Pro 2A banks?

[MAC702]

Good to know. I haven't even seen that as an option and I've read the various laws a few times...

Didn't they cover that in your husband's "free" CCW class?

 

[Craftymommy]

Didn't they cover that in your husband's "free" CCW class?

I have no idea what they covered. All he kept talking on and on about was how Utah is a lot better if it actually comes to using your firearm for self defense. So I asked if he wants to move to Utah, he says no. I don't understand him sometimes:banghead:

 

[MAC702]

I have no idea what they covered. All he kept talking on and on about was how Utah is a lot better if it actually comes to using your firearm for self defense....

Interesting. I'd sure like to know what they told him to give him that impression. Criminally, there is little significant difference. Civilly, outside the home, you might be sued for self-defense in Nevada, so that is a significant difference, yes.

 

[Craftymommy]

Interesting. I'd sure like to know what they told him to give him that impression.

I don't remember all the details of what he said but the gist of it was that they cannot sue you in Utah, like the family of the person you shot in self defense or the business you were in if you stopped a criminal. I guess here they can? Umm. Trying to rack my brain for what else he was saying last night when I was half asleep and he was filling out his paperwork for his permit... Something about stand your ground laws, where here you shouldn't go for a head shot if at all possible because then it is excessive force to stop the threat or something like that. Can't shoot a person in the back here and if they are running away you can't stop them, Utah you can. Though he was told the two places to make a head shot if needed but the instructor said that he cannot advise them to make a head shot in the face of a threat.

I will have to ask once he gets home tonight for the exact details on what he learned. Or have him make an account. He hardly goes online except email and facebook so the latter may prove difficult.

He keeps telling me to go take the class but I want to take a firearms class for me to get more comfortable before I attempt the ccw test. Downside is I have no time during the week when I have seen all the classes being hosted for women only.

 

[MAC702]

I don't remember all the details of what he said but the gist of it was that they cannot sue you in Utah, like the family of the person you shot in self defense or the business you were in if you stopped a criminal. I guess here they can? Umm. Trying to rack my brain for what else he was saying last night when I was half asleep and he was filling out his paperwork for his permit... Something about stand your ground laws, where here you shouldn't go for a head shot if at all possible because then it is excessive force to stop the threat or something like that. Can't shoot a person in the back here and if they are running away you can't stop them, Utah you can. Though he was told the two places to make a head shot if needed but the instructor said that he cannot advise them to make a head shot in the face of a threat.

I will have to ask once he gets home tonight for the exact details on what he learned. Or have him make an account. He hardly goes online except email and facebook so the latter may prove difficult.

He keeps telling me to go take the class but I want to take a firearms class for me to get more comfortable before I attempt the ccw test. Downside is I have no time during the week when I have seen all the classes being hosted for women only.

Looks like I edited my reply at the same time to guess that it probably had to do with the lawsuit potential. We still have a very pro-self-defense standards here to where I don't really worry about it. For the most part a good shoot is a good shoot.

As for head shots and back shots, these things will be the same in both states as to whether or not you were justified in doing so or tactically should do so. I can't believe he was taught you can shoot someone in the back running from you in UT. While there are some times where this is theoretically possible (i.e. preventing kidnapping), the same would apply in Nevada.

The "CCW test" is nothing to worry about. The standard is very easy, as it should be. The written test is a joke. But that said, you will learn mostly safety, weapons familiarity, and laws in the class. It is not about advanced stuff. You even have a full year to turn in the application after taking the class.

I'm in the process of acquiring a neutral location where I will hold some group classes for the members here. That will be a way for me to do it much more cheaply than my current private rates.

 

[Vegassteve]

He keeps telling me to go take the class but I want to take a firearms class for me to get more comfortable before I attempt the ccw test. Downside is I have no time during the week when I have seen all the classes being hosted for women only.

If you want the permission slip, then Mac is the guy. He teaches a great class and at the range is very helpful for any new shooters. He is also very patient. We hosted Mac in our home. The wife and I needed renewals, and we had around 15 others for new CCWs. Almost half were ladies. You can take Macs class and shoot the test at another time. So you could get instruction from Mac a few times before the test. He really is the best.

