How do you enforce a law that cannot be enforced? You don't. And then you use the unenforceable of the law as a n excuse to pass universal registration. No one wonders why they want that.
And who in the state of Nevada has the authority to overrule the attorney general in this matter? The FBI is certainly not going to do such, as they have stated that they will not be wasting resources for the purpose of conducting background checks on private firearms transfers.
However the attorney general for the state of Nevada does have a say in how the laws of the state are to be read, interpreted, and enforced by the police. That is part of their authority.
Indeed. Just as the Obama administration can choose to not enforce federal marijuana laws, a state executive - the AG in this case - can decide to not enforce state laws.
Then where is the recall effort from the legislature, in the wake of the announcement that the background check requirement will not be enforced?
The NV legislature has no recall power -- this power is held directly, and only, by the people, after the first 6 months in office. "Every public officer in the State of Nevada is subject, as herein provided, to recall from office by the registered voters of the state, or of the county, district, or municipality which he represents." - NV Constitution, article 2:9 https://www.leg.state.nv.us/const/nvconst.html#Art7
Then where is the recall effort on the part of the people, who supposedly exercised their will when they voted in favor of mandating background checks for private firearm transfers? Why have they not exercised their will once again to force the issue?
The head of the Nevada senate has said that he will ensure the legislature takes action to ensure this referendum is enacted. He is a democrat and democrats control the legislature. Good enough for me for now.
The head of the senate has no authority in this matter. Because the law was enacted by public referendum, the senate is legally forbidden from modifying it in any fashion for a period of three years. On top of such, the sheriffs for the state of Nevada have stated outright that they refuse to enforce the background check requirement under any circumstances. So now it is the FBI, the attorney general, and the sheriffs stating that the matter is dead as far as they are concerned. The legislature can do nothing pertaining to such.
Some people have been discussing the nevada referendum on background checks but this really is off topic to this thread and we should get back to discussing chicago.
They already have more gun control than most. It clearly isn't working. ....... Because gun control only targets legal lawful citizens.
Why do states? Do we need to go round this again? - - - Updated - - - Small numbers.....all over again
isn't it you that recently gave someone a hard time about not answering a question? I asked you a question about Chicago. This thread is about Chicago. Care to answer my question?
Ok I will answer it again. When using statistics the higher the N the more likely you data will be accurate. So state data is more accurate than city data. - - - Updated - - - So is mine
Why state stats? Aren't national stats a larger number? How about world stats, that is the largest number.
