77th (2013) Session
Opinions
View all submitted comments for each bill by the most recent, by votes for, or by votes against.
| AB70 | ||
| - | ||
| Against | Apr-25-2013 | |
| For | Apr-17-2013 | |
| For | Apr-07-2013 | |
| For | Anyone having the nerve to use force against someone in an automobile is committing such an outragious crime with high risk to the victim for injury, that defending one self & one's vehicle with deadly force is most appropriate | Apr-07-2013 |
| For | Apr-07-2013 | |
| For | Apr-07-2013 | |
| For | Again a common sense bill. Why should a criminal be rewarded for an illegal act. And why should a citizen be turned in a criminal for protect himself or others? | Apr-05-2013 |
| For | Apr-04-2013 | |
| For | Apr-03-2013 | |
| For | Apr-01-2013 | |
| For | Mar-31-2013 | |
| For | Would this bill also extend to HOA'S? Would the provisions of this bill protect those who use whatever force they deem necessary to protect their property (close). | Mar-30-2013 |
| For | Mar-25-2013 | |
| For | Mar-23-2013 | |
| For | A person should not have to retreat out of fear for one's life. In any location | Mar-23-2013 |
| For | Mar-23-2013 | |
| For | Mar-22-2013 | |
| For | Surprised I had to search NELIS to learn of this. Appears to be a sensible expansion and clarification of our right to self defense. Only sad that such has to be spelled out at all. | Mar-22-2013 |
| For | Appears to properly protect citizens who are forced to use deadly force to defend and protect themselves and their property. VOTE FOR! | Mar-22-2013 |
| For | Mar-21-2013 | |
| For | Provides much needed protections for law-abiding citizens. Why is not this getting a hearing in the Judiciary committee? | Mar-21-2013 |
| For | Mar-21-2013 | |
| For | Mar-21-2013 | |
| For | Mar-21-2013 | |
| For | Mar-21-2013 | |
| For | Mar-21-2013 | |
| For | Do this NOW! | Mar-20-2013 |
| For | I support this common sense approach to self defense. | Mar-20-2013 |
| For | provides clarification and much needed proctection against civil action | Mar-20-2013 |
| For | Mar-19-2013 | |
| For | Mar-19-2013 | |
| For | Mar-19-2013 | |
| For | Thank you, this makes perfect sense! | Mar-19-2013 |
| For | Law-abiding citizens should be allowed to defend themselves wherever they are. | Mar-19-2013 |
| For | I strongly support | Mar-19-2013 |
| For | Sounds good. | Mar-19-2013 |
| For | Mar-18-2013 | |
| For | A pearson should ba able to protect themself not matter where they are, including public buildings. | Mar-17-2013 |
| For | Mar-15-2013 | |
| For | Mar-15-2013 | |
| For | Mar-14-2013 | |
| For | We need this bill for the extended protection from criminals, so many times in the media i have heard stories of car jackings where the owner or operator of a motor vehicle have been killed, raped and or kidnapped. I believe this bill will benefit the average citizen. Ask yourself if in such a situation would you prefer to have the law back your actions of protecting your own life from one who may kill, rape, or kidnap you? | Mar-13-2013 |
| For | Victims who defend themselves deserve some protections too. | Mar-12-2013 |
| For | Mar-12-2013 | |
| For | It is about time we got some protections allowed by law against thieves! | Mar-12-2013 |
| For | Mar-12-2013 | |
| For | This is a much needed clarification of the law especially with the increased number of carjacking cases which are in fact an act of robbery by force or violence. This bill further shifts the burden of proof to the prosecuting agency’s which have historically yielded to public pressure when determining whether or not to prosecute a case rather than making the determination based upon the facts of the case. | Mar-05-2013 |
| For | Mar-04-2013 | |
| For | Mar-01-2013 | |
| For | Private property rights are at the core of any free society. To be able to protect one's property and life without fear of reprisal in reasonable ways is always a good idea. | Feb-28-2013 |
| For | Feb-28-2013 | |
| For | Feb-28-2013 | |
| For | Feb-26-2013 | |
| For | I support this bill, which strengthens the protection of law abiding citizens who act in self defense. I agree with the comment that states "... suggest that Section 2b be removed or reworded. This section, which defines the presumptions describing one acting with the required level of fear, requires that an ordinary citizen know the definition of a felony. Section 2a already describes acts which constitute grounds to use deadly force. Section 2b unnecessarily complicates the bill, and conceivably undermines its intent." | Feb-24-2013 |
| For | Feb-22-2013 | |
| For | It is time we start protecting the victoms of crimes! | Feb-22-2013 |
| For | Feb-21-2013 | |
| For | Feb-21-2013 | |
| For | Feb-20-2013 | |
| For | This bill would strengthen the right to self-defense. | Feb-19-2013 |
| For | Feb-19-2013 | |
| For | Why should a person who is defending themselves, home and property be the subject of a civil lawsuit when the perpetrator was committing a crime of violence against them. They should not. | Feb-19-2013 |
| For | Thank you, this makes perfect sense! | Feb-19-2013 |
| For | Please enact this bill ASAP | Feb-19-2013 |
| For | Feb-19-2013 | |
| For | This type of protection is a must. If you injure or kill someone breaking into your house, the perpetrator or there family can sue you. So you have defended your family, but now you are broke from fighting the civil case. Its time to protect self-defense from criminal or civil prosecution. | Feb-18-2013 |
| For | Feb-17-2013 | |
| For | This bill provides additional definition of the circumstances under which a citizen may exercise deadly force in self-defense. It is a necessary and prudent expansion of that doctrine. I urge approval of this AB70. | Feb-16-2013 |
