Henderson Library

DVC said:

Yeah -- just GO. It's THEIR problem, not yours. You only need to deal with the police, not with the hoplophobes, and unless the police go out on that limb (which they aren't likely to do), you have no reason to stop carrying.

Sounds like a good place for an OC Day. Even better, many public libraries have meeting rooms available for use, free or at a nominal price. Hold a meeting there for the ad hoc group that is going to deal with the Clark County Commisars, and go OC when you do.

"I don't want to get any messages saying 'we're holding our ground.' Let the ENEMY do that . . !" -- Patton the Elder

Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying and in a perfect world your method would be correct. Unfortunately this is a political problem. I as a member of the freedom/OC movement want to make sure that we seem reasonable in our methods particularly by the police. I don't want them to get tired of being called on things like this. What I want is for them to think that I am a reasonable person working to correct what I believe to be wrong, not just some troublemaker.

The HPD has shown itself to be generally cooperative with OC and in my experience with them, unlike other Police in CC, are well trained and generally helpful and respectful to citizens. I don't want that to change. It would not benefit us. We don't need to make enemys out of friends.

On a personal level, my life is very busy. I don't need to be arrested and have to pay for a lawyer to bail me out. I have no doubt I would walk, but I don't have the time or resources to fight it out that way. I will have to go my route. Although at this point I think it would be counterproductive anyone is free to make the fight their way.


Thanks for your input.

TBG

This may prove useful.

It seems Thomas F. Fay is the Administrator of the Henderson District Public Libraries as seen here http://www.mypubliclibrary.com/catalog/library/userdef/managers.aspx

A quick search of the name brings up the following Nevada Financial Disclosure Statement http://www.ethics.nv.gov/COE_websit...FDS_archives/2010/Fay Thomas F 2011.01.06.pdf

It appears he's appointed to the public office for the Henderson District Public Libraries. Logically this means that HDPL is a government run group, and since his office is public, so should be said buildings, right?

edit: Also, on his own LinkedIn account, he lists his job as "Government Administration". So by his own admission he's administering a government agency.

The Big Guy said:

I understand what you're saying and in a perfect world your method would be correct. Unfortunately this is a political problem. I as a member of the freedom/OC movement want to make sure that we seem reasonable in our methods particularly by the police. I don't want them to get tired of being called on things like this.

Click to expand...

I do.

I want them to become so tired of it that when they show up, they greet you by name and with a smile that says "This is a waste of time for both of us, won't these people stop freaking out and calling us?"

I want them to become so tired of it that the 911 calltakers explain that if all we are doing is wearing a pistol, there is nothing to worry about, it is legal and to call back if we actually do anything dangerous.

The cops who showed up the other day were neutral in the way they handled it. They saw you being more than reasonable, and the library staff being worried about something they didn't need to worry about. They are on the side of the reasonable people, and for that reason (and to avoid a false-arrest situation) would not arrest you. At most, they would ask you to leave until it gets sorted out. More likely, they would tell the library people the same thing that I've told you -- that it is up to them to prove that they are exempt from the pre-emption law, and until they do, more calls like this would be considered false reporting.

DVC said:

I do.

I want them to become so tired of it that when they show up, they greet you by name and with a smile that says "This is a waste of time for both of us, won't these people stop freaking out and calling us?"

I want them to become so tired of it that the 911 calltakers explain that if all we are doing is wearing a pistol, there is nothing to worry about, it is legal and to call back if we actually do anything dangerous.

The cops who showed up the other day were neutral in the way they handled it. They saw you being more than reasonable, and the library staff being worried about something they didn't need to worry about. They are on the side of the reasonable people, and for that reason (and to avoid a false-arrest situation) would not arrest you. At most, they would ask you to leave until it gets sorted out. More likely, they would tell the library people the same thing that I've told you -- that it is up to them to prove that they are exempt from the pre-emption law, and until they do, more calls like this would be considered false reporting.

Click to expand...

There never was cause to arrest me. For what? For carring a gun, nope no law there. For trespass? Nope, I was never asked to leave but just that I could not have a gun in the library. When my discussion inside was over and they told me they were going to call police I told them that it was a good idea and went outside to await them. No cause for arrest. As the police told me several times, "you're not in trouble, we don't think you have done anything wrong".

