NH 2021 Bill thread: Critical Bills need to be voted on 5/25

design

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
1,537
Likes
1,197
Update 5/23: Contact the Senate and ask them to pass these bills.

The Senate Judiciary committee will be making decisions on 6 critical pro-2a bills on Tuesday (5/25) and they need to hear from you tomorrow! We need them to vote OTP (Ought To Pass) for each of these pieces of legislation.


Email address for the cmte members.

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

The following bills are in the Senate Judiciary CMTE and need to come out with a positive recommendation

HB307 “The 2021 2nd Amendment Sanctuary State Act” [relative to the state preemption of the regulation of firearms and ammunition.]

This bill prohibits local officials from creating local gun free zones without General Court Approval. This bill expands what was started years ago. Current law prohibits the creation of local gun free zones, but the statute does not assign a penalty for breaking the law. Local officials seem to have no regarding for willfully violating this statute. This bill will correct those willful violations by adding a penalty. This is the most important bill that we need your help to pass.

HB195 Ending prosecution for display of a firearm under reckless conduct [adding display of a firearm as an exception to reckless conduct.]

Simply showing a firearm is not a crime. Threatening someone is an action and that is completely different from being charged for your shirt lifting up while getting out of a car. No one should be forced to spend their life savings to avoid going to jail for a class B felony for a firearm showing under your shirt while you pick up a grocery on the bottom shelf.

HB196 “Property protection is not a crime” [adding trespass as an exception to the charge of criminal conduct.]

This is a bill to prevent prosecution for what Mark and Patricia McCloskey did to protect their property. No one was hurt when a mob broke through the gates and trespassed on their property, yet the McCloskey’s were charged with a crime and not the mob damaging their property.

HB197 “Expanded Stand your Ground for vehicles” [relative to the use of deadly force in defense of another.]

Current law prohibits you from defending your loved ones sitting in your car. Under certain conditions when someone is about to commit a felony against you and you are inside your vehicle, you do not have the right to respond to protect yourself or those near you. This bill would restore that chance to defend yourself and your loved ones if ever that horrible situation arose.

HB334 Constitutional Carry for ATV and Snowmobiles [relative to prohibitions on carrying a loaded firearm on an OHRV or snowmobile.]

This bill simply solves a small oversight from when Constitutional carry was passed in 2017. Currently you are prohibited from riding on your own property while carrying a handgun

HB440 “The 2021 Protect Our Constitutional Rights Act” [prohibiting the suspension of civil liberties during a state of emergency.]

Currently the courts have ruled that the executive branch can strip us of our constitutional protections. This bill would correct that.

__________________________________
Seeing as it might be a good idea to post bills in a place where people can find them...
Edit 3/2
See bottom of page 2 for the latest text to CACR8 regarding making NH a 2a friendly state. I think you will like it.

Edit: 2/20
House to meet on 2/24 and 2/25 to decide the outcome of 3 bills of importance, see post 32

--------
TOMORROW!

HB246 'Eldercare Gun Confiscation' also has a continued hearing tomorrow. Please take 2 minutes to sign in against and if you can stream during your afternoon, sign up to speak and just ask that the bill be ITLd


HEALTH, HUMAN SERVICES AND ELDERLY AFFAIRS

1:00 p.m. HB 246, establishing a protective order for vulnerable adults.
Executive session on pending legislation may be held throughout the day, time permitting, from the time the committee is initially convened.
Committee members will receive secure Zoom invitations via email.
Members of the public may attend using the following links:
1. To join the webinar: Join our Cloud HD Video Meeting
2. Or Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): 1-929-205-6099
3. Webinar ID: 927 6904 4991
The following email will be monitored throughout the meeting by someone who can assist with

Several gun bills having hearings next week.
This is the link to sign in, in favor of these bills: http://gencourt.state.nh.us/.../remotetestimony/default.aspx


Monday 2/8
Members of the public may attend using the following links:
1. To join the webinar: Join our Cloud HD Video Meeting
2. Or Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): 1-929-205-6099
3. Webinar ID: 956 8668 1680
The following email will be monitored

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY
10:30 a.m. HB 253-L, requiring law enforcement officers to use body-worn cameras and establishing a grant program to assist local law enforcement agencies to purchase body-worn cameras.
2:30 p.m. HB 507, prohibiting no-knock warrants.

