Yesterday, Democrat Governor Maggie Hassan vetoed New Hampshire bill SB116 which would have removed the licensing requirement for concealed carry. New Hampshire currently permits permitless open carry, but if you want to carry concealed, you must submit an application to your local CLEO (or Town Selectman if your town is too small for its own police force). SB116 had passed the New Hampshire Senate 14-9 in February on a strict party line vote – Republicans in favor, Statists Democrats opposed. It had gone on to the House in April where it had passed 212-150. The house vote was more mixed with some Republicans voting against the bill and a few Democrats in favor of it . . .
Hassan justified the veto this way:
“New Hampshire’s current concealed carry permitting law has worked well for nearly a century — safeguarding the Second Amendment rights of our citizens while helping to keep the Granite State one of the safest states in the nation,” Hassan said. “Our concealed weapons permitting system gives an important oversight role to local law enforcement, while allowing for appeals through appropriate channels.”
New Hampshire now joins Montana and West Virginia as the third state this year in which constitutional carry was passed by the people’s representatives only to have Democrats in the governors’ mansions shoot the proposals down.
While a veto override is technically possible, it would require 3/4 of the members of both houses to accomplish that feat – unlikely at best. Constitutional carry is dead in the Live Free or Die State. At least until it figures how to rid itself of Mommy Hassan.
A setback, but the wind seems to be blowing in our favor. We’ll get there, it will just take awhile.
Look at a map of CCW shall issue states in 1986.
Meanwhile in a small dark room – Bloomberg and the governors of West Virginia, Montana, and New Hampshire shake hands and discuss campaign contributions.
Mommy Hassan does not even identify herself as a Democrat on her Governor’s home page. I wonder if all the libertarians in New Hampshire regret voting for her now.
Funny how all the close elections with liberterian candidates all seem to favor Democrats.
No, Dean, they don’t regret it. They are telling themselves either “well, a Republican would be just as bad” or “Well, Maggie is for gay marriage, infanticide, and open borders, so it’s OK”.
Wow, those damned Frenchies, with their berets and frog legs, someone should stop them from crossing the border and buying whatever it is they buy and then going back home…
Wow I Love all the hate for Libertarians. Sorry but we believe in True Freedom and Liberty. Democrats AND Republicans can’t say the same.
Libertarians don’t vote for democrats.
Many do not vote, because they feel voting would give tacit approval to the concept of government.
More pragmatic libertarians will vote for libertarian party candidates, believing that once the libertarian party can consistently clear 10%, it will gain momentum and break the false dichotomy of the republi-crat party.
And some of us joined the republican party (at least temporarily) to vote for Ron Paul (a gun rights absolutist) in primaries and caucuses in 2008 and 2012, and will probably do the same next year to support Rand Paul.
Although I’ve met a few libertarians who’ve held their noses to vote for a republican because he was a step in the right direction, I’ve never met any who’ve felt that way about a democrat.
Really, if you republicans want libertarians to vote for your candidates, start nominating candidates who support liberty, not funneling tax dollars to politically connected special interests.
BAM!
That just about sums it up.
Her wiki page confirms she has run as a Dem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maggie_Hassan
Also interesting is that she is a “Congregationalist”, which I had to look up, which refers to United Church of Christ, which, ta da, demands Israel tear down the security barriers that have stopped jihadistinian homicide bombers from blowing up Israeli buses, schools and pizza parlors.
Guess she likes terrorists as well as hates law abiding citizens.
Freedom hating statists.
I am a single issue voter. It is black and white with no shades of grey. If those in power don’t trust me to carry a firearm without thier permission, then they see me as a peasant and peon and they as my master.
It is easy to decide for the next election, who will get my vote.
Because, you know, we really don’t want the local constabulary losing any of their “oversight function” over the peasants. Now I’m gonna sit back and wait for all those “pro-gun Democrats” to step up and override the veto…
I’m not sure what “oversight” the local Five-O has. NH is a shall-issue state. According to USACarry.com, they require that you pass a NICS check, fill out a form, pay a $10 fee, and provide a reason (with “self defense” being a valid option). So it seems that any literate person who can legally purchase a firearm, with $10 in his wallet, can get a permit, and there’s no “oversight” the po-po can use to hinder that.
At only $10 per pop, it’s a money loser for the state, so it can’t be about revenue. Maybe because there are so many gun owners in NH, the permit process creates enough union jobs to make her bosses in organized labor happy.
Technically, that’s not true. There is a “suitable person” requirement in New Hampshire code that they can use to deny applicants. I don’t know how often that happens, but my presumption is that New Hampshire is essentially a may-issue state that operates mostly – but not entirely – as shall-issue.
Freedom hating statists.
This is why I am a single issue voter. The right to keep and bear arms without need of permission from the state is fundamental.
If those in power do not trust me to practice this right without their permission, then I don’t trust them to be my representative.
Simple, and a very easy decision on who to vote for in the next election.
“single issue voter” ? That’s how we got where we are, because there are no single-issue candidates. Even if there were, your once dog-catcher_self-appointed_community-organizing_king, got past that opportunity to say yay or nay on that issue and now they’ve got “ideas.”
I THINK he means that regardless your stance on slowing down socialism, preserving traditional marriage, and stopping baby killers, jihadists and illegals from overrunning our country, if we don’t vote to preserve our RKBA, the rest is BS….
Of course you have a point, we could elect some Rino who talks good on 2A and then starts banning…
Reminds me of the essay by L. Neil Smith, “Why Did it Have to be…guns?” It’s a short read that I think does a good job of expressing the single-issue voter’s viewpoint: http://www.lneilsmith.org/whyguns.html.
This is why I will never vote Demokkkrat and why liberals need to be treated as the communist traitors they are.
Right… because Constitutional Carry worked so poorly for their next door neighbor, Vermont… Sigh…
And the crime rate has skyrocketed in their other neighbor Maine, since passing it.
AFAIK Maine hasn’t passed it … yet …. still awaiting the governor’s signature there.
Do you need any further proof why you can’t trust democrats on 2A issues?
2A? They can’t be trusted with the other nine, let alone the second amendment. Not saying Repubs are better, but Dems never support individual freedoms over gov’t authority. We duh slaves now, duh Dems be duh plantation owners now.
I suspect it’s all a dog and pony show. I wonder how many representatives voted for it safe in the knowledge that the governor was going to veto it. She looks good to her democratic constituents, the republicans look good to their 2nd Amendment supporting constituents, it’s a win-win, except we lose.
Well, I expect you have just explained the few House Dem votes for it, anyway.
Is she Lois Lerner’s twin sister?
No, it’s her twin brother Kaitlyn.
“Republicans voting against the bill”
And meanwhile, the Republicans here in the NC General Assembly have done the same thing to OUR Constitutional Carry Bill. They control both houses AND the governor’s mansion, and STILL we can’t get “pro-freedom” legislation passed.
Actions speak louder than the words spoken in campaign promises.
The bed wetting mouthpiece of the Sheriff’s Association couched the issue in “Law and Order” terms, the Republicans in the in the State Legislature took that bait and ran with it.
To make matters worse, word I heard was that the SA did not even speak for the majority of Sheriffs in the State on this issue, but rather voiced the “concern” of a few.
Funny, though, how that “Good Old American Apple Pie Law and Order” line will sway the Republicans (and many voters) as often as not.
Statists are statists regardless of party. The proof is in their voting record, NOT the part affiliation. My high hopes for this Republican controlled House, Senate and Governor’s mansion are dashing quickly.
Ditto the US House and Senate, though, really. I’m sick of Big Government politicians and their “We know what’s best for YOU” mentality…again, regardless of party affiliation.
Not all Republicans are statists, but all Demokkkrats are.
That’s because the people who write the checks to fund campaigns represent the 0.02% most wealthy and the giant corporations, who are inherently statist. That’s the “election” that counts, the one where those who see the rest of us as “consumers” (peasants whose duty is to buy things) decide who can be permitted to be elected. So long as we allow that “election”, we’re stuck with statists.
You cannot point to a single 100 year period of human history where “we” were “stuck with” anybody. The sh_t always sifts out in a more littered eventuality.
“On the notion of individual sovereignty one individual could say to another “Stand feet shoulder-width in your largest foot gear and draw a chalk line around the soles of your shoes.
The lines alone contain the hallowed ground upon which you are king, until, by you, I am made to move my feet”. [TERMS, J.M. Thomas, R., 2012, Pg. 77]
That’s why we have primaries, to weed out the ones who only talk a good game.
If primaries truly worked to weed out the shitty candidates, why are so many of our elected representatives so awful?
I say get rid of political parties entirely, and make the candidates run on their own merits.
The US congress has a 98% incumbency rate. Local races are similarly biased toward the incumbent.
Short of eliminating the offices altogether, strict term limits are the best option.
I’m 100% in favor of term limits, but they only solve one aspect of the problem: how to get rid of any particular shithead. Odds are, since most districts are carefully drawn to ensure one party or the other has a strong advantage, and the parties have quite a lot of say in who gets to run for office, that the shithead that “term limits” out will be replaced by a virtually identical shithead, beholden to the same special interests as the previous one.
The only solution to that is the abolition of political parties, or at least a severe limiting of their power and influence.
Cause we have too many open primaries.
And banning political parties sounds great…
Great idea, ONLY ONE PARTY, LIKE…
IN CUBA!
Not “one party”, JF. No parties at all. Like George Washington and John Adams wanted.
Same here… a few years back the Floriduh Senate, packed full of RINOs, snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Bogdanoff being key to gutting the OC bill, was absolutely slaughtered in the next election. The most one-sided annihilation of a RINO I’ve ever seen… Of course, replaced by a Democrat, but at least now we have the Devil we know instead of a backstabber.
I wish they could expand reciprocity to all permits, that would seam like a fair compromise. I know a lot of states with constitutional carry had back up bills just in case.
So the Democrat governors from New Hampshire and West Virginia both vetoed constitutional carry bills that passed by a wide margin by their legislatures. How do these people keep getting elected in those states?
They do VERY WELL in elections (garnering approximately 131% of the vote from eligible voters [who then vote in other states – don’t say they don’t, come to OK and in any big city you see busses arrive a week or two before the election and the paid kiddies get off busses (from other states) at the various DMV tag agencies and register to vote – we see ya you evil POS(D)]).
Because the social issues that Democrats embrace are more important to a lot of people than the gun issue. We forget that people who really care about gun rights are a minority in the this country (a vocal minority no doubt, but a minority).
How do they get republican legislatures and a Democrat governor?
Reps and Senators are voted in by districts and all but one district in NH is overwhelmingly Republican. The Governor is a statewide vote and that one Dem district, that houses the capital and biggest city, has enough votes so that the rest of the state doesn’t matter.
a couple of reasons. First of all, there are more people out there than you might think who truly believe that republicans in control of one branch of government and dems in control of the other provides a series of checks and balances.
Secondly, in the last couple of elections, the Republicans have not managed to run an electable candidate for Governor. In the first election Hassan won, the Republican was a guy who had run his mouth about women’s issues and pissed off just about every female voter in the state. Add to the fact that his opponent was a woman and he was DOA.
In the most recent election, I couldn’t even tell you who the Republican was.
Idiocy, Lunacy, Constancy,
Stupid Crazy Forever ! The mantra of the Evil House of (D).
I left the “Live free or Die” state in 1990 because I saw the handwriting on the wall. Taxachusettians were moving in at an alarming rate in an attempt to escape some of the burden of living in the Bay Sate. But they brought with them their socialist nanny state attitudes, and this is the result. I fear the same will happen to Texas and Florida if illegal immigration is not curtailed.
Don’t worry, there’s always Civil War.
I’m not saying I’m going to start one, I wouldn’t tell you if I was, and I won’t hold my breath for any similar affirmations by you/from you either. Best way to tell when, then, is by discerning Action. [loosely paraphrased: TERMS, J.M. Thomas R., 2012]
Actions like the NH blue POS(D) gov. and other blue state statists like her.
I can’t disarm you in time to be handy for my prosecution of a Civil War, but I can let people like the NH gov. do it, and it won’t cost me anything. All I really need to do is hope she gets it done so that a Civil War will flush out/weed out similar cr_p to finish our home-game war with Mexico before we do a home-game land war with China.
<speechless>
Bill, NH has the Free State Project though, right?
Yes it does … and they’ve gotten about 20 folks elected to the House since folks have started moving to NH. One thing to remember is that NH has 400 representatives, so it’s much easier for folks to get elected to office there than in most places.
They are, in effect, reinforcements for the “live free or die” folks.
One problem with the Free State Project is that they have a number of Sovereign Citizens who identify with their cause. Look up the Sovereign Citizens movement on Wikipedia and you’ll see why having folks like this as part of your group does an excellent job of discrediting your movement.
While Free Staters have had some success in some towns, in other towns, the incumbent people in power have been successful in labeling the free state candidates as outsiders who are seeking to mess things up. New Hampshire Yankees hate meddling outsiders more than just about anything, so the Free State project has its work cut out for it to gain traction.
And then you have the problem of all the Statist Massholes who keep moving up and like to vote.
So how are Texas and Florida doing on Constitutional carry?
Too many Statist RINOs in Floriduh… Good ol’ Boys.
Constitutional Carry Fail in New Hampshire? I think you meant Democrat Fail in New Hampshire.
Saggy Maggie Hassan should change the state’s motto from “Live Free or Die” to “Live Free or Not.”
Democrat fail? I’d call that democrat success. Any time democrats can either make it more difficult or expensive, or prevent it from becoming easier or more affordable, for law abiding citizens to acquire, possess, or carry firearms it’s a big win for them.
Constitutional Carry in Missouri was introduced by Representative Eric Burlison, 133rd District. Unfortunately it didn’t pass the first time around, but he will be re-introducing it this upcoming legislative session. Since both houses are heavy majority Republican, I am hoping it will pass this upcoming session. I know that it will be vetoed by the statist Dem Governor Jay Nixon, but hopefully the legislature will grow enough balls between both houses to override the almost guaranteed veto. Keep after them Eric.
Gov. is confused as to what the term Right means. She also doesn’t comprehend why a license is a Constitutional infringement, a Right is not a privilege. Licenses are only for privileges, a Right is a guarantee to all legal American citizens. Another poor leader.
Maine update: Gov Paul lePage said on a Radio interview (WVOM) this am (july 7), that he will sign Maine’s constitutional carry bill into law in a day or two at a signing ceremony.. Republican Governor Paul LePage folks…. the whining mommies panties are in a twist.. we win!
Great news for Maine!
I’m reasonably sure West Virginia will get it next year. They had the votes to override the governor’s veto – but they did not have enough time left in the legislative session to do so.
As for New Hampshire … I guess the state needs a new governor first (and Montana does too).
What if someone started voting with bullets.
If I was on a jury, I’d never convict someone for shooting a politician that voted against the 2nd.
Just saying,
Hmm, voting from the rooftops + jury nullification. Interesting…
You won’t find enough people in the whole country with balls enough to do it, and somehow all end up on the same jury, but interesting…