Bullshit, you don't have to go through a background check to get a DL. Just show up at the DMV, take a simple test and don't kill anyone. They pretty much let anyone drive, even those who can't see or appropriately control the vehicle.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
NH Alert! The DoS Has Changed the P&R License Application Form!**UPDATE POST 406
- Thread starter soloman02
- Start date
Bullshit, you don't have to go through a background check to get a DL. Just show up at the DMV, take a simple test and don't kill anyone. They pretty much let anyone drive, even those who can't see or appropriately control the vehicle.
DispositionMatrix
NES Member
Deserves its own comment.
And another...
It's not a permit. It's a license. And this is from - not only an issuing authority - but the so called President of the NH Association of Chiefs of Police? You'd think they'd know this law inside and out.
Someone's looking for a career change to Walmart greeter.
I've noticed the trend.
Antis tend to belittle it using the language permit which has a different connotation then a license - Which is the language specifically used by RSA, the application and the actual document itself. It's a license.
Anyway, it was a little troubling that posters on the Concord Monitor were equally misinformed, well most of them anyway.
Antis tend to belittle it using the language permit which has a different connotation then a license - Which is the language specifically used by RSA, the application and the actual document itself. It's a license.
Anyway, it was a little troubling that posters on the Concord Monitor were equally misinformed, well most of them anyway.
DispositionMatrix
NES Member
I'm sure what he "knows" is guns are not for the little people.
If we keep the current licensing scheme, we need a bill to explicitly define the word "suitability." If we have a CC bill it will likely contain the same language while at the same time making the license optional.
Walt Havenstein has come out and said he supports CC.
Sounds like he's been spending time with the MCOPA brass. And never assume any PO (never mind a chief) KNOWS any laws!! Chiefs are usually so far removed from reality in their ivory towers that they have no concept of the laws . . . that's why it is commonly referred to as "riding a desk" by those with boots on the street!!
We still need a licensing scheme for reciprocity reasons. So I think the agenda items should be 1. Statutorily define suitability - and while we're add it, let's also define the components of the physical application too via RSA, and 2. Constitutional Carry for all "suitable" individuals.
Quiet
Banned
Would the substitution of the word "qualified" for "suitable" fix everything (for that issue)?
DispositionMatrix
NES Member
This is why I make a concerted effort to avoid using their language--at least unquoted--and not acknowledge they are permitting me to do something. Currently they control the language of the non-debate, and it works spectacularly in their favor--even at the most basic level. What they call "gun control" I call "gun restrictionism" or "gun prohibitionism" since the latter terms are accurate and directly convey their intent to restrict or prohibit. Since many gun prohibitionists have taken to using "gun enthusiast" in the pejorative, I have been referring to them as "civilian disarmament enthusiasts" at every opportunity.
I posted a comment that was far tamer than some of what was there. Appears not to have been approved.
For those of you talking about the term "suitable person", I encourage you to read the link in the post below. It can help you realize just what we are dealing with. A bill defining it is not so simple. Though that is from 1997, you can bet the same arguments will remain today, and I'd bet we are dealing with even stronger opposition now. I agree this needs to happen, just trying to give some more insight. It's not going to be so easy.
Quiet
Banned
Without going to find the statute, doesn't it basically define who is qualified? Then instead of suitable you put in "whosoever is "so qualified"" or just change it to say. "a person qualified under this section" making it clear that extraneous qualifications are not allowed while tending to obfuscate your objective from people who aren't paying attention or have 8 second attention spans (the public).
Just some thoughts
Nope. No definition of "qualified." In fact, the word qualified does not exist in RSA 159.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xii/159/159-mrg.htm
The law on background checks is also hardly there.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xii/159-D/159-D-mrg.htm
I'm not so sure the opposition would be the same. We are nearly 2 decades from the last attempt and a lot has changed. We have more gun owners than ever before. We have more P&R license holders than ever before. We probably even have more of both on a per capita basis than ever before. Further, guns are not "hidden" like they were in 1997 and gun owners as a whole are far more politically active than ever before (the internet is a huge reason for this as there now exists the ability to communicate and organize in real time).
I'm not saying it will be easy but I think you overstate how difficult it will be this time around.
Agreed - things change.
Gun prohibitionists will suffer the same ultimate fate that alcohol prohibitionists and cannabis prohibitionists earned: crushing defeat. And it will take decades of hard work to do it, but it will get done one way or another.
This rep was left to me on the post above: "I meant the part of the statues that qualify a person for possessing a gun."
My answer: There is no statute that qualifies a person for possessing a gun in NH per se. The only thing that comes close is the following:
The rest of such "qualification" is reliant upon federal law. The only other mention that I can find applies only to restraining orders:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xii/173-b/173-b-mrg.htm
Basically, NH statute does not explicitly define who can possess other than RSA 159:3 stating felons can't (which fed law already says).
Even RSA 159
which deals with background checks doesn't define who can possess:
Quiet
Banned
A list of reasons a person is disqualified is a section that would qualify a person.
To qualify does not mean solely to assertively set forth requirements, it also means to meet the required standard, i.e. no felonies, etc. No felonies? Meet Federal criteria? Then you're qualified.
Don't get so hung up and insulted every time someone says "clip" or "permit" in casual speech.
I thought I had read a section in NH law about disqualifiers, I see (thanks, solo) it was likely in the section about confidentiality (which makes no sense to me, but whatever)
Casual speech? Are you of the naive and misguided belief that CoP's use permit instead of license CASUALLY?
Their use of the word permit is intentional and designed to educate the NH citizens that they need permission from the government.
Eff National reciprocity and non-resident permits - we need Constitutional carry quickly before the courts and CoP's get to decide what suitability means.
Quiet
Banned
Huh? Still butthurt over a convo from a couple of weeks ago where your JBT tendencies rose to the top? Sorry. Get over it and move on.
Don't get hung up on this stuff. A chief's language is not the law.
Do you also argue that since driving is a privilege that it should be a driver's permit instead of a license, or do you argue that driving is a right that has been curtailed and the vestigial evidence of such is that it's called a license?
Do you want to spend 20 minutes trying to convince someone on the fence that the distinction (which is 0 in their mind) matters? Or do you want to spend those 20 minutes explaining why we enjoy the right to defend ourselves?
Words have meaning, and their use establishes society norms that change the way people behave. Your attempt to argue language is irrelevant by saying "hung up" is unsupported by the evidence - yes, words do matter.
Yes, I will argue the distinction between permit and license. Yes, I will spend the 20 minutes or more to educate an open minded person that asks why does it matter.
If you like your freedom, you should use every chance to advance the right cause, and educating people on law and freedom is a big part of that.
It's there now.
My guess is that suitability could be something that currently exists on ATF 4473: Are you in the United States illegally? Are you a fugitive from justice? Were you dishonorably discharged? Etc. Maybe throw in an age requirement (e.g. age of majority) and that should be fine to define suitability. Basically, if you can purchase a firearm from an FFL you should be able to conceal it without begging your CLEO permission to do so.
Like others have said: Words have meaning. I call my computer a computer, my TV a TV, my car a car, my Pistol/Revolver license a license, etc. OK, sometimes I call my "Operator's License" a Driver's License.
If we don't use the right language it creates confusion. Confusion causes anxiety. Anxiety drives people to act in a way they wouldn't otherwise. That threatens our liberty and freedom.
So it's not a permit. It's a New Hampshire resident Pistol/Revolver license to carry a pistol or revolver concealed under a garment.
It's not a clip. It's a standard-capacity rifle magazine.
![[thumbsup]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/044.gif "Thumbs Up [thumbsup]")
Several towns websites refer to them incorrectly as permits, my town being one. I understand the issue of the licence vs. permit debate. But here is the black law definition of license.
License: A permission, accorded by a competent authority, conferring the right to do some act which without such authorization would be illegal, or would be a trespass or a tort.
http://thelawdictionary.org/letter/l/page/40/
So yes, words do have meanings. The meaning of the word license still relies on permission. Both permit and license are often used interchangeably.
Here is how it is defined on another site.
"The permission granted by competent authority to exercise a certain privilege that, without such authorization, would constitute an illegal act, a Trespass or a tort.
A license is different from a permit. The terms license and permit are often used interchangeably, but generally, a permit describes a more temporary form of permission."
A license is different from a permit. The terms license and permit are often used interchangeably, but generally, a permit describes a more temporary form of permission.
No matter how you cut it, it is still a violation of your rights guaranteed by the US and NH Constitution. No matter how you cut it, you still need permission. So whether it is called a permit or a license is largely a semantical argument. The legal term, in NH, is indeed a license.
The point being, if someone incorrectly calls it a permit, it does not change the fact that without one, you cannot legally carry a loaded handgun either concealed upon your person or in a vehicle.
By contrast, here are two words that are often used interchangeably where the argument between the two is not simply semantics. Lawful vs. legal.
License: A permission, accorded by a competent authority, conferring the right to do some act which without such authorization would be illegal, or would be a trespass or a tort.
http://thelawdictionary.org/letter/l/page/40/
So yes, words do have meanings. The meaning of the word license still relies on permission. Both permit and license are often used interchangeably.
Here is how it is defined on another site.
"The permission granted by competent authority to exercise a certain privilege that, without such authorization, would constitute an illegal act, a Trespass or a tort.
A license is different from a permit. The terms license and permit are often used interchangeably, but generally, a permit describes a more temporary form of permission."
A license is different from a permit. The terms license and permit are often used interchangeably, but generally, a permit describes a more temporary form of permission.
No matter how you cut it, it is still a violation of your rights guaranteed by the US and NH Constitution. No matter how you cut it, you still need permission. So whether it is called a permit or a license is largely a semantical argument. The legal term, in NH, is indeed a license.
The point being, if someone incorrectly calls it a permit, it does not change the fact that without one, you cannot legally carry a loaded handgun either concealed upon your person or in a vehicle.
By contrast, here are two words that are often used interchangeably where the argument between the two is not simply semantics. Lawful vs. legal.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
Whutmeworry
NES Member
Outstanding video clip.
Similar threads
