AN ACT requiring background checks for all firearm sales. NH HB1589

The committee wants to "study" taking away our rights:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=664885493555393&set=gm.10152175969491649&type=1

I have also found out some other "interesting news" Rep. Butler owns an inn Harts location.
http://www.notchland.com/search.html

So when you call his published number you get..
The front desk :)

The front desk tells you to call his cell phone...

"Rep. Edward Butler, (603)374-6131 (this is the Inn he lives at...) please call 603-986-4387 (cell)" was what members were being told today. Keep calling the inn. If he is rich enough to own a inn, he can afford to pay the staff to take notes for him...

Carroll- District 07
Seat #:2042
Former
Home Address:
2 Morey Rd
Harts Location, NH 03812-4105
Phone: (603)374-6131
Email: [email protected]

More:


Please keep up the calls, please ask them politely to take a message and ask them to have Rep. Butler call you back. Emails also work and so does calling Rep. Butlers cell phone.
The Committee chair is accountable to the entire state and needs to hear from the entire state.

-Design
 
Penny Dean explaining how this bill allows an FFL to break federal law.

[video=youtube_share;-plBbVEGjuo]http://youtu.be/-plBbVEGjuo[/video]

Here is the "offending" section:

159-E:2 Firearms Sales to be Conducted Through a Licensed Dealer.

I. No person shall sell or transfer a firearm unless:

(a) The person is a licensed firearms dealer; or

(b) The purchaser or transferee is a licensed firearms dealer; or

(c) The requirements of paragraph II are met.

II. If neither party to a prospective firearms transaction is a licensed firearms dealer, the parties to the transaction shall complete the sale or transfer through a licensed firearms dealer as follows:

(a) The seller or transferor shall deliver the firearm to the dealer, who shall process the sale or other transfer as if he or she were the seller or other transferor, except that the unlicensed seller or transferor may remove the firearm from the business premises of the licensed dealer while the background check is being conducted. If the seller or transferor removes the firearm from the business premises of the licensed dealer while the background check is being conducted, the purchaser or transferee and the seller or transferor shall return to the business premises of the licensed dealer, and the seller or transferor shall again deliver the firearm to the licensed dealer prior to completing the sale or transfer.
Click to expand...

Doesn't an FFL enter the firearm into its bound book while performing the transfer/background check?
 
Proposed amendment by Rep Ed Butler (D) guts the entirity HB1589

design said:
The committee wants to "study" taking away our rights:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=664885493555393&set=gm.10152175969491649&type=1
Click to expand...
Looks like they know they are on the ropes, Rep Ed Butler (D) want to gut the bill and create a "study" committee?

eoq6d.jpg

Looks to me like a way to save face and waste taxpayer money.
 
laura jones responded to my message urging opposition to the bill with "will do!" so that's nice to see. no responses from anyone else however.
 
Sending this to study commitee is a way of saving face as well as re writing it in a manner that is legal so the next time they submit it people like Penny don't make them look quite as stupid as they did this time

Anyone else notice how the chair allowed the anti's to ramble on forever but most pro rkba folks got a "hurry up" from him?

What a douche....
 
a Letter from NHFC on this: (I don't know how to make the links work) Please check the NHFC page for the letter, it should be posted within an hour.
Letter with actual working links: http://www.nhfc-ontarget.org/2014/0...needed-rep-butler-pushing-anti-gun-amendment/

---
NHFC: New Hampshire's Only No Compromise Gun Rights Organization


Dear Gun Rights Advocate,

We have been warning you about HB 1589 which, if enacted, which, will put you in prison for selling a gun to one of your friends.

Our statehouse sources have told me that the sub committee which we told you about in our last alert is planning to offer a substitute bill that would call for a so called "study committee". The majority of "study committee" members would be appointed by anti gun House Speaker Rep. Terie Norelli. This does not bode well for your rights to own use and sell your firearms as you see fit.

Don't be fooled by this amendment, it will open the door for sweeping gun and magazine bans in New Hampshire as well as restrictions on private sales and on who can own or carry a gun for self defense. You can read the amendment by clicking here.

Here's what you need to do:

First contact all members of the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee by clicking here.

You can click on each committee members name for their phone and email address.

Second, contact The chair, Rep. Butler and let him know how you feel about this draconian legislation. His listed number goes to the front desk of the hotel he owns. Be polite and just ask them to take a message for you and to have Rep. Butler call you back. Rep. Edward Butler, (603)374-6131

You also need to send a very strongly worded message to Rep. John Hunt, the ranking Republican / minority member of the committee. You need to remind Rep. Hunt that he has a duty and obligation to follow his party platform and vote against all new gun control and make sure that the other members of his party do the same and vote HB 1589 "Inexpedient to Legislate" ITL.

Click here to email Rep. Hunt. and call him at: (603) 899-6000

Please don't forget to contact House Minority Leader Rep. Gene Chandler and remind him of the basic principles of his party. Tell Rep. Chandler that you expect him to make sure that all members of his caucus vote ITL on HB 1589.

Click here to email Rep. Chandler and call him at: (603) 374-6603

Finally, contact your own state rep. and urge them to vote ITL on HB 1589. Click here to find out who your state rep is.

If any of these elected officials writes back to you please forward that email to NHFC.

Thanks for your support.

In Liberty,

Scott A. Krauss
Vice President - NHFC

P.S. The New Hampshire Firearms Coalition is working tirelessly to keep gun owners like you up-to-date on as many gun issues as possible -- please consider contributing to the effort by chipping in $15 or $20.
 
Last edited:
design said:
a Letter from NHFC on this: (I don't know how to make the links work) Please check the NHFC page for the letter, it should be posted within an hour.
Click to expand...

Thanks for continuing to post these here.

For the link if you have both window open in your browser; click and cop the web page address and paste it here in your text and it should work.
 
Plan on writing to the committee members, my reps, and the sponsor/co-sponsors tonight. I don't really like using the GOA or NHFC templates but I do it occasionally.

At the same time, I'll post my letter so people can freely use it to email the committee, reps, and the (co) sponsors.
 
design said:
a Letter from NHFC on this: (I don't know how to make the links work) Please check the NHFC page for the letter, it should be posted within an hour.
---
NHFC: New Hampshire's Only No Compromise Gun Rights Organization


Dear Gun Rights Advocate,

We have been warning you about HB 1589 which, if enacted, which, will put you in prison for selling a gun to one of your friends.

Our statehouse sources have told me that the sub committee which we told you about in our last alert is planning to offer a substitute bill that would call for a so called "study committee". The majority of "study committee" members would be appointed by anti gun House Speaker Rep. Terie Norelli. This does not bode well for your rights to own use and sell your firearms as you see fit.

Don't be fooled by this amendment, it will open the door for sweeping gun and magazine bans in New Hampshire as well as restrictions on private sales and on who can own or carry a gun for self defense. You can read the amendment by clicking here.

Here's what you need to do:

First contact all members of the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee by clicking here.

You can click on each committee members name for their phone and email address.

Second, contact The chair, Rep. Butler and let him know how you feel about this draconian legislation. His listed number goes to the front desk of the hotel he owns. Be polite and just ask them to take a message for you and to have Rep. Butler call you back. Rep. Edward Butler, (603)374-6131

You also need to send a very strongly worded message to Rep. John Hunt, the ranking Republican / minority member of the committee. You need to remind Rep. Hunt that he has a duty and obligation to follow his party platform and vote against all new gun control and make sure that the other members of his party do the same and vote HB 1589 "Inexpedient to Legislate" ITL.

Click here to email Rep. Hunt. and call him at: (603) 899-6000

Please don't forget to contact House Minority Leader Rep. Gene Chandler and remind him of the basic principles of his party. Tell Rep. Chandler that you expect him to make sure that all members of his caucus vote ITL on HB 1589.

Click here to email Rep. Chandler and call him at: (603) 374-6603

Finally, contact your own state rep. and urge them to vote ITL on HB 1589. Click here to find out who your state rep is.

If any of these elected officials writes back to you please forward that email to NHFC.

Thanks for your support.