---
Wednesday 2/10
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY
Members of the public may attend using the following links:
1. To join the webinar: Join our Cloud HD Video Meeting
2. Or Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): 1-929-205-6099
3. Webinar ID: 968 1561 3466
The following email will be monitored

9:00 a.m. CACR 8, relating to firearms. Providing that the legislature make no law restricting the right to own, carry, or use firearms or firearm accessories.
10:00 a.m. HB 195, adding display of a firearm as an exception to reckless conduct.
11:00 a.m. HB 307, relative to the state preemption of the regulation of firearms and ammunition.
11:45 a.m. HB 334, relative to prohibitions on carrying a loaded firearm on an OHRV or snowmobile.
2:30 p.m. HB 579, requiring notice to the public before immigration checkpoints are conducted.
 
Last edited:

omega42

NES Member
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
2,882
Likes
2,014
Location
NH
I'd like to see CACR8 broadened to all arms, recalling that in the UK they now ban knives that many of us routinely carry.

I think HB 307 has a loophole in it. Quoted below with how I'd amend it in bold.

159:28 VIII. Except as otherwise required in statute, public funds or insurance purchased with public funds shall not be used to defend any such action, and any such damages, attorneys’ fees and costs shall not be payable by any public funds or insurance carried at taxpayer expense. Interest on the sums awarded pursuant to this section shall accrue at the legal rate from the date on which suit was filed.

Starting an oppose list:

Wednesday 2/10
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY

1:45 p.m. HB 620, requiring law enforcement agencies to gather and analyze certain demographic information.

ETA: Mods can we make this a sticky thread?
 
Last edited:

MikeRizz

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
408
Likes
77
Location
Fremont, NH
Just need to get the one shutting down the NH Gun Line added!

Going for another 120 mile round trip to pick up an item since it's not longer "same day" let alone 20 minutes.
They now do an instant NICS check when a FFL calls! So they must have got the message. I know there was some talk about making it go away. As a FFL the wait time in the last year or so has been very frustrating!
 

design

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
1,537
Likes
1,197
NH Gun Line is better, but still needs work. From what I have been told, the fax side of the system is still having 1 day delays.
 

design

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
1,537
Likes
1,197
HB246 also has a continued hearing tomorrow. Please take 2 minutes to sign in against and if you can stream during your afternoon, sign up to speak and just ask that the bill be ITLd


HEALTH, HUMAN SERVICES AND ELDERLY AFFAIRS

1:00 p.m. HB 246, establishing a protective order for vulnerable adults.
Executive session on pending legislation may be held throughout the day, time permitting, from the time the committee is initially convened.
Committee members will receive secure Zoom invitations via email.
Members of the public may attend using the following links:
1. To join the webinar: Join our Cloud HD Video Meeting
2. Or Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): 1-929-205-6099
3. Webinar ID: 927 6904 4991
The following email will be monitored throughout the meeting by someone who can assist with
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 30, 2007
Messages
3,645
Likes
512
Location
NH
NH Gun Line is better, but still needs work. From what I have been told, the fax side of the system is still having 1 day delays.
I've been trying to follow this but from what I understand this is addition too. It's not a Federal vs local state level. So, how is having a local check on top of the federal better than just federal?
 

Kevin_NH

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
9,495
Likes
3,626
Location
WNW of MHT
I've been trying to follow this but from what I understand this is addition too. It's not a Federal vs local state level. So, how is having a local check on top of the federal better than just federal?
Our "partial POC" was political thing at the beginning of the Brady checks, the idea was that the state police had access to in-state disqualifying records which NICS did not have, which is why it is used for all motions for the return of seized firearms in addition to pistol purchases.

