JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Remember November 2016 when the voters of Nevada approved a ballot measure to require background checks for all gun sales? This was a vote that indicates the will of the people, which should be the law of the land. This is called, Direct Democracy, where the citizens can directly affect public policy.

Ballot measures are not an easy process. The language must be carefully constructed to meet legal requirements. Many thousands of signatures of voters must be obtained. The signatures must be verified. The ballot measure must survive any legal challenges. Then it needs to pass by a majority of the voters in the next election.

Our Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt has decided to oppose this law because he doesn't agree with the voters. (He also says he doesn't agree with the voters who approved legalizing marijuana but he isn't blocking that one.)

Nevada AG not enforcing gun law because he disagrees with voters: Pat Fling
 
yep, here in oregon SB941 became a joke when a certain somebody broke the law. knowingly or not he incriminated himself and NOTHING was done. they looked the other way. must not have fit the underlying agenda.

so tell me, what good is a law not enforced?
 
The difference is the Ag of Nevada discovered that the law cannot be enforced as written. The Bloomberg backed out of town supporters failed to read what they themselves had written, and when subjected to an actual LEGAL test, it failed as the feds refused to play along. If Killery had stolen the presidency, she would have ordered the federal authorities to change and conform to disarm the law abiding, but since she didn't, this is the way it stands. Bloomers can come back and waste another 25 million if he chooses.
 
I can't say that I agree with that law but I don't live in Nevada so it has no immediate impact on me.
I think there is a big difference between not enforcing it because you don't agree with it and not enforcing it because it's not enforceable as written, a smart man wouldn't try to enforce something that they know doesn't have the metal to stand up to challenge as it's a waste of time and resources.
It's obvious the woman who wrote the article is anti gun and in all reality the background check on private gun sales will not have that big an effect on murders most thugs, criminals etc don't answer a for sale ad to buy a gun they contact another shady person who knows a guy who has a stolen gun and even if the law were being enforced these people have zero regard for any law.
I would like to see the statistics that show the number of crimes/murders with a firearm directly related to no background check.
In her article she spouts about all these shooting and states with certainty they wouldn't have passed a background check, I say Bull and they could have still gotten a firearm in a back alley even if they were denied one by the new law.
 
It's not that the AG doesn't agree with the voters or the will of the people, this is completely false!!!
The issue at hand is the language in ballot measure 1as it is written. The poorly written language would have required the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
to conduct STATE background checks at the behest of the state. The F.B.I. said it is not a right belonging to the STATE to order the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to perform the requested background check and not a requirement of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to follow the direction of the STATE. It was a poorly drafted proposal and unenforceable as written. The AG did his due diligence, had the verbiage been different the outcome would be different.
 
It's not that the AG doesn't agree with the voters or the will of the people, this is completely false!!!
The issue at hand is the language in ballot measure 1as it is written. The poorly written language would have required the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
to conduct STATE background checks at the behest of the state. The F.B.I. said it is not a right belonging to the STATE to order the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to perform the requested background check and not a requirement of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to follow the direction of the STATE. It was a poorly drafted proposal and unenforceable as written. The AG did his due diligence, had the verbiage been different the outcome would be different.

I agree with you and disagree with the article. It's clear the author is bias.
 
If the law was enforced as written it would be a defacto ban on private party sales. There is no mechanism in place to do the required background checks. The law was to require background checks no ban all private party sales. We just got rid of the "Blue Card" gun registration in Clark County a couple years ago now they jammed this down our throats by misleading gullible citizens. Nevada used to be a "live and let live" state but with the major influx of cali libs fleeing all the regulations they brought onto themselves they are now ruining Nevada!!
 
It's the CALIFORNICATION of Nevada,
I don't like it one bit.
Now with a Democrat controlled Assembly and Senate in Nevara the crap they are trying to get passed is going to be just the beginning.
 
If the law was enforced as written it would be a defacto ban on private party sales. There is no mechanism in place to do the required background checks. The law was to require background checks no ban all private party sales. We just got rid of the "Blue Card" gun registration in Clark County a couple years ago now they jammed this down our throats by misleading gullible citizens. Nevada used to be a "live and let live" state but with the major influx of cali libs fleeing all the regulations they brought onto themselves they are now ruining Nevada!!

It's the CALIFORNICATION of Nevada,
I don't like it one bit.
Now with a Democrat controlled Assembly and Senate in Nevara the crap they are trying to get passed is going to be just the beginning.

Same exact thing is happening in Oregon and Washington.
 

Upcoming Events

Crossroads of the West Gun Show
Las Vegas, NV

New Resource Reviews

Back Top