Beating with a hammer is not allways the best way to fix something that is broken.

TBG


P.S. DVC, I used to be kind of a hammer and tong guy myself but over the years I've added to my aresnal of methods. Be assured I can still swing the hammer too, but not till all reason is exhasted. I don't think that is the case here as overall we are making progress. Do you know the story of the 2 bulls? I'm sorry I can't put it in perspective using that story but it would get the whole thread removed.

Michigan is going through this battle right now and it has gone to the appeals court.

The Lansing area district library (CADL) is an authority which they claim is not a local unit of government. The Circuit Court judge agreed and said preemption doesn't apply and the Library could ban firearms. We are appealing. Search CADL on this site for more. The link below goes to a summary by our side.

http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?t=135653

Venator said:

Michigan is going through this battle right now and it has gone to the appeals court.

The Lansing area district library (CADL) is an authority which they claim is not a local unit of government. The Circuit Court judge agreed and said preemption doesn't apply and the Library could ban firearms. We are appealing. Search CADL on this site for more. The link below goes to a summary by our side.

http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?t=135653

Click to expand...

Thank you very much for the info. I and I'm sure other locals here will be keeping up on this. Hopefully a win there will be ammunition to use for our cause here.

TBG

The Big Guy said:

There never was cause to arrest me.

Click to expand...

Which is why if they DID arrest you, it would be false arrest.

My point is that YOU being reasonable got the cops on YOUR side, even though they were on the library's side when they arrived (by default).

There are two sides, Offense and Defense. The hoplophobes put you on the defensive, and you are accepting that role when you believe that you have to justify your rights.

Under the law, they are asserting that they are not bound by the pre-emption law. That places the burden on them to prove that -- and until they do, they have no legal right to deny you YOUR legal rights, unless you grant them that power over you.

I would not grant them that power. In a case like this, if they can show me that they are in fact exempt, I would cheerfully accept that and act accordingly. If the cops asked me to leave the pistol in my car, as an official request, I would again act accordingly. Unless and until they do, I would not give them the power to render me defenseless, just because someone is offended.

After a couple of times of being called, the cops would politely but firmly inform the hoplophobes that they are abusing 911, and suggest that they stop doing it until they prove their exemption to pre-emption.

I'm in the boonies here in the Northland, or I would wander on in and let them have their hissy fit.

While I agree that it is encumbent on the library, and not on the individual to prove that they are indeed a privately owned organization - which clearly they are not, otherwise their officials wouldn't be elected by government entities and their funding wouldn't come from the taxpayer - however I do find issue with the statement the previous poster made regarding the predisposition of the responding officers to be on the 'side' of the library employees.

A well trained officer, as these officers appear to have been, will respond to a call with a neutral attitude to both parties. Any officer with experience in the field will know that sometimes the 'victim' is not the 'victim', the 'issue' is not the 'issue' and most of all, they never really know what they are responding to, which is why they use caution responding to any call.

I know addressing the actions of the police can often become tense on these forums, especially when someone appears to be defending them, so I apologize if it offends you for someone to take the stance that not all cops are bad. I am sure my stance is in part due to my upbringing in the home of a fair, well liked, well trained, and decorated police officer who took pride in being good at his job.

jdholmes said:

A well trained officer, as these officers appear to have been, will respond to a call with a neutral attitude to both parties.

Click to expand...

They are SUPPOSED to. That's not the same thing as actually doing it.

Consider the call they get, and what will go through their minds:

1) MWAG -- automatically, they assume the worst.
2) At the library -- the library is an entity that they grew up respecting
3) Reported by the Librarian -- that must be kindly, old Miss Brown!

Do the math, and you get "Kindly, old Miss Brown is being threatened by a guy with a gun in OUR library! Expedite units to back!"

Yet, when they get there, Miss Brown is nowhere to be seen -- they find Just Another Guy standing there calmly, pistol secured in the holster, while some gal is freaking out and refuses to listen to reason.

