• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Now have you had enough of the Nevada Firearms coalition

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
If what NVFAC states is the reason behind their effort, aren't they using the same methodology as the anti gun crowd? Go after the outward symptoms rather than the root cause? If the problem is suicide brought on by PTSD, depression, or any other mental disorder, temporarily relieving them of their method of choice will not ultimately stop them. From what I have read on the subject in the past many people who are depressed take on a very cheery demeanor when they have finally made the decision to kill themselves. Unless it was someone you were familiar with on an ongoing basis so you would know of their change in mood, how could you make that determination?

I'm sorry when this sort of thing happens but how can tramping on my rights to buy a new carry firearm change anything? This is not at all well thought out and reminds me of the reactionary methods of the anti firearms crowd.
Indeed it is telling them that they have been right all along that the answer is to keep firearms out of otherwise law abiding citizens hands. It does not matter who takes on the moral high ground in the decision making process the results are the same.

TBG
 
Last edited:

De5115

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
36
Location
Lost Wages, NV
If NVFAC wants to ask questions prior to selling a firearm is fine with me. If you don't want to answer their questions then you don't have to.

I rather have store owners use their better judgment on who they sell to than have who they sell to legislated.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
NVFAC isn't a gun rights organization. It is a social group, in which some of the members mention gun rights once in a while. NVFAC has actively opposed open carry, and continues to do so.
Thank you for the clarification.
 

Vegassteve

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
1,763
Location
Las Vegas NV, ,
If NVFAC wants to ask questions prior to selling a firearm is fine with me. If you don't want to answer their questions then you don't have to.

I rather have store owners use their better judgment on who they sell to than have who they sell to legislated.



True no one has to answer. Yet for a group that claims to support your rights, this is not the way to do it. Also as pointed out already, gun store counter jockeys are some of the last people you would want making a psych evaluation. After four hours of so called training no less. Along with the huge invasion of privacy these questions pose.

Along with the possibility that groups like the Bradys see this and start pushing it on the gov to implement it. I can hear it now. The gun stores and gun rights groups started it so it must be a good enough idea to make into a law.
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
forgive the out of state intrusion but...

unfortunately, even mental health professionals who have been appropriately trained in suicide ideation assessment and using validated standard assessment protocols, find they do not always work across the board. there are 'assessment' questions which the subject can respond to but the individual's behaviour and affect is paramount for a mental health professional to define the severity, intensity, lethality, of any persons thoughts and behaviour which could lead the person to ultimately do self-harm to themselves or others.

if this is not the first time presenting ideation, individuals know the 'proper' response to assessment questions and answer with the 'appropriate' answer, thus misdirecting someone from a appropriate diagnosis.

Finally, the mental health profession has one other ace in their back pocket...they can contact the proper authorities and immediately put someone on a three day hold.

sorry but 'reading' someone's ideation is not done by a lay person who is standing over the gun counter 'chatting' a can set of questions.

ipser

there are going to be three groups of people

1) those who are suicidal or near to it and who will try their best to give the 'proper' response/answer and misderect. Their suicidal state of mind will be hard to discover and yes... they will usually pass screening

2) those who are suicidal but are open to respond in the affirmative if asked.

(2) do exist. Assuming a (2) who goes to the gun store to buy a gun have taken a substantial step. Not all who buy a gun with the intent to kill themselves, will of course and some who buy a gun with no intent to do so, may later develop the desire to kill theirself.

Cops etc. deal with group 2 all the time. I've seen tons of examples where people who are suicidal, will admit it. It's happened to me many times, and of course I am duty bound to invol them and I have done so scores of times... people in group (2) being a decent size chunk of the group of people i've invol'd. You think that people (you imply ALL people who are suicidal) who are suicidal and have previously presented ideation will always try to avoid the person detecting them to be suicidal.

anybody who has ever dealt with suicidal/parasuicidal persons knows that group 2 exists. You make it sound like discovering these people requires great skill and great trickery to see behind their automatically present intent to deceive you about their intent.

3) group 3 are those who aren't suicidal.