I still maintain that New Hampshire needs to make one or two tiny changes to the P&R statute so we can attain Permanent Brady Nirvana.
 

design

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
1,537
Likes
1,197
The gun line is important, but let's not make that issue the sole focus of this year, or we lose the chance to fix a number of other statutes that need to be corrected.
 

design

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
1,537
Likes
1,197
Use the link on inside the green box when you want to find out more about the bills: This is the link to the new and improved calendar. This allows you to use the youtube channel or to testify etc.
1612838602556.png
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 30, 2007
Messages
3,645
Likes
512
Location
NH
The gun line is important, but let's not make that issue the sole focus of this year, or we lose the chance to fix a number of other statutes that need to be corrected.
I don't disagree with you on that but you NHFC is taking a lot of heat online for the gun line legislation.
 

MaverickNH

NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
4,662
Likes
2,792
Location
SoNH


Leonard Korn, a doctor representing the New Hampshire Medical Society, opposed the amendment too, referring to studies indicating that the United States has the highest rate of gun violence among developed democracy. Firearm regulations are important to address a rising number of suicides in the state, Korn argued. “Proponents of this amendment state that they are concerned regarding civil rights,” he said. “However the civil right of being alive and safe in our state, safe to remain alive, safe to vote, safe to breathe, safe from being shot, is clearly more necessary than focusing only on having more guns everywhere.”

Notice how she slipped “safe to breathe” in there, in reference to Floyd/BLM/Police. “Living Constitution” doctrine at it’s finest - enumerated Civil Rights are doubtful, but the ones not there are certain...
 
Last edited:
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 18, 2020
Messages
596
Likes
3,469
Location
New Hampshire


Leonard Korn, a doctor representing the New Hampshire Medical Society, opposed the amendment too, referring to studies indicating that the United States has the highest rate of gun violence among developed democracy. Firearm regulations are important to address a rising number of suicides in the state, Korn argued. “Proponents of this amendment state that they are concerned regarding civil rights,” he said. “However the civil right of being alive and safe in our state, safe to remain alive, safe to vote, safe to breathe, safe from being shot, is clearly more necessary than focusing only on having more guns everywhere.”
Yes, he can’t stand the thought of a terminally ill patient deciding for themselves instead of being raped by the medical system of every last penny they have for “treatment”. 260,000 people died last year from medical errors according to John Hopkins - admitted an old study, but newer ones still bear this out. Why haven’t we shut down thatindustry?
sorry for the rant. I just can’t stand the bloviated f***tard.
 

Qwikdraw45

NES Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
1,796
Likes
2,134
Location
Rochester NH
Our "partial POC" was political thing at the beginning of the Brady checks, the idea was that the state police had access to in-state disqualifying records which NICS did not have, which is why it is used for all motions for the return of seized firearms in addition to pistol purchases.

I still maintain that New Hampshire needs to make one or two tiny changes to the P&R statute so we can attain Permanent Brady Nirvana.
I've suggested this ever since I moved back to the area from Arizona (their permit qualifies). I was loudly shouted down by members of this board when I suggested it. They were worried that they wouldn't get Con-Carry (which can still be done away with by a new administration) and that offering a Brady-qualified permit as an option would be made mandatory. Or having to pay a fee to exercise a right. Cheaper for me to pay for a permit every 5 years vs. having to make two trips of any distance to get what I want in-state.

Whatever. Background checks are going to happen since the Feds require them. And if people want to wait...and wait...and wait for a check, that's on them. It's enough of a sticking point with me that I'm looking at going back to AZ when I retire. Just sucks that they have State sales tax...
 

Cipher

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jan 7, 2019
Messages
935
Likes
1,874
Location
1000 miles from nowhere


Leonard Korn, a doctor representing the New Hampshire Medical Society, opposed the amendment too, referring to studies indicating that the United States has the highest rate of gun violence among developed democracy. Firearm regulations are important to address a rising number of suicides in the state, Korn argued. “Proponents of this amendment state that they are concerned regarding civil rights,” he said. “However the civil right of being alive and safe in our state, safe to remain alive, safe to vote, safe to breathe, safe from being shot, is clearly more necessary than focusing only on having more guns everywhere.”

