by peter5427

Even with the second reprint (amended) version of this bill, it is still and exercise in absurdity and still a barely veiled, no, a blatant attack on the Second Amendment. They are chiseling away at the edges with “reasonable” sounding excuses to deprive a person from his fundamental God-given right of self-defense. If a person is convicted of domestic violence, there is no question he should be in custody.  If the person accused of domestic violence is  claimed to be so dangerous that he should be disarmed, then he should also be kept in custody, not just disarmed. Again, that is for a court to decide. The real intent of this bill is evident from its singling out firearms, but not mentioning the endless list of other common objects that can and have been used as deadly weapons. In an emotion laden case such as domestic violence, the potential victim will never feel safe. Is THAT sufficient reason to abolish the Second Amendment?

by simi4relo

NO. People convicted of domestic violence are currently not allowed to possess a firearms. This bill could remove firearms from people just accused of domestic violence. It would take only a verbal accusation from an angry spouse (true or not) to cause firearms to be forceably removed from the accused. This is not due process, upon which our nation of laws was built.

by fishingrampa

Just say hell no.
SB124 would further infringe on your second amendment.

It is not appropriate to infringe on a persons civil rights for misdemeanor crimes let alone to cancel your civil rights when there is no conviction of a crime as this bill does.
Section 5 of this bill is especially stupid.  It requires the surrender of the any weapons or other scary things only to Law Enforcement or a licensed firearms dealer.  If there is co-ownership in said objects it is not appropriate for the non-adverse person to lose their use of said object.  It is required that the surrender take place in 24 hours.  If the adverse person lives in Texas the surrender would not be able to take place in 24 hours.  A family heirloom should not be lost to the family in a misdemeanor case.

If a person writes bad checks that person is not required to get rid of their checkbook.  There are so many examples of how this bill ignores commonsense for the sole purpose of stealing our guns and freedom.

Violating this misdemeanor related surrender order will result in a Class B felony.
It is no surprise this bill comes from the Communist Democraps.

Please, please comment on this bill on the website and contact your representatives in the Legislature.


by Nevada Firearms Coalition <>

The Nevada Firearms Coalition strongly opposes the passage of this bill that would revise provisions concerning the ownership, possession and control of firearms by people accused of domestic violence.

People convicted of domestic violence are not allowed to possess firearms. But these bills could strip firearms from people only “accused” of domestic violence, not “convicted” of it.

SB124 eliminates judicial discretion for the surrender, sale, or transfer of any firearm in a case of domestic violence coming before the court.

A judge should have to ability to order the transfer of firearms as applicable for the situation.

Eliminating judicial discretion places an undue penalty on firearm owners who are convicted of domestic violence from giving them to family members or other means of disposal.

SB124 narrowly restricts the surrender of firearms to only two sources, law enforcement or a licensed firearms dealer, within a 24-hour period.

The bill should authorize the court to allow for other means of disposal, especially of items like antique firearms that have been passed down for generations.