Yesterday the Women’s Defense League of New Hampshire (The League) released poll results that clearly show Granite Staters are not happy with the current pistol license law. Susan Olsen, Legislative Director for The League spoke at a press conference in the Legislative Office Building yesterday and explained the original intent of the law – discrimination. Former State Representative Emily Sandblade spoke about the findings in the poll and explained the methodology.
They interviewed 833 registered voters by phone and included Democrats, Republicans and those who are Undeclared (often referred to as Independents). The results are pretty remarkable compared to what gun control groups and Democrats often claim. The biggest question in the poll was regarding the state-sanctioned discrimination that allowed in the pistol license law:
The state law governing concealed carry permits was set up to bar union member Irish and Italian immigrants and their families from possessing a concealed firearm. The language that makes this kind of discrimination possible is still in place. Do you support or oppose the ability of local police to make decisions about issuing permits based on their judgment of suitability – even when such decisions can be based on political, union membership, gender, or racial bias?
This is important information because most people simply think the pistol license laws were put into place for safety reason. That is a lie. Every pistol license or permit law in the United States, including New Hampshire, was put into place so the state could legally discriminate against those applying for a pistol license. In New Hampshire, people who are legally able to purchase and possess firearms can openly carry a firearm without permission but they cannot carry concealed unless their chief of police feels they should be allowed to. From The League:
In 1911, New York enacted the Sullivan Law, which was to become the model for restricting the ownership and carrying of handguns. The law outlawed handgun ownership without a police permit and was modeled after European firearms laws that were considered to be successful in dealing with political dissidents, anarchists, and labor agitators.
New Hampshire’s law was written in 1923 after a huge 9 month long union strike which leads one to believe that not only was the law enacted based on discrimination against immigrants but those who dared to strike for so many months. Unfortunately the law continues to allow police chiefs or selectman to discriminate against law-abiding citizens who are legally able to own a firearm.
Another question that shows pretty amazing results was the following:
Do you support or oppose the right of a person to defend herself with a firearm in a dangerous situation?
That’s a pretty huge number who support citizens defending themselves with a firearm. It just goes to show that New Hampshire indeed is a pro-2nd Amendment state. Something Democrats should remember since they consistently vote for gun control and against the 2nd Amendment yet a majority of their own constituency don’t agree with their votes.
Finally, another interesting question was asked about out-of-state money pushing gun control in New Hampshire:
Most of the money that is financing the effort in New Hampshire to defeat the repeal of the concealed carry license comes from a few big contributors from outside the state. Do you agree or disagree that a few wealthy out-of-state people should be able to influence New Hampshire state law?
This clearly refers to groups like Moms Demand who are completely funded by out-of-state gun control extremist Michael Bloomberg. Moms Demand has never been a grassroots organization and they have little support in the state but still claim they aren’t astroturfing for Bloomberg despite being outed a while ago.
Senate Bill 116 aka Constitutional Carry is expected to hit Governor Hassan’s desk within the next week or so. The bill would reform the pistol license law by making it optional. Hassan has already claimed she will veto it based on support from Moms Demand. That’s a couple of strikes against Hassan – catering to out-of-state money and continuing to allow state-sanctioned discrimination – two things that the majority of voters, from all affiliations, do not agree with based on the latest poll.
Watch the video here:
Cross posted from Examiner