Statewide Ballot Questions to Appear on the November 8, 2016, General Election Ballot

State of Nevada

STATEWIDE

BALLOT QUESTIONS

2016

To Appear on the November 8, 2016

General Election Ballot

Issued by

Barbara K. Cegavske

Secretary of State

BARBARA K. CEGAVSKE

Secretary of State

WAYNE THORLEY

Deputy for Elections

GAIL J. ANDERSON

Deputy Secretary

for Southern Nevada

STATE OF NEVADA

OFFICE OF THE

SECRETARY OF STATE

SCOTT ANDERSON

Chief Deputy Secretary of State

CADENCE MATIJEVICH

Deputy Secretary

for Operations

NEVADA STATE CAPITOL

MEYERS ANNEX

LAS VEGAS OFFICE

101 N. Carson Street, Suite 3

COMMERCIAL RECORDINGS

555 E. Washington Avenue, Suite 5200

Carson City, Nevada 89701-3714

202 N. Carson Street

Las Vegas, Nevada 89101-1090

Carson City, Nevada 89701-4201

nvsos.gov

Dear Fellow Nevadan:

As the November 8, 2016, general election approaches, it is my responsibility as the

state’s Chief Elections Officer to ensure voters have all the information necessary to make

informed decisions on the four statewide ballot questions that will be presented to them this year.

Accordingly, my office has prepared this informational booklet that provides the exact wording

and a brief summary of each question, as well as fiscal notes detailing the potential financial

impacts to the State of Nevada. Arguments for and against passage of each ballot question are

also provided.

For your reference, Ballot Question Numbers 1 and 2 propose new statute or amend

existing statute and qualified for the ballot through initiative petitions filed in 2014. Both

petitions were presented to the Nevada Legislature in 2015 but were not acted upon and therefore

will be presented to the voters.

Ballot Question Numbers 3 and 4 propose amendments to the Nevada Constitution and

qualified for the ballot through initiative petitions filed in 2016. If successful at this election,

these questions will appear again on the 2018 general election ballot.

I encourage you to carefully review and consider each of the ballot questions prior to

Election Day on November 8, 2016. As a voter, your decisions on these ballot questions are very

important, as they may create new laws, amend existing laws, or amend the Nevada Constitution.

Thank you for your attention on this important matter. If you require additional

information, please do not hesitate to contact my office at (775) 684-5705, or visit my website:

www.nvsos.gov.

Respectfully,

BARBARA K. CEGAVSKE

Secretary of State

2016

STATEWIDE BALLOT QUESTIONS

SUMMARY

Question #

Title

Originated

If Passed in 2016

The Background Check

Initiative

Initiative Petition

Becomes Law

Initiative to Regulate and

Tax Marijuana

Initiative Petition

Becomes Law

The Energy Choice

Initiative

Initiative Petition

Will go to the 2018

General Election Ballot

Medical Patient Tax Relief

Act

Initiative Petition

Will go to the 2018

General Election Ballot

STATE QUESTION NO. 1

Amendment to Title 15 of the Nevada Revised Statutes

Shall Chapter 202 of the Nevada Revised Statutes be amended to prohibit, except in certain

circumstances, a person from selling or transferring a firearm to another person unless a

federally-licensed dealer first conducts a federal background check on the potential buyer or

transferee?

Yes  No 



EXPLANATION & DIGEST

EXPLANATION—This ballot measure proposes to amend Chapter 202 of the Nevada Revised

Statutes to prohibit, except in certain defined circumstances, any person who is not a licensed

dealer, importer, or manufacture of firearms from selling or transferring a firearm to another

unlicensed person unless a licensed dealer first conducts a background check on the buyer or

transferee. To request the required background check, the law would require both the

seller/transferor and the buyer/transferee to appear jointly with the firearm before a federally

licensed firearms dealer. The background check would be conducted using the National Instant

Criminal Background Check System administered by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI),

and the federally-licensed dealer would be able to charge a reasonable fee for conducting the

background check and facilitating the firearm transfer between unlicensed persons.

The measure would establish various exemptions to the mandatory background check

requirements, including:

 The sale or transfer of a firearm by or to any law enforcement agency;

 To the extent he or she is acting within the course and scope of his or her employment and

official duties, the sale or transfer of a firearm by or to any peace officer, security guard

entitled to carry a weapon, member of the armed forces, and federal official;

 The sale or transfer of an antique firearm;

 The sale or transfer of a firearm between immediate family members, defined as spouses

and domestic partners, as well as parents, children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren,

aunts, uncles, nieces, and nephews, whether whole or half blood, adoption or step-relation;

and

 The transfer of a firearm to an executor, administrator, trustee, or personal representative

of an estate or trust that occurs by operation of law upon the death of the former owner of

the firearm.

