OC in Nevada

[ed2276]

Would you mind Posting the exact verbiage she used? And her Name?

Here ya go:

To ed19612002@yahoo.com Dec 29, 2014
CC CoonC@cityofnorthlasvegas.com



Mr. Davis,

The information stated on this website is incorrect. The City of North Las Vegas does not have a law that prohibits "open carry" within City limits. The City of North Las Vegas does have a City ordinance that prohibits possession of a "deadly weapon" in your vehicle. See this link to review City Ordinances (https://www.municode.com/library/nv..._of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT9PUPEMOWE_CH9.32WEGE)

A "Deadly or Dangerous weapon is defined in ordinance: The term "dangerous or deadly weapons" includes, but is not limited to, any dirk or dagger; any knife with a blade three inches or more in length, and any snap-blade or spring-blade knife, regardless of the length of the blade; any ice pick or similar sharp stabbing tool; any straight edge razor or any razor blade fitted to a handle; any dangerous or deadly weapon within the meaning of any law of this state restricting the use thereof; and any cutting, stabbing, or bludgeoning weapon or device capable of inflicting grievous bodily harm; and any firearm other than (a) one carried pursuant to a valid permit, issued by a duly authorized government authority, or (b) an ordinary rifle or shotgun lawfully carried for purposes of hunting or other lawful sport.

As long as you obtain your CCW permit, you will fall within the "one carried pursuant to a valid permit." Otherwise, we have folks who open carry in North Las Vegas without any problems. They do not get stopped by the police nor are they arrested solely for open carry as there is no law in place that says that they can't.

Hope this answers your questions, if I can be of any further assistance, please feel free to email or call me.

Sergeant Chrissie Coon
Special Assignments Unit
North Las Vegas Police Department
2332 N. Las Vegas Blvd.
North Las Vegas, NV 89030
702-633-1946

 

[HPmatt]

Does NLVPD recommend OCers duct-tape their handguns on their car hood when they drive around the town?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mp06011999]

Wow, wonder if that blatant disregard for law will change after these new laws...

 

[garand_guy]

Wow, wonder if that blatant disregard for law will change after these new laws...

Henderson has immediate plans to comply. They emailed me back tonight. Council meetings are scheduled for July, first slots open. Posting about it in the main forum.

 

[ed2276]

Wow, wonder if that blatant disregard for law will change after these new laws...

If the new laws pass, NLV will have to scrub that ordinance, and any other like it, from their books. They can't keep it on the books, but not enforce it; it has to be gone.

If NLVPD tries to enforce the ordinance the new law gives the victim of any such enforcement action the right to sue the city. Also, the law uses the language that any such ordinances are null and void, which means it is as if the law never existed. Any officer who tries to enforce the ordinance, which is a legal nullity, would be acting under color of law and outside the scope of his/her authority. This raises the possibility of a loss of qualified immunity for the officer, as well as false arrest and other civil actions. I don't think any cops would want to go down that road.

 

[ed2276]

Henderson has immediate plans to comply. They emailed me back tonight. Council meetings are scheduled for July, first slots open. Posting about it in the main forum.

Does Henderson have an ordinance similar to NLV's with regard to OC in a vehicle?

 

[garand_guy]

Does Henderson have an ordinance similar to NLV's with regard to OC in a vehicle?

No, just registration and some old CC ordinances. Never been an issue in recent memory, just need to get off the books. Henderson is very cool when it comes to guns.

 

[mp06011999]

If the new laws pass, NLV will have to scrub that ordinance, and any other like it, from their books. They can't keep it on the books, but not enforce it; it has to be gone.

If NLVPD tries to enforce the ordinance the new law gives the victim of any such enforcement action the right to sue the city. Also, the law uses the language that any such ordinances are null and void, which means it is as if the law never existed. Any officer who tries to enforce the ordinance, which is a legal nullity, would be acting under color of law and outside the scope of his/her authority. This raises the possibility of a loss of qualified immunity for the officer, as well as false arrest and other civil actions. I don't think any cops would want to go down that road.

I got an NRA email that it was signed into law by the Governor last night.

It'll be interesting to see what Metro does with their "No Guns" signs on their doors and their illegal enforcement of such.

 

[The Big Guy]

I got an NRA email that it was signed into law by the Governor last night.

It'll be interesting to see what Metro does with their "No Guns" signs on their doors and their illegal enforcement of such.

I'm wondering what Metro is going to do with current resources which used to process blue cards. Will they then speed up processing of concealed weapons permits?
That's probably too much to hope for.

TBG

 

[CowboyKen]

I'm wondering what Metro is going to do with current resources which used to process blue cards. Will they then speed up processing of concealed weapons permits?
That's probably too much to hope for.

TBG

As of right now (I just called the Enterprise and Northeast commands and asked) they are still registering handguns. They have no need to change a thing.

Ken

 

[The Big Guy]

As of right now (I just called the Enterprise and Northeast commands and asked) they are still registering handguns. They have no need to change a thing.

Ken

They have no need to change a thing? I'm not sure what that means.

TBG

 

[Bernymac]

As of right now (I just called the Enterprise and Northeast commands and asked) they are still registering handguns. They have no need to change a thing.

Ken

Who gives a crap if they are still registering handguns. You are not breaking any laws by not registering with those idiots. What are they gonna do? And why did you feel the need to ask them?

