Las Vegas sheriff frustrated after red-light camera, DUI bills fail: ‘We can do better'
'I got to be honest with you, I feel like I failed,' McMahill, who leads the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, told the 8 News Now Investigators during an exclusive interview Wednesday. 'We can do better. We absolutely can do better, and politics played a role in these things not getting passed.'
The 120-day legislative session ended Tuesday at midnight. Nevada lawmakers failed to pass any legislation this session to amend the state's DUI laws where death is involved, or several proposals to allow red-light cameras.
McMahill pushed for the cameras in an attempt to discourage reckless and speeding drivers.
'I'm sick and tired of people dying on our roadways because of the bad behavior of other drivers,' he told a legislative committee in March.
The bill failed to move forward and died in April.
Two proposals aimed at enhancing sentences for DUI involving death also failed to become law. Nevada's DUI-with-death law carries a sentence of 2-20 years. A 1995 Nevada law requires judges to sentence a person to a range, meaning the maximum amount of time a DUI driver who kills can serve in prison before going before the parole board is eight years. The 8 News Now Investigators have found most drivers who kill serve those eight years or less, not 20.
An amended version of Republican Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo's crime bill, Senate Bill 457, would have increased the maximum amount of prison time for a DUI driver who kills to 25 years.
Lombardo told the 8 News Now Investigators in March that he wanted to change the law to allow prosecutors to charge a DUI driver who kills with second-degree murder. The amended version would have carried a similar maximum sentence – 25 years — as the state's second-degree murder statute. However, the bill failed to pass the Nevada Senate amid a last-minute scramble and speech.
A second proposal, Senate Bill 304, would have amended the state's vehicular homicide law to include all DUIs involving death. As currently written, a driver must have three prior DUI convictions to face a vehicular-homicide charge. The proposal would have negated the prior conviction clause, carrying a possible sentence of 10 to 25 years or 10 to life, the same as the state's second-degree murder statute.
'There's just tragedy, tragedy, tragedy all the way around, and it sickens me that I wasn't able to get this done, quite frankly,' McMahill said.
Opponents have argued that imprisoning a person for years on the taxpayers' dime is not effective
'Who do you think is working against this?' 8 News Now Investigator David Charns asked the sheriff.
'I think there's a lot of people out there who advocate that this mass incarceration piece hasn't worked over the years,' McMahill said. 'And look, there's a few arguments I think that are valid on that side of the house. There's also a bunch of people that think we've become very soft on crime, and I think there's some arguments that are true there as well.'
Nevada law classifies a person's first DUI as a misdemeanor. It carries a potential jail sentence of 2-180 days, though the law is written to say the time can be served through community service. The crime becomes a felony after a person's third DUI within seven years. Tougher penalties, including potential prison time, do not begin unless a person joins that three-plus club.
A felony DUI conviction can carry prison time and require a driver to have an interlock device placed in their vehicle. One driver the 8 News Now Investigators followed racked up the three cases so quickly that he did not have a second DUI conviction before his third arrest, meaning all three remained misdemeanors. Records show in those first three DUI cases, municipal court judges ordered the driver to attend classes, stay out of trouble and pay a fine.
'The punishments are literally a slap on the hand,' McMahill said. 'The multiple, multiple DUI, I've watched your reports, you know exactly what I'm talking about, people can get away with a DUI over and over again and that's purely not acceptable.'
A third proposal involving misdemeanor DUI, Senate Bill 309, passed and — 36 hours after the end of the session — showed as enrolled in the legislative system. The bill changes the minimum jail requirements for a person's second DUI offense within seven years, amending a possible penalty from 10 days in jail to 20. The bill also lowers the blood-alcohol threshold for when a defendant would be ordered into treatment.
Several people blamed the failure of the governor's crime bill on its late introduction and last-minute votes in the final minutes of the legislative session. The governor submitted the crime bill in February, but the Legislative Counsel Bureau did not finalize it until April, a spokesperson for his office said. They added that Democratic leadership did not give the bill a hearing until May 28 — days before the end of the session.
Lawmakers will not reconvene, except for special circumstances at the request of the governor, until February 2027.
