Not only did Nevadans in all but one county (and most sheriffs) not support the Bloomberg measure, it was written so poorly the FBI said there was no way they could legally cooperate. So why is a police union representing members who took oaths to support the Constitution demanding enforcement?
“As the leader of the Nevada Association of Public Safety Officers – the largest statewide affiliation of law enforcement associations in Nevada, representing more than 1,500 law enforcement professionals – I am calling on Attorney General Laxalt to do his job,” NAPSO executive director Rick McCann tells Reno Gazette-Journal readers. “As the state’s top cop, he can and should work with both Nevada’s Department of Public Safety and federal officials at the National Instant Criminal Background Checks System (NICS) to find a path forward, ensuring that law enforcement in our state are protected when they risk their lives to protect ours.”
He’s referring to the Michael Bloomberg-led Question One “background check” initiative that passed in Nevada in November, albeit by less than one percent of the vote, failing in all counties but populated Clark (so much for the lie that voters overwhelmingly supported it). And Laxalt really had no choice, as the FBI has no authority to allow unauthorized intermediaries to run background checks, a determination made because state law was written in conflict with federal.
Unacknowledged by McCann is that a majority of Nevada sheriff’s opposed the initiative. And unaddressed is how the measure would protect lives, especially since even the National Institute of Justice admitted in its 2013 “Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies” that ““Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registration.”
Seeing as how violent prohibited persons are immune from being required to register because the Supreme Court ruled that would violate their Fifth Amendment-guaranteed right against self-incrimination, it would seem the very people McCann uses to justify his concerns will just keep on violating the law regardless.
Besides, note he didn’t say he wanted to ensure citizens are protected, and that plays on the same rationale he used when stumping for Question One’s passage:
“Our job is basically to protect officers around the state,” McCann said at the time.
Some might argue their members’ primary job is to keep the oath they took to the Constitution, that is, to “the supreme Law of the Land.’
Instead, it appears that NAPSO is in it for the self-interest first, and that’s evidenced by two other prominent political endorsements on their NCPSO/CWA-Local 9110 AFL-CIO website. In 2016 they backed Democrats Catherine Cortez Masto for the United States Senate and Dina Titus for the House of Representatives.
Here’s what NRA said about Masto and the Second Amendment:
She’s working to solidify that by backing a “path to citizenship,” which by all credible polls and real world experience adds to Democrat and anti-gun voter rolls.
And here’s what Titus had to say about guns:
“I applaud the President’s common sense reforms to our current laws, including universal background checks and stricter prosecution of gun-related crimes, as well as the pledge to improve the nation’s mental health system. I also support renewing the ban on assault weapons and limiting the size of magazines.”“It’s time for Attorney General Laxalt to put public safety ahead of his personal politics and implement and enforce Nevada’s Background Check Law,” McCann concludes. “Other states have been able to implement similar laws because they have state officials willing to put the law ahead of powerful special interests and big money campaign donors.”
What, like Bloomberg and his fellow billionaires who dropped $20 million on Question One?
This McCann character seems as oblivious to the irony as he is to the rights of the people who ultimately pay for his position of privilege.
oped: side note Rick McCann and the NCPSO are currently involved in the recall of our local Sheriff Gerald Antinoro...Storey County who supports the 2nd Amendment and keeps his Oath of Office...this group supported and financed the opposition who ran against him in the last election and lost...most likely this is a case of sour grapes see: http://sharlaslabyrinth.blogspot.com/2017/02/storey-county-nevada-recall-pacharper.html
—–If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work. You can donate HERE.