76th (2011) Session
Opinions
View all submitted comments for each bill by the most recent, by votes for, or by votes against.
| SB126 | ||
| - | ||
| For | Jun-01-2011 | |
| For | May-28-2011 | |
| For | May-28-2011 | |
| For | May-26-2011 | |
| For | May-25-2011 | |
| For | this is a common sense bill that saves the permit holder money. | May-19-2011 |
| For | Ron Paul 2012 | May-19-2011 |
| For | In todays dangerous society and especially with a geat economic down fall, I would feel safer if I could protect myself. Taking this right away from good citizens would only leave us handicaped and pray to the criminals that carry no matter what. Please consider SB126 carefully. | May-19-2011 |
| For | May-16-2011 | |
| For | May-10-2011 | |
| For | May-05-2011 | |
| For | Requiring qualification with all semi-autos on the permit is costly and an unnecessary waste of citizens and officials time and money. Pass this bill | Apr-30-2011 |
| For | Apr-29-2011 | |
| For | We need this. | Apr-29-2011 |
| For | Apr-24-2011 | |
| For | Apr-19-2011 | |
| For | Apr-19-2011 | |
| For | Apr-18-2011 | |
| For | Apr-17-2011 | |
| For | Apr-17-2011 | |
| For | This bill allows qualification with one semi automatic handgun to enable carrying other semi-autos without individual qualification. I support it strongly, and encourage all voting to pass the legislation. | Apr-17-2011 |
| For | Apr-15-2011 | |
| For | Apr-14-2011 | |
| For | Apr-13-2011 | |
| For | Apr-12-2011 | |
| For | Apr-12-2011 | |
| For | Apr-11-2011 | |
| For | Stoongly favor, should add all matters relating to CCW are confidential except for law enforcement. | Apr-11-2011 |
| For | Apr-10-2011 | |
| For | Criminals already carry concealed weapons, and it’s the innocent people that become victims of these thugs because they can't. Allowing citizens To carry CCW who have gone through the proper background checks only makes sense and will make the criminal think twice before trying to attack any innocent victim. This change is long overdue. | Apr-10-2011 |
| For | Apr-09-2011 | |
| For | Apr-08-2011 | |
| For | This is a necessary adjustment to Nevada's concealed carry law. | Apr-08-2011 |
| For | Apr-08-2011 | |
| For | I think the experience of the young lady that was raped says it all. That could have been prevented if she had been allowed to defend herself. | Apr-07-2011 |
| For | Apr-07-2011 | |
| For | Apr-07-2011 | |
| For | Apr-07-2011 | |
| For | Apr-06-2011 | |
| For | No Comment | Apr-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Apr-04-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Apr-04-2011 |
| Against | semi-automatic weapons should be registered and persons with registration should be trained and that should be public information. It is a sahme to waste time on changing a law to benefit those who want to skirt the training requirement (i..e. Jim Gibbons and the like). We have more important issues in Nevada for our legislators to consider. CUrrent law is appropriate | Apr-03-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Apr-02-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Apr-02-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-31-2011 |
| For | The NV Libertarian Party supports this bill. Thomas Cornell, Registered Lobbyist, http://www.nvclp.org | Mar-30-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-30-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-30-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-30-2011 |
| For | Thank you, I am a gun owner and a CCW holder.I support this bill because.1) It will save county shareffs money on paper and work keeping track of the make,model and type of guns already on CCW"s.3)Increase the sales of firearms which is increase in sales taxes,because the CCW holder will not have to meet the restrictions already in place in the current CCW law. | Mar-30-2011 |
| For | This should be passed. One semi-automatic is pretty much like any other, they all work the same way. A permit holder should not have to qualify with more than one in order to be able to carry different ones. | Mar-30-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-29-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-28-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-28-2011 |
| For | Long past due to pass legislation like this. Thank you to every elected representative for helping it getting passed. Your names will not be forgotten next election. | Mar-27-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-27-2011 |
| For | The criminals already carry concealed and it’s the innocent people that become victims of these thugs… Allowing citizens To carry CCW who have gone through the proper background checks only makes sense and will make the criminal think twice before trying to attack any innocent victim… This change is long overdue… | Mar-26-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-25-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-24-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-24-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-24-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-24-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-24-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-23-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-23-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-23-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-23-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-23-2011 |
| For | To make it difficult for a person to carry the the semi-auto gun they feel most comfortable with is not a good idea. As new semi autos come out, people feel more comfortable with them but do not want to spend the time and money to get it added to their permit. Please make this law so that all semis are covered under one category | Mar-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-21-2011 |
| For | Why should Clark be the only county in the state that has specfic laws about handguns? | Mar-19-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-18-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-17-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-17-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-17-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-17-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-17-2011 |
| For | I ask for your support of SB126. My 20 years of Honorable Naval service leads me to believe this is common sense legislation. I thank you in advance for your support. | Mar-17-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-15-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-15-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-14-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-14-2011 |
