Dear Commissioners,
Thank you for granting my request to speak with you about my concerns regarding "Constitutional Carry" (2017 SB 12) and the prosecution of gun crimes.
I have never taken much interest in gun law. My public policy interests lie in advocacy for people with disabilities and for a clean energy economy. I have never testified against any gun legislation and don't belong to any advocacy organizations for or against guns. That may change in the future.
Frankly, if people are going to carry guns in public, I would rather that they are concealed. I'll admit that "open carry" intimidates me and sends a chill down my spine. I expect to see weapons in the hands of the military or law enforcement; not my neighbors. The sight of a person openly carrying a gun triggers alarms for me. I suspect that people carrying guns in full sight (especially long guns) know the reaction of fear and anxiety they cause in others.
Despite not liking guns, I'm a veteran of the USAF and the NH Air National Guard. The most lethal weapon I ever handled in the defense of my country was a soldering iron as an electronic technician on KC-135 tankers. Does the fact that I wasn't trained to shoot make me less of a veteran or patriot?
I don't like guns, but as long as I don't have to see them and the gun owners are responsible, I agree that it's a basic right to own and carry them. I never thought much about people carrying concealed weapons prior to the passage of "Constitutional Carry." I knew that before Constitutional Carry, people who carried concealed weapons were screened by local police chiefs or select boards and that gave me some sense of security. Now that this protection has been undone, I feel more must be done on the side of deterrence when a gun owner does not act responsibly. It is my hope that the same people who advocated so strongly for Constitutional Carry will also advocate for stronger penalties for irresponsible gun use.
"Gun owners, of course, must always act responsibly -- but then lawful gun owners tend to act lawfully in the first place." ~Michael Walsh
And, in the formal record of a hearing on 1/10/17, one of the major points in favor of SB 12,
"Those who are likely to carry out a crime are not likely to be dissuaded by a
misdemeanor punishment" ~Senator Bradley
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/HearingReport.aspx?id=62&sy=2017
Recently there was an instance of alleged criminal threatening with a handgun in Rindge, NH. The Cheshire County Attorney was unwilling to prosecute the case as criminal threatening. The reason given was that the case was "weak." Wouldn't you think that if the Town Prosecutor thought it should be a criminal threatening charge, the County Prosecutor would trust his judgement?
Since the accused denied the charge and was represented by a high powered NRA attorney, our County Prosecutor wanted to "just let it go." Ultimately, the Town Prosecutor was allowed to proceed with a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge.
I think the fact that the person accused of criminal threatening admitted to being engaged in a road rage incident and, while denying that he pointed a loaded weapon at 3 young people in a vehicle, claimed he'd pointed a black gloved hand at them, provides strong evidence of guilt. (Police recovered a loaded gun from his vehicle.)
Isn't it true that even if a person is only using a fake gun in a robbery, it's still considered felony armed robbery? Why are there greater penalties for threatening to take money from a bank than for intimidating people? If the person being robbed thinks it's a gun, the criminal is prosecuted for that crime.
"Stand your ground" law in New Hampshire would also indicate that if the young people in the other car were armed, they would be legally justified if they shot the person who they thought was pointing a gun at them while they were stuck at a light. What if they had panicked and pulled out into oncoming traffic endangering other lives? The person accused of brandishing the weapon is also a member of a citizen's militia group and I'm certain is well acquainted with gun law.
In the end, the accused plead no contest to misdemeanor disorderly conduct and paid a fine. He still gets to carry a gun. He wasn't assigned to any anger management or gun safety training.
I can understand why the parents of the young victims may not have been enthusiastic about hiring their own attorney or filing a lawsuit. Who wants to spend time and money in court and possibly become the target of NRA activists or the local militia?
Most of the statements in favor of SB 12 argued that the existing system of issuing permits caused some people to feel that they were unlawfully denied a permit by local authorities and that challenging such denials was expensive. Penny Dean, an attorney practicing in ME, NH, and DC stated,
"Senator Gannon asked how much it costs on average to challenge a denial.
In general between $10,000 and $50,000 to do it correctly, but it is not just the money, as some people are concerned about losing their jobs."
It seems to me that SB 12 has shifted the burden of disarming irresponsible gun owners from fellow gun owners and local law enforcement to the unsuspecting general public.
What are we to do?
I contend that if the State chooses to take away local control and the discretion of local authorities, it must find a remedy for situations in which guns wind up in the hands of the wrong people. As Senator Bradley noted, "Those who are likely to carry out a crime are not likely to be dissuaded by a
misdemeanor punishment." Perhaps criminal threatening with a gun should be an automatic felony charge?
I am not satisfied that justice was done nor that the rights of the people of Cheshire County were adequately represented.
I'm here today to ask you to engage and to act on behalf of the unarmed citizens of Cheshire County. Failing that, I'm asking for your advice on how to proceed so that NH doesn't become the "Wild West," where everyone must arm themselves for protection because law enforcement fails to take gun crime seriously.
Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment