Can we take a second, for the 2nd? (opinion)

To say 2020 was a crazy and eventful year would be an understatement. I think just about everyone can agree on that. But in the midst of a pandemic, a summer of protests, and an election year that shattered records, (pick a category, any catagory) it seems nevadans also found alot to disagree on. It was easy to see if one attended any of these protests.

Amongst the crowd of teens all the way to senior citizens and any age in between, one thing seemed to have stood out more than anything-firearms. And there has been alot of chatter about "militias", and legality of firearms in public.

If you live in Nevada you should know we are what is called an "open carry" state. Section 11 of article 1 of the Nevada constitution provides that "every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense,for lawful hunting and recreational use and for any other lawful purposes." Do keep in mind the constitutional right to keep and bear arms is not an absolute on.

The Nevada legislature can, and has in fact placed certain restrictions to lawfully possess a firearms. NRS.202.360 prohibits certain persons from owning or possessing a firearm, for example, convicted felons who have not received a pardon, fugitives from justice, and persons who are mentally ill. Those are just a few of the restrictions listed under Nevada law. Those are what responsible firearm owner call "the obvious" laws. And if you plan on open carrying you should know your rights, and laws. With that said the Nevada legislature has not enacted any statute or law that prohibits the open carry of firearms by person who are otherwise authorize to possess firearms. In short if you can legally purchase a firearm in Nevada you can legally open carry in Nevada. Of course there are certain restrictions on certain locations, so again if you plan on open carrying than you should know the laws.

Concealed carry has its own laws and restrictions seperate from open carry, and requires a permit. Concealed carry laws commonly get intertwined and confused by some and can create confusion so please don't mix the two of those up.

This brings us back to the protests and the "big question" of why are so many people carrying firearms this summer? I'd be more inclined to ask the question of "well, why not?" We have the legal right to do so. Were the armed men and women in public legally open carrying, or were they possibly protesting the newly implemented red-flag law, AB-291 which was hastily pushed through the 2019 legislation? Either way we have the right to do both! Why would law abiding citizens protesting while legally carrying bother anyone? Especially someone who considers themselves an activist. I mean, isn't the point of activism and protesting, to be heard? And to do it in dramatic fashion to be noticed? Is there a better way to safely protest and exercise your right to open carry while standing on public ground in front of our state capital building where they hold legislation? The recent movement "black lives matter" did it, as they had the right to. So did the pro/anti abortion protesters. And the pro Biden and Trump supporters. You can see where this is going.

As far as the so called "militia" they have in fact been almost non existent. With the exception of the infamous heavy set man wearing fatigues, who by the way is a felon and cannot and does not carry a firearm while present at these protests. I recently read a column that addressed Nevada law regarding militias. As the article was correct referring to illegal militias, organized or not and when it can be applied lawfully and unlawfully, most folks need to first understand what defines a "militia member" or a "militia." For that label to be accurate a group must define themselves as such, or organize themselves as a paramilitary group. I did not see anyone "engaging in activities reserved for the state militia", as previously stated in a column. Nor did I, or anyone I know see any other citizens marching in formation, or to cadences. There was not a soul "waiting to be called forth by our governor." (Mind you he is not very popular among the firearm owning community) And last, no one was seen "taking part in paramilitary actions or drills." So where was this militia?

In the previously stated opinion, one insinuated that a militia can merely be labeled as such for simply going to the local gun range and shooting pistols together amongst friends. Maybe push eachother to have better accuracy or have friendly competitions with eachother on shooting exercises. I mean, our local military regularly attend the shooting range amongst eachother.

According to previous opinion and interpretation of what constitutes a "militia member" this would make every citizen and John Q Public that attends our local range a "militia member." In my opinion that is a very broad accusation to call every man, woman, and child who gets together and enjoys shooting together, part of a militia. After all that is a great past time for most. But the military does the same shooting activities........so I'm sure one can see the confusion and double standard here.

With the exception of present radicals on both sides of every protest, I saw a giant crowd of law abiding citizens enjoying the right to open carry legally in our state. I saw the protesting of the vague AB-291 law, and the protesting of the apparent desire of some of our elected officials to enact even more firearm restrictions, thus resulting in turning regular everyday law abiding folks into possible criminals. I witnessed all of this and I proudly stood with them.