METRO BLINKS!!

I wish that I could take credit for this, but all praise must go to a loyal Section 11 reader. Our friend contacted Clark County Attorney Mary-Anne Miller pointing out the fact that Metro was NOT going to change their web site, or their policy, regarding the changes made by SB 92. Please see yesterday’s post to understand what happened when Larry Rhodes contacted Metro regarding the changes that went into effect 1/1/08.

Our guy went about this the right way, he cited the law, Metro’s incorrect posting on their website and the response County Attorney Miller had sent to me. In an unbelievably short period of time (he emailed her at about 1:25 p.m. and CA Miller responded back to him at 2:30 p.m.) CA Miller answered his concerns.

In her email CA Miller indicated that this had been brought to her attention by another individual and she had notified Metro this morning that their website was incorrect. So what did Metro do? They blinked!! Check out their new Firearms Registration page HERE.

Absolutely amazing! That, my friends, is the power of having right on your side! Now if we could only get CA Miller to re-evaluate her decision regarding Section 4 of SB 92!!

Speaking of Section 4 of SB 92, I received a letter today from my County Commissioner, Bruce Woodbury. He’s not taking any risks. He says that District Attorney David Roger’s opinion “will be binding on Clark County unless a contrary opinion comes from the Nevada Attorney General’s office or the courts.” I actually didn’t expect anything else. These guys don’t make independent decisions. They all line up and toe the party line. DA Roger’s decided, through County Attorney Miller, that even though the language is clear, SB 92 doesn’t really mean what it says.

I’m very hopeful that the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee to Keep and Bear Arms will take on our case.

WE MUST REMAIN EVER VIGILANT…EVER WATCHFUL

What The Heck Is This All About???

We have received reports that not only is Clark County and apparently the rest of the municipalities going to ignore the provisions of SB 92 as we interpret them, but now it appears that Metro is going to ignore the provisions as interpreted by the Clark County Attorney! See below:

To Sheriff Doug Gillespie:

Las Vegas Metropolitan Police (LVMPD) are still flouting the registration changes to Nevada Law! They still insist that the old 24 hour provision still applies. See what they say on their website: Metro Registration Requirements.

Also, I called LVMPD and they insisted that the 24 hour provision still applied. They told me I could take it up with the Legislature in Carson City if I didn't like it.

Someone in Vegas should point it out to the Clark County District Attorney's office (to Ms Miller perhaps) that the law is being flouted. Have them (her) look at the LVMPD's website.

I just got back from a short trip to Vegas. (I live in Arizona and have Arizona and Utah CCW Permits. The Utah Permit is recognized by Nevada now.) I registered the gun that I was carrying with the LVMPD within 24 hours because I don't want to be a test case (this is the second gun I've registered with the LVMPD).

Even though I complied with their misinterpretation of the Law I'd like to see it straightened out for other people. After reviewing your website, I see you are promulgating inaccurate (unlawful) and obsolete law information.

Do you actually plan to ATTEMPT to enforce the above unlawfully since the code was preempted by the people of the great state of Nevada in the 74th legislative session?

Respectfully,

Larry Rhodes


Mr. Rhodes is HOT and SO AM I! What the hell good is getting a law changed if the County Attorney and now Metro refuse to follow it??

I am so pissed that if I had a spare $1,000 I'd challenge these idiots today!! Unfortunately I don't have the spare cash for a lawyer and I'm not in a position to set myself up for being arrested, that being said I'm still thinking about it!!

Folks it is time to do something…any suggestions????

WE MUST REMAIN EVER VIGILANT…EVER WATCHFUL

Random Thoughts and Pot Shots II

Still no response from the various City Attorneys. I’m guessing that we are not going to hear from them unless prodded again. I will do the proddin’!!

In our last post we mentioned the possibility of contacting the Nevada State Attorney General, Catherine Cortez Masto. Well I’m having second thoughts on this, at least for now. AG Masto is a pretty liberal Democrat and I’d much rather we wait until we have a better handle on where we stand legally. As a friend said, “Don’t ask the question unless you know how they’ll answer”. I think that’s good advice. If we get shot out of the saddle right out of the box then we’re in a much weaker position when we want to go forward.

Speaking of good advice, I visited with Dudley Brown the Executive Director of the National Association for Gun Rights. He seems like a pretty smart guy. His advice is for us to form a statewide association, gather members, solicit contributions, and then as a unified group flex our muscles. As one would guess, this would take time, resources, and dedication. In the meanwhile we sit with the County and cities ignoring the state law and watch our rights being infringed everyday.

I have sent a bundle of material to the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. I’m hoping that we might intrigue them enough to take on our case. In addition I’ve contacted the only real friendly media in town, the Las Vegas Penny Press. I sent Fred Wienberg, the Editor and Publisher, the same material as I did to SAF. I’m hoping that Fred will look into this and pursue it.