Certain temporary transfers of a firearm without a background check would also be allowed

under the measure, as long as the temporary transfer is to a person who is not prohibited from

558,586 Votes (50.45%)

548,685 Votes (49.55%)

buying or possessing a firearm under state or federal law, the transferor has no reason to

believe that the transferee is prohibited from buying or possessing firearms under state or

federal law, and the transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee will use or intends

to use the firearm in the commission of a crime. Allowable temporary transfers would include:

 Temporary transfers required to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm;

 Temporary transfers at an established shooting range authorized by the governing body of

the jurisdiction in which the range is located;

 Temporary transfers at a lawfully organized competition involving the use of a firearm;

 Temporary transfers while participating in or practicing for a performance by an organized

group that uses firearms as part of a public performance;

 Temporary transfers while hunting or trapping if the transfer occurs in the area where

hunting and trapping is legal and the transferee holds all licenses or permits required for

such hunting or trapping; and

 Temporary transfers while in the presence of the transferor.

Lastly, approval of this ballot measure would establish criminal penalties on an unlicensed

person who sells or transfers one or more firearms to another unlicensed person in violation of

the provisions of the measure. For the first conviction involving the sale or transfer of one or

more firearms, the seller or transferor would be guilty of a gross misdemeanor, punishable by

up to a year in county jail, a fine up $1,000, or both imprisonment and a fine. For the second

and each subsequent conviction, the seller or transferor would be guilty of a category C felony,

which is punishable by imprisonment between one and five years in state prison and a fine of

not more than $10,000.

A “Yes” vote would amend Chapter 202 of the Nevada Revised Statutes to prohibit, except in

certain circumstances, any person who is not a licensed dealer, importer, or manufacture of

firearms from selling or transferring a firearm to another unlicensed person unless a licensed

dealer first conducts a background check on the buyer or transferee.

A “No” vote would retain the provisions of Chapter 202 of the Nevada Revised Statutes in

their current form. These provisions currently allow, but do not require, a background check

be performed on a firearm buyer or transferee before the private sale or transfer of a

firearm.

DIGEST— Chapter 202 of the Nevada Revised Statutes contains provisions relating to crimes

against public health and safety. Approval of this ballot measure would amend Chapter 202 of

the Nevada Revised Statutes to require that a federal background check be performed before

private sales and transfers of firearms, except in certain defined circumstances. In order to

obtain a required background check, both the firearm seller/transferor and the firearm

buyer/transferee would be required to appear together before a federally licensed firearms

dealer. The background check would be conducted using the National Instant Criminal

Background Check System administered by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), and the

federally-licensed dealer would be able to charge a reasonable fee for conducting the

background check and facilitating the firearm transfer. A person who violates the new

background check requirements would be guilty of a gross misdemeanor for the first offence

and a category C felony for the second or subsequent offences. It is undetermined at this time

whether approval of this ballot measure would have any impact on public revenue.

If this ballot measure is approved, the following sales or transfers would be exempt from the

background check requirement: firearm sales or transfers between law enforcement agencies,

peace officers, security guards, armed forces members, and federal officials; the sale or transfer

of an antique firearm; the sale or transfer of a firearm between immediate family members; the

transfer of a firearm to an estate or trust that occurs upon the death of the former owner of

the firearm; temporary firearm transfers to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm; and

temporary firearm transfers at authorized shooting ranges, at lawful firearm competitions, for

use in public performances; while hunting or trapping, or while in the presence of the

transferor.

Current Nevada law, found in Chapter 202 of the Nevada Revised Statutes, allows, but does not

require, a private person who wishes to transfer a firearm to another person to request a

background check from the Central Repository for Nevada Records of Criminal History on the

person who wishes to acquire the firearm. If a background check is requested, the Central

Repository has five days to perform the background check and notify the person who requested

the background check if the receipt of a firearm by the person who wished to acquire the

firearm would violate a state or federal law. The current law allows the Central Repository to

charge a reasonable fee for performing a requested background check.

ARGUMENT FOR PASSAGE

The Background Check Initiative

Vote yes on Question 1.

Vote yes on Question 1 and close the loophole that makes it easy for convicted felons, domestic

abusers, and people with severe mental illness to buy guns without a criminal background

check.

It is illegal for these dangerous people to buy guns.

That’s why criminal background checks are

required for every gun sale from a licensed dealer.

But no background check is required in

Nevada if a person buys a gun from an unlicensed seller, including buying from a stranger they

meet online or at a gun show.

Question 1 would create a level playing field where everyone would have to follow the same

rules, whether they buy and sell at a gun store, at a gun show, or using the Internet.

Voting yes on Question 1 protects our rights and meets our responsibilities.

