Changes in NV reciprocity!!


PDA






mljdeckard
June 24, 2009, 10:55 PM
From a USSC newsletter I just received:

IMPORTANT NOTE FOR UTAH CONCEALED WEAPONS PERMIT HOLDERS- NO MORE NEVADA CARRY!

Nevada authorities have decided that Utah Concealed Weapon Permits will NOT, repeat NOT, be recognized in Nevada effective July 1, 2009.

Even though Nevada has recognized Utah permits for several years, they recently reviewed permits from all states and decided that they will no longer recognize permits from Utah or Florida. The excuses given are that Nevada law requires the other states permit requirements to be “substantially similar to” those of Nevada. However, since Utah does not require live fire to get a permit, Nevada will not longer recognize our permit. Florida permits are good for seven years, but Nevada permits are only good for five years, providing the excuse for dropping Florida.

The people involved with Nevada permits seem to include a few powerful members of the law enforcement community who are hostile to private citizens self defense rights.

Utah Shooting Sports Council and the National Rifle Association will continue to pursue actions to restore recognition of Utah permits by Nevada, but it may take several years and changes to the Nevada laws.

Meanwhile, DO NOT CARRY IN NEVADA with a Utah Concealed Weapons Permit!

If you enjoyed reading about "Changes in NV reciprocity!!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
OurSafeHome.net
June 24, 2009, 11:04 PM
This is very valuable information, thanks for passing it along.

Next time I visit Nevada, I will just wear an "Open Carry (http://www.opencarry.org/nv.html)" rig.

mljdeckard
June 24, 2009, 11:32 PM
Yeah, no more strapping on as soon as I get through Truckee Pass, or carrying through the gaming floor at The Luxor.

model of 1905
June 24, 2009, 11:38 PM
One more reason not to visit Nevada, think that is enough. Nevada is too close to California geographically for me, anyway.


wait, wait, WAIT, Nevada is still an open carry state, so who cares! Maybe I will go to Lake Mead after all!.;)

230RN
June 25, 2009, 03:03 AM
This "reviewing" seems to be getting to be a regular thing with the States. "Substantially similar" is just an excuse -- a word you used correctly several times.

Methinks it's a just an anti reaction to the increasing popularity of the "shall-issue" movement. They are desperately looking for any "chokepoints" on ordinary citizens' firearms ownership.

Look for more of this nonsense.

I wonder if they have the same provisions for review of "substantially similar" driver's license requirements, or "substantially similar" marriage license requirements, or any other requirements under the "full faith and credit" clause. Betcha they don't scrutinze those, too.

Wanna bet?

Can you imagine, "Oh, we can't recognize your marriage from State XYZ because your State allows marriage between 15-year-olds, and we don't. Therefore you are breaking the law by cohabiting in our State."

Gr.

Snarl.

Growf.

I'm surprised the Feds can't figure out a way to block interstate recognition of CCW permits because of some hyperbolically-absurd interpretation of the infamous and highly-abused interstate commerce clause.

Gr.

Snarl.

Growf.

Terry, 230RN

Oyeboten
June 25, 2009, 03:06 AM
Well...really...it's not unreasonable for Nevada to require a CCW holder to have shown they can operate a Firearm...or, with this, to decline to recognise permits issued by States who do not require an applicant to 'qualify', by showing they can operate a firearm...


It should not be a Hardship for Utah to have an applicant 'qualify' by actually firing an Arm...and, if they would, then 'end-of-reciprocity-problem'...

RonSC
June 25, 2009, 03:52 AM
I'd wager that Harry Ried and his cronies had a lot to do with this decision...

davec
June 25, 2009, 05:27 AM
I'd wager that Harry Ried and his cronies had a lot to do with this decision...

Yeah, Harry hates guns so much he voted against his party and his party's president in 1994 when he was one of 8 Democratic Senators to oppose the Assault Weapons Ban

230RN
June 25, 2009, 10:18 AM
It should not be a Hardship for Utah to have an applicant 'qualify' by actually firing an Arm...and, if they would, then 'end-of-reciprocity-problem'...

Oh, yeah?

How about:

It should not be a Hardship for Utah to have an applicant 'qualify' by actually driving a car...and, if they would, then 'end-of-reciprocity-problem'...

