(NH) No permit necessary?


PDA






lapidator
February 15, 2004, 06:31 PM
Should New Hampshire eliminate permit requirements for handguns?

— Granite Staters would no longer need permits to carry concealed handguns under a bill considered this week by N.H. Senate Judiciary Committee.
Sen. Joe Kenney of Wakefield supports the legislation, saying citizens today need to take more responsibility for the safety, given the threat of terrorism. Opponents of the bill say making it easier for people to carry hidden guns would not make them feel safer.
This week's question is: Should New Hampshire eliminate permit requirements for handguns?
Call 356-2550 all day Saturday and Sunday and leave your comments on our machine. You may fax your response to 356-8360 or send E-mail to DailySun@mountwashingtonvalley.com. Results will be published Tuesday.



http://www.mountwashingtonvalley.com/buildInclude1.lasso?-database=WWW_CDS_Article&-layout=WEB&-response=Story.lasso&-recordID=12585477&-search

If you enjoyed reading about "(NH) No permit necessary?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
thefitzvh
February 16, 2004, 02:06 AM
email sent...


James

Devonai
February 16, 2004, 03:12 AM
Opponents of the bill say making it easier for people to carry hidden guns would not make them feel safer.

Question to these folks: Do you feel more safe, less safe, or the same when visiting Vermont? If the answer is more safe or the same: What makes Vermont residents more responsible for carrying concealed weapons versus New Hampshire residents?

Of course, there is no good answer. I love it when logic slays the anti argument. :D

As long as New Hampshire retains a voluntary permit for the purposes of reciprocity, I'm all for this legislation. What would be even better is if they designated a driving license as a carry license. Even though it will be true by default, the official definition would be handy for reciprocity purposes.

lapidator
February 17, 2004, 08:31 AM
Here are the replies...

http://www.mountwashingtonvalley.com/buildInclude1.lasso?-database=WWW_CDS_Article&-layout=WEB&-response=Story.lasso&-recordID=12585548&-search

Oh yeah, just what the land of the violent, home of the illiterate needs right now. Allowing men, the gender that is destroying American culture and the family with its aggressive tendencies, carrying around guns at all times on their person, hidden. If it happens this country is even more screwed than it is right now. This is Jim in Freedom.

Ha!

Lapidator

Devonai
February 17, 2004, 09:31 AM
Yes, I think they should. Vermont did that under the watch of Howard Dean and I think that is the next best thing he did next to same sex unions.

You mean Howard Dean is over two hundred years old??? :what:

:rolleyes:

This is Robert in South Chatham. I feel that after you go through the requirements to achieve a permit you shouldn’t have to pay the $35 or $25 every three years to re-establish the permit once you have already cleared it. So, as far as that goes, I don’t believe you should have to pay to own a handgun permit, to require a permit once you have acquired one.

Check your bank records, Robert. Your amount and duration are off a little bit.

This is Cindy from Conway. No, they shouldn’t do away with permits. What is wrong with this picture?

I don't know, Cindy. Why don't you tell us?

Bob from Conway. No, I think they should make it a lot harder for them to get a permit. If you take permits away, we’d go back to the old western days. Everybody would shoot everybody and go all out gung ho. Now, isn’t that crazy? All out crazy.

Yes, our comrades to the west in Vermont are plagued with daily massacres.

Absolutely not. I’m more worried about some of my co-workers than I am about terrorism.

http://www.jobfind.com

Do you realize that means the nut living next door to you or me could be carrying a concealed weapon. That scares the hell out of me.

Maybe if you smiled and said hello to your neighbors once and awhile you wouldn't be deathly afraid of them.

dustind
February 17, 2004, 12:06 PM
This change will keep permits as an option. (to help with reciprocally)

geekWithA.45
February 17, 2004, 01:44 PM
we’d go back to the old western days. Everybody would shoot everybody and go all out gung ho. Now, isn’t that crazy? All out crazy.

What the hell is wrong with these people?

Why, oh why, does this come up every single time?

Zundfolge
February 17, 2004, 03:38 PM
Bob from Conway. No, I think they should make it a lot harder for them to get a permit. If you take permits away, we’d go back to the old western days. Everybody would shoot everybody and go all out gung ho. Now, isn’t that crazy? All out crazy.
I'd LOVE to go back to the "old western days" ... back when crime rates where 1/10th what they are today.

I love it when the antis bring out the "Wild West" argument because when you look at the facts about the old west you find them making the argument for less gun control.


Like it or not, more guns DOES equal less crime.

sigman4rt
February 17, 2004, 04:49 PM
What about the Non-resident permit holder? A resident permit holder from another state holding a now valid N.H. non-resident permit is now able, because of reciprosity, to legally carry in many more states than he legally can with just a resident permit. IOW, a Maine resident with a Maine permit may legally carry in 14 states, because of reciprosity. The same permitholder with a non-resident N.H. permit may legally carry in 12 ADDITIONAL states. As long as N.H. retains a voluntary non-resident permit then it could pssibly be a boon for RKBA'rs. Downside? Check (packing.org) to see how many states have reciprosity with Vt. as opposed to N.H.(Vt. requires no permit). In a perfect world you should need no permit, in the real world however, with no permit system in place you lose most of your reciprosity. A N.H. resident with a valid permit may legally carry in 14 other states because of reciprosity, do away with the permit system and he will lose 10 of them. Backdoor gun control???

Jonesy9
February 17, 2004, 05:03 PM
I don't see it as backdoor gun control at all. But I too would like to see the permit retained voluntarily just for reciprocity reasons similair to AK.

dustind
February 18, 2004, 12:50 AM
This will keep the permit system intact. The Senate version only removes the part that says (short version) "it is unlawful to carry on your person a concealed weapon with out a lisence." The house version strips every (I think) gun law off the books. People are pushing for only the Senate part which will keep the permits intact. Here is a pdf which may be out of date by now. http://dustin.o-f.com/storage/SB454_HB1271.pdf

If you enjoyed reading about "(NH) No permit necessary?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!