Ridiculous Gun Show Infringement - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Ridiculous Gun Show Infringement

  1. #11
    I do not know what the heck is going on with this "gun show issue."

    However, http://art1sec11.blogspot.com/ has a different take on it.

    Who knows what is correct?!!

    At any rate, it needs to be challenged.

    And if my (and many others') interpretation of current law (as amended by SB-92 enacted in the 74th legislative session) is correct, this will be a moot point on January 1, 2008.

  2.   
  3. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by varminter22 View Post
    I do not know what the heck is going on with this "gun show issue."

    However, http://art1sec11.blogspot.com/ has a different take on it.

    Who knows what is correct?!!

    At any rate, it needs to be challenged.

    And if my (and many others') interpretation of current law (as amended by SB-92 enacted in the 74th legislative session) is correct, this will be a moot point on January 1, 2008.

    This guy is way off, and I will shortly tell him so; I was there and personally bought hand guns and rifles from multiple vendors; there has NEVER been a problem with not having someone at the show who could do transfers including this time...

    The shuttle to NLV refers to the complementary service that was offered by Bargain Pawn of NLV whom was also doing many of the transfers at the show. I have been doing business with them personally for years and I have always been able to cash and carry until THIS SHOW.
    In the case of the piece that I bought from Bargain Pawn, they did all the paper work for the piece I bought from them and then SHUTTLED it to their store in NLV where I had to drive to pick up my piece that I picked up from them...
    They also explained to me the new "City of Las Vegas" Infringement...

    Mike Huckabee on the issues and policies:
    http://www.mikehuckabee.com/

    Last edited by Bohemian; 12-21-2007 at 09:15 PM.

  4. #13
    I finally received the email response from the Clark County DA's office. I don't know why I didn't receive it when it was originally sent, but I finally got it on January 4, 2008:

    QUOTE
    >>> Mary-Anne Miller 12/19/2007 4:09 PM >>>
    Dear Mr. Rhodes,

    We are in receipt of Stillwater Farearms Association's December 12,
    2007 inquiry into whether local codes have been changed to reflect the
    changes in law regarding local firearms regulations. Please be
    advised
    that the ordinance implementing these changes has been adopted for
    Clark
    County. It was finally adopted in early December, and effective
    December 18, 2007. Since it is a new amendment to our code, you may
    have missed it online, but it can be reviewed at:

    http://www.accessclarkcounty.com/clerk/amendments.htm

    I hope this addresses your concerns with respect to Clark County, but
    if not, please do not hesitate to contact me.

    Sincerely,

    Mary-Anne Miller
    County Counsel
    Office of the District Attorney
    Clark County, Nevada
    (702) 455-4761
    [email protected]
    UNQUOTE

    Since this did NOT answer my questions and it appears Clark County has no intentions of complying with the law as we see it, I responded with the following today, January 5, 2008:

    QUOTE
    Dear Ms Miller,

    Thank you for responding to my letter of December 12, 2007.

    My original questions contained in said letter were:
    1) Have the city/county ordinances been repealed/amended?
    2) Or is there a move afoot to do so as required by Nevada law?
    3) Have the sheriff and city police departments been informed that most of the ordinances are now, or on January 1, 2008 will be, null, void and unenforceable?

    After reading your email, it appears you have answered respectively:
    1a) Only partially; not in full compliance with NRS.
    3a) No.

    While it is laudable Clark County has amended the ordinance concerning registration, it appears Clark County has no intentions of complying with Section 5 of Chapter 308, Statutes of Nevada 1989, at page 653, which states:

    Quote
    "... apply to ordinances or regulations adopted before, on or after June 13, 1989."
    Unquote

    And clearly does not grandfather any other county/city ordinances.

    Nevada law says no city, county, nor town may infringe upon the Legislature's right to regulate firearms law; and the law specifically states this applies to all ordinances and regulations, even if adopted prior to June 13, 1989.

    I have reviewed the recent amendment at http://www.accessclarkcounty.com/clerk/amendments.htm and compared/applied it to the Clark County code at www.ordlink.com/codes/clarknv/index.htm There are many instances (virtually all) of Clark County ordinances that are NOT in compliance with Nevada law.

