Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Spoke to Assistant to the Chief of Police of NLV

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    I just got off the phone with Tim Bedwell, he is the assistant to the Chief and I must say, he was extremely helpful, polite, and overall a pleasure to speak with regarding the NLV municipal codes.

    One thing he pointed out was that his officers are NOT out to harass ordinary law abiding and responsible citizens, the codes they are enforcing are for the purpose of criminals and they can tell the difference.

    He called me on my office line, which means that I have a recording of the entire conversation. If anyone is interested, I can email them the WAV file, however, I will not post it on a public forum. Its filled with detailed information, but that is beyond the scope of this email.

    I will however, break down everything he told me.

    In a nutshell, 9.32.080 pertaining to Deadly weapons in a vehicle still stands and is enforceable. He made it clear that the only way to carry a loaded weapon in your car in North Las Vegas is with a CCW.

    When I asked about Open Carry, he informed me that it was perfectly legal since there was no law on the books about it, however, if somebody calls about it or an officer sees it, you can be confronted. YOU WILL BE TREATED THE SAME WAY THAT YOU TREAT THE OFFICER. Therefore, if you feel like OCing, be as polite, courteous, and respectful as possible and you wont have an issue. Id say this goes without saying, anywhere you choose to OC.

    The great news is that he and the majority of the officers in the NLVPD support private gun ownership.

    -Geoff

  2. #2
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713

    Post imported post

    I guess they decided to agree with John C. Berrier, (legal researcher for the Nevada Attorney General,) on the preemption laws being useless?

    This is very frustrating.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    Regardless of the analysis as to whether grandfathered status exists, I think the legislative intent is quite clear. The legislature does not want law abiding citizens to be subject to restrictive, confusing, and contradicting laws while traveling peaceably between cities, counties, and townships throughout the state.

    The problem with the Chief's statement is that since it is a "crime" in their view, they would have probable cause to detain you, seize your weapon, and possibly search you and your vehicle (if you have 1 "illegal" gun, you might have 2).

    Makes the OC litter pickup all the more important, while also making it potentially more risky. I have a NV CCW issued by Las Vegas Police Dept, so another problem with what the chief said, is that another city ordinance, 9.32.020, talks about a CCW that is not the state's "shall issue" CCW but rather a city CCW for which the Chief's judgment determines who should have this "privilege".

    How about Las Vegas? The Helldorado Days parade is that weekend.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vegas, ,
    Posts
    112

    Post imported post

    Here's the only laws that were amended and grandfathered by the preemption laws...

    NRS 244.364 Limited authority to regulate firearms; restrictions concerning registration of certain firearms in county whose population is 400,000 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 county 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. A board of county commissioners may proscribe by ordinance or regulation the unsafe discharge of firearms.
    3. If a board of county commissioners in a county whose population is 400,000 or more has required by ordinance or regulation adopted before June 13, 1989, the registration of a firearm capable of being concealed, the board of county commissioners shall amend such an ordinance or regulation to require:
    1. A period of at least 60 days of residency in the county before registration of such a firearm is required.
    2. A period of at least 72 hours for the registration of a pistol by a resident of the county 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:
    1. "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.
    2. "Firearm capable of being concealed" includes all firearms having a barrel less than 12 inches in length.
    3. "Pistol" means a firearm capable of being concealed that is intended to be aimed and fired with one hand.

    So clark county handgun registration (minus boulder city) and no discharging guns within city limits were pretty much the only grandfathered laws.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    BhmBill wrote:
    Here's the only laws that were amended and grandfathered by the preemption laws...

    NRS 244.364 Limited authority to regulate firearms; restrictions concerning registration of certain firearms in county whose population is 400,000 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 county 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. A board of county commissioners may proscribe by ordinance or regulation the unsafe discharge of firearms.
    3. If a board of county commissioners in a county whose population is 400,000 or more has required by ordinance or regulation adopted before June 13, 1989, the registration of a firearm capable of being concealed, the board of county commissioners shall amend such an ordinance or regulation to require:
    1. A period of at least 60 days of residency in the county before registration of such a firearm is required.
    2. A period of at least 72 hours for the registration of a pistol by a resident of the county 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:
    1. "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.
    2. "Firearm capable of being concealed" includes all firearms having a barrel less than 12 inches in length.
    3. "Pistol" means a firearm capable of being concealed that is intended to be aimed and fired with one hand.
    So clark county handgun registration (minus boulder city) and no discharging guns within city limits were pretty much the only grandfathered laws.
    I certainly agree. BUT remember that they continue to believe their ordinances are still in effect and many have stated they will enforce them.

    Use caution.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    524

    Post imported post

    geoffw wrote:
    One thing he pointed out was that his officers are NOT out to harass ordinary law abiding and responsible citizens, the codes they are enforcing are for the purpose of criminals and they can tell the difference.
    Theycan tellwho is a criminal! So if they say you are a criminal, YOU ARE A CRIMINAL!!!

    Ken

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    CowboyKen wrote:
    geoffw wrote:
    One thing he pointed out was that his officers are NOT out to harass ordinary law abiding and responsible citizens, the codes they are enforcing are for the purpose of criminals and they can tell the difference.
    Theycan tellwho is a criminal! So if they say you are a criminal, YOU ARE A CRIMINAL!!!

    Ken
    He was refferring to the thugs who moap around.

    They dont bug law-abiding gun enthusiasts.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , Nevada, USA
    Posts
    716

    Post imported post

    geoffw wrote:
    CowboyKen wrote:
    geoffw wrote:
    One thing he pointed out was that his officers are NOT out to harass ordinary law abiding and responsible citizens, the codes they are enforcing are for the purpose of criminals and they can tell the difference.
    Theycan tellwho is a criminal! So if they say you are a criminal, YOU ARE A CRIMINAL!!!

    Ken
    He was refferring to the thugs who moap around.

    They dont bug law-abiding gun enthusiasts.
    There are some who, through their own experiences, would disagree.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    Ohh Definately,

    But now that I have Tim Bedwells direct line in my phone, If I ever have an issue, Id be glad to give him a ring.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    geoffw wrote:
    He was refferring to the thugs who moap around.

    They dont bug law-abiding gun enthusiasts.
    Referring to your first post, the chief did say that you can be confronted if someone calls. So, as a law abiding gun enthusiast, you would in fact, be bugged by NLV LEO.

    This doesn't really mean much though, because I believe police have a duty to investigate each call.

    However, if I am going to be treated exactly as I treat the officer, then that's fine with me. I'll ignore him and refuse to answer his questions and he can ignore me and refuse to ask me any. This will probably be construed as my being uncooperative, and all the reason they need to hassle me more and/or bust me with their voided law.

    Mayor Mike Montandon already stated 9.32.080 is now moot and void. As far as I know, the police chief reports to the mayor, so logic would dictate, the police chief is incorrect, as his boss contradicted him. Regardless, if anyone gets busted, the Mayor could be called as a defense witness, and his emails entered into evidence under the freedom of information/open records law. Even if our interpretation is wrong under judicial review, I think you'd have a tough time being convicted having a message from the mayor saying the law was void.

    Tim

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    Do we really have a letter from Michael Montandon?

    Id love to see that and show it to Tim Bedwell. I think it would really strengthen our case.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vegas, ,
    Posts
    112

    Post imported post

    I just can't believe how foolish NLVPD is being with regards to firearms and the preemption in place.

    The law clearly states what laws are now null and void and they still want to detain and prosecute you under void laws, and if they can't do that, they'll try to find a loophole with their deadly weapons laws.

    It's seriously looks like NLVPD is gonna have to get a lawsuit on their hands before they attempt to comply with the preemption.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Washoe County, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    256

    Post imported post

    "In a nutshell, 9.32.080 pertaining to Deadly weapons in a vehicle still stands and is enforceable. He made it clear that the only way to carry a loaded weapon in your car in North Las Vegas is with a CCW."

    Huh? All of that was pre-empted for the last 1.5 years by state law. Sounds like somebody needs to sue NLV and get those now-obsolete laws off the books.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NV
    Posts
    148

    Post imported post

    we'll see where it goes next sunday. I'm pretty excited about all this.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    41

    Post imported post

    What a fantastic forum all of you have here! Thanks to Desert Atilla for pointing this sight out to me.

    Also, thanks to all of you out there for what you are doing and for standing up to our rights to arm and protect ourselves.

    I have just completed my CCW course and our class was told by the instructor that North Las Vegas and Boulder City does not allow "Open Carry" within their city. After the class, I approached him on the "Preemption". He stated to me while shaking his head that those cities "opted out" of the preemption and reiterated to me that you cannot open carry in those cities.

    I have read the numerous posts on the regulations, as well as the city ordinances, regulations, laws and do not find any language relating to this claim.

    Has anyone else heard of these cities "opting out" of the preemption? What law/s exist that would give them the authority to do so? There is none that I am aware of.

    BTW, this is my first post and I have read much of the info within this forum. I understand all of your positions on the state law and it does sound clear to me. I am inquiring more on the "opting out" by these cities.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,098

    Post imported post

    Sounds like your instructor was full of low-grade fertilizer of the bovine extract variety. Any jurisdiction that thinks they can "opt out" of a State law in order to infringe on civil rightswill soon find themselves neck deep in their primary product mentioned above...

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    takemine2 wrote:
    What a fantastic forum all of you have here! Thanks to Desert Atilla for pointing this sight out to me.

    Also, thanks to all of you out there for what you are doing and for standing up to our rights to arm and protect ourselves.

    I have just completed my CCW course and our class was told by the instructor that North Las Vegas and Boulder City does not allow "Open Carry" within their city. After the class, I approached him on the "Preemption". He stated to me while shaking his head that those cities "opted out" of the preemption and reiterated to me that you cannot open carry in those cities.

    I have read the numerous posts on the regulations, as well as the city ordinances, regulations, laws and do not find any language relating to this claim.

    Has anyone else heard of these cities "opting out" of the preemption? What law/s exist that would give them the authority to do so? There is none that I am aware of.

    BTW, this is my first post and I have read much of the info within this forum. I understand all of your positions on the state law and it does sound clear to me. I am inquiring more on the "opting out" by these cities.
    Which instructor was this? Id be glad to send him a letter.


  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, ,
    Posts
    18

    Post imported post

    My guess is the instructor at The Gun Store.

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    41

    Post imported post

    The instructor is Scott Hoerner. HIs email is stenusmc@gmail.com.

    Regardless of this information he has given us, the overall experience with the company has been fantastic and I will return for additional training.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    41

    Post imported post

    No, it was not at the Gun Store but I have also heard this open carry issue from instructors at American Shooters.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    I recieved the same bovine extract at discount. as well as all parks are off limits and also was toldI am required to announce my weaponwhen approached by leo.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, ,
    Posts
    18

    Post imported post

    Intersting. I heard the same thing at the Gun Store.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    Sounds like these guys could be politicians. Make up whatever you want, preach it as gospel, and then pretend to be puzzled as to why people have so many questions.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    It makes me wonder who instructs the instructors.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    902

    Post imported post

    geoffw wrote:
    The great news is that he and the majority of the officers in the NLVPD support private gun ownership.

    -Geoff
    I can care less what he and his officers think. The bottom line from the most simple angle is that state law prohibits such a local ordinance, if they enforce it or attempt to enforce it, that would be a civil rights violation and appropriate steps should be taken... lawsuit and or possible jail time.

    I'm not impressed or fooled by peoples personalities. I'm an LEO myself... but I guess I'm one that does not engage in illegal activity.

Posting Permissions

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