NH: Lawmakers to defy House chamber gun ban

If I remember correctly the ban was not based on law but because the house could set "rules" on the use of the building.... eg, this ban isn't in RSA explicitly....

Yeah, this “ban” has no lawful basis outside of the House itself saying “these here are the rules for us”.

It’s kinda like the “no guns” signs in the mall...

ETA: but, of course, any of us little people found in violation can reasonably expect to get utterly and completely f***ed as a result.
 
So, with that being given, whats the worst that could happen to the protesters? they could get escorted out?

-Mike
 
The ban has no lawful basis for the house either.

The constitution allows the house to establish its own rules wrt process and punish folks that are disruptive

It does not allow for the house to ban concealed carry any more than they could ban people from wearing blue jeans

Given that the Constitution gives the House the power to punish, by imprisonment, anyone found guilty of “disrespect to the House”, I would say they do, in fact, have the lawful authority to ban firearms and blue jeans. All they have to do is say that showing up in denim is disrespectful, and BAM. You’re in jail.

Sounds an awful lot like a ban to me.
 
Any attempt to ban blue jean would be baseless

Similarly for anyone CCW

You MIGHT be able to make an argument for someone open carrying a 91/30 in the gallery but........


They have the authority to imprison anyone they find to be disrespectful, contemptuous, or disruptive. They get to decide what’s disrespectful, contemptuous, or disruptive.

See where this is going?

If they come out and say “no denim allowed”, and you wear your blue jeans anyway....guess what? You’ve just been disrespectful. And/or contemptuous. And now they have the lawful authority to imprison you.

Now substitute “firearms” for denim.

They might not have the lawful authority to directly ban firearms, or denim, but they sure as shit have a way to make it happen.
 
They actually dont get to define societal values and accepted norms

Furthermore they could no more ban/consider a hidden tattoo underneath a shirt/sweater to be disruptive/disrespectful or contemptuous than they could a concealed handgun.

If its not visible/audible etc then its outside of their purview

Sure thing, bud.

Good luck with that.
 
Wow, what a POS ! My Lai?
"
Before and after debate Wednesday, some opponents of the ban vowed to independently ignore it if it passed, but Monday’s letter was the first concerted and public effort to do so.

In laying out their case, the representatives invoked the June 2017 shooting at a Congressional baseball practice in Alexandria, Va., in which a politically-motivated gunman took aim at Republican legislators, and critically wounded then-House Majority Whip Steve Scalise.

And they argued that while the House has the ability to pass rules, it “does not have the authority to strip Representatives of their rights.”

Any rule that does that, the lawmakers wrote, is a violation of lawmakers’ “natural rights” and should be ignored.

“There are times when the acts of a majority are so repugnant to the dignity of the individual that the act itself is cast asunder,” the representatives wrote. “The act removes itself from the realm of legitimate government authority and is to be ignored, if not openly held in disdain.”

But Shurtleff rejected the premise, declaring the House rule in line with other forms of gun restrictions.

“The Supreme Court’s already held under the Second Amendment that certain bodies have the right to ban firearms, including legislators and jails, courts and airplanes,” he said. “So that’s already been adjudicated and there’s already court decisions on that. We don’t really follow natural rights as an argument.”

In their letter, the representatives made reference to the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, in which hundreds of unarmed civilians were murdered by U.S. soldiers. The incident provided a teaching moment for disobeying “unlawful orders,” the New Hampshire lawmakers argued.

And they said their resistance to the rule was meant as a deterrent for would-be shooters. "
 
The house could no more ban women (or men if thats your thing) from wearing a thong underneath other clothing than they can ban CCW because none of the above in any way shape or form constitutes a disruption, disrespect etc of the processes/business of the house

Now, if a person were to begin waving either of the above around then thats another story

You say they can’t, and yet they have.

Also, btw...they voted on adding a dress code two years ago.

With the NH Constitution being as vaguely written as it is, there really isn’t much of anything that is outside of their lawful authority to regulate via the House (or Senate) rules.
 
Culture matters more than the law. Control the culture control who gets punished and for what. Remember that next time someone is telling you to be tolerant of non Christian, non American values.
 
This is where it becomes clear who didnt pay attention in school and who did......

Is english your second language or are you going to declare that the sky is green next?

Absent one of the above ACTIONS against one or more of its members OR an action that OBSTRUCTS the deliberation of the legislative body a person or persons cannot be found guilty of any of your percieved thought crimes.

A person who sits quietly in the gallery while wearing a thong under their pants/skirt or who similarly has a tatoo that is not visible can no more be found guilty of any of the above than a person who has a concealed handgun under clothing

Look, dude. I’m not saying that banning thongs or jeans or guns is in any way effective, smart, or something they ought to be doing.

BUT, if they say something is against the rules, and you do it anyway, that is, by definition contemptuous behavior, which is disrespectful to the House, which is punishable by imprisonment, which means that basically whatever the hell they say is banned in there, is banned.


Will they know? Not unless you’re stupid about it. But that doesn’t change the fact that, like I said, they ultimately do have the lawful authority to do this.

ETA: good luck convincing the security guard that they didn’t have the lawful authority to ban firearms while he’s escorting you out, btw.
 
None of the above is the question

The question revolves around whether or not the NH constitution grants the House the power/authority to ban firearms from the house floor/gallery and its clear that it doesnt

The NH Constitution doesnt even grant the House the power/auth to pass a BILL to do that.....

2A has equally clear language that affirms this......



Do you see any exceptions/language that provides for the legislature to contradict this?

Nope


So, does 2a protect my right to wear a thong and blue jeans too? Or.....
 
Not a lawyer, but the vagueness of the rules would be considered "arbitrary and capricious" if challenged in court.
 
One of the state reps who i think promised to keep carrying ... has reportedly now been banned from exercising his first amendment rights as well. But of course that is making the authoritarians look more and more like the bad guys.

From state rep John Burt's facebook post 1/17 roughly:

"Attention Pro Second Amendment folks. I need help. I need people with video cameras to help me. Please Share.

Anti Gun bills are coming to the House Criminal Justice committee and the Chair today has BANNED me from taking videos or photos from my seat. See video below.

I told him I will still take them. He went and brought the Speaker in to the committee which the Speaker said, If I keep taking pictures the committee can and will take a vote to remove me by force if needed.

The chair last term sat next to me and took several pictures. Picture 2 - 6 are the pictures I took this week. Many Reps takes pictures. This is to stop the Anti Gun bills from being posted on Youtube for the NH citizens to see. Please help me.

Do not get me wrong, I like the Chair and the Speaker but what they are doing is wrong. This is the first time I have ever heard of anyone being banned from taking a video or pictures at the NH State House.

Here is the video of the vote. Watch what Rep Welch said at minute 4:40. Thank you Michael Yakubovich for the video.
View:
View: https://youtu.be/n8FUxkGGQoU
 
One of the state reps who i think promised to keep carrying ... has reportedly now been banned from exercising his first amendment rights as well. But of course that is making the authoritarians look more and more like the bad guys.

From state rep John Burt's facebook post 1/17 roughly:

"Attention Pro Second Amendment folks. I need help. I need people with video cameras to help me. Please Share.

Anti Gun bills are coming to the House Criminal Justice committee and the Chair today has BANNED me from taking videos or photos from my seat. See video below.

I told him I will still take them. He went and brought the Speaker in to the committee which the Speaker said, If I keep taking pictures the committee can and will take a vote to remove me by force if needed.

The chair last term sat next to me and took several pictures. Picture 2 - 6 are the pictures I took this week. Many Reps takes pictures. This is to stop the Anti Gun bills from being posted on Youtube for the NH citizens to see. Please help me.

Do not get me wrong, I like the Chair and the Speaker but what they are doing is wrong. This is the first time I have ever heard of anyone being banned from taking a video or pictures at the NH State House.

Here is the video of the vote. Watch what Rep Welch said at minute 4:40. Thank you Michael Yakubovich for the video.
View:
View: https://youtu.be/n8FUxkGGQoU



I know Michael Yakubovich. He grew up under the Soviet Russian thumb. The prog/libs should not underestimate him. He knows what it's like to live in a communist society. We need a lot more of people like him in the house.
 
They have the authority to imprison anyone they find to be disrespectful, contemptuous, or disruptive. They get to decide what’s disrespectful, contemptuous, or disruptive.

See where this is going?

If they come out and say “no denim allowed”, and you wear your blue jeans anyway....guess what? You’ve just been disrespectful. And/or contemptuous. And now they have the lawful authority to imprison you.

Now substitute “firearms” for denim.

They might not have the lawful authority to directly ban firearms, or denim, but they sure as shit have a way to make it happen.

If it isn’t vague, then show me where it limits, or defines, what constitutes disrespect to the House.

A long, long time ago, colonial/state legislatures functioned as courts. "Contempt" and "disrespect" of the House rules are probably treated similarly to contempt of court. Nearly all courts have rules against wearing a hat. Usually, the security guards firmly ask people to take off hats at first. If someone becomes an assh*le, then the guards escort them out of court/courthouse. If the situation becomes really bad, then the person goes to jail and is prosecuted for contempt of court. Note that contempt of court applies to court actors like lawyers:

As the clerk was looking for the next court date, Borowski had the deputy return Wilborn to his seat, then told Tsai to sit down. "Is there something you want to say, or do you want to go into custody?"

That's when Tsai said he wanted to highlight that Wilborn is innocent at this stage.

"No kidding. I get that. Sit down," Borowski said, then, "Counsel, if you don't knock —" then ordered him taken into custody before finishing his sentence.

"Rolling your eyes, throwing your hands in the air, acting like I'm some kind of idiot gets you locked up for contempt," Borowski told Tsai.

Milwaukee County judge under fire for detaining defense lawyer, who wound up shackled

Here's what Congress can do to members who violate House rules:

Discipline & Punishment | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives

Also, "contempt" has a bunch of definitions in Black's Law Dictionary, which I will not post because IANAL and this isn't legal advice.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I know Michael Yakubovich. He grew up under the Soviet Russian thumb. The prog/libs should not underestimate him. He knows what it's like to live in a communist society. We need a lot more of people like him in the house.

yakubovich is a badass

I'm definitely happy that I helped him get elected.
 
Stay tuned, there is more going on about this tomorrow. If you happen to be in Concord, swing by the LOB at 815am... :)
 
Back
Top Bottom