Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: WTH, Campus Carry destroyed...

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    84

    WTH, Campus Carry destroyed...

    Wtf... why is the chairman allowed to kill a bill that at least 7/12 members would have voted in favor of allowed to remove the bill without votes? This pisses me off so bad, it's an utter slap in the face of our legislative process. Seems like the guys taking bribes or something when there is support for it and he kills it before allowing it to be voted on. Anyone follow this closer than me that could tell me WTF happened? Also how he has the authority to do that?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927
    Quote Originally Posted by MP_4_Life View Post
    Wtf... why is the chairman allowed to kill a bill that at least 7/12 members would have voted in favor of allowed to remove the bill without votes? This pisses me off so bad, it's an utter slap in the face of our legislative process. Seems like the guys taking bribes or something when there is support for it and he kills it before allowing it to be voted on. Anyone follow this closer than me that could tell me WTF happened? Also how he has the authority to do that?
    Because that is just the way it is. The majority party (Democrats) get to control everything. And this isn't new - the same thing happened to Campus Carry last session. The bill did pass the first house (senate) but the bill was killed singlehandedly by Asm Horne (by him not allowing a vote.)

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Perhaps the Dems are hoping for a campus mass shooting, which will enable them to impose tight restrictions on our civil rights.

    That's the only possibility which fits all of the evidence.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pointy end and slightly to the left
    Posts
    1,539
    My opinion, by not allowing such a common since life saving measures to pass increases the chance of another mass murder event.

    By allowing life saving laws to fail, I sure hope it is because of brain dead knowledge. The need for grand standing among their peers, and being part of the clueless who puts themselves in the, we know better than anyone else group. Not in hopes of making it easier for another disaster to help fuel their anti gun agenda.


    So the battle must continue no matter their brain dead reasons.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    Perhaps the Dems are hoping for a campus mass shooting, which will enable them to impose tight restrictions on our civil rights.

    That's the only possibility which fits all of the evidence.
    I actually e-mailed the chairman on his embarrassing actions and I even told him I pray no other victims come from his poor decision, because the blood of the future victims are on his hands. I find it b/s that any one person can oppose a bill single handed and effectively destroy the bill. I feel this is a travesty to our justice system, is there a way to bypass the houses so they can't take this kind of action in the future?

  6. #6
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Quote Originally Posted by MP_4_Life View Post
    I actually e-mailed the chairman on his embarrassing actions and I even told him I pray no other victims come from his poor decision, because the blood of the future victims are on his hands. I find it b/s that any one person can oppose a bill single handed and effectively destroy the bill. I feel this is a travesty to our justice system, is there a way to bypass the houses so they can't take this kind of action in the future?
    The only way to fix this is to get a case before the Nevada Supreme Court and get an oppinion of a majority of the court to say that either the statute itself is unconstitutional or the process of arbitrary denial is unconstitutional. This requires someone with deep pockets or a wealthy sponsor to be willing to persue such a lengthy process. This is what would happen. A student would sure in district court. Either way the court rules, it will be appealed. The Nevada supreme court will rule that the plaintiff didn't propperly persue the matter to the Board of Regants and require the Board to hear the case. The Board of regants will hear the case and find that the denial is justified, the student would then have to again go back to district court where in either case, the verdict would be appealed again to the supreme court. You're looking at a ten year process at least, and probably $250k in legal fees. Most students wouldn't bother because they're in and out of the university in 4 years. and very few of them have the money to pay their tuition out of pocket, much less fund a suit of this magnitude.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Blood on their hands...

    Quote Originally Posted by MP_4_Life View Post
    I actually e-mailed the chairman on his embarrassing actions and I even told him I pray no other victims come from his poor decision, because the blood of the future victims are on his hands. I find it b/s that any one person can oppose a bill single handed and effectively destroy the bill. I feel this is a travesty to our justice system, is there a way to bypass the houses so they can't take this kind of action in the future?
    They ALREADY figuratively have blood on their hands. Here is the text of my July 31, 2011 letter:
    July 31, 2011
    Dr Marc Johnson
    Interim President
    University of Nevada, Reno/001
    Reno NV
    89557-0061

    Dear Dr. Johnson,

    I received you letter denying me permission to lawfully carry my concealed firearm on the UNR Campus in accordance with Nevada law.

    I must say I am astounded by your remarks.

