Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: CCW / Instacheck may not be lost: NRA says call your County Sheriff ASAP

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Washoe County, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    256

    Post imported post

    http://www.NRAILA.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=4061

    Important Information for Nevada’s Right-to-Carry Permit Holders!

    Tuesday, July 01, 2008

    As many of you have been made aware, as of today, Tuesday, July 1, all Nevada CCW permits will no longer qualify as an alternative to a National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) through the Federal Bureau of Investigation. This action is a result of Nevada's loss of exemption due to an audit conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) in 2004 which uncovered a number of Brady Law violations.


    In 2006, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was reached between BATFE and all seventeen of Nevada sheriffs. The MOU specifically addressed the absence of a Nevada law requiring NICS checks to be conducted by all county sheriffs before issuing renewal CCW permits to include a check of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) databases for applicants who are not citizens of the United States. During the 2007 legislative session, a measure was introduced to fulfill the MOU agreement but fell victim to political wrangling over permit fee increases and the bill died when the Governor pledged to veto a fee increase of any kind, despite agreements worked out between the interested parties.


    As a result, no legislative fix was passed to correct the audit deficiency and in May of 2008, BATFE issued another edict fulfilling their promise that all Nevada FFL's eliminate Nevada CCW permittees’ NICS exemption effective July 1, 2008.


    NRA has recently learned that the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association (NVSCA) will be discussing the possibility of asking BATFE for another audit of the Nevada CCW permit process prior to their scheduled July 17 quarterly meeting. According to NVSCA Executive Director Frank Adams, he believes that Nevada could pass a new audit, however, the request to BATFE must be given the green light from all seventeen sheriffs. Please take the time to contact your Sheriff immediately and ask that they join with their fellow sheriffs when this matter comes before them! The contact information for your Sheriff, as well as all seventeen, can be found on the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association website at www.nvsca.com/agency_links.html.


    On another very important note, the NVSCA sub-committee on Nevada CCW will be meeting on Tuesday, August 5 at 1:30 p.m. at the Sawyer Building in Las Vegas. Last year was the first meeting of this kind to be held and was attended by over a hundred NRA members and activists with an interest in the CCW process.


    We are hoping to get even more to attend this meeting where Frank Adams and several NVSCA officers will be on hand to discuss firearms issues. A television link to Carson City will be made available for all who want to attend from northern Nevada (details will follow with more information on the link).

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    333

    Post imported post

    Dear Sheriff Gillespie,

    As I'm sure you are aware, the BATFE has once again rescinded Nevada
    CFP (CCW) holders' exemption from Brady background checks during the
    process of an FFL transfer or retail firearm purchase.

    I understand via information from the NRA that Frank Adams has
    suggested petitioning the BATFE for another audit, which he feels the
    state could pass.

    As a resident of Clark County and a supporter of your successful
    campaign for the office of Sheriff, I strongly urge you to support Mr. Adams'
    efforts in doing whatever is possible to restore the recognition of Nevada's
    Concealed Firearm Permit.

    Nevada CFP holders are among the most upstanding citizens in our fine
    state, and as I expect you're aware, we are a growing and politically
    active group who participates in elections at a level far greater than
    other citizen demographics.

    Thank you for your attention to this important matter. I've quoted
    below, the relevant information I received from the NRA regarding this
    issue.

    Regards,

    bobernet
    my home address
    in clark county

    "NRA has recently learned that the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs
    Association (NVSCA) will be discussing the possibility of asking BATFE
    for another audit of the Nevada CCW permit process prior to their
    scheduled July 17 quarterly meeting. According to NVSCA Executive
    Director Frank Adams, he believes that Nevada could pass a new audit,
    however, the request to BATFE must be given the green light from all
    seventeen sheriffs."

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Sparks, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    177

    Post imported post

    Sent a very similar email to Sheriff Haley here in Washoe County.

  4. #4
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713

    Post imported post

    I just wrote a letter to Washoe County Sherriff Michael Haley.

