Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Nevada AG Masto Publishes Opinion Over Park Prohibition

  1. #1
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    Nevada AG Masto Publishes Opinion Over Park Prohibition

    Give this a read, It will anger you that we elected an AG that doesn't understand the law.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  2. #2
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    My Letter to the Nevada State Bar Disciplinary Counsel

    To:
    Bob Bare, Bar Counsel
    C/O State Bar of Nevada
    600 E. Charleston Blvd
    Las Vegas, NV 89104


    RE: Nevada Attorney General Masto, Ethics Violations

    Mr. Bare,

    I am writing you today because I am unsettled by misconduct that has occurred by Nevada Attorney General Masto. On 13 August, 2010, Attorney General Masto released an opinion to the Clark County District Attorney David Roger regarding the legitimacy and enforceability of a Clark County Code prohibiting the possession of firearms in county parks; which I have included along with a copy of SB 92 (2007).

    Her interpretation of Nevada revised statutes was derived from NRS 244.364 as well as SB 92 (2007), and AB 147 (1989). Her interpretation was not complete or accurate by any means.

    Attorney general Masto concluded that because Clark County Code 19.060.04 was enacted prior to 1989, Clark County’s Authority to regulate the possession of firearms was “grandfathered.” She is mistaken; please allow me to explain why. SB 92 (2007) Sec. 4 reads as follows:

    Sec. 4. Section 5 of chapter 308, Statutes of Nevada 1989, at page 653, is hereby amended to read as follows:
    Sec. 5.
    1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, the provisions of this act apply to ordinances or regulations adopted on or after June 13, 1989.
    2. The provisions of this act, as amended on October 1, 2007, apply to ordinances or regulations adopted before, on or after June 13, 1989.

    It is my assertion that her omission of this portion of SB 92 (2007) from her interpretation was deliberate and was done in an effort to pander to the whims of the Clark County District Attorney, The Clark County Parks and Recreation Commission and The Division Commander of the Clark County Park Police. I believe she knows very well that she is incorrectly interpreting Nevada Law and is facilitating an unlawful prohibition on firearms in Clark County Parks.

    I am bringing this to your attention because it is my position that this is an offence for which she should receive sanctions. Her action may lead to the unlawful arrest, and conviction of private citizens. To put it simply, I believe Attorney General Masto should and must be disbarred and removed from the Office of Nevada Attorney General. Please take the necessary actions with respect to this egregious violation of ethics and the public trust
    Last edited by Nevada carrier; 08-20-2010 at 09:44 PM.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by Nevada carrier View Post
    Give this a read, It will anger you that we elected an AG that doesn't understand the law.
    Our Tennessee Attorney General is picked by the Tennessee Supreme Court and he doesn't seem to know the law. Good luck!

  4. #4
    Regular Member john-in-reno's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    238
    The AG letter is so full of legal mumble jumble and double speak, wrapped around the lack of properly understanding the law!

    Smells kinda funky to me

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413
    Thanks for posting this! I am just now getting a chance to come over, so I'm glad someone beat me to the punch.

  6. #6
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950

    Expected

    Took her a year to figure out how to say what she wanted to say. Did not do well either. God help us if anyone ever apoints her to a judgeship.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Quote Originally Posted by The Big Guy View Post
    Took her a year to figure out how to say what she wanted to say. Did not do well either. God help us if anyone ever apoints her to a judgeship.
    Agreed. any time it takes that long to issue some kind of opinion or ruling it usually because the person issuing it needs that long to twist the law into the shape they need. Lets just hope that I'm not the only one who's written a complaint to the State Bar association and that this peaks their interest.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Lord Sega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Warrenton, Oregon
    Posts
    317

    Oregon here...

    I don't know Nevada law, been studying Oregon's, but after reading the AG's opinion everything sounded correct up until the grandfathering part. And even if it is grandfathered, IMHO the new state preemption trumps the county's old code making it null and void of possible enforcement, therefore impotent.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    La Paz county, Arizona.
    Posts
    338

    this AG has got to go

    how the heck did she get there in the first place?
    where does she think she is? NYC?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas NV
    Posts
    12

    First post, long time 2A advocate . . .

    This is particularly interesting to me, because I visit a county park here almost every night after work to take the pup out for a walk when it's cooled off a bit.

    Having read the AG's letters and the updated 2007 pre-emption law, it is obvious that the only local ordinance that continues to be grandfathered is the pistol registration in Clark county.

    She makes reference to the pending cases of Nordyke and others in the 9th circuit, pointing out that the exact scrutiny to be used for 2A has yet to be defined, and that sensitive places are not defined yet, but it's all bluster. If Yosemite Valley isn't a sensitive place, with all the international tourism there, certainly little old Sunset park isn't either.

    But none of that is at issue here. The park regulations prohibit even CCW licensees the ability to carry in the parks. That is nonsense.

    This attorney general is intentionally misreading the 2007 law that eliminates all grandfathered local firearms laws. I would expect this kind of thing in California, but not in Nevada. She needs wake up and smell the coffee and realize this is not a state that takes 2A infringement lightly.

    I am puzzled, too, by the county retaining a gun restriction that is vestigial, anachronistic to the state, and just dumb. Clark county and North Las Vegas are being sued by the NRA right now for pre-emption violations.

    I have emailed Chris Cox at the ILA to alert him to this additional infringement, but have not received a reply in over a month.
    Last edited by Maestro Pistolero; 08-25-2010 at 05:33 AM.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    215
    Look at the signature, she had someone else sign it.
    How to cover ass.
    Life is tough, its tougher when your stupid.

    http://www.itsnotthelaw.com

    Feds: U.C.C. 1-308, State: U.C.C. 1-207, Both: U.C.C. 1-103.6

Posting Permissions

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