In Liberty,

Scott A. Krauss
Vice President - NHFC

P.S. The New Hampshire Firearms Coalition is working tirelessly to keep gun owners like you up-to-date on as many gun issues as possible -- please consider contributing to the effort by chipping in $15 or $20.
Click to expand...

And here's JR Hoell (design) in action:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
For those that use facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/events/671620516215117/?ref=22

Party to watch the Commerce Committee Vote on: "sell a gun go to jail bill"


Commerce Committee will be voting on HB1589, Let's come and watch how they vote, VIDEO TAPPING IS ENCOURAGED!
NH State House
107 North Main St, Concord, New Hampshire 03301
In the LOB building room 302 at 1:15pm on 1/28/2014
 
List of members of the Commerce Committee:
Note (Pulled from another page and I have not yet verified)
All members of the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee:
Representative Edward Butler (D-7), Chairman
Harts Location
(603) 271-3369
[email protected]

Representative Donna Schlachman (D-18), Vice Chairman
Exeter
(603) 772-4934
[email protected]

Representative Chris Muns (D-21), Clerk
Hampton
(603) 929-3629
[email protected]

Representative Angeline Kopka (D-28)
Nashua
(603) 577-5561

Representative Catherine Mulholland (D-17)
Grafton
(603) 523-4497
[email protected]

Representative Joe Scarlotto (D-31)
Portsmouth
(603) 501-1800
[email protected]

Representative Donald Flanders (R-3)
Laconia
(603) 524-5369
[email protected]

Representative Pamela Tucker (R-23)
Greenland
(603) 431-8982
[email protected]

Representative Ralph Doolan (R-1)
Littleton
(603) 259-3187

Representative Kenneth Gidge (D-33)
Nashua
(603) 888-2355
[email protected]

Representative Ruth Heden (D-23)
Milford
(603) 673-7036
[email protected]

Representative Kermit Williams (D-4)
Wilton
(603) 654-7684
[email protected]

Representative Ronald Belanger (R-8)
Salem
(603) 893-0659
[email protected]

Representative Laura Jones (R-24)
Rochester
(603) 948-2264
[email protected]

Representative Emily Sandblade (R-18)
Manchester
(603) 845-3228
[email protected]

Representative Jill Hammond (D-24)
Peterborough
(603) 547-0715
[email protected]

Representative Richard McNamara (D-38)
Hillsborough
(603) 464-0212
[email protected]

Representative John Hunt (R-11)
Rindge
(603) 899-6000
[email protected]

Representative Frederick Rice (R-21)
Hampton
(603) 929-1517
[email protected]

Representative Keith Murphy (R-7)
Bedford
(603) 488-5792
[email protected]
 
Can somebody proof-read mine? Either PM or reply back to this thread. Plan on sending it to the co-sponsors and sponsor, committee members my state reps and state senator.

Greetings NH State Representative,

I implore you to render NH HB1589, an act to criminalize otherwise lawful behavior between responsible NH gun owners, as “inexpedient to legislate”. After reading the plain text of HB1589, I noticed there were plenty of half-truths and falsehoods sprinkled in the foreword of the bill; lies and misdirection made in an effort to trick our elected officials into attacking our unalienable right to self-defense and property – rights explicitly protected by the United States and New Hampshire Constitutions.

Firstly, the bill is completely unconstitutional. The text of the bill violates the spirit and letter of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution (“…the right of the people to keep and bear arms”) and Article 2 (All men have certain… rights … among which are … acquiring, possessing and protecting, property…”) and Article 2-A (“All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property…”) of the New Hampshire state Constitution.

If signed into law, this bill would unnecessarily burden gun owners and Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs). It would force all transfers, except for a handful of exceptions, to be consummated by an FFL. One-time loans given to friends during hunting trips, guns sold to life-long neighbors, guns given to step-children as bona fide gifts, firearms given to a person new to the shooting sports for target practice at a range other than one that’s officially sanctioned by the state without the intervention of an FFL could result in criminal prosecution. This bill unnecessarily criminalizes otherwise lawful behavior, such as a live-in girlfriend using her boyfriend’s gun to lawfully defend herself from a home invasion as this is not a stated exemption.

