Editorial: CCW holders should not undergo background checks, too

It appears that a bill passed earlier this year to require background checks prior to the sale or transfer of firearms from one private party to another is being misinterpreted to apply also to Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) Permit holders, who are currently exempt from such background checks when buying from a licensed firearm dealer.

First reported by The Nevada Independent, a donation-sponsored online news outlet, Department of Public Safety (DPS) a month ago sent a letter to all licensed firearm dealers telling them CCW holders will have to now undergo a background check. Senate Bill 143 changed the law to require dealers to conduct background checks for private sales.

The letter does not cite any verbiage in the law but rather relies on testimony before a joint meeting of the Senate Judiciary and Assembly Judiciary committees in February to support its conclusion.

The pertinent testimony involves questions to the attorney for the gun-grabbing, Michael Bloomberg-financed Everytown for Gun Safety, which pushed a narrowly approved voter referendum in 2016 to require background checks prior to private gun transfers. Because the initiative required the background checks to be conducted by the FBI and the FBI refused to do so, it was deemed unenforceable.

SB143 fixed that flaw by requiring a state agency to conduct such background checks after submission by licensed firearm dealers, who may charge an unspecified fee for doing so.

In the committee testimony, Everytown attorney William Rosen was asked by Assemblywoman Jill Tolles whether CCW holders would be required to undergo background checks under the law. Rosen replied, “That is correct.”

Tolles followed up, “It makes sense that someone who is licensed for a CCW and shows his or her card should not be subject to additional checks. Why would that not apply to private sales?”

Rosen basically replied that CCW permits last for five years and there is a possibility a disqualifying event such as a restraining order might not get into the system to revoke the CCW. Might?

No lawmaker voiced an agreement with Rosen’s contention that this is what the new law requires. Only Rosen’s contention was relied on to show legislative intent.

As a result, Don Turner, president of the Nevada Firearms Coalition, sent a letter to DPS challenging the interpretation of the law. “A review of SB143 provides no basis for this determination by DPS. Moreover, the minutes of the Joint Meeting of the Senate Committee on Judiciary and the Assembly Committee on the Judiciary have no legal weight or authority and were never incorporated into the statute itself,” Turner wrote.

Turner noted that the statue requires a licensed dealer to treat the private transaction as if the dealer was conducting the sale from its own inventory. A licensed dealer is allowed to accept the CCW permit in lieu of a background check.

He argues the state cannot override federal law as it pertains to background check exemptions for CCW holders and calls on the agency to change its directive to firearm dealers.

The Nevada Independent notes that the change in background check requirements would especially burden rural counties — pointing out for example that 15 percent of individuals in Nye County and 13 percent of the people in Storey County are CCW holders.

DPS should change its interpretation of the law to one that relies on what the law actually says rather than the vague wishes and whims and speculation of East Coast gun grabbers.

A version of this editorial appeared this week in some of the Battle Born Media newspapers — The Ely Times, the Mesquite Local News, the Mineral County Independent-News, the Eureka Sentinel,  Sparks Tribune and the Lincoln County Record.

Newspaper column: Lawmakers should narrow, not expand gun-free zones

Lawmakers in Carson City continue to exhibit rabid hoplophobia — fear of guns. A bill has been introduced to further extend gun-free zones to public libraries and their parking lots. Senate Bill 115, introduced by state Sen. Mo Denis of Las Vegas, would add public libraries to the current law, which already prohibits guns and other weapons in the buildings and parking lots of universities, public and private schools and childcare facilities. Now, we have no problem with the private owners of land and buildings demanding that visitors come unarmed, and the state is surely the owner or custodian of universities and public schools. Though why lawmakers should be allowed to dictate to private schools and private childcare facilities is beyond us.

Additionally, this bill is a pointless endeavor that does nothing but add needless paperwork and wastes time, because every library district in the state has the power to control its own grounds and facilities. The Las Vegas-Clark County Library District already has a policy barring arms inside buildings and has guards who check to make sure that the holster on your belt holds a cellphone and not a handgun.

This law would require someone to get written permission to bring his or her weapon onto a library parking lot or into a library building.

During a recent committee meeting on the bill, Republican state Sen. Michael Roberson of Las Vegas, said, “I’m concerned that if these libraries don’t have adequate security that what we’re doing is we’re telling the public that we’re creating gun-free zones. And those here that want this bill can disagree with me but there have been studies that show gun-free zones are a magnet for criminal activity and mass shooters.”

He said the bill undermines law abiding Nevadans and actually endangers the public.

Republican state Sen. Don Gustavson — who represents all of Esmeralda, Humboldt, Lander, Mineral, Pershing and parts of Nye and Washoe counties — echoed Roberson’s concerns about creating gun-free zones. He asked rhetorically whether one would have a quicker response by pulling out a cellphone and calling 9-1-1 or pulling out a weapon. He said many in his district carry concealed weapons wherever they go.

According to the Nevada Firearms Coalition, since about 1950, more than 95 percent of all mass shootings in America have taken place where law-abiding citizens are banned from carrying guns.

Most puzzling is why it is a crime to have a gun in your car in the parking lot of these facilities. In fact, in the 2015 legislative session Assemblyman John Hambrick introduced a bill that would have allowed guns in vehicles at the aforementioned locales. A hearing on the bill was packed with proponents and opponents. A digest of the bill stated it would add an exception to the law so that a person would not be prohibited from possessing a weapon on those specific grounds if it were inside a locked or occupied motor vehicle. Seemed like a common sense approach, but it never got out of committee.

So people who are accustomed to keeping a pistol in the glove compartment or a rifle in a gun rack or the trunk are breaking the law if they drop their children off on school or daycare parking lots or visit a college campus. Now this bill would add public libraries, even if one is dropping a book at an outside collection box. Having a gun in the parking lot is not as good as having one on your person if the need arises. Just ask the vice principal of the Pearl, Miss., school who had to run a quarter mile to his vehicle to retrieve a gun to stop a shooter.

In October of 1997 a young man showed up on a school campus carrying a .30-30 rifle. He fatally shot two students. At the sound of gunshots, the vice principal ran a quarter of a mile to his truck, because the school was declared by law to be a gun-free zone, to recover and load his pistol before returning to campus, where he captured and disarmed the gunman and held him for four minutes until police could arrive. This could be an opportunity for an enterprising lawmaker to show some common sense for a change. Amend SB115 by adding the parking lot exception offered by Hambrick two years ago. That would not go far enough but would be a move in the right direction. Also, let library districts set their own policies.

A version of this column appeared this week in many of the Battle Born Media newspapers — The Ely Times, the Mesquite Local News, the Mineral County Independent-News, the Eureka Sentinel and the Lincoln County Record — and the Elko Daily Free Press.