To: Dr. Michael Richards, President
6375 W. Charleston Blvd.
Las Vegas, NV 89146
CC: Chief, CSN Police Department
General Council, College of Southern Nevada
Re: Request for Permission to Carry Concealed Firearms on CSN Property.
Dear Dr. Richards and other interested parties,
This letter is to advise you of my renewed request for written permission to carry a concealed firearm while attending classes and conducting lawful business on CSN property in accordance with Nevada Revised Statute 202.265.
I currently possess a valid permit to carry concealed firearms in the state of Nevada. My background has been thoroughly investigated many times. Once, with every firearms purchase made; and again, upon issuance of my permit to carry concealed firearms. I am a veteran of the United States Army where I underwent exhaustive background investigation to obtain a secret security clearance as well as extensive training in the use of firearms. I have been fingerprinted numerous times in the process of obtaining my security clearance, concealed firearms permit and Nevada gaming license. Clearly, if concern existed that I were a threat to public safety, it would have been discovered.
Denial of this request without just cause or due process of law shall not only be deemed a violation of my rights under the second, fifth and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution, but may also constitute a violation of 18 USC, Section 1983. The Board of Regents being the governing body of the Nevada System of Higher Education, a subdivision of the State of Nevada has appointed Dr. Michael Richards to preside over the campuses that make up the College of Southern Nevada. This makes Dr. Richards an agent of the State and thus he must grant all rights afforded to me by the United States constitution; specifically, equal protection under the fourteenth amendment. Amanda Collins, a student at the University of Nevada, Reno and a victim of sexual assault on a NSHE campus, was granted permission to carry a concealed firearm while on campus. Under the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment, I, a similarly situated student of the Nevada System of Higher Education, demand similar accommodation as Ms. Collins.
By implication, Nevada Revised Statute 202.265 suggests that a permit scheme exists to grant citizens the ability to lawfully possess and carry firearms on Nevada System of Higher Education property. According to the Supreme Court of the United States, A firearm licensing scheme must have defined, articulable criteria, and if a person should meet these criteria, a license shall issue (District of Columbia v. Heller). Additionally, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that the Heller decision applies to the states as well (McDonald v. City of Chicago, Ill). Because the Board of Regents has not clearly defined and articulated a permit scheme of their own, by default, they must accept the criteria as defined by Nevada Revised Statute 202.366.
Denial of this request also constitutes coercion under Nevada Revised Statute 207.190 1. (b); by this statute, coercion is defined as to “deprive the person of any tool, implement or clothing, or hinder the person in the use thereof.” Article one, section eleven of the Nevada Constitution affirms the right of citizens of the State of Nevada to keep and bear arms “for security and defense.” Should this request be denied, I would effectively be deprived of the tools necessary for my security and defense beyond the boundaries of CSN where I have a lawful right to possess them.
Additionally, should you refuse to grant this request; I shall hold the College of Southern Nevada financially liable for any damages that occur should I not be able to adequately provide for my own self-defense. This liability shall exist any place, on or off campus, where refusal to grant this request causes me to be without my firearm and damages occur. Currently, the General Council believes agents of the college enjoy immunity from liability under NRS 41.032, 41.0336 and 41.035. This is not the case. Consider the ruling made by the Supreme Court of the United States which says, “the affirmative duty to protect arises not from the State's knowledge of the individual’s predicament or from its expressions of intent to help him, but from the limitations which it has imposed on his freedom to act on his own behalf” (DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services). If this request is denied and my personal liberty restrained, a special relationship will exist. The College of Southern Nevada and its agents will then have an affirmative duty to ensure my safety anywhere the denial causes me to be disarmed, or accept liability for any damages that arise as a result of failure to provide adequate protection. NRS 41.032, 41.0336 and 41.035 will not shield the college or its personnel from liability should they deny this request.
There is an easy way to avoid this liability; grant this request. NRS 41.032, 41.0336 and 41.035 would shield the administration from liability should it grant this request as granting it would be an “act” that does not restrain anyone’s liberty and does not create a special relationship with anyone as defined by the Supreme Court in the DeShaney case. In short, denying this request creates a liability by virtue of a special relationship, while granting it does nether. Rest assured, CCW permit holders are sane, rational people. The lack of significant statistical evidence to the contrary is testament to this. While I do not foresee a statistically rare tragedy like Virginia Tech ever occurring at CSN, violent crime is nonetheless a reality on and off campus. The sexual assault of Amanda Collins, at gunpoint, in a UNR parking facility confirms this. The State of Nevada trusts in my judgment and ability to safely carry my firearm virtually everywhere else, and so I ask that you would as well.