Notice how she slipped “safe to breathe” in there, in reference to Floyd/BLM/Police. “Living Constitution” doctrine at it’s finest - enumerated Civil Rights are doubtful, but the ones not there are certain...

"Rising suicides" "safe from being shot".

Yeah we don't want to become like Massachusetts do we?
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
246
Likes
247
Location
New Hampshire
I've suggested this ever since I moved back to the area from Arizona (their permit qualifies). I was loudly shouted down by members of this board when I suggested it. They were worried that they wouldn't get Con-Carry (which can still be done away with by a new administration) and that offering a Brady-qualified permit as an option would be made mandatory. Or having to pay a fee to exercise a right. Cheaper for me to pay for a permit every 5 years vs. having to make two trips of any distance to get what I want in-state.

Whatever. Background checks are going to happen since the Feds require them. And if people want to wait...and wait...and wait for a check, that's on them. It's enough of a sticking point with me that I'm looking at going back to AZ when I retire. Just sucks that they have State sales tax...
The issue with making the NH pistol license a NICS check exemption is that it is valid for NOT LESS than 5 years. If a person apply the day after their birthday the license will at a minimum valid for 5 years and 364 days. Second, the issuing authority is selectmen not law enforcement.

the problem is state police are unable to process checks instantly not that your license is not an exemption. GOA sent an alert a day or so ago


 
Last edited:

AFAR/PFAR

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Messages
1,949
Likes
2,337
Location
Grafton & Coös Counties
Use the link on inside the green box when you want to find out more about the bills: This is the link to the new and improved calendar. This allows you to use the youtube channel or to testify etc.
View attachment 447754

So I was messing around with that page the other day. Is there any way to get email alerts from it? New bills, LSRs, etc?
 

Kevin_NH

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
9,495
Likes
3,626
Location
WNW of MHT
The issue with making the NH pistol license a NICS check exemption is that it is valid for NOT LESS than 5 years. If a person apply the day after their birthday the license will at a minimum valid for 5 years and 364 days. Second, the issuing authority is selectmen not law enforcement.

the problem is state police are unable to process checks instantly not that your license is not an exemption.
No, "the issuing authority is selectmen not law enforcement." is not true - there might be an issue that selectmen could issue permits, but they don't routinely do so -- 99.999% of P&Rs are issued by law enforcement. And it's easy to work around that, just stamp LE-issued permits with "NICS Exempt", just like they do in AK & SD.

Why did the law change to five years in 2019?
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
246
Likes
247
Location
New Hampshire
No, "the issuing authority is selectmen not law enforcement." is not true - there might be an issue that selectmen could issue permits, but they don't routinely do so -- 99.999% of P&Rs are issued by law enforcement. And it's easy to work around that, just stamp LE-issued permits with "NICS Exempt", just like they do in AK & SD.

Why did the law change to five years in 2019?
The statute says select men but allows them to designate a police officer. But the authority to issue rests with selectmen. Elected officials. Change from not less then 4 to not less than 5 was part of SB 12 constitutional carry
 

Qwikdraw45

NES Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
1,796
Likes
2,134
Location
Rochester NH
The issue with making the NH pistol license a NICS check exemption is that it is valid for NOT LESS than 5 years. If a person apply the day after their birthday the license will at a minimum valid for 5 years and 364 days. Second, the issuing authority is selectmen not law enforcement.

the problem is state police are unable to process checks instantly not that your license is not an exemption. GOA sent an alert a day or so ago


Well, with the Gun Line abolished, the SP will have plenty of time to do the new permits. If you are going to change statute to allow such a permit, you can change who issues it. Also, "not less than 5 years" means if you issue it on such-and-such a date, it can be dated for exactly 5 years. It doesn't have to be set to your birthday like a driver's license or local P&R license. (I can understand why NH uses birth dates - spreads car registrations/licenses out through the year, but annoying as hell unless you buy a car or move and change your address in your birth month).
 

KBCraig

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
14,659
Likes
12,276
Location
Granite State of Mind
I don't disagree with you on that but you NHFC is taking a lot of heat online for the gun line legislation.
There is another organization in NH whose major voice has a permanent rage boner against NHFC. When I called for switching to NICS years ago, she called me anti-gun.

