Have done some preliminary searches via Search Nevada legislature.

Searching out the good and bad needs to be a team effort as it's really too much for one person and NRA etc. will not notice or inform us of every RKBA related BDR and Bill.

Here are a few I found using BDR and a related keyword such as "Firearms" or "Weapon".
NOT a complete list, and I have not had the time to determine the good and bad among them!

The best chance to kill the bad and support the good happens fairly early in the  session, at the FIRST hearings!

1.   untitled
File size 124.4K - 03-Feb-2017
20 hit(s) - Relevance 100%
(BDR 15-79) ...authorizing a person who holds a permit to carry a concealed firearm to possess a handgun in a vehicle that is on ...possessing certain weapons, including, without limitation, pistols, revolvers or other firearms, while on the property of the Nevada System of ...a person who holds a permit to carry a concealed firearm from carrying a concealed firearm while on the premises of ...authorizes a person who holds a permit to carry a concealed firearm to possess a handgun on the property of the
2.   AB87.pdf
File size 97.2K - 02-Feb-2017
11 hit(s) - Relevance 99%
(BDR 15-96) ...relating to weapons; authorizing persons who possess permits to carry concealed firearms that were issued by certain other states to continue to ...carry concealed firearms in this State pursuant to those permits after becoming ...a person who possesses a permit to carry a concealed firearm which was issued by a state that meets certain ...this State may, pursuant to that permit, carry a concealed firearm in
3.   SB46.pdf
File size 110.7K - 02-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 44%
(BDR 38-131) ...mayhem; (b) Any other felony involving the use of a firearm or other deadly weapon; (c) Assault with intent
4.   SB99_78.pdf
Ive done some searching and confirmed that there will be several firearms related bills.


File size 443.4K - 02-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 30%
(BDR 14-134) ...097; (IV) A deadly weapon, explosives or a firearm; (V) The use or threatened use of force or
5.   SB18.pdf
File size 237.6K - 02-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 20%
(BDR 57-464) ...weapons; (4) The retention of weapons; (5) Qualifications for the use of firearms; and (6) Defensive tactics; (d)
6.   SB71.pdf
File size 195.7K - 02-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 20%
(BDR 40-183) ...or violence against the victim or the use of a firearm or other deadly weapon; or -*SB71*
7.   untitled
File size 147.7K - 03-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 20%
(BDR 40-677) ...manslaughter or mayhem; (5) Any felony involving the use of a firearm or other deadly weapon;(6) Assault with intent

1.   untitled
File size 124.4K - 03-Feb-2017
6 hit(s) - Relevance 100%
(BDR 15-79) ...prohibits, with certain exceptions, a person from carrying or possessing certain weapons, including, without limitation, pistols, revolvers ...care facility to give permission to carry or possess the weapon.Any person who violates such a provision is guilty ...section does not prohibit the possession of [a] : (a) A weapon listed in subsection 1 on the property of: [ ...care facility to give permission to carry or possess the weapon.[(b)] (2) A
2.   AB88.pdf
File size 137.1K - 02-Feb-2017
3 hit(s) - Relevance 82%
(BDR 15-156) ...death to more than one person by means of a weapon, device or course of action which would normally ...harm to more than one person by means of a weapon, device or course of action that would normally be
3.   SB18.pdf
File size 237.6K - 02-Feb-2017
3 hit(s) - Relevance 80%
(BDR 57-464) ...and procedures for exoneration;(2) Methods [of arrest;] for apprehending defendants; (3) Nonlethal weapons; (4) The retention of weapons; (5)
4.   AB87.pdf
File size 97.2K - 02-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 54%
(BDR 15-96) ...AN ACT relating to weapons; authorizing persons who possess permits to carry concealed firearms that were issued by certain other states
5.   AB90.pdf
File size 120.5K - 02-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 44%
(BDR 15-528) ...bodily harm to more than one person by means of a weapon, device or course of action that would normally be
6.   SB46.pdf
File size 110.7K - 02-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 44%
(BDR 38-131) ...other felony involving the use of a firearm or other deadly weapon; (c) Assault with intent to kill or
7.   SB99_78.pdf
File size 443.4K - 02-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 30%
(BDR 14-134) ...097; (IV) A deadly weapon, explosives or a firearm; (V) The use or threatened use of force
8.   SB71.pdf
File size 195.7K - 02-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 20%
(BDR 40-183) ...the victim or the use of a firearm or other deadly weapon; or -*SB71*
9.   untitled
File size 147.7K - 03-Feb-2017
2 hit(s) - Relevance 20%
(BDR 40-677) ...felony involving the use of a firearm or other deadly weapon;(6) Assault with intent to kill or

Was expecting worse.

NOT a complete list, just the first result of a cursory search.
There is still time for "Our" legislators to introduce many more bills and amendments for better or worse.
The first couple of days will be wasted with pomp and ceremony, then they will get to deciding committee appointments.
Committee action is where we often get screwed when the D's are in control as good bills are refused a hearing while bad bills are not held to the rules.
Sometimes committee's can be held accountable if LOTS of us show up to their hearings, be prepared to be needed!

It's just the tip of the iceberg.

The Clark County Sheriff is going to push HARD for a magazine ban. And the Dems in Carson will listen to his BS.

Hopefully the Governor will veto any anti-gun legislation if we can't kill it ourselves.

What would it realistically take to recall that POS?

A Constitutional candidate and SHIT TON of money.

Learn how to protect your rights!
Passing this along as a PSA.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nevada Families for Freedom
186 Ryndon Unit 12, Elko, Nevada 89801, 775-397-6859, Sparks 775-356-0105
www.nevadafamilies.org  [email protected]
Feb. 6 2017, In the Year of Our Lord        

Citizen Lobbyist Workshop Scheduled for Reno and Carson City.
Reno: Tues. Feb. 7, 6:00pm, KNPB 1670 N. Virginia St. at UNR
Reno: Wed. Feb 8, 1pm, Conservative Talk Lunch, Kings Buffet,
3650 Kietzke
Carson City: Saturday, February 4, 10amCapital Christian Center.

"The Nevada Legislature begins on February 6, 2017.  We as citizens have a responsibility to be engaged in the Legislative process in order to protect and defend our liberties. The concerns this Session are particularly compelling because the Democrats control both the Nevada Senate and the Assembly," stated Janine Hansen, State President of Nevada Families for Freedom.

"In addition, the vast majority of Legislators are from Southern Nevada, which significantly dilutes the understanding and interests of Northern Nevadans. The voices of Northern Nevadans are critical if our concerns are to be recognized and heard at the Nevada Legislature," continued Hansen.

"In order to prepare for the Legislature, we are holding Citizen Lobby Workshops to teach people simple ways to be effective Citizen Lobbyists from their own homes.  Our workshops will be held in Carson City: Saturday, February 4, 10amCapital Christian Center, Reno: Tues. Feb. 7, 6:00pm, KNPB 1670 N. Virginia St. at UNR, Reno: Wed. Feb 8, 1pm, Conservative Talk Lunch, Kings Buffet, 3650 Kietzke Ln.  There is no cost but donations are welcome. Workshops have been held in Elko, Las Vegas, Pahrump and are scheduled for Winnemucca," stated Hansen.

Nevada Families for Freedom is sponsoring the event in conjunction with twelve co-sponsors including the Independent American Party, Chuck Muth President-- Citizens Outreach, Nevada Firearms Coalition, Nye County Republican Central Committee, Private Well Owners CoOp of Nye County, Stillwater Firearms Association, Tom Tabor--Silver Sage PAC, Nevada Right to Life, Elko Constitution Study Group, Charleston Neighborhood Preservation, Reno Conservative Talk Lunch, and the Washoe County Republican Assembly.

"We encourage citizens to make a difference by making their voices heard at the Nevada Legislature. Last Session Nevada Families sent out over 150 Legislative Alerts and updates enabling citizens a simple way to engage in the Legislative process," concluded Janine Hansen.

The workshops will be presented by Janine Hansen and John Wagner. Janine Hansen has been a citizen lobbyist and activist at the Nevada Legislature every session since 1971 and has been there full time since 1991. John Wagner has been actively engaged as a citizen lobbyist at the Nevada Legislature since 2001.

I expect the unconstitutional effort to "Fix Q1" to be done via as much stealth and amendments to unrelated bills as possible.
We will have to watch VERY carefully for that and act immediately when it happens.

In case you do not get NRA alerts.
Bills pre-filed and introduced today.

Assembly Bill 87, sponsored by Assemblywoman Robin Titus (R-38), would allow new Nevada residents to continue to carry a concealed firearm by utilizing their recognized out of state permit until that permit expires or a Nevada CCW is issued.  Currently, new residents may only carry under their recognized out of state permit for 60 days.

Senate Bill 102, sponsored by Senator James Settelmeyer (R-17), would allow lawful gun owners with concealed weapon permits to carry or store their firearms in their vehicles on school property.

Senate Joint Resolution 11, sponsored by Senator Scott Hammond (R-18), proposes to amend the Nevada State Constitution to preserve the right to hunt, trap and fish.  SJR 11 passed both chambers in 2015 and must pass both chambers of the legislature this year in order to be presented to the voters in 2018.

How much is a shit ton? We need to send a message to the Dems and the
C.C. Sheriff would be a good start.

Tom
Edited to spell ishoot2live correctly.

Find out how much the current Sheriff raised in the last election and triple it.

And find a no-nonsense candidate (Like President Trump) and run with all the failures of the current Sheriff.

PS: Actually the current Sheriff is a RINO.

Sheriff Clarke for Clark County Sheriff!

Sheriff Clarke is Anti-NFA. He won't sign-off on NFA items in his county.

I like him but he is not as great as people think he is.

He's not in the Trump Administration because Don, Jr. knows about his Anti-NFA stance.

A quick search showed he raised nearly $1 Million.
what would the $3 million go towards?
I found that Clark county requires signatures from 25% of people that voted in the election of which the candidate ran.
Tom

The money would go for ads and campaign expenses. Most of the candidates he ran against last time were grass roots candidates. Unfortunately, being a nice guy (gal) with little money doesn't win elections. Money is the 'mother's milk' of politics and you have to be a Trump-like candidate nowadays.

As far as a recall that would be pretty tough in Liberal Clark County.

However, anything is worth a try.

JMO

I will just note here that we were unable to raise the relatively small sum necessary to defeat Q1 in CC.
We nearly won that battle, but our RKBA is not a game of horseshoes.

I agree and I'm committed to being more active in order to keep our RKBA.
Joe, thanks for your insight on the recall thoughts.

Tom

YW.

So, remember how I said that I expected the D's to ignore the rules to suit themselves further up this thread?
Seems it's even easier than that, they just changed the rules to allow ramming a bill through committee BEFORE WE CAN REACT!
Our proper response here is to light up the lines, no matter who "Your" rep is let them know ASAP that this is intolerable.
"Rules" like this CAN be reversed if enough heat is felt in Carson City!
The Bold below is my edit.

Press Release
Jim Wheeler at Nevada State Legislature.
Monday at 9:54pm · Carson City ·
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Ross Hemminger
[email protected]
419.934.3069
Assemblyman Jim Wheeler on Joint Standing Rules Changes
CARSON CITY - Assemblyman Jim Wheeler released the following statement regarding today's Joint Standing Rules changes.

