NV Dumps UT

[Steve Koski]

From a NRAILA email today:

Utah Concealed Weapons Permits No Longer Recognized in Nevada


Effective Wednesday, July 1, the State of Nevada will no longer recognize concealed weapon permits from Utah. Nevada, on the other hand, has added Ohio and West Virginia as recognized states.

Every year in May, the Nevada Department of Public Safety (NDPS) conducts an audit of all states and their current concealed weapon statutes for the purpose of determining which states' permits will be recognized in Nevada.

Subsequently, NDPS provides a recommendation to the Nevada Sheriffs and Police Chiefs Association (NSPCA) for final determination as provided in Nevada state law. According to Nevada law, any changes take effect on July 1.

The recognition of Utah permits is being dropped this year because Utah state law does not mandate live-fire range training as a part of its course requirement for the issuance of a Utah permit. Nevada law requires that, in order for other states' permits to be recognized in Nevada, those states' permit issuance standards must be "substantially similar" to Nevada's standards.

Since Nevada law specifically provides for a live-fire component as a part of the training requirement, NDPS and the NSPCA both agreed that the recognition of Utah permits should be rescinded. NRA staff met with representatives of both NDPS and NSPCA in recent weeks and was told by both entities that the initial approval for Utah permits to be recognized in Nevada was erroneous and based on the misinterpretation that Utah law required live-fire as a part of the training requirement.

The Nevada Department of Public Safety and the Nevada Sheriffs and Police Chiefs Association will be hosting their annual CCW forum in Carson City in late August. This event is open to the public and we encourage all members who have questions or concerns about the change to attend this informational meeting. Details will be forthcoming once the date and time is announced.

[jawjaboy]

That sucks.

[MakeMineaP99]

The whole reciprocity thing is stupid. If you're licensed by a state to carry, your licensed to carry, just like driving.

I was going to do UT so I could carry out west, however, I'm just going to send out for FL now.

[UtahIrishman]

I read, forget where, that the reason they dropped Utah is because Utah doesn't require live fire for your permit. Yet when I took it the instructor required it. The state may not but he did.


Nevada seems to come and go...they added Utah like four or five years ago at the most. I've traveled through Nevada more than once with a pistol in my truck. Not on me though. Got pulled over one time by a cop in Wendover, NV and he was really cool about it.

Your mileage may vary though, particularly in places like Vegas or Reno

[ede]

problem with UTAH permits is they only reconize a few instructors. not every NRA certified instructor can train you for a Utah permit.

[yammerschooner]

sorry to see my Utah permit not valid in a place that I would like to travel to.

[MullahElRon]

AZ has the "live range fire" component and Nevada has never recognized it for reciprocity.

[MONTEGOD7SS]

Utah was due to not having live fire, and WV was because they have 7yr permits instead of the required 5yr or less. It doesn't really affect me, but I do still plan on getting a UT as well because so many other places accept it. Cops here don't care anyways because they have nowhere near as much crap to deal with as North Las Vegas or Vegas Metro. This is Nevada, everybody has a gun on em anyways.

[creophus]

The whole reciprocity thing is stupid. If you're licensed by a state to carry, your licensed to carry, just like driving.

I was going to do UT so I could carry out west, however, I'm just going to send out for FL now.
They dropped the Florida permit too. The reason is the same as why they dropped WV...7 year permit instead of 5 years.

To me this is a stupid move. Seems like being close to Cali is affecting their decision making.

[Steve Koski]

UT used to have live fire requirements, at least when I got my permit back in 95. They were pretty much like this.

Are you alive?
Can you fire?


OK, I'm exagerating a little, but if you could hit a 8.5 x 11" piece of paper at about 5 feet you passed.

[MONTEGOD7SS]

They dropped the Florida permit too. The reason is the same as why they dropped WV...7 year permit instead of 5 years.

To me this is a stupid move. Seems like being close to Cali is affecting their decision making.

Nah, not really. Law was just passed a few months ago that a local government can't overrule the state. This means that counties and cities can't decide if they are shall issue or may issue, if you pass the requirements you get a permit. North Las Vegas and Metro had a habit of denying people, so that little problem is all taken care of now. Like I said, this is NV, everybody has a gun on em whether the hippies want to believe it or not.