Whatever. Background checks are going to happen since the Feds require them. And if people want to wait...and wait...and wait for a check, that's on them.
Yes, the Feds require them. NH doesn't require any background check at all, and shouldn't be in the business of conducting them. We don't assimilate federal gun laws here, and shouldn't. If the Feds want a background check, the Feds should conduct it.

The federal NICS is far faster than the NH Gun Line. I have a friend who's been waiting almost a month for a handgun transfer, despite no criminal record.
 
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
2,721
Likes
2,277
Location
The hills of TN
There is another organization in NH whose major voice has a permanent rage boner against NHFC. When I called for switching to NICS years ago, she called me anti-gun.


Yes, the Feds require them. NH doesn't require any background check at all, and shouldn't be in the business of conducting them. We don't assimilate federal gun laws here, and shouldn't. If the Feds want a background check, the Feds should conduct it.

The federal NICS is far faster than the NH Gun Line. I have a friend who's been waiting almost a month for a handgun transfer, despite no criminal record.
Jesus. I just picked up a Glock 44 through a trade and both of us were done in 15 minutes. This was about 2 weeks ago.
 

AFAR/PFAR

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Messages
1,949
Likes
2,337
Location
Grafton & Coös Counties
Yes, the Feds require them. NH doesn't require any background check at all, and shouldn't be in the business of conducting them. We don't assimilate federal gun laws here, and shouldn't. If the Feds want a background check, the Feds should conduct it.

The federal NICS is far faster than the NH Gun Line. I have a friend who's been waiting almost a month for a handgun transfer, despite no criminal record.

Someone on here a couple months ago mentioned that at least the NH Gun Line gave an individual a "local" chance to appeal a denial. I can almost see his point, but I also see no reason the state should be involved in background check that the Feds require. If the Feds need them, let the Feds do it.
The only thing the gun line has done for me is cost me about $20 in gas and wasted many hours of my time. It certainly isn't "instant" like the intent of the Fed NICS.

------
I also liked the concept that NC had with their Concealed Handgun Permit allowing someone to bypass NICS, but I would rather not add complexity to a constitutional carry state.
 

Kevin_NH

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
9,495
Likes
3,626
Location
WNW of MHT
I also liked the concept that NC had with their Concealed Handgun Permit allowing someone to bypass NICS, but I would rather not add complexity to a constitutional carry state.
It's not just NC, it's half the states. Here's the relevant Federal law:
Brady Act said:
``(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to a firearm transfer between a licensee and another person if--
``(A)(i) such other person has presented to the licensee a permit that--
``(I) allows such other person to possess a firearm; and
``(II) was issued not more than 5 years earlier by the State in which the transfer is to take place; and
(ii) the law of the State provides that such a permit is to be issued only after an authorized government official has verified that the information available to such official does not indicate that possession of a firearm by such other person would be in violation of law;

After re-reading the above, appears our current law (RSA 159:6 as amended) is NICS exemption compliant, the 5 year thing is not a deal killer (note that it says 'was issued" not "is valid for no more than") and the Federal statute says "an authorized government official has verified"; selectmen are both authorized, and also government officials.

So how do we get the attorney general to formally request NICS exempt status for the NH resident P&R?
 

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
8,737
Likes
7,050
Someone on here a couple months ago mentioned that at least the NH Gun Line gave an individual a "local" chance to appeal a denial. I can almost see his point, but I also see no reason the state should be involved in background check that the Feds require. If the Feds need them, let the Feds do it.
The only thing the gun line has done for me is cost me about $20 in gas and wasted many hours of my time. It certainly isn't "instant" like the intent of the Fed NICS.

------
I also liked the concept that NC had with their Concealed Handgun Permit allowing someone to bypass NICS, but I would rather not add complexity to a constitutional carry state.
Not really a local thing to appeal. According to the DOS denials "follow the federal process" . I've had this argument and this comes from the people doing the checks, actually their council. The only kind of denial they can handle locally is one that results when they input the information wrong. I've posted stats that include how often that happens.
 
Top Bottom