep up but are happy to post old news.
    It is very easy to make an accusation of FUD (FEAR, UNCERTAINTY and DOUBT) yet despite all of your many posts, you have not once shown anywhere that the grandfathered portions of the Preemption bill have been overturned. The simple fact remains that you could get into trouble in certain parts of Las Vegas despite the Preemption bill. If these are just "old news" (March and April of this year), then I would be very interested if you can actually cite a case where charges were dismissed based on Preemption. If Preemption over rules the grandfathered regulations then it should be a slam dunk for you to present a case where the state over turned a local arrest or better yet, over turned a conviction. I have searched specifically for such case and have yet to find anything of that sort. On the contrary, it appears that the Las Vegas folks still prosecute these laws.

    In addition, the CCW course I went to in May is a well known course in Las Vegas, and several other websites list the grandfathered as current law. If my posts on this issue are truly FUD as you allege, then it should be quite easy for you to show actual legal cases proving that point. I have not been able to find any at this point. I will leave that task in your court if you really wish to settle the issue. But it appears the reason that this is unsettled is because there is no case taken to the Nevada Supreme court that I am aware of to settle the issue. There are times where conspiracies actually occur and there are times where doubt and uncertainty are caused by real doubt and uncertainty. The status of Las Vegas gun laws is such a case in point.

  4. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaska444 View Post
    It is very easy to make an accusation of FUD ...
    Perhaps so. But I'm tired or these old canards about the terrors of Las Vegas being brought up every time somebody asks. The fact is you will probably not be proned out if you OC on the strip. You will probably be told to leave every establishment you enter and you will also be questioned multiple times by security and Police.

    As for NLV -- a lot has changed in the last few years. The state pre-emption lists very little as not being nulllified by state law. That execreble blue-card is one. The NLV weapon in car ordnance is not. So far, nobody has taken it to court that I know of. I believe NLV is making sure it doesn't go to court because they know if will be overturned. Look at this quote from the article you cited:
    “The intent was to go after gangbangers, not mom and pop in the RV,” Davidson says.
    That is the kind of remark someone makes when they know they are on weak ground.

    The fact is, you need no worry in NLV unless you're doing something that will draw great attention to yourself -- and that is true everywhere. Police can pile on bogus charges whenever they want. NLV and this unenforcable ordnance are the same. Find a case where somebody who was not doing something egregious went to court with this on their charge sheet. I can't find anybody who's made it to court with this at all.
    ... The status of Las Vegas gun laws is such a case in point...
    That is an unfortunate fact. The California-lite folks and those who want to remain part of free America are duking it out in this schizophrenic state.

    Whatever else, it seems the OP figured out he can come to NV without being assaulted by police at every turn. You have to go to Maricopa County for that!

    I'm done with this thread -- and I'm still not worried about a gun in my car in NLV. Neither is the gun shop I buy from in NLV.
    People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome.--River Tam

  5. #34
    Oh, before I go, the Arpaio remark above was a joke! I'm headed to Maricopa County tomorrow and expect I'll be fine.

    So, heads up to AZ!
    People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome.--River Tam

  6. Quote Originally Posted by NDS View Post
    Perhaps so. But I'm tired or these old canards about the terrors of Las Vegas being brought up every time somebody asks. The fact is you will probably not be proned out if you OC on the strip. You will probably be told to leave every establishment you enter and you will also be questioned multiple times by security and Police.

    As for NLV -- a lot has changed in the last few years. The state pre-emption lists very little as not being nulllified by state law. That execreble blue-card is one. The NLV weapon in car ordnance is not. So far, nobody has taken it to court that I know of. I believe NLV is making sure it doesn't go to court because they know if will be overturned. Look at this quote from the article you cited:

    That is the kind of remark someone makes when they know they are on weak ground.

    The fact is, you need no worry in NLV unless you're doing something that will draw great attention to yourself -- and that is true everywhere. Police can pile on bogus charges whenever they want. NLV and this unenforcable ordnance are the same. Find a case where somebody who was not doing something egregious went to court with this on their charge sheet. I can't find anybody who's made it to court with this at all.

    That is an unfortunate fact. The California-lite folks and those who want to remain part of free America are duking it out in this schizophrenic state.

    Whatever else, it seems the OP figured out he can come to NV without being assaulted by police at every turn. You have to go to Maricopa County for that!

    I'm done with this thread -- and I'm still not worried about a gun in my car in NLV. Neither is the gun shop I buy from in NLV.

    Thank you for an honest answer of the fact that the laws in Las Vegas have not all been over turned by the Preemption bill. You say you are done with this thread, so be it, but I am not quite yet done. My posts on this issue have been called BS and FUD by you and NavyLT when in reality you finally admit that I was not wrong. The simple fact that you don't like the state of affairs of Las Vegas does not justify the false accusation that my posts was FUD:

    Fear, uncertainty and doubt

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) is a tactic of rhetoric and fallacy used in sales, marketing, public relations,[1][2] politics and propaganda. FUD is generally a strategic attempt to influence public perception by disseminating negative and dubious/false information designed to undermine the credibility of their beliefs. An individual firm, for example, might use FUD to invite unfavorable opinions and speculation about a competitor's product; to increase the general estimation of switching costs among current customers; or to maintain leverage over a current business partner who could potentially become a rival.