[UtahIrishman]

UT used to have live fire requirements, at least when I got my permit back in 95. They were pretty much like this.

Are you alive?
Can you fire?


OK, I'm exagerating a little, but if you could hit a 8.5 x 11" piece of paper at about 5 feet you passed.

I can relate to that. When I took the course the instructor didn't make it a requirement but he 'highly suggested' doing the live fire exercise he had.

One braggard had a .357 Magnum Revolver that he said he was a dead shot with...he managed to fire it and drop it at the same time.

:42:

Instructor passed him anyways...he had to... since live fire wasn't a requirement to get a permit.

I have mixed feelings about that. On the one hand I think everyone should be able to carry a gun, but I think some training, while not required by the government, only makes sense...unless you're professional enough to carry a Glock foorty

[Steve Koski]

One braggard had a .357 Magnum Revolver that he said he was a dead shot with...he managed to fire it and drop it at the same time.

Good times brother, good times!

[MONTEGOD7SS]

I had to pass a driving test to get my drivers license and a car is no more or less deadly than a gun. For that reason I like the idea of requiring a live fire test, and don't feel bent at all that UT got dumped for CCW here. I dang sure don't want some ninja pulling a .38 out at Taco Bell and trying to stop somebody from robbing $50 from em and end up shooting somebody else.

[MakeMineaP99]

Carrying a firearm is a right, driving is not. I object to any REQUIRED classes or training. Here in IN we've been doing it without a class or training forever. Pay your fee, fill out the form, fingerprints and they mail you your LTC. I don't feel any less unsafe because we don't have training, as the "training" required in most states is hardly worth the time and damn sure doesn't make any one a good shot.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, in NV you can have your firearm in your vehicle without a license anyway, so what's the difference? You got someone with a license that had "live fire" and some without a license that didn't, both with a firearm in his vehicle? Makes a lot of sense.

[BigSlick]

We've all heard stories of the inexperienced or the ninja trying to impress others at a live fire qualification, but, it's still better than none.

The instructors in Tejas are pretty lenient, as long as you are safe and meet the course requirements to pass. If you fail, most instructors offer some one on one training to help get an applicant up to speed.

In my mind, if ya can't shoot, you have no business taking the course yet, but, some people don't see it that way.

In my last class, there were only two people, me an one other guy. I shot reloads, picked up the brass from both of us and passed. The instructor was a little annoyed that I was shooting reloads, but the course guidelines didn't say anything about new or reloaded ammo, so he let it go. He bowed up a little when I was pickin up the brass, but, I wasn't leaving my brass there for damn sure.

I don't think there oughta be a regulation per se, because the last thing this country needs is more regulation, but I don't want to be anywhere near some Grandma when she's learning to shoot it a live SD situation

[MONTEGOD7SS]

Yes, you can have a loaded weapon in the car here without a license, but that ain't quite the same as having some numbnut carrying at Chuck E. Cheese. Mine is on me everywhere I go 'cept for work, whether the place is posted or not. I feel there should be some form of live fire, and whether it's a right to carry a gun unregulated or not doesn't matter to me in that aspect. Let granny touch off a .357 snubbie that gramps left her when the died and God knows what's gonna happen.

[Steve Koski]

Carrying a firearm is a right, driving is not. I object to any REQUIRED classes or training. Here in IN we've been doing it without a class or training forever. Pay your fee, fill out the form, fingerprints and they mail you your LTC. I don't feel any less unsafe because we don't have training, as the "training" required in most states is hardly worth the time and damn sure doesn't make any one a good shot.


Why don't you vociferously object to paying a fee, filling out a form, getting fingerprints, carrying a LTC? A live fire requirement is in principal no different from these other hoops.

[creophus]

We have the live fire requirement here in Florida. Before getting the class certificate, each applicant must safely discharge a firearm in the instructors presence. You don't have to hit the target, just handle the gun safely. You don't do that and you don't pass. Whatever logic was used to drop UT doesn't apply to us.

Ok, you MIGHT be able to argue that the live fire requirement makes the world a safer place, but what difference does the length the license is valid make?

After the 5th year are applicants prone to become criminals? I think not. I like what FL did by offering us a 7 year license. We get more for our money.

The whole idea of having to get the stupid license is an infringement on the 2A. Look at this slippery slope. First we accept that we need a license. Then we agree to a background check and finger prints. Next thing we have to have a class and then live fire training....etc etc. Where's it going to stop???

Less hoops is better IMO.

[MakeMineaP99]

Why don't you vociferously object to paying a fee, filling out a form, getting fingerprints, carrying a LTC? A live fire requirement is in principal no different from these other hoops.

I object to all of the above, however, we're talking about specifically mandatory training vs. not here.

[yammerschooner]

The whole idea of having to get the stupid license is an infringement on the 2A.


Exactly.

[MullahElRon]

I had to pass a driving test to get my drivers license and a car is no more or less deadly than a gun. For that reason I like the idea of requiring a live fire test, and don't feel bent at all that UT got dumped for CCW here. I dang sure don't want some ninja pulling a .38 out at Taco Bell and trying to stop somebody from robbing $50 from em and end up shooting somebody else.
That driving test is really workin' out well.



http://geoff82.files.wordpress.com/2006/12/traffic-fatalities.gif

[Steve Koski]

Mullah,

Have practical driving tests ever not been required? It would be interesting to see some adjusted data that could tease out the impacts of pracitcal tests.

Koski

[jawjaboy]

In GA you jes pay ya forty some odd dollars and get printed.

[Pitmaster]

I have mixed feelings about that. On the one hand I think everyone should be able to carry a gun, but I think some training, while not required by the government, only makes sense...unless you're professional enough to carry a Glock foorty

Training should happen before one turns 18. Learning to shoot as a kid should be as available as learning the ABC's.

Frankly the only requirement I think there should be regarding firearms is that you must be 18 to buy without parent permission. Bring guns back to hardware stores where they belong.

[MullahElRon]

Mullah,

Have practical driving tests ever not been required? It would be interesting to see some adjusted data that could tease out the impacts of pracitcal tests.

KoskiI'd be happy if they'd measure the distance between the applicants' eyes.

[AlPackin]

I'd be happy if they'd measure the distance between the applicants' eyes.
:animlol:

[fredj338]

From a NRAILA email today:

Utah Concealed Weapons Permits No Longer Recognized in Nevada


Effective Wednesday, July 1, the State of Nevada will no longer recognize concealed weapon permits from Utah. Nevada, on the other hand, has added Ohio and West Virginia as recognized states.

Every year in May, the Nevada Department of Public Safety (NDPS) conducts an audit of all states and their current concealed weapon statutes for the purpose of determining which states' permits will be recognized in Nevada.

Subsequently, NDPS provides a recommendation to the Nevada Sheriffs and Police Chiefs Association (NSPCA) for final determination as provided in Nevada state law. According to Nevada law, any changes take effect on July 1.

The recognition of Utah permits is being dropped this year because Utah state law does not mandate live-fire range training as a part of its course requirement for the issuance of a Utah permit. Nevada law requires that, in order for other states' permits to be recognized in Nevada, those states' permit issuance standards must be "substantially similar" to Nevada's standards.

Since Nevada law specifically provides for a live-fire component as a part of the training requirement, NDPS and the NSPCA both agreed that the recognition of Utah permits should be rescinded. NRA staff met with representatives of both NDPS and NSPCA in recent weeks and was told by both entities that the initial approval for Utah permits to be recognized in Nevada was erroneous and based on the misinterpretation that Utah law required live-fire as a part of the training requirement.

The Nevada Department of Public Safety and the Nevada Sheriffs and Police Chiefs Association will be hosting their annual CCW forum in Carson City in late August. This event is open to the public and we encourage all members who have questions or concerns about the change to attend this informational meeting. Details will be forthcoming once the date and time is announced.
My Utah class required 70rds for permit. SO if that were the determining factor, I'm not sure that is why.

[robotek]

My Utah class required 70rds for permit. SO if that were the determining factor, I'm not sure that is why.

Your instructor may have required it but the state does not. I just sat in a CC class and the students never even touched a real firearm.

[fredj338]

Your instructor may have required it but the state does not. I just sat in a CC class and the students never even touched a real firearm.
Well Calif requires "qualification", but the stds are so low, I really don't see that as the issue. More like one state said no so the other state said no. I have the Utah permit & about the only place I would carry outrside Calif would be Nevada.:banghead: