Nevada removes Utah and Florida from CCW list

[gvaldeg1]

Effective today July 1, 2009, Nevada removed Utah and Florida from the list of States from which CCW permits would be recognized. They also added Ohio and West Virginia to the list. The link to the Nevada DPS list is:

Link Removed

This is the official list. So, this is no longer just rumor. Because I have both Arizona and Utah permits and go to Nevada frequently you can imagine how I feel about this.

 

[Quiet]

Get a non-resident NV permit?

 

[AZSATT]

Anyone know the reasoning or motivation behind this new list, and the restrictions toward so many other states' CCW's?

Why's Nevada so restrictive? I mean, I realize AZ is a relatively "easy" CCW standard, but I'm still thankful I'm not back east.

 

[utimmer43]

Anyone know the reasoning or motivation behind this new list, and the restrictions toward so many other states' CCW's?

Why's Nevada so restrictive? I mean, I realize AZ is a relatively "easy" CCW standard, but I'm still thankful I'm not back east.

The first post in THIS THREAD pretty much sums it up.

 

[AZSATT]

Thanks, I didn't realize there was a duplicate thread out there - but wow, sounds like the NV DPS folks are a little on the "difficult" side to deal with...

I can see the lack of live-fire as a reason - not a good reason, but a reason. (AZ's live-fire standard proves only the applicant has a pulse... doesn't "prove" much.) But Florida's dropped because their permit is good for 7 instead of 5 years?... that's crap.

I do agree that if enough money-spending, NV vacation-taking, CCW-permit holding citizens voice their disapproval of this "hostile" perspective of CCW's from other states, the proper attention may change this - again. Money has that affect a lot in gov't.

Thanks for the redirect to the other post. Appreciated.

 

[Quiet]

It's not the NV DPS that's doing this, it's the Nevada Sheriffs' and Chiefs' Association (NVSCA).

The NV legislature gave the NVSCA the ability to approve/disapprove which states get honored by NV. [NRS 202.3689]

With the removal of UT and FL from the list of states that NV honors, the only non-resident permit that NV now honors is the NV non-resident permit.

Ever since, UT and FL were added to the list of states that NV honors, more and more people have opted to not get or renew the NV non-resident permit. Since, the FL & UT permits are cheaper and more convienant to obtain than the NV non-resident permit, which requires training in NV & permit application to be submitted in person.

That is a considerable loss of money for NV.
Loss of money for NV business (hotels/resturants/firearms instructors) and loss of money to county/state government agencies (ccw application fees).

Supposedly, the NVSCA is willing to add FL and/or UT back to the list, if the NV legislature changes NV to be like CO and FL.
CO and FL does not honor other states non-resident permits.


Nevada Revised Statue 202.3689
1. On or before July 1 of each year, the Department shall:
(a) Examine the requirements for the issuance of a permit to carry a concealed firearm in each state and determine whether the requirements of each state are substantially similar to or more stringent than the requirements set forth in NRS 202.3653 to 202.369, inclusive.
(b) Determine whether each state has an electronic database which identifies each individual who possesses a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm issued by that state and which a law enforcement officer in this State may access at all times through a national law enforcement telecommunications system.
(c) Prepare a list of states that meet the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b). A state must not be included in the list unless the Nevada Sheriffs’ and Chiefs’ Association agrees with the Department that the state should be included in the list.
(d) Provide a copy of the list prepared pursuant to paragraph (c) to each law enforcement agency in this State.
2. The Department shall, upon request, make the list prepared pursuant to subsection 1 available to the public.

 

[AZSATT]

That's an outstanding explanation - thanks! I appreciate the clarification.

 

[eldonvieira]

reading the law why don't they honor CA ccw

 

[LVLouisCyphre]

reading the law why don't they honor CA ccw

Here are the likely reasons;

• CA has no standardized training, it greatly varies from city to city and county to county. If you know the right person, you can get a CA CCW with no training whatsoever. This is common place in the larger metropolitan areas. Did you think Feinstein had to sit through a class to get her CCW from San Fransisco PD?
• CA probably doesn't do 7/24 online verification of CCWs.

My first question to the NSCA this August is why did I have to pay $107 to the State of Florida to renew their CCW when that money could have been spent here in Nevada? License/permit term has nothing to do whether or not a State should be on the recognition list.

There's nothing we can do about Utah being removed from the list. They have a valid point, Utah has no statutory live fire requirement. It was an oversight they were put on the list to begin with.

What will probably happen since Bernie Anderson is out now is an overhaul of the Nevada recognition statute.

 

[Quiet]

Here are the likely reasons;

• CA has no standardized training, it greatly varies from city to city and county to county. If you know the right person, you can get a CA CCW with no training whatsoever. This is common place in the larger metropolitan areas. Did you think Feinstein had to sit through a class to get her CCW from San Fransisco PD?
• CA probably doesn't do 7/24 online verification of CCWs.

Correct on both points.

Supposedly, all CA CCW permit holders are entered into the AFS (Automated Firearm System) of CLETS (California Law Enforcement Telcommunication System). I say supposidely, because not all CA LE agencies enter their CCW permit holders into AFS, because it is not mandatory to do so. In addition, NV LEOs do not have 24/7 access to CLETS.

The training requirements for a CA CCW permit, is not standardized and varies from agency to agency. CA law just says the training requirement can't exceed 16 hours, unless it's a POST certified training course than it can't exceed 24 hours. Also, the format of a CA CCW permit, may vary from agency to agency, since it is not standardized.

 

[JimMullinsWVCDL]

Nevada

Actually, Nevada needs to change its reciprocity law to either recognize all other states' licenses like Arizona, Idaho, and Utah, or, at a minimum, rewrite its comparable licensing standards requirement to have a more liberal standard (such as the law Arizona had in effect between 2003 and 2006).

The real problem here is that NSCA very conveniently found a couple of pretextx to drop both recognized states that issued nonresident licenses because nonresident permit business in Nevada cratered after they began honoring florida and Utah licenses and they want the money.

 

[mappow]

I was under the impression that Navada dropped FLA due to FLA extending their permit to 7 years verses 5 years.

 

[AvidshooterTX]

I think all gun owners should drop Nevada from any of their recreational plans - and company plans too if that's in their power.

 

[JimMullinsWVCDL]

I was under the impression that Navada dropped FLA due to FLA extending their permit to 7 years verses 5 years.

That's correct. Denying a state reciprocity over the length of the term of a license is one of the silliiest reasons I have ever heard. However, this was merely a pretext for Nevada officialls unlawfully usurping the Legislature and creating a de facto resident-license-only requirement by eliminating both states that issued to nonresidents. That's why I suggested above a total rewrite of Nevada's reciprocity law to either honor all states' licenses like Arizona, Idaho, and Utah currently do, or at least impose a more objective set of standards for recognition such as the law Arizona had from 2003 to 2006, which recognized most states' permits (including Florida and Utah) as long as they had some form of training requirement.