    FUD techniques may be crude and simple, as in claiming "I read a paper by a Harvard professor that shows you are wrong regarding subject XXX", but the paper does not exist. (Were the paper to exist then it would not be FUD but valid criticism.) Alternatively FUD may be very subtle, employing an indirect approach. Someone who employs FUD cannot generally back up their claims (i.e. "I don't recall which professor or which year the paper is from"). To dispel FUD, the easiest way is to ask for details and then provide well researched hard facts which disprove them. For instance, if it can be shown that no Harvard professor ever has written a paper on subject XXX, then the FUD is dispelled.

    The term originated to describe disinformation tactics in the computer hardware industry and has since been used more broadly.[3] FUD is a manifestation of the appeal to fear.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_u...inty_and_doubt

    It now turns out that even though you accused me several times of disseminating false information and actually disinformation, you have now back tracked on that since you are unable to show that I spread false information. In fact, the Las Vegas laws do appear to continue have a grandfathered status and anyone that is going to carry concealed or open needs to pay attention to this simple fact until the day that Preemption is able to remove these laws. Until then, tread carefully in Las Vegas.

    Lastly, I will categorically state that I have never once engaged in deliberate false information for the purpose of disseminating fear, doubt and uncertainty. I do not in any manner claim that I am all knowing or infallible, but you my friend have accused me falsely. For that I would be more than happy to accept your apology. Then I will be through with this thread as well.

  7. To sum up what the statutes actually state, as written, minus the personal opinion:

    This North Las Vegas Ordinance:
    9.32.080 - Deadly weapon prohibited in vehicle—Exceptions.

    It is unlawful for any person to have in his possession in any automobile, truck, motorcycle, or any other type of vehicle any dangerous or deadly weapon, but this restriction shall not be deemed to prohibit the carrying of ordinary tools or equipment carried in good faith for uses of honest work, trade or business, or for the purpose of legitimate sport or recreation.
    Is preempted, null, void and unenforceable in regards to firearms by this Nevada Statute:
    NRS 268.418 Limited authority to regulate firearms; restrictions concerning registration of firearms in city in county whose population is 400,000 or more.

    1. Except as otherwise provided by specific statute, the Legislature reserves for itself such rights and powers as are necessary to regulate the transfer, sale, purchase, possession, ownership, transportation, registration and licensing of firearms and ammunition in Nevada, and no city may infringe upon those rights and powers. As used in this subsection, “firearm” means any weapon from which a projectile is discharged by means of an explosive, spring, gas, air or other force.

    2. The governing body of a city may proscribe by ordinance or regulation the unsafe discharge of firearms.
    This North Las Vegas Ordinance:
    9.36.100 - Registration.

    A. Any person who has been a resident of the city for a period of sixty (60) days or more is required to register any pistols in their possession as set forth in Section B of this section.

    B. Any resident receiving title to a pistol, whether by purchase, gift or any other transfer, shall within seventy-two (72) hours of receipt, personally appear at the police station, together with the pistol, for the purpose of registering the same with the chief of police. It shall be the duty of the chief of police to register the pistol and he may cooperate in any manner he sees fit with other law enforcement agencies in effecting registration of pistols to the end that efficient registration will be secured at a minimum cost and duplication.
    Is grandfathered by the remainder of NRS 268.418, and remains in full force and effect:
    3. If the governing body of a city in a county whose population is 400,000 or more has required by ordinance or regulation adopted before June 13, 1989, the registration of a firearm capable of being concealed, the governing body shall amend such an ordinance or regulation to require:
    (a) A period of at least 60 days of residency in the city before registration of such a firearm is required.
    (b) A period of at least 72 hours for the registration of a pistol by a resident of the city upon transfer of title to the pistol to the resident by purchase, gift or any other transfer.
    It's right there in black and white. NRS 268.418 very specifically in unquestionable terms states exactly what the limit of the grandfather clause is. That limit is long-standing registration requirements. Nothing else is grandfathered. "Legislative intent" only applies when a statute is vague enough to leave doubt as to what the statute means; but, in this case, "no city may infringe upon those rights and powers" is not vague. It's plain, clear, cut and dried, ESPECIALLY given the paragraph following which specifically defines limits set upon what city governments are allowed to do (and regulating the transportation of firearms in vehicles is not within those limits defined).

  8. Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    To sum up what the statutes actually state, as written, minus the personal opinion:

    This North Las Vegas Ordinance:


    Is preempted, null, void and unenforceable in regards to firearms by this Nevada Statute:


    This North Las Vegas Ordinance:


    Is grandfathered by the remainder of NRS 268.418, and remains in full force and effect:


    It's right there in black and white. NRS 268.418 very specifically in unquestionable terms states exactly what the limit of the grandfather clause is. That limit is long-standing registration requirements. Nothing else is grandfathered. "Legislative intent" only applies when a statute is vague enough to leave doubt as to what the statute means; but, in this case, "no city may infringe upon those rights and powers" is not vague. It's plain, clear, cut and dried, ESPECIALLY given the paragraph following which specifically defines limits set upon what city governments are allowed to do (and regulating the transportation of firearms in vehicles is not within those limits defined).

