NH Alert! The DoS Has Changed the P&R License Application Form!**UPDATE POST 406

[Fattman]

Yes, but he's not making that determination based on what a law says--rather, only based upon his own determination. It's irreverent that such a power to deny comes from a statute. Prohibited by law = law says no. Suitability = Chief says no.

I see what you're getting at and while I think it's a plausible interpretation, when we talk about "prohibited by law or regulation from possessing a firearm", we're talking PP territory--as in "operation of law"--not pursuant to law.

Let me try putting this another way: Say my LTC gets revoked for suitability, but I had an FID card that (up until last week) was not revokable. What then?

Whatever the case, this potential confusion should be fodder for arguments of you NH folk.

What if you never took the Mass firearms safety class? You cannot get an FID or LTC without it and therefor prohibited from possessing firearms?

 

[Kevin_NH]

Perhaps not, but are you cool with pointless, poorly worded questions being added to gov't forms without oversight? Do you underestimate the dishonest, vindictive nature of political hacks? We're best served by nipping this sh!t in the bud.

I'm not saying the situation is good, I'm just saying it's not as horrifically bad as some people like to make it out to be. One jetliner falls out of the sky, and certain subsets of the community love to run around screaming the sky is falling.

 

[Buggin]

I'm not saying the situation is good, I'm just saying it's not as horrifically bad as some people like to make it out to be. One jetliner falls out of the sky, and certain subsets of the community love to run around screaming the sky is falling.

Give them an inch........

 

[DarrenL]

Give them an inch........

This is the problem. As a former resident of Mass, I can tell you that this is grease for the slippery slope. If no one does anything, they will start tacking on more absurd/vague questions, then requirements, etc. That process may take years or decades, but a journey of 1000 gun rights restrictions begins with a single step.

 

[soloman02]

I'm not saying the situation is good, I'm just saying it's not as horrifically bad as some people like to make it out to be. One jetliner falls out of the sky, and certain subsets of the community love to run around screaming the sky is falling.

It is an election year. Are you telling me you don't want the gun owners to be reminded why they should show up to vote for the locals even if a certain Brown substance is on the ballot for senate?

While it is not looking likely, if the dems keep the house again (and somehow take the Senate), you will see the following: Income tax/sales tax, AWB proposed, Mag limits, proposed, UBC (likely to pass), revision of the P&R to real may issue with similar BS to what Mass has for licensing, and a whole host of other anti freedom and anti business legislation (half of NH job seekers look outside for jobs, if the dems get in, that statistic will skyrocket as businesses in NH close up and leave).

The other issue is that this change has been made without following the RSA.

 

[Lcstyle]

It is an election year. Are you telling me you don't want the gun owners to be reminded why they should show up to vote for the locals even if a certain Brown substance is on the ballot for senate?

While it is not looking likely, if the dems keep the house again (and somehow take the Senate), you will see the following: Income tax/sales tax, AWB proposed, Mag limits, proposed, UBC (likely to pass), revision of the P&R to real may issue with similar BS to what Mass has for licensing, and a whole host of other anti freedom and anti business legislation (half of NH job seekers look outside for jobs, if the dems get in, that statistic will skyrocket as businesses in NH close up and leave).

 

[soloman02]

I should have qualified with proposed. I am uncertain if all would pass. There does seem to be a lot of opposition to an income tax, even among democrats (however not as much to a sales tax). The issue is that the democrats are always good little serfs and tend to vote how they are told by the leadership. Republicans tend to scoff if the leadership tells them to vote a certain way and they don't agree.

I mean, the democrats tried to tax paint this session (35 cents per pint to $1.60 on anything over a gallon). PAINT!!!

 

[drgrant]

Youre smoking some serious crack if you think a sales tax would ever pass there. It would destroy the economy and the voters would eviscerate anyone involved politically.

-Mike

 

[pdm]

Youre smoking some serious crack if you think a sales tax would ever pass there. It would destroy the economy and the voters would eviscerate anyone involved politically.

-Mike

That doesn't necessarily mean it wouldn't pass. Just that legiscritters don't always think ahead.

 

[soloman02]

Youre smoking some serious crack if you think a sales tax would ever pass there. It would destroy the economy and the voters would eviscerate anyone involved politically.

-Mike

I can tell you that my democrat opponents support a sales tax and one is vocal about supporting an income tax...

When the feds stop paying for medicaid expansion, and if it has not been repealed, the dems will make it a priority to enact a new broadbased tax to pay for it. They will not let it go unfunded.

But that is an aside from the issue here of executive overreach.

Note this is the second time we have caught the Hassan administration changing the administrative rules without legislative approval in the past month.

 

[Hush]

Is a YES answer an automatic disqualified, or does it just require further explanation?

 

[KBCraig]

http://granitegrok.com/blog/2014/08/dos-dont-need-stinkin-permission-apparently

 

[soloman02]

Is a YES answer an automatic disqualified, or does it just require further explanation?

A yes answer requires an explanation on the back of the application.

http://granitegrok.com/blog/2014/08/dos-dont-need-stinkin-permission-apparently

Yea, unfortunately this story is now dead in the media's eyes because a blog reported on it first. None of the newspapers will touch it now. So no one in NH will know about this unless we find a way to make it become a news story.

 

[knoxy]

Yea, unfortunately this story is now dead in the media's eyes because a blog reported on it first. None of the newspapers will touch it now. So no one in NH will know about this unless we find a way to make it become a news story.

Note this is the second time we have caught the Hassan administration changing the administrative rules without legislative approval in the past month.

Would the media be interested in the more general story of Hassan acting without legislative approval (not necessarily focusing on the P&R license issue)? Is it even a story, or just the status quo?

Is this a pattern that extends beyond the 2 cases in the past month? Seems like general disregard of the legislative process might be newsworthy.

 

[soloman02]

Would the media be interested in the more general story of Hassan acting without legislative approval (not necessarily focusing on the P&R license issue)? Is it even a story, or just the status quo?

Is this a pattern that extends beyond the 2 cases in the past month? Seems like general disregard of the legislative process might be newsworthy.

Well, where there is smoke, there generally is a fire....

If you or someone else can find a separate instance of this elsewhere in the administration (they tried to change the business real estate transfer tax before this) and get proof, keep it quiet and contact me (PM or email) for the next course of action.

 

[CoastieRon]

Youre smoking some serious crack if you think a sales tax would ever pass there. It would destroy the economy and the voters would eviscerate anyone involved politically.

-Mike

He's not. Those will all be proposed. Medicaid expansion is an unfunded federal mandate after 2017. There will be a new tax for it unless we get NH out of the expansion. As for AWB, P&R restrictions a la MA, etc, I can whole-heartily believe that if the D retake the house & senate, the executive council remains unchanged, and Maggie stays, we quite possibly see all of that.

 

[knoxy]

Well, where there is smoke, there generally is a fire....

If you or someone else can find a separate instance of this elsewhere in the administration (they tried to change the business real estate transfer tax before this) and get proof, keep it quiet and contact me (PM or email) for the next course of action.

Unfortunately I have no insight into these things other than what shows up on NES.[sad2]

 

[Mr Weebles]

I'm sending the following out tomorrow:

August 7, 2014

Via Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested

Commissioner John J. Barthelmes
Department of Safety
James H. Hayes Safety Building
33 Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03305

Re: Recent Changes to New Hampshire Pistol & Revolver License Resident Application

Dear Commissioner Barthelmes:

This request is made pursuant to Part 1, Article 8 of the New Hampshire Constitution and New Hampshire’s Right to Know Law codified at RSA 91-A et seq. Please provide me with access to the following described governmental records in the possession or control of the New Hampshire Department of Safety:

1. All government records, including but not limited to meeting agendas, minutes, e-mails, electronic data, letters, internal communications, external communications, proposals, agreements, announcements, concerning or relating to the recent changes to the New Hampshire Pistol & Revolver License Resident Application and the addition of the following questions:

a) “Has any state or federal agency or licensing authority ever claimed that you are prohibited by law or regulation from possessing a firearm?”
b) "Are you prohibited by federal law or regulation from possessing a firearm?"
c) "Have you held a resident pistol/revolver license before?"