 

[Craftymommy]

Looks like I edited my reply at the same time to guess that it probably had to do with the lawsuit potential. We still have a very pro-self-defense standards here to where I don't really worry about it. For the most part a good shoot is a good shoot.

As for head shots and back shots, these things will be the same in both states as to whether or not you were justified in doing so or tactically should do so. I can't believe he was taught you can shoot someone in the back running from you in UT. While there are some times where this is theoretically possible (i.e. preventing kidnapping), the same would apply in Nevada.

The "CCW test" is nothing to worry about. The standard is very easy, as it should be. The written test is a joke. But that said, you will learn mostly safety, weapons familiarity, and laws in the class. It is not about advanced stuff. You even have a full year to turn in the application after taking the class.

I'm in the process of acquiring a neutral location where I will hold some group classes for the members here. That will be a way for me to do it much more cheaply than my current private rates.

I don't believe it was that he was specifically taught that, but you know if it happened then it wouldn't be prosecuted the same way. More lenient in their laws I guess. It really bothers me none as long as you know I am allowed to defend myself and my family, that is what matters most. As for the test I don't feel I am that good of a shot, granted there was someone in his class who only had a firearm for a month before taking the test and he passed, but I would rather feel more confident in my skills as a marksman and with my gun overall.

 

[Craftymommy]

If you want the permission slip, then Mac is the guy. He teaches a great class and at the range is very helpful for any new shooters. He is also very patient. We hosted Mac in our home. The wife and I needed renewals, and we had around 15 others for new CCWs. Almost half were ladies. You can take Macs class and shoot the test at another time. So you could get instruction from Mac a few times before the test. He really is the best.

Unless it is hosted on the weekend there is no way I can make it during the week. In all honesty I would probably prefer an all woman's course anyway just for me to be more comfortable too. Not that I have anything against men( I am married to one) but I would just be more comfortable knowing that it was all women in the same situation as me wanting to become more proficient with their firearm.

 

[MAC702]

...I would probably prefer an all woman's course anyway just for me to be more comfortable too. Not that I have anything against men( I am married to one) but I would just be more comfortable knowing that it was all women in the same situation as me wanting to become more proficient with their firearm.

Contact Maggie Mordaunt at 702-375-5900. I do not know how good she is or how accurately she discusses OC issues, and she often uses a facility that is anti-OC, but I think she does all-female classes.

Assuming you want the instructor to be female as well.

 

[Vegassteve]

Unless it is hosted on the weekend there is no way I can make it during the week. In all honesty I would probably prefer an all woman's course anyway just for me to be more comfortable too. Not that I have anything against men( I am married to one) but I would just be more comfortable knowing that it was all women in the same situation as me wanting to become more proficient with their firearm.

My wife would also be happy to go shooting with you. She competes in Hi Power matches and is getting ready to start shooting in the vintage military semi matches as well. And she is also adding cowboy to that list. She hangs out at the range with us and sometimes she is the only lady. She holds her own and quite frankly the men have been very gracious and kind to her.

And Mac as I am sure he can tell you will do weekends. I have been to a few instructors and we just can not say enough good things about Mac and his dedication and style.

 

[z28power]

The current exception is with written permission of the child care owner. So as the owner, you can give that written permission to any whom you think would want it.

Also, I've NEVER heard of an enforcement of this part of the law. It could only happen if you were to call the police, really.

Hey MAC, question for you.

The way that I have read the 202.3673 exceptions portion of that law, it always appeared to me that there is NO EXCEPTION to the school portion of the law, and that it specifically states that 202.3673.4: The provisions of paragraph (b) of subsection 3 do not prohibit: ....

paragraph B only applies to public buildings, while paragraph A is what applies to child care, schools, universities, etc.

If I continue down that strict interpretation, it appears to me that there is no exception for child care or schools. since the law only lists permissible exceptions (including written permission) for paragraph B. Excepting the portion that states a home, during times not being used for official child care purposes, no longer has this law applied to it. I yield to the expert though -- did I miss something?

Now, that being said - I can completely see your point that as the day-care facilitator for a small home based child care service, this would likely never be an issue unless you were calling the police to report somebody else.