| For | This bill has been a long time coming. Please support it and pass it. | Mar-13-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-13-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-12-2011 |
| For | We must give our citizens as much consideration as we do our criminals. | Mar-12-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-12-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-12-2011 |
| For | This is an important adjustment to the permit process. The requirement to qualify with every firearm is burdensome and unnecessary. For example, the manual of arms for Glock semi-autos is the same, yet the law requires qualification with each model and caliber. | Mar-12-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-11-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-11-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-11-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-11-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-11-2011 |
| For | I work in a hardware store that also sells guns. I see no problem with customers handling various caliber or manufacturer guns. Makes sense to recognize that those who take the initiative to obtain a ccw to recognize that they are going to be completely familiar with the weapon(s) they carry. It's called self preservation. | Mar-10-2011 |
| For | Having multiple permit cards is silly. Pass this bill, please. | Mar-10-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-10-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-10-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-09-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-09-2011 |
| For | This bill should be passed without delay. I will be watching who supports it as firearms measures largely determine for whom I vote. | Mar-09-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-09-2011 |
| For | This bill actually makes sense. It will improve the efficiency of the CCW permit process. It will also protect crime victims from further, undue, burden. Please pass this bill and make it law. | Mar-09-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-09-2011 |
| For | I am in Total Support of this Bill. | Mar-09-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-09-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | One is like the other and it is a waste of time and resources. | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | This improvement is long overdue. | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | 50-year Nevadan who strongly agrees with this SB126 and urge it's passage. | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | It makes sense that if you qualify one, to qualify all. | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-05-2011 |
| For | I want the reconciliation to bill to use S.B. 126 language with the privacy provision added or retained from A.B. 143. | Mar-05-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-05-2011 |
| For | please pass this, it's an undue burden in time and money to have to certify on each and every caliber and model of semiauto firearm I own and carry. semis are as common to each other as revolvers, 1 semi should allow all semi auto pistols. | Mar-05-2011 |
| For | This ends the practice of the permit becoming a means of semi-automatic firearm registration. Please VOTE YES and make all firearms equal. | Mar-05-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-05-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-05-2011 |
| For | It is common sense that when we qualify for a revolver or a semi-auto gun that we qualify for any of those. | Mar-05-2011 |
| For | Support | Mar-05-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-03-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-03-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-03-2011 |
| For | A definite common sense type of bill. | Mar-03-2011 |
| For | This bill needs to be amended to include the privacy protections included in AB143 see Section 3 lines 39 thru 45 | Mar-03-2011 |
| For | This bill removes the requirement that CCW holders qualify for their permit with each and every individual semi-automatic firearm that they own, but rather will allow a CCW holder to obtain a permit to carry any semi-automatic firearm, just as they can apply to carry any revolver under the current law. The bill also seeks to protect the privacy of CCW holder’s identity in response to an unfavorable Nevada Supreme Court decision. | Mar-03-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-03-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-03-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-03-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-02-2011 |
| For | I am writing in strong support f SB 126, a bill that will protect the confidentiality of CCW permit holders. I believe it is in the interest of the public safety not to disclose the location of fire arms that might be subject to theft , if disclosed, and might endanger both owner and potential criminals looking for weapons. Other provisions in the law make the process simpler for both government and citizenry. | Mar-02-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-02-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-02-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-02-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-02-2011 |
| For | I fully support the revisions contain in this bill toward our CCW permit process. | Mar-02-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-02-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-02-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-02-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | The citizens of Nevada deserve the right to protect theirselves with out excessive government oversight. | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | In Favor of Common Sense SB126 PASSAGE! | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | This should be passed unanimously. RESTORE ALL SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS! | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | Please support this bill to simplify the CCW process. | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Mar-01-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-28-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-28-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-28-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-28-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-27-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-27-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-27-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-27-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-25-2011 |
| For | A very practical proposal that benefits many gun owners and has no negative consequences to any certain people or demographic. Vote IN FAVOR to amend. | Feb-24-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-24-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-24-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-24-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-23-2011 |
| For | Guess when and if you need help and are afraid to defend yourself....call a cop! | Feb-23-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-23-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-23-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | This is long overdue! | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | Current law is unfair to those with multiple handguns, qualify with one is sufficient, why should we pay to qualify, pay to add, Nevada needs to get on board with the rest of the states! | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-22-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | To the person who commented "against"this bill, saying that "too many neighbors are afraid of gun-owners" ... I have not observed this attitude in my community. We live in NV, not California. Me thinks this person is projecting his/her own fears when those fears should have been checked at the NV border. Please don't try to turn us into "CA lite." | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | Please make this bill state law!!! | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | I am voting FOR this legislation because the current law makes NO sense. Having to qualify for each gun creates unnecessary record keeping and does nothing to increase public safety. | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | We should not have to qualify with every semi-auto. | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | As former Police Officer, Child Abuse Investigator and NRA Certified Firearms Instructor who recently moved to Nevada from NYC, I really support this CCW amendment. | Feb-21-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-20-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-20-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-20-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-20-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-20-2011 |
| For | Please pass, and amend the "ownership" part Thank you. | Feb-20-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-20-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-20-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-20-2011 |
| For | Refer to 2nd amendment rights. CCCW laws now are a form of gun registration | Feb-20-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-19-2011 |
| For | Keep it simple and aim for commonality with other states. Do not pass restrictions. One liscense should be good in all 50 states. Current laws are confusing and frustrate 2nd ammendment rights. KISS (Keep It Simple Sir) | Feb-18-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-18-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-18-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-18-2011 |
| For | Let's have Nevada echo the rest of the country with regard to how we manage our CCW permits | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | I completely agree with the provisions of this bill. It will save time and money for each CCW holder and it makes sense. | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | Vote YES on SB126 which improves the CCW law. Support the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | This simplification of the CCW law makes perfect sense. This is definitely a step in the right both in detail and in general. | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | As a retired law enforcement officer and law enforcement and military small arms marksmanship instructor I believe this to be a good bill to clean up the poorly thought out and poorly written language used when the original act was passed. I would also eliminate the wording of ownership. What difference does it make if the weapon is owned by me, my wife or another as long as that person is allowing me to use it? | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | I think this is a great idea. The old way had nothing to do with public saftey. | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | As a pistol instructor, Master class competitor,and president of Carson City Shooters assoc Inc, and a CCW holder qualified with 11 weapons, I admire the logic of SB126 and the pragmatism of it's creator and supporters. | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-17-2011 |
| For | This makes a lot of sense to me. . .kind of like driving any car with a Class C drivers license-low tech or high tech cars-once you qualify you can drive any kind of similar class CAR. | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | Yes on all comments. Take out the ownership clause. | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | This is a good first step. Please pass this | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | 66 years old and I bought my first weapon - to affirm my Constitutional rights. CCW is next whatever the cost or effort. | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-16-2011 |
| Against | No Comment | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | This bill makes the law uniform for revolvers and semi auto pistols. | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | logical | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | In my opinion, one that i am sure many others share, there should be no reason to not allow us to qualify with one semi automatic weapon and carry any. It is already being done with revolvers, and revolvers can differ in size, style, action, and operation just as much as a semi automatic. There are still key elements that almost every semi automatic pistol has, and they are generally in the same location or very close to it on all semi auto weapons. This includes the safety, magazine release, and the slid | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-16-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | Continuing to list each semi-auto on a CCW is a waste of effort on behalf of the citizen having to qualify and on sheriff's staff for constantly making changes and additions. | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | This bill makes perfect sense | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | language needs to be changed to take out the phrase "....firearms you own". | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | This is simple common sense. | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | There is no real reason to make a person qualify with each individual semi-auto handgun but to raise money from the taxpayer. Shooting a Colt 1911 semi is the same as shooting a Kimber 1911, they are identical semi-autos except for the name. I am retired military and still serve in Iraq and Afghanistan working for the Federal Government, I have trained with several different types of Semi-auto handguns and the basic shooting principal is the same. This needs to be changed ASAP and will reduce backlog with | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | The CCW law will be improved with the passage of this bill | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-15-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-14-2011 |