8 News Now Investigator David Charns can be reached at dcharns@8newsnow.com.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
a few seconds ago
- Boston Globe
Obama applauds Newsom's California redistricting plan as Texas GOP pushes new maps
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up According to organizers, the event raised $2 million for the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates, one of which has filed and supported litigation in several states over GOP-drawn districts. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Eric Holder, who served as Obama's attorney general and heads up the group, also appeared. Advertisement The former president's comments come as Texas lawmakers return to Austin this week, renewing a heated debate over a new congressional map creating five new potential GOP seats. The plan is the result of prodding by President Donald Trump, eager to stave off a midterm defeat that would deprive his party of control of the House of Representatives. Texas Democratic lawmakers delayed a vote for 15 days by leaving the state in protest, depriving the House of enough members to do business. Advertisement Spurred on by the Texas situation, Democratic governors including Newsom have pondered ways to possibly strengthen their party's position by way of redrawing U.S. House district lines, five years out from the Census count that typically leads into such procedures. In California — where voters in 2010 gave the power to draw congressional maps to an independent commission, with the goal of making the process less partisan — Democrats have unveiled a proposal that could give that state's dominant political party an additional five U.S. House seats in a bid to win the fight to control of Congress next year. If approved by voters in November, the blueprint could nearly erase Republican House members in the nation's most populous state, with Democrats intending to win the party 48 of its 52 U.S. House seats, up from 43. A hearing over that measure devolved into a shouting match Tuesday as a Republican lawmaker clashed with Democrats, and a committee voted along party lines to advance the new congressional map. California Democrats do not need any Republican votes to move ahead, and legislators are expected to approve a proposed congressional map and declare a Nov. 4 special election by Thursday to get required voter approval. Newsom and Democratic leaders say they'll ask voters to approve their new maps only for the next few elections, returning map-drawing power to the commission following the 2030 census — and only if a Republican state moves forward with new maps. Obama applauded that temporary timeline. Advertisement 'And we're going to do it in a temporary basis because we're keeping our eye on where we want to be long term,' Obama said, referencing Newsom's take on the California plan. 'I think that approach is a smart, measured approach, designed to address a very particular problem in a very particular moment in time.'


Newsweek
a minute ago
- Newsweek
Barack Obama Reacts to Gavin Newsom's Redistricting Play
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Former Democratic President Barack Obama has weighed in on the rare mid-decade redistricting battles unfolding in several states, voicing support for California Gov. Gavin Newsom's cautious approach to revising congressional maps. Obama's comments came as Republican-led efforts in Texas, encouraged by President Donald Trump, aim to strengthen GOP control ahead of next year's elections. "I believe that Gov. Newsom's approach is a responsible approach," Obama said Tuesday during a fundraiser on Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts, according to excerpts obtained by The Associated Press. "He said this is going to be responsible. We're not going to try to completely maximize it. We're only going to do it if and when Texas and/or other Republican states begin to pull these maneuvers. Otherwise, this doesn't go into effect." This article includes reporting by the Associated Press.

a minute ago
Obama applauds Newsom's California redistricting plan as 'responsible'
Former President Barack Obama has waded into states' efforts at rare mid-decade redistricting efforts, saying he agrees with California Gov. Gavin Newsom's response to alter his state's congressional maps, in the way of Texas redistricting efforts promoted by President Donald Trump aimed at shoring up Republicans' position in next year's elections. 'I believe that Gov. Newsom's approach is a responsible approach. He said this is going to be responsible. We're not going to try to completely maximize it,' Obama said at a Tuesday fundraiser on Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts, according to excerpts obtained by The Associated Press. 'We're only going to do it if and when Texas and/or other Republican states begin to pull these maneuvers. Otherwise, this doesn't go into effect.' While noting that 'political gerrymandering' is not his 'preference,' Obama said that, if Democrats 'don't respond effectively, then this White House and Republican-controlled state governments all across the country, they will not stop, because they do not appear to believe in this idea of an inclusive, expansive democracy.' According to organizers, the event raised $2 million for the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates, one of which has filed and supported litigation in several states over GOP-drawn districts. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Eric Holder, who served as Obama's attorney general and heads up the group, also appeared. The former president's comments come as Texas lawmakers return to Austin this week, renewing a heated debate over a new congressional map creating five new potential GOP seats. The plan is the result of prodding by President Donald Trump, eager to stave off a midterm defeat that would deprive his party of control of the House of Representatives. Texas Democratic lawmakers delayed a vote for 15 days by leaving the state in protest, depriving the House of enough members to do business. Spurred on by the Texas situation, Democratic governors including Newsom have pondered ways to possibly strengthen their party's position by way of redrawing U.S. House district lines, five years out from the Census count that typically leads into such procedures. In California — where voters in 2010 gave the power to draw congressional maps to an independent commission, with the goal of making the process less partisan — Democrats have unveiled a proposal that could give that state's dominant political party an additional five U.S. House seats in a bid to win the fight to control of Congress next year. If approved by voters in November, the blueprint could nearly erase Republican House members in the nation's most populous state, with Democrats intending to win the party 48 of its 52 U.S. House seats, up from 43. A hearing over that measure devolved into a shouting match Tuesday as a Republican lawmaker clashed with Democrats, and a committee voted along party lines to advance the new congressional map. California Democrats do not need any Republican votes to move ahead, and legislators are expected to approve a proposed congressional map and declare a Nov. 4 special election by Thursday to get required voter approval. Newsom and Democratic leaders say they'll ask voters to approve their new maps only for the next few elections, returning map-drawing power to the commission following the 2030 census — and only if a Republican state moves forward with new maps. Obama applauded that temporary timeline. 'And we're going to do it in a temporary basis because we're keeping our eye on where we want to be long term,' Obama said, referencing Newsom's take on the California plan. 'I think that approach is a smart, measured approach, designed to address a very particular problem in a very particular moment in time.'