Henderson handgun registration.

As an update, I received a response from the City Attorney's office regarding what they say is an answer to questions 1 & 2. What they actually sent me was a cover letter from someone at Metro stating they had signed a mutual aid agreement and were returning it to Henderson. They did not bother to include a copy of the agreement.

I responded to them stating that this cover letter did not fulfill the requirements of these questions and literally had nothing to do with what I was asking. How does having an agreement to send manpower in the case of an emergency to each other have anything to do with enforcing county law within the city?

No response so far.

TBG

Demand letter to Henderson C.A.

I just sent this off and coppied to the Mayor, City Manager and all council members. We'll see what shakes.
Forgive the formatting as it did not copy over well.

TBG



03/08/13Josh Reid, City Attorney
Henderson City Hall
POB 95050
Henderson NV 89009-5050

Dear Mr. Reid,
As the chief legal authority for the City of Henderson I am directing this letter to you.
With regard to my previous letters and emails to City Officials about registration of firearms,
I have some follow up points I felt needed to be considered by the Mayor, Council and City Attorney’s office.
I believe it is quite obvious that the City of Henderson has no legal authority to register handguns as city
ordinance 8.98.030 became null and void under SB-92 in 2007. This required the City of Henderson to remove it
under a time limit as it did not meet state preemption requirements. The City failed to act and therefore is
in violation of state law.
In an email dated 09/06/12, Assistant City Attorney Robert Zentz stated the following:
“Clark County Ordinance 12.04.110 requires all county residents to register pistols with the Sheriff of Clark
County within 72 hours of possession. This same ordinance also permits the Sheriff to cooperate with other local
law enforcement so that “efficient registration shall be secured at minimum cost and duplication.” To that end,
the Henderson Police Department cooperates with the Sheriff in the registration of firearms.”
He further goes on to state that:
“The HPD has done a search of their records and has found no written agreements concerning Clark County Ordinance
12.04.110 in response to your request.”
On 01/21/13 I filed an NRS chapter 239 request which asked among other things, item #1 “Any document in the City’s
possession containing the authority with which the city of Henderson has been registering concealable firearms on
behalf of the County since preemption in 2007.” The only answer from your office appears to be irrelevant to the
questions asked. As such, I began my own search of Henderson Municipal Codes. In my search I was unable to locate
any ordinance that gives the Henderson Police Department the authority to enforce Clark County laws. The only
things I found were the following:

8.02.010 Violation of state law is city misdemeanor.
The commission of any act within the corporate limits of the city of Henderson by any person or persons, or the
failure to perform any duty imposed by law which is defined as an offense and made a misdemeanor under the laws
of the state of Nevada is declared to be, and shall constitute a misdemeanor when said act is committed, or said
duty omitted, within the corporate limits of the city of Henderson.

2.40.030 Policy of the city.
A. The proper operation of democratic government requires that public servants:

5. Shall uphold the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of
Nevada and the Charter of the City of Henderson, and carry out
Impartially the laws of the United States, the State of Nevada and the
Henderson Municipal code, and thus foster respect for all government.

As you can plainly see from these ordinances no provision is given for the enforcement of county law. Enforcement of
Clark County law would only apply if the city has a municipal ordinance to allow for it.
As I mentioned in previous correspondence, last spring there were two examples of the Henderson Police using the
outdated and nullified city code 8.98.030 in bringing charges. A reasonable assumption would be that HPD had no
authority to do so under Clark County Code 12.04.110, so they charged under the state voided city code. Even if HMC
8.98.030 were still in force per state law, it would be invalid as there is no means in place to register with the
Chief of police as called out by that code. These charges were at best improper.

Clark County ordinance 12.04.200 states the following:
It is unlawful for any person with at least 60 days of residency in the county to own or have in his possession,
within the unincorporated area of Clark County a gun, pistol or other firearm capable of being concealed, unless
the same has first been registered with the sheriff or with a police department of any on the incorporated cities
of Clark County.
Per this county ordinance there is no provision to require the registration of firearms within incorporated cities
and kept within those incorporated city boundaries. This county ordinance would only apply if I were to transport
my firearms outside the city limits of Henderson and into the unincorporated areas. It has been long understood that
the citizens of Boulder City are not required to register, nor does the Boulder City police enforce these county
ordinances. I have confirmed this with Boulder City.
Beginning in June of 2010 I began petitioning the City of Henderson to stop the enforcement of it’s illegal city code
HMC 8.99.030(M) and the improper enforcement of state law NRS 202.3673. After much discussion back and forth, your
predecessor finally admitted that the municipal code concerning firearms in city parks was indeed in violation of state
law and that the city was improperly interpreting state law with regard to firearms in city buildings. As such, signage
in city buildings was changed to reflect only the concealed carry of firearms per state law, and the prohibition of the
carry of firearms in city parks was removed.
It is my understanding that the City Attorney’s office is undertaking a review of all city municipal codes, and while I
laud those efforts, I believe when evidence of wrongful enforcement is presented it is the duty of city officials to
immediately address those concerns. I therefore am asking the city of Henderson to stop its illegal enforcement of
firearm registration with respect to the citizens of Henderson. It is my belief that I have clearly outlined that the
city has no authority under state law to do so and that county law does not apply within the city limits of the
incorporated city of Henderson.

In addition to the legalities, in my contact with both your office and the Henderson Police Department no one has been
able to show where the enforcement of registration has been a benefit in the solving of any crime in the city of Henderson.
There is no evidence that it has been beneficial in solving crimes in any part of the county either. It is just a nuisance
to the law abiding citizens of Henderson, and will likely at some point in the future end up in legal proceedings against
the city.

I look forward to your timely favorable reply.

Regards

Big Guy, if I ever need an attorney, I know who I am calling!

Excellent work.

OUTSTANDING!

The veiled threat at the end is nothing short of masterful.

I would mail this, Registered (Return Receipt) to the mayor, councilcritters and City Attorney. That will serve as prior notice for the lawsuit, if it doesn't shake them out of their tree.

DVC said:

OUTSTANDING!

The veiled threat at the end is nothing short of masterful.

I would mail this, Registered (Return Receipt) to the mayor, councilcritters and City Attorney. That will serve as prior notice for the lawsuit, if it doesn't shake them out of their tree.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your kind words. I'm thinking if a satisfactory answer is not forthcoming, I will look at filing charges against city officials under the referenced ordinance 2.40.030 Policy of the city which states:

A. The proper operation of democratic government requires that public servants:

5. Shall uphold the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of
Nevada and the Charter of the City of Henderson, and carry out
Impartially the laws of the United States, the State of Nevada and the
Henderson Municipal code, and thus foster respect for all government.

It is clear to me that they are in violation of this Municipal code. I will have to look to see if there is a penalty involved or if it would be civil and need to brought out in litigation against city officials. If the code has any teeth, this might get them off their butts. They seemed to move on another issue when Don't Tread On Me threatened the City Attorney with citizens arrest.

It is my experience that you have to surround them and not give them any way out without serious pain. Multiple avenues of attack are best.

TBG

Meeting with Josh Reid

I had a call this afternoon from the Henderson City Attorney's Assistant. I have a meeting scheduled with Josh Reid and A.C.A. Michael Oh on April 4th.

Should be interesting.

TBG

Take your recorder!

JoeSparky said:

Take your recorder!

Click to expand...

Take 2 of them, just in case !

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

The Big Guy said:

...It is just a nuisance to the law abiding citizens of Henderson...

Click to expand...

Since it is extremely common to use this phrase, we should note that "law-abiding" is a hyphenated compound word. Without the hyphen, I first read it as "nuisance to the law" and then was wondering what direction the sentence went with the next word.

I rarely use the phrase "law-abiding citizen" any more.

I've replaced it with "honest citizen," or sometimes "honest, rational citizen."

While I respect just and reasonable laws, there are too many of the others for me to consider NON law-abiding to be a condemnation.

Outstanding observation!

You show me the man; I'll show you the law-breaker.

I was just watching the NSL Judiciary comity hearing on SB137,223,226 and of coarse all the State and local PD's were all in opposition to all 3 bills.

Henderson PD rep. went out of his way to mention that it was "very easy and free" to register your hand gun in the City of Henderson when talking about 226. Sounds like they are digging in there heels


BBJ

Meeting with Henderson City Attorney.

I met with City Attorney Josh Reid and Assistant City Attorney Michael Oh this afternoon. Randy Mackie V.P. of Legislative Affairs for the NVFAC was also present.

The meeting went well. Reid asked some good questions and seemed receptive to my arguments. On several occasions he assured me that if the registration ordinance is invalid he will not fight it and it will be removed. I believe he had some real doubt whether it is valid under preemption. He kept saying that registration is done as a courtesy. We also talked about the cost of the program.

One of the things he really seemed perplexed about was if the registration produces no results in all the time it’s been in existence, why do we still have it? Why does the Sheriff defend it so strongly to which Randy and I both said at the same time “that’s what we keep asking”.

Michael Oh seems to think that the ordinance is ok saying that since the city did not make the changes it was ordered to do under state law, the state law automatically changed it under SB92. They spoke of simply amending the city registration ordinance. I told them that under preemption they were not allowed to do that. Any changes that would substantially change the meaning of the law would not be valid under state preemptions grandfather clause.

Going back to the park ordinance he stated that it will be removed. (Although not enforced it is still technically on the books.) He asked me if there had been any problems with regard to park carry and I told him no. The C.A.’s office is working on updating all city codes and ordinances and they expect that changes will be presented to the City Council by July 1[SUP]st[/SUP]. He stated that under state law changes have to be brought up by the council twice. I don’t really know what that is all about but as long as they get it done.

Randy filled him in on some county issues and legislative affairs. He made it clear that the Coalition was strongly behind my efforts and believe that my stand is correct.


TBG

The Big Guy said:

... He asked me if there had been any problems with regard to park carry and I told him no...

Click to expand...

I would have answered that differently.

If a sign (or even just an ordinance) wrongly says I can't carry, and I LEGALLY carry anyway, the other law-abiding people think I am a law-breaker. I have a problem with that.

Sometimes they make a MWAG call, and police roll out for no reason. That is a problem, even if they just wave and smile as they drive by.

But that is minutia compared to the awesome job you are doing talking to these officials! Outstanding!

MAC702 said:

I would have answered that differently.

If a sign (or even just an ordinance) wrongly says I can't carry, and I LEGALLY carry anyway, the other law-abiding people think I am a law-breaker. I have a problem with that.

Sometimes they make a MWAG call, and police roll out for no reason. That is a problem, even if they just wave and smile as they drive by.

But that is minutia compared to the awesome job you are doing talking to these officials! Outstanding!

Click to expand...

He was asking if were we being hassled by the police or has the issue been resolved as far as enforcement. I told him that the signs had been immediately covered and that the police pay us no never mind. His interest was to find out if the police were doing what they were supposed to with regard to carry in the parks. He apologized several times about the time it takes to get the actual code changed but again he assured us that it will be changed and in the interim it will not be enforced. Sometimes you just have to take people at their word until such time as they prove themselves to be other than truthful.

I feel we are making progress.

TBG

The Big Guy said:

...His interest was to find out if the police were doing what they were supposed to with regard to carry in the parks. ...

Click to expand...

Then you did perfect. You were the one there with your fingertip on the pulse of the conversation! Again, THANK YOU for these efforts!

Thanks for all the work you do. It sounds like those in charge in Henderson are fairly reasonable people. Not like the whining children in Las Vegas and Clark county.

I wish someone could identify where in the law previously enacted ordinances are grandfathered other than a COUNTY handgun registration ordinance. I heard this referenced when I talked to Stavros Anthony's assistant about the LV city parks ordinance, the LV city attorney Brad Jerbic mentioned it during the public meeting discussing the ordinance as did the others who defended the "no guns in parks except with a permit" portion of the law. Then the Clark county park police is another matter entirely....

NRS 268.418  Limited authority to regulate firearms; restrictions concerning registration of firearms in city in county whose population is 700,000 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.
3.  If the governing body of a city in a county whose population is 700,000 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.
4.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 1, as used in this section:
(a) “Firearm” means any device designed to be used as a weapon from which a projectile may be expelled through the barrel by the force of any explosion or other form of combustion.
(b) “Firearm capable of being concealed” includes all firearms having a barrel less than 12 inches in length.
(c) “Pistol” means a firearm capable of being concealed that is intended to be aimed and fired with one hand.
(Added to NRS by 1989, 652; A 2007, 1289; 2011, 1159)

Click to expand...

jpa said:

Thanks for all the work you do. It sounds like those in charge in Henderson are fairly reasonable people. Not like the whining children in Las Vegas and Clark county.

I wish someone could identify where in the law previously enacted ordinances are grandfathered other than a COUNTY handgun registration ordinance. I heard this referenced when I talked to Stavros Anthony's assistant about the LV city parks ordinance, the LV city attorney Brad Jerbic mentioned it during the public meeting discussing the ordinance as did the others who defended the "no guns in parks except with a permit" portion of the law. Then the Clark county park police is another matter entirely....

Click to expand...

Las Vegas has cut their own throat with regard to park carry grandfathered or not. They did away with the old ordinance, and made a completely new one. Even a fifth grader reading the NRS would be able to determine that they violated preemption. I'm not a lawyer but I don't think I need to be one to say their new ordinance would last about 10 minutes in litigation. Whether they want to admit it or not, OC or CC is now legal in LV parks. As the old saying goes you can beat the wrap but you can't beat the ride. Who wants to be a test case?

TBG

If i wasnt in the military i would be the first to do it. Hell, even so I am STILL considering it.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

The Big Guy said:

...Who wants to be a test case?

TBG

Click to expand...

I do. That should make a good headline. Local state-certified firearms law expert arrested for violating illegal local firearms law...