Republican New Hampshire State Sens. have reportedly defeated an effort to impose the inclusion of psychiatric records in background checks for firearm purchases.
Lawmakers on Thursday stopped a final attempt to push the measure, arguing that it would violate Second Amendment protections on the right to keep and bear arms, according to the New Hampshire Bulletin. The bill would have included mental health records, such as psychiatric hospitalizations, in the background check process. It also would have allowed for a “process for the confiscation of firearms following certain mental health-related court proceedings.” (RELATED: DOJ Publishes New Rule That Massively Expands Background Checks For Gun Purchases)
Republican State Sen. Daniel Innis said the bill could have empowered the state to seize not only firearms owned by a person who was hospitalized over mental health issues but also those in the possession of another person living in the home, the outlet reported.
Republican State Sen. Sharon Carson reportedly criticized the bill’s sponsors for not discussing the issue with gun rights groups while drafting the proposed legislation. “It’s important that their voices are heard, but they’re never included in this process,” the lawmaker argued, according to the New Hampshire Bulletin. “So please, if you’re going to bring things forward, include people who actually own guns and get their opinion.”
Republican State Rep. Terry Roy, a co-sponsor of the measure, reportedly never backed a piece of gun control legislation until this bill. Alongside Democratic Rep. David Meuse, he filed House Bill 1711 in response to a November shooting of a hospital security guard.
⚡️ Lawmakers in New Hampshire are planning to address a gap in the state’s gun policy following a shooting at a psychiatric hospital. The shooting involved a former patient who fatally shot a security officer. The lawmakers aim to fix the issue by… https://t.co/lpikyTjyv8 pic.twitter.com/RuvfpclcSI
— RiskMap (@RiskMapOfficial) December 6, 2023
“I continue to be a 2nd Amendment advocate,” he told the New Hampshire Bulletin via text after the Senate vote. “But that does not mean that I cannot take extremely limited, constitutional, life-saving matters into consideration. The two are not mutually exclusive.’
If the bill had been passed, it would not have applied to those who became the subject of an involuntary emergency admission petition but only to those who were admitted on a non-emergency basis, the New Hampshire Bulletin reported February. This would have meant they would have gone through a court hearing where a judge deemed them dangerous to themselves or others, according to the outlet.
