AB 245 revises Nevada’s firearm laws to prohibit people under 21 from handling, possessing, or controlling semiautomatic shotguns and semiautomatic centerfire rifles, with specified exceptions. It also makes it unlawful to aid or knowingly permit a person under 21 to possess those firearms, and it extends existing penalties for negligent storage and unlawful access to this new age group. The bill further bars the sale or barter of semiautomatic centerfire rifles and semiautomatic shotguns to anyone under 21 when the seller acts with reckless disregard or knows, or should know, the buyer is underage.
The bill also amends Nevada’s child-firearm possession statute to narrow when minors age 14 and older may possess rifles or shotguns at home or in other settings. Under the revised language, a rifle or shotgun kept at a minor’s residence must not be a semiautomatic shotgun or semiautomatic centerfire rifle, and it must be unloaded and stored in a securely locked container when not in use. The measure preserves exceptions for military members, law enforcement officers, hunting, target shooting, organized competitions, public performances, and certain rangeland activities.
In practical terms, AB 245 changes NRS 202.300 and NRS 202.310 by creating a new offense category for under-21 possession of certain semiautomatic long guns, adding related liability for adults who facilitate access, and expanding the age-based sales restriction from concealable firearms under 18 to specified semiautomatic rifles and shotguns under 21. It also incorporates existing firearm definitions into the new section and takes effect July 1, 2025. The bill therefore affects minors, young adults, firearm sellers, parents or guardians, hunters, and law enforcement, while leaving other firearm categories and existing exceptions largely intact.
The overall sentiment reflected in the voting history was mixed but ultimately favorable enough for passage in both chambers. The Assembly passed the bill 27-15, and the Senate passed it 12-8, indicating majority support but meaningful opposition. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record does not show detailed debate, but the close votes suggest the measure was politically contested.
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s expansion of age-based firearm restrictions to 18-to-20-year-olds and its specific targeting of semiautomatic shotguns and semiautomatic centerfire rifles. Supporters likely viewed the measure as a youth-safety and gun-storage reform, while opponents likely objected to the added restrictions on lawful possession, hunting, and firearm access for young adults and families. The exceptions for hunting, military service, law enforcement, and supervised activities appear designed to address some of those concerns.
AB 245 amends Nevada Revised Statutes 202.253, 202.300, and 202.310 to create new restrictions on possession, storage, and sale of semiautomatic shotguns and semiautomatic centerfire rifles by persons under 21. It adds criminal penalties for under-21 possession, for adults who aid or knowingly permit such possession, and for negligent storage that allows access by prohibited persons. It also narrows certain youth firearm exceptions and updates the state’s age-based firearm sales prohibitions, while preserving existing exceptions for military, law enforcement, hunting, target shooting, competitions, and related lawful activities.
The bill appears to have had a divided but ultimately supportive reception. It passed the Assembly 27-15 and the Senate 12-8, showing that it cleared both chambers with majority support but not broad consensus. The absence of committee transcript material limits insight into specific arguments, but the vote margins indicate that the proposal was controversial and drew substantial opposition alongside enough support to advance.
The central controversy is the bill’s extension of firearm restrictions from minors under 18 to people under 21, especially for semiautomatic centerfire rifles and semiautomatic shotguns. Opponents likely viewed this as an infringement on lawful firearm ownership, hunting, and family access for older teens and young adults, while supporters likely argued it closes a public-safety gap and strengthens safe-storage rules. Additional tension likely centered on whether the bill’s exceptions for hunting, military service, law enforcement, and supervised use are sufficient to preserve legitimate uses without undermining the new restrictions.