    In my October 5, 2007 letter to Dr Milton Glick, I stated “In view of your current policy, you will effectively have the blood of innocent victims on your hands in the event such a crime would occur at UNR.

    Sadly, my statement above turned out to be prophetic as shortly thereafter, on October 22, 2007, UNR student Amanda Collins was brutally assaulted and raped at gunpoint.

    By continuing to follow the late Glick’spolicy of virtually total denial, you too have the blood of innocent victims upon your hands.

    Government statistics and credible private studies show that lawful carry of a concealed firearm actually reduces crime. Also, consider the fact that our neighboring great state of Utah does not prohibit concealed firearm permittees from carrying on campus and has experienced no adverse effects.

    Nevada is not immune to such horrors that have occurred at many colleges across the nation. I urge you to get the facts and reconsider your policy. CCW permittees undergo an extensive vetting process and are among the most conscientious of law-abiding citizens.

    The 1st, 4th, and 5thAmendments apply on campus. Why not the2nd Amendment?

  8. #8
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by varminter22 View Post
    They ALREADY figuratively have blood on their hands. Here is the text of my July 31, 2011 letter:
    Very good letter. Too bad common sense is so uncommon...TBG
    Last edited by The Big Guy; 04-13-2013 at 08:12 PM.
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  9. #9
    Regular Member punisherprice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    92
    whatever happened to checks and balances? i guess it doesnt apply to anti-gun individuals...
    "Si vis pacem parabellum" - If you want peace, Prepare for war.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by punisherprice View Post
    whatever happened to checks and balances? i guess it doesn't apply to anti-gun individuals...
    Sad but true. I just fail to understand why people run for offices that affect a citizenship of an area, yet they let emotions and their own beliefs run their judgments instead of thinking logically an
    d thoroughly investigating a cause and make a valid judgment based on constitutionality and thoroughly factual information instead of emotion. Honestly If I wasn't in my late 20's already I would change my major in school and try and become a civil rights attorney or litigator and try and help put our country back on track of following our constitution and factual based laws, but 8 years is too long to wait at this point to be able to do that. If only people could keep emotion out of the legal process and follow the constitution and fix this system that might not be broken but very different from what out founding fathers envisioned of this great nation.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Quote Originally Posted by MP_4_Life View Post
    Sad but true. I just fail to understand why people run for offices that affect a citizenship of an area, yet they let emotions and their own beliefs run their judgments instead of thinking logically an
    d thoroughly investigating a cause and make a valid judgment based on constitutionality and thoroughly factual information instead of emotion. Honestly If I wasn't in my late 20's already I would change my major in school and try and become a civil rights attorney or litigator and try and help put our country back on track of following our constitution and factual based laws, but 8 years is too long to wait at this point to be able to do that. If only people could keep emotion out of the legal process and follow the constitution and fix this system that might not be broken but very different from what out founding fathers envisioned of this great nation.
    Critical thinking is not a requisite of public office. Truthfully, those serving on the state level are only really seeking advancement to a higher office. They could give a **** less is the legislation they pass or obstruct is in the best interests of the people they represent as long as they can get enough support to run for a cushy federal office where they get much better perks. These jack holes have no idea that they are tugging at the tail of a snake that bites back.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    During the debate, one of the officials said that there were few applications for a waiver.

    This was stated as if it had some kind of significance.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    During the debate, one of the officials said that there were few applications for a waiver.

    This was stated as if it had some kind of significance.
    no one pointed out the number of people who were likely told by their CCW instructor that it was outright illegal to carry, rather than the truth that they could theoreticaly get permission to carry; so the don't bother to even try. Additionally, many people know that it's pointless to ask for permission to carry because the truth is, they know they'll just be denied anyway.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    People don't bother to apply for waivers that they know won't be granted.

    I hope that when there is another incident on a Nevada campus, someone carrying Constitutionally will stop it, put the attacker down, then dare the university to prosecute.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    People don't bother to apply for waivers that they know won't be granted.

    I hope that when there is another incident on a Nevada campus, someone carrying Constitutionally will stop it, put the attacker down, then dare the university to prosecute.
    You know that'd be great, but they'd make it out that the savoir would be one of the aggressors I bet, and the Metro cops would kill him claiming he/she was one of the attackers.

    I have to admit, I think it's kinda extreme thinking but I have a feeling we're looking at a powder keg waiting to explode, and I have a weird feeling that the gun issues is gonna be the spark that ignites it.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by MP_4_Life View Post
    I have a feeling we're looking at a powder keg waiting to explode, and I have a weird feeling that the gun issues is gonna be the spark that ignites it.
    You mean, like the last time?

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    You mean, like the last time?
    Good point. I keep forgetting that is what set the powder keg off last time too.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    The results would be similar, too. Have you noticed how much of the nation's vital facilities are in red states, and how few in blue states?

    The West Coast would stay Loyalist -- for maybe two or three weeks. They wouldn't last too long if the highways were blocked on the borders from AZ, NV and ID -- all certain to be on our side -- and over 50% of California's electricity comes from NV and AZ, and 2/3 of their natural gas comes through Arizona, so they would have to decide whether it's more important to use the remaining third for gas-fired powerplants or hot food and water. Whatever the decision, there will be enough unhappy people that Sacramento would fold, hoping that they had done so fast enough to not be thrown out of office.

    Without California, DC wouldn't have a prayer of maintaining power over the Western states.

    Ultimately, DC would either have to return to the original plan of free and independent states, allied for common purposes, or DC would only control the Northeast and possibly the Great Lakes states.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    The results would be similar, too. Have you noticed how much of the nation's vital facilities are in red states, and how few in blue states?

    The West Coast would stay Loyalist -- for maybe two or three weeks. They wouldn't last too long if the highways were blocked on the borders from AZ, NV and ID -- all certain to be on our side -- and over 50% of California's electricity comes from NV and AZ, and 2/3 of their natural gas comes through Arizona, so they would have to decide whether it's more important to use the remaining third for gas-fired powerplants or hot food and water. Whatever the decision, there will be enough unhappy people that Sacramento would fold, hoping that they had done so fast enough to not be thrown out of office.

    Without California, DC wouldn't have a prayer of maintaining power over the Western states.

    Ultimately, DC would either have to return to the original plan of free and independent states, allied for common purposes, or DC would only control the Northeast and possibly the Great Lakes states.
    Wow, you've thought a lot about this huh? I just pray it never comes to something like that, but we'll have to wait and see how things play out. I think the biggest concern in a situation like that is how much of the military will back the people or the government.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by MP_4_Life View Post
    Wow, you've thought a lot about this huh? I just pray it never comes to something like that, but we'll have to wait and see how things play out. I think the biggest concern in a situation like that is how much of the military will back the people or the government.
    I hope and pray that it is never necessary.

    I doubt that the military would go to war again against American citizens. The Civil War was won by the North because they were able to match armies with the South, and they had the resources to back it up. Today, most recruiting is in the red states, most production, most energy and other resources, and nearly all of the bases which house warfighting and weapons as their primary occupants. Most of the bases in blue states are non-ordnance logistics, engineers, etc., who don't offend the tender sensibilities of the Save-the-Moss crowd by smelling like gun oil.

    This means that the military is more likely to be sympathetic to an "honorable dissention" by the people in their hometowns than to some leader who doesn't much like the military, who rules from distant DC. It also means that the physical power is in the red states, while the political power is in the blue. If some idiot pushes too hard, too fast, he's likely to start something he can't finish and won't enjoy.

    Just like last time.

    Yes, I've given it some thought over the years. History is an interest of mine, and what we are living today will be history tomorrow It helps to have some idea what the signs and portents mean, and how they fit into what's come before and will come after.
    Last edited by DVC; 04-15-2013 at 11:00 PM.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    One interesting fact is that a "blue" state is blue because of its dense urban areas. The majority of the land (and production areas) are in the red parts of those "blue" states.

    Even the vast majority of California (area-wise, farm-wise) is red.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    One interesting fact is that a "blue" state is blue because of its dense urban areas.
    More precisely, its dense urban population.

    . . .who prove just how dense they really are in the voting booth . . .

  23. #23
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    One interesting fact is that a "blue" state is blue because of its dense urban areas. The majority of the land (and production areas) are in the red parts of those "blue" states.

    Even the vast majority of California (area-wise, farm-wise) is red.
    The republicans owned California before '86 amnesty.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  24. #24
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713
    There is an effort to try and revive campus carry if you can spare a moment to write an e-mail... may be long shot, but it is worth a shot: http://www.douglasgop.org/2013/04/ur...e-minutes.html

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Following that link, I am one of several who have personally emailed the Speaker of the Assembly to ask her to revive it. My entire letter can be seen on the thread at the Nevada Shooters forum.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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