Nevada Concealed Firearm Permit Holders Lose NICS Exemption for Private Transfers

Opinion

Nevada State Flag Gun Ban NO Circle image NRA-ILA
Nevada State Flag Gun Ban NO Circle image NRA-ILA

Fairfax, VA – -(Ammoland.com)- Nevada Concealed Firearm Permit holders are set to get a lump of coal in their stocking this Christmas. Nevadans with a permit have long-enjoyed NICS-exempt status, which exempts these law-abiding individuals from having to undergo [repeated] National Instant Criminal Background Check System checks every time they purchase a firearm from a gun dealer. Thanks to SB 143, which criminalized the private transfer of firearms in the Silver State, as of January 2 permit holders will be forced to undergo a NICS check when they purchase a firearm from a private individual through a dealer.

Federal law requires individuals to undergo a NICS check every time they purchase a firearm from a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL). However, 18 U.S.C. § 922(t)(3) exempts transfers between a gun dealer and another person if,

              (i) such other person has presented to the licensee a permit that–

(I) allows such other person to possess or acquire a firearm; and

(II) was issued not more than 5 years earlier by the State in which the transfer is to take place; and

(ii) the law of the State provides that such a permit is to be issued only after an authorized government official has verified that the information available to such official does not indicate that possession of a firearm by such other person would be in violation of law;

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives maintains a list of state-issued permits that qualify for this exemption. This list is available as the ATF’s “Permanent Brady Permit Chart.”

The NICS exemption system is efficient, as it allows persons who have already been vetted by a NICS background check to purchase firearms without delay and decreases the burden on the FBI’s NICS Section by reducing redundant background checks.

Further, for some gun owners, a NICS exempt permit is essential to the meaningful exercise of their Second Amendment rights. According to the 2018 NICS Operations Report, 10 percent of all NICS transactions in 2018 were delayed for additional research while only about 1.2 percent resulted in a denial. This means that many law-abiding gun owners face significant background check delays despite being able to lawfully possess firearms.

Lengthy delays often happen through no fault of the prospective firearm buyer. As the FBI explains on its website,

A delay response from the NICS Section indicates the subject of the background check has been matched with either a state or federal potentially prohibiting record containing a similar name and/or similar descriptive features (name, sex, race, date of birth, state of residence, social security number, height, weight, or place of birth).

For many people, the NICS exemption is vital, as they are repeatedly misidentified each time they undergo a check. Rather than go through a lengthy delay every time they exercise their rights, the NICS exemption process enables a person to undergo the cumbersome process once and then purchase guns without interference for the next five years.

In late October, the Nevada Department of Public Safety began sending out letters to FFLs informing them about their obligations under SB 143. The letter stated that “effective January 2, 2019, a Concealed Carry Weapon Permit holder is NOT exempt from the NICS background check for private parties required” by the new state law. Therefore, individuals seeking to obtain a firearm from another private party will be required to undergo a NICS check even if they have a Nevada carry permit that the ATF recognizes as NICS exempt.

Nevada’s anti-gun politicians sold their background check legislation as a way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. However, just like all gun control measures, this legislation was designed to further encumber law-abiding gun owners and reduce their ability to exercise their rights.


National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

About:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JD
JD
1 year ago

Nevada is a point of origin state so the NV Dept of Public Safety does the check. There is no cost for the check; however, dealer will charge their transfer fee. In Churchill county the fees run from $25 to $50. P.S. NV already had a UBC law that was adopted by citizen initiative in 2016. Question One’s text had the Fed’s doing the check & when the AG contacted the FBI to set up the check system the Obama FBI said NO! because congress hasn’t appropriated the funds to perform them. For the same reason the Dem’s took control… Read more »

StLPro2A
StLPro2A
1 year ago

A politician with a law never stops a bad guy with/without a gun.
He only controls the good guys……which is his true agenda.

The other Jim
The other Jim
1 year ago

And what about the $20.00 to $60.00 the FFL will charge to transfer the gun? Is Arizona picking up the fees on this, or is there an Arizona Reimbursement Claim Form so Arizona can pay for the additional burdensome costs?

Circle8
1 year ago

All Californians should stay in the state and NOT move to the free states BECAUSE they bring their warped thinking to the free states. Then they join the anti Americans and voted to destroy OUR 2A rights. We do not want you because you elected these anti Americans politicians (traitors) so you keep them.

MICHAEL J
MICHAEL J
1 year ago

So how many people that have concealed permits committed crimes to make the government take away this privilege?

Tionico
Tionico
1 year ago

WHEN will the NUCS system get fixed to stop returning Delay or Deny codes when data is “similar” to that of a prhibited person? WHY can’t that system be fixed to consider afew critical fields, and unless ALL those fields match there IS no match? If Robert Jones is buying a gun, submits his name Robert Jones, date and city of birth,state of residence, and someone else names ROBBY Jones, born four years earlier on the other side of the country has a prohibiting record, WHY does NICS return a match or even a partial match? It is just like… Read more »

Ryben Flynn
Ryben Flynn
1 year ago

Liberal Californians leaving the State over high taxes and other reasons are infecting more States with their Leftist ideology. Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Colorado, it’s slowly working East and North.

nrringlee
nrringlee
1 year ago

Keep voting for progressives and leftists and this is what you get. Voter participation in the “red” counties of Nevada is increasing but not fast enough to keep up with the angry urban mob that is Clark County. So sad to see but Nevada is getting Kalifornicated fast.

Operator Z
Operator Z
1 year ago
Reply to  nrringlee

I don’t know why this concept is so hard to understand. I’ve voted in every election since I was 18. Even voted by mail when I was deployed.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
1 year ago
Reply to  Operator Z

Not voting is the way many are saying we no longer CONSENT to being governed by psychopathic control freaks. Voting is giving CONSENT to a broken system.

Billbo
Billbo
1 year ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

Nobody cares whether you CONSENT or not. Voting gives you a chance to vote gun friendly or gun hostile politicians.

American Patriot
American Patriot
1 year ago
Reply to  nrringlee

Yeap…We have a boatload of their illegals not to mention all the dead people voting dem in Clark county & Reno!

Ansel Hazen
Ansel Hazen
1 year ago

Another failure by the NRA to stop the gun snatchers. You’d almost think the NRA doesn’t really have our backs.

jack mac
jack mac
1 year ago
Reply to  Ansel Hazen

AH: Good-morning; a lot of people have a hard time waking up to the fact that the BOD or our NRA does not have our backs.

JD
JD
1 year ago
Reply to  jack mac

To effectively fight Bloomberg you have to spend millions of $$$. In 2016 Bloomberg & Co. spent $13 million pushing Question One.

JD
JD
1 year ago
Reply to  Ansel Hazen

Bloomberg outspent the NRA by more than 10 to 1.