Depending on the response from SAF I may also contact the Gun Owners of America. The NRA-ILA would be the very last place I’d take our case to. The NRA-ILA has a history of rejecting fights that they aren’t 110% sure that they’ll win. Just look into the history of the current Supreme Court Case, Heller vs. the District of Columbia. The NRA pushed and pushed hard for this case NOT to go to the Supreme Court. Now they’re behind it, but not happily nor willingly.

Today, my hero, Fred Thompson dropped out of the Republican race for President. I’m very saddened by this. To me Fred was about the only electable true conservative running. I am now going to weigh my objections to Ron Paul and Mitt Romney and determine who will get my support. I did attend this past weekend’s Nevada Republican Caucus and was selected as a delegate from my precinct to the Clark County Republican Convention. This should be interesting.

Give me your thoughts on forming a statewide organization. This would have to be a no compromise group, different than the Nevada State Rifle and Pistol Association and the NRA for sure. It would need widespread support from all sectors of the shooting sports as well as from hunters. I’m just not sure that kind of support is out there, but then I’ve always been a bit of a cynic.

WE MUST REMAIN EVER VIGILANT…EVER WATCHFUL

OUR FIRST RESPONSE! NOT ENCOURAGING

Yesterday I received the following e-mail from Mary-Anne Miller Clark County Counsel. It is similar to a letter received by one of our supporters, Tim. Here it is:

Dear Mr. Lussem,

District Attorney David Roger has referred your recent correspondence regarding 2007 Senate Bill 92 to me for response. Another constituent had raised similar concerns, and Mr. Roger asked me to review the legislative history on this bill to determine whether Clark County has correctly updated its ordinances.

I agree that Section 4 of SB 92 might lend itself to the interpretation that you suggest. However, the rules of statutory construction in Nevada require that one read a piece of legislation in its entirety to glean statutory intent, and if that legislation is ambiguous, one is to review the legislative minutes to determine intent.

Contrary to Section 4, Sections 3 and 5 of SB 92 retain authority in a county to regulate firearms, and the minutes of the legislators make clear that a compromise was reached to allow counties over 400,000 to retain authority as long as their ordinances were amended to allow transitory possession without registration as directed by the Legislature.

I hope this adequately explains the position of this office. We are, of course, open to reconsideration of the local ordinances if we receive contrary direction from the Attorney General.

Sincerely, Mary-Anne Miller
County Counsel
Office of the District Attorney
Clark County, Nevada
(702) 455-4761
millerm@co.clark.nv.us

Of course, we completely disagree with Ms. Miller. #2 under section 4 states categorically that "provisions of this act, as amended October 1, 2007, apply to ordinances and regulations adopted before, on or after June 13, 1989".

What part of "provisions of this act" doesn't she get? She can't cherry pick what parts of the act apply and which do not.

I have sent letters to each of the Clark County Commissioners, unfortunately before I received this email. In the letters I expressed our interpretation of the provisions of S.B. 92 and that we feel that Clark County needs to amend all county wide ordinances to comply with the NRS.

I have yet to receive any response from the city attorneys, but I'm guessing that Ms. Miller's opinion will be reflected in most of their letters.

Do we now go to the Attorney General. Ms. Miller says that the county is willing to "reconsider" local ordinances if the Attorney General gives them some input. I have no idea if the State Attorney General will side with our interpretation or Clark County's, but I guess this is our next step.

In all honesty I am not sure how to approach the AG. Do I do it directly as I did with the various County and City Attorney's? Do I wait to hear back from the other City Attorneys? Do I try to find someone to speak for us that has credibility with the AG? At this point I sure don't want to screw this up.

I have been in contact with Dudley Brown, Executive Director of the National Association for Gun Rights and am to visit with him on the phone next week. Maybe he can help shed some light.

Any helpful suggestions would be appreciated. Oh, and don't hesitate to do something on your own. This issue belongs to every Nevadan and every reader of SECTION 11!!

WE MUST REMAIN EVER VIGILANT...EVER WATCHFUL

Still Waiting...

It’s now been over a week and I have not heard one word from any of the District or City Attorneys that I mailed my inquiries to. If I don’t hear by the end of the week, then it’s going to be Phase II (I’m not real sure what that will be, but it will be very serious!)

As you all know, Saturday the 19th is Nevada caucus day. I’ve personally examined all of the candidates that want to be president and have come to one conclusion.

Fred Thompson…08!!

Agree or disagree, I don’t really care, but I think that Fred upholds the conservative principles that I believe in and is a very longtime supporter of our Second Amendment rights.

If you go to caucus on Saturday, please consider Fred as your candidate.

We Must Remain Ever Vigilant…Ever Watchful

RANDOM THOUGHTS & POT SHOTS…

While waiting to hear back from the various legal beagles here in Clark County regarding their response to my inquiries as posted below, I thought I’d share some stuff with you.