    Thank you for digging up that information. It looks like a lot of that has not translated down to the LEOs and other CCW sites in Las Vegas.

  9. The problem is that people need to put pressure on the cities and counties that have these illegal ordinances on their books to change them to come in line with Nevada Revised Statutes. We've been making steady progress in Washington State in this regard. The nullification of ex-Mayor Nickels gun ban in Seattle by the Washington courts have helped us immensely in this effort.

    Here's an example:
    Snohomish County councilman misrepresents law to push anti-gun agenda

    And the result:
    HeraldNet: County drops ban on guns in parks

  10. #39

    NRA Files Suit Over Preemption Violation in Nevada

    NRA Files Suit Over Preemption Violation in Nevada


    The National Rifle Association is backing a lawsuit filed against Clark County and the City of North Las Vegas in Nevada District Court. This lawsuit aims to defend the state’s firearms preemption law. NRA counsel filed suit on behalf of plaintiff David Hanes in the case Hanes v. Clark County and the City of North Las Vegas.
    “The NRA is committed to defending firearms preemption laws in every state where they exist,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA chief lobbyist. “Law-abiding gun owners shouldn’t be subjected to different laws when they cross city or county lines. Nevada's statewide preemption law was designed to prohibit this from occurring.”
    Nevada originally passed a preemption law in 1989, meaning that counties and municipalities cannot pass gun laws that are more restrictive than the state law. Some gun ordinances in some parts of the state were “grandfathered” in at that time. However, in 2007, Senate Bill 92 amended the preemption law, removing all grandfathered ordinances with the exception of a handgun registration ordinance.
    Unfortunately, to this day, the City of North Las Vegas has failed to fully comply with the amended law. Currently, despite the fact that it is perfectly legal to do so across the state, anyone transporting a firearm through North Las Vegas is in violation of a city ordinance and could face prosecution. David Hanes, a permit holder who frequently hunts and makes trips to the Clark County Shooting Park, is in violation every time he leaves the state-of-the-art, multi-million dollar shooting facility.
    “It’s a shame that the City of North Las Vegas has failed to comply with state law and has put so many law-abiding gun owners in jeopardy of a citation just for exercising their Second Amendment rights,” concluded Cox. “The NRA will see this through to ensure that Nevada has a meaningful, statewide firearms preemption law.”
    http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=14105

    http://gonv.org/laws.htm




    "The people never give up their liberties, but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Bohemian View Post
    NRA Files Suit Over Preemption Violation in Nevada


    The National Rifle Association is backing a lawsuit filed against Clark County and the City of North Las Vegas in Nevada District Court. This lawsuit aims to defend the state’s firearms preemption law. NRA counsel filed suit on behalf of plaintiff David Hanes in the case Hanes v. Clark County and the City of North Las Vegas.
    “The NRA is committed to defending firearms preemption laws in every state where they exist,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA chief lobbyist. “Law-abiding gun owners shouldn’t be subjected to different laws when they cross city or county lines. Nevada's statewide preemption law was designed to prohibit this from occurring.”
    Nevada originally passed a preemption law in 1989, meaning that counties and municipalities cannot pass gun laws that are more restrictive than the state law. Some gun ordinances in some parts of the state were “grandfathered” in at that time. However, in 2007, Senate Bill 92 amended the preemption law, removing all grandfathered ordinances with the exception of a handgun registration ordinance.
    Unfortunately, to this day, the City of North Las Vegas has failed to fully comply with the amended law. Currently, despite the fact that it is perfectly legal to do so across the state, anyone transporting a firearm through North Las Vegas is in violation of a city ordinance and could face prosecution. David Hanes, a permit holder who frequently hunts and makes trips to the Clark County Shooting Park, is in violation every time he leaves the state-of-the-art, multi-million dollar shooting facility.
    “It’s a shame that the City of North Las Vegas has failed to comply with state law and has put so many law-abiding gun owners in jeopardy of a citation just for exercising their Second Amendment rights,” concluded Cox. “The NRA will see this through to ensure that Nevada has a meaningful, statewide firearms preemption law.”
    http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=14105

    http://gonv.org/laws.htm



    LOL

    Silly backwards gun-grabbers.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Nevada: Action Alert - Tracking Nevada Gun Owners...
    By Bohemian in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 02-26-2010, 08:27 PM
  2. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-04-2009, 11:24 AM
  3. Traveling From California to Arizona
    By RRGlock23 in forum Traveling With Handguns
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-15-2009, 09:22 PM
  4. Concealed Carry Self Defense Knife
    By NMGunIt in forum New Mexico Discussion and Firearm News
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-23-2008, 10:49 AM
  5. BATFE Targets CCW Holders
    By Bohemian in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 09-15-2008, 03:43 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast