Lost rights in NV...

E

EricN

New member
I went looking for a new toy today and had a rude surprise. BATFE has declared NV CCWs are no longer acceptable as an alternative to POS Brady checks. This means I have to pay the $25.00 fee like everyone else. This is unacceptable.

According to the research Ive been able to do BATFE's new attitude is in response to an audit they did on the state of Nevada. Evidently sheriffs in certain counties have not been conducting yearly FBI background checks on their CCW holders.

Who do I complain to? Could this be a temporary situation or is this going to be ongoing? How is this going to effect reciprocity with other states?

ericn
 
its been confirmed...

I went to three seperate gun stores monday. Two of them were big chains (outdoor wherehouse, gart sports) and one was a mom and pop gun dealer. All three said the same thing and all three had the same letter from batfe sitting on their counters.

Someone has already posted on Packing.org in the bug reports about batfe's decision. Packing.org just hasnt gotten around to changing their site. It will be kind of interesting to see just how long it takes them to make the change.

I still havent found who exactly I should start writting to. Im going to start with Nevada's State Attorney General's Office. My logic being the AG is the head law enforcement officer in the state. Anyone know if Im correct here?

What do you folks think will happen with Nevadas reciprocity? Would you want someone with an out of state ccw carrying in your state if they hadnt had the proper background check? Im not sure I would.

ericn
 
Replies....

Do you see now why I always say that Brady must be repealed?
Click to expand...
Micro: As much as I would agree it should be repealed as its an intrusion on our 2A right, do you think in our wildest dreams it might?

Uh, you may wanna start with the Sheriffs who didnt do their jobs, apparently.
Click to expand...
sendec: Id love to but BATFE wont release which sheriffs are responsible (or irresponsible as the case may be).
 
you have to pay $25.00 for a brady check.....:eek:

crap..... Here in Texas I have yet to pay anything for that unless its an out of state transfer from another FFL and I only pay $10.00 for that
 
" Id love to but BATFE wont release which sheriffs are responsible (or irresponsible as the case may be)."

As near as I can tell there are only about 16 counties in Nevada. Why not write a short, nice generic letter that reminds them of their obligations, and send a copy to each one? It would only cost a few bucks and I bet it would take less than half an hour.

Tim
 
found it...

This morning I recieved an email from the owner of a CCW training facility and private range here in Nevada. The Email says that Nevadas failure to protect CCW rights and the the safety of its citizens came in two parts.

First it seems that Nevada Department of Public Safety (NDPS) has failed three seperate audits by the BATFE regarding the way background checks are carried out.

Second, it seems that the Nevada Chiefs and Sheriffs Association (NC&SA) recently voted to end NCIC checks for Nevada CCW holders. This would allow Sheriff departments extra revenue. They get to keep the money I paid for my background check yet not perform it.

As I recieve and am able to verify information Ill post more.

ericn
 
TimRB thank you....

Tim,

Thats being done as well as a letter to the Governor, State Attorney General, and most importantly, the president of the NC&SA.

ericn
 
"They get to keep the money I paid for my background check yet not perform it."

Sounds like theft in office to me.
 
answers and more questions...

I just got off the phone with president of the Nevada State Rifle and Pistol Association (NSRPA) Robert Smith. According to Mr. Smith the state of Nevada wanted the revenue Brady checks generate. Due to an increase of CCWs statewide it became apparent that by removing the ability of CCWers to purchase firearms without the Brady check more money would be sent to NDPS. The NC&SA seems to like this idea as they can still charge full fees for a CCW and now pocket the extra cash. Mr. Smith went on to say that he was confidant that this could be fixed, but it would take legislatifve action. He expects it to be an issue for the legislature in 2007.

On a side note...