Clark County is reportedly facing at least a $42 Million budget shortfall this fiscal year. One solution? Voluntarily do away with the concealable handgun registration ordinance! Metro said last year, in testimony on changes to the Concealed Carry statute, that they were losing money in processing concealed carry permits. This was well before county sales taxes started their nosedive. Well if they’re losing bucks there, then they surely must be losing even more on this unconstitutional ordinance. I say “Scrap it and save money!!” (I wish I could take credit for this innovative idea, but I must admit it came from one or our readers)

Although this happened a little while ago maybe some of our Southern Nevada readers were unaware that Sheriff Ken Furlong up in Carson County thinks he can get away with a violation of Section 11 and Nevada Revised Statutes and that no one will call him on it! Oops! Sheriff Furlong decided that he would like the serial numbers for all firearms that are put on an individual’s concealed carry permit. NRS does NOT require serial numbers on a CCW, just the make, model and caliber. In essence Sheriff Furlong thinks he’d like to institute his own handgun registration ordinance without benefit of his County Board of Commissioners or state law! As we all know that is a violation of Carson County’s residents Section 11 rights. This was pointed out to the befuddled sheriff and he indicated that this was “optional” and not required. That may be, but the space is still on his CCW form. This is just another reason that CCW’s MUST be taken away from the county sheriff’s and placed under the control of the Department of Public Safety.

Have any of our Southern Nevada friends heard about this? It seems that confiscating firearms from individuals who bring them into a county park is becomming very common. I have heard that this has been happening for some time. As far as I can tell, there is NO county ordinance prohibiting firearms on county park property. I’ve read Title 19 of the Clark County codes and I can’t find this being addressed anywhere. On the other hand there is a Park Regulation prohibiting firearms from being carried or discharged in a park. See THIS. I’m not certain when this rule (or is it a regulation?) was instituted, but my guess it was “on, before, or after 6/13/89”. It’s gotta GO right along with the other illegal Clark County firearms ordinances. I'm thinking that this illegal reg was passed in some "consent" item that the County Commisssioners probably never even read.

Tim, one of our loyal readers, has received a letter from Mayor Mike Montandon of North Las Vegas indicating that he is fully in favor of doing away with the unconstitutional and now illegal firearms related ordinances found in his fair city. Mayor Mike is a firearms enthusiast himself and has been trying to convince his city council that these ordinances found in 9.32.010 through 9.36.200 of the City of North Las Vegas city code should be scrapped. We have heard that a major reason former NLV Police Chief Mark Paresi became “former” was based on his lack of support for Mayor Mike’s initiative. We’re crossing our fingers that the mayor gets the council to side with him before someone sues his city for violating Nevada State statutes.

That’s about it for now. Keep those comments coming and tell your friends and shootin’ buddies about Section 11. We need all the support we can get!!

WE MUST REMAIN EVER VIGILANT…EVER WATCHFUL

Getting Active…We Can Use Your Help!

Please read the various comments following the last couple of posts. Richard and Varminter have been sending letters and visiting with folks all in an effort to get S.B. 92 to be recognized as meaning what it says.

Last week I sent five letters to the Clark County District Attorney and others, as mentioned in my most recent post.

Today the Las Vegas Review-Journal ran an editorial criticizing the City of North Las Vegas for something or other, but in it they erroneously said that NLV’s “hand gun on the seat of the car” ordinance was invalidated by the last year’s legislature. Here’s a link to the editorial: R-J

Based on that opinion piece, I sent the following letter to the editor:

January 7, 2008

Las Vegas Review-Journal
Las Vegas, NV

Re: Today’s editorial “North Las Vegas Pet Tricks”

Today’s editorial points out what so many of us have known, the City of North Las Vegas continues to think of themselves to be above Nevada State Law. I must point out an error in your commentary, however.

For the longest time, law-abiding Clark County gun owners with target or self-defense weapons safely cased in their cars had to worry about inadvertently driving across the line into North Las Vegas, where the gun laws were more restrictive. (The Legislature finally told them to knock it off, last year.)

In the above statement regarding North Las Vegas’ city ordinance 9.32.080, which I believe to be accurate, I’m afraid that North Las Vegas has made no change. In fact I believe that their entire Chapter 9 is now in violation of NRS 244.364 and/or NRS 269.222 as amended by the legislature last year in S.B. 92.

In NRS 244.364 and/or NRS 269.222, as amended, the state legislature reserves for itself all firearms related issues with only two exceptions, Clark County’s concealable handgun registration requirement—as modified by S.B. 92—and the ability of a county, city or town to regulate the discharge of firearms in their jurisdiction. That’s it. They can have no other ordinances regulating firearms.

