This is what tyranny looks like. It's not about a vaccine, it's about complying with what the government wants you to do. A medical emergency has become an excuse for grabbing power.
Screw these cops and their lawsuit. I hope they lose big time and end up paying legal fees out of pocket for this suit. Even though I was a close relative of a nearby agency, I have no sympathy for these two anymore.
Two LA County Deputies got shot by a piece of trash gang member with a Polymer80 weapon. Since P80s came out, criminals have been making DIY Glocks instead of stealing guns. Good for gun theft, bad for home assemblers and Polymer80.
PLLCA doesn't apply to manufacturers like Polymer80. General product liability should. The problem is that scumbag hoplopaths are suing because the courts are unwilling to enforce the fact that companies are not liable for misuse of their products.
My first instinct was that some shyster personal injury attorney got to the promising big bucks. Not so. Everytown is leading the suit. Which means their scumbags talked to the deputies and got them in as plaintiffs.
Based on the area and the surnames of the officers, I'm betting they grew up in a community with a poor gun culture where only criminals and cops had guns. The idea that average citizens might want to be armed and have guns that can't be easily confiscated is foreign to them. That and getting shot makes them a ripe target for being plaintiffs.
My long assumption and fear is that urban cops, particular minorities in heavily minority and Democratic Party controlled areas, will be the ones who are most anti-gun when Second Amendment totalitarianism and gun confiscation comes.
Screw these cops and I'm sorry I ever felt bad for them.
Dayton, Nevada's own Polymer80, your favorite 80% handgun lower company, won an injunction today, July 20, against AB 286. AB 286 essentially bans 80% lower receivers in Nevada and is so poorly written even old, unserialized guns are potentially illegal.
From Polymer80's blog post:
In June, following the enactment of AB 286, Polymer80 took emergency action to stop the enforcement of the new law by challenging its constitutionality. To this end, Polymer80 initially filed a Verified Complaint coupled with an emergency application for an Order to Show Cause and related motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction to bar enforcement of this new and seriously defective enactment. Polymer80 was forced to take this extraordinary action because, among many other reasons, AB 286, a hastily and poorly written and passed bill, purports to curtail and criminalize products that are legal to own under federal law. And, it does so through vague, unintelligible, and sweeping restrictions. At its core, AB 286 strips lawful citizens of Nevada of their basic, constitutionally protected rights and targets corporations, such as Polymer80, for lawful activities that greatly contribute to the Nevada economy and facilitate and safeguard the rights of Nevadans.
The injunction applies to Sections 3.5 and 6.9 of AB 286 (bill text). This is an injunction in state court.
Section 3.5 prohibits a person from selling, offering to sell or transferring an unfinished frame or receiver.
Section 6.9 reads: 9.“Unfinished frame or receiver” means a blank, a casting or a machined body that is intended to be turned into the frame or lower receiver of a firearm with additional machining and which has been formed or machined to the point at which most of the major machining operations have been completed to turn the blank, casting or machined body into a frame or lower receiver of a firearm even if the fire-control cavity area of the blank, casting or machined body is still completely solid and unmachined.
So right now it is legal in Nevada to buy 80% receivers until the injunction is reversed or the case is adjudicated. The criminalization of possession of 80% receivers you already own does not apply until 1/01/2022.
A few weeks ago, the Nevada Firearms Coalition PAC interviewed Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo. Many members, including myself, expressed concerns on how long it takes Las Vegas Metro Police to issue CCW permits in particular.
There are two major issues. The first is (and has been for a long time) that it takes most of the 120 day statutory time period to issue permits. That is, once you turn in your application, the sheriff has 120 days to approve or deny the permit. Metro and Washoe County are currently running at that limit.
The second and more recent issue is appointment time. Until 2020, all sheriff’s offices accepted walk-in appointments. This meant waiting for fingerprinting was like waiting in any other line. Remember that the 120 clock doesn’t start until you turn in your application. That will be important later.
In 2020, online/scheduled fingerprint appointment times were introduced. Metro briefly went to a deeply unpopular online only application system for the fingerprint and application appointment. In his call with the PAC, Lombardo announced that he had reinstated the ability to apply in person at headquarters. Little public announcement was made of this.
The problem with these online/scheduled appointments is that appointment slots were booked up for months. Unprecedented demand didn’t help, but at least with in-person appointments, you could always wake up early and wait in line. Now the scheduling delays forced many people into a year’s artificial delay, on top of the 120 statutory limit. That means some people wouldn’t get a permit until 16 months (theoretically) after scheduling the appointment.
Due to a massive backlog induced by COVID and unrest, Washoe County Sheriff launched an initiative in March to reduce the year-long backlog just to apply for a permit. Clark County applications were reporting up to a 90 day wait just to apply, one quarter of the wait for Reno-area applicants. A five-six month wait was not uncommon even after the initiative.