"I am disturbed by the fact that over 150 years of tradition were tossed aside today. By removing the 24-hour rule, there remains the possibility that bills can be jammed through in one day without any opportunity for negotiation. I am also disappointed that we had only forty minutes to review the rule changes. I believe it prudent that members have an opportunity to carefully consider all rule changes, especially when flying in the face of decades of tradition."

EDIT: I have asked for a clarification of exactly how this changes the legislative process.
I do not want to "Overreact" but this is already a clear abuse of the legislative process and a power grab such as would never have been tolerated by D's and their lap-dog "Press" if it were the R's doing it!

EDIT II.

I asked for clarification as follows, "OK, but I would not think they could get away with disallowing reasonable time for public participation in the process.
If that is their intent the proper response is to deny them a quorum until they come to their senses.
My impression has been that the "Rules" do not override statute, and that many steps of the legislative process are controlled by statute.
I need to be careful that I fully understand before sounding the alarm.

So to be absolutely clear.
This rule allows a bill to pass or fail in committee on first reading?

It allows a vote at the first hearing?

It allows a vote without public input?

If all the above are correct this is clearly far too radical to be allowed to stand without legal challenge.

Please expand on exactly what this does for the mere citizens who are not professional politicians".

The reply, "No. It must still go through committee and be voted on. However, instead of waiting for 24 hours it can then be immediately sent to 3rd reading and voted on.
What this means is that any bill can be treated as an emergency bill. A committee could be held "behind the bar", quickly and basically on the floor".

Is there a state or better yet, local (Clark County) association for gun owners?

Edited to apologize if I am derailing (hijacking) the intent of this thread.
Tom

NVFAC

They will also be starting a No. Nevada fund raising raffle soon.
Lobbying is expensive.

Richard, are you affiliated with the NVFAC? If so, you should ask Wolfpack to
make a sticky with their info and a link to their website.
Tom

Just a member and donor.

This is all very interesting.  I know (hope) the guys repping my area are against this.  Will see if I can get info at our Lincoln Day Dinner tonight.

Thanks for sharing the info.

This one may not be huge for some, however, I feel it needs to get out as there is a large percentage of us here that hunt.  I also got blatantly lied to by the Assemblyman IMO.

AB101.  

Link Ab101

Share your opinion here. Share your opinion

Copies of the emails

February 3

Sir,

I have read your bill, AB 101.  

I am confused as to what the purpose of it is?  Does this eliminate the funding for management of predatory wildlife within the state of Nevada?

Thank you,


February 3 response


Hello marcial,

No this allows NDOW more flexibility in how they manage predators and more importantly allows them to received matching federal dollars for these management purposes.

Thank you for your email and participation on the process.

Sincerely,

Assemblyman Mike Sprinkle
Representing Assembly district 30
775-742-5935


My friend's response last night
If AB101 is passed it will effectively eliminate predator control in Nevada. Currently 80 percent of the $3 predator management fee is mandated to be used on lethal predator reduction projects to benefit big game. The only way Pittman-Robertson funds will be available to match the funds generated by the $3 predator fee collected each time a hunter applies for a big game tag is if the funds are only used for non-lethal projects. This will eliminate the option for NDOW to use any of the $3 predator fee money for lethal projects. The original intent of the $3 predator fee was for lethal management. So, if these fees are not going to be used largely for the original purpose there is no reason to charge Sportsmen the $3 fee at all. Most Sportsmen do not mind paying the fee since they know it is going to improve and support Big Game herds throughout Nevada.A more reasonable bill would simply change the percentage of the predator fees to be used for lethal management, My observation is that NDOW carefully selects predator removal projects that benefit struggling big game populations {such as California Bighorn Sheep} in specific areas. These projects are supported by biological data that indicate a need to protect specific herds that are being suppressed by excessive predation or disease. Allowing for temporary lethal predator removal in these areas is necessary to protect certain species during recovery periods until that herd population reaches numbers that are sustainable. Currently NDOW does not have other funds available for predator removal. NDOW is an underfunded agency so to try to come up with these funds elsewhere would hamstring the agency even further. One need only to look at the issues our neighboring states{California,Oregon,Washington} have with managing predators to see that Nevada needs to keep all options available on this subject. Why would our citizens want to limit ourselves on methods and tools in managing one of Nevadas' greatest assets {Wildlife}





Dave Gowan

Owner/Founder

Canyons West Guide Service LLC




He described it better than I can.  

