Competing Bills Would End Concealed Weapon License Requirement - Page 2
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36

Thread: Competing Bills Would End Concealed Weapon License Requirement

  1. #11

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by artcarney View Post
    I always marvel at how the liberal media makes us think mayhem will ensue from folk carrying legally.

    Dishonest folk will continue to carry illegally regardless of what laws are in effect. Passing a law such as this will give them a opportunity to wonder if that next person they are going to rob is carrying a gun.
    And right you are, I sometimes shake my head and dont understand, whats so hard to understand. Hello, criminals dont obey the law, if they have a gun it is illegal. We have to even the scale. Oman, dont get me started on this again.

  2.   
  3. #12
    After reading HB 0536 I only have one question? Why did they exclude prisoners and the mentally ill? From what I can tell it allows two time felons to carry along with everyone else (didn't check on age), so why those two categories. Don't they also have the right to defend themselves?

    One other question is wouldn't someone visiting someone in prison be able to carry during the visit?

  4. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    washington state
    Posts
    817
    While I live in Washington State I posess a non-resident NH licence. In my opinion guns should NOT be brought into jail while visiting inmates because for one thing it is too easy to have it taken away from you. And in most all court actions there is a loser and Ive yet to see a happy loser. So in my opinion guns dont belong in court either. Please no hate mail.

  5. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by santa View Post
    While I live in Washington State I posess a non-resident NH licence. In my opinion guns should NOT be brought into jail while visiting inmates because for one thing it is too easy to have it taken away from you.
    And in most all court actions there is a loser and Ive yet to see a happy loser. So in my opinion guns dont belong in court either
    . Please no hate mail.
    Why should one group be allowed to do so(police) while everyother group cant(the public)?

    THEY MAY TAKE OUR LIVES BUT THEY'LL NEVER TAKE OUR FREEDOM!!!!!

  6. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by S&WM&P40 View Post
    I think not needing a permit to carry concealed or in a automobile is outstanding! When I go to Vermont it's nice to not have to worry about if I have a permit or not. Now is the time to pass something like this so we had better pick something we can live with. Even if Lynch vetos it they have the numbers to over ride his veto.
    It would be nice in the sense of Constitutional freedom, and your pocket come renewal time. But what about Reciprocity? If NH got rid of their permits what would you do about the 23 states you had reciprocity with? (Not counting AK,VT) Since some Non-Res's don't give you THEIR reciprocity You'd have to get possibly a couple Non-Res permits all over the place to fix the gap. Which without a home state permit probably takes a while, Possibly cost more than your NH permit did. VT residents would know better than me. I know I'd loose AL,GA which I sometimes travel through. Granted the fight is about upholding our rights....but the side effect would still suck. I still got my fingers crossed for Nat'l Reciprocity long shot or not.

  7. #16
    [QUOTE=snatale42;190086]It would be nice in the sense of Constitutional freedom, and your pocket come renewal time. But what about Reciprocity? If NH got rid of their permits what would you do about the 23 states you had reciprocity with? (Not counting AK,VT) Since some Non-Res's don't give you THEIR reciprocity You'd have to get possibly a couple Non-Res permits all over the place to fix the gap. Which without a home state permit probably takes a while, Possibly cost more than your NH permit did. VT residents would know better than me. I know I'd loose AL,GA which I sometimes travel through. Granted the fight is about upholding our rights....but the side effect would still suck. I still got my fingers crossed for Nat'l Reciprocity long shot or not.[/QUOT

    People who live in Vermont can ask their police departments for a letter stating they are fit for a permit.

    New Hampshire would still have permits for those who would still like one. But they would end the need to have one to carry concealed if the person did not want one.

    THEY MAY TAKE OUR LIVES BUT THEY'LL NEVER TAKE OUR FREEDOM!!!!!

  8. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by S&WM&P40 View Post
    People who live in Vermont can ask their police departments for a letter stating they are fit for a permit. New Hampshire would still have permits for those who would still like one. But they would end the need to have one to carry concealed if the person did not want one.
    In that case sounds like theres no kinks to work out, other than to pass it. Which it probably will. LIVE FREE!

