Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: 2011 Legislation - What Can YOU Do?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    2011 Legislation - What Can YOU Do?

    This is the notice I sent to our SFA membership:

    The 76th (2011) Legislative Session began February 7, 2011 and will end June 6, 2011.

    SFA’s Legislative Action Committee of unpaid lobbyists plans to attend/testify at every opportunity as feasible. But we need YOUR help.

    What can you do?

    Email/write/call/fax your legislators AND all members of the Senate or Assembly committee that will hear pertinent bills. Assembly and Senate contact info/email are available at www.leg.state.nv.us

    If possible, attend key committee hearings. Testify in support of good bills – and in opposition to any bad bills.

    Visit and use the Nevada Legislature’s website: www.leg.state.nv.us It is a wealth of information!

    Click on “Share Your Opinion on Legislative Bills.” Direct link: www.leg.state.nv.us/AppCF/Opinion/76th2011/Poll/ Here you can cast your “vote” on a bill and type in an optional comment. Note: Our legislators DO read these votes/comments!

    To help in keeping track and up-to-date, use the “Personalized Bill Tracking” feature.
    Direct link: www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/76th2011/Subscriber/

    New this year is the “Nevada Electronic Legislative Information System” – another valuable tool. Direct link: https://nelis.leg.state.nv.us/

    Together we CAN and WILL make a difference! Everyone is encouraged to take part! We need your help!

    From time to time, SFA will send email notices [to the SFA membership] concerning pending legislation.

    Everyone is also encouraged to visit the SFA “Nevada Legislation 2011” forum at www.stillwaterfirearms.org/phpnuke/modules.php?name=Forums [registration required] for more information about pending legislation.


    J. L. "Larry" Rhodes
    Chairman, Legislative Action Committee

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

    There are a lot of very important bills this session. I hope we can get university carry and constitutional carry worked in.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927
    Am also anxiously awaiting those BDRs to become bills!

    Campus Carry will be HUGE. Will NEED EVERYONE'S support.

    Constitutional Carry - same; will probably encounter great resistance, but we'll press on!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    115
    Does anyone know the AB #'s for the gun related bills?
    Last edited by vegasche1023; 02-14-2011 at 03:02 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, ,
    Posts
    120
    Great post, varminter!

    Quote Originally Posted by vegasche1023 View Post
    Does anyone know the AB #'s for the gun related bills?

    AB143
    SB126

    Those are for revising provisions related to concealed carry permits. The assembly bill seems to be the better of the two, since the assembly bill adds some strength to keeping permit info confidential and the senate one requires ownership of the firearm in order to legally carry it.

    AB8 revises provisions related to the use of force. It is a somewhat a version of "castle doctrine".

    There will be others, so make sure to check periodically for updates.
    Last edited by SoLasVegas; 02-14-2011 at 03:22 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, ,
    Posts
    120
    I also wanted to add a bit more to the "what you can do" list.

    Talk to your friends and neighbors. Show them how to go to the state website and research this stuff. Urge them to post their comments and to write their representatives.

    If you can afford to, print up some pamphlets and/or posters regarding these legislative items along with instructions and URLs of the appropriate pages. Talk to local gun-friendly shops and see if they would be willing to give up some counter space and/or wall space for the pamphlets and posters. Some might even be willing to print some more on their dime so be sure to have electronic versions of the print-outs on a disc you can give them to make it easy.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927
    Quote Originally Posted by vegasche1023 View Post
    Does anyone know the AB #'s for the gun related bills?
    Here ya go! Remember, all is subject to change/amendment.

    SB-126 “Any Semi-Auto”


    www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/76th2011/Reports/history.cfm?ID=292

    Legislative Counsel’s Digest:
    1 Under existing law, a person applying for a permit to carry a firearm in a
    2 concealed manner is required to list on an application each specific semiautomatic
    3 firearm to which the permit will pertain but may receive a permit for all revolvers
    4 owned by the person without listing each revolver specifically. (NRS 202.3657)
    5 This bill revises this provision to allow a person to complete one application and
    6 obtain one permit to carry in concealment all firearms owned by the person. The
    7 application must specify whether it pertains to revolvers, semiautomatic firearms or
    8 both, and the applicant must demonstrate competence with each category of
    9 firearm, as applicable. The permit is then valid for any firearm within each category
    10 of firearm listed on the permit which is owned or obtained by the person.

    The first hearing for SB-126 is February 16, 2011.

    P. S. We are working to remove the language “…owned by the person” – and possibly replace with “The person must not be required to list nor identify on the application each revolver or semiautomaticfirearm.