Bottom line: Reasonable Gun Owners 1, Hoplophobes 0 -- and an effect multiplier is that they went in with the complete opposite expectation.

I am sure my stance is in part due to my upbringing in the home of a fair, well liked, well trained, and decorated police officer who took pride in being good at his job.

Click to expand...

Our upbringing is similar. So think back to the stories you grew up hearing, and consider how many times they are about how your dad went it with one mindset and found something entirely different.

I guess my whole point is that they do not necessarily go in with the preconceived ideas about what is happening. Your description of what /must/ be going on in their heads is just your idea of how things may be playing out in their heads...you are putting people in a cookie cutter when you start determining what must go on in their heads. My point was that it doesn't happen like that all the time...and that not all officers are the same.

A good officer may not necessarily assume the worst, the location is irrelevant and the only thing that may change the situation would be literally knowing the caller...which is possible but not all that likely. I am not aware of how your dispatching system works here, but where I am from the responding officer is not given full details of the call ie: who is calling in.

I am not implying that all officers respond in the way they should, with neutrality and an open mind. What I am implying is that you just expressed a stereotype that is so common in these forums. You have preconceived notions of what other people are thinking before you even meet them.

We have two examples in this situation of what appear to have been well trained officers that responded with the neutrality that we wish they all had.


I probably should have refrained from responding again, as I am well aware that anyone who defends actions and behaviors of officers or shows support to them of any kind seems to find themselves quickly bashed, so I will withdraw with apologies for stepping on toes.

gmijackso said:

I'd like to re-offer the idea that perhaps a simple look up into who owns the building could solve a lot of this problem. As I said before, being unfamiliar with this library, I'm unable to determine it's address, or location on a map for that matter. However, if somebody could clarify those points to me, we could locate it and determine who owns the building.

If the building is government owned, that's a huge step in the right direction. They could have leased it to whomever, and then the leaseholder chooses the rules, but that lease should be public info if it's a govt owned building. Seems to be a viable avenue for gaining facts rather than waxing poetic about it.

Click to expand...

I looked up the old address (they moved) it was and still is owned by the City of Henderson. The new location does not show up in the assessor’s website. I know that the Library was raising funds to build it. I will call the Assessor’s office to see what they can tell me.

TBG

The Big Guy said:

I looked up the old address (they moved) it was and still is owned by the City of Henderson. The new location does not show up in the assessor’s website. I know that the Library was raising funds to build it. I will call the Assessor’s office to see what they can tell me.

TBG

Click to expand...

I poked around on the assessors map and I can only assume it is parcel 179-18-111-003 as I'm not familiar with the area. Here is the link to the page for that parcel. http://sandgate.co.clark.nv.us/assr...spx?hdnParcel=179-18-111-003&hdnInstance=pcl7 The aerial view of the assessors map appears to be fairly recent construction and is registered to "Henderson District Public Libraries". It is across the street from 101 W Lake Mead, so it could stand to reason that it would be 100 W Lake Mead. Maybe if you look at the map, you will be able to confirm if it is in fact the location you visit.

gmijackso said:

I poked around on the assessors map and I can only assume it is parcel 179-18-111-003 as I'm not familiar with the area. Here is the link to the page for that parcel. http://sandgate.co.clark.nv.us/assr...spx?hdnParcel=179-18-111-003&hdnInstance=pcl7 The aerial view of the assessors map appears to be fairly recent construction and is registered to "Henderson District Public Libraries". It is across the street from 101 W Lake Mead, so it could stand to reason that it would be 100 W Lake Mead. Maybe if you look at the map, you will be able to confirm if it is in fact the location you visit.

Click to expand...

That is it, thank you.

TBG

jdholmes said:

I guess my whole point is that they do not necessarily go in with the preconceived ideas about what is happening.

Click to expand...

EVERYBODY goes EVERYWHERE with preconceived ideas. You can't help it. That's the whole idea behind "Say the first thing that crosses your mind" interviews that they give would-be cops -- to find out what their preconceptions are.

Ask your dad what would be going through his head if he were answering this call. He WON'T tell you "I have no idea."

