Supreme court upheld CCW denial in New Hampshire

[VTpro]

Supreme Court upholds police chief's denial of weapons license for city man

By Elizabeth Dinan
[email protected]
June 04, 2008 12:53 PM

PORTSMOUTH — Police Chief Michael Magnant “was justified” in his decision to deny a license to carry a concealed weapon from applicant and former city worker Lee Roseberry, according to a June 2 Supreme Court decision.

The Supreme Court issued the finding in favor of the police chief, while also denying Roseberry’s request to appeal a June 2007 District Court denial of his gun license. The appeal is “unnecessary,” the court decided, because “the record contains sufficient evidence” that the local court made no error.

Roseberry petitioned the state’s highest court on the grounds that the District Court erred by allowing documents from his city personnel file into evidence and not considering his credentials as an experienced gun safety instructor. The Supreme Court found that whether or not personnel records were introduced, testimony at trial was sufficient. It also ruled the lower court can accept or reject any evidence presented.

Magnant refused to renew Roseberry’s concealed carry permit a year ago, after Roseberry was fired from his job as a city wastewater treatment operator, in part because former colleagues found copies of his previous gun license on their desks following work-related disputes. During a July 2007 District Court trial, the city’s human resources officer, Diane Fogarty, testified that Roseberry created a “hostile work environment.”

The Supreme Court decision calls the testimony about the permits left on coworkers’ desks, “the most troubling piece of evidence.”

“To some degree, it made the city a safer place,” City Attorney Robert Sullivan said about the license denial. “The message for the citizenry at large is that if a person wants a concealed weapons permit, that person should act in a responsible manner in their daily life.”

During a three-hour District Court hearing on the matter last July, Magnant testified that during four-plus years as police chief, he approved an estimated 450 concealed carry licenses and denied just two, including Roseberry’s. Noting New Hampshire’s history of supporting Second Amendment rights, Sullivan said Wednesday that the chief’s denial was “difficult” and “to be commended.”

Roseberry could not be reached for comment.

 

[vellnueve]

I'm not sure what NH law reads, but I have trouble condemning the chief for this considering what this guy appears to have done.

 

[VTpro]

I'm not sure what NH law reads, but I have trouble condemning the chief for this considering what this guy appears to have done.

I agree with the decision


seeing that its New Hampshire, he probably can still OPEN CARRY tho

 

[pdm]

Well, it's not like he can't own a gun, like the case would be in MA if he was denied his license.

 

[doobie]

I agree with the decision


seeing that its New Hampshire, he can still OPEN CARRY tho

Corrected your comment. He can still open carry or CCW where he lives (and place of business, but he may need to own it or have permission from the owners).

 

[KMaurer]

While he doesn't exactly sound like the sort of person I'd be happy working around, and it does sound as if the chief had a legitimate reason to deny his application, it's a really fine line. Case in point: Back when I worked on Beacon Hill, we got a real asshat as the top boss. After getting yanked from my nice corner office and moved into a cube farm, I decided to decorate my cube the way I wanted it. One of the things I put up on my walls, along with the diplomas and certificates that were routine everywhere, were my NRA instructor credentials. After a while the chief asshat stopped dropping by my cube to ask for stuff, sending one of his lackeys instead. I later heard from a friend in HR that he was scared shitless of me. Really funny, considering that he was fostering a rumor that he'd actually been working for the CIA on one of his previous positions overseas. I suppose that if he'd been willing to let the whole world know he was such a sissy and a phony, he could easily have got my LTC pulled, and more than a few people would be sitting around saying, "yep, sounds like a good call to me."

Ken

 

[drgrant]

I'm not sure what NH law reads, but I have trouble condemning the chief for this considering what this guy appears to have done.

I have problems with systems where denials are handed out without a statutorial reason for doing so, or at least a jury trial. It opens a gate to
other bad shit like what we deal with in MA.

I agree that the guy is probably a dickhead, but this denial doesn't sound like
due process.

IMO this is yet another argument for a Vermont-style system where no
silly permit is necessary.