| Against | No Comment | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | This is a very reasonable step in the right direction. | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | Strengthens citizens 2nd amend. rights. We need to pass this. | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | Just like many other states in the U.S., we need to streamline our process of CCW licensing. CCW holders already have to sit in training and prove competency at the range. | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | This is a very reasonable improvement in the law and ends the practice of the permit essentially becoming a means of semi-automatic firearm registration. Last session this same change was made for revolvers. | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | It's ludicrous that law abiding citizens must show competency on every handgun in order to obtain a CCW permit. Anyone can carry openly without any training, but those who want to carry concealed can't. The only requirement should be whether they know the laws. | Feb-14-2011 |
| For | common sense approach...please pass. | Feb-13-2011 |
| For | REMOVE the word 'OWNED'. Current statutes do not require one can ONLY carry a gun owned by them! | Feb-13-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-12-2011 |
| For | The passage of this law is just common sense. lThis would bring NV into line with most other states law. I strongly support passage. | Feb-12-2011 |
| For | This bill makes sense. It has my full support. | Feb-11-2011 |
| For | I find it somewhat redundant to put the same type of semi-auto on a ccw permit several times because the caliber changes. If it's a Glock, it'a a Glock. If it's a 1911 style, it doesn't matter who the maker is; they're all the same. If nothing else, at least limit it to types of auto's. Glock, Springfield XD or XDM, 1911 style, FNH, Smith & Wesson M&P. It would sure be a lot simpler. | Feb-11-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-11-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-11-2011 |
| Against | No Comment | Feb-11-2011 |
| For | This makes sense. | Feb-11-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-11-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-11-2011 |
| For | I am for this bill as it makes perfect sense to me. Qualifying for any revolver, and any semi-auto would help to simplify the system greatly. There is not that much difference from one semi auto to the other. | Feb-10-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-10-2011 |
| For | As a lifelong Nevadan, I think a return to responsible gun ownership would be helped along by bills like this. Keep moving back toward the Second Amendment--when no one had to register their lawfully-owned guns and every young person knew how to shoot for food and protection. People took their gun rights and responsibilities seriously. Let's get back to personal accountability with less government control. | Feb-10-2011 |
| For | I am advocating for passage od SB 126. It seems ridiculous that a ccw permit allows any revolver if you qualify, but you must qualify oneach semi-automatic firearm. | Feb-10-2011 |
| For | Common sense, we already do it for revolvers. Cuts down the time and expense to process each weapon for both permitee and permit grantor. Member of the Stillwater Firearms Assn. I will attend hearings on this bill | Feb-10-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-10-2011 |
| For | I am a member of the Stillwater Firearms Association and would like to express that I am in strong support of SB126. | Feb-10-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-09-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-09-2011 |
| For | This will go a long way to reducing idiotic paperwork. Most Semi-Autos of a particular make usually work the same way, but under current law, they must be listed separately. | Feb-09-2011 |
| Against | This revision is a change for the worse. I live in an area where residents are already intimidated by gun carrying neighbors. Public safety needs to be a consideration. This bill does nothing to serve public welfare and safety. | Feb-09-2011 |
| For | Please pass this bill, everytime I buy a new firearm I have to go down and take a test with it. This is a real pain and ends up costing money where you take the test and then for it to be added to your'e ccw. This should not cost all this extra money. We have already qualified and passed why the extra costs??? Criminals just stick it in thier pocket. We are law abiding citizens. Please do what is right and pass this bill!!! I don't appreciate putting my name and address on here. This is almost lik | Feb-09-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-09-2011 |
| For | It is burdensome to be required to show competence with each semiautomatic. | Feb-09-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-09-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-09-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-09-2011 |
