Firearms now banned from state buildings in NH
by CmdrFenix on Dec.25, 2009, under Political Discussion
I just got an alert from gonh.org (Gun Owners of NH) that local Demorcrats (and yes, this was ALL Demorcrat) have now back door banned firearms in state building of NH.
The NH Legislative Facilities Committee voted today to ban firearms in the NH State House.
This is a Joint Committee, and members are:
Sylvia Larsen (D)
Terie Norelli (D)
Margaret Hassan (D)
Mary Jane Wallner (D)
Peter Bragdon (R)
Sherman Packard (R)
Lou D’Allesandro (D)
Marjorie Smith (D)
Daniel Eaton (D)
Gene Chandler (R)
Martha Fuller Clark (D)
Sheila Roberge (R)The Joint Facilities committee just passed by an 8-3 vote (party lines)
the following regulation on the State House:“No person, except for law enforcement personnel in active duty, shall
carry a firearm or other dangerous or deadly weapon or an explosive,
openly or concealed, while inside the State House, the Legislative
Office Building, the Upham Walker House, or any of the underground
tunnels connected to these buildings. Law enforcement personnel, when
requested by State House security staff, must produce sufficient
identification establishing their status as law enforcement personnel.”
Here is what bothers me about this. They tried in scheduled session to do this twice last there and there was an overwhelming protest against it, which promptly instructed them to vote the bill as ITL (In expedient to legislate – Basically kills the bill). Regardless of who the people protesting (yes some of the “free staters” were there, but for the most part it was simply ordinary people) were, there is a large (and yes large is a valid statement considering the number of people who showed up) part of the population that disagrees with this. Now in scheduled session, they can’t get this passed, so what do they do? Do it as an unexpected event and ram it in the back door.
This is the shit that REALLY pissess me off. Letters are going out to ALL parties involved. I am going to print and send them certified. I’ll scan / attach it here when I’m done. Now I’m off to enjoy some of the holidays.
December 26th, 2009 on 11:38 am
One of your precious R’s didn’t vote, apparently.
December 26th, 2009 on 1:15 pm
Well I wouldn’t call the “R’s” as precious. They are in most cases just as problematic, or do we need to talk about the “Patriot Act” again…?
December 26th, 2009 on 9:12 pm
I was at the protest wednesday. This bill isn’t enforcable, it’s not a law, just an administrative rule. To prove it’s unenforcable, the 2 state troopers standing just inside the door of the state house watched several open carriers carry their firearms into the state house to warm up. Typical of the new politics we seem to have these days, they didn’t announce this hearing (as required) and passed this without public comment or input. If they had announced it, 40 or 50 armed individuals would have given their comment and they would have voted against it. Some of their reasoning was the recent shootings at VA tech and FT Hood. Of course, they didn’t mention that both were gun free zones. There is no provision for metal detectors or searches when going into the state house, actually, the constitution requires that the legislative gallery be open to all unless people are misbehaving (second section, article 8). There’s going to be another protest, an empty holster protest, on wednesday at 8AM.
December 26th, 2009 on 9:14 pm
They tried this in 2008 as a new law. It was overwhelmingly voted against, over 200 to less than 20. Guess if you can’t pass it, then throw in a rule in the dark of night.
December 27th, 2009 on 6:09 pm
A few mixed thoughts on this. On one hand, I think it’s … kindof dumb. Exactly like you pointed out, anything that says a six year old needs to wait a day before buying an UZI is dramatically unpopular in NH (for better or worse, just saying we’re a very pro gun state). It was a very thinly-veiled case of playing some limp-pen politics to get it passed.
Other thoughts are, that I’m frankly surprised that it wasnt already on the books in some form. You can agree or disagree with people carrying weapons into the senate chambers, but the vast majority of democratic assemblies world-wide prohibit people from brandishing weapons (this isnt a *gun* issue, it includes pitchforks and torches) into their chambers.
I also agree with Jeremy that it will be totally unenforcable. As an interesting tid bit, members of the state legislature are “officially” prohibited from brining laptops, pdas, or any form of electronic recording device into legislative session. Take a guess how few cell phones end up in the bin outside the door….
However, this isnt something I’m about to get terribly outraged over. In addition to my surprise that it wasnt already on the books, I’m forced to ask …. what is it exactly, specifically, that you actually -want to do- that this law prohibits you from doing? Did you actually want, and intend, on showing up to the state house armed for the guided tour or whatever? I’m not baiting, im honestly curious what practical impact you think it will have.
December 27th, 2009 on 6:11 pm
Oh by the way, one of those guys was on the ballot last time I voted. He didn’t, and won’t, get my vote..
December 27th, 2009 on 7:16 pm
I have a problem with this because it sets a dangerous precedent. If it’s “OK” to ban them here, I have to envision them asking where else can they get get away with it? I would sooner see us draw a line in the sand here for something like this than try and fight to get back any personal liberties that are taken away later on. I agree this is an unenforceable and unneeded law and I disagree with any law that sets out to make ANYONE safer by disarming them.
December 27th, 2009 on 8:04 pm
I just want to point out that no one “brandished” firearms. That is against the law, though I can’t find the RSA. It’s also unlawful to threaten members of congress or the senate.
Most have carried weapons into the state house to show displeasure for anti-gun bills being discussed. The last time they attempt to pass a law, several hundred people, at least 50 of them openly armed showed up for the committee hearings, there was only 1 person that showed up for the bill. As far as I’m concerned, the unrestricted ownership of arms is the single most important thing for personal freedom.
If you look at history, weapons free places have been killing zones. Just look at the fort hood incident It was brought up in the committe hearing that banned firearms in the state house. A place with very strict anti gun regulations, where cars are regularly searched, barracks inspected frequently. The military members have FBI background checks, psych exams, and still, someone got a weapon onto the base and shot something like 30 people. I don’t expect that there will be a shooting in the state house, but if there is, the more armed people the better.
