-
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
I agree, since this is an important topic, I've taken the liberty of shoveling some OT stuff into its own thread....
Any more FOPA/national reciprocity unicorns type garbage goes here now: http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/260378-FOPA-Discussion-Unicorn-Moshpit-Megathread
Any more OT/thread drift stuff that ends up in this one will just be incinerated without warning.
-Mike
Last edited:
Thank you Sir!
Last edited by a moderator:
KBCraig
NES Member
Find an older version, print it off, and turn it in. See if they object. If they don't, no problem. If they do, then use the new form to the best of your ability, and contact NHFC.
Yes.
Proceed.
I just picked mine up yesterday in Nashua, My daughters' is also ready.
Took 8 days, no problems.
No fingerprint or mugshot bullshit like someone on here was saying either...
- - - Updated - - -
No!
If you turn in an old app it will not pass. I asked the cop at the counter.
Well the cop at the counter is who you must give the application to, & if he throws it in the trash you are out of luck..See, there is your problem right there. You asked the cop at the counter.![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
I see no problem, I got my license.
Sending in the old form via certified mail should elicit a response.
Maybe I'll give that a try.
Where in the US Const or NH Const was the leg granted the power to delegate legislative power to another branch of same gov?
Simply put its not there......not only is it not there but there's language ensuring that all legislative power resides with the Legislature.....(that almost deserves a "DUH!")
Last edited:
strangenh
NES Member
What an absurd point. Where do you find legal basis for your opinion that delegation is itself a "power" and needs to be enumerated? You're awful sure about it. You do know this question has been debated among western republics for 400 years, and ours since its inception. Right?
(Or are you just reading from Douglas Ginsburg's Heritage Foundation paper?)
Last edited:
I think his point speaks towards the separation of powers, which is explicitly stated in the NH Constitution.
The legislature delegating it's power to the executive doesn't really fall in line with this separation of powers, IMO.
The legislature delegating it's power to the executive doesn't really fall in line with this separation of powers, IMO.
strangenh
NES Member
I agree with you about his point, but he's going beyond what you're saying and quoting. Mind, it is nice discussing this long-debated topic with someone who doesn't mind reading, so thanks for posting that. That said, that provision is first and foremost about setting out where the historical powers of legislatures, executive, and judicial branches reside, and thus especially as a matter of how the NH constitution should be interpreted (i.e., it is there so - for example - the legislature can smack down the executive branch for just taking on one of their powers). Also important to remember is that a state constitution is not built on the same concept of enumerated powers as the Federal constitution with its explicit limits and (broken by history and in need of major repair) 10th Amendment.
Let's also note the section cited states the branches and their respective powers "ought to be kept as separate from" each other "as the nature of..." and as "is consistent with..." etc. It decidedly doesn't prohibit delegation, though one could read it as discouraging delegation; if one reads it so, the fact it comes out and talks about delegation means delegation was a known happening with representative government branches even at the time (which it certainly was, and had been hotly debated in England and if I recall correctly even in the Dutch Republic).
I'm certainly not suggesting it is a winning argument. Let's be frank, citing either the State or US Constitution as a basis for a legal argument nearly always fails, even when it shouldn't. This is much more of a subjective area then some instances. It is, however, just my opinion, that secondary legislation is a joke, dangerous, and the antithesis of a just government.
Can't believe this even needs to be said.
WRT Fed gov its crystal clear.....not even open to discussion.
US Constitution is an outline for the formation of a federal gov and clearly enumerates the powers granted to each body/branch of gov.
Those bodies have NO MORE than the explicit powers enumerated to them.
The Constitution itself is THE legal foundation for this.
Article I
Section 1.
All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Article 5a of the NH Const does the exact same thing........
Last edited:
Good point.
Quite a few towns (e.g. Dunbarton) either host a copy of the old form on their website, or link to the old version on the NH Dept. of Safety site.
Both those link to the current form at issue.
strangenh
NES Member
Our club's newsletter noted at least one town was still using the old form (some towns still have pads of them I gather, as another poster on here noted). We're not going to win this one in the courts - the NH Supreme Court is definitely finding wiggle room for chiefs in "suitable." We need to take back the house and change the language about the license, as well as go con carry (i.e., make license optional AND explicitly shall-issue like AZ).
Looks like Dunbarton finally fixed their site.
Long term, absolutely. Meanwhile, what happened with Sweeney's statement that DoS would back out the changes to page 1?
strangenh
NES Member
VERY good question. Political pressure is all we have here short term. Another case like that (who the BLEEP relies on some language on a form as a legal argument?) and the court will take us another step away from "shall" on the basis of the word suitability being in the statute.
Last edited:
Post number one of this thread has old copies of both the resident and non-resident forms.
Every executive branch in the nation allows its corresponding executive branch to enact regulations pursuant to legislation. Every. Single. One.
I'm sorry, but you are wrong.
There is not a single legislative body anywhere that has the time or the technical knowledge to write effective regulations. The legislature creates the broad stokes. The regulations should paint inside the lines.
Do the regulators sometimes go beyond their remit? Yes.
And you don't see the problem with that?
The reality is that legislatures can not respond quickly enough or well enough to write and update regulations. Regulations require too much detailed technical knowledge that neither the legislators nor their staffs can manage.
The base issue here, however, is not the regulator or the change in regulation. The base issue here is that NH law allows for discretion. The law needs to be changed and the place to do that is the legislature. That is where you should focus your energy.
This is just a sideshow. Don't get distracted by it.
Last edited:
Similar threads
