License denial case in Keene

KBCraig

NES Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
19,638
Likes
21,845
Location
Granite State of Mind
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Derrick is a well known activist and gadfly in Keene. He applied for his NH Revolver & Pistol License, and was denied based on "negative police contacts and arrests". He was convicted in 2012 for five misdemeanors that aren't disqualifying, and all but one (possession of marijuana) arose from an order of no trespass (later overturned), where he and other activists were barred from setting foot on the property of the district court. (They had been singing Christmas carols to employees leaving work -- the horror!)

While I agree that he's an annoying git, we need annoying gits in this world. If for no other reason, than to illustrate just how petty and personally vindictive government agents can be.

Note: he has already retained the services of Evan Nappen, and is appealing in a timely manner.

http://freekeene.com/2014/07/11/derrick-j-denied-concealed-carry-by-kpd/
 
Derrick is annoying, but is he "unsuitable"?

If nothing else, perhaps we will at least get some case law around "...applicant is a suitable person to be licensed"

I suspect that pot arrest is going to be sufficient to tip the court against him.
 
He should be ready to appeal. If he's not a prohibited person then he should get it. This is not a may issue state.

Nothing pisses me off more (except idiots) than the govt not following the law.
 
But yet, I have an acquaintance that went after someone with a machete, did time for it, gang mamber. Now I find find out this retard has permit to carry and owns a gun. He just had it removed for threatening his ex on facebook.
How the fvck did he get approved in the first place?
 
But yet, I have an acquaintance that went after someone with a machete, did time for it, gang mamber. Now I find find out this retard has permit to carry and owns a gun. He just had it removed for threatening his ex on facebook.
How the fvck did he get approved in the first place?

You mean this offense was actually a misdemeanor?
 
I am confused. I thought NH was shall issue if you are not a P.P they had to issue.

I wish this man luck.
 
Looking at it from glass half full, in MA the OP would most likely be prohibited from even owning a gun or ammo....and possibly pepper spray too.

Looking at it from glass half empty, its BS you folks in NH have "suitability" standards. No matter how rarely its employed, "suitability" is worth everyone's fight because that crap will only expand with time. Reference our fine nanny state MA.
 
I am confused. I thought NH was shall issue if you are not a P.P they had to issue.

I wish this man luck.

A common misconception but a misconception nevertheless. No permit required to purchase as long as you are not a prohibited person under the law, and no prohibition against open carry, but a permit to CCW is "may issue" in the "live free or die state" [wink]
 
He should be ready to appeal. If he's not a prohibited person then he should get it. This is not a may issue state.

You say that, but people have been blocked and the chief or whoever essentially won. It's rare but it does happen. That guy who stabbed the other guy but didn't get convicted for it is an example of this. P/R license denied, appeal denied, not a prohibited person.

-Mike
 
A common misconception but a misconception nevertheless. No permit required to purchase as long as you are not a prohibited person under the law, and no prohibition against open carry, but a permit to CCW is "may issue" in the "live free or die state" [wink]

Interesting thanks for clearing that up.

I find suitability to be a cancer in our rights no matter where it is
 
Looking at it from glass half full, in MA the OP would most likely be prohibited from even owning a gun or ammo....and possibly pepper spray too.

Looking at it from glass half empty, its BS you folks in NH have "suitability" standards. No matter how rarely its employed, "suitability" is worth everyone's fight because that crap will only expand with time. Reference our fine nanny state MA.

Interesting thanks for clearing that up.

I find suitability to be a cancer in our rights no matter where it is

Donate to PACkingNH to stop suitability.

Seriously.

http://packingnh.net/packing/donate/
 
Even the reddest of NH towns has fewer annual P&R denials than the greenest in MA

a permit to CCW is "may issue" in the "live free or die state" [wink]
Suitability != May issue

It would be more accurate to state that NH is "shall issue", however the standard is not as simple as just confirming the applicant is not a prohibited person, does allow a degree of leeway to the issuing authority (due to the words "proper purpose" and "suitable person"), but not unfettered discretion. As mentioned, we have case law on this, and while the court decisions are imperfect, even the worst ones do not support a claim that NH is "may issue".

RSA 159:6 said:
upon application of any resident ... shall issue a license to such applicant authorizing the applicant to carry a loaded pistol or revolver in this state ... if it appears that the applicant ... has any proper purpose, and that the applicant is a suitable person to be licensed. Hunting, target shooting, or self-defense shall be considered a proper purpose. ...
I don't see the verb "may" anywhere in RSA 159:6 I (a). Compare this to MGL Ch. 140 Sec. 131.
 
Indeed. The phrase "is a suitable person to be licensed" is the issue. What does that mean? What is a 'suitable person'? Unless that specific term is defined, this is a huge legal gray area. There are only three ways to fix this, and none have anything to do with our courts. Either that phrase needs to be outright removed (the best and most proper solution), the term 'suitable person' needs to be explicitly defined with objective criteria only (defining it with any subjective criteria at all would only make it worse), or lastly replace the term with an already clearly defined term of objectivity (like "is not a federally prohibited person as defined in xxx).

It is ironic that the RSA lists two criteria that need to be met to be licensed. The first (a proper purpose) is defined. The second (suitable person) is not.
 
