OC-moto450r
Guest
2A
Last edited:
So my question is...
If you have a CCW but are OCing, are they going to enforce their version of the spirit of NRS 202.3667 and require you to show ID? Seems to be the same to me. Both laws are 100% regulating CC not OC.
If only it were this easy here in the Battle Born State.
If they want a "safe work environment" they should find a safer job.
Law enforcement, as well as working with the public in any capacity, has its risks.
Bear in mind that LE rarely makes the 10 most dangerous jobs list in any year.
How many of those more dangerous jobs restrict civil rights?
Controlling law-abiding citizens does nothing to improve their safety.
Posting signs does nothing to control criminals.
Why is that so hard to understand?
If they want a "safe work environment" they should find a safer job.
Law enforcement, as well as working with the public in any capacity, has its risks.
Bear in mind that LE rarely makes the 10 most dangerous jobs list in any year.
How many of those more dangerous jobs restrict civil rights?
Controlling law-abiding citizens does nothing to improve their safety.
Posting signs does nothing to control criminals.
Why is that so hard to understand?
The sight of someone other than an employee open carrying a gun disturbs them, when the majority of employees walking around inside their work environment are open carrying guns? So, it is not the open carrying per se that bothers them; it is the status of the person carrying the weapon. It is an us vs. them mentality that sends our public servants into paroxysmal fits of fear at seeing a mere Mundane (Will Grigg term) going cheerfully and peacefully about his business with a weapon on his hip, though the Mundane exhibits no aggressiveness or threatening behavior.
They feel insecure around the "law-abiding citizens" with weapons, who most likely have never drawn or pointed their weapons at another human being, while they feel perfectly safe in the presence of their fellow employees who often display aggressive natures and who most likely have drawn, pointed their weapons at, and threatened to kill other human beings with those weapons?
For some reason, I'm not buying their "safe work environment" argument as a justification for their lawlessness.
what sign has ever kept a criminal from committing a criminal act?... and how is restricting the lawful open carrying of weapons somehow "maintain(ing) a safe work environment for both (their) employees and visitors?" I think we all agree, somebody is really, really full of sh*t here.
If only it were this easy here in the Battle Born State.
I found this interesting.
Originally Posted by Grapeshot
It has been suggested (stated?) by Dan Hawes, I believe, that they title of a code does not play into the meaning/interpretation of the law. All such is contained within the body of the statute.
Since my OP cited the "title" of the NRS, I thought I'd relay the above info as food-for-thought. FYI Dan Hawes goes by the OCDO handle "user"
quote above from this thread, post #23
...areas where I can see the "spirit" of the law was to keep the guns out...
Yeah its kind of like the "overnight" success story that takes 15 years. It is nice that (now) a single letter can make a meaningful change for the better.
Brag away. What you have gained has taken nothing away from the rest of us. Maybe the newly formed NVFAC www.nvfac.org will learn what worked for y'all.