Whenever Republicans hold the majority in the lower chamber of the legislature, they ensure the House Rules allow for concealed carry of a firearm. Democrats repeal the rule and prohibit firearms everywhere they can, when in charge. And they try to get them banned when they are not in charge.
We’ve had armed Reps on the House Floor and attended chambers and areas for years, over the years, here and there, and no one has shot or killed anyone, even if someone thought they deserved it. A fact that continues to be lost on Democrats, who think everyone is as irresponsible and driven by emotion as they are.
The Second Amendment does not brook any restriction. Still, even if you can’t swallow that, it is a right to self-defense, not arbitrary acts of murder – which are already illegal. You know how Democrats feel about making laws to prevent people from doing things (like enjoying life in peace). Well, we have them to dissuade killing, and disarming people doesn’t stop killers from trying.
Yesterday was Convening Day in the New Hampshire House. Newly elected Reps show up “for work” for some procedural stuff, a bit of pomp, and to vote on proposed rule changes. There are always a few, but this year, one of them got a lot of headlines. Tabling bills in committee without a hearing. Republican and Democrat reps alike were buried in emails and comments in opposition. It was tabled as predicted. And, as is the custom, a Democrat proposed banning firearms in the House chamber (anterooms, gallery, and cloakroom).
Democrats, as a cult, truly know very little about firearms. A few years back, one of my town’s reps dropped her cell phone (in its leather cover and case) during session, and the Democrat seated next to her asked if it was her gun.
Rule 64 covers deadly weapons, electronic devices, and cameras (interesting grouping and how right it is).
The proposed restriction on concealed carry was voted down 154Y-227N and a different proposed change to the same rule passed. If you displayed your “deadly weapon” prior to this amendment, you would violate the rule and could be removed. The change, which passed 216Y-164N, would not be considered a violation of Rule 64 if the “display” was unintentional.
You carry at three, four, nine, or ten o’clock, and your suit coat covers the weapon, but you need to grab a wallet from a back pocket (or perhaps it’s just a wardrobe malfunction) and inadvertently expose you exercising your right to self-defense. Prior to the 2025-2026 session, you’d be a rule breaker, which required other carry locations to prevent that. It is no longer an issue, though I suspect armed reps will continue to carry as concealed or inconspicuous as can be managed.
That is, after all, the point. The right is more effective when those who might work ill have no idea who is armed but suspect that someone likely is.
The NH House remains a Gun Zone. Huzzah!
For a complete rundown of all the Rule change results, look here.