It has taken quite a bit for me to wake up and see the need to protect our ever eroding gun rights. Watching in horror as police and military demand law abiding citizens to give up their rights and hand over their only means of protecting family and loved ones. Being forced to wonder "what would I do?" Its easy to beat ones chest and smile remembering C. Heston's quote "from my cold dead hands.." while youre sitting in your warm house and no ones at your door. Its a whole different story when you havent eaten in a couple of days, youre wet, and your local police are now making demands with guns pointed at you. I hope I never nor any of you ever have to make that call.

Being a member of the NRA and placing a bumper sticker on the back of ones truck is no longer enough. Today I mailed my check and membership application off to the NSRPA. November 5th Ill go to my first meeting. I urge everyone here that hasnt already gotten involved with their local state associations to do so. To at least find out what the issues are for your state and how it effects you. Were seeing alot of progress right now all across the country and perhaps with a bit more work none of us nor any of our children will ever have to make a decision on just how important the second ammendment is to them, when theyre hungry, wet and scarred.

ericn
 
In any other state do the buyers have to pay for Brady checks?

Maybe it's just a Texas thing, but to the best of my knowledge I've never had to pay for a background check on a gun purchase.

Unless the fee is hidden in the cost of the gun.

The only $25 dollars I've ever had to pay extra was a fee for having a gun shipped to a dealers FFL from out of state.

LawDog
 
Micro: As much as I would agree it should be repealed as its an intrusion on our 2A right, do you think in our wildest dreams it might?
Click to expand...
There is no question that it's possible.

Giving it up as a "wild dream" is exactly the reason it hasn't happened: apathy.

It is hard, expensive, long-term work to change law. That is a good thing.

The responsibility for doing so doesn't belong to anyone else. It belongs to us.

No effort, no contribution, no whining. Posting on an insignificant gun board doesn't count. Gun boards aren't law.

Step up, put up and put out, or have a seat, and live with the laws the rest of us write.
 
Brady checks have to be paid for in most states because the Brady law doesn't fund the state check system - someone has to pay the people on the other end of the line.

VA's check is $5. NV's was $15 until a few months ago. That NV needs to charge $25 to run their system should be no surprise when you view the totallity of NV's economic responsibilty. I believe they were rated in the top 5 least fiscally responsible states in the union - worse than CA.
 
According to the research Ive been able to do BATFE's new attitude is in response to an audit they did on the state of Nevada. Evidently sheriffs in certain counties have not been conducting yearly FBI background checks on their CCW holders.
Click to expand...

So typical bureaucratic logic says, "Punish EVERYONE, rather than simply go after those who DID do wrong, or didn't do their job..." :barf:

Sorry for you, there.


Where's the charge of malfeasance by the "sheriffs in certain counties"? Why didn't BATFE punish those specific sheriffs rather than impose a penalty on even those who WERE doing the checks?! :mad:


-blackmind
 
I live in Colorado where we have to do the NICS check regardless of CCW permit or not but at least we do not have to pay for the intrusive and unwarranted background check directly as it comes out of the State's general funds as it should be. For those of you folks that do have to pay for your own background to be checked I feel for you. Having to pay for a background check to buy a gun is like if you are driving down the road and you came across a drunk driver checkpoint. Now you are totally sober so the cop starts to waive you through but then stops you and says "We need $25 before you go on because, you know, these things cost money to setup and run." How popular do you think that would be? I can see suing the folks who know they cannot buy a gun legally but yet try to (not to mention the criminal liability) for some degree of restitution but why should the legal gun buyer be burdened with paying for the intrusive check when they did nothing wrong? Do you personally have to pay the cops for their time when they take your statement in a motor vehicle accident you were not at fault for? Would you personally have to pay the State for its time and expenses if it brought you to trial and LOST? Isn't that, a trial and subsequent acquital, essentially what a background check is anyway?
 
Maybe it's just a Texas thing, but to the best of my knowledge I've never had to pay for a background check on a gun purchase.
Click to expand...

Unless they build it in to the price of the gun (doubtful), I have never paid for a federal background check in MI (pistol permits not included), or at the CMP store in OH.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top