-
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.
Non resident open carry?
- Thread starter tools8288
- Start date
strangenh
NES Member
As someone always adds -- make sure you unload and make either the ammo or the gun not readily accessible before getting into a car. Loaded carry in a vehicle is considered concealed and requires the carry license.
Last edited:
Thank you, I forgot about that. You cannot have your pistol loaded inside the vehicle until you get your non-res.
Yes and no.
Yes, you need a concealed carry license to carry a loaded gun in a vehicle, but loaded carry in a vehicle is not "considered concealed." These are two entirely different points that appear in the same RSA as an artifact of the way they were enacted, not because they are thought to be linked.
N H State Police FAQ
I would like to bring my handgun into New Hampshire, yet I don’t have a license to carry concealed. How may I carry?
You may carry unloaded in your vehicle. Be sure that the ammunition is separate from the gun.
You may carry loaded on your person. The weapon needs to be fully exposed. For example, it may not be concealed by a shirt or a jacket, or located in a backpack.
You may carry unloaded and concealed on your person, so long as you do not possess any ammunition on your person.
Please refer to RSA 159 for additional information.
I would like to bring my handgun into New Hampshire, yet I don’t have a license to carry concealed. How may I carry?
You may carry unloaded in your vehicle. Be sure that the ammunition is separate from the gun.
You may carry loaded on your person. The weapon needs to be fully exposed. For example, it may not be concealed by a shirt or a jacket, or located in a backpack.
You may carry unloaded and concealed on your person, so long as you do not possess any ammunition on your person.
Please refer to RSA 159 for additional information.
strangenh
NES Member
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
Come on by some time - my neighbor's dog has some more nits you can pick.I do not think the person asking was concerned with the legislative history.
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
Seriously, though - yes, of course you are "correct." I thought about wording my response just like the statute, but given the confusion that seems to ensue whenever people start wondering about the difference, I thought it best to equate them in a straightforward way. Because that's what our courts now seem to be doing. Also, when the picky difference is raised, from time to time the discussion will turn to "what counts as loaded in a vehicle? Can I keep a loaded mag in the glove box?" or some other "clever" idea that will likely wind up considered constructive carrying just as would carrying IWB with a loaded mag in a pocket. Sometimes the person doesn't ask it but may just get all clever on their own. Search around on the site some, you'll see what I mean.
RSA Section 159:4:
"No person shall carry a loaded pistol or revolver in any vehicle or concealed upon his person, except in his dwelling, house or place of business, without a valid license therefor as hereinafter provided"
This, I did not know. That's a cool little tidbit, is the legal age to do this 21+ in NH or would an 18+ be ok?
Last edited:
Notice that these opinions offered by the State Police do not reflect the reality of the statute. There is nothing in RSA 159 about "fully exposed," or not possessing ammunition on your person.
I do not think the person asking was concerned with the legislative history.
Seriously, though - yes, of course you are "correct." I thought about wording my response just like the statute, but given the confusion that seems to ensue whenever people start wondering about the difference, I thought it best to equate them in a straightforward way. Because that's what our courts now seem to be doing. Also, when the picky difference is raised, from time to time the discussion will turn to "what counts as loaded in a vehicle? Can I keep a loaded mag in the glove box?" or some other "clever" idea that will likely wind up considered constructive carrying just as would carrying IWB with a loaded mag in a pocket. Sometimes the person doesn't ask it but may just get all clever on their own. Search around on the site some, you'll see what I mean.
RSA Section 159:4:
"No person shall carry a loaded pistol or revolver in any vehicle or concealed upon his person, except in his dwelling, house or place of business, without a valid license therefor as hereinafter provided"
You gave a reply that included something that isn't true. I offered a correction, and I'm the bad guy? Hilarious.
There is nothing ambiguous about the NH law concerning loaded handguns, and no need to be "clever." The next sentence of 159:4 states: "A loaded pistol or revolver shall include any pistol or revolver with a magazine, cylinder, chamber or clip in which there are loaded cartridges." Pretty simple.
There is no minimum age to carry in NH. However, under Federal law, you can't carry a gun under age 18 without also carrying a parental note authorizing it.
strangenh
NES Member
Never said you were the bad guy. Read it over again.
As to ambiguity, I direct you to the word "with" in what you just quoted - is a loaded magazine "with" the handgun on your hip if it's not inserted but in your pocket? With it if it's in the glove box while you're driving? The question of whether a handgun counts as loaded turning on readily available ammo has been had in many states, with various outcomes. NH included. The statute isn't the whole of the law.
According to the testimony last time these questions came up in Concord, if there is no ammo in the gun, it is unloaded. Simple. If you are aware of any NH cases where an unloaded gun has been legally deemed to have been loaded and a prosecution has resulted, I would love to see them. I can see if there is any interest in remedial legislation this term (probably not - its getting late), or something might be worked on for next time.
strangenh
NES Member
Thanks again for the reply.
No, there isn't any I have been able to dig up - one way or the other; these may just not get to a reportable level, and I only know of a couple of local decisions mostly ad hoc and burned down in pleas - and that is the issue, I guess. When it has come up in some other states, it's an unusual case that drives it. But "readily available" has been the standard that seems to stick when it does make it to some reported holding. Frankly, if the testimony on record in the leg history is that unloaded means unloaded, then it's a can of worms we would probably do well not to open.
If any remedial legislation is to occur in Section 159, I would focus on the chilling effect of Section 159:5-a on Section 159:14. An (I hope) unintended consequence that needs to be addressed; viz. the recent nonsense in Brookline.
His nitpicking above is slightly important.
The reason it is so, is because by floating this stuff about "concealment" having something to do with carry in a vehicle, seems to imply that there is a way to fulfill that obligation legally without unloading the handgun- eg, a legal workaround, and there really isn't one.
-Mike
The reason it is so, is because by floating this stuff about "concealment" having something to do with carry in a vehicle, seems to imply that there is a way to fulfill that obligation legally without unloading the handgun- eg, a legal workaround, and there really isn't one.
-Mike
strangenh
NES Member
Mike, I understand. I spend so much time translating legal technicalities to non-legal people that sometimes I don't anticipate all the "creative" things they might find in the language, the statutory or mine. I was trying to come down on what my experience said was the safer route - to translate rather than just quote that particular item. I even had the post written one way and then changed it to what you saw. With a couple of people calling the ball the other way, I guess I figured wrong. Next time, I'll just make it an even longer explanation!
![[smile]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/001.gif "Smile [smile]")
I agree with you that 159:5-a is a problem. I don't see it being addressed this session, but its a good one to put on the list.
However, I disagree that Brookline is a good example. I would wager that I am more familiar with the actual circumstances than most here. I have read the NES posts on that case, and know that they do not reflect the full story. Knowing more of the totality of the situation than has thusfar been posted, I am comfortable that 159:14 was not violated.
strangenh
NES Member
Great. I will happily lend what help I can. It seems to me like a minor tweak to remedy.
I am not sure what you mean by 159:14 being or not being "violated." Can you expand on that? Not violated by the state?
159:14 Exemption. – None of the provisions of this chapter shall prohibit an individual not licensed under the provisions thereof who is not engaged in the business of selling pistols or revolvers from selling a pistol or revolver to a person licensed under this chapter or to a person personally known to him.
Sorry for my awkward phrasing. I am comfortable that 159:14 was not applicable to this particular situation.
strangenh
NES Member
Ah. Interesting. I'd like to hear about that sometime, offline if needs be. I guess we still could use to adjust 159:5-a, but good to know its effect on 159:14 was not in play in that case. Thanks.
Huh? What should cover it? This thread is talking about an entirely different topic.
Wouldnt the non-res open carry restrictions apply to rifles when hunting
Huh? Which non-resident open carry restrictions are you talking about and what do they have to do with anything discussed in this 5+ year old thread? I'm genuinely confused at what you are wondering and will absolutely try and help any confusion you may have regarding NH law.
SemiAutoSam
Banned
Ive read the posts above but failed to understand if "loaded firearm, pistol, or rifle" means a loaded magazine in said firearm or loaded magazine plus loaded chamber?
This is an old thread and a more recent case has attempted to make the term more clear.
"Loaded" means there is ammunition in the firearm at all, not just the chamber, but does not mean ammunition near the firearm. I say that last part because as stupid as it sounds, that is the reason the case existed. They charged (and convicted!) a guy for a violation saying he had a loaded firearm based on having ammunition near (but not in) the firearm. The NH Supreme Court overturned that BS.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nh-supreme-court/1641225.html
Last edited:
Haven't seen this guy in quite awhile. Welcome back.
Right. The state tried to twist the law into meaning "equipped". And by "equipped" meaning that there was a magazine or clip "nearby". The NHSC ruled in favor of the plaintiff. You can openly carry a loaded pistol or revolver without a license. As soon as your in (or on?) a motor vehicle, you'll need to have first unloaded said handgun unless you have a P&R license.
Loaded rifles cannot be "in or on" an MV regardless if you're a P&R licensee.
Thanks.
SemiAutoSam
Banned
Was away for several years, life online has taken a backseat compared to its importance in the past.
Haven't seen this guy in quite awhile. Welcome back.
Right. The state tried to twist the law into meaning "equipped". And by "equipped" meaning that there was a magazine or clip "nearby". The NHSC ruled in favor of the plaintiff. You can openly carry a loaded pistol or revolver without a license. As soon as your in (or on?) a motor vehicle, you'll need to have first unloaded said handgun unless you have a P&R license.
Loaded rifles cannot be "in or on" an MV regardless if you're a P&R licensee.
Similar threads
