Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: So. NV Health District called police on me

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    I open carried into the office of the Southern Nevada Health District located on Shadow Lane in Las Vegas today. I was confronted by the Facility Services Manager and a security guard, who told me I could not O.C. there. The guard told me he could call metro (police) on me for doing so, and I replied that he was wrong about the law and that I expected the police would confirm that if he called them. He replied by asking "you really think the law says I can't kick you out of here for carrying a gun?" and then proceeded to call the police via his cell phone in my presence. I could hear the dispatcher say that they would be there in a few minutes. At that point, I told the manager and guard that I would go lock the gun in my car, so that when the police arrived they would not be confronting an armed person.

    The building manager, guard and I went outside the building to the parking lot and waited together discussing the law. Within a few minutes, a half-dozen or so police units arrived and initiated an encounter with me which lasted about 10-15 minutes.

    A young officer told me he understood it was legal to open carry in the building, but that I could still be trespassed by the building management for doing so.

    Another of the officers later attempted to convince me that the law prohibited firearms in all public buildings. He asked me if I had actually carried the gun inside the building and when I told him "yes," he indicated that I had broken the law. I told him I knew for a fact that he was incorrect about that, and he asked another officer to bring out the law book. He turned to the section dealing with the intricacies of concealed weapons in public buildings and started reading me the actual definition of a public building, which was irrelevant. I responded by pointing out that the entire statute applied only to concealed weapons regardless and I was not carrying concealed, at which point he backed down.

    The police concluded the encounter by asking me if they could run my gun's serial number to make sure it wasn't stolen, since as a Nye county resident I did not have a blue card to present to them. I told them the gun was locked in the car and I would not resist them, but I did not consent to anything. I was then told I was free to go, and I heard one of the officers ask the security guard if he wanted to trespass me. The guard indicated "no" and the police left. I then returned into the building, this time unarmed, to conclude my business.

    Questions:

    1) Did the So. NV Health District violate my rights by making me leave a public building where I had every right to be, and also by escalating the situation to the police?

    2) Did Las Vegas Metro PD violate my rights by:

    a) attempting to convince me I was breaking the law when I was not,

    b) failing to inform the Health District personnel that I was within my lawful rights and immediately terminating the encounter, or

    c) asking the Health District security guard if he wanted to trespass me for engaging in what had now been clearly established as lawful conduct?

    I would appreciate any comments by those knowledgeable about the law.

    If it appears this is actionable, I also request assistance in locating any pro-2A attorneys in NV that might be willing to work with me.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763

    Post imported post

    I hope you have names of all those involved.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    I suggest you contact Lee Rowland, northern coordinator ACLU of NV, they are proccing these types of cases for possible actions # 775-786-1033

    good work by the way

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    spiritof76 wrote:
    Questions:

    1) Did the So. NV Health District violate my rights by making me leave a public building where I had every right to be, and also by escalating the situation to the police?

    Interesting question. They did not violate your rights by calling the police, but probably did so by asking you to leave a public building when you're violating no laws and not being disruptive (the latter is probably the excuse they would cite however).

    2) Did Las Vegas Metro PD violate my rights by:

    a) attempting to convince me I was breaking the law when I was not,

    Police are allowed to lie.

    b) failing to inform the Health District personnel that I was within my lawful rights and immediately terminating the encounter, or

    Police have no obligation to settle your dispute, although they should have at least tried.

    c) asking the Health District security guard if he wanted to trespass me for engaging in what had now been clearly established as lawful conduct?

    I firmly believe yes. Not so much in the fact that he asked the security guard, but that he likely would have "trespassed" you had the guard requested it. This same crap was pulled in Seattle. State law preempts local ordinances. So since Seattle can't outlaw OC in public buildings/parks/etc, they said they're just trespass you. http://www.seattle.gov/firearmsrule/

    Someone in the Washington forum probably has the answer as to what legal battles are being fought over this one.

    I mention it only because it is so similar. You're not doing anything illegal, but you're doing something we don't agree with, so since we can't arrest you for carrying, we'll just kick you out and trespass you if you refuse to leave. This is no different than saying "Red shirts prohibited" and kicking out anyone wearing one.

    I would appreciate any comments by those knowledgeable about the law.