Terry, 230RN

mljdeckard
June 25, 2009, 10:48 AM
The other thing that makes it silly, while it is not a requirement for the course of the Utah permit to test shooting, most instructors require it anyway. I know there are classes at the gun shows where you don't have to shoot, but I shot, my friends who are instructors have a shooting test, my dad just took the class from a guy he has known and shot with for forty years, and he STILL required him to shoot first. I don't know anyone who didn't shoot as part of their course.

oneounceload
June 25, 2009, 10:56 AM
Many folks get Utah and Florida permits from other places due to the high reciprocity rates of those two, thereby allowing most to carry in a majority of other states.

Having lived in NV for over 20 years, I won't sully this forum with my thoughts about harry reid........

CoRoMo
June 25, 2009, 11:03 AM
For those who think the permit was a step forward in the RKBA fight.

D94R
June 25, 2009, 11:25 AM
It should not be a Hardship for Utah to have an applicant 'qualify' by actually firing an Arm...and, if they would, then 'end-of-reciprocity-problem'...

Do you feel you should have to qualify to exercise you're other rights?


It should not be a Hardship for Utah to have an applicant 'qualify' by actually driving a car...and, if they would, then 'end-of-reciprocity-problem'... Driving cars are privelages... but you're right. I think Utah gives driver licenses away with every happy meal purchase.


I don't know anyone who didn't shoot as part of their course. I took the course under Larry's instruction at Cabela's. No shooting required. I'd be interested to see what would happen if you refused to take the instructors shooting part of the course. Since its not a requirement I don't think they'd be able to deny you the permit if you declined???

mljdeckard
June 25, 2009, 11:52 AM
It's the instructor's discretion. I think they would probably ask you to find a different instructor if you didn't want to fulfill the requirements of their course.

And yes, I still think that 40 of 50 states being 'shall issue' is a very positive step for gun rights. Issues like this getting attention and pressure from gun groups is a good thing, not a bad thing.

CleverNickname
June 25, 2009, 12:00 PM
Since when are Florida's permits are good for 7 years? Mine is only for 5.

There's an incentive for states not to have permits valid for more than 5 years, otherwise they don't meet one of the requirements for it to substitute for a NICS check.

green-grizzly
June 25, 2009, 12:18 PM
Thanks for the heads up.

It is infuriating. The biggest reason I would want a license is to carry in CA and LV, and now I can't do either.

Oyeboten
June 25, 2009, 02:10 PM
I am not sure of the correct interpretation of the relationship between the 2nd Ammendment, with respect to Concealed Carry in various Federal jurisdictions or States.


While owning Firearms seems clearly enough 'guaranteed' as a Civil Right...particulars regarding carrying them openly or concealed are already subject to many and various conditions


A 'CCW' is a 'Licence'...

Does one have to apply, qualify howeverso, and be approved, to receive a license for exercising one's other Civil Rights?

No...

So...already, this has been liable to differences from other Rights.


I see nothing unreasonable about a State granting a License for Concealed Carry to qualified applicants, and, denying the License to unqualified applicants...if States are exercising their own proper rights to be regulating these matters of Conealed Carry.

Demonstraing the ability to operate and fire an Arm, would seem to me to be a basic qualification for CCW.


Maybe...under the strictest interpreation of the Constitution, no such License or qualifications are appropriate...and if so, then, it's fine with me if the present limitations are removed.


As it is, States and Federal Jurisdictions appear to claim the right to oversee and regulate who may Carry Concealed, and, who may not, according to their ideas about what qualifies an individual, in their opinion.


And if we accept that as an already in force condition, then, I see nothing objectionable about them wanting applicants to show they can operate and fire an Arm, for granting them a License to carry concealed.

MrEdim
June 25, 2009, 02:34 PM
Someone copied this over to the Nevadashooters web site and this is the response from one of our moderators.

"I'm calling BS. Loud and proud, I'm calling BS."



"I just got off the phone with Lisa up at the Washoe County Sheriff's Office. She directed me to a website http://dps.nv.gov/ where they have a section called "CCW Changes" http://www.nvrepository.state.nv.us/...W_CHANGE.shtml.

Utah is still listed. She informed me there were no changes to reciprocity in the 2009 legislature, but if there were ever any changes that they would be listed there. Last change to CCW laws was in 2007 with the generic revolver clause and this updated list (MI was added in 2008):



Out of State Carry Concealed Weapon Permit Recognition

Effective Oct 1, 2007

In accordance with NRS 202.3689 passed by the 2007 Nevada Legislature the State of Nevada will recognize the following States' CCW permit holders:

Alaska
Arkansas
Florida (added January 3, 2008)
Kansas
Louisiana
Michigan (added May 9, 2008)
Missouri
Nebraska
Tennessee
Utah

This law allows holders of valid permits from these states to carry a concealed weapon while in the State of Nevada. The permit must be in the possession of the issuee at all times while carrying a firearm. "

MrEdim
June 25, 2009, 02:54 PM
"wait, wait, WAIT, Nevada is still an open carry state, so who cares! Maybe I will go to Lake Mead after all!."

