Did you know that Nevada law protects students who wear pro-gun clothing? The Washoe County School District is wishing that its administrators and teachers heard of that law (NRS 392.4634) right now, considering that they've been sued by the Firearms Policy Center because an 8th grader got in trouble for wearing on of their shirts.
In 2015, Nevada made a lot of news for its "Pop-Tart gun" bill (AB 121) that was intended to let kids be kids. After a school district in Maryland disciplined a child for chewing Pop Tart into the vague shape of a gun, Nevada legislators led the charge to prevent schools from enforcing stupid policies on children. Pop Tart guns, pistol fingers, and now vaguely pro-Second Amendment t-shirts are considered "badthink" and incur the wrath of stupid and/or biased teachers.
It's clearly non-offensive. The Sparks Black Rifle shirt that is described is also non-offensive. Such shirts with guns on them that aren't obscenely violent are perfectly legal and protected (unless you're in high school) in Nevada. Since this went to federal court, it looks like the attorneys have ignored state law. In fact, it looks like state law was totally ignored from the beginning by both parents and schools.
It looks like both the parents and Washoe County schools were totally oblivious to our Pop Tart gun law. The teacher, principal, and district officials probably had no clue about this law. They forgot about it after 2015's sensationalism died down, moving on to anti-gun walk-outs and hand wringing about campus carry. There is no excuse for such ignorance of the law by school administrators. Once is excusable, but the second time, they ought to have known better. Now taxpayer dollars will be used to fight this because of ideological reasons, unless some sort of common sense prevails.
Based on the complaint, it appears that the teacher, Brooke May, and the assistant principal, Heather Curtis, never took it further up the chain of command to someone who might know about the Pop-Tart law. It appears that May and Curtis had a bone to pick with guns and the plaintiff if they made such a big deal over such tame shirts. It smacks of puritanical nanny-ism and down right hoplophobia. Because of oversensitivity towards gun or their own anti-gun tendencies, they walked right into a test-case lawsuit.
Assuming the women here are ignorant and know/care little about guns, their knee-jerk reaction to the seeming incongruity of guns and schools created this situation. Make no mistake, it's a culture war. Things could have been different if these women knew the law, understood a gun shirt was nothing to make an issue over, and if they were not from a professional background that abhors the Second Amendment.
Whatever the motive behind their actions, be it ignorance, malice, or simply misinformation about gun culture, these women will be forever poisoned against the Second Amendment because they were made into examples. We will be the enemies for "making a mountain out of a molehill." But then again, if they made an issue over a silly t-shirt, could they have been won over anyhow? I doubt it.
Read the complaint here.
Support Nevada Carry/Frontier Carry on Patreon for just $1 a month! This helps us keep the lights on and cover our expenses where the paltry ad revenue can't. It's a way to contribute something to help us keep spreading the truth about gun laws, gun control, and history. In return, you get access to rare tidbits I've found in historical research (old articles, clippings, photos), links to scholarly articles, invitations to meet ups, premium Q&A questions etc.