We have the right to bear arms. And with rights come responsibilities, including the

responsibility to keep guns out of the hands of felons, domestic abusers, and the severely

mentally ill.

Question 1 won’t stop all gun violence—nothing will. But in states that require criminal

background checks for all handgun sales, almost 50% fewer police are killed with handguns

and about half as many women are shot to death by abusive partners.

Since 1980, over 50% of police officers murdered with guns in the line of duty in Nevada were

shot by people who would have likely failed a background check.

There are more than 35,000 guns for sale in Nevada each year on just four websites—and no

background check is required for most of these sales.

Question 1 closes these loopholes.

No Nevada tax dollars will be used to conduct Question 1 background checks because the

checks will be run by the FBI.

The Nevada Association of Public Safety Officers and Las Vegas Fraternal Order of Police—

representing thousands of law enforcement officers—urge yes on Question 1.

Nevada doctors

, crime victims

, the Nevada Parent Teacher Association

, and the Nevada

State Education Association

all agree—passing Question 1 will help save lives.

We need to close this dangerous loophole and make sure criminal background checks are

required on all gun sales in Nevada. Please vote yes on Question 1.

The above argument was submitted by the Ballot Question Committee composed of citizens in

favor of this question as provided for in NRS 293.252. Committee members: Matt Griffin

(Chair), Nevadans for Background Checks; Justin Jones, private citizen; Elaine Wynn, Nevadans

for Background Checks. Pursuant to NRS 293.252(5)(f), the Committee does not believe the

measure will have any environmental impact. This argument, with active hyperlinks, can be

found at www.nvsos.gov.

______________

18 U.S.C. § 922(g); Nev. Rev. Stat. § 202.360.

18 U.S.C. § 922(t).

Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, State Background Check Requirements and Firearm Homicide Against

Law Enforcement, January 15, 2015, http://every.tw/1FpRqkh.

Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, State Background Check Requirements and Rates of Domestic Violence

Homicide, January 15, 2015, http://every.tw/1y3kxCb.

Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, Nevada Law Enforcement Deaths and Illegal Guns, November 9, 2015,

http://every.tw/1q2kqck.

Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, The Wild Wild Web: Investigating Online Gun Markets in Nevada,

January 29, 2016, http://every.tw/26XLqeY.

Letter from the Nevada Association of Public Safety Officers, January 12, 2016; and Letter from the Las Vegas

Fraternal Order of Police.

Letter from Nevadans for Background Checks; and Letter from the Nevada Public Health Association, April 19,

2016.

Letter from Nevadans for Background Checks.

Letter from Nevada Parent Teacher Association, February 2, 2016.

Letter from the Nevada State Education Association, April 11, 2016.

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT FOR PASSAGE

Question 1 will do nothing to promote public safety. It is about destroying the Second

Amendment freedoms of law-abiding Nevadans by out-of-state gun control groups.

Criminals, by definition, do not obey laws.

U.S. Department of Justice statistics show that criminals obtain guns illegally--through straw-

purchasers, theft, and the black market.

Question 1 does nothing to stop these methods of

obtaining guns.

The supporters of Question 1 mislead Nevada voters by arguing that this initiative is about gun

sales to violent criminals and the mentally ill. If this were about violent criminals and gun sales,

supporters would have written the initiative to focus on sales, but they chose instead to cover

all transfers, including those between friends and family.

Prohibiting someone from loaning a gun to a friend for an afternoon of target shooting or to go

hunting – without a background check – will do nothing to stop violent crime. Rather, it

advances another stated goal of gun control groups: establishing a federal registry of gun

owners across America.

Supporters of Question 1 use self-generated statistics in their attempts to fool the public into

ignoring the base, common-sense reality that criminals will not be dissuaded from violent crime

if Question 1 passes.

The above rebuttal was submitted by the Ballot Question Committee composed of citizens

opposed to this question as provided for in NRS 293.252. Committee members: Daniel Reid

(Chair), NRA Nevadans for Freedom; Blayne Osborn, private citizen; Don Turner, Nevada

Firearms Coalition. Pursuant to NRS 293.252(5)(f), the Committee does not believe the measure

will have any environmental impact. This rebuttal, with active hyperlinks, can be found at

www.nvsos.gov.

________________

Nevadans for Background Checks, Contributions and Expenses Report, Nevada Secretary of State web page

available at:

https://nvsos.gov/SOSCandidateServices/AnonymousAccess/CEFDSearchUU/GroupDetails.aspx?o=xLkkWMf4XkrE

VN%252bbfpbfTQ%253d%253d.

Special Report: Firearm Violence, 1993-2011, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of

Justice Statistics, May 2013, http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf; Guns Used in Crime, U.S.

Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, July 1995,

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/GUIC.PDF; and Following the Gun: Enforcing Federal Laws against Firearms

Traffickers, Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, June 2000,

http://everytown.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Following-the-Gun_Enforcing-Federal-Laws-Against-Firearms-

Traffickers.pdf.

ARGUMENT AGAINST PASSAGE

Question 1 is not what its supporters claim it is and goes well beyond sales to include loans,

leases and gifts. Imagine a soldier being required to run a background check on their fiancé or

roommate just to store their firearms in anticipation of an upcoming deployment. That’s

exactly what this initiative will do. Or maybe you’d like to loan your firearm to a friend of 20

years to go target shooting on BLM land. Again, Question 1 would mandate that you run a

background check on this trusted friend.

Question 1 goes even further than that. If passed, this new law would require Nevadans to

appear jointly at a federal firearms dealer who may charge a fee anytime they relinquish

possession of a firearm and to have it returned.

Failure to do so will constitute a serious crime

and up to a year in prison. This complex, unenforceable, and overly burdensome change places

more bureaucratic restrictions on law abiding citizens while not impacting criminals.

Under current law, federal firearms dealers are required to run a background check when

selling a firearm regardless of where the transfer takes place.

Question 1 would expand this to

include private transfers of a firearm, all to be conducted through a federal firearms dealer and

subject to fees.

In the case of loaning a firearm to your friend for a target shooting trip, this

would mean each of you making two separate trips to a federal firearms dealer and two

separate fees just to loan and return the firearm.

There are no limits to the fees that can be

charged for the two mandated trips.

If supporters of Question 1 were truly interested in stopping crime, QUESTION 1 WOULD HAVE

BEEN WRITTEN TO TARGET CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, NOT TO ENSNARE THE INNOCENT. Question 1

will expose law-abiding Nevadans to criminal penalties and burdensome costs without making

our state any safer.

The supporters of Question 1 have given no regard to fixing the current system and focusing

attention on criminals. During a 2014 hearing in the legislature, it was revealed that 800,000

criminal records were missing from the current state crime database.

Instead of addressing

this obvious failure in the system, Question 1 targets law-abiding citizens and otherwise legal

behavior.

Question 1 won’t make Nevada safer. Laws that target criminals or criminal behavior are what

reduce crime and promote public safety. Question 1 does neither.

The above argument was submitted by the Ballot Question Committee composed of citizens

opposed to this question as provided for in NRS 293.252. Committee members: Daniel Reid

(Chair), NRA Nevadans for Freedom; Blayne Osborn, private citizen; Don Turner, Nevada

Firearms Coalition. Pursuant to NRS 293.252(5)(f), the Committee does not believe the measure

will have any environmental impact. This argument, with active hyperlinks, can be found at

www.nvsos.gov.

_________________

The Background Check Initiative.

18 U.S.C. § 922(t).

The Background Check Initiative.

Id.

Report: Nevada repository missing thousands of criminal records, Las Vegas Review Journal, June 20, 2014,

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/nevada/report-nevada-repository-missing-thousands-criminal-records.

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PASSAGE

Opponents of Question 1 are trying to confuse voters, but Question 1 will make Nevada safer.

Background checks work, and they’re convenient for law-abiding gun owners.

Over the last three years, background checks at Nevada gun dealers blocked 5,379 gun sales to

criminals and other dangerous people who cannot legally buy guns, including felons, domestic

abusers, and people with dangerous mental illness.

But under current law, dangerous people can avoid background checks and buy guns from

strangers they meet online or at gun shows, no questions asked.

Question 1 closes that loophole, requiring all gun sellers to play by the same rules.

Question 1 will help save lives. In states with background checks for all handgun sales, 48%

fewer law enforcement officers are killed with handguns,

and 46% fewer women are shot to

death by abusive partners.

Background checks are quick and easy. 97.1% of Nevadans live within 10 miles of a gun dealer.

And over 90% of FBI background checks are completed on the spot.

We have a right to bear arms and a responsibility to keep guns away from criminals, domestic

abusers, and people with dangerous mental illness.

YES on Question 1 will make our communities safer.

The above rebuttal was submitted by the Ballot Question Committee composed of citizens in

favor of this question as provided for in NRS 293.252. Committee members: Matt Griffin

(Chair), Nevadans for Background Checks; Justin Jones, private citizen; Elaine Wynn, Nevadans

for Background Checks. Pursuant to NRS 293.252(5)(f), the Committee does not believe the

measure will have any environmental impact. This rebuttal, with active hyperlinks, can be found

at www.nvsos.gov.

______________

Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, Gun Violence and Background Checks in Nevada, August 27, 2015,

https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-and-background-checks-in-nevada/.

Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, State Background Check Requirements and Firearm Homicide against

Law Enforcement, January 15, 2015, http://every.tw/1FpRqkh.

Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, State Background Check Requirements and Rates of Domestic Violence

Homicide, January 15, 2015, http://every.tw/1y3kxCb.

Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund analysis of U.S. Census data, May 2015. (There are 515 federally licensed

gun dealers in Nevada able to conduct background checks on unlicensed sales. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,

Firearms and Explosives, data for type 1 and 2 FFL licenses in Nevada in May 2015, http://1.usa.gov/1JOixGK.)

U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, 2014

NICS Operations Report, http://bit.ly/29YNKMh.

FISCAL NOTE

FINANCIAL IMPACT – CANNOT BE DETERMINED

OVERVIEW

Question 1 proposes to amend various sections of the Nevada Revised Statutes to require that

a background check be conducted by a licensed dealer before a firearm is transferred from one

unlicensed person to another unlicensed person (private-party sales) under certain

circumstances. Question 1 also establishes criminal penalties for violations of these provisions

by unlicensed persons who sell or transfer firearms.

FINANCIAL IMPACT OF QUESTION 1

Pursuant to the provisions of the federal Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Public Law

103-159), federally licensed firearm dealers are required to obtain a background check on an

individual before a firearm may be purchased by that person. The law requires that the

background check be conducted either directly through the National Instant Criminal

Background Check System (NICS) maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), or

through a point of contact (POC) established within each state.

The Department of Public Safety has indicated that the Department’s Criminal History

Repository (CHR) serves as Nevada’s POC based on the provisions of the Brady Act. As a result

of this POC status, licensed firearm dealers contact the CHR to initiate background checks on

retail firearm sales instead of contacting NICS directly. Currently, the CHR assesses a $25 fee

for each background check that is conducted for this purpose.

The Department of Public Safety has indicated that passage of Question 1 would require a

renegotiation of POC status or the development of an alternative agreement with the FBI in

order to accommodate the provisions of the question. Based on this requirement, the Fiscal

Analysis Division has identified three potential scenarios that could occur due to the

implementation of Question 1:

1. If the agreement between the State and the FBI required the CHR to perform all background

checks, it would result in additional expenditures of approximately $650,000 per year.

However, the Department has estimated that the additional revenue that would be

generated from the $25 fee imposed on the private-party background checks would be

sufficient to defray these expenditures, which would result in no financial impact upon state

government.

2. If the agreement between the State and the FBI allows licensed firearms dealers to contact

NICS directly to conduct federal background checks for private-party sales, but allows the

State to maintain POC status and continue to conduct background checks through the CHR

for all other sales by licensed firearm dealers as is currently required by federal law, there

would be no financial impact upon state government.

3. If the agreement between the State and the FBI removes Nevada’s POC status under the

Brady Act, licensed firearms dealers would be required to contact NICS directly to obtain

background check information for retail and private-party sales rather than contacting the

CHR. The Department has indicated that, if licensed dealers are required to access NICS

directly for background checks on all gun sales, this would result in the elimination of

approximately 13 positions and a loss in revenue of approximately $2.7 million per year,

which is used to support the current operations of the CHR. This loss in revenue would

result in a negative financial impact upon state government, as additional revenue would be

required from the State General Fund or other sources to supplant revenues used to

support the CHR’s functions.

Because the Fiscal Analysis Division cannot determine what agreement may be reached

between the Department and the FBI with respect to Nevada’s status as a POC state under the

Brady Act, the resultant financial impact upon state government cannot be determined with

any reasonable degree of certainty.

The provisions creating misdemeanor and felony provisions for violations of the requirements

of Question 1 may increase the workload of various state and local government agencies with

respect to enforcement, investigation, incarceration, probation, and parole. The Department of

Corrections, the Department of Public Safety, and the Fiscal Analysis Division are unable to

determine the number of persons who may be investigated, prosecuted, or incarcerated as a

result of violations of these provisions. Thus, the resultant financial effect upon state and local

government cannot be determined with any reasonable degree of certainty.

The provisions creating misdemeanor and felony provisions for violations of the requirements

of Question 1 will require two changes to the Nevada Offense Codes used in the CHR. The

Department of Public Safety has indicated that these changes can be accommodated with

existing staff, and that no additional financial impact would be incurred by the Department.

Prepared by the Fiscal Analysis Division of the Legislative Counsel Bureau – August 12, 2016

THE BACKGROUND CHECK INITIATIVE

EXPLANATION – Matter in bolded italics is new; matter between brackets [omitted material] is material to be omitted.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEVADA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

Section

Sections 1 to 8, inclusive, of this act may be cited as The Background

Check Act.

Sec.