Nevada is NOT an open carry state. Nevada is a 'free carry' state.
Arizona is an open carry state because it has a law that specifically allows one to openly carry a loaded firearm.

Nevada on the other hand is a free carry state because we have no statute that forbids open carry.
Therefore, open carry in Nevada is 'de facto legal' because it's not illegal.

You should know that you can still draw some unwanted attention from local LE while open carrying and that you may be cited for something other than open carrying a weapon. Something like disturbing the peace, etc.

Try to open carry on The Strip or downtown at The Fremont Street Experience and see how long ya last before you're breakin' out the ol' ID and talking to Metro.

mljdeckard
June 25, 2009, 03:14 PM
That link doesn't open up for me. Is it possible that she won't discuss the changes because they aren't in effect yet?

OurSafeHome.net
June 25, 2009, 03:41 PM
http://www.nvrepository.state.nv.us/ccw_changes.shtml

Or click here (http://www.nvrepository.state.nv.us/ccw_changes.shtml)

Wolfebyte
June 25, 2009, 03:45 PM
Try this one..


double entry.. ... slowed to the draw by the phone... rats..

Sheldon J
June 25, 2009, 09:37 PM
One more time... It is a real bad idea to let Police Chiefs decide / make law and or policy... put someone in charge that is answerable to the voters....

Avenger29
June 25, 2009, 09:54 PM
wait, wait, WAIT, Nevada is still an open carry state, so who cares! Maybe I will go to Lake Mead after all!

You can't carry at Lake Mead NRA cause it's a National Park Service managed site until 2010 when the new regs go into effect. And then you can only carry concealed.

Frank Ettin
June 26, 2009, 02:20 AM
In any case, I'll be heading to Nevada next month to take the class and get the Nevada permit.

rtroha
June 26, 2009, 06:25 AM
Effective, July 1, Nevada will no longer recognize Right-to-Carry permits from Utah or Florida. They have, however, added Ohio and West Virginia as recognized states.

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?id=5001

RDak
June 26, 2009, 08:08 AM
As to the driver's licenses. Didn't all of you have to pass a driving test to get a license?

We do here in Michigan. Separate ones for cars and motorcycles also.

Are there States who grant driver's licenses to people without testing their driving skills in the first place??!! :eek:

ETA: So I'm thinkin' the driver's license argument might just be a red herring arguing against Nevada's reciprocity denial to Utah permits. (The Florida denial is just plain stupid though IMHO.)

green-grizzly
June 26, 2009, 12:58 PM
As far as equating driving and carrying concealed, is there a constutitonal right to drive? Is the constitutional right to defend yourself limited to the ability to defend yourself with accurate fire only?

If so, no cops should be able to carry guns. Their accuracy in defensive shootings is generally atrocious.

Most people drive every day. Most people who carry concealed will never use their weapon. For the very small number who do, the vast majority of defensive firearm uses involve just showing the weapon with no shots being fired. Is Nevada going to test whether you waive your gun around properly?

Does a simple range test accurately measure the ability of a person to deploy and fire a firearm defensively? I doubt it. Is there any scientifice evidence showing such a relation?

Going back to the analogy with the test drive, it is like believing that passing driver's ed qualifies you for NASCAR. A little target practice at the range does nothing to prepare you for defensive shooting.

Firearm safety and the rules for defensive use of a firearm can be tought without actually shooting the gun.

I think Utah dispensed with a shooting test for good reason, and it makes me suspicous Nevada is doing this just to "keep guns off the street."

But I suppose it is up to Nevada to make their own rules. The only thing Utahns should do about it is to stay out of Nevada.

Wile E Coyote
June 26, 2009, 01:09 PM
Green-Giz...Let's not forget how many non-residents have Utah permits as well. It's gonna affect more than just NV and UT residents.

Erich
June 26, 2009, 01:45 PM
Drat. :( And I am going to NV in a couple of weeks and was planning on carrying (as usual) under my UT and FL licenses. Good looking-out, folks, but drat.

CoRoMo
June 26, 2009, 01:52 PM
I assume at some point, Colorado will do this type of blue state thing and require range time. I just hope the current permit holders get grandfathered in because I don't want to plop down another stack of C-notes for a class.

Anyone from a state where the change was made while you had a permit? How'd that change affect your permit? Renewal?

Quiet
July 1, 2009, 08:07 PM
NV DPS (http://www.nvrepository.state.nv.us/ccw_changes.shtml) was changed. UT & FL removed and WV & OH added.

Utah DPS (http://publicsafety.utah.gov/bci/FAQother.html) changed NV to a state that does not recognize UT permits.

FL DACS (http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/news/concealed_carry.html) removed NV from list of states that have reciprocity with FL.

Also on the FL website.
This list was last updated on July 1, 2009, when the State of Nevada was removed from the reciprocity list. Authorities in Nevada notified the Division of Licensing that as of that date, Nevada would no longer honor Florida concealed weapon licenses. Therefore, in accordance with the reciprocity provision set forth in section 790.015, Florida Statutes, Florida could no longer honor concealed weapon licenses issued by the State of Nevada.

HIcarry
July 1, 2009, 09:47 PM
Quote:
wait, wait, WAIT, Nevada is still an open carry state, so who cares! Maybe I will go to Lake Mead after all!

You can't carry at Lake Mead NRA cause it's a National Park Service managed site until 2010 when the new regs go into effect. And then you can only carry concealed.

Why would you be restricted to concealed carry after the new regulations go into effect in 2010? The new regulations specifically state that the firearms laws in the parks will mirror the laws of the state it is located in. So, if you can open carry in the state, you can open carry in the park.

freewheeling
July 17, 2009, 08:19 PM
As for me, Nevada reciprocity was one of the major reasons I got the Utah permit, since NV doesn't have reciprocity with VA. But combining a VA and a UT permit would render NV's excuse invalid. It seems to me that one would be able to make a credible argument that if you have two permits, one that requires live fire, as well as the Utah non-resident permit, you ought to be able to carry concealed in Nevada. In other words the argument about combining multiple permits to meet a given state's stricter requirements might be a useful line of public debate. Such an "aggregated training" argument might be a useful way to counter the anti-ccw advocates who think they've found an Achilles heal with this "substantially similar" concept.

Frank Ettin
July 17, 2009, 08:25 PM
...It seems to me that one would be able to make a credible argument that if you have two permits, one that requires live fire, as well as the Utah non-resident permit, you ought to be able to carry concealed in Nevada....One would think. But I guess the powers that be don't see it that way. And that is why I'm presently sitting in a hotel room in Sparks, Nevada so that I can take a Nevada CCW class tomorrow. And I'll be staying over so I can swing by the Washoe County Sheriff on Monday to apply.

Bailey Guns
July 18, 2009, 04:11 PM
Well...really...it's not unreasonable for Nevada to require a CCW holder to have shown they can operate a Firearm...or, with this, to decline to recognise permits issued by States who do not require an applicant to 'qualify', by showing they can operate a firearm...


It should not be a Hardship for Utah to have an applicant 'qualify' by actually firing an Arm...and, if they would, then 'end-of-reciprocity-problem'...

Ahh, yes. Elitism at it's finest. "Sorry, YOU don't qualify."

This has been hashed and rehashed. The believers of the "you must actually shoot" in order to get a permit are pretty hard-pressed to ever find proof this is an actual, rather than a perceived, problem. Many, many shall-issue states require nothing more than a classroom lecture and I sure don't see it as a being a problem. 2 states require nothing more than legally being allowed to own a gun. Don't hear of any problems there, either.

This whole "you must qualify" thing is a solution looking for a problem.

Frank Ettin
July 18, 2009, 09:38 PM
Ahh, yes. Elitism at it's finest. ...Ahh, yes. The typical response of the "Training? We ain't go no training; We don't need no stinkin' training" crowd. Anyway, your not liking it isn't going to change it. And if you want to change it, go for it.

In any case, I have no problem with a state expecting me to demonstrate that I can manage a gun, and that I have some knowledge of the applicable law, before I go about in public with a loaded gun on my person. And instead of grousing about it, I took care of business. I took the class today and qualified, and will be going to the sheriff on Monday to submit my application. It's something of a nuisance, but I'm getting a nice little Reno vacation out of the exercise.

If you enjoyed reading about "Changes in NV reciprocity!!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!