A good officer may not necessarily assume the worst

Click to expand...

He will if he wants to go home tonight. That's the first thing they teach in Officer Survival courses, and the first mantra in these classes is that "EVERYONE is armed!"

After the BBQ today, Don't Tread On Me, Sabotage, and I went to the Henderson Library at Lake Mead & Water St by the new Target. We all went in OC to fill out new voter registration cards so we could participate in the upcoming Republican caucuses. Anyway, we went straight to the main Help Desk, talked to the librarian, who promptly helped us find the voter forms, and then we sat in the middle of the library for about 15 minutes filling out the cards and chatting. The library staff definitely noticed but didn't mention one word. We noticed one Henderson police officer drive by the library, and thought he was coming to talk to us, but he kept going towards Target.

After we left, Tread and I went around the rear exit of the library so we could go to Henderson Harley, and there were 3 or 4 Henderson cruisers there with someone detained, so they were very close had they were called, but obviously they were not.

Looks like the efforts of The Big Guy and his family paid off. Henderson libraries now seem OC friendly.

Tim

This is a good sign. However, one out of two isn't a trend. Let's see what happens (or doesn't) the next four times.

Also, don't assume that they are gun-friendly, just because no cops show up. They need to see OCers repeatedly being polite, pleasant and Just Like Anyone Else before they will become comfortable with us. Once we normalize OC in their minds, THEN they will be gun-friendly.

New twist on old story.

My wife noticed a sign saying something about "Rescue my Library, vote yes on question one." I looked it up and here is what I found.

LAS VEGAS CBS KXNT- The board of the Henderson Library system will send a resolution to the county commission next week, asking for approval to place a property tax override on the November Ballot. If the ballot question is approved by commissioners and the voters, it would recapture about $1.5 million of $3 million in annual revenue losses since the recession began.
It’s a tax increase of $2 per $100 of assessed value, Executive Director Tom Fay told KXNT, or about $7 per Henderson household.
The goal is to bolster the budget for materials and operational expenses, including utility bills and building maintenance. It would also stave off closure of two library branches.
Fay said there have been cuts to staff and to library hours. Through attrition, the staff has shrunk by 32 positions, and the libraries are now closed on Sundays.
The shift to electronic books has not been as beneficial as library users might imagine, since the industry has not settled. In the long-term, the ebook transition will be more economical, Fay told KXNT. But in the near term, it is merely shifting costs from hard materials to technology and personnel budgets.


What this means is that the citizens of Henderson can vote to raise property taxes within the city to pay for the Library. I knew that the Henderson District Library was funded by county taxes, but I did not know it was strictly a tax levied against Henderson Residents.

Because of other more pressing obligations I dropped the ball on this one but have always intended to revisit it in the future. Right now I don't have the time as I'm working hard on gun registration. Not that it isn't important but other things seem more pressing at the moment. Family and business take a big chunk of my time.



TBG

TBG thanks for all your efforts. It looks like you're spreading yourself around a lot and I for one appreciate what you're doing.

From reading your previous posts it looks like the library is another one of those quirky quasi-governmental agencies like the RTC, the LVCVA, the SNWA/LVVWD, SNHD, etc. It's not state. It's not county. It's not city. It's a murky situation to be sure. Probably one that should have some clarity brought to it. I look forward to seeing where this progresses but I know you've got bigger fish to fry. Thanks again!

It has been a long time getting back to this but I have some ideas. Is there a Henderson resident that would like to jump in the middle of this? Write some letters etc. Sorta take charge. I have a plan, but too much on the plate to take it on now. Let me know if you are interested. Even a few people could get in on it.

TBG

BTW, I also posted this in the "how did it go?" sticky.

So I ran out of books and went to the Paseo Verde Library (Henderson) today. I went in, walked right past the “no drugs, alcohol, or weapons” sign which pursuant to NRS 202.3673 prohibited me from carrying a concealed weapon. Good thing I was open carrying!
Now I’ve done it before without incident, but this time, as I was looking at all the new books (due back in 3 weeks, rather than the 1 my hometown library used to allow; good on you Henderson!), I was approached by an employee/volunteer who politely told me the following:
He stated, to the effect that: “Sir, this is a public building. We have signs that prohibit weapons in the building.”
I politely responded that actually, the law only prohibits concealed weapons in public buildings.
“But this is a public building.”
I should have said: So what?
I kept up the line that I was doing nothing wrong by open carrying and that the law again, prohibited concealed weapons. I tried to give him one of my info cards, but he threw his hand up like he was done with me and walked off. He approached the librarian (I assume) and tattled on me. I finished looking at the new books and walked off.
Nobody did anything.
I made my selection and checked out without further incident. No patrons got upset or alarmed, no kids panicked. No staff members eyed me suspiciously (other than that guy) and the police didn’t arrive. I didn’t commit any acts of violence and my gun stayed in its holster in plain sight where it belonged.
What offended me was this guy was so quick to jump on me (kudos for being observant, at least), but equally quick to dismiss me when I protested. If he knew better, then why not try to reason and educate me? I was being polite and informative (in our very brief exchange), not angry, abusive, or anything other than cool and respectful. He was the one who became undignified and walked away. He did not want to engage in an exchange of ideas.
I will give credit to the librarian in charge for not calling the police on my (just across the parking lot) or accosting me further. I have sent an email to various library officials and the city (a copy for you). I intend to go back and exercise my right to open carry while at the library next time I need reading material.

-Letter-

To whom it may concern:

This letter is concerning the erroneous information that a library employee/volunteer may have regarding the carrying of firearms while in a public building. Today, while I was visiting the Paseo Verde library, a male employee/volunteer (approximately late 30s to early 40s, medium height, stocky build with dark hair) approached me and informed me that the handgun I was openly carrying on a holster on my belt was prohibited in a public building. This is incorrect.
Nevada law only prohibits the concealed carry of firearms in public buildings where there is a metal detector or a ‘no weapons’ sign present at each public entrance. Openly carrying weapons as I was is not prohibited by law. Nevada state law also prohibits local authorities from making their own laws or regulations regarding carrying firearms (known as preemption). I violated no law by openly carrying a firearm in the library.
The reason I carried a firearm into the library is for my own personal safety. One never knows when one might encounter a criminal or a deranged person bent on violent mayhem. I have no desire whatsoever to violate the law, only to protect myself in the same manner that I bring my cell phone (a lifeline to 911) with me wherever I go and keep fire extinguishers and smoke detectors in my home.
I consider today’s interaction a small affair. No one was alarmed, outraged, or seemed to notice or care, aside from this one ill-informed employee/volunteer. In fact, every other interaction I’ve had regarding me openly carrying a firearm has been positive and supportive.
What galled me most was the unwillingness of this employee/volunteer to listen to me. He stated (politely of course): “Sir, this is a public building and we have signs prohibiting weapons in the building.”
I politely responded that state law only prohibited concealed weapons and that I was not violating any law. I offered to discuss this further with him and wanted to offer him a business card for an informative website regarding Nevada firearms carry laws, but he declined and walked away, seemingly upset. I am most offended because he made no attempt to engage in discourse with me or showed any desire to educate himself on the subject. Small-mindedness in a library of the 21st Century shocked me. I finished making my selection, checked out, and left without further incident. There was no shock, horror, or alarm that I could detect from the other patrons.
While I have carried my handgun openly in this library before without incident, and I do not believe this to be a systemic attempt at violating Nevada’s rights within the Henderson library system, I was bothered by this incident and would like to call attention to the fact that openly carrying a weapon in the library is perfectly legal.
I invite you and your staff to read the relevant statutes and to browse my informative website, www.nevadacarry.org.
I do request that perhaps an email be sent to all library employees/volunteers informing them of the legality of openly carrying a firearm inside the library. Also, the sign at the door should be modified to state “no concealed weapons” as that is the only lawful prohibition.

Thank you for your kind attention to this matter,

NRS 202.3673  Permittee authorized to carry concealed firearm while on premises of public building; exceptions; penalty. http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-2...#NRS202Sec3673
NRS 244.364  Limited authority to regulate firearms; http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-2...l#NRS244Sec364