I don’t believe the New Hampshire AG ever investigated claims by NH Police Chief Andrew Shagoury when, in his opposition to concealed carry, he suggested to a State House Committee that minors might have been issued pistol revolver licenses. That would be in violation of state law, as would his knowing it and not demanding an investigation himself.
Let me amend that. I know the AG didn’t because the gun-ban left would have short-stroked that for months to justify letting the government (the same elite club that may have broken the law to give concealed carry permits to minors) use the law to keep you from getting one.
That’s how government works if you happen to be new to this. And it’s why we hope the Committee vote to ITL Marsey’s Law sticks. But back to the Chief.
Teleport to 2018 and the same Police Chief is happily endorsing Marsy’s Law because victims rights are too often overlooked. Overlooked in violation of state law?
In a side by side comparison between the “rights” created by the constitutional amendment (CACR22) he endorses and existing New Hampshire law which he is supposed to follow, Marsy’s Law comes up short.
(State Statutes are on the left, comparable “protections” from CACR22 are on the right, a copy of CACR22 is on page three. Click here for a better view.)
[pdf-embedder url=”http://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/COmparison-of-NH-Constitution-ML-and-Victims-Bill-of-Rights.pdf” title=”Comparison of NH Law and Marsys Law CACR22″]
The aforementioned allusions with regard to pistol permits were part of testimony for the purpose of denying law-abiding citizens their second amendment right to constitutional carry. Self-Defense rights you are born with, enumerated in two documents meant to restrain the power of the state such that they shall not deny them.
The latter allusion is in favor of embedding a constitutional right (Marsy’s Law) created by the government because that same government is incapable of following or enforcing victims rights laws already established.
Putting aside the fact that a state empowered to use a constitution to define your rights is nothing more than a creeping despotism, who among you believe that the same government that can’t follow the Constitution (or its own law) will change its behavior once amended?
And how do you think they’ll do when Marsy’s law builds in constitutional protections for the state when they ignore statutory protections that The Chief suggests The State is already ignoring?
Now you know why the U.S. Constitution is top-heavy with protections for the accused. Because the state is incapable of self-restraint, such that it is willing to cloak its tyranny under the guise of promoting victims rights.
“Rights” that, in the form of Marsey’s Law, are unconstitutional. But only, ironically, if the justice system they empower decides as much.
CACR22 left the committee with a recommendation kill the bill. But it’s not dead yet. And there are still forces on both sides convinced they can and should impose this unconstitutional amendment. They think you need to give them a power (and you’d have to do just that) they are already too incompetent to exercise.
Save everyone a lot of time (and money). Send your State Senators and House Reps a polite note and encourage them to vote yes to ITL the unconstitutional CACR 22.
For further reference, Nicole Fortune was kind enough to spend a few minutes with me discussing several of the troubling aspects of this proposed amendment (yes, there are more). You can listen to that here.
Kimberly Morin also has some published remarks from Nicole here.
And this is the letter attributed to The Chief!, care of Rep. John Burt, submitted as written testimony to the NH House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee.
Andy Shagoury [firstname.lastname@example.org]
To: House Criminal Justice and Public Safety
Tuesday, April 17, 2018 5:34 PM
Dear members of the House Judiciary Committee
I’m writing to express our strong support for CACR 22 and to ask you to please consider passing along a Victim’s Rights Constitutional Amendment to the voters this November. As you know, CACR 22 will establish meaningful, enforceable rights for those who become victims of crimes in our State’s Constitution. The New Association of Chiefs of Police executive board voted to support CACR 22 at our January meeting.
Too often crime victims are overlooked in the court process, and you can see how that impacts them and their loved ones. Victims deserve the chance to be present and be heard at all proceedings but are either not notified or told they may not speak. One of the most important missions of law enforcement is to protect victims of crime. The only way to assure that victim’s rights will be considered on even playing field with those of the accused is to protect those rights within the Constitution.
I urge you to please pass CACR 22 and send it to the ballot in November for the people of New Hampshire to have their say.
Chief Andrew Shagoury
Tuftonboro Police Department
PO Box 98, 240 Middle Road
Center Tuftonboro, NH 03816
Remember, New Hampshire has plenty of statutory protections for victims that do not violate the constitution. The only possible reason they could be ignored is if the public servants in the criminal justice system are not doing their jobs and following that law.
You don’t solve that problem by rewarding them constitutional immunity. You fire them and replaced them with people who can and will follow the law.