I believed the Assemblyman, the Dave set me straight.   Pay attention people, the crooks they are!

The first meeting in the committee is today at 1330!

Please get as many as you can to respond to this!

https://www.firearmspolicy.org/nevada_sb_115

This is how it starts...

From the varied alerts  have got so far it seems the "Theme" for this years session is promoting BIG government to control and decide every aspect of our lives.
Lots of measures to reduce citizen participation and having a vote.
Measures to give more control to DC and the governor, eliminate current elected offices in favor of appointments.

We knew the PC Gun Control crap was coming, looks like it is here!
This is one where we need to fill the room in opposition.
Maybe, just maybe, a strong showing early on will discourage more of the same later!?

I witnessed this today with AB101

I was told there was going to be public comment. The chair barely allowed the opposing assemblymen to comment.  

There is a bill to remove the controller and treasurer from elected positions.  

The previously mentioned firearms bill.  

The list goes on.

I have told as many people as I could. My wife and I were the only people to show up in Elko.  I was to the point of being obnoxious and could not get a response from the committee to even sit down and wait my turn.  

We are going to loose if we don't wake up!  You can't tell me that there weren't 10 people in Elko that could have taken 15 minutes out of their Thursday with two days notice.  

People have their heads buried in the sand.

WAKE UP

Link

Here is proof that we are being ignored!  This article says there was no one was in Elko, but I was there.  We are getting screwed out of everything at this point!

Call the editor and demand a correction.
As big as Elko is I would have hoped for more participation.

EDIT: Link gets an "Error 404".
Truly error 404, or now hiding their lie?

Passing along the NRA alert I got tonight so that members have some advance warning to SHOW UP at the capitol next week.
I've reproduced their live links for you.
If you are in LV there should be a room available at the Grant Sawyer building, and even a live-feed spot somewhere in Elko.
===================================================================
Next week, the Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled hearings for two gun bills.

Senate Bill 115, sponsored by state Senator Moises Denis (D-2), would expand the list of places firearms are prohibited from being carried and kept in vehicles to include public libraries.
The motivation behind this bill likely stems from an incident last year where a mother of three, who home schools her children, was detained and handcuffed for open carrying in a public library even though it’s not prohibited under current law.  
SB 115 has been scheduled for a hearing Tuesday, February 28, at 1:30pm.  Please contact members of the committee and urge them to OPPOSE SB 115!

Senate Bill 102, sponsored by state Senator James Settelmeyer (R-17), would allow lawful gun owners with concealed weapon permits to carry or store their firearms in their vehicles on school property.
This bill would help fix a shortfall in the concealed carry laws that place permit holders in violation of state law by simply crossing the arbitrary line that defines a school zone.
SB 102 is scheduled for a hearing next Wednesday, March 1.  Please contact members of the committee and urge them to SUPPORT SB 115!

Click the “Take Action” button below to contact committee members in regards to SB 115 and SB 102!

Additionally, Assembly Bill 118, a pro-gun bill sponsored by Assemblyman Skip Daly (D-31), was recently introduced.  
AB 118 would allow a member of the military between 18 and 21 years of age to obtain a permit to carry a concealed firearm.
Current law requires a person to be at least 21 years of age to be eligible for a concealed carry permit.
If persons between 18 and 21 years of age are risking their lives for our country then they should be eligible to acquire permits for self-defense.

Also, don’t forget log on to the  Nellis Opinion Poll on the Nevada Legislature Website and voice your opinion on these important measures.
Click here to read more details on AB 87 and SJR 11.

