HB1454

2nd Amendment gone wild again - it overrides legitimate public safety.

Testimony Against HB 1454: Harmful Implications of Firearm Surrender Policies I oppose HB 1454, which seeks to criminalize the possession of firearms following a court order requiring their surrender. While the intention to enhance public safety may seem commendable, the implementation and oversight mechanisms associated with this bill are deeply concerning. This legislation does not adequately consider the complexities surrounding individuals involved in domestic violence cases or those facing mental health challenges. By classifying possession as a misdemeanor or felony offense, particularly under the context of domestic violence, the bill exacerbates existing inequities and can further endanger marginalized individuals who might not have adequate legal representation or supportive resources during their court proceedings. Furthermore, the oversight of such a policy carries significant risks, particularly regarding how the enforcement will occur. The vagueness surrounding how and when firearms are to be surrendered raises serious questions about the due process rights of individuals. There is also the potential for disproportionate enforcement against communities already facing systemic discrimination, leading to higher rates of criminalization for vulnerable populations. This bill shifts the focus from rehabilitation and support to punishment, often disregarding the underlying issues that lead to violence, such as socioeconomic instability and mental health crises. The risks associated with HB 1454 are not merely legal; they are human, undermining the dignity and safety of individuals and families while failing to create a truly protective environment for all.

Dear Members of the Committee, I oppose HB 1454-FN, which establishes procedures for the surrender, storage, and return of firearms after protective orders but fails to adequately protect individuals' due process rights.Protective orders can result in the temporary or permanent deprivation of a fundamental constitutional right—the right to keep and bear arms—yet this bill does not sufficiently ensure robust safeguards against abuse or error. Due process requires meaningful notice, a fair opportunity to be heard, clear standards of proof, and prompt mechanisms for challenging and returning firearms once the order expires or is lifted. Without these protections, law-abiding Granite Staters risk losing their firearms based on allegations alone, with limited recourse, potentially for extended periods.In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), the Supreme Court emphasized that firearm regulations must align with the Nation’s historical tradition. There is no historical analogue for broadly disarming individuals through civil protective orders without strong due process guarantees, especially when such orders can be issued ex parte or on lower evidentiary thresholds.New Hampshire's Constitution (Part I, Article 2-a) declares the right to keep and bear arms as natural, essential, and unalienable for defense of self, family, property, and the state. HB 1454-FN undermines this by prioritizing procedural mechanisms over substantive due process protections, inviting potential misuse and infringing on constitutional liberties.I urge you to vote against HB 1454-FN or amend it to include stronger due process requirements that truly protect the rights of the accused while addressing legitimate safety concerns. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Brady Owens

Leave federal law to the federal government. There is no reason for NH to assimilate federal laws nor assist in their enforcement.

This bill does not protect individuals due process rights !

This steps way over the line in presumption of legal "dangerousness" which causes law enforcement to assume clearance to become trigger-happy.