NH 2019 Bill HB 218 relative to the use of deadly force by a law enforcement officer.

Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
3,387
Likes
3,059
Feedback: 4 / 0 / 0
NH 2019 Bill HB 218 relative to the use of deadly force by a law enforcement officer.

A bill most of us would support

This bill removes the legal authority for a law enforcement officer to use deadly force in effecting an arrest.
 
Folks you should read the RSA that this refers to and read the one line that it repeals. Give it some thought and then start making your comments. I know that all the Free State Anarchists already have their opinion.
 
627:5 Physical Force in Law Enforcement. –
I. A law enforcement officer is justified in using non-deadly force upon another person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes it necessary to effect an arrest or detention or to prevent the escape from custody of an arrested or detained person, unless he knows that the arrest or detention is illegal, or to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the imminent use of non-deadly force encountered while attempting to effect such an arrest or detention or while seeking to prevent such an escape.
II. A law enforcement officer is justified in using deadly force only when he the officer reasonably believes such force is necessary:
(a) To defend himself or herself or a third person from what he the officer reasonably believes is the imminent use of deadly force; or
(b) To effect an arrest or prevent the escape from custody of a person whom he the officer reasonably believes:
(1) Has committed or is committing a felony involving the use of force or violence, is using a deadly weapon in attempting to escape, or otherwise indicates that he the person is likely to seriously endanger human life or inflict serious bodily injury unless apprehended without delay; and
(2) He The officer had made reasonable efforts to advise the person that he is a law enforcement officer attempting to effect an arrest and has reasonable grounds to believe that the person is aware of these facts.
(c) Nothing in this paragraph constitutes justification for conduct by a law enforcement officer amounting to an offense against innocent persons whom he the officer is not seeking to arrest or retain in custody.

III. A private person who has been directed by a law enforcement officer to assist him in effecting an arrest or preventing an escape from custody is justified in using:
(a) Non-deadly force when and to the extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to carry out the officer's direction, unless he believes the arrest is illegal; or
(b) Deadly force only when he reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the imminent use of deadly force, or when the law enforcement officer directs him to use deadly force and he believes such officer himself is authorized to use deadly force under the circumstances.
IV. A private person acting on his own is justified in using non-deadly force upon another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes it necessary to arrest or prevent the escape from custody of such other whom he reasonably believes to have committed a felony and who in fact has committed that felony: but he is justified in using deadly force for such purpose only when he reasonably believes it necessary to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the imminent use of deadly force.
V. A guard or law enforcement officer in a facility where persons are confined pursuant to an order of the court or as a result of an arrest is justified in using deadly force when he reasonably believes such force is necessary to prevent the escape of any person who is charged with, or convicted of, a felony, or who is committing the felony of escape from official custody as defined in RSA 642:6. The use of non-deadly force by such guards and officers is justified when and to the extent the person effecting the arrest believes it reasonably necessary to prevent any other escape from the facility.
VI. A reasonable belief that another has committed an offense means such belief in facts or circumstances which, if true, would in law constitute an offense by such person. If the facts and circumstances reasonably believed would not constitute an offense, an erroneous though reasonable belief that the law is otherwise does not make justifiable the use of force to make an arrest or prevent an escape.
VII. Use of force that is not justifiable under this section in effecting an arrest does not render illegal an arrest that is otherwise legal and the use of such unjustifiable force does not render inadmissible anything seized incident to a legal arrest.
VIII. Deadly force shall be deemed reasonably necessary under this section whenever the arresting law enforcement officer reasonably believes that the arrest is lawful and there is apparently no other possible means of effecting the arrest.
 
Last edited:
I'm thinking since cops aren't required to protect you. Liberals don't want them to protect themselves. We should push a bill to eradicate them as our civic duty. Any NH legislators on here? Calling mine Monday.

Yeah KBCraig, Kevin Craig, Lancaster, But more than likely he supports it.
 
Last edited:
Not sure if serious I don't see where this takes away their right. However, also not sure it's ever really going to change anything either wrt police misconduct.
 
Not sure if serious I don't see where this takes away their right. However, also not sure it's ever really going to change anything either wrt police misconduct.

Mike, It won't do anything, Deadly force is either warranted or it isn't. This is just more garbage filed by the Free State Anarchists.
 
NH 2019 Bill HB 218 relative to the use of deadly force by a law enforcement officer.

A bill most of us would support

This bill removes the legal authority for a law enforcement officer to use deadly force in effecting an arrest.


If this passes, would it mean they could only use deadly force for self defense?
 
Folks you should read the RSA that this refers to and read the one line that it repeals. Give it some thought and then start making your comments. I know that all the Free State Anarchists already have their opinion.

Done, and done.

I don’t think this bill does what you seem to think it does.

Although, realistically, this all depends on how one interprets II(b) and the applications of the subparagraphs thereof....

Does the law, as it stands, allow for use of deadly force when effecting ANY arrest, or is it only under the conditions of subparas (1) and (2)?
 
Last edited:
Done, and done.

I don’t think this bill does what you seem to think it does.

Although, realistically, this all depends on how one interprets II(b) and the applications of the subparagraphs thereof....

Does the law, as it stands, allow for use of deadly force when effecting ANY arrest, or is it only under the conditions of subparas (1) and (2)?

I didn't allude to any thoughts, I wanted everyone to read what was being repealed, and think about what this repeal does. Now I will tell you this, It does nothing, as I said either Deadly force is warranted or It isn't. But You have the Free State Anarchists thinking that they are screwing the cops that they hate so much.
 
Again I want a bill disbanding all police in Nh. Why pay for report takers. If they are not obligated to protect us, nor can they protect themselves. Why have them. Let's band together and rid us of this statist burden.

Works for me. Trespass, Steel Chickens, you get shot, no problem, Total Chaos and Anarchy, just like The Free Staters want.
 
Works for me. Trespass, Steel Chickens, you get shot, no problem, Total Chaos and Anarchy, just like The Free Staters want.
Will only take about 10 news reports of someone shooting someone else for simply stealing their chicken and you have nothing resembling total chaos and anarchy, what you have is no one stealing anything anywhere in the state.
 
Really? So you are the leo. I pull a gun. You follow law I walk away. Are you obtuse? In all fairness I was in lawenforcement. I just view things differently.

Lip,,,As is often said to me "Your Sarcasm Meter needs to be adjusted". I too spent over 30 years in Law Enforcement.
 
well then, let's agree. Since N h wishes to weaken our Leo's let's finish the job. Btw I have zero respect for law enforcement. Now peace officers I do. There is a difference
.

A lot of us older cops have little or no use or respect for the new breed that are out there. I find them to be lazy and want the laws to all be "Cookie Cutter" so that they do not have to articulate the elements of a crime.
 
A lot of us older cops have little or no use or respect for the new breed that are out there. I find them to be lazy and want the laws to all be "Cookie Cutter" so that they do not have to articulate the elements of a crime.
This law enforcement. Sheesh. You I imagine, were a peace officer. Can we agree? A society that emasculated its protection deserves neither.
 
This law enforcement. Sheesh. You I imagine, were a peace officer. Can we agree? A society that emasculated its protection deserves neither.
Ah but they already aren't societies protection. The court is clear on that. If they aren't protecting society why should they have extra special killy powers that free individuals do not have? I don't necessarily agree with the proposed law but it makes a point, probably not the one intended. I'm sure the intent is to give their deepstate supported foreign invasion criminal terror against Americans horde freer reign.
 
Back
Top Bottom