Again, rubbish. Many people are mandatory reporters in our society and the mental health system has made suicide less likely by using intervention and with the help of the responders in the field to make the initial detection.

ironically, i happen to be a cop who went to grad school for psychology. There is nothing I learned in grad school regarding how to discover suicidal intent during interaction with a patient, that the average salty first responder hasn't learned over time and through training. It's not rocket science at all.

ime, most of the suicide cases I have seen, there was "fair warning" given before they finaly pulled the trigger. It's a rarity for them not to reach out at all.

and of course for every suicidal person who commits suicide w.o giving some sort of warning and who would not reveal their state of mind to anybody querying them (the group that questioning will not reveal ) , there are several more who gave warning and got intervention

Nothing in psychology works across the board. People are complex, differ in all sorts of ways, etc. Psychology is a really "soft science". calling it a science at all is a stretch and the longer I stayed in grad school for psychology as well as spent time on the street dealing with tons of EDP's, the more I became convinced of the field's low rate of succesful prediction for example etc.

NOTE: I am not saying that I support the practice of gun sellers making these queries. I am simply pointing out that one of the effective (SOMETIMES) methods in determining whether a person is suicidal is to simply ask... simple questions... that one does not need to be a psychologist or MHP to employ with DECENT success.

People are so diverse, complex, unpredictable etc. on an individual basis (aggregate behavior ofen form relatively predictable trends) that there is no set of questions and no amount of training that would make a person anywhere near 100% effective in identifying the suicidal person before its too late.

of course.

But that;s not the same thing as saying no layperson can do this with some people/some of the time.

heck, i ve had plenty of people be 100% forthright and open to questioning, and many others have required a bit more questioning and observing.

The REASON many suicidal persons will admit it even at the point where they have gone as far towards completion of the act, as entering a gun store and trying to purchase a firearm is that there is often psychological pressure within to divulge, and it feels good to make these admissions. Many others go all the way to committing suicide hoping all the time that there will be somebody who will notice their behavior/state of mind and intervene. How do we know this? from interviews with people who made bona fide suicide attempts (i am not talking the typical slice wrist with butter knife case... the weakass quasi suicidal acts are as a matter of statistics going to be females most of the time fwiw. females have a much higher rate of Attempting suicide than men. I know this from training and grad school study but havge also seen it clearly in the suicide and attempt suicide calls I have responded to.

Just like many people who commit a crime will confess if asked "did you do it".Many think people only confess when they are skillfully tricked, or after long and fatiguing questioning by LEO's, but the simple truth is, just like with suicidals, there is psychological pressure to divulge/confess. And again, based on training , experience, and questioning criminals who confessed to me, I've learned that for most the pressure was there and very uncomfortable AND divulging./confessing brought relief. Like q junkie getting his next fix after starting to go through withdrawals , and feeling the wave of endorphins crashing in their brain and bringing them relief, many suicidals will get a similar pressure reducing good feeling upon divulging, Again, not my opinion from a vacuum but from study , trainign an extensive experience. Why would a guilty person confess to a crime, especially knowing their confession might be the only thing needed to get them incarcerated? Because of rather counterintuitive psychology. The same holds true for suicidals.

And just like many interrogators wil fail to get a confession froma guilty man, manyothers whether MHP's or laypeople will fail to get the person to divulge his suicidal state of mind

Like i said, im not arguing to support this practice im just saying the person i am responding to is making a fallacious arguments, based on an untrue understandin of the internal and external working so to speak of the suicidal person's brain

i've had the pleasure of dealing with so so so many edp's in all sorts of crises to include those that result in suicidal ideation to be confident in these assertions... many of which were later corroborated that much more by the studies etc. referenced by my professors.

Fwiw, Jails ask screening questions of arrestees they receive to include questions asking about the person being suicidal or not because it'[s their duty to protect that person AND because time has shown that ceteris paribus, a smaller %AGE OF inmates will commit suicide in the jail that does this screening , then in jails that don't
 
Last edited:

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
If NVFAC wants to ask questions prior to selling a firearm is fine with me. If you don't want to answer their questions then you don't have to.

I rather have store owners use their better judgment on who they sell to than have who they sell to legislated.

Sure, and if you don't answer the questions they turn you down for the purchase. Who is to say their judgement is better? Better than who? I agree with Steve. The gun community starts it, the anti's pick up on it and make it mandatory. A slippery slope if I ever saw one. The anti's see that not all gun shops get on board and decide that they all should and be forced (legislated) to do so. After all the the firearms rights organizations came up with the idea didn't they?

This is a typical "I don't have anything to hide, why should I object?" Your papers please.

TBG
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
True no one has to answer. Yet for a group that claims to support your rights, this is not the way to do it. Also as pointed out already, gun store counter jockeys are some of the last people you would want making a psych evaluation. After four hours of so called training no less. Along with the huge invasion of privacy these questions pose.

Along with the possibility that groups like the Bradys see this and start pushing it on the gov to implement it. I can hear it now. The gun stores and gun rights groups started it so it must be a good enough idea to make into a law.

Hmmm! Aren't these the same guns store employees that give out wrong information on the legalities of firearms ownership most notably open carry? You want to trust them to make an evaluation on the spot of someone wanting to purchase a firearm? I submit that not even a very well trained mental health professional is capable of doing that.

TBG
 

De5115

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
36
Location
Lost Wages, NV
TBG

My attitude isn't the "I don't have anything to hide attitude." (Which I don't.) It is the let business owners run their business's the way they please. And if others don't like it then they should feel free to shop elsewhere or start their own business and run it however they want.
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
TBG

My attitude isn't the "I don't have anything to hide attitude." (Which I don't.) It is the let business owners run their business's the way they please. And if others don't like it then they should feel free to shop elsewhere or start their own business and run it however they want.

Any firearms seller can refuse the sale for any reason they want. Why do they need the NVFAC tell them how to run their business?
If you don't see the slippery slope, I can't explain it to you.

TBG
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
snip...
Cops etc. deal with group 2 all the time. I've seen tons of examples where people who are suicidal,...

ironically, i happen to be a cop who went to grad school for psychology.

ime, most of the suicide cases I have seen, there was "fair warning" given before they finaly pulled the trigger.

Like i said, im not arguing to support this practice im just saying the person i am responding to is making a fallacious arguments, based on an untrue understandin of the internal and external working so to speak of the suicidal person's brain

i've had the pleasure of dealing with so so so many edp's in all sorts of crises to include those that result in suicidal ideation to be confident in these assertions... many of which were later corroborated that much more by the studies etc. referenced by my professors.

you know I am glad you furthered your education receiving grad psychology courses (did you receive your degree) as it is heartwarming the tons of suicidal people you have seen have benefited from this expertise. however since you made this extremely exaggerated claim, can you provide a figure, out of the 'tons' of ppl you have encountered, any figure that defines how many of the 'most' gave fair warning?

especially since your crisis encounters were validated in an after the fact manner by your professors.

Yet you have the gall to state i presented a fallacious argument based on your perception that i showed an untrue understanding with my post. So individual, who has taken grad school psy courses, seen tons of examples suicidal individuals, many who gave warning, and regularly confer after the fact to reach consensus w/your professors, what specific portions of my six sentence post did you find fallacious and untrue?

Alas, you and your elite group see those individuals who have already reached the decision of self-harm and unfortunately, actively search your group out to facilitate their plan - suicide by cop. others reach their demise by one car accidents which are not forensically investigated to see if it was in fact a suicide instead of tragic single car accident.

ipse
 
Last edited:

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
Thank you for the clarification.

It was a false statement. HIS opinion, not reality. The NVFAC is a gun rights lobbying organization.

http://www.nvfac.org/

Welcome to the Nevada Firearms Coalition. We are a membership organization designated by the National Rifle Association as the State Association for Nevada.

We are a registered Nevada nonprofit corporation. Our members are dedicated firearms owners, users, public and private gun clubs, and commercial shooting sports enterprises who are interested in promoting and protecting the ownership and safe use of firearms for self-defense, for establishing, hosting and participating in competitive firearms events and general recreational shooting. We also want to protect the natural resources in order to continue to enjoy the outdoor shooting sports including hunting and informal outdoor target shooting.

We are the NEVADA STATE ASSOCIATION for the shooting sports. We hope you will join us in promoting and protecting the shooting sports in Nevada.

For too long NV shooters have not been a presence in Carson City, or in our local cities and counties. We have relied heavily on the NRA-ILA. It is our objective to be there and promote positive laws for NV firearms owners, clubs and organizations. It is time for Nevada shooters to be a factor in gun rights laws, regulations as well as participants in our sports.

If you are a firearms owner, you need to be a member of the NEVADA FIREARMS COALITION.

So by the rules of this website, bashing the NFC is 'bashing another gun rights organization,' whether those doing the bashing accept the reality or not, or whether they agree or disagree with the actions of the NFC.
 
Last edited:

DVC

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,185
Location
City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
The NVFAC is a gun rights lobbying organization.

Or, to be more accurate, NVFAC CLAIMS to do lobbying.

The current POTUS also claims to believe in the Second Amendment.

When you look at either of them, there is little to back up their claims. In the case of NVFAC, they have been conspicuously silent, while ad hoc activists have had more effect. During the legislative session, I met with two legislators who are major opponents of civil rights -- neither one had heard a word from anyone representing NVFAC.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
When you look at either of them, there is little to back up their claims. In the case of NVFAC, they have been conspicuously silent, while ad hoc activists have had more effect. During the legislative session, I met with two legislators who are major opponents of civil rights -- neither one had heard a word from anyone representing NVFAC.
Whether either of the two you met with heard from them, does not mean they were not lobbying, it only means that those two you met with, did not hear from anyone representing NVFAC.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
Incorrect they hired a out of state lobby firm.

Oh, so hiring someone, is different somehow? :confused:


Unless those who registered to lobby were retired, I can fully understand hiring a lobby firm. When we were lobbying from the SFA, we sure wished we had the funds to do such, as we simply could not attend all sessions we needed to attend.


Which firm do you feel was the 'out of state' one?
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/AppCF/Lobbyist/reports/LobbyistEmployerList.cfm?Employer=79&Session=77
 

Attachments

  • NVFAC_Lobbyists.jpg
    NVFAC_Lobbyists.jpg
    74.5 KB · Views: 54
Last edited:

Vegassteve

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
1,763
Location
Las Vegas NV, ,
Oh, so hiring someone, is different somehow? :confused:


Unless those who registered to lobby were retired, I can fully understand hiring a lobby firm. When we were lobbying from the SFA, we sure wished we had the funds to do such, as we simply could not attend all sessions we needed to attend.


Which firm do you feel was the 'out of state' one?
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/AppCF/Lobbyist/reports/LobbyistEmployerList.cfm?Employer=79&Session=77

As I recall we were told by the leadership, sorry I chuckled when I typed that word, that they hired a grass roots group from Colorado. And upon review of my email I see they settled on some group from Reno.

Either way it doesnt matter they were as useful as **** on a boar hog. And now they have come out with this steaming pile of a idea.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
As I recall we were told by the leadership, sorry I chuckled when I typed that word, that they hired a grass roots group from Colorado. And upon review of my email I see they settled on some group from Reno.

Either way it doesnt matter they were as useful as **** on a boar hog. And now they have come out with this steaming pile of a idea.

No group would have been more successful this past session. Frankly, I believe they were successful in helping prevent bad legislation from passage. Not alone, but yes, helpful.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I for one would really appreciate it if folks who are from other States would stop making excuses for the failures of the Nevada Firearms Coalition.

In their two years of existence they have accomplished exactly ZERO of their stated goals. They have not even made a small effort at most of them.

All that they have done is self promotion (badly at that) of some of the officers. They have been especially ineffective in their legislative activism attempts.

They have failed to accomplish membership and fundraising goals and, it seems, they have wasted the money that they have raised.

This is just one more episode in the joke-fest that is the NVFAC.

Of course, that is just my opinion (some others here in Nevada seem to agree with me).

Ken


Grapeshot posted:

However, the Forum Rules do not allow attacking groups:

  • (12) NO BASHING OF OTHER GUN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS: Regardless of how convinced you are that another gun rights organization is not doing their job, this is not the place to air those concerns unless they are specifically related to an anti-open carry position taken by that organization. All other rants against other gun rights groups will be deleted or the thread locked.

Where exactly is the bashing?

Ken presents statements that are summations of facts and immediate inferences of facts. Where is the bashing?

The forum rule does not say "no criticism is allowed." Nor, does it say, "passing along deleterious fact-based information is prohibited."

If his summations and inferences are proven wrong, then he'll look like a fool.

But, where is the bashing? Exactly. No twists. No stretches. Exactly where is the bashing?
 
Last edited:
Top