    If it appears this is actionable, I also request assistance in locating any pro-2A attorneys in NV that might be willing to work with me.
    I don't think it's so much actionable since nothing really happened and you complied. If you had refused to lock up your weapon and been wearing it when the police arrived, any number of things might have happened that may have been actionable.

    Regarding trespassing, The Nevada Supreme Court has held that when an owner of premises asks a guest who was originally invited to the premises to leave, the owner has given a sufficient warning not to trespass, and the disinvited guest commits trespassing if the guest then refuses to leave. (Scott v. Just. Ct., 84 Nev. 9 (1968))

    I find it difficult to accept that a public building can trespass an individual who has lawful business there. Can you be trespassed from a courthouse? Where do you go to fight the charge? I think it is for that reason there exists this law:
    NRS 203.119 Commission of act in public building or area interfering with peaceful conduct of activities.
    1. A person shall not commit any act in a public building or on the public grounds surrounding the building which interferes with the peaceful conduct of activities normally carried on in the building or on the grounds.
    2. Any person whose conduct is prohibited by subsection 1 who refuses to leave the building or grounds upon request by the proper official is guilty of a misdemeanor.
    3. Any person who aids, counsels or abets another to commit an act prohibited by subsection 2 is guilty of a misdemeanor.
    4. For the purpose of this section:
    (a) “Proper official” means the person or persons designated by the administrative officer or board in charge of the building.
    (b) “Public building” means any building owned by:
    (1) Any component of the Nevada System of Higher Education and used for any purpose related to the System.
    (2) The State of Nevada or any county, city, school district or other political subdivision of the State and used for any public purpose.
    (Added to NRS by 1969, 582; A 1985, 335; 1993, 365)
    It seems to me that this law is redundant to trespassing, especially the emphasized part, which sounds a lot like TRESPASS (see NRS 207.200). If trespassing from a public building is allowed, what is the purpose of this law?

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    To head off some of you who may cite the reference to "public property" in the trespass law, I would suggest that applies to places where you have no lawful business. You have business at the DMV, library, and SNHD and if you're not breaking the law, being "trespassed" seems like a gaping loophole in which arbitrary, otherwise illegal, rules can be enforced.

    You do not have business in the city fleet parking lot or the state highway maintenance buildings. These buildings are not open to the public, are probably marked NO TRESPASS and are also probably fenced.

    I don't know the case law though, so I may be mistaken.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    timf343 wrote:
    You have business at the DMV, library, and SNHD and if you're not breaking the law, being "trespassed" seems like a gaping loophole in which arbitrary, otherwise illegal, rules can be enforced.
    +1

    timf343 wrote:
    I don't think it's so much actionable since nothing really happened and you complied. If you had refused to lock up your weapon and been wearing it when the police arrived, any number of things might have happened that may have been actionable.
    That may well be the case, and if the case ever ends up in court they will likely raise that argument. However, I did not disarm UNTIL the guard had actually called the police. Only at that point did I do so, in order to avoid a potentially dangerous situation where the police were likely to disarm me involuntarily. Thus I did NOT "voluntarily comply," but that of course is ultimately up to someone else to decide if anything comes of this situation.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    487

    Post imported post

    This is an interesting read..



    It does bring one question to mind. Does a public building have the ability to trespass you? I mean, what if the DMV trespassed you, you wouldn't be able to conduct any mandatory-in-person business there?

    For the sake of this part of the discussion, I am only referring to public buildings where you have a reason to be, for the purpose of conducting business.
    ---
    Carry On

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    Exactly.

    While I don't agree with banning firearms at post offices, at least I can send mail through other carriers (UPS, Fedex, etc.) or at any number of non-post office locations (my own mailbox at my house for example).

    But the DMV....I have to get my picture taken for a driver license.

    The SNHD....I have to get my health card to work in certain professions.

    So, that's my question too - can I be banned/trespassed from a public building where I have a right to be (and in fact, an obligation to be, depending on the circumstances), when I'm doing nothing illegal?

    In a quick google search, I'm seeing lots of states/counties/cities have laws on the books and mainly hold that to be trespassed from a public building, you must have no lawful business there, or you must be acting in a way that disrupts or disturbs others conducting their own lawful business there.