 

[Craftymommy]

Contact Maggie Mordaunt at 702-375-5900. I do not know how good she is or how accurately she discusses OC issues, but I think she does all-female classes.

Assuming you want the instructor to be female as well.

Worth checking out, thank you!

 

[Craftymommy]

Hey MAC, question for you.

The way that I have read the 202.3673 exceptions portion of that law, it always appeared to me that there is NO EXCEPTION to the school portion of the law, and that it specifically states that 202.3673.4: The provisions of paragraph (b) of subsection 3 do not prohibit: ....

paragraph B only applies to public buildings, while paragraph A is what applies to child care, schools, universities, etc.

If I continue down that strict interpretation, it appears to me that there is no exception for child care or schools. since the law only lists permissible exceptions (including written permission) for paragraph B. Excepting the portion that states a home, during times not being used for official child care purposes, no longer has this law applied to it. I yield to the expert though -- did I miss something?

Now, that being said - I can completely see your point that as the day-care facilitator for a small home based child care service, this would likely never be an issue unless you were calling the police to report somebody else.

I asked my husband last night, he actually asked in his class this past Saturday becuase he would be carrying and have to come home where I would be running my daycare. He was told I would have to give written permission to anyone who was to carry on the premises while I have children in my care. In all honesty though the only way anyone would know is if a) random inspection by the govt agency who is in charge of child care facilities and I had a parent open carrying at the time or b) had to call the police becuase of an unsafe situation.

 

[wrightme]

Hey MAC, question for you.

The way that I have read the 202.3673 exceptions portion of that law, it always appeared to me that there is NO EXCEPTION to the school portion of the law, and that it specifically states that 202.3673.4: The provisions of paragraph (b) of subsection 3 do not prohibit: ....

paragraph B only applies to public buildings, while paragraph A is what applies to child care, schools, universities, etc.

If I continue down that strict interpretation, it appears to me that there is no exception for child care or schools. since the law only lists permissible exceptions (including written permission) for paragraph B. Excepting the portion that states a home, during times not being used for official child care purposes, no longer has this law applied to it. I yield to the expert though -- did I miss something?

Now, that being said - I can completely see your point that as the day-care facilitator for a small home based child care service, this would likely never be an issue unless you were calling the police to report somebody else.

I will see if I can find something else, but the statute you refer to is about public building accessibility pursuant to cc permits. There should be a statute about school zone prohibitions for firearms that is the applicable statute.



Yep, different statute applies:
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-202.html#NRS202Sec265

NRS 202.265  Possession of dangerous weapon on property or in vehicle of school or child care facility; penalty; exceptions.

1.  Except as otherwise provided in this section, a person shall not carry or possess while on the property of the Nevada System of Higher Education, a private or public school or child care facility, or while in a vehicle of a private or public school or child care facility:
(a) An explosive or incendiary device;
(b) A dirk, dagger or switchblade knife;
(c) A nunchaku or trefoil;
(d) A blackjack or billy club or metal knuckles;
(e) A pistol, revolver or other firearm; or
(f) Any device used to mark any part of a person with paint or any other substance.

2.  Any person who violates subsection 1 is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

3.  This section does not prohibit the possession of a weapon listed in subsection 1 on the property of:
(a) A private or public school or child care facility by a:
(1) Peace officer;
(2) School security guard; or
(3) Person having written permission from the president of a branch or facility of the Nevada System of Higher Education or the principal of the school or the person designated by a child care facility to give permission to carry or possess the weapon.
(b) A child care facility which is located at or in the home of a natural person by the person who owns or operates the facility so long as the person resides in the home and the person complies with any laws governing the possession of such a weapon.

4.  The provisions of this section apply to a child care facility located at or in the home of a natural person only during the normal hours of business of the facility.

