NH HB687 Red Flag Gun Confiscation hearing scheduled 6/24/20

I got several supportive replies from my representatives. And two from the NH EPRO bill sponsors. One was wish-washy, like “I support 2ndA & Gunowners as well as common sense gun laws.” The other was more interesting - the representative included a link to a 2016 study looking at the Connecticut ERPO law with 1999-2013 data, showing *some* efficacy.

This suggests that Giffords/Everytown/Bloomberg is seeding legislators with background (and no doubt money) to organize behind the bill. I sent a polite pushback noting the study she offered from CT over 13yr was an early and limited study vs Lott’s study of CA, CT, IN, WA over 36yr showing no efficacy of ERPO laws.

Some NH Democrat legislators are rabid, anti-gun liberals but others are just left of the fence, even if not on it. They are fed the background that support the gun-control agenda. You know...like the 3yr preliminary study of the 1994-2004 AWB that showed it was working while the final 10yr study showed it didn’t work. Nobody says “While early, limited studies showed the laws work, broader long-term studies showed they didn’t, but we’re going with the early, limited studies to support our views.” Cause that would look stupid and deceitful. They like to lie by omission and mislead but not out-and-out lie.
 
This will end up being a nationwide thing, unfortunately. They’re digging for anything just to say that they’re trying to stop these active shooter events, and of course it’s us that will pay the price, not the criminals, not the mentally deranged or freakshows of FB.

20.00 bucks says this will be nationwide SOP within 2 yrs.

I agree, the best policy is to go quiet
 
When NH gets a full time legislature its doa.
A very interesting thought. Professional politicians, hmm. WCGW?
Actually, lots of research indicates that professional legislatures without term limits result in more stability over time. Basically, there's more incentive to avoid radical shifts because there's more for them to lose and they aren't under pressure to make a name for themselves before their term limits are up by passing dumb laws.

So you're less likely to get hard leftist politicians that get elected in a wave year and do a bunch of stupid shit. And yes, you're less likely to get lots of hard-right politicians in a wave year that do stuff you like. But at the end of the day I'll take more bias towards the status quo over radical back-and-forth shifts. At the end of the day, "you shall not pass" is generally a victory for conservatism. It's the other side that wants government to do lots of stuff.
 
Actually, lots of research indicates that professional legislatures without term limits result in more stability over time. Basically, there's more incentive to avoid radical shifts because there's more for them to lose and they aren't under pressure to make a name for themselves before their term limits are up by passing dumb laws.

So you're less likely to get hard leftist politicians that get elected in a wave year and do a bunch of stupid shit. And yes, you're less likely to get lots of hard-right politicians in a wave year that do stuff you like. But at the end of the day I'll take more bias towards the status quo over radical back-and-forth shifts. At the end of the day, "you shall not pass" is generally a victory for conservatism. It's the other side that wants government to do lots of stuff.
WHAT!, please cite sources, I need to read that.
Have you looked at what the MA Legislature has done/is doing? If you want to ignore their hard leftist leaning, just look at how they gave themselves a pay raise. The MA Legislature can't give themselves a salary increase, so they called it a stipends. But the people can vote to overturn any Bill..... unless that Bill includes salaries for Judges. Now guess what they added to their stipends Bill to insure the people could do nothing.

This is how a professional legislature acts. It's also one of the big reasons I left the PRM.

I can only assume you have some form of Stockholm Syndrome, I wish you a speedy recovery.
 
WHAT!, please cite sources, I need to read that.
Have you looked at what the MA Legislature has done/is doing? If you want to ignore their hard leftist leaning, just look at how they gave themselves a pay raise. The MA Legislature can't give themselves a salary increase, so they called it a stipends. But the people can vote to overturn any Bill..... unless that Bill includes salaries for Judges. Now guess what they added to their stipends Bill to insure the people could do nothing.

This is how a professional legislature acts. It's also one of the big reasons I left the PRM.

I can only assume you have some form of Stockholm Syndrome, I wish you a speedy recovery.
I didn't say professional legislatures keep out leftists. We live in a left-leaning state with left-leaning voters, so we get left-leaning politicians and left-leaning policy. That has nothing to do with whether or not we have a professional legislature.

But if you take the political lean of the state into account, and the fact that the legislature is 80% Democrats, we have more stable, less hard-left policy and less wild swings than lots of other states. I read about this years ago, but can't find the source now.
 
Actually, lots of research indicates that professional legislatures without term limits result in more stability over time. Basically, there's more incentive to avoid radical shifts because there's more for them to lose and they aren't under pressure to make a name for themselves before their term limits are up by passing dumb laws.

So you're less likely to get hard leftist politicians that get elected in a wave year and do a bunch of stupid shit. And yes, you're less likely to get lots of hard-right politicians in a wave year that do stuff you like. But at the end of the day I'll take more bias towards the status quo over radical back-and-forth shifts. At the end of the day, "you shall not pass" is generally a victory for conservatism. It's the other side that wants government to do lots of stuff.

Whoever is doing that research is an idiot because they obviously haven't been to Massachusetts.... the only thing preventing ma legislature from being 150% more communist is that the commies fight about the money they get to redistribute and what it gets used for... and occasionally the tax base pushes back instead of giving them more money to blow..... plus the institutional soft corruption in this state causes more sloth but that's a terrible thing to rely on politically... it's kind of like saying "oh we don't have to worry about those people driving, theyre too drunk to even start the car on a regular basis" "Professional" legislators are mostly human garbage. imo every legislator should have a term limit of some sort or maximum number of terms that they can run. Representation ratio needs to be high in the house, and the season of the legislature in each case should be as short as humanly possible..... Basically the more "professional" the legislature is, and the longer the sessions run, the more opportunities they have to f*** everybody over... "idle hands, spend time at the genitals".

-Mike
 
Would you guys take your mass legislation discussion somewhere else?

This is a NH Red Flag thread

I agree and have deleted my recent posts on this to not drag things further into the mud. Boston XXXX if you want to continue this, start a new thread in OT.

-Mike
 
I was at the hearing today and it was clear that only gun groups that were opposing this bill were NHFC and Gun Owners of America. There were two others that spoke against it (Penny Dean and one other) The balance of those were in support of taking away our firearms.

Prime sponsor said this was not a "Gun bill" yet the word firearm is mentioned 25 times where as the word finance is only mentioned 5 times.....
Maybe the sponsor has been smoking some of the stuff that he wants to decriminalize...
 
Last edited:
I'm at the Dr right now, I'll be heading in from Barrington as soon as I can leave here.

Tan jacket, black hooded sweatshirt, blue jeans.
 
GOP chair PR against HB687:

Concord, NH: NHGOP Chairman Stephen Stepanek released the following statement regarding HB 687-FN, relative to extreme risk protection orders:

“This is yet another bill that seeks to encroach upon constitutional rights here in New Hampshire. This bill, HB 687-FN, sponsored entirely by Democrats, is a model of so-called “Red Flag” legislation - allowing anyone to utilize the New Hampshire judicial system to limit the rights of anyone else in the state before a situation can be fully examined. This is a dangerous disarming of the people of New Hampshire and encroaches upon their judicial rights. Legislators would be wise to realize that New Hampshire is constantly among the safest states in the nation because of our strong support of the Second Amendment, and our strong Second Amendment community. All Republican legislators should uphold our platform and vote against this severely flawed legislation.”
 
The hearing was out of order at that point.

I was truely upset with what I saw there. This nonsense, on top of the limiting of time for people to speak, to the sponsor of the bill berating and bullying the woman from the NH-ALCU to the point she walked out and left, for airing their concerns about the bill.

I attempted to locate the speaker to make a complaint, but by the time I got his office, the door was closed and no one was around. I was up against the clock and had to leave, so I am trying to collect my thoughts and make a coherent letter to send to my reps, the speaker, and the Governor's office.

Anyone else I should add to this list?
 
Back
Top Bottom