    So, while some may claim carrying a firearm is disruptive, IMO, disruptive means more like you're jumping in line, harassing others, talking loudly on your cell phone (at a library for example), etc.


  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Sadly, you backed down when he called the cops. but being on uncertain ground, I understand your position.

    Intimidation 1, Citizenship 0
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    240

    Post imported post

    I wouldn't say he backed down. I have conducted business in the same office (as a Nevada Professional Engineer) on multiple occasions and instead of openly carrying I have kept my gun in the car.

    I appreciate the fact that he started this dialog and education process. His actions might allow me to open carry there in the future without the fear of harassment.

    This might spill over to other public buildings that I attend on a regular basis. Like the Clark County government building.

    Not everybody has time in their daily business to have lengthy encounters with LVMPD. I really appreciate the professional actions of this gentleman, and his efforts.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026

    Post imported post

    In Washington, those involved would be guilty of criminal acts.

    Specifically Coercion, and Official Misconduct.

    In addition, again in Washington, some LEO's have a sworn DUTY to arrest violators, and they would add another criminal violation should they fail to do so when notified of/witnessing the criminal act.

    All this to say that perhaps you should research the Nevada statutes for similar legislation. Nothing like pointing out an officer's (or other public employee's) conduct as being CRIMINAL to make them sit up and pay attention.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    NRS 207.190 Coercion.
    1. It is unlawful for a person, with the intent to compel another to do or abstain from doing an act which the other person has a right to do or abstain from doing, to:
    (a) Use violence or inflict injury upon the other person or any of his family, or upon his property, or threaten such violence or injury;
    (b) Deprive the person of any tool, implement or clothing, or hinder him in the use thereof; or
    (c) Attempt to intimidate the person by threats or force.
    2. A person who violates the provisions of subsection 1 shall be punished:
    (a) Where physical force or the immediate threat of physical force is used, for a category B felony by imprisonment in the state prison for a minimum term of not less than 1 year and a maximum term of not more than 6 years, and may be further punished by a fine of not more than $5,000.
    (b) Where no physical force or immediate threat of physical force is used, for a misdemeanor.


    Interesting observation, thanks Phssthpok! It is arguable as to whether a sign posted pursuant to NRS 202.3673 (no concealed carry) would have weight against open carry. As there is no state law specifically preventing OC, we all know it to be legal. Without specific law granting authority to public buildings to prevent OC, we all assume it to be legal. But how may a court interpret it?

    Does NRS 202.3673 permit, although quite vaguely, public buildings to post no weapons signs? I tend to think NO since it appears only under the CONCEALED WEAPONS section (NRS 202.3653 - NRS 202.369) and not under the more general WEAPONS section (NRS 202.253 - NRS 202.362).

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    90

    Post imported post

    Good point, Tim. This brings me back to the signs that are posted at the CC library on Flamingo. To paraphrase: You will be charged if you bring a firearm into the building.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    timf343 wrote:
    Does NRS 202.3673 permit, although quite vaguely, public buildings to post no weapons signs? I tend to think NO since it appears only under the CONCEALED WEAPONS section (NRS 202.3653 - NRS 202.369) and not under the more general WEAPONS section (NRS 202.253 - NRS 202.362).
    The problem is that NRS 202.3673 not only allows, but specifically REQUIRES that public buildings post a "NO WEAPONS" sign in order for the statute which applies only to CONCEALED weapons (carried by permit holders) to be effective. Open carry is still legal, but this poorly crafted statute calls for a sign that deliberately misleads the public as to what the law actually states.

    Here is the relevant text of the statute, with bold emphasis added by me to make the point:

    NRS 202.3673

    (3) A permittee shall not carry a concealed firearm while he is on the premises of: [...] (b) A public building that has a metal detector at each public entrance or a sign posted at each public entrance indicating that no firearms are allowed in the building [...]

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763

    Post imported post

    spiritof76 wrote:
    timf343 wrote:
    Does NRS 202.3673 permit, although quite vaguely, public buildings to post no weapons signs? I tend to think NO since it appears only under the CONCEALED WEAPONS section (NRS 202.3653 - NRS 202.369) and not under the more general WEAPONS section (NRS 202.253 - NRS 202.362).
    The problem is that NRS 202.3673 not only allows, but specifically REQUIRES that public buildings post a "NO WEAPONS" sign in order for the statute which applies only to CONCEALED weapons (carried by permit holders) to be effective. Open carry is still legal, but this poorly crafted statute calls for a sign that deliberately misleads the public as to what the law actually states.