    See AB-143, below.


    ************************************************** *


    AB-143 “Any Semi-Auto AND CCW Confidentiality”


    www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/76th2011/Reports/history.cfm?ID=349

    Legislative Counsel’s Digest:
    1 Existing law provides that a qualified applicant for a permit to carry a
    2 concealed firearm may obtain a permit for revolvers, for one or more specific
    3 semiautomatic firearms, or for revolvers and one or more specific semiautomatic
    4 firearms. (NRS 202.3657) If the application for a permit involves semiautomatic
    5 firearms, the applicant must state the make, model and caliber of each
    6 semiautomatic firearm for which the applicant is seeking to obtain a permit. (NRS
    7 202.366) Additionally, to receive and renew a permit involving semiautomatic
    8 firearms, an applicant or permittee must demonstrate competence with each
    9 semiautomatic firearm to which the application pertains. (NRS 202.3657,
    10 202.3677)
    11 Existing law also provides that information in an application for a permit to
    12 carry a concealed firearm and all information relating to the investigation of an
    13 applicant for such a permit is confidential. (NRS 202.3662) However, the Nevada
    14 Supreme Court recently held in Reno Newspapers, Inc. v. Haley, 126 Nev. Adv.
    15 Op. 23, 234 P.3d 922 (2010), that the identity of a holder of a permit to carry a
    16 concealed firearm and any postpermit records of investigation, suspension or
    17 revocation are not confidential and are therefore public records.
    18 Section 1 of this bill allows a qualified applicant for a permit to carry a
    19 concealed firearm to obtain one permit for all semiautomatic firearms that the
    20 applicant seeks to carry instead of being required to obtain a permit for each
    21 specific semiautomatic firearm. Sections 1 and 4 of this bill provide that an
    22 applicant or permittee may demonstrate competence with semiautomatic firearms in
    23 general rather than competence with each specific semiautomatic firearm. Section 3
    24 of this bill provides that the identity and any information acquired during the
    25 investigation of a holder of a permit to carry a concealed firearm are confidential,
    26 as are any records regarding the suspension, restoration or revocation of such a
    27 permit.

    First hearing date to be announced.


    ************************************************** *


    AB-8 “Castle Doctrine”


    www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/76th2011/Reports/history.cfm?ID=26

    Legislative Counsel’s Digest:
    1 Under existing case law, there is no duty to retreat before using deadly force if
    2 the person using deadly force is not the original aggressor and reasonably believes
    3 that he or she is about to be killed or seriously injured. (Culverson v. State, 106
    4 Nev. 484 (1990)) Section 1 of this bill provides that under the defense of justifiable
    5 homicide there is no duty to retreat if the person using deadly force: (1) is not the
    6 original aggressor; (2) has a right to be present at the location where deadly force is
    7 used; and (3) is not engaged in criminal activity at the time deadly force is used.
    8 Section 1 also revises the definition of “justifiable homicide” to include specifically
    9 the killing of a person in defense of a motor vehicle or in defense against any
    10 person who manifestly intends and endeavors to enter the motor vehicle of another
    11 for the purpose of assaulting a person who is in the motor vehicle.
    12 Existing law provides that a killing is justifiable if the circumstances were
    13 sufficient to excite the fears of a reasonable person and the person killing really
    14 acted under the influence of those fears and not in a spirit of revenge. (NRS
    15 200.130) Section 2 of this bill establishes a presumption that the killing is
    16 justifiable under the standard set forth in NRS 200.130 if the person killing: (1)
    17 knew or had reason to believe that the person who was killed was entering
    18 unlawfully and with force, or attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the
    19 habitation or property of another; (2) knew or had reason to believe that the person
    20 who was killed was committing or attempting to commit a felony; and (3) did not
    21 provoke the person who was killed.
    22 Existing law provides that in a civil action brought by or on behalf of a person
    23 against whom force which is intended or likely to cause death or bodily injury was
    24 used: (1) there is a presumption that the person who used such force had a
    25 reasonable fear of imminent death or bodily injury to himself or herself or another
    26 person if the person against whom such force was used was committing burglary or
    27 invasion of the home; and (2) that presumption must be overcome by clear and
    28 convincing evidence to the contrary for the civil action to be maintained. (NRS
    29 41.095) Section 3 of this bill extends that presumption to circumstances in which
    30 the person who used such force was in his or her motor vehicle and the other person
    31 was committing grand larceny of the motor vehicle with the use or threatened use
    32 of a deadly weapon. Section 3 also enacts a provision, based upon Texas law,
    33 which provides that a person is immune from civil liability for using force which is
    34 intended or likely to cause death or bodily injury if the person was justified in using
    35 such force under the applicable provisions of Nevada criminal law. (Texas Civil
    36 Practice and Remedies Code, § 83.001)

    First hearing date to be announced.