 

[DON`T TREAD ON ME]

Here ya go:

Thanks for that, I have had many a talk with her. She considers herself an expert in verbal judo... For whoever was asking about taping their gun on the hood here is a recapp of how NLV has been violently accosting people without authority:

9.32.080 - Deadly weapon prohibited in vehicle—Exceptions.

It is unlawful for any person to have in his possession in any automobile, truck, motorcycle, or any other type of vehicle any dangerous or deadly weapon, but this restriction shall not be deemed to prohibit the carrying of ordinary tools or equipment carried in good faith for uses of honest work, trade or business, or for the purpose of legitimate sport or recreation.

(Ord. 596 § 1, 1978: prior code § 7.22.070)

I like to sling my shotgun, while riding my motorcycle to the trap range in NLV

 

[Vegassteve]

Who gives a crap if they are still registering handguns. You are not breaking any laws by not registering with those idiots. What are they gonna do? And why did you feel the need to ask them?

I am glad the call was made. We need to know this stuff so we can move forward and make them pay for it in court.

 

[ed2276]

No, just registration and some old CC ordinances. Never been an issue in recent memory, just need to get off the books. Henderson is very cool when it comes to guns.

Good to know. I actually bought my last handgun in Henderson because there was no 3 day waiting period there.

 

[ed2276]

I got an NRA email that it was signed into law by the Governor last night.

It'll be interesting to see what Metro does with their "No Guns" signs on their doors and their illegal enforcement of such.

Yeah. I saw the other thread announcing Sandoval had signed the bills into law after I had posted in this section last night. I just didn't modify my posts here after seeing it had already passed.

Metro will probably keep them up and apply the restriction to CC people. They won't be able to prohibit OC, though; and, if they do, after 10/01 they will be subject to civil lawsuits. I'm going to do an OC test at the library tomorrow and see what happens. I'll be toting a copy of the relevant parts of SB 175 and of the opinion from the Legislative Counsel Bureau that OC in public buildings is lawful.

I'll let you know what happens after I get out of jail. lol.

 

[ed2276]

I'm wondering what Metro is going to do with current resources which used to process blue cards. Will they then speed up processing of concealed weapons permits?
That's probably too much to hope for.

TBG

That would be a welcome change! I actually put off applying for a CCW early this year in anticipation of the passage of constitutional carry. Had I not done so, I probably would have just been receiving my CCW right about now. I rolled the dice and got snake eyes. That's what happens in Vegas, baby! lol

I'll have to go ahead and apply for a CCW now and wait the 3-4 months for it to be issued. If Metro shifts personnel and resources to speed up CCW processing that would be a big help.

 

[ed2276]

As of right now (I just called the Enterprise and Northeast commands and asked) they are still registering handguns. They have no need to change a thing.

Ken

Did they say "they have no need to change a thing."? It wouldn't surprise me, if they did. They know that the civil lawsuit provision doesn't kick in until October. They are wasting their time though, as they will have to destroy the very records they are taking the time to create now.

 

[The Big Guy]

Yeah. I saw the other thread announcing Sandoval had signed the bills into law after I had posted in this section last night. I just didn't modify my posts here after seeing it had already passed.

Metro will probably keep them up and apply the restriction to CC people. They won't be able to prohibit OC, though; and, if they do, after 10/01 they will be subject to civil lawsuits. I'm going to do an OC test at the library tomorrow and see what happens. I'll be toting a copy of the relevant parts of SB 175 and of the opinion from the Legislative Counsel Bureau that OC in public buildings is lawful.

I'll let you know what happens after I get out of jail. lol.

Take a copy of the coercion law that Tread dug up too. It's on here someplace.

TBG

 

[ed2276]

Take a copy of the coercion law that Tread dug up too. It's on here someplace.

TBG

Okay. Thanks. I'll look for it.

Edit: I just went straight to the NRS.

NRS 207.190  Coercion.

1.  It is unlawful for a person, with the intent to compel another to do or abstain from doing an act which the other person has a right to do or abstain from doing, to:

(a) Use violence or inflict injury upon the other person or any of the other person’s family, or upon the other person’s property, or threaten such violence or injury;

(b) Deprive the person of any tool, implement or clothing, or hinder the person in the use thereof; or

(c) Attempt to intimidate the person by threats or force.

2.  A person who violates the provisions of subsection 1 shall be punished:

(a) Where physical force or the immediate threat of physical force is used, for a category B felony by imprisonment in the state prison for a minimum term of not less than 1 year and a maximum term of not more than 6 years, and may be further punished by a fine of not more than $5,000.

(b) Where no physical force or immediate threat of physical force is used, for a misdemeanor.

[1911 C&P § 475; RL § 6740; NCL § 10424]—(NRS A 1967, 522; 1979, 1455; 1995, 1239)

I'll likely be dealing with a security guard and library personnel, who may or may not call Metro on me. This NRS might also come in handy:

NRS 207.280  False reporting of crimes unlawful.  Every person who deliberately reports to any police officer, sheriff, district attorney, deputy sheriff, deputy district attorney or member of the Department of Public Safety that a felony or misdemeanor has been committed, which causes a law enforcement agency to conduct a criminal or internal investigation, knowing such report to be false, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

(Added to NRS by 1965, 409; A 1967, 523; 2005, 939)