  9. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by snatale42 View Post
    In that case sounds like theres no kinks to work out, other than to pass it. Which it probably will. LIVE FREE!
    As far as I know they are fighting over the wording of it right now. Even people who support the idea, disagree with the wording of the bill. They say it leaves to many things open to interpretation.

    They are also trying to pass HB235 "Parking lot law" as they seem to call it. It would make it legal for you to have a firearm in your vehicle on company property. The employer could no longer fire you for having the firearm on their property. But again they are fighting over the wording of the bill. Mostly the supporters of the idea because it again leaves to much open.

    STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

    In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eleven

    AN ACT relative to the right to possess a firearm in one’s personal motor vehicle.

    Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

    1 Intent. This act is intended to codify the long-standing legislative policy of the state that individual citizens have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms, that they have a constitutional right to possess and keep legally-owned firearms within their motor vehicles for self-defense and other lawful purposes, and that these rights are not abrogated by virtue of a citizen becoming a customer, employee, or invitee of a business entity. It is the finding of the general court that a citizen’s lawful possession, transportation, and secure keeping of firearms and ammunition within his or her motor vehicle is essential to the exercise of the fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms and the constitutional right of self-defense. The general court finds that protecting and preserving these rights is essential to the exercise of freedom and individual responsibility. The general court further finds that no citizen can or should be required to waive or abrogate his or her right to possess and securely keep firearms and ammunition locked within his or her motor vehicle by virtue of becoming a customer, employee, or invitee of any employer or business establishment within the state, unless specifically required by state or federal law.

    2 New Subdivision; Possession of Firearms in Motor Vehicles. Amend RSA 159 by inserting after section 26 the following new subdivision:

    Possession of Firearms in Motor Vehicles

    159:27 Definitions. In this subdivision:

    I. “Parking lot” means any property that is used for parking motor vehicles and is available to customers, employees, or invitees for temporary or long-term parking or storage of motor vehicles.

    II. “Motor vehicle” means any automobile, truck, minivan, sports utility vehicle, motor home, recreational vehicle, motorcycle, motor scooter, or any other vehicle operated on the roads of this state and required to be registered under state law.

    III. “Employee” means any person who is eligible to work in this state and:

    (a) Works for salary, wages, or other remuneration;

    (b) Is an independent contractor; or

    (c) Is a volunteer, intern, or other similar position, for an employer.

    IV. “Employer” means any business that is a sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, professional association, cooperative, joint venture, trust, firm, institution, or association, or public sector entity, that has employees.

    V. “Invitee” means any business invitee, including a customer or visitor, who is lawfully on the premises of a public or private employer.

    159:28 Prohibited Acts.

    I. No public or private employer shall violate the rights of any customer, employee, or invitee.

    II. No public or private employer shall prohibit any customer, employee, or invitee from possessing any legally-owned firearm, including any ammunition or accoutrements attendant to the lawful possession of a firearm, when such firearm is lawfully possessed and locked inside or locked to a private motor vehicle in a parking lot and when the customer, employee, or invitee is lawfully in such area.

    III. No public or private employer shall violate the privacy rights of a customer, employee, or invitee by verbal or written inquiry regarding the presence of a firearm, including any ammunition or accoutrements attendant to the lawful possession of a firearm, inside or locked to a private motor vehicle in a parking lot or by an actual search of a private motor vehicle in a parking lot to ascertain the presence of a firearm within the vehicle. Further, no public or private employer shall take any action against a customer, employee, or invitee based upon verbal or written statements of any party concerning possession of a firearm stored inside a private motor vehicle in a parking lot for lawful purposes. A search of a private motor vehicle in the parking lot of a public or private employer to ascertain the presence of a firearm within the vehicle may only be conducted by on-duty law enforcement personnel, based upon due process and must comply with constitutional protections.