December 27th, 2009 on 8:08 pm
To answer your question about what I want to do. I go to the state house for committee hearings and sit in the gallery when important bills are voted on. I carry a firearm most everywhere I go. I live less than 10 miles from the state house. I don’t open carry, but there is no reason I shouldn’t be able to carry concealed or open in the state house, even if it makes people uncomfortable.
December 27th, 2009 on 8:48 pm
So you WANT to carry a weapon (firearm or otherwise) into the senate chambers? … I think you’ve made my argument for me.
As well as “the more armed people the better” I’d like to remind you that president reagan was shot in the gut in broad daylight while surrounded by heavily armed body guards from the most highly trained protection service in the history of mankind. Having “more armed people” did nothing to prevent the crime.
That being said, I still think you should be allowed to carry, even if I find your reasons for doing so to be flawed.
Freedom and practicality > Rhetoric.
December 27th, 2009 on 9:24 pm
I like firearms, what can I say.
You want to go to the range sometime?
December 27th, 2009 on 10:44 pm
I go shooting with John now and then, weather/schedule allowing. When I’ve got money to flush I go to the indoor range in Manchester. Good times.
December 28th, 2009 on 6:05 pm
I’m a member of a club in Canterbury, sunset mountain fish and game club. We’ve got a 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 yard rifle range, a 100 yard rifle/shotgun range, a 75 yard pistol range, and an indoor range. The indoor range is for all lead, non-magnum loads. I’ve never been to the manchester range. Can you bring your own there? I collect surplus military long guns. I’ve got a small collection of WWII and WWI rifles and a couple handguns. I like the ammo, it’s cheap and comes in large quantities. I’m serious, if you’re interested in going shooting sometime, let me know.
December 28th, 2009 on 9:02 pm
The last time I went to the indoor range in manch, I was with a few pals and we brought our own but used their ammo (which wasn’t too bad) for everything above .22 , I dont think they’d have a problem with basically whatever you brought in – they rent AKs, AR,s MP5s, and so on, so I can’t see any reasonable objection to bringing a service rifle or whatever.
December 28th, 2009 on 9:38 pm
I looked at their website, I can’t shoot any of my military rifles except my SKS. The Garand and the Mosin Nagants aren’t allowed.
December 28th, 2009 on 10:10 pm
At the Manch firing line? Surprising. I want to get a Grand as a compliment to my Mosin Nagant.
December 29th, 2009 on 5:11 pm
They don’t allow anything over 2,000fps (unless you purchase their frangible ammo). 30-06 and 7.62×54R are specifically listed as banned firearms.
December 29th, 2009 on 7:23 pm
That’s right… forgot about that.
The only thing I dislike about Firing Line is the cost. Went up there and shared a lane with a friend on his birthday and dropped $200 after rental and ammo.
December 29th, 2009 on 8:57 pm
CmdrFenix, for the M1 Garand you should look at the CMP, http://www.odcmp.com You can mail order a garand starting at 495$, and they are really much much nicer than the ones you can find at gun shows, and at least half as much. I bought a service grade one for 600$, and it’s in excellent shape, it’s a real shooter.
January 10th, 2010 on 1:40 pm
Committee hearings tommorrow at 1PM for two bills.
One would make it a class B felony to carry a firearm in the state house and would authorize the legislature to purchase, install and operate metal dectectors at all the state house entrances.
http://www.nhliberty.org/bills/view/2010/HB1654
The other one would make it a Class B Felony to carry openly or concealed a firearm (or dangerous weapon) in any public building or place.
http://www.nhliberty.org/bills/view/2010/HB1635
January 13th, 2010 on 8:44 am
I watched many of the youtube videos from the hearing on 1/11. I especially liked the US Marine who stood up and spoke his mind on this. It is my hope that the representatives that night heard… actually heard the people there. This is a foolish waste of money and time. We have WAY more important things we should be spending money on that metal detectors for the state buildings and more stupid laws, but as is usually the case, I doubt the Democrats (yes the majority in the committees are) or Republicans will hear any of that.
January 14th, 2010 on 11:34 pm
While I don’t disagree that there are better things to put the funds towards, I think you may need to look up the word “hear” in the dictionary.
I’m quite sure that marine’s voice was “heard” and I’m also quite sure the committee members will “hear” the complaints.
They may simply disagree, or otherwise not act on it.
January 15th, 2010 on 7:53 am
Oh I know the definition. I am quite sure they heard the words, but they didn’t get it and I have no doubt they won’t act on it.
January 18th, 2010 on 9:06 am
But if a gun control lobby shows up and starts chanting “HEAR OUR VOICE!” then that’s different right? Do you still want them to “hear” and also act on, just because somebody is saying it?
Do you see how silly that line of argument is?
January 18th, 2010 on 10:59 am
If a gun control lobby were to show up and in addition to that a large number of pro-gun people were to show up, I think it would still cause them to think twice about the bill in question, but no… “Papa Democrat (TM)” knows best and will do whatever they like to get that bill passed including the tactic that was using in this article.
January 18th, 2010 on 1:19 pm
Pot to kettle, “Hey, You’re Black!”
Read up on how the federal congress passed almost every single piece of legislation during the first 6 bush years to avoid potential democrat filibusters.
Case in point: they all do it. Don’t hate the players, hate the game.
February 18th, 2010 on 10:56 am
Well, I agree all of them do it(scott brown excluded, but hey we cant all be as lucky as massachusetts), But we are a nation FOR the People By the People, legislators and politicians ignoring people is the real issue here. If people rally and protest (enough of them) and they still ignore it, it is the job of the people to throw the bums out next election so that people WILL listen to them!