Group asking Nevada to throw out gun ballot item

A gun rights group wants Nevada's elections chief to throw out a proposed 2016 ballot measure that would tighten background checks for anyone buying firearms from private sellers or gun show exhibitors.

In a letter obtained Monday by The Associated Press, Nevadans for State Gun Rights tells Secretary of State Ross Miller that initiative proponents missed a deadline to deliver signatures to one clerk. The group also says some pages lack a proper signature-gatherer's affidavit, and some signatures are dated after the affidavit was notarized.

I know it's out of a Kansas paper but it is about Nevada and the proposed BGC initiative. A state senator told me that there is nothing legislatively that can be done with this POS initiative and it will be in the voters hands. If the petition could be tossed out, that would be great since it was sold to signers as "simply" a way to "prevent criminals from getting guns and reducing domestic violence". We all know what a load of BS that is and will accomplish neither of those objectives. My guess is that "they" will be able to prove that, despite some "irregularities", there will still be enough valid signature for the initiative to move forward. The general populace will be fooled in to supporting it as they did in WA based on lies and misdirection and semantics. You can bet nannie bloomers and his buddies will be pumping truck loads of $$$$$ since the lost their attempt last session. If anyone wishes to donate to the Nevadans for State Gun Rights can go to this site.

http://nevadansforstategunrights.com/

That is the crux of the “problem” as the nannies see it. If, like the WA I594 initiative, this POS thing passes, if, by what the WA flow chart shows, you could be charged with a misdemeanor for the act of merely handing someone a firearm if you were observed doing it. The second time, it would be a felony. So, I suppose you just have to take your chances and only deal with people you know. Which sometimes can be hazardous as well. I’ve had some firearms that were lost in a boating accident that were obtained many years ago. If you were to do as the law now directs you to do, there would then be a record of that firearm someplace. But, how many true “rejections” are followed up on by the police now? Not very many. And, this would force the FFL’s in NV to use the federal system instead of the currently used state system for doing the intergalactic background checks. And there are lots of holes in both systems.

Based on the answer I got from the state senator, it just proves what an asinine boondoggle the initiative/referendum process is. We all know just how intelligent the voters are. Most of them will buy the “prevent criminals from obtaining guns and reduce domestic violence” lie with no regards or research into what the far reaching effects are to law abiding citizens. Because, after all, “it’s for your own safety”. No explanation on just how this would prevent anything.

Most of them will buy the “prevent criminals from obtaining guns and reduce domestic violence” lie with no regards or research into what the far reaching effects are to law abiding citizens. Because, after all, “it’s for your own safety”. No explanation on just how this would prevent anything.

Amen.

I practically lived on the various newspaper comments sections up in Washington, trying to get our point across: The people were being lied to and manipulated, i.e. There is no “loophole” (backed up with quotes from the 1968 GCA) and exposing it is a registration scheme in disguise (typical liberal trick).

Unfortunately, non-gun owners didn’t give a damn (and I doubt that they will in any other state). All they could see is how “reasonable” it was, ignoring the Form 4473 connection. That, or the “it would make us safer” meme.

Bloomberg and his fellow one per-centers will use the same successful arguments in Nevada, Oregon and other targeted states.

We had better start putting pressure on the NRA, GOA and other gun rights organizations to go pro-active on this “background check” business or gun registration will be implemented state by state. We are going to have to offer a background check initiative that checks the buyer ONLY, via a drivers license or some recognized photo ID.

Sitting at the keyboard and making defensive arguments against this background check scam is not going to work. There are too many Gruber-voters out there. We need our own competing version to cut the ground out from under the antis.

Most of us are familiar with that animated GIF that shows the spread of Shall Issue CCW states. If the pro-gun organizations don’t get off their duffs, we’ll see a similar one showing how quickly universal background checks spread. Start emailing/calling/badgering your politicians and gun organizations NOW.

On it, but like the pro-2nd state senator I heard from, if the petitions hold, there is really nothing the legislature can do other than NOT enact it forcing it on to the ‘16 ballot and the ignorant/uninformed/dgas voters who don’t have a dog in the fight. As you said, most of them don’t feel that it affects them so what do they care? As long as the “promise” of stopping crime and domestic violence is the cry they hear, they’ll buy it. If it is held until the actual (s)election cycle, does this just give nannie bloomers and his unpatriotic pals more time to spread more lies? I’m afraid that with all the repub senate seats up for grabs in the next general (s)elections, the pro 2nd groups will be spending money on candidates and not issues.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.