The SB 244 And NICS Problem - Granite Grok

The SB 244 And NICS Problem

“If I were a magician, I’d hand out broken compasses. It’s all about misdirection.?”  —Jarod Kintz

Senator David Watters
Senator David Watters

The Hearing on Senate Bill 244, “[R]equiring the names of certain persons to be reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System Index,” came to hearing Tuesday before Senate Judiciary.

The hearing process puzzled me. As is the custom, the Bill’s sponsors came and testified (and their testimony hardly reflected any model of brevity) Then came Pro-Gun New Hampshire in support of the Bill. Evan Nappen is an attorney who is thoughtful, articulate and I am certain he has gun owners interests at heart. But lets face it, (and I am reasonably certain he would agree) any petition filed in any court in New Hampshire is going to take a great deal of time and money. Evan said the cost to avail oneself of this would be around $1,000. I am skeptical and do not think so. But I will elaborate more on that later in this post.

The hearing brought out a great many people, not all of which could fit into the room. Thus, some people were denied entry to this public hearing. we did not hear any opposition to this bill for at least one hour. In sum total, the hearing took shape in the form of building on the notion that the bill has widespread support. It does not.

The first twenty lines of the bill create a new specific mandate to prohibit persons who have been adjudicated not mentally competent to use, own or otherwise possess firearms. The remainder of the bill (51 lines) is devoted to outlining the process of how one seeks to have his or her name removed from the prohibited persons list.

I have heard and seen it uttered that this bill is in response to the Newtown Massacre, Jared Loughner shooting Representative Gabrielle Giffords, and the Colorado Movie Theater shooter. If that is the case, this is a very poor response because this law does not deal with those particular challenges. None of those individuals had been adjudicated as mentally diminished. Thus, this bill, even if passed would not stop a similar massacre like this from happening in the Granite State.

There have been considerable lies and false statements put forth regarding this bill. Senator David Watters and Representative Jeff Goley, the bills sponsors testified they had contact with the NRA and that the NRA supports the bill. Yet, nobody from the NRA showed up to support the bill, nor has any NRA-ILA person I’ve spoken to ever heard of David Watters or Jeff Goley.

This brings to mind a certain Nashua Alderman who sought to pass an ordinance banning the processing and hanging of wild game in residential areas.  I had a telephone conversation with this particular Alderman in an effort to explain why the ordinance was wrong. The following day in the Nashua Telegraph it was reported that the New Hampshire Wildlife Federation supports the measure, with my name affixed to it. So there is that. Politicians lie.

Aside from what others have said about the bill, I contend this bill is bad for different reasons. If people choose to seek the help, assistance or advice of a counselor or therapist, that comes into the mix. There are those who said that is not the case, but its right in the bill. The bottom of page 2 and top of Page 3 states,

“[.]…the name and address of any mental health provider who has been providing treatment to the petitioner since discharge, a signed release of information form allowing mental health providers to disclose reports or similar information and express opinions relevant to the issue of the likelihood that the petitioner will misuse firearms or otherwise act in a manner dangerous to public safety; a signed release of information form allowing the court-appointed guardian to disclose reports or similar information and express opinions relevant to the issue…”

So, for whatever reason, a person has a past adjudication, (rightly or wrongly) and seeks to avail themselves of the adjudication so they can purchase a firearm for deer hunting or skeet shooting or other lawful purpose. Under this scheme, the petition would be deemed not complete if the release authorization is not signed. If a person signed it, yet failed to disclose the hypnotist they sought to quit smoking, or the marriage counselor they asked to help improve their marriage or relationship, the petition may likely be dismissed. Inversely, Once the information is in, it is in to be used as the court sees fit.

Lastly, we as citizens should genuinely worry about any process that put in place based on 20 sentences in law, but 51 sentences to undo it.  Attorney Nappen asserted at the hearing the cost to avail ones’ self to be about $1,000.  To file any petition in the Superior Court, Petition to annul criminal record is $125, while a Civil Writ is $175. Service costs range from $30-50, certified copies of ones’ criminal record is roughly $25. If one us not successful at the circuit level, there is a whole other layer of fees to be had to have the decision reviewed de Novo.

Finally, as I mentioned previously, this law had it been adopted in the locations where the massacres took place, would have been no assistance because none of the shooters had ever been adjudicated.  Despite mandatory reporting laws, those who had the ability to address prior threats failed to do so.

The bill finally removed accountability for errant reporting, unless it arose out of willful misconduct or criminal misconduct. An amended bill was disseminated removing that provision, but not all received a copy of it and it has not been published anywhere I can find.

Despite what some might say, I would challenge folks to read the bill carefully. There are some that will say, “I don’t think you understand the bill,” or, “The bill does not contemplate that,” when the plain language is there. We call that “misdirection.”

>