NRS 205.465 Possession or sale of a document to establish false status or identity. It is unlawful for a person to possess any document for the purpose of establishing a false identity for himself or any other person.
You have the common law right to use any name you chose. If you chose it then it is not fake. Just don't falsify any government documents or ID to support you chosen name.
... is why I don't read these boards as often as I would like to. If you actually read NRS 205.465 it SPECIFICALLY AND CLEARLY applies only to the fraudulent use of another actual existing person's identity which common sense would tell you is a crime. It does not apply to FAKE information (the title of your message).
NRS 205.465 Possession or sale of document or personal identifying information to establish false status or identity.
1. It is unlawful for a person to possess, sell or transfer any document or personal identifying information for the purpose of establishing a false status, occupation, membership, license or identity for himself or any other person.
2. A person who:
(a) Sells or transfers any such document or personal identifying information in violation of subsection 1; or
(b) Possesses any such document or personal identifying information in violation of subsection 1 to commit any of the crimes set forth in NRS 205.085 to 205.217, inclusive, 205.473 to 205.513, inclusive, or 205.610 to 205.810, inclusive,
is guilty of a category C felony and shall be punished as provided in NRS 193.130. 3. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, a person who possesses any such document or personal identifying information in violation of subsection 1 is guilty of a misdemeanor.
4. Subsection 1 does not:
(a) Preclude the adoption by a city or county of an ordinance prohibiting the possession of any such document or personal identifying information; or
(b) Prohibit the possession or use of any such document or personal identifying information by officers of local police, sheriff and metropolitan police departments and by agents of the investigation division of the department of public safety while engaged in undercover investigations related to the lawful discharge of their duties.
5. As used in this section:
(a) �Document� includes, without limitation, a photocopy print, photostat and other replica of a document.
(b) �Personal identifying information� means any information designed, commonly used or capable of being used, alone or in conjunction with any other information, to identify a person, including, without limitation:
(1) The name, driver�s license number, social security number, savings account number, credit card number, debit card number, date of birth, place of employment and maiden name of the mother of a person; and
(2) The fingerprints, voiceprint, retina image and iris image of a person.
(Added to NRS by 1975, 1460; A 1981, 2012; 1985, 1980; 1995, 1227; 1999, 1345; 2001, 2581)
..bloody what!
Are you one of those stupid law abiding persons, who couldn�t even stomach the thought that you might break a law?
Go and take your goody two shoes and bugger off with the fairy�s.
Get so danger and adventure in your life.
If you want fake ID then go and do it. Only bloody idiots get caught...are you a bloody idiot?????
And embarrass yourself by posting the entire statute now.
This statute CLEARLY applies to stealing someone else's ACTUAL personal information and using it for your own devices. The light bulb should have gone off for you when it described fingerprints and retina images!
The upshot is that if I want to call myself Anon E. Hamster and stroll around with ID of the same, I would only be in violation of this statute if I had taken actual identity information of existing people called Anon E. Hamster or if I passed off a retina print of someone else, say Anon E. Gerbil as Anon E. Hamster's own retina print.
This statute does not cover fictional information you use for your own non-fraudulent purposes.
The way you read the statute those fake Area 51 and Elvis Presley IDs sold at many Las Vegas gift shops would be illegal to buy, and obviously they're not.
The use of a fake ID (a document) to establish that you are "NOT" your actual self establishes a false "status", i.e. "Non-counter". No theft of actual personal information is required. Moreover if it induces a casino to offer you a game that they otherwise would not, your action could in fact be considered fraud. Don't be so sure. You are talking about Nevada.
LVBear had asked:
Could you please quote a specific statute, regulation, or court decision that makes the use of false ID in a casino "illegal"?
Do I think that if you were busted for having a players card in another name you would win the case or the charges would be dropped?
Yes.
Do I think it is possible a casino would try to use this law to have you arrested?
Yes.
this post made me feel compelled to do so.
"The use of a fake ID (a document) to establish that you are "NOT" your actual self establishes a false "status", i.e. "Non-counter". No theft of actual personal information is required. Moreover if it induces a casino to offer you a game that they otherwise would not, your action could in fact be considered fraud. Don't be so sure. You are talking about Nevada."
I am one of the most vocal critics of the Nevada court and "justice" system, since it is usually skewed heavily in favor of the casino political contributors. Many ridiculously unjust decisions have come out of Nevada courts favoring casinos over the years.
But on this issue, even the Nevada Supreme Court ruled in favor of a player with false ID. See Chen v. Monte Carlo, the infamous case where the Monte Carlo tried to blatantly cheat the player out of $40,000.00 (may have been $80,000.00, I can't recall right now and don't have my copies of the case handy), using the excuse that he used false ID to gain access to a blackjack game. They refused to cash his chips after backing him off, until the Supreme Court decision forced them to.
So, though the lower levels of the Nevada system, including the Gaming Control Board, went far out of their way in reaching absurd decisions, apparently to try to help the casino cheat the player, there was at least some integrity in the Supreme Court, though if I recall correctly, a few of the Justices had to recuse themselves because of conflicts of interest.
Only now-Chief Justice Bill Maupin dissented from the opinion, saying that he would have sided with the casino and allowed them to cheat the player.
Stalin's Russia?
The post was correcting Pro's false interpretation of THIS PARTICULAR Nevada statute. Anyone who understands English can see Pro has misinterpreted it. This statute concerns using another actual person's identifying characteristics for your own purposes. As in: I'm thinking of using my hamster's retina as an ID that defines me as Anon E. Hamster. I think you'll find that this is acceptable within this statute, since my hamster isn't a person. This statute concerns what you are doing with SOMEONE ELSE's information, not how you are representing yourself!
What your post is about is fraud which is a separate matter (and statutes) entirely and which leads us into gray areas of the law (worse) which would be interpreted, at least initially in a case, by the biased Nevada courts. Right now there are people all over Nevada using fake names in casinos with the casino's full knowledge and consent. The casinos even encourage these people to do so if it means they will come and stay with them.
A casino discovering you using a false identity would have to win a case in court by proving your false identity caused them to suffer by fraud. This is almost impossible to prove with legal advantage play or comps, even to those sympathetic Nevada courts. The casinos, knowing this, never take these cases to court, they just withdraw the comps if they can, and/or ask you to leave. Regarding the use of comps under a false identity, the casino would have to convince a court that they would not have issued the comps if they knew your identity was really Anon E. Gerbil, not Anon E. Hamster and this somehow defrauded them. Since comps are issued as a reward for your casino play, the identity you have chosen to go by on this matter is irrelevant.
The only situation that immediately comes to mind that a casino would likely win would be if you produced a false identity after having been properly 86'd from the casino in an attempt to prove you weren't the 86'd person. If you're this stupid, then yes - a cell is waiting in this case for violating the trespass laws, not for what name you'd like to be booked into jail as!
No Nevada law enforcement officer is going to enforce this statute on you unless you are actually misrepresenting yourself as an existing person. Thus the casino's only other recourse to get rid of you would be the trespass acts, if you allowed them to serve those on you.
I have friend he win many jackpot on slot machine. He like use fake
ss and drivers licencee. I tell him be careful but he keep doing. He
not get no trouble yet, but I afraid IRS get him.
Long as the poison I'm impoisenatin' don' exist, I'm in the clear. Correct? Sup to the cops to prove he exists somewhere! Good luck weedat.
OK. Now what happens if that other poison, they find out he exists awright, but, then dies ?? Then I ain't impoisenatin' anyone alive as you say. (I'll have my phonecall, now, off'cer.)
