This will be one to watch as it is already the exception to the rule.  The last day to file LSRs for 2024 was 15 September.  

Add to it, that the Ds will likely win the two Coos special elections as they tend to get the word out for them.  That would put the Ds in control of the House when you count the Is.

Meuse is an anti 2A shitstain.  Always trying to chip away at rights.  Between him or one of his cronies, something will try to get added or the way to regain your rights will be convoluted as fuck.

The LSR isn't listed yet.  

As a separate FYI, some bill #s and details are being published already.  Some decent ones so far on the hunting front.  





CONCORD, N.H. —

State lawmakers are taking action to address loopholes in the reporting of mental health information after the fatal shooting at New Hampshire Hospital last month.

In Concord, top legislative leaders in the House approved a bipartisan request Tuesday to draft a bill that could address some of the systemic issues that may have played a role in the hospital shooting.


State Rep. Terry Roy, R-Deerfield, and Rep. David Meuse, D-Portsmouth, spoke before the committee, saying they aim to craft a narrow bill that will simply require the state to report information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System when a person has been involuntarily committed and had their right to possess firearms taken away.


https://www.wmur.com/article/new-hampshire-house-bill-gun-background-checks-125/46044035

Yep, whether the person losing his rights was afforded due process or not will be important.



I wouldn't be surprised if this comes up in the hearings.  Could be a slippery slope could be I'm paranoid, but if this medical information is shared what else can be shared.

[Art.] 2-b. [Right of Privacy.] An individual's right to live free from governmental intrusion in private or personal information is natural, essential, and inherent.
December 5, 2018

Here is the bill text:  HB 1711 (AN ACT authorizing the state to report mental health data for firearms background check purposes and providing for processes for confiscation of firearms following certain mental health-related court proceedings and for relief from mental health-related firearms disabilities. )

SPONSORS: Rep. Roy, Rock. 31; Rep. Stone, Sull. 8; Rep. Meuse, Rock. 37; Rep. Monteil, Ches. 15

snippet of criteria

159-F:2  Mental Health Reporting Authorized.

I.  In compliance with the federal NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, Public Law 110-180 and the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, Public Law 103-159, the New Hampshire judicial branch and the department of safety are authorized to report to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) records concerning persons who have been disqualified from possessing or receiving a firearm under 18 U.S.C. section 922(g)(4) because they have been:

(a)  Adjudicated as not guilty of a crime by reason of insanity;

(b)  Adjudicated as incompetent to stand trial and found by the court to be a danger to themselves or others pursuant to RSA 171-B:2, 135-E:5 or 135:17-a; or

(c)  Involuntarily committed to a mental health facility pursuant to RSA 135-C:34-54.


My question with C is who does the committing.  Looks like a judge after an examination by a psychiatrist which generally sounds reasonable assuming the petitioner isn't making everything up.  RSA 135-C  See 34-54.


Regaining rights under this bill looks like a clusterfuck that one would have to hire a lawyer for.  Also annoying that there is a set time limit for the initial hearing to revoke someone's rights, but there is no set time limit for the initial hearing to attempt to regain your rights.  Just, we'll get around to it eventually and maybe send you to a doc within 45 days after that hearing.

Don't get me wrong, crazy fucks are probably not going to get their rights back and probably shouldn't.  Just dealing with revoking and 'un-revoking' rights is a pretty darn serious thing.

Fwiw I've testified to have patients committed along with the Dr. and the judge would not. That was in liberal Massachusetts.

It's not easy.