Again, please click the “Take Action” button above to contact committee members in regards to SB 115 and SB 102.

I submitted comments on all 3 just now.  

I will not be able to attend either of the upcoming meetings as I will be in different parts of the state on those two days which are my days off.  

I will try to get another text message and email list out on those three bills as well.

Senators of the Judiciary Committee,.

You are presented with two bills.  One would restrict the rights of Nevadan's to possess firearms on the premises of a library or in their private vehicle while parked on property owned by the library.  

The second would expand the rights of individuals to possess firearms in their vehicles while on school property if they have a CCW permit and have passed a background check.  

The United States’ Bill of Rights and the Nevada Constitution allow for the keeping and bearing of arms.  This should not be restricted any further.  

Please oppose Senate Bill 115, making more restrictions on law abiding Nevadan's and support Senate Bill 102 strengthening the rights of Nevadan's.  

Thank you,



I sent this email to the Senate Judiciary Committee

[email protected]

Scratch that.  I got a form reply as it says that that email is for submitting support materials and it states to use the share your opinion form.  It is obvious to me that they are ignoring that page, and doing whatever they want.

Whenever you write to them you need to add this past as well.

You swore an oath to defend the Constitution, not the parts you deem necessary

Well, NUTS!
I made plans to be at the legislature Tuesday and Wednesday.
Today I've come down with the crud.
Probably not a good idea to infect everyone from our side with it.
Really hoping some members will step in for me.
Please try to take notes and report back if you can.

This one needs a lot of our attention.
Looking at the committee chair and members we are working against a stacked deck!
he only way to win this one is for us to show up in LARGE numbers.
I am out of town for the day, hoping other will make it.

Vote Thursday, March 9, 1:30 Senate Judiciary Rm. 2134

Oppose SB115: An Anti-Gun Bill denies right to carry a gun in public library

Watch online: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Go down to Monday to Sen. Judiciary

MESSAGE: (Write your own message) Vote NO on SB115. Don't leave us defenseless when we go to a public library by taking away our right to carry a concealed weapon.
Gun free zones are magnets for criminals.

CALL if you CAN: Nevada Legislative Hotline connects with all offices:
800-995-9080, Las Vegas 702-486-2626, Reno/Carson 775-684-6800
Chair Senator Segerblom: 775-684-1422, Senators Cannizzaro 775-684-1475, (Sponsor) Denis 775-684-1431,
(Majority Leader) Aaron Ford 775-684-6502

CONTACT:  [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

So, anyone know more about the rumor of an effort to outlaw OC?

Have not heard anything about outlawing open carry.  

I did get an email that there is a public hearing on Tuesday for SJR11 from last session that is to amend the Constitution for hunting, fishing and trapping.

I have been watching pretty well, and have not seen anything related to oc

Another bad one has emerged

SB254 will remove civil liability protections

Here are the sponsors

Primary Sponsor(s): Senator Aaron Ford Senator Kelvin Atkinson Senator Pat Spearman Senator Moises Denis Senator Yvanna Cancela Assemblyman Jason Frierson Assemblyman William McCurdy II Assemblywoman Dina Neal Assemblyman Tyrone Thompson Assemblyman Richard Carrillo
Co-Sponsor(s): Senator Nicole Cannizzaro Senator Mark Manendo Senator David Parks Senator Julia Ratti Senator Joyce Woodhouse Assemblyman Edgar Flores Assemblywoman Sandra Jauregui Assemblywoman Brittney Miller Assemblywoman Daniele Monroe-Moreno

I just found out about a section of the Legislature's web site this morning while looking for info on SB254.  I didn't know this existed and I don't know if it really helps change legislator's opinions, but it can't hurt.  You can see all results of the votes on bills and read the comments posted.  Here is the explanation from the site:


79th (2017) Session of the Nevada Legislature
Share Your Opinion with your Legislators

Reports | View Comments | Submit Another Opinion

The Opinion Poll portion of this site contains constituent opinions for the 79th (2017) Session of the Nevada Legislature. Feel free to view constituent opinions by clicking on the links above.