5.  For the purposes of this section:
(a) “Child care facility” means any child care facility that is licensed pursuant to chapter 432A of NRS or licensed by a city or county.
(b) “Firearm” includes any device from which a metallic projectile, including any ball bearing or pellet, may be expelled by means of spring, gas, air or other force.
(c) “Nunchaku” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 202.350.
(d) “Switchblade knife” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 202.350.
(e) “Trefoil” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 202.350.
(f) “Vehicle” has the meaning ascribed to “school bus” in NRS 484A.230.
(Added to NRS by 1989, 656; A 1993, 364; 1995, 1151; 2001, 806; 2007, 1913)

 

[MAC702]

...The way that I have read the 202.3673 exceptions portion of that law, it always appeared to me that there is NO EXCEPTION to the school portion of the law, and that it specifically states that 202.3673.4: The provisions of paragraph (b) of subsection 3 do not prohibit: ....

paragraph B only applies to public buildings, while paragraph A is what applies to child care, schools, universities, etc.

If I continue down that strict interpretation, it appears to me that there is no exception for child care or schools. since the law only lists permissible exceptions (including written permission) for paragraph B. Excepting the portion that states a home, during times not being used for official child care purposes, no longer has this law applied to it. I yield to the expert though -- did I miss something?...

Good question, let's see:

Permittee authorized to carry concealed firearm while on premises of public building; exceptions; penalty.
1.  Except as otherwise provided in subsections 2 and 3, a permittee may carry a concealed firearm while the permittee is on the premises of any public building.
...
3.  A permittee shall not carry a concealed firearm while the permittee is on the premises of:
(a) A public building that is located on the property of a public school or a child care facility or the property of the Nevada System of Higher Education, unless the permittee has obtained written permission to carry a concealed firearm while he or she is on the premises of the public building pursuant to subparagraph (3) of paragraph (a) of subsection 3 of NRS 202.265....

I think I see your point. Does a child care facility count as a "public building" for the exception?

But to take the strict interpretation further, it also appears one could argue the law is only applicable to a "public building that is located on the property of a ... child care facility." Which, of course, doesn't make much sense.

So let's add

Possession of dangerous weapon on property or in vehicle of school or child care facility; penalty; exceptions.
1.  Except as otherwise provided in this section, a person shall not carry or possess while on the property of the Nevada System of Higher Education, a private or public school or child care facility, or while in a vehicle of a private or public school or child care facility:
...
(e) A pistol, revolver or other firearm; or
...
2.  Any person who violates subsection 1 is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
3.  This section does not prohibit the possession of a weapon listed in subsection 1 on the property of:
(a) A private or public school or child care facility by a:
(1) Peace officer;
(2) School security guard; or
(3) Person having written permission from the president of a branch or facility of the Nevada System of Higher Education or the principal of the school or the person designated by a child care facility to give permission to carry or possess the weapon.
(b) A child care facility which is located at or in the home of a natural person by the person who owns or operates the facility so long as the person resides in the home and the person complies with any laws governing the possession of such a weapon.
4.  The provisions of this section apply to a child care facility located at or in the home of a natural person only during the normal hours of business of the facility.
5.  For the purposes of this section:
(a) “Child care facility” means any child care facility that is licensed pursuant to chapter 432A of NRS or licensed by a city or county.
(b) “Firearm” includes any device from which a metallic projectile, including any ball bearing or pellet, may be expelled by means of spring, gas, air or other force.

I think that part makes it much more clear.

 

[z28power]

I asked my husband last night, he actually asked in his class this past Saturday.

Yeah, I remember what they told me in class - but I don't expect the CCW instructor to get the minutiae of subsection 3 paragraph b exceptions exactly right. I've learned many of the active NV OCers on this site are better informed in NRS statutes, sadly, than some of the CCW instructors in town. So I typically put more stock in discussions here than anything I obtained in that CCW class. I had my CCW instructor tell me Open Carry isn't worth the hassle, and it's perfectly legal to do so, but you will get stopped by metro and they will check your gun regularly. :lol: Also, who wants deterrant when you can have the SURPRISE FACTOR was said commonly. Another was if you are CC and decide to Open Carry, if anybody sees you make the switch it's automatically brandishing a weapon and you can be arrested. (Note: he made no reference of doing this in the middle of a room, we were talking about stepping out of your car and tucking a shirt, for example.)

