ivyleague28477
Regular Member
imported post
smn wrote:
true enough!
smn wrote:
... remember, you may beat the rap but you won't beat the ride.
true enough!
... remember, you may beat the rap but you won't beat the ride.
We don’t need to “incorporate” the federal Second Amendment. What we have in our own State constitution is already better:—Can you challenge the charge on Constitutional grounds? probably, although the circumstances likely to be mentioned repeatedly by a prosecutor ("multiple guns", "body armor", "driving with a suspended license", "misuse of plates") as well of the relatively minor nature of the "crime" would make this a difficult case to take all the way to get both a ruling on incorporation of the second amendment to the States combined with a very narrow definition of reasonable restriction.
Just in case you're uninformed rather than merely a loudmouthed troll: liability insurance is not required in New Hampshire."When yourefuse to register your car and maintain a drivers licence YOU HAVE NO LIABILITY INSURANCE.
MarkNH wroteWe don’t need to “incorporate” the federal Second Amendment. What we have in our own State constitution is already better:—Can you challenge the charge on Constitutional grounds? probably, although the circumstances likely to be mentioned repeatedly by a prosecutor ("multiple guns", "body armor", "driving with a suspended license", "misuse of plates") as well of the relatively minor nature of the "crime" would make this a difficult case to take all the way to get both a ruling on incorporation of the second amendment to the States combined with a very narrow definition of reasonable restriction.
[Art.] 2-a. [The Bearing of Arms.] All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.
Shawn, are you sure you understood her correctly?Listening to her, she stated there are some interesting facts about NH law, like if its not a common pistol, then you don't need a permit (I can't cite statue). So, what type of weapon were you guys carrying?
Just in case you're just a jerk from Texas that attacks everyone that disagrees with your foolish opinions with the label TROLL:no carry permit ? wrote:Just in case you're uninformed rather than merely a loudmouthed troll: liability insurance is not required in New Hampshire."When yourefuse to register your car and maintain a drivers licence YOU HAVE NO LIABILITY INSURANCE.
:no carry permit ?
Tell them you're encouraging the 2A by using the first.I dont know... there are some good things in that ruling as well as some bad. Okay lots bad...
But they basically agree (bottom of page 4 top of page 5) that the RKBA is a fundamental right but then decided not to address Bleiler's assertions that by taking away his conceal carry license it forced him to open carry subjecting him to a 'stigma'.
Now follow my thought process here and tell me what y'all think of it:
If I can substantially prove the stigma which open carry subjects me and my business to with police reports and severe business decline, would it possibly open up this line of questioning again and therefore possibly reverse their ruling here that they need not review RSA 159:6-b?
A little background on that line of thought. My husband and I run a restaurant in a little town here in NH. It's a Tex-Mex place and we have open carried here and encourage it from our partons, especially on Friday's where it's theme night and one gets a dicount for "dressing up" as a cowboy/girl. Our first two or three weeks of business were great... then we started getting calls from the local PD Cheif who told us basically that it would be in our best interest to conceal our weapons. He told us that he'd received several calls of concern because we open carry and encourage other folks to open carry. We've also had people outright walk out of our business and tell us it was because they did not like the open carrying. It's a small town, and the rumor mill is wild with stories about us 'weilding our weapons' and such and since those first few weeks, our business has rapidly declined. Therefore, I can substantially prove the 'stigma' that open carrying causes, and therefore might have some grounds to have them review the statue under 'strict scrutiny'.
Thoughts?
BS on that. My mother was hit head on by a driver while stopped on her side of the roadwith no way to avoid him. Hehad no insurance, no property and no way to pay the hospital bills that myfamily incurred due to it. My grandmother's hip was broken and for six weeks after she had to stay in the bed while we paid someone to look after her. After that she used a walker for another three months. Thank goodness my 6 year old sister and 6 year old cousin were strapped in and did not go face first into the windshield like my mother did. 35 years later my mother still finds pieces of glass in her forehead.yes if i were to cause damages without insurance I would still be liable even if i did not carry liability insurance. yes if i were to cause damages i would be in great financial hardship in order to cover those damages. yes if i were to cause damages it would be my responsibility to pay for said damages. no one ever said i would not be responsible and not pay for the damages i caused if such damages were to occur. those are the risks one takes when they do not have insurance - sure i could be out a ton. that's my dice to roll, not yours to judge me on.
Tell them you're encouraging the 2A by using the first.
I suppose I wont really know the answer until I try that argument in court, but I was wondering if, based on the situation, other people thought that might be a reasonable argument to pose.If I can substantially prove the stigma which open carry subjects me and my business to with police reports and severe business decline, would it possibly open up this line of questioning again and therefore possibly reverse their ruling here that they need not review RSA 159:6-b?
That doesn't mean everyone is in that situation just because they do not have insurance. Hospital bills can be paid over time. He should have been held liable even if he couldn't pay them up front and immediately. He could have conceivable paid those bills for your family on a weekly or monthly payment plan to the hospital or doctors or visiting nurses or what have you without any negative effect to your family's financial situation. You're right that his actions were irresponsible; that does not mean mine will be if ever I were in an accident.He had no insurance, no property and no way to pay the hospital bills that my family incurred due to it.
Click on NH on the map - what does the summary say about car carry?So if NH is an open carry state, why was Bill not openly carrying his firearm?