In many cases, people convicted of domestic violence crimes can lose their right to possess a gun.
But that’s not the case if the abuse is inflicted on a parent by an adult child.
It’s a hole in federal law, some say. And the policy is raising questions at the State House, in the week after a New Hampshire man was accused of shooting two Manchester police officers with a gun he purchased despite a criminal history of assaulting his father.
“If he was involved in a domestic assault against his father he should not have been able to get a firearm,” said Rep. John Tholl, a Whitefield Republican who chairs the House criminal justice committee.
Under federal law, it’s possible.
Federal statute prohibits felons, drug users, people living in the country illegally and fugitives from possessing guns.
It also blocks people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes that involve use of force, attempted use of force or the threatened use of a deadly weapon.
But that prohibition on gun ownership only applies to instances of domestic violence between certain people: like a parent attacking a child, a spouse abusing a spouse, or assault between two people who share a child.
The definition does not include a child attacking a parent.
It means a man could lose his right to possess a gun if he commits a domestic violence crime against his adult son who lives above the garage, but not if he is convicted of attacking his elderly father who sleeps in the spare bedroom.
“Federal law has a very narrow definition as what qualifies as a domestic violence issue that triggers a ban on the purchase of firearms,” said Amanda Grady Sexton, with the New Hampshire Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence. “There’s a gaping hole for children committing offenses against a parent.”
The definitions were solidified more than 20 years ago. Since then, aspects of family life have changed.
More young adults are living with their parents now than during recession years, according to the Wall Street Journal. And New Hampshire’s aging population means more people in the state are becoming caregivers for elderly parents or a spouse with serious health problems.
There have been some efforts at the federal level to broaden the domestic violence definition, to include a couple who is dating but not living together, for example. The proposal stalled.
Several states have their own laws in place that expand on the federal gun restrictions for domestic abusers. Illinois, for example, bars people from owning guns if they were convicted of domestic battery against any person related to them by blood, or with whom they were living.
New Hampshire hasn’t done that and relies heavily on the federal statute. The Granite State does have laws on the books that block people under domestic violence protection orders from having guns. When the order is lifted, so is the ban.
Some question why government treats some crime victims differently than others in its gun laws. “Why is an adult child attacking their parent different than a person attacking persons?” said Rep. JR Hoell, a Dunbarton Republican who plans to run for state senate.
Second Amendment debates have come up regularly in Concord over the last two years. The biggest fight has focused on concealed carry licenses and how they are issued.
New Hampshire is an open-carry state, meaning anyone who legally owns a gun can carry it exposed without any paperwork or permit.
People have to get a license for local law enforcement if they want to carry a loaded gun concealed in a purse or beneath a coat.
The Republican-led Senate and House passed bills this year that would remove that conceal carry license requirement. But the legislation will likely be rejected by Gov. Maggie Hassan, who vetoed a similar bill last year. Now, with only a few weeks left in the legislative session, it looks like the state won’t make any changes to gun laws in response to the Manchester shooting. Future efforts to strengthen or loosen firearm laws will likely depend on the election in November, and which political parties come to control the House, Senate and governor’s office.
Trump train
Republicans are trying to unify around Donald Trump, but it seems some are unable to let go of the past.
At the House Republican Majority Caucus office in downtown Concord, Ted Cruz 2016 campaign signs are still plastered to the windows.
The House Majority Cacucus formed after Rep. Bill O’Brien lost a bitter speaker’s race to fellow Republican Shawn Jasper. In response, O’Brien and Rep. Steve Stepanek, a Trump New Hampshire campaign co-chairman, created the House Republican group. The caucus staked a claim as the House’s true conservatives.
O’Brien has been an outspoken Cruz supporter and is slated to attend the GOP convention this summer as one of the Texas senator’s delegates. But he hasn’t come around to Trump, it seems. O’Brien told the Monitor recently the New York businessman isn’t conservative enough.
Cap those bills
The Legislature has killed 520 bills so far this year, out of more than 1,000 that were up for debate. Now some House leaders are seeking to curb the volume of proposals representatives file each year in an effort to cut back on duplicative bills that take up time and distract from more weighty issues.
The fix approved by the House Rules Committee last week would give more power to the speaker to deal with members trying to file the same bills. It says that if representatives won’t enter mediation to agree on a single bill, the legislation may not be filed. If mediation isn’t successful, the proposal would give the House speaker power as ultimate arbiter to decide which bill will be filed.
Repetitive bills were a problem this year. Three representatives each filed a bill seeking to repeal a state ban on tinting the front windows of a car. Three more lawmakers each filed separate bills to legalize marijuana.
The policy would aim to stop that by making representatives join on a single proposal.
The full House has to approve the change, and it will come up in the first week of June. Unlike most bills, the changes requires a two-thirds majority to move forward. That will be a challenge.
(Allie Morris can be reached at 369-3307 or at amorris@cmonitor.com.)