    ************************************************** *


    AB-66


    www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/76th2011/Reports/history.cfm?ID=127

    Revises certain provisions concerning the restoration of a person's right to bear arms.

    Legislative Counsel’s Digest:
    1 Under existing law, if a court orders the sealing of a person’s criminal record,
    2 the person’s right to vote, right to hold office and right to serve on a jury are
    3 immediately restored to the person if those rights have not previously been restored.
    4 (NRS 179.285) However, the sealing of the record does not restore the person’s
    5 right to bear arms. Existing law prohibits a person who has been convicted of a
    6 felony from owning or possessing a firearm unless the person has received a pardon
    7 and the pardon does not restrict his or her right to bear arms. (NRS 202.360)
    8 Section 1 of this bill requires that upon the sealing of a person’s criminal records,
    9 the person be given a written notice informing the person that his or her right to
    10 bear arms is not restored, unless the person has received a pardon and the pardon
    11 does not restrict the person’s right to bear arms.
    12 Existing law authorizes certain agencies and persons to inquire into and inspect
    13 certain criminal records which have been sealed. (NRS 179.301) Section 2 of this
    14 bill authorizes the State Board of Pardons Commissioners, which consists of the
    15 Governor, justices of the Nevada Supreme Court and the Attorney General, to
    16 inquire into and inspect certain sealed criminal records of a person who applies to
    17 the Board for a pardon.
    18 Under existing law, if a person is granted a full, unconditional pardon by the
    19 State Board of Pardons Commissioners, all civil rights are restored to the person.
    20 (NRS 213.090) Section 3 of this bill clarifies that those civil rights include, without
    21 limitation, the right to bear arms. Further, existing law requires that a person who is
    22 granted a pardon by the Board be given an official document which provides that
    23 the person has been granted a pardon. (NRS 213.090) Section 3 requires that the
    24 official document explicitly state that the person’s right to bear arms is restored if
    25 that right is restored to the person.

    This bill is said to need amendment.

    First hearing date to be announced. [First hearing was today, Feb 14]


    ************************************************** *


    BDR-742 “NV Campus Protection Act”


    This very important legislation would enable Nevada Concealed Firearms Permit holders to carry a concealed firearm for self-defense on college campuses.

    Actual bill language and bill number pending.


    ************************************************** *


    BDR-15-556


    Removes fees and other requirements for carrying a firearm.

    Believed to be Senator Gustavson’s ‘Constitutional Carry’ bill;
    Actual bill language and bill number pending. [Update: The Constitutional Carry bill MAY not be coming after all; but can expect a good bill in its place. More to follow]


    ************************************************** *


    BDR-15-51


    Revises provisions relating to concealed weapon permits for military police under 21 years of age.

    Actual bill language and bill number pending.


    ************************************************** *


    BDR-45-52


    Revises provisions to allow game animals that are struck and killed by vehicles to be processed for meat.

    Actual bill language and bill number pending.


    ************************************************** *


    BDR/Bill numbers unknown;
    Not yet drafted into bill form; Actual language and bill numbers pending:

    Firearms in State Parks

    CCW Full Recognition


    ************************************************** *

  8. #8
    Guest
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    ,
    Posts
    395

    Ab8

    2A
    Last edited by OC-moto450r; 08-02-2012 at 09:20 PM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927
    Quote Originally Posted by OC-moto450r View Post
    Does anyone know why AB8 never made it out of committee, or should I say why it was allowed to die in committee?

    http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/7...tory.cfm?ID=26

    Apr 16, 2011
    (Pursuant to Joint Standing Rule No. 14.3.1, no further action allowed.)
    Yes, we know. AB-8 was NOT even heard because, just like his predecessor (Bernie Anderson), Assembly Judiciary Committee Chairman Horne (D) would NOT allow a hearing. These guys do not want to disallow lawsuits even if the use of firearm is completely lawful.

    However, AB-321 (the “lite” version) passed.

    Assemblyman Horne also killed SB-231 even though the bill passed the Senate and the bill had enough votes to pass out of the Assembly Judiciary Committee.

    http://nevadashooters.com/showthread.php?t=17996

  10. #10
    Guest
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    ,
    Posts
    395
    2A
    Last edited by OC-moto450r; 08-02-2012 at 09:20 PM.

Posting Permissions

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