Fallschirjmäger
Active member
At a guess...
They took the signs down because they had to,
they keep quiet about it because they didn't want to
(have to take them down, that is.)
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
My latest run in at the DMV
- Thread starter Sabotage70
- Start date
At a guess...
They took the signs down because they had to,
they keep quiet about it because they didn't want to
(have to take them down, that is.)
timf343
Campaign Veteran
I don't think they had to take them down because state law gives them the authority to restrict the carry of concealed weapons in public buildings. I'm thinking it was actually something else - without the signs, concealed carry is 100% legal by a CCW holders. I think they took them down so that someone who is CC is not required to OC. Obviously doesn't change the fact that you can't conceal without a CCW, so OC is the only choice for some.
Vegassteve
Regular Member
Did you get names and badge #s? Whats the next move?
Sabotage70
Regular Member
I'm going to file a complaint. To be honest i'm going to need a little help. I'll get the ball rolling Monday. I've been away from home all day so I haven't been able to look anything up yet.
I got the DMV supervisor's contact info. So I got that to start with.
Sent from the Droid on roids
I got the DMV supervisor's contact info. So I got that to start with.
Sent from the Droid on roids
lock_stock_barrel
New member
I have to make some changes to my voter registration...does anyone else have business at the DMV? Or would a group OC not be the best choice right now?
The Big Guy
Regular Member
Tom Jacobs, Chief Public Information Officer, Nevada Dept. of Motor Vehicles wrote this regarding a letter that had been sent to the State Department of Motor Vehicles concerning this issue, in that local DMV offices had posted signs with a reference to NRS 202.3673. It was pointed out to them that this only covers permit holders and in no way limits the right of citizens to open carry. See the response below:
“You are correct. We are in the process of changing the signs.”
TBG
“You are correct. We are in the process of changing the signs.”
TBG
JoeSparky
Centurion
SAB70 before you file ANY complaint get any and all info in Nevada's version of an open records request.... Lock that down FIRST and then after review--- file your complaints.
wrightme
Regular Member
That is what you really need to address with his supervisor. And above.
OC-moto450r
Guest
2A
Last edited:
Fallschirjmäger
Active member
Is the DMV located on property of a public airport?
Is the DMV located on the property of a public school, daycare, childcare, or NV System of Higher Learning?
Is the DMV equipped with metal detectors at signage at every public entrance?
Of course, from the wording that only applies to concealed carry, I don't see anything prohibiting openly carried arms.
The fact that the sign quotes the title of the law and not the applicable paragraph kinda hints that there isn't an applicable paragraph but the DMV doesn't want anyone to know that.
Last edited:
OC-moto450r
Guest
2A
Last edited:
MKEgal
Regular Member
But he wasn't, at least, not 'til he was on his way out.OC-moto450r said:
And then it was the guard trying to enforce his opinion,Sabotage70 said:
then the employee trying to enforce her opinion,
then the cop trying to enforce his opinion + theirs...
Interesting... they don't want people to be able to show what goes on there?OC-moto450r said:
What do they have to hide, these public employees in a taxpayer-funded building?
:shocker:
The cop?!?! I would half expect that from a security guard, but a COP?!?!
WTF?
How is it he didn't end up with at least a bloody nose?
I'd say that's good for a charge of attempted theft, since he didn't have any legal reason to do it.
Says nothing about OC.OC-moto450r said:sign at the Pahrump DMV. I took this picture today.
And with a cc license, you have written permission, right?
Actually, the state statute gives written permission.
How about the state Constitution?
And it doesn't say who/what has to give written permission, does it?
The temptation is strong to write on a 3x5" card "PERMISSION TO CARRY A FIREARM". (This got kind of long, so I'll make it 3 posts.)
MKEgal
Regular Member
Sabotage, the locals can help you most with the particulars & where to send stuff,
but in general to do a FOIA request:
Identify date, time, place
Identify parties (cop's name if you have it, otherwise say 'an officer of your department'; for the DMV, employee names or descriptions)
Request everything you can think of that they might have that describes from their point of view what happened: video, audio, personal recorders, radio traffic, phone calls, written reports
Seeing the 2 guys at the end of the wall talking on their cell phones, ESPECIALLY get phone conversations!
Looks like the one was doing a seral # check (illegal search, after their illegal seizure of your property). Also looks like it wasn't pointed in a safe direction.
Request memos, directives, emails, training materials, etc. relating to the activity.
In this case, for both the DMV & police: lawfully-armed citizen transacting business in a publicly-owned building
For the police: disarming thereof, search thereof, seizure of property, demand for identity document, demand to enter/access private property (car)]
but in general to do a FOIA request:
Identify date, time, place
Identify parties (cop's name if you have it, otherwise say 'an officer of your department'; for the DMV, employee names or descriptions)
Request everything you can think of that they might have that describes from their point of view what happened: video, audio, personal recorders, radio traffic, phone calls, written reports
Seeing the 2 guys at the end of the wall talking on their cell phones, ESPECIALLY get phone conversations!
Looks like the one was doing a seral # check (illegal search, after their illegal seizure of your property). Also looks like it wasn't pointed in a safe direction.
Request memos, directives, emails, training materials, etc. relating to the activity.
In this case, for both the DMV & police: lawfully-armed citizen transacting business in a publicly-owned building
For the police: disarming thereof, search thereof, seizure of property, demand for identity document, demand to enter/access private property (car)]
MKEgal
Regular Member
re: the video
Your cinematic technique does leave something to be desired.
COP: "you probably should have left this in the car"
Why? Is there a law against having it?
COP: "you understand they don't have to let you in there if they don't want to, right" x2
No, I understand that as employees of a gov't agency you all have to follow the law.
COP: "that's probably not the best decision, right? it's your right, but not a good decision"
Following the law is not a good decision?
love this one:
We're here to enforce the laws, not opinions, right?
[cops stays quiet... then says "really?" What an ass.]
COP: "can I put your gun in your car?"
No. You can give it back to me right here.
(or) No, but I'll walk over there with you & you can give it back when we arrive.
[Did they also put your ammo & unloaded magazine in the car?]
BTW, did they make sure the door was locked, with your pistol lying plainly visible on the driver's seat?
And did they hang around to be sure your car wasn't broken into & the pistol stolen?
And then you get a personal escort back inside to give you the permit you were denied the first time?!@?!?
COP: "you're subject to the business"
BS... they sure gave you the business!
Your cinematic technique does leave something to be desired.
COP: "you probably should have left this in the car"
Why? Is there a law against having it?
COP: "you understand they don't have to let you in there if they don't want to, right" x2
No, I understand that as employees of a gov't agency you all have to follow the law.
COP: "that's probably not the best decision, right? it's your right, but not a good decision"
Following the law is not a good decision?
love this one:
We're here to enforce the laws, not opinions, right?
[cops stays quiet... then says "really?" What an ass.]
COP: "can I put your gun in your car?"
No. You can give it back to me right here.
(or) No, but I'll walk over there with you & you can give it back when we arrive.
[Did they also put your ammo & unloaded magazine in the car?]
BTW, did they make sure the door was locked, with your pistol lying plainly visible on the driver's seat?
And did they hang around to be sure your car wasn't broken into & the pistol stolen?
And then you get a personal escort back inside to give you the permit you were denied the first time?!@?!?
COP: "you're subject to the business"
BS... they sure gave you the business!
ed2276
Regular Member
This is a bit off topic, but I noticed something interesting in the code.
The reason this is of interest to me is because I am an employee of the federal government, working at a VA Clinic. There is signage at the entrance to the clinic forbidding the possession of firearms, among other things. There is no metal detector at the entrance. So, if I have a CCW does State law preempt the federal regulation; since Nevada has not ceded the land and building to the federal government would the clinic fall under State law?
I am just asking theoretically. I wouldn't attempt to cc into the building because even if it is lawful under State law I am an at will employee and could be fired, even if I am not subject to criminal prosecution by law.
The reason this is of interest to me is because I am an employee of the federal government, working at a VA Clinic. There is signage at the entrance to the clinic forbidding the possession of firearms, among other things. There is no metal detector at the entrance. So, if I have a CCW does State law preempt the federal regulation; since Nevada has not ceded the land and building to the federal government would the clinic fall under State law?
I am just asking theoretically. I wouldn't attempt to cc into the building because even if it is lawful under State law I am an at will employee and could be fired, even if I am not subject to criminal prosecution by law.
Last edited:
Sabotage70
Regular Member
re: the video
Your cinematic technique does leave something to be desired.
COP: "you probably should have left this in the car"
Why? Is there a law against having it?
COP: "you understand they don't have to let you in there if they don't want to, right" x2
No, I understand that as employees of a gov't agency you all have to follow the law.
COP: "that's probably not the best decision, right? it's your right, but not a good decision"
Following the law is not a good decision?
love this one:
We're here to enforce the laws, not opinions, right?
[cops stays quiet... then says "really?" What an ass.]
COP: "can I put your gun in your car?"
No. You can give it back to me right here.
(or) No, but I'll walk over there with you & you can give it back when we arrive.
[Did they also put your ammo & unloaded magazine in the car?]
BTW, did they make sure the door was locked, with your pistol lying plainly visible on the driver's seat?
And did they hang around to be sure your car wasn't broken into & the pistol stolen?
And then you get a personal escort back inside to give you the permit you were denied the first time?!@?!?
COP: "you're subject to the business"
BS... they sure gave you the business!
After watching the video a few times. I really think if he could have gotten away with it. I would have been laid prone with a bloody face. The look on his face and his body language really says a lot.
Sabotage70
Regular Member
I'm guessing you still have to go by the fed.
Nevada carrier
Regular Member
It was My understanding that Metro had a policy that forbids officers from giving their opinion in the course of their duties. Concealing or opting not to carry may amount to his opinion of common sense, but you know what they say about opinions.
And no, you can not be trespassed from public buildings when you have lawful business and have not broken the law.
OC is legal in that venue and,
you have lawful business,
they have no legal right to deny you access to our building.
And no, you can not be trespassed from public buildings when you have lawful business and have not broken the law.
OC is legal in that venue and,
you have lawful business,
they have no legal right to deny you access to our building.
Sabotage70
Regular Member
I'm screen capping the video and just watched him a little closer. I think he mouthed "a$$hole" right before he walked away.