So someone expressing interest in a CCW permit might have to wait several months just to apply for their permit, meaning if they applied and scheduled now, they might get a permit by New Year’s.
Before, as well as during COVID, both new and renewal CCW applicants have been seeing processing times that have approached, or in many cases, exceeded the statutory 120 calendar day limit. While it might be easy to fall back on an explanation of "short staffed" or "high volume", this is a service that is funded by the fees that are paid by the applicants. More applicants equals more funding.
It may also be easy to fall back on a "backlog at DPS", since the process is dependent on them. However, other counties in Nevada are reporting processing times as little as days or weeks, not months. And certainly not over the statutory 120-day limit.
Lander County Sheriff says they are running 60 days, which is consistent with their turnaround pre-COVID. Humboldt County Sheriff says they are typically about 4-6 weeks out right now. Their clerk told me it’s usually about a week to get your appointment, and then the vast majority of the rest of the time is up to Department of Public Safety (DPS) in Carson City.
Humboldt is getting their applications processed by DPS in approximately four weeks, typically, which is consistent with pre-COVID issuance. The clerk said that whenever the local instructors graduate a class, their appointments might push out to eight days instead of five. After the political changes at the national level (the clerk’s wording), they are seeing like four or five times the number of applications. This is consistent with reports across the state and nation.
Elko County Sheriff Narvaiza replied to me himself and said they are at about two months. I specifically asked how the time breaks down, and Humboldt said it is almost all DPS in their county. The in-office time was just days on both ends. Once Humboldt County authorities get the blessing from DPS, the permits are printed and out the door within 48 hours.
Our understanding is that DPS runs the fingerprints through the FBI, for a criminal record check, and run the application through the NICS database, to confirm they are not a prohibited person disqualified from processing firearms. Lander County reported its two-month turn-around, again was mostly DPS. 60 days for DPS would be consistent with what Metro told us in 2016 (if one accounts for variations due to massive demand).
Sheriff Antinoro in Storey County (Virgina City) told me, as for wait times, virtually all of it is waiting on state or FBI returns. Local time consists of one to two days. “We were turning CCWs around in about 3-4 weeks pre-apocalypse. We got up to 6-8 weeks at the height of the pandemic. Now in the waning days, as of last week I'm told we're down to 4-6 weeks. That's all FBI/state delay.”
So assuming all of them are going through the same queue at DPS, that means that Metro’s CCW detail is taking three extra months above DPS time. The same would be the case, albeit on a smaller scale, in Washoe County.
Demand is a factor in any system with a bottleneck; ask us in Clark County about this. Permit issuance is greatest here because of the population size and tourism (duh). Naturally it takes longer, but “longer” has been 80-120 days on average since 2013. The appointment fiasco didn’t factor into that because until recently, it was first-come, first-served.
The only explanation for why it takes so long for Nevada to issue permits is staffing. At the state level, DPS doesn’t have the manpower to handle their end with this level of demand in a reasonable timeframe. Okay, we get it. Nevada is a small state.
However, with Washoe and for darn sure Clark County, the only answer is that the sheriffs do not want to devote the manpower and money for their CCW details to process permits faster. In times of great demand we might forgive the government slow processing due to a bottleneck, but especially in Metro’s case, this bottleneck has been going on for years.
Considering the above, how Sheriff Lombardo explain the current state of the CCW detail within Metro, and these long processing times? I have done the research. I’ve contacted more than half of the county sheriffs in the state. I think every CCW holder in Nevada wants a straight answer to this question.
As our esteemed editor said: “120 days is the deadline, not the goal.” Sheriff Lombardo has refused to make any meaningful changes to speed up processing. Increased demand should equal more staffing. A right delayed is a right denied (never mind the questionable constitutionality of requiring a permit in the first place).
We've seen some questions lately whether CCW carry insurance is required in Nevada or not. It most definitely is not. In fact, we're unaware of any state requiring liability insurance to own or carry a firearm (although San Jose, CA, passed a controversial ordinance recently).
CCW insurance, carry insurance, or self-defense insurance (it goes by many names) is essentially membership or traditional insurance based coverage to assist with a legal defense or liability judgements in the event of a self-defense incident. Each policy is different; some are reimbursement only (you pay the defense costs and the policy reimburses you), some pay for a lawyer, others pay for both a lawyer and will pay any judgement against you.
This is optional coverage that is a great idea, but not mandatory. Few of us can afford an expensive legal defense and one should never talk to the police without an attorney present. A small monthly payment for one of these services makes sure there is an attorney on call should you be involved in a defensive gun use. A good lawyer, if you go to trial, can costs tens of thousands of dollars or more.
Some CCW instructors make sales pitches for the various self-defense insurance companies out there. Nevada Carry was part of a referral program in the past. There's nothing wrong with pitching these services; it's a good way for the instructors to make an extra buck off the referral and the service is a good idea for the citizen.
Where we take issue is when the sales pitch is at the expense of actual training or students are misinformed. An extended or especially forceful pitch to a captive audience is not fair or ethical. Sitting students down and selling the insurance for an hour is too much and if that's part of the 8-hour minimum, it's probably not kosher with the approved curriculum.
So again, while it's a good idea to have it, Nevada flat-out does not require any sort of insurance to own or carry a gun. There is no legislation mandating it in the future (although we're not guaranteeing anything in the future). Anyone telling you insurance is required to carry a gun is wrong.
On a political note, anti-gun hoplopaths and talk out of both sides of their mouths maligning it as "murder insurance" then say they want to require liability insurance for gun owners often blaming the "cost" of "gun crimes." Law abiding citizens aren't the ones causing society to pay a price for violence; these calls for insurance are just to make it as difficult as possible to legally own a gun
Today, NVFAC published the contents of the gun safety flyer that Clark County School District will be circulating to parents.
All it basically says is “Playing with guns is dangerous. Please educate your children so they don’t do that or bring them to schools.”
The statement is a well-balanced one that probably should be a bit more strongly worded. It doesn’t tell people to lock up their guns or do anything unconstitutional, but to be responsible and educate their kids.
Given that too many kids have brought guns to school and the parents showed total recklessness in letting the kids have access, I don’t think
Let’s admit it: this isn’t aimed at gun owners who read this blog or any of the people getting pissed online. This is for the stupid people out there. Remember, common sense isn’t so common and if you are of average intelligence, half of the people in the world are dumber than you are.
So I’ve prepared a translation of how the letter should read:
Dear irresponsible parents,
I see a lot of gun owners online freaking out and treating this like it's sex ed telling moron teenagers to use a condom. Well guess what, kids gotta learn safe...gun safety somewhere.
Now maybe we can work on teaching kids on how to safely shoot and the really basic Eddie Eagle stuff?
Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo is running as Republican for governor, apparently under the theory that anyone is better than Sisolak. Well, only marginally so. Frankly, I think Lombardo has done a crappy job and is just a casino sheriff, which means he will be the casino's governor, not yours.
I'm past the point of voting for people just because they aren't a Democrat. Lombardo might as well be a Democrat given his stance on guns (the issue we care about here). If we can get enough Republican senators to block any terrible bills in 2023, let's do that instead.
Lombardo was invited to be a guest of the Nevada Firearms Coalition PAC to do a Q&A. Now, for reasons having to do with maintaining a political relationship, the questions were softened up. The hardballs that many of the members wanted to throw were blunted. I don't like it, but I understand why the lobbyist had to do it.
Despite his vehement insistence that (banging on the table) "I support the Second Amendment!" it's clear he doesn't. Lombardo expressed support for banning private gun sales (universal background checks) and prioritizes officer safety over gun rights. He really couldn't give an example of gun control he doesn't support. Remember how he wanted to ban "high capacity" magazines?
And on top of all of this, he clearly doesn't care enough about citizen's being able to protect themselves to get CCWs out in a timely manner. Counting scheduling the fingerprint appointment, it's taking Metro beyond the statutory 120 days to issue CCWs (the sheriffs count from when you turn in your application and fingerprints, not when you schedule your appointment).
He was not supported by the rank and file in his last election. He also decided to switch to an encrypted radio system (or at least turn it on) after October 1, presumably because people recorded what an S-show the response was. Though that is not his fault, covering up police radio traffic en masse like that against popular opinion is bad. We don't need an autocrat running the state.
Does this guy really deserve your support as a governor? He would be Sisolak but from a different party. There are better people out there who would do a better job. Lombardo needs to retire.
Recently Nevada removed several states concealed weapons permits from the list of states it recognizes (effective 7/01/2021). Is the plot of our tyrannical governor and attorney general?
This is due to changes in other states' processes. Nevada requires that a state's permit and process be similar to our own. The list is updated regularly as other states change their process.
Per NRS 202.3689, this is checked every year before July 1:
(a) Determine whether each state requires a person to complete any training, class or program before the issuance of a permit to carry a concealed firearm in that state.
These are the states Nevada no longer recognizes:
Florida will no longer recognize Nevada's permit as we do not grant them reciprocity. This is the situation prior to 2015 with that state in particular.
2020 List and 2021 List
Slideshow: Nevada Reciprocity and Recognition
Clayton E. Cramer
Gun Free Zone
The War on Guns
The View From Out West