New Hampshire Firearms Coalition Outing the Lies, Calls To Stop SB 500

New Hampshire
New Hampshire Firearms Coalition Outing the Lies, Calls To Stop SB 500

USA -( It has come to my attention that there is some confusion regarding the points raised in our last alert.about SB 500.

This email is intended to further explain why SB 500 is bad for gun owners. Quite frankly, I am surprised that I even need to write this because our first alert was pretty clear.

First, it is never a good idea to tie state law to federal law. Federal law can change, we here in New Hampshire might not like that change. However, once the federal definitions change, New Hampshire gun owners would be bound by that change in definitions. Right now, today, federal law defines firearms to include frames, receivers, silencers and even STARTER GUNS! None of these items can fire live ammunition, but yet federal law includes these items in the definition of a firearm.

Now, to be clear, we must follow federal law but that means New Hampshire based dealers cannot sell firearms to prohibited persons and private citizens cannot modify firearms in a manner that would violate any law, New Hampshire or federal. However, following the law does not mean linking New Hampshire law to federal law.

SB 500 also changes some of the words in the misdemeanor domestic violence gun ban. We have been pretty clear in our opposition to this arguably unconstitutional gun ban. For many years, we have said that we would like to see the only gun ban that is triggered by a misdemeanor and not a felony repealed. Thus, it makes no sense to modify the words and make it easier to prosecute people when our true goal is a full repeal.

The possessory gun ban found in R.S.A. 207:7 should also be repealed. We have said as much for several years. Yet the sponsors of SB 500 are attempting to modify the language in a possessory only gun offense. We can see no reason to fix drafting errors or correct inconsistent language in a law that we have advocated repealing.

When we surveyed candidates for State Senate and State Representative, we have asked candidates about these two anti-gun laws.

Senator Avard completed a candidate survey and said that he would support repealing both the misdemeanor gun ban and the possessory gun ban. However, when it came time to introduce a bill; instead of a full and complete repeal of these repulsive laws, he decided to modify these two, really bad, anti-gun laws.

Several people have called and emailed asking why I didn't speak with Senator Avard. I tried, he has refused to return my phone calls. He told at least one person that he won't speak with me. That left NHFC with no choice, we went directly to you, the grassroots gun owner, to help us defeat SB 500.

Therefore, I am repeating my call to action, please, do not wait, contact Senator Kevin Avard and demand that he withdraw SB 500 at once.

There is still time before the 2018 Senate session begins for him to withdraw the bill. Click here to email Senator Avard or call him at (603) 318-4031 or (603) 271-4151. Then, please contact Senator Jeb Bradley and deliver the same message,

Click here to email Senator Bradley or call him at (603) 387-2365 or (603) 271-2609.

Please feel free to reply to this email with any questions or concerns. I answer all emails; I have been fighting for Second Amendment civil rights for close to 30 years including 14 years as an NHFC Board Member, close to 20 years working with Gun Owners of America and 6 years as a founding Board Member of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. I do what I do, because if a right is worth having than it is also worth some sacrifices to protect.

Please feel free to share your thoughts and ideas.

Finally, if you hear from Senator Avard or Senator Bradley please forward their comments to me.

Thanks for your support!

New Hampshire Firearms CoalitionIn liberty,
Alan M. Rice

President – NHFC, Inc.

P.S. The New Hampshire Firearms Coalition is working tirelessly to keep gun owners like you up-to-date on as many gun issues as possible — please consider contributing to the effort by chipping in $15 or $20.

Click here to support NHFC by purchasing one of our custom rifles.

  • 5 thoughts on “New Hampshire Firearms Coalition Outing the Lies, Calls To Stop SB 500

    1. How about total repeal of any 2A restictions that keep guns from law abiding citizens?
      Strange how these groups work tirelessly for 20 plus years and still cant get a handle on things.

    2. This email doesnt explain why SB500 is bad for NH, because it isnt. What is does do is show the absolute lack of knowledge and arrogance of the NHFC, the “pro 2A rights organization” that almost blew Constitutional Carry for us in NH last year. SB500 is merely a housekeeping bill. It brings in line the definition of a firearm with the federal definition. What the NHFC is not telling you, is the federal definition is already in NH state statute. If the NHFC would take the time to do actual research, they would know this. Instead, their ego is getting in the way, and they are threatening to “paper the district” of one of NH’s most liberty minded and pro 2A supporters we have. One other thing you may like to know about this alleged pro 2A group. Their president is a Massachusetts police officer. Ironic, huh? Funny how all other 2A groups are on board with this bill.

    3. NHFC and its leadership apparently did not realize that the federal definition of “firearm” was already in New Hampshire statute and are now either embarrassed or, because their new president is also a police officer, only want it applied in crimes against LEOs. Specifically, the relevant NH statute is NH RSA 642:3-a V, (a):

      “NH RSA 642:3-a Taking a Firearm From a Law Enforcement Officer. –
      I. Whoever knowingly takes a firearm:
      (a) From the person of a law enforcement officer, while such officer is engaged in the performance of official duties; and
      (b) Against that officer’s will; or attempts to do so, shall be punished as provided in paragraph II.
      II. The punishment for an offense under this section is:
      (a) In the case of an offense other than an attempt, or an offense that is an attempt during which the firearm is discharged (other than intentionally by the officer), a class A felony; and
      (b) In the case of any other offense that is an attempt, a class B felony.
      V. In this section:
      (a) “Firearm” has the meaning given that term in section 921 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
      (b) “Law enforcement officer” means law enforcement officer as defined in RSA 630:1, II. “

    Comments are closed.