Suitability != May issue

It would be more accurate to state that NH is "shall issue", however the standard is not as simple as just confirming the applicant is not a prohibited person, does allow a degree of leeway to the issuing authority (due to the words "proper purpose" and "suitable person"), but not unfettered discretion. As mentioned, we have case law on this, and while the court decisions are imperfect, even the worst ones do not support a claim that NH is "may issue".


I don't see the verb "may" anywhere in RSA 159:6 I (a). Compare this to MGL Ch. 140 Sec. 131.

Well Kevin de jure it may not be "may issue" but "de facto" it is. So in the end, what is the difference. Your local COP can deem you unsuitable just like in Mass. I love you how you NH boiz just love to jump on things and say "it's really different here" oh yeah...sure it is, I got it. Let's see what things are like up there 20 or 30 years from now when enough of us M*******s have moved up there...[rolleyes]
 
Well Kevin de jure it may not be "may issue" but "de facto" it is. So in the end, what is the difference. Your local COP can deem you unsuitable just like in Mass. I love you how you NH boiz just love to jump on things and say "it's really different here" oh yeah...sure it is, I got it. Let's see what things are like up there 20 or 30 years from now when enough of us M*******s have moved up there...[rolleyes]

I wouldn't go as far to say "Just like in mass". In NH such a denial has to be constrained pretty dramatically compared to the way it is down here. "I don't like how his breath smells" is not going to fly in NH like it does here. They have to come up with a reason good enough to impress a Judge, most of which don't suck as badly as many of the ones down here do. Not to mention, said denial doesn't revoke ownership rights, and it doesn't cause the Waffen SS to come and steal all your guns and ammo, either. Those are pretty dramatic differences, I'd say.

-Mike
 
Well Kevin de jure it may not be "may issue" but "de facto" it is. So in the end, what is the difference. Your local COP can deem you unsuitable just like in Mass. I love you how you NH boiz just love to jump on things and say "it's really different here" oh yeah...sure it is, I got it. Let's see what things are like up there 20 or 30 years from now when enough of us M*******s have moved up there...[rolleyes]

How long have you lived in NH?
 
How long have you lived in NH?

I haven't lived in NH. About 15 mi from the border, but I've lived in states more free than NH. I've seen Southern NH start to morph into Northern Mass. I'm not preaching doom and gloom here. You guys are free now, but the question is how much will change in the next three decades. There are cracks in the Granite State foundation. You can diss me all you want but even Mass was a had more freedom 30 years ago than it does now. Personally I think people who value personal liberty are going to have to move west to hold out states like Idaho. Of course the wild card is this: will there be an intact United States 30 years from now? If we don't, just where will NH fall? I think we already know what Mass will be.
 
I haven't lived in NH. About 15 mi from the border, but I've lived in states more free than NH. I've seen Southern NH start to morph into Northern Mass. I'm not preaching doom and gloom here. You guys are free now, but the question is how much will change in the next three decades. There are cracks in the Granite State foundation. You can diss me all you want but even Mass was a had more freedom 30 years ago than it does now. Personally I think people who value personal liberty are going to have to move west to hold out states like Idaho. Of course the wild card is this: will there be an intact United States 30 years from now? If we don't, just where will NH fall? I think we already know what Mass will be.

Which is why I keep harping on the MA and CT escapees to remain active in the political process to attempt to stem the tide of socialism/progressiveness.

I wasn't trying to dis you, NH is pretty damn awesome when you are a resident.
 
Lets not overlook the street level warfare of courtroom misdemeanors that has been going on in Keene for a while now. The levels of ridiculousness over the most minor of infractions has reached epic proportions. The denial is unsurprising actually. A lot of boat rocking ends up with a bilge full of puke.
 
A common misconception but a misconception nevertheless. No permit required to purchase as long as you are not a prohibited person under the law, and no prohibition against open carry, but a permit to CCW is "may issue" in the "live free or die state" [wink]

Yeah, needing a license to purchase or a license for mere possession is, with some exceptions, very much a "Massachusetts state-of-mind" approach.

We went over the interstate protections of FOPA in this year's police in-service. What was eye-opening (but not so surprising) to me was the number of officers who answered the hypothetical "what do you do?" with "just ask for the permit from X state where he's going and Y state where he came from," not knowing most states don't require any permitting for mere possession.
 
Suitability != May issue
That's certainly part of the equation, but not the whole thing. Do remember that the words "may issue" in MGL 140/131 contrasts to the words "shall issue" in MGL 140/129B.

I was wondering how that language would end up working with suitability if applied to FID cards.
 
Yeah, needing a license to purchase or a license for mere possession is, with some exceptions, very much a "Massachusetts state-of-mind" approach.

We went over the interstate protections of FOPA in this year's police in-service. What was eye-opening (but not so surprising) to me was the number of officers who answered the hypothetical "what do you do?" with "just ask for the permit from X state where he's going and Y state where he came from," not knowing most states don't require any permitting for mere possession.

I assume they were corrected on that point? Did their heads asplode?
 
Which is why I keep harping on the MA and CT escapees to remain active in the political process to attempt to stem the tide of socialism/progressiveness.

I wasn't trying to dis you, NH is pretty damn awesome when you are a resident.
Which involvement in politics might have helped in our (Ma) 2A fight . We need to STAY active.
 
Back
Top Bottom