The People of Nevada do hereby find and declare that:

1. To promote public safety, federal law currently prohibits felons, domestic abusers,

the severely mentally ill, and other dangerous people from buying or possessing firearms;

2. Federally licensed firearms dealers are required to run background checks on their

prospective buyers to ensure they are not prohibited from buying or possessing firearms;

3. Criminals and other dangerous people can avoid background checks by buying guns

from unlicensed firearms sellers, whom they can easily meet online or at gun shows and who are

not legally required to run background checks before selling or transferring firearms;

4. Due to this loophole, millions of guns exchange hands each year in the United States

without a background check;

5. The background check process is quick and convenient: Over 90% of federal

background checks are completed instantaneously and over 97% of Nevadans live within 10

miles of a licensed gun dealer;

6. We have the right to bear arms, but with rights come responsibilities, including the

responsibility to keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons and domestic abusers;

7. To promote public safety and protect our communities, and to create a fair, level

playing field for all gun sellers, the people of Nevada find it necessary to more effectively

enforce current law prohibiting dangerous persons from purchasing and possessing firearms by

requiring background checks on all firearms sales and transfers, with reasonable exceptions,

including for immediate family members, hunting, and self-defense.

Sec.

Chapter 202 of NRS is hereby amended by adding thereto the provisions set

forth as sections 4 to 6, inclusive, of this act.

Sec.

As used NRS 202.254 and sections 4, 5 and 6 of this act, unless the context

otherwise requires:

1. “Central Repository” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 179A.045.

2. “Hunting” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 501.050.

3. “Licensed dealer” means a person who holds a license as a dealer in firearms

issued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 923(a).

4. “National Instant Criminal Background Check System” has the meaning ascribed

to it in NRS 179A.062.

5. “Transferee” means an unlicensed person who wishes or intends to receive a

firearm from another unlicensed person.

6. “Transferor” means an unlicensed person who wishes or intends to transfer a

firearm to another unlicensed person.

7. “Trapping” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 501.090.

8. “Unlicensed person” means a person who does not hold a license as a dealer,

importer, or manufacturer in firearms issued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 923(a).

Sec.

The provisions of NRS 202.254 do not apply to:

1. The sale or transfer of a firearm by or to any law enforcement agency and, to the

extent he or she is acting within the course and scope of his or her employment and official

duties, any peace officer, security guard entitled to carry a firearm under NAC 648.345,

member of the armed forces, or federal official.

2. The sale or transfer of an antique firearm, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921(16).

3. The sale or transfer of a firearm between immediate family members, which for

the purposes of this chapter means spouses and domestic partners and any of the following

relations, whether by whole or half blood, adoption, or step-relation: parents, children,

siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces and nephews.

4. The transfer of a firearm to an executor, administrator, trustee, or personal

representative of an estate or a trust that occurs by operation of law upon the death of the

former owner of the firearm.

5. A temporary transfer of a firearm to a person who is not prohibited from buying or

possessing firearms under state or federal law if such transfer:

(a) Is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm; and

(b) Lasts only as long as immediately necessary to prevent such imminent death or

great bodily harm.

6. A temporary transfer of a firearm if:

(a) The transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee is prohibited from

buying or possessing firearms under state or federal law;

(b) The transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee will use or intends to

use the firearm in the commission of a crime; and

transfer is exclusively:

(1) At an established shooting range authorized by the governing body of the

jurisdiction in which such range is located;

(2) At a lawful organized competition involving the use of a firearm;

(3) While participating in or practicing for a performance by an organized

group that uses firearms as a part of the public performance;

(4) While hunting or trapping if the hunting or trapping is legal in all places

where the transferee possesses the firearm and the transferee holds all licenses or permits

required for such hunting or trapping; or

(5) While in the presence of the transferor.

Sec.

An unlicensed person who sells or voluntarily transfers one or more firearms

to another unlicensed person in violation of NRS 202.254:

1. For a first conviction involving the sale or transfer of one or more firearms, is

guilty of a gross misdemeanor and shall be punished as provided in NRS 193.140; and

2. For a second or subsequent conviction involving the sale or transfer of one or

more firearms, is guilty of a category C felony and shall be punished as provided in

NRS 193.130(2)(c).

Sec.

NRS 202.254 is hereby amended to read as follows:

202.254 1. [A private person who wishes to transfer a firearm to another person may,

before transferring the firearm, request that the Central Repository for Nevada Records of

Criminal History perform a background check on the person who wishes to acquire the firearm.

2. The person who requests the information pursuant to subsection 1 shall provide the

Central Repository with identifying information about the person who wishes to acquire the

firearm.

3. Upon receiving a request from a private person pursuant to subsection 1 and the

identifying information required pursuant to subsection 2, the Central Repository shall within 5

business days after receiving the request:

(a) Perform a background check on the person who wishes to acquire the firearm; and

(b) Notify the person who requests the information whether the information available to

the Central Repository indicates that the receipt of a firearm by the person who wishes to acquire

the firearm would violate a state or federal law.

4. If the person who requests the information does not receive notification from the

Central Repository regarding the request within 5 business days after making the request, the

person may presume that the receipt of a firearm by the person who wishes to acquire the firearm

would not violate a state or federal law.

5. The Central Repository may not charge a fee for performing a background check and

notifying a person of the results of the background check pursuant to this section.

6. A private person who transfers a firearm to another person is immune from civil

liability for failing to request a background check pursuant to this section or for any act or

omission relating to a background check requested pursuant to this section if the act or omission

was taken in good faith and without malicious intent.

7. The Director of the Department of Public Safety may request an allocation from the

Contingency Account pursuant to NRS 353.266, 353.268 and 353.269 to cover the costs incurred

by the Department to carry out the provisions of subsection 5.] Except as otherwise provided in

section 5 of this act, an unlicensed person shall not sell or transfer a firearm to another

unlicensed person unless a licensed dealer first conducts a background check on the buyer or

transferee in compliance with this section.

2. The seller or transferor and buyer or transferee shall appear jointly with the

firearm and request that a licensed dealer conduct a background check on the buyer or

transferee.

3. A licensed dealer who agrees to conduct a background check pursuant to this

section shall take possession of the firearm and comply with all requirements of federal and

state law as though the licensed dealer were selling or transferring the firearm from his or her

own inventory to the buyer or transferee, including, but not limited to, all recordkeeping

requirements, except that:

(a) The licensed dealer must contact the National Instant Criminal Background Check

System, as described in 18 U.S.C. § 922(t), and not the Central Repository, to determine

whether the buyer or transferee is eligible to purchase and possess firearms under state and

federal law; and

(b) The seller or transferor may remove the firearm from the business premises while

the background check is being conducted, provided that before the seller or transferor sells or

transfers the firearm to the buyer or transferee, the seller or transferor and the buyer or

transferee shall return to the licensed dealer who shall again take possession of the firearm

prior to the completion of the sale or transfer.

4. A licensed dealer who agrees to conduct a background check pursuant to this

section shall inform the seller or transferor and the buyer or transferee of the response from

the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. If the response indicates that the

buyer or transferee is ineligible to purchase or possess the firearm, the licensed dealer shall

return the firearm to the seller or transferor and the seller or transferor shall not sell or

transfer the firearm to the buyer or transferee.

5. A licensed dealer may charge a reasonable fee for conducting a background check

and facilitating a firearm transfer between unlicensed persons pursuant to this section.

Sec.

If any provision of this act, or the application thereof to any person, thing or

circumstance is held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such

invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of this act as a

whole or any provision or application of this act which can be given effect without the invalid or

unconstitutional provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this act are declared to

be severable.

Sec.

This act shall become effective on October 1, 2015, if approved by the

legislature, or on January 1, 2017, if approved by the voters.

STATE QUESTION NO. 2

Amendment to the Nevada Revised Statutes

Shall the Nevada Revised Statutes be amended to allow a person, 21 years old or older, to

purchase, cultivate, possess, or consume a certain amount of marijuana or concentrated

marijuana, as well as manufacture, possess, use, transport, purchase, distribute, or sell

marijuana paraphernalia; impose a 15 percent excise tax on wholesale sales of marijuana;

require the regulation and licensing of marijuana cultivators, testing facilities, distributors,

suppliers, and retailers; and provide for certain criminal penalties?

Yes  No 



EXPLANATION & DIGEST

EXPLANATION—This ballot measure proposes to amend the Nevada Revised Statutes to make

it lawful for a person 21 years of age or older to purchase and consume one ounce or less of

marijuana other than concentrated marijuana, or one-eighth of an ounce or less of

concentrated marijuana. It would also make it lawful for a person 21 years of age or older to

cultivate not more than six marijuana plants for personal use, as well as obtain and use

marijuana paraphernalia.

The ballot measure would also allow for the operation of marijuana establishments, which

would be regulated by the Department of Taxation. Regulated marijuana establishments would

include marijuana cultivation facilities, marijuana testing facilities, marijuana product

manufacturing facilities, marijuana distributors, and retail marijuana stores. For the first 18

months, the Department of Taxation would only accept license applications for retail marijuana

stores, marijuana product manufacturing facilities, and marijuana cultivation facilities from

persons holding a medical marijuana establishment registration certificate. Similarly, for the

first 18 months, the Department of Taxation would only issue marijuana distributors’ licenses to

persons holding a Nevada wholesale liquor dealers’ license, unless the Department determines

an insufficient number of marijuana distributors would result from this limitation.

