Slap Leather, Pilgrim!

[nastygunz]

Deadly Force Bill To Be Revisited

Bill Proposes Expanding Right To Use Deadly Force In Self-Defense

CONCORD, N.H. -- Four years ago, Gov. John Lynch blocked gun rights advocates' effort to expand a person's right to use deadly force in self-defense without first attempting to retreat.

The legislation will be back this coming year, and this time, Lynch may not be able to stop its passage.

In his veto message blocking the 2006 gun bill, the Democratic Lynch said he wanted to avoid a law that "would authorize any shopper to instantly shoot and kill a thief who had grabbed or tugged at the shopper's purse or briefcase, regardless of how many shoppers might be placed in harm's way by such actions."

His opposition led to a compromise this year that softened the prohibition against drawing a gun on someone. The new law takes effect Saturday and allows citizens to show a weapon to warn away a potential attacker without facing prosecution.

That law may not stand long, however, before being replaced by the conservative-leaning, Republican House and Senate.

Bills have been filed built on the Castle Doctrine, which says a person has no duty to retreat from intruders before using deadly force. The legislation also would expand citizens' rights to use deadly force in public or anywhere they have a right to be - a principle known as the Stand Your Ground principle.

New Hampshire law allows the use of deadly force inside the home in defense against certain crimes such as rape. Deadly force also can be used in public places to defend someone else or to stop a rape, kidnapping or other serious crime. The law requires citizens to retreat if they can safely, except at home when they are not the aggressor.

Gun rights advocates say people shouldn't be faced with the split-second choice of deciding whether protecting themselves will lead to criminal prosecution against them.

"I shouldn't have to put my pants on to run out the door," said state Sen. Jack Barnes, R-Raymond. "Why should I have to run away? It's my house."

Barnes said he doesn't care where he is, "If they attack me, I have a right to defend myself."

State Rep. Leo Pepino, a Manchester Republican sponsoring one of New Hampshire's bills, said his measure also would protect citizens from being sued by their attackers if the use of force was deemed justified by law enforcement.

Pepino notes that the weapons involved don't have to be guns; they could be a knife or baseball bat, for example.

More than two dozen states have passed either the Castle Doctrine, Stand Your Ground or both laws.

Last month, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell vetoed a bill similar to Pepino's proposal. Rendell criticized the bill as a dangerous solution to a nonexistent problem that would encourage a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality.

Ohio prosecutors say their state's Castle Doctrine is increasingly being manipulated to help murder suspects avoid taking responsibility for their crimes. In one case, a man stole a dealer's drugs, then shot and killed the dealer when he broke a window in the man's car attempting to retrieve his goods. Defense attorneys argued the man acted lawfully. A jury convicted him of reckless homicide rather than murder.

Lynch voiced similar concerns about criminals killing other criminals and claiming self-defense.

Lynch's 2006 veto was with the support of many in law enforcement, including then-Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, now a U.S. senator.

Opponents presented lawmakers with images of shootouts in the street like the old Wild West during the debate on whether to uphold Lynch's veto. Lynch and law enforcement argued they were concerned innocent bystanders would be hurt if people were given more freedom to use guns or other deadly weapons in public.

The Senate voted 11-11 to uphold the veto. As a result, the House didn't vote whether to override it.

Republicans now hold 19 of the 25 Senate seats and 297 of the 400 House seats - enough to override Lynch's vetoes if they can hold together their caucuses on issues. Two-thirds are needed to override a veto.

The outcome could be different this year.

"People shouldn't have to worry about being prosecuted for defending themselves," said Senate President Peter Bragdon, a Milford Republican who sponsored the bill Lynch vetoed in 2006.

[THO Game Calls]

It will never become law.  Period.  

Even though the Republicans have the majority in both the house and senate, they are weak kneed pussies when it comes to anything gun related.  

The current house rule on carrying guns in the state house being debated today is a prime example.

The law says NH Citizens can openly carry.   The Republicans, playing both ends against the middle have proposed a weak compromise that they are trying to sell NH Citizens and make it look like they have overturned last sessions Democratic ban on firearms in the state house.    Their proposal would allow firearms in the state house as long as they were not openly visible.   That means you would have to have a Pistol/Revolver Permit (our form of CCW).   This does not restore the right of the people to openly carry, yet the Republicans are touting it as a great step forward, when in fact it is an attempt to gain votes and support from firearm owners.

In the end, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or Independent, they are politicians first and will lie, cheat, steal, and do whatever it takes to get reelected at the EXPENSE of the people.    

When it comes to gun issues these people are afraid of who they will piss off, and they forget two important rules of life.....

1) an armed society is a polite society

2) when seconds count, the cops are only minutes away


The republicans will tout it as a great victory if they are able to get it passed, and blame it on the democrats when they cannot over ride Lynch's certain veto.  It's all a game, and the only winners are the politicians.

[KySongDog]

"Any fool can make a rule, and every fool will mind it."  Henry David Thoreau

I've been carrying ever since I came back from across the big pond.   People, in general, worry too much about rules. 

[vvarmitr]

"Lynch voiced similar concerns about criminals killing other criminals and claiming self-defense."
We can't have that now; can we. 

If this got out of hand who would we gun toters get to shoot at? 

