One of the first things Democrats do when they take control of the New Hampshire legislature is to disarm House representatives. They do it because they can. A lesson voters have failed to learn because it applies to everything Democrats do.
At the first opportunity, they deny you natural rights and create rights which the government defines and controls. So, when the House Democrats banned firearms in the New Hampshire House chamber, Rep. John Burt challenged it.
Where does the state constitution allow any temporary majority to deny individuals the natural-born right to self-defense? Or, ignoring that, the legally permissible right as outlined in state law to legally carry a firearm openly or concealed? It doesn’t, but a judge has tossed out the challenge, anyway.
Why?
Because the Legislature has a right to set its own rules?
But Rep. John Burt, R-Goffstown, the plaintiff in the case, said the Superior Court judge’s decision was not a surprise and he is “looking ahead to the Supreme Court.”
“They’re the only ones that can really decide this,” Burt told the Monitor on Thursday. “The lower courts do not like getting involved when it is a major constitutional case.”
And that’s where this is headed.
How will that turn out? I’m optimistic but cautious. The State Supreme Court has been unpredictable. But I’d like to think that they have the sense to realize that the place where they make the laws should be the one place, above all others, where everyone is subject to them.
That includes the ones that one party or the other may not like.
Not holding my breath.
| NHPR
