Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Legislative Alert - 2/5/08 - Save the Date!

UPDATE (2/1/08): Room change noted below.

**** Attention, New Hampshire gun owners! ****

The Democrats in Concord, having apparently recovered from their defeat last year in their campaign to whittle away at our right to bear arms, are back at it once again.

In response to all the incidents of bloodshed, death, and destruction caused recently by armed law-abiding citizens within the confines of the New Hampshire State House, the anti-gun bigot brigade is now looking to make it illegal to carry a firearm in the State House or Legislative Office Building.

Unless, of course, you're a law enforcement officer or a murderous criminal who has as much use for a law such as this as Stevie Wonder has for a telescope.


AN ACT relative to security in the state house and legislative office building.

SPONSORS: Rep. Kjellman, Merr 5

COMMITTEE: Legislative Administration


This bill prohibits a person, other than a law enforcement officer, from carrying a firearm or any other weapon in the state house or legislative office building.


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

1 New Section; Legislative Officers and Proceedings; State House Security. Amend RSA 14 by inserting after section 14-c the following new section:

14:14-d State House Security.

I. No person shall knowingly carry a loaded or unloaded pistol, revolver, or firearm or any other deadly weapon as defined in RSA 625:11, V, whether open or concealed or whether licensed or unlicensed, upon the person or within any of the person's possessions owned or within the person's control in the state house or legislative office building.

II. Firearms may be secured at the entrance to the state house or legislative office building by legislative security officers.

III. The provisions of this section shall not apply to marshals, sheriffs, deputy sheriffs, police, or other duly appointed or elected law enforcement officers.

2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect 60 days after its passage.

This is nothing more than the latest example of a feel-good, do-[absolutely] nothing, liberal "solution" to a non-existent problem. And, as was the case last year with Senate Bill 44, it would serve only to allow the anti-freedom camp to get that first foot in the door that they desperately need in order to spread the cancer that is discriminatory Massachusetts-style gun laws into New Hampshire.

Received in the mail from GO-NH:

There will be a hearing on this bill one week from today, February 5th, at 10:30 AM in the State House Room 100 Legislative Office Building, Room 104 before the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee. Call 271-3661 for updates.

Here's my letter to the sponsor of this insidious bill, Representative Kjellman, who (surprise, surprise) is a Hillary Clinton endorser from Massachusetts.

Representative Kjellman,

I'm reading the text to House Bill 1354: An act relative to security in the state house and legislative office building, and I simply do not see the reasoning behind this unnecessary piece of legislation.

Has there been a rash of shootings in the State House, committed by individuals licensed by the state to carry concealed handguns, of which I am unaware?

I was at the State House last year attending the hearing for Senate Bill 44 which sought to give town police chiefs more discretionary power in denying pistol licenses to otherwise qualified applicants. I was lawfully carrying a concealed sidearm that morning, as was a large percentage of the state's gun owners who showed up to have their opinions heard.

Yet, the crowd was as peaceful as one could possibly imagine. No one was in any kind of danger. There was no threat to public safety, whatsoever. All I saw that morning was a large number of law-abiding citizens exercising their Constitutionally-protected rights in a safe an responsible manner.

Does that bother you?

I would sincerely appreciate a reply, as I'm confused as to why you think such a law is needed. To me it just seems like a "solution" in search of a problem, not to mention, a tremendous waste of the taxpayer dollars that would then be needed to install, service and monitor metal detectors at all entrances and exits to both the State House and Legislative Office Building.

Wouldn't that money be better spent providing educational resources or improving the quality of health care for New Hampshire's under-privileged children?

Again, if there had been a series of violent gun battles inside the State House as of late, I'd at least understand where you're coming from with this bill. But, that is absolutely not the case.

I await your response.

- Bruce [last name]

Any reply I receive (not holding my breath) will be posted here.