It sounds kinda like the following:

Q: "...The court has now reached a verdict- GUILTY!"

Picard: "Guilty of what?

Q: "Of being inferior!"

Another part of me thinks, though, that this guy had a terrible
lawyer. I would imagine a decent one would try to make a case that
him being an a**h*** at work was "in the past" and try to contradict
the smear job the city probably did on him.



-Mike

 

[vellnueve]

All good points (and I do know the reference you made)

Like I said, I don't know exactly how the NH law reads. Based on that account, it seems like this guy was a major dickhead and if true, I'd have less trouble disagreeing, but I don't know if NH statute allows for that.

 

[Coyote Whiskey]

Oh crap here it goes

Not to piss people off ,but the Supreme Court sounds like due process. I am not a lawyer but seems the case went to its end.

Me, I am a 2nd amendment dude, a member of the NRA, love the shooting sports, carry ( nobody knows, but me, hopefully, and I guess all you dudes and dudettes now), and hates the marxist attitudes in MA.

That said , based on what was presented at the case, I also hate folks that pull their CCW's (or copies) out, like they where pulling a gun on those that they disagree with.

It gives all of us a bad name and with the looming storms a brewing in November, I resent folks like him, because it makes our case harder. He being a Safety instructor gives me pause as to his abilities to be trusted.
Sounds like a bully. (if all they evidence was correct)

I believe the Chief made the right call. (if all they evidence was correct)

I am not writing this to start a fight just to give my opinion. And we all know about opinions.

Barkeep give me another beer!!!!!!! Its Saturday night for goodness sake!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[jdubois]

the marxist attitudes in MA.

I think we're getting off topic but... While the MA political climate is certainly often on the Socialist end of things, it's not at all Marxist. Marxism is a philosophical position that history is shaped mainly by class struggles, and it's political ideals consist of throwing off the oppression of the ruling class. The reason Marxism and Socialism are often tied together (though they need not be) is because Marx argued that Capitalism was inseparably tied to the exploitation of the working class.

 

[sksguns]

He lost his license because he pulled out a photocopy of his license and placed it on peoples desks.

I guess that was a pretty stupid thing to do but the worst that could have happened to those people was they may have gotten a paper cut.

Is it safe to assume that because some idiot goes around placing pictures of a car on your desk after a disagreement that he intends to drown you or run you over and you have to revoke his driver's license?

Not the smartest thing to do but to lose your license.......that's a bit of a stretch....

 

[Fsorrent]

He lost his license because he pulled out a photocopy of his license and placed it on peoples desks.

I guess that was a pretty stupid thing to do but the worst that could have happened to those people was they may have gotten a paper cut.

Is it safe to assume that because some idiot goes around placing pictures of a car on your desk after a disagreement that he intends to drown you or run you over and you have to revoke his driver's license?

Not the smartest thing to do but to lose your license.......that's a bit of a stretch....

Stretch...definately. let me ask you this, If I went to your work and placed a picture of you in your house that I took outside your house, technically its just a piece of paper, but its the intent of the photo that causes the real harm. Placing a paper stating "i have a concealed gun license" on everyones desk is in a way a threat. Since it's NH, he didn't have to go around telling everyone since most people up there do anyway. But it was the fact that he made it a point for everyone to know, they caused people to become nervous. Shit, if some guy walked up to me and said "I have a gun on me!". It would make me wonder "why the hell are you telling me this?". Obviously, I'd be like " that's nice, I have two on me w/ lots of rounds to go with them whats your point?". His words aren't going to cause internal bleeding, but the fact that he made it a point to inform me he is armed would signal a red flag

 

[jhblaze1]

Not to piss people off ,but the Supreme Court sounds like due process. I am not a lawyer but seems the case went to its end.

Me, I am a 2nd amendment dude, a member of the NRA, love the shooting sports, carry ( nobody knows, but me, hopefully, and I guess all you dudes and dudettes now), and hates the marxist attitudes in MA.

That said , based on what was presented at the case, I also hate folks that pull their CCW's (or copies) out, like they where pulling a gun on those that they disagree with.

It gives all of us a bad name and with the looming storms a brewing in November, I resent folks like him, because it makes our case harder. He being a Safety instructor gives me pause as to his abilities to be trusted.
Sounds like a bully. (if all they evidence was correct)

I believe the Chief made the right call. (if all they evidence was correct)

I am not writing this to start a fight just to give my opinion. And we all know about opinions.

Barkeep give me another beer!!!!!!! Its Saturday night for goodness sake!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As shady as this guy sounds, it's pretty anti-2A to agree with taking someone's gun rights away when NO CRIME WAS EVEN COMMITTED, much less a felony. This is BS.

 

[sksguns]

Stretch...definately. let me ask you this, If I went to your work and placed a picture of you in your house that I took outside your house, technically its just a piece of paper, but its the intent of the photo that causes the real harm. Placing a paper stating "i have a concealed gun license" on everyones desk is in a way a threat. Since it's NH, he didn't have to go around telling everyone since most people up there do anyway. But it was the fact that he made it a point for everyone to know, they caused people to become nervous. Shit, if some guy walked up to me and said "I have a gun on me!". It would make me wonder "why the hell are you telling me this?". Obviously, I'd be like " that's nice, I have two on me w/ lots of rounds to go with them whats your point?". His words aren't going to cause internal bleeding, but the fact that he made it a point to inform me he is armed would signal a red flag

Excellent response...lol...

Yes, I see your point about a picture of me in my house from the outside. There are privacy issues and more could probably be read into that.

Did anyone ask him why he dropped that on their desk? I know it mentions they had a dispute.....what kind of dispute? Why didn't anyone say "this is cool. Why did you put it on my desk? Are you threatening to shoot me?"

Maybe the answer would have been...."yes." Ok arrest the guy and take his ticket and whatnot....

But if the answer was like...."no, I heard you and so and so talking about carrying concealed. If you are interested I'm licensed tro carry concealed and can help you thorugh the paper work. I'm also a licensed instructor..."

Just because people have disagreements doesn't mean someone is always looking to shoot the other...

Like I said...probably not the smartest thing to do. But there was only an assumption of a threat based on a piece of paper with a picture of his license on it. No actual threat was made....

 

[Tiktock]

I dont really have a problem with this. To me its no different than a panhandler walking up to me, telling me that he has a gun permit, and then politely asking for 5$. He didn't threaten me, but its clear what he is implying. If you get into a disagreement with someone and they hand you a CCW card, its pretty clear they are threatening you, as well. If this guy resorts to any kind of threat using his gun over an office dispute, I don't have a problem with him not getting a carry license.

Maybe thats an unpopular attitude to have, but whatever...if it was your family member whose desk this guy dropped a copy of his gun license off on, would you still be crying over his lost rights to carry a concealed weapon?

 

[Fsorrent]

Excellent response...lol...

Yes, I see your point about a picture of me in my house from the outside. There are privacy issues and more could probably be read into that.

Did anyone ask him why he dropped that on their desk? I know it mentions they had a dispute.....what kind of dispute? Why didn't anyone say "this is cool. Why did you put it on my desk? Are you threatening to shoot me?"

Maybe the answer would have been...."yes." Ok arrest the guy and take his ticket and whatnot....

But if the answer was like...."no, I heard you and so and so talking about carrying concealed. If you are interested I'm licensed tro carry concealed and can help you thorugh the paper work. I'm also a licensed instructor..."

Just because people have disagreements doesn't mean someone is always looking to shoot the other...

Like I said...probably not the smartest thing to do. But there was only an assumption of a threat based on a piece of paper with a picture of his license on it. No actual threat was made....

True! That's why I didn't disagree with you. There isn't enough information to understand the purpose of him leaving that on their desk. If they were arguing, one can assume he meant it as a threat..but you know what they say about assuming.

 

[sksguns]

True! That's why I didn't disagree with you. There isn't enough information to understand the purpose of him leaving that on their desk. If they were arguing, one can assume he meant it as a threat..but you know what they say about assuming.

I agree. I'd like more of the specifics.

 

[drgrant]

Maybe thats an unpopular attitude to have, but whatever...if it was your family member whose desk this guy dropped a copy of his gun license off on, would you still be crying over his lost rights to carry a concealed weapon?

Well, for starters, I would at least understand that them taking his license away doesn't make that family member any safer. If the guy has ill intent, is a piece of paper/plastic card going to stop him from doing something bad to my family member? I kinda doubt it. (While we're at it, has there ever been a criminal that said "Well, I was gonna shoot this guy, but the cops took my gun license away, so I couldn't do it. " ) If I felt my family member was genuinely threatened by this bozo I'd probably want the authorities to actually do something effective, assuming they could at all. If I am going to play "devil's advocate statist authoritarian" here for a minute, the game would be to file an RO against him (esp if the filer is a female) and then at least that way the police will probably go over and shake him down for any guns he owns. Even that, however, is a fairytale guarantee of
safety. (Not to mention it might not work, or be viable at all if there is no relationship between the people... d'oh!)

Does NH have a law against "Criminal Threatening" or the like? I would have less of a problem with them taking his license away if they actually had convicted him of something like that. I am guessing, however, that when these incidents happened, the police decided that such a prosecution wouldn't fly, so they resorted to this wallhack instead.

I guess I just don't see the point in a "feel good" action like taking the license away- at the cost of (possibly) setting a bad precedent. I'd feel differently if the guy was at least convicted of something related.

Of course, one thing missing here, is we don't know the full extent of the "hostile work environment". It's possible
the "CCW card" dropping trick was just the tip of the iceberg. He may have made other threats, as well... who
knows...

-Mike

 

[Garys]

While he doesn't exactly sound like the sort of person I'd be happy working around, and it does sound as if the chief had a legitimate reason to deny his application, it's a really fine line... and more than a few people would be sitting around saying, "yep, sounds like a good call to me."

Ken

A couple of thoughts Ken. It's different putting up a diploma on a cube wall than it is putting copies of your LTC on the desks of people you've had disputes with. If he had done the first, he probably would not have had his CCW permit denied. I don't see the two as analogous at all. One can be reasonably construed as a threat, the other can't.

Then again, I wonder if you would really need to put something on the wall to scare a boss shitless?

 

[sksguns]

Well, for starters, I would at least understand that them taking his license away doesn't make that family member any safer. If the guy has ill intent, is a piece of paper/plastic card going to stop him from doing something bad to my family member? I kinda doubt it. (While we're at it, has there ever been a criminal that said "Well, I was gonna shoot this guy, but the cops took my gun license away, so I couldn't do it. " ) If I felt my family member was genuinely threatened by this bozo I'd probably want the authorities to actually do something effective, assuming they could at all. If I am going to play "devil's advocate statist authoritarian" here for a minute, the game would be to file an RO against him (esp if the filer is a female) and then at least that way the police will probably go over and shake him down for any guns he owns. Even that, however, is a fairytale guarantee of
safety. (Not to mention it might not work, or be viable at all if there is no relationship between the people... d'oh!)

Does NH have a law against "Criminal Threatening" or the like? I would have less of a problem with them taking his license away if they actually had convicted him of something like that. I am guessing, however, that when these incidents happened, the police decided that such a prosecution wouldn't fly, so they resorted to this wallhack instead.

I guess I just don't see the point in a "feel good" action like taking the license away- at the cost of (possibly) setting a bad precedent. I'd feel differently if the guy was at least convicted of something related.

Of course, one thing missing here, is we don't know the full extent of the "hostile work environment". It's possible
the "CCW card" dropping trick was just the tip of the iceberg. He may have made other threats, as well... who
knows...

-Mike

Great post!!!

 

[KMaurer]

A couple of thoughts Ken. It's different putting up a diploma on a cube wall than it is putting copies of your LTC on the desks of people you've had disputes with. If he had done the first, he probably would not have had his CCW permit denied. I don't see the two as analogous at all. One can be reasonably construed as a threat, the other can't.

Then again, I wonder if you would really need to put something on the wall to scare a boss shitless?

Oh, I agree that they're different. My point was that they're close enough that the the difference might easily elude most GFWs. Any time I have to rely on liberals recognition of little things like that (or differences between our behavior and intentions in Iraq and those of Nazi Germany in Poland or of Imperial Japan in Nanking), I worry a little.

Ken

 

[USMA-82]

"Roseberry was fired from his job as a city wastewater treatment operator, in part because former colleagues found copies of his previous gun license on their desks following work-related disputes."

I'm as pro-2A as any of you, but I see this as a bullying, blantant intent to intimidate. I don't like the thought of taking away rights, but.... you can't fix stupid.

 

[rscalzo]

He lost his license because he pulled out a photocopy of his license and placed it on peoples desks.

I happen to know people who are acquainted with this individual. He had done more than just placing copies of his license on employee's desks but that was the issue in the case. He was a major screwball and brought the action on himself.

 

[Fixxah]

I believe the man acted in a way to intimidate co-workers. That is a major no-no in my book. Granted, nobody is perfect but assuming this guy went to the trouble to copy (how many?) CCW permit to leave on desks, would it be fair to say he should have expected the response? Should have let the sleeping dog lie.

 

[GSG]

Slightly belated update.

http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20100628-NEWS-100629839

PORTSMOUTH — A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court Monday regarding the Constitution's “right to keep and bear arms” limits the reach of state and local governments and expands the rights of gun owners, said Concord attorney Penny Dean.

Further, said Dean, the 5-4 decision by the Supreme Court justices means people like Portsmouth's Lee Roseberry won't be denied licenses to carry concealed firearms.

Roseberry's license was denied in June of 2007 by former police chief Michael Magnant, who cited the former city sewer worker's troubled work history as reason for the denial. Roseberry appealed the denial in Portsmouth District Court during a July 17, 2007 trial when he cited his lack of criminal history, his 13 years as an officer of the Piscataqua Fish & Game Club and certification as a firearms instructor.

This was just a local attorney's opinion on it, but it seems like something might be in the works for this case.

 

[strangenh]

GSG, Lynch vetoed a lot of bipartisan pro-self-defense legislation in his time in office. With any luck in the elections, the General Court will be able to moot this specific issue next year with an RSA amendment defining suitability the way the NH state police have explicitly interpreted it. That or change to a VT-style carry mode. This is an extremely important election year in NH.

 

[drgrant]

GSG, Lynch vetoed a lot of bipartisan pro-self-defense legislation in his time in office. With any luck in the elections, the General Court will be able to moot this specific issue next year with an RSA amendment defining suitability the way the NH state police have explicitly interpreted it. That or change to a VT-style carry mode. This is an extremely important election year in NH.

Vermont style (permit-less) carry will never happen in NH with Lynch in office. IIRC he already vetoed it once already, otherwise it would have been the law.

-Mike

 

[strangenh]

Vermont style (permit-less) carry will never happen in NH with Lynch in office. IIRC he already vetoed it once already, otherwise it would have been the law.

Right. That was part of the point.

 

[radioman]

This guy clearly threatened his coworkers!! I agree that he has been denied his LTC.

Those of you who say it was just a piece of paper- get a clue.

If a pan handler came up to me and handed me a photo of my daughter leaving her elementary school and then asked me for 5 bucks?? Damn right I'd give it to me because he just threatened me. Same as this dude did!

Spin it any way you like it was a threat and this guy is unsuitable!

The way some of you guys talk the inmates at MCI Walpole should be walking around CCWing. The 2nd amendment doesn't say anything about felons??

 

[garandman]

I'm not sure what NH law reads, but I have trouble condemning the chief for this considering what this guy appears to have done.

If this was a MA chief this thread would be 10 pages long, with every pinkneck in NH opining.