    Is my literal interpretation of the law somehow incorrect? If so, what law intercedes my interpretaton?

    Has Clark County overlooked the recently amended Nevada law? Or is it true Clark County will not comply with Nevada law?

    Again, untold numbers of Clark County and Nevada citizens anxiously await your response.

    Sincerely
    UNQUOTE

    Again, IF my literal interpretation is somehow incorrect, can someone PLEASE tell me where I'm wrong??!!

  5. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NW New Mexico
    Posts
    148
    varminter22 - Good for you! I am not Nevada (NM), but so many juristictions seem to "keep on Keeping on" with the same old "that's how we always did it". Looking forward to a future answer post, to see how they dodge your questions this time. I'm distressed because NM is not "honored" for CCW, I guess because of the 24/7 online info access. I've written to NM DPS to inquire about the info access situation - no answer yet. Like you, I guess I'll just have to keep hammering.
    sailor

  6. #15
    Thanks, Sailor.

    CPO, USN(RET)

  7. #16
    more action appears necessary. See latest reply from the Clark County DA's office:
    Hello,

    I appreciate your perspective. Different provisions of the statute,
    when read separately, certainly can lead to different conclusions.
    Accordingly, I reviewed the legislative history (as is appropriate when
    dealing with an ambiguous statute). While the bill definitely started
    out as a total preemption bill, the history makes clear that the
    legislators added language that they intended to work a compromise with
    law enforcement to allow the continuation of the ordinances in Clark
    County, provided they were amended to address the transient possession
    issues.

    If you receive Attorney General direction to the contrary, please so
    advise me, and we will reconsider our ordinance. I will also bring your
    concerns to our legislative staff.

    Mary-Anne Miller
    County Counsel
    Office of the District Attorney
    Clark County, Nevada
    (702) 455-4761
    [email protected]
    I am still seeking an education concerning why the law doesn't mean what it says.

    Win or lose, there will be more to come on this issue.

  8. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NW New Mexico
    Posts
    148
    varminter22 - you have to realize that most law makers are lawyers, who spend lots of money and years of hard work going to law school, to be able to write a simple, clear & concise sentence, taking 15 pages of single space, with words that contradict each other, leading to other sentences that lead nowhere. Getting the picture? I read the single sentence that is our Second Amendment of the Constitution, then I read any part of any current attempt at gun legislation - it's mind boggling. You are a layman (i presume), you aren't supposed to understand what lawyers write (sorry, I just had to say that), nor am I.
    sailor

  9. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by sailor View Post
    varminter22 - you have to realize that most law makers are lawyers, who spend lots of money and years of hard work going to law school, to be able to write a simple, clear & concise sentence, taking 15 pages of single space, with words that contradict each other, leading to other sentences that lead nowhere. Getting the picture? I read the single sentence that is our Second Amendment of the Constitution, then I read any part of any current attempt at gun legislation - it's mind boggling. You are a layman (i presume), you aren't supposed to understand what lawyers write (sorry, I just had to say that), nor am I.
    sailor
    Ha, yeah, understand! And I certainly am a layman!

    One would LIKE to think that "lawyers, who spend lots of money and years of hard work going to law school" would indeed be able to write a simple, clear & concise sentence. But, alas & alack ...

  10. #19
    I have not found the specific amendment/statute citation at:
    http://www.accessclarkcounty.com/clerk/amendments.htm

    as the clerks response indicated; does anybody else know what it is?

    thanks in advance.

  11. #20

    Thumbs up Ridiculous gun show infringement (Las Vegas, Clark County, Nevada)

    Please take a moment to read some of the diatribe that I have been going through since I first encountered this issue last year...

    Note this email thread stems from an inquiry I made to Senator Bob Beers, who if you are in Nevada and did not know already is one of the good guys and one of our biggest 2nd Amendment supporters in Nevada so remember him on election day! and Note one of the things he has been trying to get passed, but keeps getting blocked by the democrats is getting rid of the superfluous gun free school zones act (aka: the kill for free school zones and leave our kids and their teachers defenseless act); Bob Beers would like to give Nevada teachers the right to carry on campus if they already have a ccw or can obtain one... I am all for it...

    From my layman interpretation of my responses thus far; is the Senators, Legislators and Frank Adams the Director of the Nevada Police
    Chiefs' and Sheriffs' Association are not aware that the laws are not being enforced they way they intended them to be... at least as far as the gun show issue goes anyway; or they are being completely blind sided by someone at the city level...

    If you are a Nevada resident or a Las Vegas gun show visitor please start making phone calls, emails, snail mails, faxes etc., contact info can be found earlier in this thread...

    AND if you are a Clark County, Nevada resident, write your Senators, Representatives, the media etc., and complain about Clark County residents not having the same rights as the rest of the state of Nevada; for example, Clark County is the only County in the entire state of Nevada that has a MANDATORY GUN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT! And while the newly passed NIC's improvement act that was signed into law this year that prohibits the FBI from charging for NIC's background checks, Clark County, Nevada STILL DOES!

    Continuing with the Ridiculous gun show infringement (Las Vegas, Clark County, Nevada) repeal/correction effort...

    http://lasvegasgunshow.com/
    http://www.crossroadsgunshows.com/

    E.G.:

    <snip>
    To: Warren Hardy [email protected],
    cc: [email protected],
    "Hoffecker, Craig" [email protected],
    "Lee, John Senator" [email protected],
    "Hardy, Warren Senator" [email protected],
    date: Sat, May 3, 2008 at 6:08 AM
    subject: Re: Pistol Purchase Wait Periods

    Any luck with this yet?

    the next scheduled gun show at Cashman center is May 10-11...

    Thanks in advance,
    (Omitted)

    re:
    On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:10 AM, Warren Hardy [email protected] wrote:

    (Omitted),
    It is my understanding that nothing has changed relative to the cash and
    carry ability. It was certainly not changed by the legislation we passed
    last session. I will contact Metro directly to see if they are enforcing it
    improperly, or if there are federal changes we are unaware of. As the email
    from Craig indicates, the statute and the ordinance are clear. I will see
    what I can do to clear this up.

    W--

    Warren B Hardy II
    Nevada State Senator
    702-453-1112 Office
    702-453-1155 Fax

    On 4/14/08 5:53 PM, (Omitted) wrote:

    To whom it may concern,

    If this is the case, please explain why it been enforced different since
    December 2007?

    Prior to December 2007 I could cash and carry a hand gun from the regular
    gun shows at Cashman center, and have done so; I now can not, nor can any
    other law abiding citizen from Nevada or elsewhere; the police attending the
    event clearly state that we can not carry it out regardless of whether we
    have a ccw and or a previous blue card registration citing the new laws that
    went into effect December 2007.

    Thanks in advance,
    (Omitted)

    re:
    On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:11 PM, Hoffecker, Craig
    [email protected] wrote:

    Senator Bob Beers
    Via Email: [email protected]

    Dear Senator Beers:

    As you can see from the email by Frank Adams, Director of the Nevada Police
    Chiefs' and Sheriffs' Association and copied below, it appears that the 72
    hour waiting period does not apply when the purchaser of the gun already has
    a weapon registered with the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department or the
    purchaser has a current carry-concealed weapons permit.

    The City of Las Vegas and Clark County Codes discussing the waiting period
    (my emphasis):

    Las Vegas City Code

    10.66.060 Sale-delivery waiting period--Manner of delivery.

    (A) When any sale of a pistol is made by a dealer under this Chapter,
    seventy-two hours must elapse between the time of sale and time of delivery
    to the purchaser, and when delivered, all pistols must be securely wrapped,
    must be unloaded and must be accompanied by a receipt, signed by dealer,
    setting forth:
    (1) The name, address and description of the purchaser or transferee;
    (2) A complete description of the pistol, including the manufacturer, model
    and manufacturer's serial number thereof;
    (3) The date and time of sale and the date and time of delivery of such
    pistol; and
    (4) A statement notifying the purchaser or transferee that said pistol must
    be registered with the Sheriff or his designee within twenty-four hours.
    (B) The aforesaid seventy-two-hour waiting period shall not apply to the
    sale of a pistol to any person who, at the time of such sale, produces bona
    fide documentary evidence that he is a member of a Federal law enforcement
    agency, that he is a peace officer of the State or any political subdivision
    thereof who is regularly employed for pay by the State or such subdivision,
    or that he currently owns a pistol which is duly registered in his name with
    any law enforcement agency in the County, nor shall said waiting period
    apply to any person who requires the use of a pistol in his employment and
    receives written permission from the Sheriff or his designee to waive said
    waiting period; provided, however, that all of the other provisions shall
    apply to any of such sales.
    (Ord. 1881 3, 1977: Ord. 1216 2 (part), 1965: prior code 6-4-9)

    Clark County Code

    12.04.080 Time between sale and delivery of pistol.

    When any sale of a pistol is made by a dealer under this chapter,
    seventy-two hours must elapse between the time of sale and the time of
    delivery to the purchaser. When delivered, all pistols must be securely
    wrapped and be unloaded, and must be accompanied by a receipt signed by the
    dealer, setting forth the name, address, and description of the purchaser or
    transferee, a complete description of the pistol (including the
    manufacturer, model and manufacturer's serial number thereof), the date and
    time of sale, and the date and time of delivery, of such pistol, and advice
    to the purchaser or transferee if a resident of the county that the pistol
    must be registered with the sheriff within seventy-two hours. (Ord. 3571
    2, 2007: Ord. 242 8, 1965)

    12.04.090 Exceptions to Section 12.04.080.

    The aforesaid seventy-two hour waiting period shall not apply to the sale of
    a pistol to any person who, at the time of such sale, produces bona fide
    documentary evidence that he is a member of a federal law enforcement
    agency; or a peace officer of the state of Nevada or any political
    subdivision thereof, regularly employed for pay by the state or such
    subdivision; or that he currently owns a pistol which is duly registered in
    his name with any law enforcement agency in Clark County; or that the pistol
    is an unfinished kit which is designed to fire black powder of the cap and
    ball or flintlock variety. And said waiting period shall not apply to any
    person who requires the use of a pistol in connection with his employment,
    and who receives written permission from the sheriff with express waiver of
    the waiting period; however, all of the other provisions herein shall apply
    to any such sales. (Ord. 876 1, 1984: Ord. 242 9, 1965)

    ---------------

    For whatever reason it appears that Clark County decided to split the
    "rule" and the "exceptions" into two parts. From looking at the legislative
    history of the Clark County Code it doesn't look like any amendment was made
    to the exceptions in Clark County Code 12.04.090 which lists the exceptions
    to Section 12.04.080. It is somewhat confusing with
    the two different sections unlike the Las Vegas City Code where the rule and
    exceptions are together. For the most part the two codes appear similar.

    If you (or Senators Hardy or Lee) have different opinions on reading these
    sections, please share them with me and I would be happy to pass them on to
    Mr. Adams. I hope this helps. My email is [email protected]
    mailto:[email protected] and my phone number is (775) 687-8620.
    Thank you.

    Craig

    ________________________________

    From: Frank Adams [mailto:[email protected]]
    Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 10:48 PM
    To: Hoffecker, Craig
    Subject: RE: Pistol Purchase Wait Periods

    Craig, sorry it took me a little bit to run this down. If the person has a
    weapon currently registered with LVMPD and has their registration card they
    do not have to wait the three days. Also if they had a current CCW permit
    they do not have to wait.

    Frank Adams

    </snip>

    Remember, to research the second amendment and other records of the Senator, Representative or other law makers in your area before you cast your vote for them... AND share your findings with your friends, family, peers and neighbors, you would be surprised at how many people do not pay attention to who they are voting for except for President and even then they often buy into the biased media spin...

    If you live in Nevada...
    Harry Reid - BAD GUY... uber liberal, ultra-left wing, gun grabbing, illegal alien loving nut job...
    Dina Titus - BAD GUY/GIRL... ditto.
    Oscar Goodman - BAD GUY... ditto.

    Bob Beers - GOOD GUY...
    John Ensign - GOOD GUY...
    Jon Porter - GOOD GUY...
    Jim Gibbons - GOOD GUY (for guns), BAD GUY(loves illegals and h1b visas).
    Last edited by Bohemian; 05-03-2008 at 10:30 AM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

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