| For | This Bill would be of great help to those of us who use semi-auto handguns by saving us time and money. I have a number of Glocks in different calibers and they all function the same but I am required to qualify with each one. I don't feel this is fair or just. | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | This should be passed, as it will save time and money for the tax payer and police dept. | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | There is no practical reason to require each semi-automatic weapon to be listed. Definitely support this bill. | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | See a trend here? 100% for this bill. "Owned" should be changed | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | Please remove this unneccesary burden placed on law abiding citizens intending to protect their families. These fees add up quickly. We all know that criminals will not be affected by such a change in the verbiage; your constituents will. | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | This is a step in the right direction. | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | Repeal requirement for a permit & fee. | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-08-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | This is much needed. I am new to Nevada, and I voted in the last election, and I will not hesitate to vote you out. Were are all watching you! | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | Please remove the ownership requirement. Then PASS IT! Even better would to remove the requirement for a permit in the first place. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | I support SB126 | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | Nice step in the right direction. Very few states even require a permitee to qualify with a revolver or semiauto to carry one, much less NV's system of qualifying with each gun. This is a good idea and stop the added expense to having to pay $25 each time a person has to amend their permit because they bought a new gun that they wish to carry concealed. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | This bill is a good start. I support constitutional carry without government regulations on when or where I can protect myself. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | Common sense | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | I support this BILL! | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | Other states (Oregon for example) utilize the same provisions as proposed by this change to the bill and show no greater crime because of the provision. This removes overhead paperwork from our overburdened sherrif's offices, and benifits the rights of the people. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | I support this bill where it indicates you do not need to qualify with EACH individual Semi Auto weapon. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | About time. However, the "ownership clause" must be modified. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | Great Bill. PLEASE REMOVE the ownership part. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | I would thank the legislature to recognize that a semi auto firearm should be subject to the same restrictions as a revolver on a person's CCW card. Thank you. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | It certainly makes sense. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | Currently, the requirement to qualify with each individual semi-auto weapon is an unnecessary burden placed on the permit holder. Once someone is familiar with the operation of one, they are likely able to perform to the same standard with any other. Please consider amending this bill to address how it will affect current permit holders. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | I follow how our elected officials vote. AND I VOTE IN GENERAL ELECTIONS! | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | I support the bill however request removal of ownership requirement. My wife has a CCW but all of our handguns are in my name, which would make it illegal for her to carry it. Please revise that wording. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | I urge everyone to strongly support this bill. Although, I would like to see changes made to the wording that requires you to own the gun that you are carrying. It would not be uncommon for a family member of mine to carry one of my handguns with their CCW, such as my wife or father, and this wording would that that illegal. | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-07-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | drop the part about needing to "own" the weapon. | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | I urge the Legislature to pass this. The only thing I would like to see is the removal of the ownership language. It opens too much latitude for unnecessary regulation based on ownership. Otherwise, this revision is long overdue. | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | I support this bill, and urge its passing, but I would like to see the term "owned" removed from its language. | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | This would simplify the permit process and make things much easier for the sheriffs office. The present law is confusing and causes problems for honest gun owners. Please pass this post haste! | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | The extra work involved to get different types of autos approved on the same CCW is stupid. We need this passed. Please remove any requirement of ownership. This was never required before and is a step backwards. | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | revise so that firearms do not have to be owned to carry concealed. | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | Everything looks good with the exception of the added 'can carry firearmes owned'...should be able to carry any firearm/weapon even we do not own it. | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | Yea on all points. | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | I agree with this 100%, we already do the same for revolvers so it should be the same for semi auto pistols as well. | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | I would be very happy to see this bill passed. Current requirements are time consuming and unnecessary. Thank you for considering my opinion. | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | Excellent, but please amend language to permit a person to carry a firearm other than one they own. This would allow a husband, wife etc to carry each others pistols. This is allowed in current CCW language. | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | This is a MUST PASS bill! Many thanks to Senator Settelmeyer. It does, however, need an amendment to remove the requirement to actually OWN the firearm(s) one will carry. Currrent law does not require you to actually OWN firearms - and this bill should not either! Amend and DO PASS! | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | This is a common sense bill that would remove a large paperwork burden for local police agencies. Get real people, this is Nevada, not California | Feb-06-2011 |
| For | No Comment | Feb-05-2011 |
 Session Info | NELIS | Interim Info | Law Library | General Info | Counsel Bureau | Research Library | Assembly | Senate | FAQs View Scheduled Meetings | Publications | Proposals | Career Opportunities | Gift Shop | Site Map | Contact Us © 2013 Nevada Legislative Counsel Bureau |
|