    Here is the relevant text of the statute, with bold emphasis added by me to make the point:

    NRS 202.3673

    (3) A permittee shall not carry a concealed firearm while he is on the premises of: [...] (b) A public building that has a metal detector at each public entrance or a sign posted at each public entrance indicating that no firearms are allowed in the building [...]




    I wonder if they would get you on the No Firearms part. By somehow dividing the NRS up? It is a sticky one I think. I have often thought of OC into my local library, but alas I chicken out.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    Vegassteve wrote:
    I wonder if they would get you on the No Firearms part. By somehow dividing the NRS up? It is a sticky one I think. I have often thought of OC into my local library, but alas I chicken out.
    The whole point is that they have no authority to "get you on the No Firearms part." The statute calls for a sign that misleadingly implies an authority that they do not have.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763

    Post imported post

    spiritof76 wrote:
    Vegassteve wrote:
    I wonder if they would get you on the No Firearms part. By somehow dividing the NRS up? It is a sticky one I think. I have often thought of OC into my local library, but alas I chicken out.
    The whole point is that they have no authority to "get you on the No Firearms part." The statute calls for a sign that misleadingly implies an authority that they do not have.




    How do you mean? Sorry I am dense tonight.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    You have a right to open carry into a public building, because no law prohibits you from doing so. The sign is irrelevant to open carry because the statute authorizing the sign applies only to concealed carry. It's as simple as that.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763

    Post imported post

    spiritof76 wrote:
    You have a right to open carry into a public building, because no law prohibits you from doing so. The sign is irrelevant to open carry because the statute authorizing the sign applies only to concealed carry. It's as simple as that.
    Correct. I understand that you do too. I was just wondering if the courts would really see it that way.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    261

    Post imported post

    Not sure if it means anything to this part of the thread, but I OC in my local library all the time and no one (even the "security" guy volunteer) ever bats an eye. I know for a fact my firearm has been seen by patrons and staff alike.

    This is Pahruimp, Nye county.

    There are no signs or metal detectors either.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763

    Post imported post

    Erus wrote:
    Not sure if it means anything to this part of the thread, but I OC in my local library all the time and no one (even the "security" guy volunteer) ever bats an eye. I know for a fact my firearm has been seen by patrons and staff alike.

    This is Pahruimp, Nye county.

    There are no signs or metal detectors either.




    I dont want to derail this thread but ours are posted be it at only one entrance. In another thread here I think I posted a email back for the library saying all guns are prohib. I know the force of law behind the sign. But I also know it would be a big stink someday if I tried to OC in it.

  22. #22
    Regular Member z28power's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    143

    Riiiiise from your grave

    Hope everybody appreciates the Sega Genesis Altered Beastreference there. -- corrected the title, thanks HPMatt!

    Anyway....

    I found this thread from a google search - I have official business at the SNHD and was curious about two things:

    Is this a state facility? If so, have they received the same instruction as the DMV?

    If a county facility, am I not safe to OC here? I understand that legally I have every right to OC here but... I don't have time to be trespassed and have a scene this time, unfortunately as I really need to get a Death Certificate before the weekend. It's unfortunate because if this was not time sensitive and related to something as private and hard to handle as a death of a parent, I would be happy to go down and push the limit if needed.

    Thanks for all your help!
    Last edited by z28power; 03-19-2014 at 04:11 PM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597
    Quote Originally Posted by z28power View Post
    Hope everybody appreciates the Sega Genesis Wolfman reference there.

    ...

    Thanks for all your help!
    Wasn't this from 'Altered Beast'?
    Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    spiritof76:

    Nevada State Law NRS 202.3673 does NOT Apply to, or Effect, Open Carry.

    aadvark

  25. #25
    Regular Member z28power's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by HPmatt View Post
    Wasn't this from 'Altered Beast'?
    TOUCHE!!! It was. I could remember the wizard necro looking thing saying it, but had the title wrong!

    I stand corrected, Fine Sir.

Posting Permissions

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