If the ballot measure is approved, no marijuana establishments would be allowed within 1,000

feet of a public or private K-12 school or 300 feet of a community facility. There would also be

limits on the number of retail marijuana store licenses issued in each county by the Department

of Taxation. In a county with a population greater than 700,000, up to 80 retail marijuana store

licenses would be allowed; in a county with a population greater than 100,000 but less than

700,000, up to 20 retail marijuana store licenses would be allowed; in a county with a

population greater than 55,000 but less than 100,000, up to 4 retail marijuana store licenses

would be allowed; and in a county with a population less than 55,000, up to 2 retail marijuana

602,400 Votes (54.47%)

503,615 Votes (45.53%)

store licenses would be allowed. At the request of a county government, the Department of

Taxation may issue retail marijuana store licenses in excess of the number otherwise allowed.

In addition to licensing, the Department of Taxation would be charged with adopting

regulations necessary to carry out the provisions of this ballot measure. The regulations must

address licensing procedures; licensee qualifications; security of marijuana establishments;

testing, labeling, and packaging requirements; reasonable restrictions on advertising; and civil

penalties for violating any regulation adopted by the Department.

Approval of the ballot measure would not prevent the imposition of civil or criminal penalties

for driving under the influence of marijuana; knowingly selling or giving marijuana to a person

under 21 years of age; possessing or using marijuana or marijuana paraphernalia in state

correctional centers; possessing or using marijuana on school grounds; or undertaking any task

under the influence of marijuana that constitutes negligence or professional malpractice. The

measure would also not prevent employers from enforcing marijuana bans for their workers;

marijuana bans in public buildings or on private property; and localities from adopting control

measures pertaining to zoning and land use for marijuana establishments.

Under the provisions of the ballot measure, all applicants for a marijuana establishment license

would be required to pay a one-time application fee of $5,000. Additionally, the Department of

Taxation may require the payment of an annual licensing fee ranging from $3,300 to $30,000,

depending on type of license. The measure would also impose a 15 percent excise tax on

wholesale sales of marijuana in Nevada by a marijuana cultivation facility. Revenue from this

excise tax, as well as revenue from licensing fees and penalties collected by the Department of

Taxation related to the regulation of marijuana, would first go to the Department of Taxation

and local governments to cover the costs of carrying out the provisions of this measure. Any

remaining revenue would be deposited in the State Distributive School Account.

Lastly, this ballot measure would impose criminal penalties for certain violations related to the

possession, use, sale, and cultivation of marijuana and marijuana plants. Criminal offenses

would include violations of the marijuana cultivation laws set forth in the measure; public

consumption of marijuana; a person falsely representing himself or herself to be 21 years of age

or older in order to obtain marijuana; and knowingly giving marijuana to a person under 21

years of age.

A “Yes” vote would amend the Nevada Revised Statutes to allow a person, 21 years old or

older, to purchase, cultivate, possess, or consume a certain amount of marijuana or

concentrated marijuana, as well as manufacture, possess, use, transport, purchase,

distribute, or sell marijuana paraphernalia; impose a 15 percent excise tax on wholesale sales

of marijuana; require the regulation and licensing of marijuana cultivators, testing facilities,

distributors, suppliers, and retailers; and provide for certain criminal penalties.

A “No” vote would retain the provisions of the Nevada Revised Statutes in their current form.

These provisions prohibit the possession, use, cultivation, and sale or delivery of marijuana in

the State of Nevada for non-medical purposes, as well as the possession, use, sale, delivery,

or manufacture of marijuana paraphernalia for non-medical purposes.

DIGEST—Chapter 453 of the Nevada Revised Statutes, known as the Uniform Controlled

Substances Act, concerns the classification, enforcement, regulation, and offenses related to

marijuana. Approval of this ballot measure would amend the Nevada Revised Statutes to make

it lawful for a person 21 years of age or older to purchase and consume one ounce or less of

marijuana other than concentrated marijuana, or one-eighth of an ounce or less of

concentrated marijuana. It would also make it lawful for a person 21 years of age or older to

cultivate not more than six marijuana plants for personal use, as well as obtain and use

marijuana paraphernalia. Approval of this ballot measure would increase public revenue due to

revenue collections from license fees for marijuana establishments and the 15 percent

wholesale marijuana excise tax.

The ballot measure would also allow for the operation of marijuana establishments, which

would be regulated by the Department of Taxation. Regulated marijuana establishments would

include marijuana cultivation facilities, marijuana testing facilities, marijuana product

manufacturing facilities, marijuana distributors, and retail marijuana stores. In addition to

licensing, the Department of Taxation would be charged with adopting regulations necessary to

carry out the provisions of this ballot measure. The regulations must address licensing

procedures; licensee qualifications; security of marijuana establishments; testing, labeling, and

packaging requirements; reasonable restrictions on advertising; and civil penalties for violating

any regulation adopted by the Department.