SB 318-FN, relative to the use of deadly force to protect oneself. MAJORITY: INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE. MINORITY: OUGHT TO PASS.
Rep. Stanley E. Stevens for the Majority of Criminal Justice and Public Safety: This bill is almost identical to HB 1354 which was defeated by the House. Current law already covers the duty to retreat. This is the section that the sponsors of HB 1354 conceded was covered by RSA 627:3. Vote 9-5.
Rep. Elbert I. Bicknell for the Minority of Criminal Justice and Public Safety: This bill, as introduced, simply gives back a right that has been eroded if not actually taken away, by a judicial system that has for many years been giving preferential treatment to criminals. This bill simply says that if you are being attacked in your home, your yard and any other place you have a right to be, you do not have to retreat and you do not have to turn your back on the attacker and run for your life, when you have the means to defend yourself, your family or others. In other words, this bill does away with our present law that states the victim must retreat if he or she can do so safely. It is the opinion of the minority of the committee as well as 20 of 24 citizens that testified on this bill, that to retreat upon being attacked instead of defending oneself and family is too unreasonable to ask of any person in that situation.
SB 348, prohibiting the taking of arms and ammunition in a declared state of emergency. MAJORITY: INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE. MINORITY: OUGHT TO PASS.
Rep. Gene P. Charron for the Majority of Criminal Justice and Public Safety: The committee felt that the events that predicated this bill were extreme examples that happened in New Orleans. New Hampshire gun owners are responsible people. Gun seizure of an entire town would be highly unlikely. No town or city would have the resources to enforce this law. Vote 14-5
Rep. Elbert I. Bicknell for the Minority of Criminal Justice and Public Safety: According to some on the committee, and possibly in the House itself, there are those that keep insisting what happened in New Orleans could never happen in New Hampshire. The minority simply points out that New Hampshire never before had a flood like what recently occurred in Alstead, but yet it did happen. Is it unreasonable to think that in certain situations, under certain conditions, under certain leaderships, we in New Hampshire will not ever have something as catastrophic an event as happened in New Orleans? As to the confiscation, or seizure of weapons of innocent citizens by members of the Police and Armed services be they from New Orleans or other states, does anyone really think it too, could not happen in New Hampshire under the wrong leadership and right emergency situations? It will not start with a “whole town” losing its rights, it will start as most lost liberties start, piecemeal, slowly, incrementally and one morning we awake without the right to protect ourselves and family, because a “leader” gave the order to start in a given area of town and seize all weapons from all peoples. This bill will not disallow the police to still use warrants from Courts, to still use probable cause to seize on sight of the unlawful use of weapons. By no means does this bill handcuff our police, if in fact they have the authority to seize firearms now, they will under that same authority be able to do what is needed for law and order to prevail in an emergency situation with help from lawfully armed citizens of New Hampshire. This bill is needed, to ensure that what the majority says will never happen, can never happen.
