Former Cop to Test University Gun Rules

Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
205
Likes
36
Location
Massabesic
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0
http://freekeene.com/2011/12/05/pre...niversity-information-distribution-on-120911/


The following is a press release regarding a information distribution Tommy Mozingo and I will be partaking in at Plymouth State University on 12/09/11. The intent of the information distribution is to call attention to the illegal regulations that the University System of New Hampshire has enacted to restrict self-defense rights by both students and public members.
TO:
Office of General Counsel & Secretary, USNH
Plymouth State University Police
Plymouth NH Police
Holderness NH Police
Concord Monitor (Sarah Palermo)
The Clock (TheClockOnline.com)
The Union Leader
WMUR
Ridley Report
RE: Scheduled distribution of information at PSU on 12/09/11.
DATE: 12/05/11
Greetings,
My name is Bradley Jardis and I am a life-long resident of New Hampshire. I presently reside in Dover and am self-employed.
For approximately eleven years of my life I served in New Hampshire as a police officer. I am a graduate of both the 121st full-time and 211th part-time police academy. In my lifetime I have never been convicted of a criminal or traffic offense.
I am writing to inform you of my intended presence at Plymouth State University on 12/09/11. The purpose of my presence is to interact with members of the PSU community and inform them of an illegally instituted regulation which violates NH RSA 159:26, New Hampshire’s firearm and knife preemption law.
The law reads:
159:26 Firearms, Ammunition, and Knives; Authority of the State. –
I. To the extent consistent with federal law, the state of New Hampshire shall have authority and jurisdiction over the sale, purchase, ownership, use, possession, transportation, licensing, permitting, taxation, or other matter pertaining to firearms, firearms components, ammunition, firearms supplies, or knives in the state. Except as otherwise specifically provided by statute, no ordinance or regulation of a political subdivision may regulate the sale, purchase, ownership, use, possession, transportation, licensing, permitting, taxation, or other matter pertaining to firearms, firearms components, ammunition, or firearms supplies in the state. Nothing in this section shall be construed as affecting a political subdivision’s right to adopt zoning ordinances for the purpose of regulating firearms or knives businesses in the same manner as other businesses or to take any action allowed under RSA 207:59.
II. Upon the effective date of this section, all municipal ordinances and regulations not authorized under paragraph I relative to the sale, purchase, ownership, use, possession, transportation, licensing, permitting, taxation, or other matter pertaining to firearms, firearm components, ammunition, firearms supplies, or knives shall be null and void.
-/-
As you’ll note, the law forbids a “political subdivision” from adopting a “regulation” that prohibit the possession of firearms, firearms components, ammunition, firearms supplies, or knives unless such control is authorized by the NH General Court. This law was enacted in 2003 and originally only included firearms, ammunition, and firearm components. On 06/09/11 Governor John Lynch signed HB554 which modified the law to preempt any restrictions on knife possession. HB554 became effective on 08/06/11.
According to state law, the University System of New Hampshire to which Plymouth State University is a member, is a political subdivision. It’s establishment as a “body politic and corporate” is codified in RSA 187-A:1:
187-A:1 The University System of New Hampshire. – The university system of New Hampshire is established and made a body politic and corporate, the main purpose of which shall be to provide a well coordinated system of public higher education offering liberal undergraduate education encompassing the major branches of learning, emphasizing our cultural heritage, and cultivating the skills of reasoning and communication. The university system shall provide for professional and technical 2-year, 4-year and graduate programs which serve the needs of the state and the nation; for research which contributes to the welfare of mankind, to the development of the faculty, and to the educational experience of students; and for its faculty and staff to bring educational resources and professional experience to the benefit of the state and its people. The university system of New Hampshire is authorized to grant and confer in the name of the university system of New Hampshire all such degrees, literary titles, honors and distinctions as other universities may of right do.
-/-
Plymouth State University’s individual establishment as a “body politic and corporate” is codified in RSA 187-A:11:
187-A:11 Keene State College, Plymouth State University, and Granite State College. –
II. Plymouth state university is established and made a body corporate and politic and a division of the university system of New Hampshire.
-/-
The USNH and PSU’s status as a political subdivision combined with RSA 159:26 renders the Plymouth State University weapon control regulation unenforceable insofar as it pertains to firearms, firearm components, firearm supplies, knives, and ammunition. The regulation I am referring to (obtained from your internet website) is as follows:
Weapons, Firearms, and Explosives
This policy pertains to items that would generally be considered dangerous on a university campus and/or illegal such as but not limited to: Firearms; guns (pellet, air, paint ball, tranquilizer, stun, spear, dart); slingshots; switchblades; knives with a blade longer than 4 inches; combat and martial art type weapons (metal knuckles, throwing stars, clubs, metal swords); bows; arrows; explosive devices or substances (grenades, bombs, fireworks, ammunition).
The possession of any item referenced above is not allowed on campus property except with the expressed permission of the Chief of University Police.
Use of any item referenced above is not permitted on campus property.
Transfer or sale of any of the items referenced above is not permitted on campus property.
If a replica/toy version of any weapon will be used for an on-campus class presentation, project, or activity, the faculty/staff member overseeing the event and University Police must be alerted prior to the event occurring.
Authorized items may be stored in the University Police Office.
Exceptions to this policy include pocket knives, general tools, utensils, or items not designed as weapons unless the object is used in a way that would be considered dangerous.

-/-
A recent example of the illegality of similar regulations can be found in an Oregon Court of Appeals opinion that was issued on 09/28/11. The Court found that public university regulations banning the possession of firearms, similar to those of the University System of New Hampshire, were completely nullified by the Oregon’s firearm preemption law. This case is Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation v. Board of Higher Education and Oregon University System (A142974).
When I am present at your campus I will be accompanied by an associate, Tommy Mozingo. Tommy served in the United States Army from 2002 to 2006 and was discharged honorably. Following his service in the Army he worked for four years as an employee of General Dynamics at both Fort Bragg in North Carolina and Miesau Germany. Tommy has never been convicted of a criminal offense and, like me, has extensive training in firearms use, retention, and safety.
Tommy and I will be walking in areas open to the general public, holding signs, and handing out reading material which details to students and visitors that the Plymouth State University has no legal authority to regulate the possession of knives, firearms, and ammunition. We will be dressed professionally and will both be carrying an unconcealed, loaded, and slung rifle. Possession of the firearm is intended as being symbolic of the statement we are attempting to make. We present absolutely no threat to the safety of the public or any government official.
During our time present we will additionally be distributing information regarding how students and visitors can attend a free firearm safety and education class that an associate of ours will be conducting at or near the PSU campus in January of next year.
Should Tommy or I be ordered to leave the property by law enforcement authorities we will respond in the following manner:
1) We will inquire with whatever authority is demanding our departure precisely what we have done to justify removal from areas open to the public.
2) Should we not be given a response, we will presume the reason we are being told to leave is because we are in violation of illegal firearm regulations. We will remain in defiance of an order for us to leave as this will not constitute a “lawful order” under New Hampshire’s law. Simply put, no order can be lawful when it is issued pursuant to an illegal regulation.
3) Should we be told that we are being ordered to leave for being in violation of PSU’s illegal firearm regulation, we will remain in defiance of an issued order for us to leave for the reasons detailed in #2 above.
4) Should we be told we are under arrest for our refusal to follow an illegal order, we will comply respectfully with the arrest order notwithstanding our disagreement with its legality. We will completely comply with RSA 594:5 and RSA 642:2 and cooperate fully with law enforcement.
Although we understand we may have differing opinions regarding the suitability of people arming themselves for self-defensive purposes in an educational setting, we find the contempt the University System of New Hampshire and Plymouth State University has for New Hampshire law to be inexcusable. Under the current illegal regulations, a law abiding parent of a PSU student is misled to believe that they may not carry an otherwise legal firearm on campus. I believe it is also worthwhile to note that last month the NH General Court significantly strengthened the law which allows the use of a firearm in self-defense over Governor Lynch’s veto. To deny this recently enhanced legal right to individuals based on illegal regulations is absurd.
Our goals with this outreach event are as follows:
1) To call public attention to the preempted regulations with which PSU improperly threatens students and visitors.
2) To encourage your students and visitors to attend a free firearm safety class.
3) To encourage students and visitors to be aware of their legal and natural right to defend themselves from violent attack.
4) To use any criminal enforcement action taken against us as standing to bring this issue to the New Hampshire Supreme Court. We are ready, willing, and able to litigate this issue to the maximum extent of the law.
5) To encourage the University System of New Hampshire, a political subdivision which is subordinate to state control, to respect the authority of the NH General Court.
-/-
Rep. J.R. Hoell of Dunbarton stated recently in the Concord Monitor: “as long as UNH receives taxpayer money, they are a subdivision of the state and they are completely disregarding the law(.)” We completely agree with Representative Hoell and intend on making the public aware of the USNH/PSU firearm and knife regulation which is in direct contravention of public policy.
Although we are prepared to be arrested to contest this illegal infringement of self-defense rights, we would respectfully ask that you not take illegal enforcement action against us.


Respectfully,
Bradley Jardis
Dover, NH
 
Last edited:
Thank you for taking a stand. Please keep us updated on how it turns out. I've been trying to think of ways we could take similar stands here in Massachusetts, just to make a point of how crazy the laws here are.
 
Thanks and a Tip O'the Stetson™
yo.gif
for keeping moonbats at bay !
 
more from Brad...

http://freekeene.com/2011/12/08/respect-for-respectful-usnhpsu-officials/#more-13379

Respect For Respectful USNH/PSU Officials
December 8, 2011 by Brad
Filed under: New Hampshire, News, Outreach, Personal Freedom, Politics*
This morning I had an excellent conversation with the University System of New Hampshire General Counsel Ronald Rogers and Plymouth State University Vice President for Student Affairs Richard Hage. I got a genuine sense that these two professionals were doing their very best to balance what is understandably is a difficult situation to deal with.
That situation is, of course, the informational outreach event scheduled for Friday at 9:00AM on their campus.
In response to the respectful way that the General Counsel and Vice President’s concerns were addressed to me, Tommy and I have decided that during our educational outreach we will have unloaded weapons with both trigger and breech locks securely affixed. In other words, the firearms we intend on carrying for symbolic speech will be rendered absolutely non-functional.
If you are a member of the PSU community and our outreach event has caused you concern, I do genuinely apologize for any uneasy feelings you have. I would respectfully ask you to consider the fact that every day in New Hampshire you live with, work with, and attend school in close proximity to law-abiding individuals who have decided to be proactive in ensuring their (and your) safety.
As we learned from the tragedy at Virginia Tech, criminals and murderers don’t care about the law. This is about you, your right to protect yourself, and the government failing to follow the rules.
As members of a free society, it is important that everyone understands the rights we have and the obligations that come with those rights. We encourage those who feel uncomfortable with firearms to come out and discuss our exercise of our fundamental freedoms – we have no agenda other than to expose the unlawful conduct of the University System of New Hampshire and educate our fellow Granite Staters about their basic rights.
 
I have to admire this guy for putting his principles on the line. He is walking the walk, while many just talk the talk. When this guy gets arrested I plan on making a contribution to his legal defense fund...you know that something is going to happen. The university isn't going to back off.
 
Well done and Godspeed!! This guy is a patriot, throwing caution to the wind and facing whatever the state will throw at him without a flinch.
 
Okay, so this is getting a little crazy...

http://freekeene.com/2011/12/08/open-response-to-the-robed-man-who-believes-he-controls-this-blog/


If you’ve been reading this blog in the last week, you are aware of the controversy brewing around FK blogger and former cop Brad Jardis’ plan, along with former military member Tommy Mozingo, to walk onto the campus of Plymouth State University with guns, openly carried. Their purpose was to educate the students about their supposed right to carry weapons for self-defense. He announced it in advance here three days ago and since the government university system has been freaking out.
Now they have gone to the courts to save them from the peaceful gun rights demonstration and outreach event. A man who wears a robe has decreed some pretty outrageous stuff in a “TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER”, issued today to Brad and Tommy.
First, Brad and Tommy are “enjoined” from carrying any weapons on any state university campus, including Keene State and UNH. But not just Brad and Tommy, also “their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys; and any person acting in active concert and participation with Bradley Jardis and Tommy Mozingo”.
Second, Brad and Tommy (who does not have a blog account here) are both ordered to post the order to this website! The relevant paragraph:
Bradley Jardis and Tommy Mozingo are ordered to post a copy of the Temporary Restraining Order on the blog/website www.freekeene.com in order to provide notice of the enjoined activities to any individuals who plan to bring firearms or other prohibited weapons to the Plymouth State University campus, or any other campus administered by the USNH Board of
Trustees, in response to the “press release.”
The “ORDER” goes on to threaten anyone who brings a weapon on a state campus with “contempt of court” and arrest, “after receiving notice of the Temporary Restraining Order”.
So in America, people are supposed to have the freedom of speech. Doesn’t that also mean one should have the freedom NOT to speak? What obligation (besides the threat of a cage) does Brad have to do as he was told by this robed man? Can the robed man also order Brad, or you dear reader, to do anything he wants them to? Can he order Brad to do fifty pushups?
This particular man in the robe, Timothy J. Vaughan, appears to believe that he can just wave his little pen and have us obediently post his ramblings.
To Timothy J. Vaughan and other robed men: This blog is not your property. You do not get to tell us what to post here. Sure, you have men with guns and cages and you are very scary to a lot of people. Usually you can get your way through intimidation. You’re used to everyone telling you “yes, your honor”. Well, those of us here at Free Keene are telling you, “NO.” What you do is not honorable. You are just a human, like all the rest of us. You may be able to get away with threatening and harming peaceful people, but that doesn’t make you better – it just makes you a tyrant.
The only reason this article linked to your outrageous “ORDER”, was to prove to people that it was real. One attorney, when interviewed about this, commented that he has never heard of an order compelling action like this. Please note for the record, your paperwork has not been posted in full anywhere on this blog.
Free Keene is a news and opinion outlet that supports free speech and its converse, the right to remain silent. The people who blog here don’t appreciate you telling us what to do.
If you don’t like it, you could always try writing an “ORDER” telling us to bow before you, kiss your ring, and lick your boots. I bet that would really turn you on.
 
Actually, the TRO has probably created standing for court action against the policy, thus saving the protesters both the inconvenience of a possible arrest and exposure to the elements. By shifting legal action to a TRO, rather than criminal charge, the system has lost several intimidation techniques it can use to bully the actors into copping a plea (elevating the charges to something like assault because people were frightened; putting the concept of a felony on the table; threatening a jury trial at which gun owners are disqualified; etc.).

Having the TRO declared invalid would, in and of itself, be a substantial victory - perhaps as much as an actual victory against a carry charge.

There are several issues regarding lawful carry at NH universities:

1. Can an individual be arrested for simply carrying?

2. If the answer is no, can an individual be ordered to vacate public areas or face charges for carrying?

3. May the university take non-judicial disciplinary action against a student who complies with the law, but violates school weapons policy?

4. Ditto for employees

There are actually lots of issues on the table.

Presumably, the "T" is indeed "temporary" pending a decision by the court regarding a more permanent addressing of the issues.

Also, if you want to deal with the courts effectively the wisest course is fighting their game using the legal system, rather than expressing righteous indignation against an order you don't agree with. The court does not care what you think of the order but, lawful or not, has the force of law behind it until the order expires or is vacated the court that issued it or a higher court.
 
Last edited:
BUMP:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/bloge...ses?SESSeee8bcae27dd949e0684871f6ad09f86=bing

Plymouth State: Skip class if you're nervous about planned gun protest


Students at Plymouth State University will be excused from the last day of classes tomorrow if they feel anxious about a planned pro-gun-rights protest.

The protest, which was announced online earlier this week, was organized by Bradley Jardis of Dover, a former police officer, and Tommy Mozingo, a former member of the Army.

The two planned to carry loaded, unconcealed rifles, but Jardis announced earlier today on his blog that he’s decided the rifles will be unloaded, after "an excellent conversation with the University System of New Hampshire General Counsel Ronald Rogers and Plymouth State University Vice President for Student Affairs Richard Hage."

It was also on on CBS, ABC, FOX this morning. NBC not on until 5:00AM

Good Luck!
 
Last edited:
Mr. Boudrie is correct, the judge did these guys a big favor and gave them the means to have this settled by the courts without risking arresting. Of course, if the intent of the protest was to create a public spectacle the TRO isn't as useful.
 
Mr. Boudrie is correct, the judge did these guys a big favor and gave them the means to have this settled by the courts without risking arresting. Of course, if the intent of the protest was to create a public spectacle the TRO isn't as useful.

You can battle an issue in the courts much more effectively when the other side cannot use criminal charges as a bargaining chip.
 
It seems that MA doesn't have a monopoly on moonbattery.
It's higher education, everywhere.

For those who haven't followed the news: Brad and Tommy went to the campus, and were handed copies of the restraining order right away.

Both were wearing suits and were not visibly armed. They declined to say if they were carrying concealed weapons, using that as a teaching point -- just because you don't see a gun, doesn't mean there are no guns. Not knowing seemed to particularly agitate and annoy one woman who was questioning them.

Of course, there were guns everywhere on campus, openly carried. They were in the holsters of the very heavy police presence.
 
Actually, the TRO has probably created standing for court action against the policy, thus saving the protesters both the inconvenience of a possible arrest and exposure to the elements. .

Yup. Now if these guys miss the opportunity to get the campus policy removed by the courts, then their efforts would have been nothing more than a circus stunt.

Demonstrations by themselves are next to useless in creating positive change. More likely to get you labeled a radical and forever ignored than convince the body politics to rescind bad policy. If all you want are five minutes of fame then they're great. If you want to roll back bad law then there's more effective ways to go about doing so.

Keep tabs on what comes out of this, and apply the lessons learned to future gun policy reversal efforts.
 
In my opinion these guys just went from heroes to tools. NH is the underground bastion of civil gun rights (liberal castle doctrine, cheapest CCW license with the least red tape in the country, class III friendly, etc, etc). If these guys went the legal route they could have pretty easily gotten the restraining order overturned and gathered great momentum for the Concealed Carry on Campus movement and greater civil rights for everyone who works for or attends college. I'm sure Pro-Gun NH would have helped them fight for their rights.

Now they look like trouble makers and no judge will take them seriously. I hope I'm wrong and this was part of a bigger plan but I doubt it.
 
Agreed 100% with Rob's comments. I hope the fact they held the protest without guns doesn't undermine their (1st Amendment) argument against the order. At the very least, it has brought some attention to HB 334 at a time when the legislature will pass it and be reasonably likely to manage a veto override.
 
The only thing I think could be handled differently is that of treating the court with respect, even when you disagree with it's decision and are confident it will be overturned. When you file an appeal of a TRO, the court hearing your case may disagree with the other court - but, in the end, they are still professional colleagues. Telling a court "what you think of it" and using statements like "you don't get to..." to a court is not only going to not impress the court at which said invective is being directed, but makes you look less professional and can present an image to other courts that is not helpful to the case. The best way to get "court B" to fairly handle your disagreement with the decision of "court A" is to treat both courts with respect, and express your disagreement in the form of a properly prepared brief, with appropriate citation to statute and case law. Courts do not care one bit what subjects who disagree with their decision think - the equation is simple: They have the power and you do not, until you get another court to overturn the decision.

A key component of the legal system is treatment of all parties with professionalism and respect. Just watch a death penalty hearing - even when the prosecutor is quite literally trying to kill someone, (s)he treats that person with courtesy and respect.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom