YOUR COMMENTS

This country was founded by religious nuts with guns. – P.J. O'Rourke

Let's keep it that way.
- RIght, Manchester

flash forward some 20 days after this op ed by Jen Coffey: Those who agree with Jen outnumber those who disagree, three to one.

Which explains why the anti-gun people invoke such terms as, "right wing whackos, gun nuts, hysterical, loons, and even a flawed data source and an outright LIE: "While brandishing guns some "Free State" invaders of NH distrupted a legislative session"

This is right out of the pages of a Michael Moore script.
- Rick Olson, Manchester

@Michael, Hudson: You asked: "Would I feel comfortable walking into a building where the people have low popularity and gun-toting citizens are able to walk in unchecked and greet them with gun in hand?"

Yes... because if they are not allowed, some nutjob with a gun and an agenda might be.

I have always felt comfortable anywhere I go in NH because I know someone near me, or myself, is carrying, OTHER THAN A CRIMINAL.

By this hospitality committee trying to make this illegal law, they are just bringing attention to the fact that they are an open book now.. how dumb is that?

If this law can't be stopped in its tracks the result should be that all Dems suffer the fate that Eleanor Kjellman suffered in 2008 after trying to promote no firearms in the statehouse -- she was voted OUT.

Keep it up idiots.
- Sue, Manchester

I am a former law enforcement officer and also served in the military who trusted me to protect some of our nation's most important personnel and assets. I have training to deal with the most violent armed conflicts, yet I would be very hesitent to visit the "secure" State House without my licensed carry firearm. I'm perplexed that someone with my background can't be trusted to walk the halls of the legislature. This must be a real slap in the face of all the armed lawmakers and legislative employees.

However, I would like to pose a slightly different thought for people to consider: What would prevent this same "Merry band of 8" from using their sneaky "rule making" power to institute a ban on large gatherings in the legislative complex without a permit? They've tried to trample on the 2nd amendment, why not see if we can't limit the size of the vocal groups that oppose their policies. This type of "back room" policy making should have some type of oversight mechanism that is accountable to the full legislature and/or public comment before implementation.
- Howard, Derry

Dave in Sandwich that statistic from the Amer. Jrnl of PH of "gun owners" being more likely to be shot was a flawed statistic. There was no attempt to ensure the "gun owners" were in fact legal gun owners (they may very well have been convicted felons in the commission of crimes), they based this "pseudo-fact" on a handful of chosen gun incident reports not random, the usual anti-freedom lies
- Beth, Sutton

Good for you Rep. Coffey! It is rare anymore to see a politician who actually has and uses common sense. Far to many of our elected officials nowdays are more concerned with being P.C. and, following personal agendas of there own or others to the point of at times violating State and sometimes Federal laws. I was born and raised in MA and after I got out of the Navy in 68, got fed up with the increasing level of control, restrictions and congestion. I moved to WY which is like NH in many ways. We don't live under lock and key, and almost everyone owns firearms of one sort or another. I have a carry permit, and we can carry open also, there are a few restrictions though. The crime rate is very low, as the saying goes "An armed society is a polite society", and this applies no matter where you live. It's unfortunate for our country that more of our elected officials seem unable, or unwilling to look at the true facts of any given situation and make intelligent, common sense decisions. So once again i'll say, congradulations, and good for you! Keep up the good work, mabey we'll all get lucky and your common sense will become contageous, we can only hope.
- Carl, Sheridan,WY

Congratulations and good for you Rep. Coffey. It is so refreshing to see a politician excercising some common sense rather than worrying about being P.C. as seems to be the norm these days. As I listen to a lot of what's going on these days in the area of politics it appears to me that the more educated some of these people running our country are, the less common sense they seem to employ. As a former resident of MA(born and raised there) I became fed up with the increasing control, restrictivnes, and congestion and moved to WY. It's a lot like NH in many ways, low crime, we don't lock our doors or cars and most people are armed, concealed and open. "An armed society IS a polite society". So again I say, "Good for you", wish we had more like you all around the country.
- Carl, Sheridan,WY

It seems that Mass govt control liberals love N.H. liberty so much that they're moving to N.H. in sufficient numbers to replicate another putrid Mass.
- Woodpiggie, Plattsburgh, NY

To what Dave has said, its not that people are going the ways of Charles Bronson , i think its just a duty of a citizen to provide security or just being responsible for their own or their communities safety because law enforcement cant be everywhere all the time. Its just another issue on limiting rights again, although i dont know why you would want to Open carry, being a trained person with a CCW permit would be more ideal would it not; because after all a gun is a last resort not the answer to everything, everyone should be trained (i realize everyone with a permit is not) to ensure they could use their firearm to defend themselves or others should the need arise. Its a huge responsibility!
- Mark, Derry, NH

What a brilliant op-ed, by a rare rep who writes about effective protection, not about How I Feel About Guns. Rep. Coffey is more rational than the name-callers who tried and failed to rebut her.

Ron of Manchester, it wasn't even necessary that there be just one gun on each of the doomed flights on 9/11--only that the terrorists think there might be.

Obama's approach after the Christmas incident (and Bush's or McCain's would have been no different) is to mobilize Homeland Security to prevent an exact repeat of the previous incident, to use higher technology to more fully invade our privacy, and to make trips to the airport more intrusive and annoying, to con us into thinking the government is "doing something," while never focusing on the likely suspects, because we wouldn't want anyone thinking badly of us.
- Spike, Brentwood NH

Michael from Hudson:

"Would you feel comfortable walking into a building where the people have low popularity and gun-toting citizens are able to walk in unchecked and greet them with gun in hand?"

What do you think the scene was like the morning HCR-6 was voted down? If that wasn't a politically-charged atmosphere that brought together armed citizens and unpopular lawmakers, I don't know what would be.

What WAS proven on that day, beyond ANY measure of doubt, was that the gun owners of New Hampshire CAN, I repeat, CAN be trusted to carry their firearms responsibly and safely.

Your rhetoric about them having a "gun in hand" notwithstanding.
- Bruce MacMahon, Brentwood

Thank you Representative Coffey for telling it how it really is.
- Keith, Keene

There is absolutely no reason to revoke citizens' 2nd Amendment rights in the State House (and adjoining buildings) unless it's a first step to revoking them elsewhere. Many legislators have been carrying concealed in the State House for years and there has never been any problem. The same could probably be said about those attending hearings. Again, no problems whatsoever. No one is endangered by law abiding, properly licensed citizens carrying personal defense tools (except those that would threaten their lives).

This ban is intended to do the following:
1. Discourage those who carry from running for office as they would have to spend a lot of time in a self-defense-free zone
2. Discourage those who carry from attending hearings on gun control laws.
3. Use this ban as a first step to creating more and more self-defense-free zones.

Check the other article just posted on this web site. The ban is going to be reconsidered in the committee that imposed it. Get going with your phone calls and emails to the committee members. If you contacted them before, do so again. The only reasonable way to handle this is to repeal the ban and allow the legislative process to determine whether the ban is imposed. Bills have been filed to do this. Have the hearings, have a vote of the full house. The pieces of legislation include provisions to make this a felony so gun banners should really prefer this to a simple rules change. Follow the process and let everyone have their say. Let us know how that works out for you.
- Mark, Amherst

Would you feel comfortable walking into a building where the people have low popularity and gun-toting citizens are able to walk in unchecked and greet them with gun in hand?
- Michael, Hudson

For the person who suggested that NH Statehouse might be the next Columbine:

Are you threatening employees and legislators?

Most of the people present with those two goons at Columbine were kids. You want kids walking around with guns? Do you know how silly kids can be? Troublemakers are always pushing kids around, etc. Guns are bound to go off accidentally. What about lockers at phys.ed.? My high school didn't have locks. They could get stolen and used by mentally incapable kids. Maybe the student should carry it around DURING phys.ed.? Hmmm... let's play tennis with a gun hanging out their pockets.

Get a brain.
- Michael, Hudson

@ Dave
~ Law enforcement doesn't work.

No one said that. LE just can't reliably arrive in time to prevent crimes. That's one reason why crime statistics are what they are.

~ Gun laws don't work.

You're correct. That has been established by CDC and the American Academy of Sciences reports showing no correlation between gun laws and reduction crime. Why make another ineffective law or rule?

Shall Issue carry laws, on the other hand, have a significant effect on reducing crimes.

~ Armed security guards can't be trusted.

There are no armed security guards or metal detectors in use or provided for in the gun free zones by the eight people inflicting this rule on the NH Legislature and NH citizens.

~ No one in America is safe anywhere - including inside the NH State House - unless they're packing heat.

Those are your words. The opposite is true: just because one legally packs heat makes it less likely that they will be the ones committing a gun crime.

Educate yourself.
- Bob Frost, Portsmouth

I love the posts here agreeing with the state house ban, fools are clearly identifying themselves. Those favoring the ban put themselves in the position of indirectly advocating a successful armed attack on one of the largest deliberative bodies in the world by declaring the victim pool to be in a gun free zone.

It's not like there has been a problem with shootouts in NH's Legislature in the past couple hundred years.

The ban was passed only by a subcommittee, eight of eleven people made a decision, not the NH Legislature. The ban is an emotional, knee jerk response ignoring established facts and thereby defying reason. The fact is guns are used far more often to stop or prevent crimes than to commit them and when seconds count, police are only minutes away.

Defensive Gun Use (DGU) studies by the Government and by credentialed scholars, were summarized by Tom W. Smith in a piece under joint copyright by him and Northwestern University School of Law in 1997. What is of significance here is that the estimates for DGU ranges from a low of .76 million in an FBI to a high of 3.61 million based on one to five years' recall in an LA Times study.

These studies clearly indicate guns are used anywhere from about over two and one half to almost twelve times more often to defend against crimes than to commit them.

Those misguided, self centered pols instituting the ban have trampled on the rights of law abiding NH citizens by deliberately avoiding what should have been a procedure involving the full legislature with a democratically determined outcome. They and others supporting the ban seem to favor the tyrannical method used to put it place.
- Bob Frost, Portsmouth

Dear Dave in Sandwich,

1.) If a police officer confronts two parties who are facing each other with firearms, that party who does not put down his or her gun when instructed to do so should be shot.

2.) If "gun owners are 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than non-gun owners," then said firearms owners probably suffered from a PRE-EXISTING greater risk of more violent attack due to geographic or socio-economic factors.
- JBM, III, Ashland, MA

Rep. Coffey is an amazing representative and, as usual, is right on! The Democrats in the House are out of control.

A bill that would have banned self-defense in the State House already failed miserably in 2008.
- Jack, Concord

I was on my way to Concord today to stand by Rep. Coffey as she spoke to protect the rights of those who would open carry, when someone pointed a loaded car at the car in front of me. (It was awful. Please say a prayer for those drivers and their families. ) Even so, I don't think forbidding cars on the road will improve my ability to participate as a concerned citizen.
- H. Puterbaugh, Barrington NH

J. Paige, if just one person on each plane in Sept 2001 had a gun, 9/11 wouldn't hold such significance in our country would it?
- Ron, Manchester

Here's a review of the gun proponents stance on this issue:

~ Law enforcement doesn't work.
~ Gun laws don't work.
~ Armed security guards can't be trusted.
~ No one in America is safe anywhere - including inside the NH State House - unless they're packing heat.

Has Charles Bronson suddenly been elected the head of the Republican National Committee? What is going on? This sounds like people are actually recommending that we must 'take the law into our own hands', which is clearly NOT the way American law enforcement is supposed to work, last time I checked. What's next - armed neighborhood vigilante patrols?

Someone from the previous editorial on this topic raised perhaps THE critical hypothetical question, which was not sufficiently answered by anyone: Say I'm a cop. I'm called the State House for an emergency. I rush in, and there's two people standing there pointing guns at each other. Now what?

And while we're quoting gun safety statistics, here's an interesting one: it seems gun owners are 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than non-gun owners.

(American Journal of Public Health - http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/99/11/2034)
- Dave, Sandwich

Representative Coffey’s article isn’t “right wing talk”; I know several New Hampshire legislators of both parties who always carry pistols in the State House. They do so for just the reasons that she wrote about in her article.

By the way, the State House security people are NOT armed, but even if they were, there are far too few of them to be stationed at every office, meeting room, and rest room in the State House and Legislative Office Building, nor would the legislators and staff want them there. Rep. Coffey’s point about disarmed victim zones is well taken; the only source of security near enough to matter is yourself.

Israel used to suffer from constant terrorist attacks on its schoolchildren. Then in 1973, the Israeli government announced a new policy encouraging all adults at schools to be armed – teachers, secretaries, janitors, visiting parents, everyone. There hasn’t been a single terrorist attack at a school in Israel since then.

I wish more people would understand that guns don’t “go off” by themselves, and that the thousands of armed people like me in New Hampshire don’t go nuts and start shooting up the place. I carry a gun because I’m a responsible adult, and I won’t be controlled by the irrational fears and prejudices of those who don’t trust themSELVES to be responsible adults.

- Sam Cohen, Bennington, NH
- Sam Cohen, Bennington, NH

Mike C.

"NH's parents' should not have to worry about their childrens' safety while visiting the State House."

So, when should they have to worry about their childrens' safety? Get real. There is danger all around them everywhere they go. The real wackos do not care about laws or 'gun free zones'. If they are intent on shooting someone, they do not wait around until that person leaves said zone. If anything, they wait until they enter, knowing that the victim will be unarmed and unable to defend themselves.

Creating more places where people are NOT allowed to defend themselves is NOT the answer.
- sally, candia, nh

Well to those Left Wing hacks... Ok first, the lovely Left Leaning rep's in the statehouse, first said that Civil Unions would be as far as they would allow back in the day when the State Rep's offered this to the people of NH. Ok look now! You give the Left leaning hacks an inch and they will want a mile.

What the rest of NH is upset about is that its a small bit of individual freedoms as guaranteed by the State Constitution is being taken away and before you know it, NH will be as arms restricting as Massachusetts or Illinois. Little bits of everyone's freedoms are being taken away in small seemingly little bites and before long all will be gone. Enough is enough... Vote these clowns out of office in 2010 before that Shaheen person or whomever before she puts in a Income or Sales tax...
- Peter H., Stoddard, Nh

To Coffey and the loons: get over yourselves. You're no more important than any one of the other 300 million plus people in this country. Your 2nd Amendment rights have not and are not being infringed upon in any fashion whatsoever and they never have. You can still keep and bear arms. Your fear, paranoia, and lack of perspective make you laughing stocks and much more dangerous to all of our Constitutional rights than any restrictions that you imagine. People react to lunacy and can overreact making you your own biggest enemies. Self important=self delusional.
- Tom, Dover-Foxcroft, Me.

A gun free zone for the law abiding is more like it. How many times do we have to go down this road until we realize criminals and those intent on hurting others do not obey these laws?

The one thing all tyrants and criminals have in common is their desire to seek out easy victims. An armed population is a safer population in any neighborhood or building. If the democrats did not find the need to disarm our soldiers at Fort Hood in Texas with another piece of brilliant legislation Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan would have been stopped a lot sooner and fewer children would have had to bury their fathers or mothers.

At some point we have to stop giving up our rights and freedoms and none more important than the right to defend ourselves. Being scared into giving up that right is nothing short of insane and will give us the exact opposite of what is claimed by those seeking to disarm society. Just look at the genocide taking place in countries with a helpless population who had to depend on who ever gained power to protect them. As they discovered one day the people in power did not favor certain segments of the population and they were helpless to do much about it. The founding fathers knew how the games of tyrants worked and gave us the second amendment so any would be tyrant would have something to consider. They also viewed each of our individual rights to defend ourselves as natural law and rightly so. I seriously doubt today’s leaders are smarter than those who set up our nation, as a matter of fact I know they aren’t as they are the ones seeking to disarm us one law at a time even as the results are having the opposite effect sold to us. Maybe after the next massacre the reality of these laws will sink in.
- Deb, Derry

I am a young professional female who conceal-carries nearly all of the time, and most people would never guess it. I do not plan to ever use my firearm outside of the firing range, but I am prepared and well-versed if necessary. It is not only crazy Free Staters that carry guns. Open carry of firearms is fully legal in NH and is NOT the same as "brandishing" and does not require a permit. A great teaching moment about the laws of NH was probably wasted when the frightened students and their frightened adults visited the State House.
- Patricia, Raymond

Mike C from Manchester said exactly everything I would have said. I'll assume each person crying about not having guns thinks we should all bring guns into court, right? And we should all bring guns on planes, right? I'm just wondering where the line is drawn in this hypocracy?
- J Paige, Manchester

Representative Coffey’s article isn’t “right wing talk”; I know several New Hampshire legislators of both parties who always carry pistols in the State House. They do so for just the reasons that she wrote about in her article.

By the way, the State House security people are NOT armed, but even if they were, there are far too few of them to be stationed at every office, meeting room, and rest room in the State House and Legislative Office Building, nor would the legislators and staff want them there. Rep. Coffey’s point about disarmed victim zones is well taken; the only source of security near enough to matter is yourself.

Israel used to suffer from constant terrorist attacks on its schoolchildren. Then in 1973, the Israeli government announced a new policy encouraging all adults at schools to be armed – teachers, secretaries, janitors, visiting parents, everyone. There hasn’t been a single terrorist attack at a school in Israel since then.

I wish more people would understand that guns don’t “go off” by themselves, and that the thousands of armed people like me in New Hampshire don’t go nuts and start shooting up the place. I carry a gun because I’m a responsible adult, and I won’t be controlled by the irrational fears and prejudices of those who don’t trust themSELVES to be responsible adults.
- Sam Cohen, Bennington, NH

Let's hope a majority of the reps at the state house are half as wise as Representative Coffey.

I do not look forward to the day where citizens must submit to a virtual strip search by one of those nude airport scanners prior to having their voices heard on an issue.

The failure of these gun free zones to protect people coupled with the zeal with which they are pursued by some in the political class makes one wonder if the bill's sponsors are more interested in safety or in intimidating a public that would dare question the authority of the state.

A similar bill was defeated about a year ago by a wide bipartisan measure. Let's hope that we can have a similar outcome this year.
- Jeff, Nashua

Enough of the right wing looney talk.

You can't wear a gun going into any courthouse in America.

You can't wear a gun going into any federal building in America.

You can't wear a gun going into the US Capitol Building.

You can't wear a gun going into the White House.

You can't wear a gun going into school buildings across the country.

You can't wear a gun in most state capitols.

While brandishing guns some "Free State" invaders of NH distrupted a legislative session when the legislators failed to vote to separate fron the US scaring the crap out of visiting young students and families in the public gallery. NH's parents' should not have to worry about their childrens' safety while visiting the State House.

Enough of the hysterical right wing talking points.
- Mike C., Manchester

Ok, Zoot--How about if YOU serve the sentence if some "whacko" kills someone in a "gun free zone"--seems fair, based on your proposal.

Of course, I bet you won't take that deal--as any idiot can see that shootings almost exclusively happen in places where the potential victims have been disarmed.
- Mike Ruff, Manchester

I realize that gun free zones are in fact far less safe than areas where concealed carry is permitted, however I was under the impression that the state house, like court houses , was protected by uniformed and non-uniformed, armed, secuirity. The self defense arguement, at the statehouse anyway, seems pretty weak.
- jeff, goffstown

Well put Rep. Coffey. Thank you.

The real problem is that our left wing leaders have no concern for our safety, in the State House or anywhere. One needs to look only at our inept Homeland Security Department (And I include the years when it was run under President Bush as well as now)

Our left wing leaders are beholden to an idea of control of the masses, not concern for them. They answer to their handlers with the money, the people like George Soros.

Our Founding Fathers both of America and the State of NH knew very well the importance of individual citizens being able to protect themselves from tyranny, hence the constitutional protection of the right to bear arms.

Is it possible that our left wing leaders in Concord are afraid of the people? If you anger the people so much that a small group come into your chamber armed, but only shout at you, shouldn't you be looking at your actions and not theirs???


Thank you Rep Coffey for taking a stand for the citizens.
- Melvin, Keene

Just what we need - a bunch of John Wayne wannabees, all worked up over some legislative proposals, wandering around the State House packing weapons. I'm not anti-gun, but this is over the top.

Here's a deal for Ms Coffey: If this proposal winds up with some whacko injuring or killing an innocent bystander, why don't you serve the same sentence as the shooter?
- zoot, Manchester

Thanks Rep Coffey. The stats just DO NOT JUSTIFY suddenly doing this when NH is the #1 safest state in the nation...as we function NOW.

We have always carried in MOST places and that is what the criminals keep in mind which makes them think twice before committing a crime. Why mess with success?
- Sue, Manchester