    IV. No public or private employer shall condition employment upon either:

    (a) The fact that an employee or prospective employee holds or does not hold a license pursuant to RSA 159:6; or

    (b) Any agreement by an employee or a prospective employee that prohibits an employee from keeping a legal firearm, including any ammunition, or accoutrements attendant to the lawful possession of a firearm, locked inside or locked to a private motor vehicle in a parking lot when such firearm is kept for lawful purposes.

    V. No public or private employer shall prohibit or attempt to prevent any customer, employee, or invitee from entering the parking lot of the employer’s place of business because the customer’s, employee’s, or invitee’s private motor vehicle contains a legal firearm, including any ammunition, or accoutrements attendant to the lawful possession of a firearm, being carried for lawful purposes, that is out of sight within the customer’s, employee’s, or invitee’s private motor vehicle.

    VI. No public or private employer shall terminate the employment of or otherwise discriminate against an employee, or expel a customer or invitee for exercising his or her constitutional right to keep and bear a firearm, including any ammunition, or accoutrements attendant to the lawful possession of a firearm, or for exercising the right of self-defense as long as such firearm is never exhibited on company property for any reason other than lawful defensive purposes.

    VII. The provisions of this section shall not apply to the following:

    (a) Any school property as defined in RSA 193-D:1, V.

    (b) Any state or county correctional facility or property under the control of the department of corrections.

    (c) Any property where a nuclear-powered electricity generation facility is located.

    (d) Property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which are conducted substantial activities involving national defense, aerospace, or homeland security.

    (e) Property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials regulated under state or federal law, or property owned or leased by an employer who has obtained a permit required under 18 U.S.C. section 842 to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials on such property.

    (f) A motor vehicle owned, leased, or rented by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer.

    (g) Any other property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which possession of a firearm or other legal product by a customer, employee, or invitee is prohibited pursuant to any federal law, contract with a federal government entity, or law of this state.

    159:29 Enforcement. The attorney general shall enforce the protections of this subdivision on behalf of any customer, employee, or invitee aggrieved under this subdivision. If there is reasonable cause to believe that the aggrieved person’s rights under this subdivision have been violated by a public or private employer, the attorney general shall commence a civil or administrative action for damages, injunctive relief and civil penalties, and such other relief as may be appropriate or may negotiate a settlement with any employer on behalf of any person aggrieved under this subdivision. Nothing in this subdivision shall prohibit the right of a person aggrieved under this subdivision to bring a civil action for violation of rights protected under this subdivision. In any successful action brought by a customer, employee, or invitee aggrieved under this subdivision, the court shall award all reasonable personal costs and losses suffered by the aggrieved person as a result of the violation of rights under this subdivision. In any action brought pursuant to this subdivision, the court shall award all court costs and attorney’s fees to the prevailing party.

    3 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2012.

    THEY MAY TAKE OUR LIVES BUT THEY'LL NEVER TAKE OUR FREEDOM!!!!!

  10. #19

    in the court rooms

    Quote Originally Posted by S&WM&P40 View Post
    Why should one group be allowed to do so(police) while everyother group cant(the public)?
    Nobody should be carrying a firearm into the court house. Yes I understand you feel your rights are being suppressed when you can't bring your firearm into a courthouse but a cop can. I just personally feel that a person who has been charged with a felony should not be armed in the court house. If you had family working in the court room would you want to worry about somebody having a fire arm on them when the guilty verdict is handed down?
    I feel you should be able to check your weapon at the door of the courthouse, maybe put it in a locker, but not bring it into the courtroom itself. Things like that need to be included in the language of any bill that passes.

  11. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Jets-Fan in Patriots Land View Post
    I just personally feel that a person who has been charged with a felony should not be armed in the court house.
    By Federal law, a person with a felony conviction cannot legally own a firearm, much less carry it concealed.

    This proposed NH law cannot circumvent Federal law.
    Glock 23 Gen 4 / Glock 30SF Gen3 .45 ACP / Glock 33 Gen3 .356 Sig / Kimber Ultra Carry II .45 ACP / Interarms Stainless Steel PPK .380

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast