New Bill Would Allow Disgruntled Family Members to Take Your Guns
House Bill 1807-FN Takes Away Due Process
Not a GOA member yet? We need you more than ever right now.
Take Action to Stop Gun Confiscation Orders!
A number of prominent New Hampshire conservatives have been targeted by “social services” because certain state officials objected to the way they were raising their children or taking care of their parents.
As a resident of the Granite State, I was also affected while dealing with my elderly mother’s care.
Well, new legislation which has already been passed by the House, would expand the ability of the social services officials to confiscate your guns in a secret star-chamber proceeding from which you would be excluded.
Here’s how it would work.
The state has perfected the art of stripping senior citizens of all their rights through secret guardianship hearings.
These are conducted, generally by a telephone call, from which the senior who is being stripped of her rights is excluded.
Sure, the statute “theoretically” gives the senior a voice, but the senior is routinely “deemed” to have waived all his or her rights.
So first, the senior is stripped of his or her rights and a guardian is appointed.
Then, under House Bill 1807-FN, the guardian can convene a secret ex parte hearing to strip the son or daughter with custody over the senior of their gun rights. [Section 173-D:5(a)(5).]
The first time the son or daughter learns of this is when the police show up at his or her door to seize his or her guns.
We’ve had a lot of experience with secret, star-chamber telephone “hearings” in New Hampshire and elsewhere.
Similar procedures in Massachusetts have prompted a liberal Massachusetts representative to conclude that judges “don’t ask very many questions.”
In Seattle, Washington, ex parte procedures (where only one party’s side is presented) have resulted in Gun Confiscation Orders being issued on 28 occasions and denied only once.
The fact is that, in a proceeding in which only the accuser is in the room, most judges would sign an order that revokes your gun rights because no one is present to offer a counter argument.
The specific authorization of Gun Confiscation Orders under 173-D:5(a)(5) is not exclusive. It is inconceivable that relief would not include the ability to search the defendant’s residence in order to ensure that all guns are relinquished.
Within 3-5 days after a person’s Second Amendment rights have been stripped from him or her, the defendant has the “right” to spend $10,000 to request a hearing to get his gun rights back.
It took me 7 days in a similar situation to find an attorney who would represent me. Even in 1998, the cost was $5,000. And most gun owners don’t have the sophistication or the money to exercise this theoretical right.
Furthermore, courts are loath to reverse their earlier judgments, particularly in “safety” cases like this.
So our question is this: What if you could be imprisoned for 3-5 days as a result of a secret hearing from which you were excluded? Or if your First or Eight Amendment rights were treated the same way?
Even if you could get your guns back, the loss of your Fourth Amendment rights can never be restored.
And remember: this is not just an order that you stay away from another person; it is a complete suspension of your Second, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments rights.
And all of this is without any probable cause or any crime.
Sure, there’s an allegation, in a secret hearing, of “neglect.”
But if major conservatives can be accused in this state of “neglect” because of the way they raise their children or take care of their parents, that’s not much of a bar.
HB 1807-FN is very dangerous legislation.
PS: GOA is fighting against gun confiscation orders in New Hampshire and across the country. Could you chip in $20, $30, or $50 to the fight?