Moreover, this bill simply duplicates existing prohibitions on handgun transfers. All handgun transfers require the transferee to hold a valid Pistol/Revolver License or be personally known to the transferring party. Nobody can knowingly sell firearms to dangerous felons per RSA 159:7.

Background checks, arbitrary magazine capacity limits, and so-called “assault weapon” (a politically invented term) bans and other shenanigans cooked up by the anti-gun lobby will do nothing to ensure public safety. In fact, it will likely backfire and result in a surge in violent crime. Pun intended. This claim is indisputable.

Finally, I would remind the representatives that New Hampshire and our neighbor to the west, Vermont, both enjoy “safest state” status because of existing simple, “common sense” gun laws in each state. Complex and stifling gun laws always benefit a single base: The criminal element. This is true because criminals simply ignore laws. Armed thugs are simply not going to transfer sell their guns through an FFL if this is passed into law. They will continue to sell to each other in back-alley transactions irrespective of any law. Note that RSA 159:3 already prohibits felons from possessing specific weapons, including firearms.

Again, I implore you to render this bill “inexpedient to legislate” and for all co-sponsors to immediately withdraw their sponsorship.

Warmest Regards,
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
mikem317 said:
Can somebody proof-read mine? Either PM or reply back to this thread. Plan on sending it to the co-sponsors and sponsor, committee members my state reps and state senator.
Click to expand...
Looks pretty good.

Personally, I would leave out the paragraph "Firstly, the bill is completely unconstitutional.... New Hampshire state Constitution.". IMHO, if the reader believes in the constitution she already agrees with you, and if not, going on about unconstitutionality won't change their mind; it's a distraction.
 
soloman02 said:
Penny Dean explaining how this bill allows an FFL to break federal law.

[video=youtube_share;-plBbVEGjuo]http://youtu.be/-plBbVEGjuo[/video]

Here is the "offending" section:



Doesn't an FFL enter the firearm into its bound book while performing the transfer/background check?
Click to expand...

Generally, licensees have to enter the acquisition or purchase of a firearm by the close of the next business day after the acquisition or purchase and shall record the sales or other disposition within 7 days.

If a disposition is made before the acquisition has been entered in the bound book, the acquisition entry must be made at the same time as the disposition entry.
 
MikeRizz said:
Generally, licensees have to enter the acquisition or purchase of a firearm by the close of the next business day after the acquisition or purchase and shall record the sales or other disposition within 7 days.

If a disposition is made before the acquisition has been entered in the bound book, the acquisition entry must be made at the same time as the disposition entry.
Click to expand...

So in plain English, an FFL has to enter the serial of the firearm being transferred into the bound book and then record it as leaving (in the bound book) once the buyer passes the background check correct?
 
Here's my final copy. Feel free to wordsmith it and send it to the sponsor/co-sponsors, committee members, and your state reps/senators...

Greetings NH State Representatives and State Senators,

I write to you hoping you'll help render NH HB1589, an act to criminalize otherwise lawful behavior between responsible NH gun owners, as “inexpedient to legislate”. After reading the plain text of HB1589, I noticed there were plenty of half-truths and falsehoods sprinkled in the foreword of the bill; lies and misdirection made in an effort to trick our elected officials into attacking our unalienable right to self-defense and property – rights explicitly protected by the United States and New Hampshire Constitutions.

It should be self-evident that this bill is totally unconstitutional. The text of the bill violates the spirit and letter of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution (“…the right of the people to keep and bear arms”) and Article 2 (All men have certain… rights … among which are … acquiring, possessing and protecting, property…”) and Article 2-A (“All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property…”) of the New Hampshire state Constitution.

If signed into law, this bill would unnecessarily burden gun owners and Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs). It would force all transfers, except for a handful of exceptions, to be consummated by an FFL. One-time loans given to friends during hunting trips, guns sold to life-long neighbors, guns given to adult step-children as bona fide gifts, firearms given to a person new to the shooting sports for target practice at a range other than one that’s officially sanctioned by the state without the intervention of an FFL could result in criminal prosecution. This bill unnecessarily criminalizes otherwise lawful behavior, such as a live-in girlfriend using her boyfriend’s gun to lawfully defend herself from a home invasion as this is not a stated exemption.