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    333

    Post imported post

    Response from Doug Gillespie's office, Lieutenant Tom Roberts, Director, Office of Intergovernmental Services Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

    Code:
    Dear Mr. bobernet
    
    Sheriff Gillespie has received your email regarding the Nevada CCW permit process and he has asked me to respond to you
    in his behalf.
    
    The vision of LVMPD is "To Be Safest Community in America". One of our Department goals is to "Initiate Timely and
    Open Communication". Open dialogue and feedback between LVMPD and the citizens of Clark County, like yourself,
    assists us in achieving this goal and ultimately our vision. We appreciate the time that you have taken to voice your
    concerns and hope that this reply answers your questions.
    
    The exempt status of Nevada CCW holders from Brady checks was not an issue in Nevada until an audit revealed that
    Nevada's CCW Laws and processes did not include the required checks under the Brady Law. As you may already be aware,
    during the 2007 Nevada Legislature, Assembly bill 21 was sponsored by the Nevada Sheriff's and Chief's association in an
    effort to bring Nevada's Law into compliance with the requirement under the Brady Law. Unfortunately this bill was not
    passed and as a result, Nevada CCW permit holders would no longer be exempt from the checks required by Law. The
    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) notified all Federal Firearms Licensees that this was to take
    effect July 1, 2008.
    
    We are confindent that if another audit was performed by the BATFE, LVMPD CCW background investigations would be found
    to be in full compliance with Brady Law (as they were during the original audit). However, it is unclear if a
    favorable audit, without changes to Nevada Law, would be enough to reverse the BATFE's decision.
    As the Sheriff of Clark County and head of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Sheriff Gillespie is an active
    member of the Nevada Sheriff's and Chief's Association. Although, he has only one vote, he has assured me that if
    this item is brought up at the next meeting, the position of LVMPD would be to support another audit by the BATFE.
    
    Sincerely
    
    Tom

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    LT Tom Roberts' reply sounds very nice.

    However, I believe it is my duty to comment.

    LT Roberts said
    "... during the 2007 Nevada Legislature, Assembly bill 21 was sponsored by the Nevada Sheriff's and Chief's association in aneffort to bring Nevada's Law into compliance with the requirement under the Brady Law. Unfortunately this bill was not passed ..."
    but LT Roberts FAILED to indicate WHY AB-21 was not enacted. AB-21 was NOT enacted because the NV Sheriffs & Chiefs Ass'n (NSCA) INSISTED on including fee increases in the bill. It should be noted that the Clark County sheriff was widely believed to be the driving force behind the fee increase request. The ONLY lobbyists urging fee increases were those law enforcement lobbyists from Clark County. In our testimony before the Judiciary Committee and via email, we (the people) voiced strong opposition to the fee increases.

    While it is true the Clark County sheriff has but one vote in NSCA matters, it is WIDELY believed that he routinely attempts todisproportionally influencethe NSCA.

    More info here: http://www.stillwaterfirearms.org/Pa..._Exemption.php



  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    I have no dog in this fight but have been keeping up with it out of curisoity and the amount of blame being placed on the different parties is amazing. I have no special insight but it sure appears that whoever one dislikes the most is the one to blame for this. One poster on a different board is adamently assuring everyone that the BATF was behind the whole deal and the legislature was on their side to increase the fees over the objections of the sheriffs.

    What is strange to me is that now NV charges $25 for a background check and most other states charge nothing. When I asked about this a while back everyone assured me that the NICS check was free. So it looks to me that whoever is getting the $25 is to blame. In SC a CWP will take the place of the NICS and if you don't havea permit the check is free as long as you buy a gun.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    I have no dog in this fight but have been keeping up with it out of curisoity and the amount of blame being placed on the different parties is amazing. I have no special insight but it sure appears that whoever one dislikes the most is the one to blame for this. One poster on a different board is adamently assuring everyone that the BATF was behind the whole deal and the legislature was on their side to increase the fees over the objections of the sheriffs.

