Yesterday, in a feeble attempt at relevancy, Kate Marshall tried to politicize a tragic school shooting in Florida by attacking me and her Democratic colleagues for an effective, public safety bill I championed in 2015. The bill, SB 175 from 2015, was passed with Republican and Democratic support and was signed into law by Governor Brian Sandoval. By attacking supporters of this legislation, Kate Marshall has launched a broadside against Democrat Senate Majority Leader and candidate for Attorney General Aaron Ford, as well as Speaker Jason Frierson, who as a private citizen in 2015, helped negotiate the final language of the bill. She actually claimed that the bill would ‘decimate our state’s gun safety measures’.
Well, since I doubt she has even read the bill, I’ll explain what it would mean in the real world for Nevadans if this law was, in fact, repealed.
First, law-abiding Nevadans who legally purchase a hand gun in Southern Nevada would need to, once again, register their hand gun with the Clark County Sheriff’s Office. This would be required, despite the fact that Sheriff Lombardo supported the repeal of this registration requirement, due to the fact that there was no good public safety reason for requiring the registration. If Kate Marshall knew anything about the history of Southern Nevada, she would know that this antiquated registration requirement was a remnant of the days when organized crime was prevalent in Las Vegas, and the registration requirement was widely acknowledged as a tool to pull over and arrest suspected mafia figures.
Second, if this law was repealed, every local government in Nevada would be able to set their own gun laws. In Southern Nevada, you would likely see four different sets of gun laws in the Las Vegas Valley. The impractical result would be that an otherwise law-abiding Nevadan could and would inadvertently become a criminal simply by driving through the multiple jurisdictions in the Las Vegas Valley. In fact, this was the reality prior to the passage of SB 175. That is why the legislature rightly determined it made much more sense to decide firearms policy at the state level, rather than at the local level.
Third, if this law was repealed, a victim of a violent car-jacking would no longer have a right to use justifiable force to defend themselves and their property.
Finally, and most importantly, if SB 175 from 2015 were repealed, perpetrators of misdemeanor domestic violence would once again be able to purchase guns, as they were before my bill was passed.
The bottom line is that Kate Marshall has been exposed, once again, as nothing more than a political opportunist who neither understands nor cares about our state’s statutes on gun laws, domestic violence protections, and other important public safety matters. She should spare her Democrat colleagues further political embarrassment and apologize for her ignorance.