Moreover, this bill simply duplicates existing prohibitions on handgun transfers. All handgun transfers require the transferee to hold a valid Pistol/Revolver License or be personally known to the transferring party. Nobody can lawfully sell firearms to dangerous felons per RSA 159:7.

Background checks, arbitrary magazine capacity limits, and so-called “assault weapon” (a politically invented term) bans and other shenanigans cooked up by the anti-gun lobby will do nothing to ensure public safety. In fact, it will likely backfire and result in a surge in violent crime. Background checks are simply a covert means to assemble a registry of gun owners. Registration inevitably leads to confiscation by the state. These claims are irrefutable.

Finally, I would remind the representatives that New Hampshire and our neighbor to the west, Vermont, both enjoy “safest state” status because of their simple, “common sense” gun laws. Complex, stifling and nonsensical gun laws always benefit a single base: The criminal element. This is true because criminals ignore laws. Of course, violent felons are simply not going to transfer sell their guns through an FFL if this is passed into law: They will continue to sell to each other in back-alley transactions. Note that RSA 159:3 already prohibits felons from possessing specific weapons, including firearms.

Again, I ask you to render this bill “inexpedient to legislate” and for all co-sponsors to immediately withdraw their sponsorship.

Regards,
Click to expand...

"elaine.andrews-ahearn" <[email protected]>, david <[email protected]>, "rebecca.brown" <[email protected]>, lharding0625 <[email protected]>, "donna.schlachman" <[email protected]>, "katherine.rogers" <[email protected]>, "david.pierce" <[email protected]>, housecommerceandconsumeraffairs <[email protected]>, edofthenotch <[email protected]>, jbhunt <[email protected]>, "gene.chandler" <[email protected]>
 
From an inside Commerce committee source who is on our side:

"The opposition is organizing. I have 1/2 dozen for tonight. "

Members sometimes count the number of emails vs. content. Get your friends to email them tonight opposing both the bill and the committee:

[email protected]

-Design
 
design said:
From an inside Commerce committee source who is on our side:

"The opposition is organizing. I have 1/2 dozen for tonight. "

Members sometimes count the number of emails vs. content. Get your friends to email them tonight opposing both the bill and the committee:

[email protected]

-Design
Click to expand...

Here is the message I sent:

Greetings to the members of the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee:

I write to you to discuss a few points about HB 1589 and implore you to vote "inexpedient to legislate."

The first point is that this bill will not accomplish what the sponsor thinks it will accomplish. To wit, several criminals who have committed mass murder in recent years, passed a background check when they purchased the firearm. Here are a few of these criminals acts:

Virgina Tech, VA on April 16, 2007
Fort Hood, TX on November 5, 2009
Binghampton, NY on April 3, 2009
DC Navy Yard on September 16, 2013
Aurora, CO on July 20, 2012
Tuscon, AZ on January 8, 2011

All these criminals who perpetrated the murders on those dates (you can Google them for the details if you wish) all passed a federal background check when purchasing the firearms used. The same check that you would subject all persons to in this bill. So in other words, this bill would have done nothing to stop those crimes. Nothing. All it would do is take a normal victimless activity and make it a felony.

Second, New Hampshire already has law addressing this. RSA 159:7 states: "No person shall sell, deliver, or otherwise transfer a pistol, revolver or any other firearm, to a person who has been convicted, in any jurisdiction, of a felony." Also, as it relates to handguns, RSA 159:14 states: "None of the provisions of this chapter shall prohibit an individual not licensed under the provisions thereof who is not engaged in the business of selling pistols or revolvers from selling a pistol or revolver to a person licensed under this chapter or to a person personally known to him." This section is one of the more difficult to read but in laymen's terms it says that a NH resident cannot sell a handgun to another NH resident unless that person is personally known to them (implying that you know if they are a felon or not) or that person has in their possession a valid pistol and revolver license for which a background check is performed during the approval process.

It is apparent that these two RSA's work because New Hampshire is the second safest state in the country, beaten only by Maine by a slim margin (which also has similar laws to NH). States that have the law proposed in this bill: NY, IL, MD, and CA are much less safe than NH. The state closest to NH with a law similar to the one proposed in this bill, Massachusetts, has a much higher murder and violent crime rate. This law will have the opposite effect of making New Hampshire less safe. Why? Because if you are going to make a currently legal activity (private sale of private property, temporary change in possession for demonstration purposes) a class B felony, not only will many choose not to abide by this Malum Prohibitum law, they will say "Screw it, since I'm already committing a felony, why bother following all the other state and federal laws?" Do you really want to create a huge criminal class overnight who no longer have any regard for the law?

One final note, the US Supreme Court is currently hearing arguments on a case (Abramski v. US) that if decided in the plaintiffs favor, will invalidate this bill. Do you really want to pass a law only to be shown up by the supreme court?

This law is not a New Hampshire law. HB 1589 should be voted "inexpedient to legislate."

Sincerely,
Click to expand...

I also got 5 others to send the email (unfortunately it was this one, word for word but better than none at all). I emailed four others with my text but have not heard back from them if they sent it. I also encouraged having their friends send my email.
 
I'm quoting the below from a comment on the article on the front page:


Hoover said:
The guy in the picture, mark something. He now makes his living off his dead kid. He runs 'sandy hook promise' full time. He quit his job and now is the paid president of that group. You know the get funding from bloomberg and left wing groups. So he's doing it as a paid shill, not a parent (if that even mattered)
Click to expand...

If this passes and makes it to the Justice committee and another shill shows up, how much poor taste would it be if, I or someone else who spoke after the shill was there asked the shill (while talking in the mic to the committee) how much they were being paid to speak?

I bet it would be epic from our POV but how would the committee see it?
 
soloman02 said:
I'm quoting the below from a comment on the article on the front page:

Quote Originally Posted by Hoover

The guy in the picture, mark something. He now makes his living off his dead kid. He runs 'sandy hook promise' full time. He quit his job and now is the paid president of that group. You know the get funding from bloomberg and left wing groups. So he's doing it as a paid shill, not a parent (if that even mattered)
Click to expand...


If this passes and makes it to the Justice committee and another shill shows up, how much poor taste would it be if, I or someone else who spoke after the shill was there asked the shill (while talking in the mic to the committee) how much they were being paid to speak?

I bet it would be epic from our POV but how would the committee see it?
Click to expand...

I agree with your sentiment and believe it would be received horribly by the opposition to our free rights.

You would at least be accused of not understanding how terrible it is that you/we can not see that he is grieving his for his loss and has dedicated the rest of his life to see that not another child gets killed by these evil assault weapons.

That would be the least and I can only imagine how bad can it get. I do hope that there is a way that others can see through this as you pointed out above.

The opposition stops at emotion and goes not one step further. We are forced to be uncaring and deal with the facts. It is entirely backwards.
 
soloman02 said:
I'm quoting the below from a comment on the article on the front page:




If this passes and makes it to the Justice committee and another shill shows up, how much poor taste would it be if, I or someone else who spoke after the shill was there asked the shill (while talking in the mic to the committee) how much they were being paid to speak?

I bet it would be epic from our POV but how would the committee see it?
Click to expand...

Do it. We're past being nice. Point out that the laws proposed have absolutely nothing to do with what happened to those kids and the parents are clearly being paid to shill whatever the antigun crowd comes up with. Call them out for standing on the dead graves of their own children for laws that would not save any children. Call them out as heartless parents. Do everything they would call you hitting all the key words. They'll have not retort because key words is all they have.
 

Similar threads

CT: HB-5467 An Act Concerning Firearms Background Checks (2024)
Replies
2
Views
226
sbhaven
S
Biden EO: Background Checks for Private Sales
Replies
1
Views
300
Toast
Toast
ATF Rule Requires Smugglers to Get NICS Checks on Gun Sales
Replies
14
Views
327
powerman
powerman
Thousands more gun dealers must run background checks on buyers as Biden administration moves to close 'doggone dangerous' loophole
Replies
4
Views
187
AJK129
AJK129
ATF Redefines All Private Sales & Who Has To Have A FFL
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
Flint
F
Back
Top Bottom