Nevada Firearms PAC statement on AB 291 red flag law provision

SB 120 is Nevada’s “Red Flag” law. A rumor is that it is to be added to AB 291. NVFAC PAC position letter

February 18, 2019

RE: SB 120

Nicole Cannizzaro, Chair
Senate Judiciary Committee
Nevada State Senate

Dear Chair Cannizzaro;

The Nevada Firearms Coalition has reviewed SB 120 (orders of protection) and we have strong concerns regarding the protection of civil rights of the accused. For this reason, we are STRONGLY OPPOSED to SB 120 for the following reasons:

The governing documents of the State of Nevada and the United States of America provide protection to citizens so that their rights are protected.

Most of the language in this bill regarding “threats” is directed to firearms and their possession. There are other devices used in domestic violence that are significant weapons, but they are not the focus of this bill.

Section 4: Clear and convincing evidence. This definition lowers the standards of prosecution and degrades the legal level of proof for conviction to that below “probable cause” and “reasonable suspicion.” Under current laws, law enforcement may temporary detain for “reasonable suspicion” and arrest for “probable cause” with court convictions being “found guilty.” This law lowers the standards of law enforcement and court actions below the level currently established for detention and arrest, and allows tremendous discretion on the part of law enforcement in the determination and enforcement of “high-risk behavior” which is not defined nor codified in Nevada statute, but identified in this bill as the mere possession custody, control or acquisition of a firearm, which on its face is both legal and a constitutionally protected right. This alone is sufficient to oppose this proposed legislation as an affront to civil liberties as articulated in Nevada and US Constitution.

Section 9: High-risk behavior is completely related to firearms and is so vague that it could be applied to any person who simply possesses a firearm. Again, this allows law enforcement to determine what an officer may believe to be in their mind “high risk behavior.” This alone is sufficient to oppose this proposed legislation as an affront to civil liberties as articulated in Nevada and US Constitutions. “High risk behavior” requires ownership/custody of a firearm in addition to other factors. This is incredibly narrow and highly subjective, and someone could exhibit “high risk behavior” without ever owning or possessing a firearm. They could have a knife, explosive device, or other weapon.

Section 9.1; The wording is very vague. What does communication of a threat of violence really mean? An argument? Someone disagrees with someone else on social media? There are serious 1st Amendment issues with this section.

Section 9.3; Vague as to what constitutes threats of violence. Ex-spouses arguing over text messages about exchanging children? Someone loses their temper?

Section 9.4 Exhibited conduct which a law enforcement officer determines would present a threat to the safety of the public. This is extremely vague and gives any law enforcement officer the ability to use personal opinions of behavior to institute law enforcement action. Some officers are of the personal opinion that hunting, open carry of a firearm, concealed carry of firearms, and otherwise lawful behaviors are “threats to the public.” This alone is sufficient to oppose this proposed legislation as an affront to civil liberties as articulated in Nevada and US Constitution.

Other sections which allow standards lower than “probable cause that a crime has been committed” or “reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed” include the following:

Section 9.5 (a)(b) “Engaged in conduct which presents a danger to himself or herself or another person while (a) in possession, custody or control of a firearm or (b) purchasing or otherwise acquiring a firearm”

Section 9. 7. Engaged in the reckless use, display or brandishing of a firearm; Nevada State Law does not define “brandishing.” Again, narrowed only to firearms. What about other weapons? Cars?

Section 9. 8: Used, attempted to use or threatened the use of physical force against another. What constitutes a threat of physical force? The wording would include justified use of force for self-defense.

Section 9. 9; Abused or is currently abusing a controlled substance or alcohol. What constitutes abuse? This is another section that is subject to subjective interpretation.

Section 9. 10: Acquired a firearm or other deadly weapon within the immediately preceding 6 months; or NRS 202…defines “deadly weapon.” But this is not referenced here. This is another example of a poorly written bill, as a mere purchase of a firearm is considered a dangerous act and “high-risk behavior.”

Section 9. 11: Engaged in any other conduct or acts the court considers relevant to determine whether to issue an order for protection against high-risk behavior. Since “high-risk” behavior is not codified in Nevada Law and by this bill is focused solely on possession of firearms, what standard would a court use for consideration?

Section 11.1;. The court may issue the order based only on the “clear and convincing” evidence standard. This is more than the “preponderance of evidence” standard used for civil cases, but not as rigorous as the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used in criminal cases.

This lower standard is troubling because the section is taking away constitutional rights, without due process, and with a lower standard of evidence (clear and convincing). If anything, the standard must be “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Section 11.2; The court is not required to have both parties appear, but this bill gives wide discretion. This violates the 6th Amendment right to confront witnesses and cross-examine them.

Section 11.3; Extended orders at least require notice and a hearing, a reasonable due process requirement. Emergency orders can be issued with or without notice and there is no hearing requirement. Ex Parte orders require notice in this bill, but it is silent regarding the requirement for a hearing.

Section 11.5: If it appears to the satisfaction to the court from specific facts communicated by telephone to the court by a law enforcement officer that an act of high-risk behavior has occurred, the court may issue an emergency order against the adverse party. Not only does this law allow for individual personal law enforcement determination of “high-risk behavior,” it provides sanctions against a person based on subjective personal opinions. This proposed legislation is an affront to civil liberties as articulated in Nevada and US Constitution.

Section 12.1; This section requires the adverse party to surrender firearms. This is a clear violation of the 4th and 5th Amendment right to unreasonable seizure and due process. It is also a violation of the 2nd Amendment. Without notice and a hearing, this is unconstitutional. In addition the passage of the “universal background check” bill prohibits the surrender of a firearm(s) without a mandatory background check.

This bill contains provisions that are clear violations of the 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments to the US Constitution. It also appears to be in direct contravention of similar Nevada state constitutional sections (Sections 8, 9, 11, 14, and 18).

In addition to the problems already mentioned, this bill will subject law-abiding residents of Nevada to adverse legal consequences before they have committed a violation of the law – indeed, punishing them for what someone thinks they might do. In a free constitutional republic that prides itself on the rule of law, for a sovereign state of that republic to contemplate such a flagrant abuse of legal process is nothing short of outrageous.

Before someone is deprived of a constitutional right, they must be given the full provision of due process. This includes specificity about the definitions and elements of that process, full rights of notice, and the full and free opportunity to legally contest that process with legal counsel, and proof of contested facts beyond a reasonable doubt. All presented in a court of law before any actions are taken that are adverse to the accused’s constitutional rights.

This bill provides no method of appeal for the adverse party. The lack of notice and hearing for any type of court order, the complete subjective interpretation of behavior, the focus on firearms only, in addition to the violations of Constitutional rights are highly problematic.

For these reasons the Nevada Firearms Coalition STRONGLY OPPOSES passage of this bill.

Sincerely,

Don Turner, President

cc: Senate Judiciary Committee
Dallas Harris
James Ohrenschall
Marilyn Dondero Loop
Melanie Scheible
Scott Hammond
Ira Hansen
Keith Pickard

Share

Don’t be a Nero

According to legend emperor Nero played a fiddle as the city of Rome burned to the ground. No one is sure why he did it but considering the fact that he was a ruthless leader who murdered his mother and his wife shortly after becoming an emperor at the age of 16 we can easily establish that he simply did not give a shit. At the end, close to 80% of the city was destroyed and hundreds of people died.
Could Nero alone have saved the city? Probably not. Would the whole city of Rome burn completely with thousands dead instead of hundreds if everyone living there chose to play a fiddle instead of trying to put out the flames or at least run for their lives? That’s a definite yes.
I am sure many of you have caught up to the analogy: I see the exact same apathy among good half of gun owners and conservatives in Nevada. It is close to impossible to get everyone to voice their opinion about the AB 291 ( which takes about 3 minutes on a smart phone) let alone organize an event on a massive scale where people will actually have to show up.
After managing for sale groups on Facebook for the last 7 years I noticed one prevailing trend. As soon as FB started cracking down on our groups and we were forced to change our format to discussion only participation dropped 10 fold almost immediately. The very same people who enthusiastically traded guns and posted things almost daily have all but vanished. They are still on member lists. They react to a funny gun meme once a year. But try asking them to sign a petition or contact a politician via provided link (which literally takes three clicks of a thumb) and it’s a desert out there. They won’t even share it which is even less work. I guess they are too busy playing the fiddle while Nevada is burning to the ground. Probably because they don’t give a shit.
There are an estimated 1.25 million gun owners in Nevada. If all of us stood together as one during elections we would not have to worry about losing any rights in our life time. But I guess even that is too much to ask. This last election cycle an astonishing two thirds of Nevada gun owners did not bother to cast their ballots. This country is about 20 years away from being completely destroyed by the lunatic left so play me the song of your people , fiddler man.

-Yuri

Share

Drawing Rules

To increase Classifieds participation we will be holding a drawing contest that will start on May 14th and run until we have 100 entries. One lucky winner will be randomly selected to receive $25 cash via PayPal or Square cash app. All you have to do is post an item for sale in our classifieds section and you will be automatically entered into the drawing.

Here are the rules.

1. Only first 100 entries will qualify.

2. No more than 5 entries per person

3. No cheating . Only post items that you are willing to sell. Complaints from potential buyers will result in cancelation of your entries and winnings .

4. You must have an account on our website. Posts made as a guest will not be considered for the drawing.

Share

K-Libtard ?

I hear it often even from the most staunch conservatives. Every time there is an attack on our rights the first response is always about how unconstitutional it is and how we need to educate the liberals who either propose or support any new gun bans or other attacks on our freedoms. Then you often see a wave of angry posts from people like me referring to liberals as democRATS, scum and degenerates that soon follow the first wave of responses. I often wondered how some people can retain their composure in the face of such travesty but then recently I got into a friendly debate with yet another conservative friend and it hit me: we disagree on what motivates the liberals to do what they do.

According to my friend the best solution to prevent people who propose unconstitutional laws is education . My friend proposed that we need to do civic testing on every wonna be politician to see if they have enough knowledge to govern and educate them if they don’t . My good natured friend does not realize that liberals already know about the Constitution, the rule of law and  the Bill of Rights . They do what they do because they hate those things. They refer to the Constitution as a living document. And anything that is living can be killed. Or at least mutilated beyond recognition. They want to destroy the very fabric of our nation : individuality. They want the majority to impose tyranny on others. All they have to do is tip the scale just a little bit during an election and have their way. They spread their ideology like cancer. They poison our children with lies and hate. They do all these things on purpose , methodically and with cold calculation .

So excuse my French but we are at war with the satanic left and I really can’t find any other words to describe them but left wing lunatic degenerate scum.

-Yuri

Share

Website Traffic And Membership Update

Temperatures are rising in Nevada and things are heating up on our website as well. April has been the busiest month in Gunslinger City’s existence so far. We have seen a large increase in classifieds as well as hits on all pages.

Here’s a quick breakdown of April’s activity.

  •   Visitor Count.

Although a total number of visitors was slightly less than in March total number of hits was above 100 thousand. In March it was only 45 thousand. Our website has more content so naturally people are staying longer and browsing longer. Each hit represents a visit on a single page or a file. Below is a chart with this years visitor and hit traffic by month. The increase in activity is clearly visible.

 

The chart below is a break down of April’s visitor activity

 

 

Our busiest days are on weekends when users have more time to browse with some days seeing well over 200 visits.

 

  • Regions

As expected 99% of our traffic is from the USA. We don’t have time resources to analyze where exactly all US visits are coming from but judging by increased activity in Classifieds section it is safe to say most of it is from Clark County

 

 

  • Membership

Our website had also seen a spike in user registration last month due to a Facebook Ad Campaign which cost us $40.00 and ran for several days targeting Nevada gun owners. Results of FB Campaign will be posted in a few days.

We currently have 282 registered users

 

And 169 active users (members who have logged in to their accounts at least once in the last 6 months)

 

 

  • Advertising

Due to high costs associated with maintaining the website and Facebook Campaigns expenses we were forced to make a decision to show some occasional ads from our partners. We will keep these ads to a minimum and all proceedings will be used to maintain our website and recruit new members.

To place a business ad on the front page please contact us at
admin@gunslingercity.com

  • Sharing

Please invite all your gun toting friends to join us here at GS City. Share our link on your ttimeline. Especially if you have an active for sale ad. It is in your best interest to invite people to see your item.

And thank you all for joining us.

-YURI

 

Share