[nastygunz]

Lawmakers Lift Ban On Guns In Statehouse

Lawmaker: Gun Free Zones ... Are Killing Zones

CONCORD, N.H. -- A Republican-dominated legislative committee voted Tuesday to repeal a year-old ban on guns and dangerous weapons in the New Hampshire Statehouse complex.

Republican members of the Joint Legislative Facilities Committee and ban opponents cited the public's constitutional rights to bear guns and defend themselves as the reasons why the change was warranted.

They left intact a rule giving security guards the right to search people for weapons. Anyone who does not want to be searched has the right to leave the building. Nothing in the rules allows security to confiscate weapons.

Weapons at the Statehouse became a concern when people with guns stood and shouted at lawmakers from the House gallery in March 2009. The disturbance was during debate and votes on a resolution to reaffirm the state's freedom from interference by the federal government. The resolution failed.

Democrats controlled the Legislature then and reinstated a weapons ban that had been in place from 1996 to 2006.

"Gun free zones, if we wake up and smell the coffee, are a killing zone," state Rep. Al Baldasaro, a Londonderry Republican, told the committee in seeking the ban's repeal Tuesday.

Reps. Jennifer Coffey, R-Andover, and Susan DeLemus, R-Rochester, testified that they did not feel safe walking to the legislative garage where their cars are parked.

"I'm feeling very threatened as I walk past people who seem a little shady," said DeLemus.

Ban supporters said the public, particularly schoolchildren, touring the Statehouse shouldn't be put at risk. Police have the training, not the public, to deal with volatile situations, they said. They also said police would have a hard time distinguishing among those with guns who were defending themselves from the aggressors if the ban was lifted.

Former state Rep. Valerie Hardy, a Litchfield Democrat, read a list of incidents around the nation involving gun violence.

"There's too much violence in this world," she said.

House Republican Leader D.J. Bettencourt of Salem challenged her.

"The vast majority of places where those took place were gun free zones, were they not?" he said.

"I can't understand why people feel they have to have a gun everywhere they go," she replied.

Carol Backus of Manchester said gun rights are not absolute and the Statehouse should be a safe haven, particularly for schoolchildren touring with their classes.

"Why should random members of the public be allowed to carry loaded handguns into Representatives Hall or the governor's office?" she said.

Senate Democratic Leader Sylvia Larsen of Concord was the lone Democrat present and voted against the repeal.

"Our most important job this session is to address economic issues," she said. "We're spending our first day addressing an issue I fear will cause problems over time."

She predicted difficult debates would produce "passion, disappointment and defeats."

"Our job is to promote civil discourse and not to allow disruption," she said.

The House also will consider changing its rules Wednesday to allow people to carry weapons in the House chamber, anterooms, cloakrooms or any area of the Statehouse adjacent to those rooms. The rule will prohibit their display, but will allow them to use weapons in self-defense and to defend others.

Currently, only law enforcement officers can carry deadly weapons on the House floor or adjacent areas.

The change would leave it to the House and Senate sergeant-at-arms to keep order in the respective chambers. State police and the Legislature's chief of protective services would keep order in other areas of the complex.

Senate President Peter Bragdon, R-Milford, said he did not know of a similar proposal to the Senate's rules.

[THO Game Calls]

Once again, the Republicans caved.   The law states we can open carry.   They refused to take a stand to uphold that law and the rights of NH Citizens.

It also opens the door for the state to be sued for discrimination and profiling. 

We might as well do away with the open carry law now.   The Precedent has been set.

But the really sad part of this is that once the Democrats regain power, out state legislature will once again waste a day debating weather the rights granted to NH Citizens by the state constitution and RSA's should be recognized by our law makers.  It will be a never ending debate.

Stupid and cowardly on the part of the Republican majority.

[THO Game Calls]

And by the way Semp,

Your quote is from Thoreau's journal, and was written in Feb of 1860.   He was talking about writing and the the rules of the English language.

A few days later, he makes an even more astute observation that you will probably enjoy..........

"Always, you have to contend with the stupidity of men."



Many of Thoreau's writings and the complete text of his journals are on line here

http://www.library.ucsb.edu/thoreau/writings_journals.html

You might enjoy them.   

[KySongDog]

Thanks for the link, Al. 

I am not a Thoreau student by any means but I do like some of his quotes.  My favorite Thoreau quote is "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation."   It's probably his most famous line from Walden.

[nastygunz]

"Always, you have to contend with the stupidity of men."

This nails tHO's mindless rants that always seem to find their way into my posts (post-stalker)...it must be a heavy burden to be an xpert on politics...law...literature....policing....etc,etc,infinity....

[THO Game Calls]

You have a habit of copying and pasting articles germane only to a small north eastern state to a board with a national following believing that anyone outside of NH cares, and you never express an opinion one way or the other about the context of the article you are posting.   

It is, in a way, another example of "ruthless posting".  I'm not 100% positive, but I bet if people wanted to know what was going on in NH politics, they would simply log on to www.unionleader.com and see for themselves. 

Then, after 6 replies to your post, you again fail to contribute in any meaningful way by expressing an opinion one way or the other and instead, launch a personal attack against someone who takes the time to read your post and reply.

Perhaps you have missed the point of what a discussion board really is?   

Do you have an opinion on the article?  Or are you simply a Xerox machine?

[vvarmitr]

Such kindred spirits those people from NH have.   
You can just tell they really do love each other.

[golfertrout]