    What is strange to me is that now NV charges $25 for a background check and most other states charge nothing. When I asked about this a while back everyone assured me that the NICS check was free. So it looks to me that whoever is getting the $25 is to blame. In SC a CWP will take the place of the NICS and if you don't havea permit the check is free as long as you buy a gun.
    Well, I disagree with the statement, "the BATF was behind the whole deal and the legislature was on their side to increase the fees over the objections of the sheriffs." How could anyone make that statement when AB-21 did not even pass out of committee??

    I attended the Judiciary Committee hearings on AB-21 and testified in opposition to the fee increase. While I was NOT included in any "back room" discussions, I did converse with NSCA Exec Dir and paid lobbyist Frank Adams and with a couple of assemblymen. I have NEVER heard of such a statement.

    It IS true that many states elect to utilize the FREE NICS check via telephone. Unfortunately, NV has elected to be a "POC" state and currently charges $25. More info here: http://www.stillwaterfirearms.org/Pa...on_History.php

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    129

    Post imported post

    We need to get the state to scrap it's POC and use the free system. That's what it's there for. I have no problem with having a NICS check done every time I buy a gun. I do have a problem with giving Nevada $25 each time when all they're doing (that I know of) is taking a phone call and entering my info in their computer. My dealer can do that just as easily, and it'll be free.

    On a "tinfoil hat" note: From what I've read, the federal government is forbidden by law from keeping a record of gun purchases/NICS checks beyond a certain number of hours. Is NV DPS? Or can they keep a record of every NICS check they do? I really don't like the idea of anyone I don't personally know and trust knowing what or how many guns I own. Especially if they're charging me $25 to record my information.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    17

    Post imported post

    Hi all, new to this forum and while I am a CCW holder in NV, I have begun to exercise my ability to OC.

    I also sent a letter to Sheriff Haley in Washoe County...here's his response:

    Code:
    NumberCruncher,  Thank you for your email inquiry reference you concerns about
    CCW and the Brady exemption issue.  My staff has been working on this with 
    Mr. Adams.  Additionally we have engaged the National Sheriff- Association.  
    We will continue to work towards resolution and trust that our collective voices
    will be heard.
    
    I will refer your email to Debi Campbell of my office in case she has additional
    information she would like to relay to you.
    
    Again thank you for you comments.
    
    Sheriff Mike Haley

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    333

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    So it looks to me that whoever is getting the $25 is to blame.
    Just to clarify, the bill in question didn't raise the Brady check fee, what it did was make minor changes to NV's CCW statutes that would, supposedly, have satisfied the ATF. The NVSCA hijacked the bill by trying to severely increase the fees charged for both new and renewal permits. This despite the fact that NV already charges more than every neighboring state with shall-issue CCW.

    As a result of this, most of us opposed the bill as written. The end result is that the Sheriffs will now blame us and the legislators.

    On a side note, I was at Spurlock's GUn Shop in Henderson on Thursday and chatted with the owner, Rance, for a while. He said that DPS has started asking them every time they request a Brady check if the person has a CCW. They didn't say why, but his thoughts are that they're keeping track of the stats to use in this "battle" with the ATF.

    Whether you have a CCW/CFP or not is not a question on the Brady check form, and not something normally asked. So, we'll see how this all pans out, I guess. It's not the $25 fee that I have the big problem with (although I don't like it) - I think the whole Brady system is asinine.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    I spoke with my sheriff this a.m. He indicated the majority of the sheriffs & chiefs desire to come to terms with the BATFE regarding reinstatement of our NICS exemption.

    The Exec Dir of the NSCA will correspond with the BATFE and try to determine what (if anything) can be done to reinstate Nevada CCW permit holders' NICS exemption.

    Either way, I believe the issue needs to addressed and corrected in the 2009 legislative session.

    And we should endeavor to scrap our "POC" status in favor of the toll free (800) telephone NICS check. Paying a $25 fee to exercise one's God given and Constitutionally guaranteed right is simply WRONG.

    Historical info on this subject here: www.stillwaterfirearms.org/Pages/NICS_Exemption_History.php

Posting Permissions

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