Posted on 02/12/2014 3:49:00 PM PST by RKBA Democrat
The sponsor of a bill that would expand background checks for gun purchases said Wednesday she hopes to keep her legislation alive this session, after her bill was killed on the floor of the House today by a vote of 242-118.
“We’re not giving up,” said Rep. Elaine Andrews-Ahearn, D-Hampton Falls, Wednesday afternoon.
She said by the end of the week, she plans to plan strategy with bill supporters about ways to bring the legislation back, perhaps as an amendment to an existing bill. “We’ll keep working on this,” she said.
HB 1589 would have required most private sellers to conduct background checks through federally licensed dealers, using a system already in place for dealer sales. Breaking the law would have been a misdemeanor charge. An exception would have been made for noncommercial private sales between individuals not prohibited by federal law from buying a gun.
The final vote came after a long and confusing debate that lawmakers said left many shaking their heads.
Supporters of the bill take heart that the first vote of the morning, to accept the bill as amended by the House Commerce Committee, actually passed by a vote of 174-166. However, after that vote, an amendment was introduced on the House floor by state Rep. J.R. Hoell, R-Dunbarton, that would in essence supercede committee’s bill entirely and replace it with a study committee. That vote passed by a vote of 177-175.
According to House Majority Leader Stephen Shurtleff, D-Penacook, once an original bill has been amended, like Ahearn’s was in committee, “it opens it up for any other amendment on the House floor.”
“It was very confusing,” said state Rep. David Borden, D-New Castle, a co-sponsor of the bill. He said during the next hour or so while several other votes failed — including bids to table the bill and to indefinitely postpone it — House members began to look at the Hoell amendment more closely.
“Many of us thought the study committee was flawed,” because it created a committee that would be comprised of more Republicans than Democrats and contained no non-legislative stakeholders.
“The study committee was poorly crafted and limited the scope of study and restricted membership,” he said. “The majority felt this was not an improvement.”
Shurtleff agreed. “Some felt that it was one-sided and I actually agree.”
Ahearn was more blunt. The study committee, in her opinion, would have been stacked with pro-gun rights advocates “and the bill never would have gone anywhere.”
When the study committee amendment came up for a vote, it failed by a vote of 165 in favor to 195 opposed. Finally, there was a vote to kill the bill in its entirely, and that was the 242-118 vote.
Republican leaders praised the final vote, saying that background check legislation was not needed or necessary.
“A bipartisan majority of the House believed this bill was not necessary,” said House Republican Leader Gene Chandler, R-Bartlett. “By killing the bill, we have avoided what would have been an excessive government overreach and restriction of the Second Amendment rights.”
That sentiment has been echoed by opponents of the bill since its inception. Hoell and others have said that expanded background checks will lead intrusion by the government into gun owners’ lives and eventually to registration of guns.
Ahearn called the final vote “horrible, absolutely horrible. We were outmaneuvered. We were all very confused, and I think that was the point.”
“The only thing worse than seeing the bill go down is seeing a vote that supported it first,” said Zandra Hawkins of Granite State Progress.
Hawkins is working with Ahearn to determine whether the original bill can be attached to existing legislation. If that is not possible, she said gun control advocates will be working House districts statewide in anticipation of the fall elections.
“We’re not really discouraged,” said Melissa Rigazio of New Castle Promise. “We’re here to stay.”
Hmmmm. I checked them out. Which probably makes me their 6th reader. I’ll tell you something that I’ve noticed, though. All the obscure, unread websites in the world don’t compare to going out and talking to people.
Already done...wonder how many of these 'reps' are from Assghanistan or New York?
ROTFLMAO!!! Don't let this victory for gun rights fool you...this state is NOT a beacon of freedom. RH is one of the most heavily regulated states in the union, and is openly hostile to small business.
I'm very, very confused.
These purchases are already exempt from NICS. Can someone give me an idea as to what kind of purchase would be prohibited under this law?
The bill would have required all “commercial” sales to go through a gun dealer. Their definition of commercial sales included essentially any sale of a firearm. A much stricter definition than under Federal law. In effect “private sales as we know them in NH would have been eliminated.
“RH is one of the most heavily regulated states in the union, and is openly hostile to small business.”
Were you thinking of Rhode Island?
No...Red Hampshire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.