Free State Project Forum

FSP -- General Discussion => Prospective Participants => Topic started by: lordpoee on September 14, 2005, 07:13:30 am

Title: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on September 14, 2005, 07:13:30 am
According to OpenCarry.org, Kentucky is more Gun-Friendly than New Hamsphire.

http://www.opencarry.org/

Hopefully we can make New Hampshire a Gold Star state too.

Kentucky has Peaceable journey laws, You may carry your firearm in Your Glove Box or any place in the vehicle that is clearly visible. This right is observed for non-residents as well.
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: KBCraig on September 14, 2005, 11:29:27 am
According to OpenCarry.org, Kentucky is more Gun-Friendly than New Hamsphire.

http://www.opencarry.org/

That's all relative, and http://www.packing.org/state/kentucky/ shows some differences.

KY honors all states' carry licenses; NH honors 18. Advantage, KY
KY licenses cost $60; NH costs $10. Advantage, NH
KY licenses must be applied for in person; NH can use mail. Advantage, NH
KY minimum age 21; NH, age 18. Advantage, NH
KY has a long list of places where it's prohibited to carry; NH only prohibits carry in a "courtroom or area used by a court". Advantage, NH

The laws and rulings cited at the packing.org page show some trickiness when it comes to unlicensed carry in KY: "A loaded handgun can be carried in the glove box. It is not necessary for you to lock your weapon in the trunk when you are in Kentucky. It may be carried in your glove compartment. It may be loaded. You may also travel with your weapon on the seat or dash of your vehicle as long as the weapon is completely visible. It may not be transported under a seat, in a console or in a drawer in the vehicle." Also, "A console is not a glove box."

Kevin
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on September 14, 2005, 06:01:58 pm
Yes I read about that ruling concerning "The console is not a Glove Box" this is a prime examples of Gun Laws that are designed to trick people. Carrying the Gun in the Console (according to the ruling) was an honest mistake.

I see alot of advantages of NH, but I also see some things that must be changed. (Carrying a pistol, which purpose is to protect you...in the trunk of your car? Excuse me Carjacker while I remove my pistol from the trunk, won't you?)

New Hampshire is my Idea of Utopia. These sort of realties bring it crashing down...

We HAVE to get Absolute firearms freedom in New Hampshire. Absolute.
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: KBCraig on September 15, 2005, 12:22:49 am
New Hampshire is my Idea of Utopia. These sort of realties bring it crashing down...

We HAVE to get Absolute firearms freedom in New Hampshire. Absolute.

Alaska-style carry came close to passing last year. We need more people in NH to help sway the vote.

Kevin
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on September 15, 2005, 10:08:15 am
I read about Lych ousting Craig Benson. Wasn't Craig Benson a friend to Libertarians and the FSP? Is lynch a friend of the FSP?
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: citizen_142002 on September 22, 2005, 05:14:16 pm
A correction to post #2, NH has no minimum concealed carry age. I personally know a 17 year old license holder.
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on September 24, 2005, 09:38:33 pm
That is  good too. I think sixteen of seventeen CAN be a responsible age to carry. That should be left up to the parents to determined weather or not their child is responsible enough. I would however believe that in this generation, few parents would.
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: citizen_142002 on September 25, 2005, 07:08:07 pm
There is no parental consent requirement. Like it or not.

Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on September 25, 2005, 07:30:24 pm
I don't neccesarily disagree.

Anywho, here is an example of what I was talking about, check out this thread that I posetd.

http://forum.freestateproject.org//index.php?topic=10922.0
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: MaineShark on September 25, 2005, 07:48:49 pm
There is no parental consent requirement. Like it or not.

Almost correct.  Last I checked, minors were required to have parental consent to own firearms.  So, while a minor could obtain a permit without parental consent, it would be purely an academic matter without it.

Joe
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on September 25, 2005, 08:39:08 pm
Bingo. Permit without consent doesn't bother me.

But it should still be up to parents weather or not their son or daughter can own a firearm. When I was sixteen I kept an SKS under my bed and I never did harm to anyone.
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: Tracy Saboe on September 30, 2005, 10:09:52 pm
That is  good too. I think sixteen of seventeen CAN be a responsible age to carry. That should be left up to the parents to determined weather or not their child is responsible enough. I would however believe that in this generation, few parents would.

It used to be a right of passage for a 12-year-old boy to carry his gun with him to school.

Tracy
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: artienewport on October 01, 2005, 07:52:34 am
We HAVE to get Absolute firearms freedom in New Hampshire. Absolute.

How many statists do you think you can convert to freedom?
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: MaineShark on October 01, 2005, 10:08:19 am
How many statists do you think you can convert to freedom?

I honestly don't care if they are "converted to freedom."  They don't have to care one whit about my rights, so long as they don't infringe upon them.

Joe
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: artienewport on October 01, 2005, 12:34:20 pm
They don't have to care one whit about my rights, so long as they don't infringe upon them.

But "they" already don't care, are the majority, and...as you might have noticed...are already infringing on them.

I mean, the amount of people against MEDICAL marijuana alone is staggering. You think open carry would survive in NH if it was put up to a vote?
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: MaineShark on October 01, 2005, 01:30:33 pm
They don't have to care one whit about my rights, so long as they don't infringe upon them.
But "they" already don't care, are the majority, and...as you might have noticed...are already infringing on them.

It's remarkably hard to oppress armed people...

You think open carry would survive in NH if it was put up to a vote?

Yes.  Even if they could manage a majority, and got a law on the books, so many people would openly defy the law that it would be a disaster for the state.  Then all the other laws would come into question.  No state can survive for very long if its laws are ignored by the people.

Joe
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: artienewport on October 01, 2005, 01:51:42 pm
It's remarkably hard to oppress armed people...

Aren't we armed now? Aren't we opressed now?!

Quote
Even if they could manage a majority, and got a law on the books, so many people would openly defy the law that it would be a disaster for the state.

Really? I don't remember ever seeing anyone open carry in the dozens of times I've been in NH. In fact, all I've heard about it is people getting detained/arrested for doing so. Could you imagine if it actually WAS against the law?
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: MaineShark on October 01, 2005, 02:04:58 pm
It's remarkably hard to oppress armed people...
Aren't we armed now?

No, not really.  You're no more armed because you own a gun than you are a musician because you own a guitar.

Really? I don't remember ever seeing anyone open carry in the dozens of times I've been in NH.

And where, precisely, were you in NH?

For one thing, you certainly didn't attend PorcFest, as quite the large number of people were carrying openly.

In fact, all I've heard about it is people getting detained/arrested for doing so. Could you imagine if it actually WAS against the law?

If a law like that was actually passed, more people would openly carry, as a form of protest.  You really don't have much experience with NH, do you?  "Live free or die" is not just a license plate slogan... a large percentage of the people take it very seriously.

Joe
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or rtaher, a lcak there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: artienewport on October 01, 2005, 02:17:11 pm
No, not really.  You're no more armed because you own a gun than you are a musician because you own a guitar.

Ok...

Quote
And where, precisely, were you in NH?

I've been all over the state. On weekdays, weekends, holidays, summer, fall, winter, spring. Never saw a single soul open carry. Sorry?

Quote
For one thing, you certainly didn't attend PorcFest, as quite the large number of people were carrying openly.

I have no desire to hang out with a group of people who mostly consist of those who only want SOME liberty.

Quote
If a law like that was actually passed, more people would openly carry, as a form of protest.  You really don't have much experience with NH, do you?  "Live free or die" is not just a license plate slogan... a large percentage of the people take it very seriously.

Do people protest against the what, 8% prepared food tax by not eating out? Must have killed the restaurant business in NH. No? Where are all the insurgents? Heh. ;-)
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: MaineShark on October 01, 2005, 02:51:32 pm
Quote
And where, precisely, were you in NH?
I've been all over the state. On weekdays, weekends, holidays, summer, fall, winter, spring. Never saw a single soul open carry. Sorry?

That’s not very precise.

Try again.

About the only places you could really avoid occasionally seeing people carrying is in the big cities.

And also remember that most people who carry, carry concealed.  It’s not like $10 license fee is going to stop them from getting the concealed carry license.

Quote
For one thing, you certainly didn't attend PorcFest, as quite the large number of people were carrying openly.
I have no desire to hang out with a group of people who mostly consist of those who only want SOME liberty.

Well, I’m even more certain that you didn’t attend PorcFest, then, as there was quite a contingent of anarchists.

Quote
If a law like that was actually passed, more people would openly carry, as a form of protest.  You really don't have much experience with NH, do you?  "Live free or die" is not just a license plate slogan... a large percentage of the people take it very seriously.
Do people protest against the what, 8% prepared food tax by not eating out? Must have killed the restaurant business in NH. No? Where are all the insurgents? Heh. ;-)

Charging a small tax on prepared food is not an equivalent infringement to telling people that they can’t carry guns.  There’s such a thing as “picking your battles,” you know...

Joe
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on October 01, 2005, 03:04:09 pm
Why can't the statist just let us have New Hampshire? We would be out of their way then...
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: artienewport on October 01, 2005, 06:01:53 pm
About the only places you could really avoid occasionally seeing people carrying is in the big cities.

What makes you think I've spent my time in big cities in NH?

I've spent more time in places where you might expect people to be taking advantage of their freedom to open carry. Nary seen one yet.


Quote
And also remember that most people who carry, carry concealed.  It’s not like $10 license fee is going to stop them from getting the concealed carry license.

I can carry concealed in a lot of states. Your point?

Quote
There’s such a thing as “picking your battles,” you know...

What do you think of Carl Drega?
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on October 01, 2005, 08:13:36 pm
I am with MaineShark: Don't tread on me.

You don't have to like my rights, but you sure as hell ain't gonna trample on 'em jes cuz you got some kinda screwy perception of 'em.

What does "Put 'em down" mean?

Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: MaineShark on October 01, 2005, 09:36:24 pm
About the only places you could really avoid occasionally seeing people carrying is in the big cities.
What makes you think I've spent my time in big cities in NH?

Because you claim to never have seen anyone carrying openly, and it's a regular occurance.

I've spent more time in places where you might expect people to be taking advantage of their freedom to open carry. Nary seen one yet.

Quite frankly, that either means you are unobservant, haven't actually been where you say you've been, and as often, or you experienced something so far out of the ordinary on so many occasions that you clearly need to start picking lottery numbers, because with luck like that, you're bound to win.

Quote
And also remember that most people who carry, carry concealed.  It’s not like $10 license fee is going to stop them from getting the concealed carry license.
I can carry concealed in a lot of states. Your point?

My point is exactly what I said it was: that most people carry concealed, rather than openly.  That doesn't mean that they will not carry openly, if someone tries to ban open carry.  Anyone tries a stunt like that, and open carry will suddenly be immensely popular.

Quote
There’s such a thing as “picking your battles,” you know...
What do you think of Carl Drega?

Didn't really achieve much meaningful change, now did he?

Joe
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on October 02, 2005, 09:14:00 pm
Ah I see now.

As for Open Carry, I have come up with an idea. Kentucky has more friendly gun-laws (they are even premepted) however, I don't commonly see people open carry.

Here a few areasons I have been given as to why people do not open carry:

#1) Police Harrasment
#2) They are afraid if people KNOW they have a gun, they will try to break in and steal it. Such things have occured, even in nice neighborhoods. However many would be theifs have been shot in their attempts...
#3) I was once advised not to open carry in my place of work because if someone tried to rob my store, I would be the first o get shot.


So: I was considering holding an event.

The even would be called "Open Carry Day: An acknowledgement of rights", at this event pamphlets concerning Open Carry, Firearms Saftey and common Myths about firearms and firearms ownerships would be avaialble. Demonstrations and possibly even a shooting contest!

One T-Shirt I am working on is an "OpenCarry.org" T-shirt, any advice for slogans would be nice.

Also: Anyone in kentucky wishing to assist in organizing this event would be welcome.

Some place with a shooting range would be nice.

I will probably start a new thread later when I have more input.
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: MaineShark on October 02, 2005, 09:28:20 pm
#2) They are afraid if people KNOW they have a gun, they will try to break in and steal it. Such things have occured, even in nice neighborhoods. However many would be theifs have been shot in their attempts...

'Round here, you just assume that everyone has a gun.

#3) I was once advised not to open carry in my place of work because if someone tried to rob my store, I would be the first o get shot.

Uh, someone would have to be pretty determined to rob that particular store.  In most cases, a robber would just move on to easier pickin's, if he saw someone carrying.

So: I was considering holding an event.

The even would be called "Open Carry Day: An acknowledgement of rights", at this event pamphlets concerning Open Carry, Firearms Saftey and common Myths about firearms and firearms ownerships would be avaialble. Demonstrations and possibly even a shooting contest!

One T-Shirt I am working on is an "OpenCarry.org" T-shirt, any advice for slogans would be nice.

Also: Anyone in kentucky wishing to assist in organizing this event would be welcome.

Some place with a shooting range would be nice.

I will probably start a new thread later when I have more input.

That even already exists.  We call it "PorcFest" :)

Joe
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on October 03, 2005, 07:36:20 am
I am gonna have to check out PorcFEST... sigh we have Freedom Fest down here... but it has very little to do with freedom and more to do with the buying and selling of Cotton Candy and Firewroks...

As for the three reasons above for not Open Carrying, these are reasons I have been given by people who say they do not open carry... I don't agree with any of them.


Hmmm, what about an "Open Carry Card" which can be handed to the police when the hassle you for open carrying?

Open Carry Card

Dear Officer

You may not be aware but Peacable Open Carry: Or the carrying of a firearm in plain sight, is perfectly legal in (state your county or state) I am a US Citizen who is legally permitted to own a firearm. My carrying of a firearm is in NO WAY a statement of intent to do harm to persons or property but rather a statement to those that would do harm to me.
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on October 03, 2005, 07:56:38 am
Hmmm, this may be of no use...however. I direct you to 18 USC 241.

§ 241. Conspiracy against rights
Release date: 2005-08-03

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Read that carefully...

"If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same"


The US Patriot ACT may be illegal soley upon these grounds... The Bush Administration may IN DEED be guilty of a high crime...
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: SteveA on October 03, 2005, 01:38:20 pm
Hmmm, this may be of no use...however. I direct you to 18 USC 241.

§ 241. Conspiracy against rights
Release date: 2005-08-03

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Read that carefully...

"If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same"


The US Patriot ACT may be illegal soley upon these grounds... The Bush Administration may IN DEED be guilty of a high crime...

Notice this doesn't solely apply to citizens either.

Thank you for posting this.
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on October 03, 2005, 03:59:29 pm
It applies to anyone within a State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District: Notice POSSESSION, such an example would be Guantanamo Bay. The US Patriot Act gives the president power to hold suspects wihtout charging them: An act expressly forbidden by the Bill of Rights. (Quck and Speedy Trial) THAT is a right. Which means the president and anyone who voted for the US Patriot Act has conspired to violate the rights of those entitled to them.
Title: Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
Post by: lordpoee on October 04, 2005, 11:19:57 am
I have been studying the US Constitution and a myriad of supreme court rulings, How in ANY judges right mind could the POSSIBLY EVEN CONSIDER making a rulling in the affirmitve for Gun Band, the Brady Bill or anything similiar?

The 2nd ammendment is VERY specific!

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

To my understanding it should be read like this.

"Since the people may need a militia (a bunch of people, who are not in the state or fedreal military) they have the right to keep guns and to carry guns and practice their aim, and congress had best not make a single law concerning the ownership of guns or the formation of militias, since one day the people may need to defend it against foreighn invaders or it's very own government, being as we the founders had to fight our own government, which outlawed the ownership of guns or passed laws on who and who couldn't own em, and whhat type. Just so we could live free from tyranny."


Congress has ignored THIS ammendment

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


In other words: When considering the meaning of the constitution: Leave the people's rights alone!


Many people should remember WHY the bills of rights was added to The Constitution. The founding fathers felt and many delegates felt that the constitution as it was written would open the way for tyranny by the central government. Many of our forefathers said they would not adopt the Constitution UNLESS the bill of rights was added! So what is more important, the bill of rights or the constitution... I would say the Bill of Rights because without it we would have NEVER even got off the ground floor as a nation.

The Bill of Rights is the power of the people and the FedGov keeps INFRINGING and MAKING LAWS CONCENING those rights.

According to Dictionary.com

in·fringe ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (n-frnj)
v. in·fringed, in·fring·ing, in·fring·es
v. tr.

   1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent.
   2. Obsolete. To defeat; invalidate.

Is the FedGov trying to make YOUR rights obsolete? To Defeat them? To invalidate them?

Damn Skippy.