| For | Long overdue for the citizen of Nevada. | Feb-15-2013 |
| For | Feb-15-2013 | |
| For | This is a bill that makes sense | Feb-14-2013 |
| Against | This Law is past due. Great law for homeowners. | Feb-14-2013 |
| For | I completely support the intent of this bill, but suggest that Section 2b be removed or reworded. This section, which defines the presumptions describing one acting with the required level of fear, requires that an ordinary citizen know the definition of a felony. Section 2a already describes acts which constitute grounds to use deadly force. Section 2b unnecessarily complicates the bill, and conceivably undermines its intent. | Feb-13-2013 |
| For | Feb-13-2013 | |
| For | Feb-13-2013 | |
| For | Enact this bill. | Feb-12-2013 |
| For | We must be protected from all liability, criminal or civil, when found to have used justifiable force to defend ourselves. | Feb-12-2013 |
| For | Feb-12-2013 | |
| For | Feb-12-2013 | |
| For | Feb-12-2013 | |
| For | Necessary clarification. | Feb-11-2013 |
| For | Feb-11-2013 | |
| For | Thank you for continuing to clarify our right to defense! | Feb-11-2013 |
| For | Victims of crimes who rightly use justifiable homicide should be legally protected. | Feb-09-2013 |
| For | It is time to completely protect the victims. Criminals, and their families, should not be allowed to chase victims for money because the criminal was killed while in the commission of a crime. | Feb-09-2013 |
| For | This must pass. This is common sense. Every session this is the most commented bill on the site and it never gets to a vote. Please do your jobs and allow this bill to go to the floor this time. The chair of a committee should not go against the will of the people.we get enough of that from Washington. | Feb-08-2013 |
| For | Feb-08-2013 | |
| For | I am completely for any legislation that grants homeowners or drivers the right, which should have never been in question in the first place, to defend themselves against burglary, robbery, or assault. A CRIMINAL or the CRIMINAL's family should NOT EVER have the right to sue individuals using deadly force to protect themselves, their family, or their property against the perpetrator of a CRIME. Maybe instead of looking at the CRIMINAL and seeing a "poor, misunderstood victim" (an absurd number of these cases have been allowed and WON, which is utterly mind-boggling)legislation such as this will place the "victim" in the correct light as a lawbreaker deserving JAIL not remuneration! Law enforcement officers do their best to protect and serve, but cannot get to me fast enough if someone means me harm...just a fact...so I should be able to, without fear of retaliation, defend myself and my family. | Feb-06-2013 |
| For | Regardless if this passes or not, I believe it to be lawful to defend oneself and others from imminent harm through the use of force as described here. Either the legislature can attempt to clarify and fix the previous wording or they can possibly put a good man in jail on linguistic technicalities. The only hope in such a hypothetical situation would be jury nullification. | Feb-05-2013 |
| For | Feb-05-2013 | |
| For | This bill will strengthen the ability of Nevadans to empower and defend themselves from violent criminals. Pass this bill as written. | Feb-04-2013 |
| For | It simplifies and clearifies the rights of the law abiding citizens to protect hems elves and their families and neighbors. | Feb-04-2013 |
| For | Feb-03-2013 | |
| For | The text of the bill contains no reference to NRS or other places where key terms are defined, such as manifest intention in section 1, reasonable fear in section 2, reason to believe in section 3. I can't imagine a person defending self or home would open a book on case law before taking action (just kidding). | Feb-03-2013 |
| For | Feb-03-2013 | |
| For | I hope that the good people of our state government pass this bill. Why are criminals able to sue law abiding citizens for protecting themselves? | Feb-03-2013 |
| For | Feb-02-2013 | |
| For | Must pass. Vote YES. Law-abiding citizens NEED this law. | Feb-02-2013 |
| For | Feb-01-2013 | |
| For | Jan-30-2013 | |
| For | Please enact this!! A person who acts in defence of self or others in full legal authority should not have to fear civil action being taken against them by an invaders family. Nevadans have proven time and time again that we know that we dont live in the wild west, there will NOT be a rash of shootings due to this bill passing through this legislative session. | Jan-30-2013 |
| Against | I don't think the provisions relating to self defense should be revised at this time because it could end up causing difficulties for some who end up defending themselves. | Jan-22-2013 |
| For | Jan-22-2013 | |
| For | Jan-22-2013 | |
| For | Jan-22-2013 | |
| For | Jan-22-2013 | |
| For | Jan-22-2013 | |
| For | Jan-22-2013 | |
| For | Jan-22-2013 | |
| For | Jan-22-2013 | |
| For | Users of justifiable deadly force in defense of persons and property should be protected from civil action. Surviving a harrowing encounter instigated by others should not lead to being subject to the avarice of parties seeking to gain financial reward from their own illegal acts (or those committed by family members). | Jan-22-2013 |
| For | Those who are acting outside the law, intruding upon someone's home or vehicle, threatening the health and life of said property's residents should not receive any compensation for breaking the law and being injured. | Jan-22-2013 |
| For | Jan-22-2013 | |
| For | Jan-22-2013 | |
 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 |
|