LINCOLN – Attorney General Jon Bruning today issued an opinion finding that Omaha’s city ordinance requiring handguns to be registered does not apply to anyone with a state- recognized concealed handgun permit.
“The Legislature clearly intended the concealed carry permit process to be stringent,” Bruning said. “If you go through the steps to obtain a permit, there’s no reason for cities to make you jump through additional hoops.”
Nebraskans must undergo a background check, firearms training and fingerprinting, and submit a photograph and $100 to obtain a concealed handgun permit.
The Concealed Handgun Permit Act, as amended by LB430 in 2009, pre-empts municipal bans on the carrying of concealed handguns. The Omaha ordinance, which prohibits the possession of unregistered concealable firearms, violates this pre-emption as it applies to those who possess a valid carry permit recognized by Nebraska.
Given the wording of “state-recognized”, well… my Texas state CHL is recognized as valid (via reciprocity) within Nebraska.
This is all good. Omaha has been very anti-gun, but the only people that’s served to hurt are the law-abiding citizens. The gangs and other criminal element so prevalent in Omaha of course doesn’t give a fairy fart about any laws. So now removing barriers from law-abiding citizens, that’s a good thing.
Stuff From Hsoi 
I’m confused about requirements like these.
If I have an “unregistered” firearm, via the 5th Amendment, I can not be forced to disclose that fact, right?
If I read the law correctly, in order to carry a firearm it must be registered.
So, the city can only cite a person for carrying an unregistered firearm….not failing to register it. Right?
Wonder how many people have been prosecuted — if any — under this ordinance that is supposed to be so helpful in solving crimes and returning lost/stolen guns.
You have to understand Omaha politics to understand it… and even then you can’t understand it.
It’s basically something to nail people with after the fact. That is, they bust some gang member (Omaha has a BIG gang problem), oh lookie… he’s got a gun, of course it’s unregistered so there’s another charge we can stack on. But of course, it ends up really hurting law-abiding folks too…. probably moreso.
So it’s great to hear that the NE AG basically said it’s null and void, at least for CHL holders. I’m happy with that.
Now if NE could just improve it’s CHL law itself. But hey… baby steps in the right direction is still progress.
Hsoi,
I understand the piling on of charges, but that is limited to those that are not prohibited from owning a firearm.
In Haynes v. United States, 390 U.S. 85 (1968) the Supreme Court ruled that, since convicted felons are prohibited from owning firearms, requiring felons to register any firearms they owned constituted a form of self-incrimination and was therefore unconstitutional.
This is what I want to point out – like you said– these laws hurt the law abiding more then the criminals.
That absolutely boggles my mind – I can be convicted of a crime that a convicted felon can not be convicted of — failing to register a firearm. What insanity have we allowed.
I agree it is baby steps and is a success.
Ah, I see where you’re coming from.
Yeah… we are bass-ackwards these days. It’s a shame.