Cheers to Wolfson for demanding action on gun background checks

Adam Laxalt could learn a lot from Steve Wolfson about how to best serve the interests of Nevadans. That became clear last week when it was revealed that Wolfson, Clark County’s district attorney, had sent a letter to Laxalt and Gov. Brian Sandoval calling for “immediate action” to implement the universal firearms background check initiative that Nevada voters passed in November 2016.

Laxalt, Nevada’s attorney general, richly deserved to be pressured. Not only did he oppose the measure during the run-up to the election, he took the first opportunity to ignore the will of the voters and wash his hands of the measure after it passed.

Laxalt made his disdain of the ballot question well known before the election, going so far as to appear in commercials urging Nevada voters to reject it.

Then, after Nevada voters passed the measure, he issued an opinion four days before it was scheduled to go into effect declaring it unenforceable. In his opinion, Laxalt cited a notice from the FBI to state officials that it would not participate in the background checks as outlined in the measure.

And then, silence. Laxalt, Sandoval and other state officials shrugged their shoulders, moved on and essentially told the 558,631 Nevadans who supported the measure that their votes didn’t matter. Not exactly a shining moment in representative government.

It wasn’t until after the Oct. 1 mass shooting that Sandoval finally asked Laxalt’s office to press for a solution.

The movement was long overdue.

True, the wording of the measure was problematic and created an implementation challenge. It called for Nevada to become what’s called a hybrid state, in which the state would handle background checks for purchases involving licensed gun dealers and the federal government would conduct checks on sales involving unlicensed sellers at gun shows, via the internet and in other situations.

In its letter to the state, the FBI said in

“According to a recent report from the University of California, Berkeley, California hospitals within a two-hour drive from the Nevada-california state line experience a 70 percent increase in admissions for shooting injuries within two weeks after the start of a gun show in Nevada.”

essence that it wouldn’t allow states to mandate tasks for the agency.

So, yes, there was a problem. But other states have managed to establish hybrid systems. And in the larger scheme of things, it’s hard to believe that a state with the wherewithal to develop systems to regulate something as complicated as gaming can’t find a way to run a gun background check.

Thus, Wolfson deserves credit for giving Sandoval and Laxalt a shove. His letter, which also was signed by Los Angeles City Attorney Michael Feuer and Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., on behalf of the gun safety organization Prosecutors Against Gun Violence, said:

“Every day that Nevada’s Background Check Law goes unenforced is another day for a domestic abuser, stalker, or other dangerous individual to get their hands on a firearm through an unlicensed sale without a background check and hurt or kill someone or themselves. Failure to enforce the Background Check Law and close the federal gun show loophole also allows Nevada to persist as an exporter of gun violence through unregulated gun sales. According to a recent report from the University of California, Berkeley, California hospitals within a twohour drive from the Nevada-california state border experience a 70 percent increase in admissions for shooting injuries within the two weeks after the start of a gun show in Nevada. It is too easy for dangerous individuals to get their hands on a firearm in Nevada.”

The prosecutors also reference the Oct. 1 shooting, saying that “while no one law will prevent all crime, we are deeply troubled that the sensible public safety law passed by voters remains unenforced nearly a year after the election.”

Laxalt, a conservative Republican who since the November election has announced he’ll run for governor, responded to the letter with a snotty statement.

“If the Clark County DA wants to advance the Californication of our state by partnering with Los Angeles and New York politicians for his own purposes, that is his prerogative,” the statement said. “As DA Wolfson knows, the office of the Nevada attorney general has no implementation or enforcement authority related to Question 1.”

How irresponsible, and how unbecoming of someone who wants to hold the highest elected office in the state.

Instead of trying to become part of the solution and serving those 558,631 voters, Laxalt went straight to politics.

Then again, it’s abundantly clear that politics — not public service — have driven him on this issue. That came into sharp focus when, after the November vote, he gave a speech at the National Rifle Association national convention citing his opposition to the ballot measure as evidence of his support of the NRA’S agenda.

Laxalt cares about the interests of the gun lobby and hardcore Second Amendment voters, not moderate and safety-conscious Nevadans.

So kudos to Wolfson for a reminder that some elected officials serve the public at large.