But what would have happened if I said, "I'm sorry, I'm not going to add phone numbers to the application because that information isn't required..." Maybe they would have let it go, or maybe they would have denied me. They clearly count on people not wanting to take that chance.
A valid concern, and you're right, they
do count on people not wanting to take that chance. But they are also counting on people not realizing that the law is cut and dry.
With respect to License to Carry in NH, city and town officials are basically relegated to the duty of processing the paperwork for the state. Local officials have 14 days to determine whether or not one is a
suitable person, but local officials do not have any say in what constitutes a suitable person (in fact, a suitable person in NH is anyone who is not otherwise prohibited under NH or federal law from possessing a firearm). The whole process is codified in state law and doesn't provide any room for local officials to do their own thing. They have 14 days to answer the basic question of suitability (in comparison, consider that NICS takes 15 minutes to determine the same thing).
From where I sit and given what I'm told, they are clearly trying to have their own say (15 days, additional requirements), and that's not how we do. If that's how they want to continue to play, they're going to find themselves in a lawsuit under RSA 159, which provides for special injunctive relief and recourse (including attorney's fees and costs of litigation) and under which the burden of proof (that one is not a suitable person) falls on the licensing entity.
Anyway, sorry to derail. I'm glad that we have one more licensed citizen in NH, but I am sorry to hear about the Hudson's overstepping behavior. It has a bad odor to it. If we, the citizens of NH, wanted the local officials to decide how it should be done, we would've written the law that way.