The City of North Las Vegas is not the only entity that is ignoring these revisions to state law. As of January 1, 2008 Clark County, the City of Las Vegas, the City of Henderson and the City of Boulder City all have ordinances on their books that are in violation of NRS 244.364 and/or NRS 269.222 as amended. I believe that most of Chapter 12 of Clark County’s ordinances, most of Chapter 10.66 through 10.68 of the City of Las Vegas’ ordinances, a good portion of the ordinances numbered 8.98 in the City of Henderson, and a small portion of Boulder City’s ordinance 7-1-3 fall into this category as well.

I have requested a response from the County District Attorney and the various cities’ City Attorneys regarding their advising their commissioners, councilmen and the Clark County sheriff that these ordinances are now invalid. As of today, I have not received any response from these individuals.

I would be more than happy to discuss this with anyone on your staff and you can read more about it on my blog: SECTION 11. Additionally if you wish for copies of S.B. 92, as enrolled, or of the applicable county and city ordinances, please let me know and I can email them to you.

Sincerely:

Michael S. Lussem

As you will see in our comments section, it looks this is going to be a fight. Clark County’s D.A.’s office has already chimed in disagreeing with our premise. I haven’t received a response to the inquiries that I sent last week, but I’m expecting much the same from Clark County, and the cities of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson and Boulder City.

I ask any of you reading this to call, email, or write a letter to the Clark County District Attorney and the various city attorneys with the same question, “Are you going to advise your commissioners, council members and the Clark County Sheriff that all firearms related ordinances with the exception of the concealable hand gun registration in Clark County and the various ordinances dealing with the discharging of firearms in their jurisdiction are now superceded by state law?”

WE MUST REMAIN EVER VIGILANT…EVER WATCHFUL

Moving Forward…Are You Coming With Me??

Now that S.B. 92 has gone into effect, I’ve sent letters to the Clark County District Attorney and the city attorneys of North Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Henderson and Boulder City. I have asked if they will now advise their governments that all of their unique firearms related ordinances have been superseded. I listed the affected ordinances for each entity and also sent each a copy of the bill as enrolled. If you would like a copy of any of these letters, just let me know. They’re too lengthy to post here.

It will be interesting to see what, if any, response I get back. I’m not holding my breath. As one of our commentators has said (and I agree with him) we’ll need an aggrieved party to file an action against the county or one of the cities before this will be resolved.

I’ve received responses from two attorneys to my inquiry regarding consultation and the development of a plan of action to fight for the provisions in S.B. 92. One Las Vegas attorney returned my call and insisted that this would be a Federal case (I have no idea what he's been smoking). I tried to explain that this involved a Nevada Revised Statute and contrary ordinances here in Clark County. His fee? $15,000 retainer!

Dr. Stephen Halbrook, the noted Second Amendment attorney, said he believes we have a case. Unfortunately his fee is $350 per hour.

So maybe someone at the Claude Hall Gun Show this weekend will turn up as an aggrieved party when he is denied the ability to take his hand gun home because no one has a City of Las Vegas “Pistol Permit”.

So…what have you done to help us eliminate these unconstitutional and illegal ordinances??

WE MUST REMAIN EVER VIGILANT…EVER WATCHFUL

IT’S NOW 2008…WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE??

Here it is the New Year! 2008!! If you have read the comments that have been submitted to my last couple of posts you’ll see that there are a number of readers who agree with me that S. B. 92 says what it says. That is, the only firearms ordinance left standing in Clark County is the unconstitutional concealable handgun registration ordinance as amended in this bill.

I personally have contacted a local attorney, via email, to ask if their firm would be interested in pursuing the challenge. As of today I haven’t received a response. I guess I really didn’t expect a local practicing attorney to jump on this, but I was hopeful. Anyway, I’m going to see if there is any firm, either here in Vegas or within Nevada, who might be interested. And if so, what it’s going to cost.

That mi amigos is the crux, what’s it going to cost? I’m not wealthy by any measure. I don’t know any wealthy people that could fund such a challenge. Maybe we could hold a raffle?? I’ve got a firearm or two that I could put up and I bet that there are a few others who could sweeten a pot to make such a raffle successful.

We’ll continue to take advice, suggestions, and comments and if anyone wants to do a challenge on their own then my advice is….GO FOR IT!!

I’ve got another attorney to contact, Stephen Halbrook who is a constitutional and firearms specialty lawyer. He’s written several books and been a litigator before the U.S. Supreme Court as well as various state and local jurisdictions. He was one of the attorneys that filed the request for relief in the Hurricane Katrina confiscations in New Orleans.

Whether Dr. Halbrook will give me the time of day, blow me off, refer me to a colleague or take on the Clark County challenge is yet to be determined. I can promise you this, though, I will not sit idly by….WILL YOU??

WE MUST REMAIN EVER VIGILANT….EVER WATCHFUL