Yesterday, several Republican State Representatives coined an OP-ED in the Concord Monitor claiming they will continue to practice their right to protect themselves by carrying concealed firearms at the state house, despite a draconian ban by newly empowered Democrats. From the Monitor:
There are times when the acts of a majority are so repugnant to the dignity of the individual that the act itself is cast asunder. The act removes itself from the realm of legitimate government authority and is to be ignored, if not openly held in disdain…
We view Rule 63 as illegitimate. We view Rule 63 as having the perverse effect of increasing the risk to everyone in the House gallery and chambers.
To make this point of view more approachable for our progressive friends, we are morally obligated to “resist.”
Last week the New Hampshire House of Representatives held their first session of the new year with Democrats now in control. The first order of business? Taking away a woman’s right to choose to practice her fundamental human right to self-defense.
After years of both State Representatives and the general public having the ability to freely practice their 2nd Amendment right in the state house and carry a firearm concealed, without issue, Democrats decided they had to change the rules so that no one, other than law enforcement, will be allowed to carry a firearm in certain spaces at the state house. The language from the rule [emphasis added]:
Deadly weapons; electronic devices; cameras. No person, including members of the House, except law enforcement officers while actively engaged in carrying out their duties as such, shall carry or have in possession any deadly weapon as defined in RSA 625:11, V while in the House Chamber, anterooms, cloakrooms, or House gallery. Any person in violation of this rule shall be subject to ejection from any such premises on the order of the Speaker and disciplinary action or arrest or both by action of the House. Nothing in this rule shall indicate that the security officer appointed by the House under Rule 61 has the right to stop and search a member of the House on the premises of the House. With the exception of devices for the hearing impaired, no member shall operate audible electronic transmitting and/or receiving devices nor shall any member operate a video camera or a camera utilizing flash bulbs on the floor of the House, while the House is in session.
The first order of business for Democrats was to violate their Oath of Office to uphold the New Hampshire Constitution all while taking a woman’s right to choose away from her. These are the people who claim to be for women’s rights yet are the first to trample all over actual women’s rights.
Of course, this is only a rule. This is not an enforceable rule (and will likely end up in a lawsuit) and certainly isn’t an arrestable offense because it is not an actual LAW. Democrat lawmakers don’t seem to grasp the difference.
If this is foreshadowing of what is to come from newly empowered Democrats in the New Hampshire State House, be prepared to see more women’s rights taken away, along with the rest of the citizens of the state. New Hampshire Democrats would rather women be defenseless victims than dare to protect themselves.