If there are any fees for searching or copying these records, please inform me if the cost will exceed $100.00. However, I would also like to request a waiver of all fees in that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of this issue. This information is not being sought for commercial purposes.
The New Hampshire Right to Know Law requires a response time of five business days. If access to the records I am requesting will take longer than this amount of time, please contact me with information about when I might expect copies or the ability to inspect the requested records.

If you deny any or all of this entire request, please cite each specific exemption you feel justifies the refusal to release the information and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.

Very truly yours,

It's already printed, I just need to hit the post office in the AM.

 

[soloman02]

I'm sending the following out tomorrow:



It's already printed, I just need to hit the post office in the AM.

Looks good. I suggest you edit it to be a little more specific. After "recent changes to the New Hampshire Pistol & Revolver License Resident Application" put (or something like it) "forms DSSP 85 (REV. 08/14) and DSSP 85 (REV. 07/14)"

Basically, find a way to include "forms DSSP 85 (REV. 08/14) and DSSP 85 (REV. 07/14)" because those are the form number and revisions that have these changes.

 

[Mr Weebles]

Looks good. I suggest you edit it to be a little more specific. After "recent changes to the New Hampshire Pistol & Revolver License Resident Application" put (or something like it) "forms DSSP 85 (REV. 08/14) and DSSP 85 (REV. 07/14)"

Basically, find a way to include "forms DSSP 85 (REV. 08/14) and DSSP 85 (REV. 07/14)" because those are the form number and revisions that have these changes.

Thanks. Good catch, I made the change.

My request was specifically for any info at the DoS, if and when I get a response I'll send in separate FOIA requests to any other agencies involved.

 

[soloman02]

Thanks. Good catch, I made the change.

My request was specifically for any info at the DoS, if and when I get a response I'll send in separate FOIA requests to any other agencies involved.

I have pinged an officer I know to see if he can confirm it, but I bet that the DoS send out guidance to every department when they send out a new revision to the form, especially if the form contains new questions because the CoP is going to need to know what to do when someone answers yes or no to those questions.

Meaning a 91a request would also possibly be in order to the local PD (especially if they have the new forms).

 

[noxin]

You might want to send it certified or priority (for the tracking) to prove the PD received it and when.

 

[Mr Weebles]

You might want to send it certified or priority (for the tracking) to prove the PD received it and when.

Read the letter:

Via Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested

I got this covered, son.

 

[noxin]

Read the letter:



I got this covered, son.

I jumped down to the juicy part and was just trying to help. Good luck

 

[Mr Weebles]

I have pinged an officer I know to see if he can confirm it, but I bet that the DoS send out guidance to every department when they send out a new revision to the form, especially if the form contains new questions because the CoP is going to need to know what to do when someone answers yes or no to those questions.

Meaning a 91a request would also possibly be in order to the local PD (especially if they have the new forms).

Good point. I'm going to hold off on any further FOIA requests until I get a response from the DoS. I want to see where the revisions originated before I look to where they went.

 

[MaverickNH]

Obama is pushing "Executive Orders" downstream to any Democrat in office to enact changes without legislative action.

The Government can overthrow the Government too...

 

[soloman02]

So now we have Cohen, of PGNH bashing Susan Olsen (who like I said earlier is a very good activist).

Oh my God -- a state government conspiracy to screw us out of our gun rights!! (Note, two exclamation points)

[Posted Wednesday, August 6, 2014, at 9:50 p.m.]