I feel neither of those statements are true. I'd rather NEVER have to draw my weapon in self defense in my entire life. If I'm comfortable OCing it and that can deter the crime against me - I would take that over self defense shooting any day of the week. Similarly, I've OCed a couple times now and nobody has gone screaming from a building, the cops were not called, and no hassle of any sort occurred.

I haven't met MAC in person, but he seems very well educated on the issues of RKBA and how they pertain to a Nevada/Clark County Citizen. In the future I would likely seek him out for recertification or anybody I know to recommend a CCW instructor just from his posts I've seen here.

NINJA EDIT: And then MAC (and wrightme) comes in right above me while I'm typing this and totally redeems what I just posted about the guys (and gals) here! Thanks man. I was only looking at the concealed portion of the law. 202.265 makes it much clearer for Open Carry. I take the strict interpretation of the CC portion to still restrict concealed carrying on any campus regardless of permission - would that be accurate from your point of view? I do agree for possession of firearm, which would include Open carry, 265 would cover the written permission portion and craftymommy, you would be good to go!

TL;DR: Most CCW instructors will pass whatever opinions THEY have on the minor details of NRS and Open Carry off as de facto law and you will be none the wiser unless you educate yourself. Take the info in those classes at face value and then make sure you educate yourself to ensure you're right. That's my OPINION on the matter

 

[MAC702]

I just came across this article, related to the OP about banks. Wells Fargo fired a branch manager in FL when they found out that she carries a concealed firearm for self-defense.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ca...anch-manager-fired-2014-03-25?dist=lcountdown

Now, I don't think she can win a lawsuit because the bank has the right to set policies for employees, and carrying a firearm does not yet count as a protected civil right.

But it certainly tells you the attitude of the bank and that they will enforce it despite lack of any supplemental issues.

I wish I had a lot more money so Wells Fargo would notice it when I pull out.

 

[wrightme]

<snip> NINJA EDIT: And then MAC (and wrightme) comes in right above me while I'm typing this and totally redeems what I just posted about the guys (and gals) here! Thanks man. I was only looking at the concealed portion of the law. 202.265 makes it much clearer for Open Carry. I take the strict interpretation of the CC portion to still restrict concealed carrying on any campus regardless of permission - would that be accurate from your point of view? I do agree for possession of firearm, which would include Open carry, 265 would cover the written permission portion and craftymommy, you would be good to go!

I am pretty sure the cc prohibition specifically disallows the public building exemption. The written exemption should (if I am reading it correctly) override the public building prohibition section pertaining to cc.

3673 is clear for cc in public buildings.

265 covers possession on campuses and daycares, and isn't different for oc or cc.


So, if it is a campus or daycare, follow 265 for all carry legality. If there are exceptions, apply them under 265.

For public buildings, look at 3673. Public buildings that are on or have a campus or daycare, require the permission cited in 265 for cc.

 

[Craftymommy]

I had seen that about Wells Fargo, something similar happened at Walgreens that I had read while trying to see what their firearm rules are as the hubby wanted to go OC at one today to get his picture done for the Utah ccw.

As for the childcare. It would be my own home and obviously I would be the one with permission so I would basically have to write a note for each parent that carries? Or like I posted previously would a sign suffice for that as my permission? My guess is no though.


With all that, we did decide(for now) to stay with our bank. However trying to find new car and motorcycle insurance but nothing beats our rates right now. Paying $120 or so a month for full coverage for both our car and bike through geico but I have read they cancelled firearms owners policies and refuse to insure other upon learning about firearms that the customer possesses.

 

[MAC702]

...As for the childcare. It would be my own home and obviously I would be the one with permission so I would basically have to write a note for each parent that carries? Or like I posted previously would a sign suffice for that as my permission? My guess is no though. ...

I would think it could be in the standard boilerplate of whatever services agreement you are going to use. There's all kinds of fine print that should be in there anyway, and a short paragraph hidden in the middle would suffice, to the effect that all legally-armed citizens are welcome on the premises in accordance with state laws. This way, you don't only exempt permit-holders, and any anti-gun customers you may have that bother to read all the fine print will get hung up on the "legally-armed" and "state law" phrases and not really realize that you just gave permission for everyone to carry a gun.