HB334 filed 4/10/2021

[jhwentworth 302]

Bill Title: Relative to prohibitions on carrying a loaded firearm on an OHRV or snowmobile.

https://legiscan.com/NH/text/HB334/id/2232774

[PolarisCobra 126]

I am not a gun owner (have no problem with those who are), just never felt the need for myself. 

If I was, I don't think I would carry while on my sled. I would be concerned about somehow losing it (maybe not an issue, again, I have no experience), or falling off the sled and onto the thing, and hurting myself. I guess I don't see the need really, not sure I see what threat there would be. Again - just my opinion, as someone who doesn't own a firearm.

 

Why would they bother with a law like this? Is there some reason that they think carrying is more dangerous on a OHRV than in other situations?

[jhwentworth 302]

2 hours ago, PolarisCobra said:

I am not a gun owner (have no problem with those who are), just never felt the need for myself. 

If I was, I don't think I would carry while on my sled. I would be concerned about somehow losing it (maybe not an issue, again, I have no experience), or falling off the sled and onto the thing, and hurting myself. I guess I don't see the need really, not sure I see what threat there would be. Again - just my opinion, as someone who doesn't own a firearm.

 

Why would they bother with a law like this? Is there some reason that they think carrying is more dangerous on a OHRV than in other situations?

The law being amended prohibits any loaded firearm on an OHRV or sled, or in a trailer behind the sled or OHRV. The change would allow a loaded handgun. The purpo0se of the original law was to discourage people from shooting game animals while operating a sled or OHRV. It appears that a loaded rifle or shotgun would still be prohibited. 

[PolarisCobra 126]

Ahh - I misunderstood. I thought they were considering preventing people from carrying, not allowing it. 

I can see the point about shooting game while riding, especially on wheelers during hunting season. 

[John Mercier 36]

If I remember correctly, prior to the change on the concealed carry permit, operators with a permit could have a loaded handgun.

It caused a stir among some landowners.

 

 

[HotRodLincoln 0]

Given the number of trail rage incidents this might lead to bold confrontations.

[jhwentworth 302]

4 hours ago, HotRodLincoln said:

Given the number of trail rage incidents this might lead to bold confrontations.

Possible, but I believe a bigger concern is that the idea that sled riders might be armed with loaded handguns might push on-the-fence landowners in the southern half of the state to close trails. I understand that gun owners have rights, but sleds and OHRVs are mostly operated on private property, and the owner's property rights trump the gun owners rights. We really don't need any more trail closures in southern NH.  I wasn't able to find comments on the bill by F&G or NHSA.

[John Mercier 36]

When it came up before the decision on the rifles was controversial.

Anti-OHRV voices were arguing that OHRV scared away wildlife. They kept trying to argue it after studies had proven otherwise; and it was determined that they had other motives based on the groups they belonged to.

But the studies did show that wildlife was less afraid of OHRV because predation was not something that had become associated with the sound/smell of OHRV. Hunting from the OHRV over time would change that... so the Association support the ban on the loaded rifles, while still supporting the unloaded rifles that hunters would carry into remote spots on an ATV/SxS.

The fact that a recreational rider could open carry an unloaded handgun, or with a permit to carry a loaded open/concealed handgun caused the stir among a few landowners that pay attention to the changes. All those landowners were not in the southern part of the State.

The change just signifies that a permit no longer exists, so the requirement can no longer exist for a permit to carry open/concealed. It will most likely stir the same landowners, if they still currently allow for trail access on their property... something I could not state for certain. But not because the situation has changed, but only that it is being brought into the light once again.

For the most part, landowners are more concerned with the outright behavior of the community toward respect for their land... respect in general.

 

 

[jhwentworth 302]

15 hours ago, John Mercier said:

The change just signifies that a permit no longer exists,

The concealed carry handgun permits still exist, but are optional. People who travel through other states might want a permit for reasons of reciprocity between states.

Trails in the southern part of the state often are routed close to residences, I have a trail that crosses my driveway, so these landowners might be more sensitive  to the issue than a corporate landowner that controls large tracts of mostly uninhabited acres of woodlands. I suspect most small landowners aren't aware of this change. Let's hope there are no "issues" involving an armed sled or ATV rider or those landowners might become very aware. Hunters in my area  have faced the closure of many hunting areas, I hope we don't follow them.

Just hope for the best...

[John Mercier 36]

Corporate owners are seeing a lot more problems with social issues than private.

Private landowners are responsive to direct confrontations, while corporate suffer from heavy indirect exposure.

 

[snorander 214]

Concealed Carry permits, still Exist, I still get one.

[John Mercier 36]

13 hours ago, Veiveismart said:

I don't know what effect this bill will have, can anyone answer me?

The current requirement in the statutes for snowmobile/OHRV requires an operator to have a CC permit for a loaded firearm in their possession.

It stirs up landowners worried about confrontation between various groups/individuals.

 

The CC permits exist, but are not required outside of the specific statutes. The change removes the requirement for the CC permit for operators/passengers.

 

[jhwentworth 302]

Status of HB334

The bill was reported out of Senate committee with an "ought to pass with amendments".

It seems the Senate used this bill to change a couple other gun-related regulations as well as changing the House version.

https://legiscan.com/NH/text/HB334/2021

Passed the House 

 

2021-05-25 / Engross
Committee Report: Ought to Pass, 05/27/2021; Senate Calendar 25A

Engrossed Bill
A legislative proposal that has been prepared in a final form for its submission to a vote of the lawmaking body after it has undergone discussion and been approved by the appropriate committees.

Edited July 12, 2021 by jhwentworth

[jhwentworth 302]

HB 334 is waiting for the governor's signature.

[jhwentworth 302]

[jhwentworth 302]

Nashua Telegraph

CONCORD – House Democrats criticized Gov. Chris Sununu for signing “without usual fanfare” on Friday HB 1636, a bill that allows carrying loaded pistols and revolvers on OHRVs and snowmobiles in New Hampshire. In a statement Monday, Sununu said “New Hampshire’s laws are well-crafted and fit our culture of responsible gun ownership and individual freedom.

 

HB1636 is the former HB334 without the firearms background checks portion.

Now we get to see what impact, if any, this has on trail closures.

[ICG 7]

It should pass to parallel the States existing statutes and the Second Amendment.

After the Pandemic and all the social strife, this is trivial.  Yet,  the left may take  notice . . . .

[John Mercier 36]

1 hour ago, ICG said:

It should pass to parallel the States existing statutes and the Second Amendment.

After the Pandemic and all the social strife, this is trivial.  Yet,  the left may take  notice . . . .

Why you don't believe in property rights? And you wonder why we shut down the trails on our land?

 

[ICG 7]

To the contrary, I believe in due process!

And the United States Constitution. 

And the Constitution allows public taking of property through Eminent Domain for public and business use...

WITH Due Process for review and consideration for property.

With John's view anyone can deny individuals constitutional rights and due process.

Sounds a little like National Socialism in Germany - 1936.  

[John Mercier 36]

Actually... It doesn't

And State Constitution and Law forbids it.

 

 

[jhwentworth 302]

16 hours ago, ICG said:

 

Sounds a little like National Socialism in Germany - 1936.  

Sorry ICG, but you've been found in violation of Goodwin's Law.

Godwin’s Law of Nazi analogies: "whoever made the comparison loses whatever debate is in progress."

Until the State of NH buys, leases, or negotiates a ROW, for all the private property included in our 7,000 miles of trails, those private property owners have the ability to control who enters their property. for any reason or no reason.

My concern is not the meaning of the Second Amendment, which has changed considerably over the years, but the possible closure of trails because of landowner concerns over loaded handguns on their private property. Trail reroutes and closures are becoming more common in my area, we don't need another reason for landowners to close a trail.

BTW: Does anybody know what the NHSA position was on this bill?