Cloudy
34°
Cloudy
Hi 36° | Lo 23°

N.H. Senate panel recommends killing “stand your ground” repeal

Peggo Hodes laughs while trying to figure out how to turn on the toy goat that plays a recording of yodeling while giving a demonstration to the audience on how to yodel before the Sound Of Music sing-a-long at Red River Theatre on April 28, 2013. Hodes is a voice instructor at the Concord Community Music School and helped the audience in perfecting their technique for the cue in the movie. 

(ANDREA MORALES / Monitor staff)

Peggo Hodes laughs while trying to figure out how to turn on the toy goat that plays a recording of yodeling while giving a demonstration to the audience on how to yodel before the Sound Of Music sing-a-long at Red River Theatre on April 28, 2013. Hodes is a voice instructor at the Concord Community Music School and helped the audience in perfecting their technique for the cue in the movie. (ANDREA MORALES / Monitor staff)

A Senate committee has recommended killing legislation that would repeal New Hampshire’s “stand your ground” law.

The law allows a person to use deadly force in self-defense anywhere they have a right to be. Before 2011, state law required a person to retreat from the situation if possible, except in their home.

The repeal bill hasbecome a lightning rod this year for criticism from gun rights activists. It passed the Democratic-controlled House last month, 189-184.

But it appears headed for defeat in the Republican-controlled Senate, where a number of Democrats are expected to vote against the bill. Two, Sen. Jeff Woodburn of Dalton and Sen. Andrew Hosmer of Laconia, have already announced they’ll oppose it.

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted yesterday, 4-1, to recommend the full Senate kill the bill. All three Republicans voted against the bill, as did Democratic Sen. Bette Lasky of Nashua. Sen. Donna Soucy, a Manchester Democrat, voted to support the bill.

The legislation next goes to the Senate floor, perhaps as early as next week.

(Ben Leubsdorf can be reached at 369-3307 or bleubsdorf@cmonitor.com or on Twitter @BenLeubsdorf.)

Legacy Comments7

Yet another profile in courage--this committee vote to kill the repeal of SYG. Thank you,Sen. Soucy, for having the courage to do the right thing. There was no need for SYG legislation--the state's Castle Doctrine has served us well for generations. ALEC and the gun lobby pushed SYG through The Tea Party legislature in 2011. Now that it's law, it will be difficult to buck the power of the gun lobby to repeal it. But it's a bad idea that essentially turns public spaces into free-fire zones. There is no evidence that it was needed, and no good evidence that it will make us safer. In fact, there is more research suggesting it will make us less safe, and raise the homicide rate. Passage of SYG was one more "success" by the libertarian far-right in their effort to diminish the ideal of the "public good", in the "public" square, and turn the nation into a fearful, suspicious, and trigger-happy armed camp.

Let's be honest. People want to be armed because without arms our freedom could and maybe will be ended by a repressive government. Better safe than sorry. No, I don't belong to a militia but I do sympathize with the folks that you excoriate. Please tell us why Janet Napolitano has been rounding up and purchasing large amounts of ammunition, ordering armed vehicles and tanks. If we plan on using that on our Southern border, that would be one thing but progressives fear an armed citizenry. If you want a good reason for the right to bear arms all you need to do is read a few of the letters on here, that is enough to scare the crap out of me that people could think, much less admit that they think in the way that they do, just look in the mirror, that is another reason. You fail when you talk about ALEC or the Tea Party, it is not about that, it is about freedom, liberty and rights. Once you trade away any rights, it is a slippery slope.

I guess under the bill the democratics passed in the house, their intent was for us law abiding citizens to run home if we are threatened with deadly force and only then, after the assailant chases you in your home, can you turn around and blow his butt away with your properly licensed to carry handgun.

And then you will spend a night in jail to decide if you overstepped your bounds, then the family of the assailants family will sue you and gun control nuts will call for further laws......

Are we supposed to make some sort of connection between the picture and the story???????????

The picture makes as much sense, as the repeal bill.

good

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.