By Sam Cohen, Pro-Gun New Hampshire Executive Vice President

...well, no. No conspiracy. Some people panicked when they read this newly added question on the just-published new version (Rev 08/14) of the application form for a New Hampshire Resident Pistol/Revolver License: "Has any state or federal agency or licensing authority ever claimed that you are prohibited by law or regulation from possessing a firearm?" You must answer by checking one of two boxes: yes or no.

Of course, the problem is that a literal reading of this question makes it impossible to answer: how could you know if the newspaper delivery licensing authority of East Goofball, Wisconsin, may have made such a claim? And of course the assumption is that a false answer would send you straight to prison (the one with the extra-sharp glass chips in the oatmeal).

The question IS poorly worded; it should have asked if you were ever officially notified, etc. But relax: the signature block on the form includes this: "I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, all of my statements are true, correct, complete and made in good faith." (Emphasis added to the magic words "to the best of my knowledge and belief.") So unless you know or believe that you're prohibited, say that you're not.

Thanks to the long-suffering Earl Sweeney, Assistant Commissioner of the NH Department of Safety, and a Senior Advisor of Pro-Gun New Hampshire, for his reassurance on this.

http://pgnh.org/oh_my_god_a_state_g...of_our_gun_rights_note_two_exclamation_points

Since the time I started writing this and got a break from work to finish this, the article has been pulled down.

The low down is that Sam Cohen wrote this attack piece without consulting the rest of PGNH.

It seems like, because Cohen and Sweeney are friends, that Cohen believed Sweeney when he said nothing is wrong. Note, in the attack piece, Cohen never once mentions the other two questions nor addresses how this change was made illegally.

Something smells fishy at the DoS. I never heard back from Sweeney on the other issues that PD's are pulling with regard to licensing (extra forms, photocopies of ID, etc) and as far as I know that is still occurring (in fact I just found out about another town requiring a photocopy of your ID).

At this point I am of the opinion that Sweeney (a PGNH Senior Advisor) has turned and is no longer an ally.

 

[Mr Weebles]

Cohen can eat a bag of dicks. Yes, it's only one simple question but it's the camel's nose getting under the tent.

My FOIA request went out today. It should get there NLT Monday which starts the 5-day clock on a response.

To be honest I really don't expect to receive anything of note from the DoS. If anything, I'll get a "no documents were found that meet your request" reply.

 

[browncoat]

So now we have Cohen, of PGNH bashing Susan Olsen (who like I said earlier is a very good activist).



http://pgnh.org/oh_my_god_a_state_g...of_our_gun_rights_note_two_exclamation_points

Since the time I started writing this and got a break from work to finish this, the article has been pulled down.

The low down is that Sam Cohen wrote this attack piece without consulting the rest of PGNH.

It seems like, because Cohen and Sweeney are friends, that Cohen believed Sweeney when he said nothing is wrong. Note, in the attack piece, Cohen never once mentions the other two questions nor addresses how this change was made illegally.

Something smells fishy at the DoS. I never heard back from Sweeney on the other issues that PD's are pulling with regard to licensing (extra forms, photocopies of ID, etc) and as far as I know that is still occurring (in fact I just found out about another town requiring a photocopy of your ID).

At this point I am of the opinion that Sweeney (a PGNH Senior Advisor) has turned and is no longer an ally.

It's pretty rare for someone as highly placed as Sweeney is to be totally clean and not playing any politics.

 

[drgrant]

I think this is much ado about nothing, but there is no harm in questioning the appearance of this verbiage or getting people to demand that it be cleaned up. A good question is "Why is this being added to the form?" I don't really think it serves any purpose other than another place someone can **** up the application by not understanding the question. It smells of obstructionism- even if the box applies to no one, making the application more intimidating can deter people from even applying.

Cohen's retardo response to all this does speak volumes though- to the level of dysfunction between the pro gun groups in NH. It's readily apparent to me that too many cooks in the kitchen is ****ing things up and is not helping anything.

-Mike