Throughout a legislative session, legislators review these opinions to gain perspective on how constituents in their districts feel about legislation. Constituent names, addresses and other personal information are NOT made public, but are available to legislators so that they will know who is submitting the comment and are able to contact the constituent if they so desire. Only opinion totals and comments are made publicly available on this site.

Thank you for participating in your government.

https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Opinions/79th2017/A/

I just read sb254.  

Total bullshit.  

So you can defend yourself from a reasonable expectation of harm, but make sure you have a fat wallet.  You might be able to win the civil suit provided you had other reasonable security measures in place, and the use of force was a last resort.  But it will cost you a shit ton of money in attorney fees and several years dealing with the shit bird's family because he was "such a good young man that had a lot going for him."

Insurance companies are going to love this one because now they get more clients for 5 million dollar umbrella insurance policies.  

Wasn't there something in discussion just recently here on the board about something in Congress forcing firearms owners to obtain higher insurance riders or some such shit?

Unbelievable what is going through the legislature at the moment.

Get rid of the electoral college?

AB274 is a dandy!  

Get rid of the electoral college.  IOW the Democrats are pissed that Donald Trump won.  

WTF is going on

WE MUST SUPPORT THE LEGISLATORS WHO ARE with us on THESE BILLS. Don't leave them hanging without support!
Time Change
HEARING: Tuesday March 14, 1:00  Rm. 2144 Senate Natural Resources
Las Vegas, Room 4412E of the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, 555 E. Washington Ave.
Elko, Room 102 of the McMullen Hall, Great Basin College, 1500 College Parkway
Watch online: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/

MESSAGE: (write your own message). Vote YES on SJR11. Protect Nevadans rights to hunt, fish and trap.Give us the opportunity to vote.

This is a proposed Constitutional Amendment that passed last session and must pass again this session. If it does it goes on the ballot. Read the bill here: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/79th2017/Bills/SJR/SJR11_78.pdf

CONTACT:
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
 
Nevada Legislative Hotline connects with all offices:
800-995-9080, Las Vegas 702-486-2626, Reno/Carson 775-684-6800

Share your opinion with Legislature: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Opinions/79th2017/A/

Bill Text: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/79th2017/Bills/SJR/SJR11_78.pdf

My "Little bird" that really knows what is going on at the legislature says that Senate Bill 115 is expected to pass (D's in control) and that Sandoval cannot be trusted to veto it.
I believe the next hearing is Thursday.
So probably the only way to stop it now is to overwhelm the hearing with folk demanding NO!
I plan to be there, need MANY others to join me.

Well, that was a waste of my effort.
With the D's in charge and Bloodsucker Tegerblom in charge only one person was allowed to speak.
The bills sponsor.
Passed 5-3 with no real discussion.
So from here we need to load up the comment pages with opposition.
Also send messages to Gov. Sandoval demanding his veto.
I know there is going to be an effort to amend in some improvement, but a polished turd is still a turd.

That's the same issue I encountered.  They don't read the comments, they don't listen to people talk.  They just have their agenda set and have it planned to get through no matter what.  Really starting to get me pissed off.

In this case no dissenters were allowed to speak, the "Vote" was as fixed as I had been told.

Today at 1:00 there will be a hearing on SB174, to rename McCarran for Harry (Pinky) Reid.
I sent an email to the two republican senators and a comment to the opinion page.
I quoted Pinky's racist past remarks about Obama, maybe the D's will be a bit uncomfortable with him over that?
I also pointed out that such honors are traditionally reserved for the deceased.

Not sure it will/can help, but you can vote AGAINST SB174 here:  https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Opinions/79th2017/A/