CCW Reference poll in NH - Please vote.

[IGetIt]

Hi all - Please vote for this poll in Seacoast Online. Their poll question is: "Should Portsmouth police require references from concealed weapon permit applicants?". So far the Yes folks are winning. I can only assume this stems from the current case against Randall Pratt's CCW denial in Portsmouth due to the police being "unable" to make contact with his references. So much for "Shall Issue" in moonbatty Portsmouth

Go here: http://www.seacoastonline.com/ then scroll down to the bottom. You'll see the poll on the bottom left of the page.

As of now, it's 55.2% YES and 44.8% NO

 

[Ken]

51.5% No vs 48.5% Yes.

 

[Smokewagon]

Voted, the No's are gaining.

 

[The Swami 87]

No 60% Yes 40%

 

[daceman63]

66% no - 34% yes

 

[Bob J]

Voted
47 Votes so far...

No 66% Yes 34%

 

[MaverickNH]

"Should police be required to comply with laws as written by elected legislatures, or should they be allowed to devise and enforce laws themselves?"

That should be the poll...

 

[Hiltonizer]

No's at 68.5% with 54 voting

 

[Twigg]

70% No now.

 

[Harpua]

71% to 29%

 

[strangenh]

The law today says they should require references. Require them but no matter what come to the issue decision in 14 days. The issue is that Portsmouth held decision on the renewal PAST the 14-day statutory deadline because they couldn't get ahold of the references. That is the issue.

 

[exo]

The law today says they should require references. Require them but no matter what come to the issue decision in 14 days. The issue is that Portsmouth held decision on the renewal PAST the 14-day statutory deadline because they couldn't get ahold of the references. That is the issue.

The law doesn't say anything about references. The forms created by the director of state police have references on them.

 

[strangenh]

The law doesn't say anything about references. The forms created by the director of state police have references on them.

Holy nitpick, Batman!

The director of state police is hereby authorized and directed to prepare forms for the licenses required under this chapter and forms for the application for such licenses and to supply the same to officials of the cities and towns authorized to issue the licenses. No other forms shall be used by officials of cities and towns. The cost of the forms shall be paid out of the fees received from nonresident licenses.

The form asks for references. The law says that form is the only one to be used.

 

[IGetIt]

Holy cow folks. Now @ 81.1% NO and 18.9% YES

Bravo!

 

[caboose84]

81.4% No, 18.7% Yes

 

[Warrior102]

OP you may with to make that link cold, they can easily track the traffic back to us, in the interim right click and open in a new tab.

 

[exo]

Holy nitpick, Batman!



The form asks for references. The law says that form is the only one to be used.

I don't think it's a nitpick. There's a difference between the law requiring personal references and the director of state police thinking it is a good idea.

 

[BostonVI]

That 18% still bothers me. This isn't should we put a stoplight or not, it's our second and fourth amendment rights, in live free and die country no less.

 

[Duece]

I don't think it's a nitpick. There's a difference between the law requiring personal references and the director of state police thinking it is a good idea.

You are correct, it is a far cry from a nitpick. The law needs to be precise

There is nothing in the LAW, that requires it. The form had it added but it was not required to be there, as such, the form is in violation of the law.

 

[ntomsw]

Even stupid shit happens in NH.

They need to stop this now, before they think it's OK to start doing it everywhere.

If it's in violation of the law, if Portsmouth PD broke the law, then deal with it. NOW.

 

[turbo89]

That website hosts some winning poles:

"Is it cruel to feed turkeys beer to make them taste better?"

http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=OPINION06

 

[Quiet]

Won't let me vote.....

Right clicking and opening in a new tab still sends referral info. To avoid sending that info you need to copy the link location then open a new window manually and paste the address into the address bar. Or get a firefox extension to do that, I'm sure there are tons of them if you care about stuff like that.

Should Portsmouth police require references from concealed weapon permit applicants?

Total Votes:164

 

[strangenh]

Leaving aside the # of angels on the head of the pin, the issue the poll asks about ("Should Portsmouth police require references from concealed weapon permit applicants?") is NOT what the case was about. In fact it shows a total misunderstanding of the legal issue brought before the court, or perhaps an intentionally dense take on it.

The case was about the police holding an application past the legally-required 14 day decision point because they didn't manage to get ahold of the references (which were provided: "his three references didn't return police calls for verification").

So chalk up another bogus survey by a liberal paper regarding a gun issue. The case would have been a slam dunk win based on the law, which requires action in 14 days, but for the "gentleman" torpedoing his own case by putting forward self-incriminating evidence that was utterly unnecessary to win the case in the first place ("an attorney who represents himself has a fool for a client"). Still, once he weathers that storm, he might still manage to get the first issue argued. But rest assured the Portsmouth chief may well cite "illegal wiretapping" as a reason the "gentleman" is not "suitable" and start a fresh case.

What we need to do is focus on various chiefs' abuse of the 14-day limit, abuse of the vague discretion the word "suitable" in RSA 159:6 allegedly provides, and get back to a focus on making sure this state is shall-issue in form and practice (or con carry, but that was a train wreck last time around). That is probably going to require some fresh legislation that doesn't try to shoot the moon.