LTE's from Undergrounders

[Kat Kanning]

Sounds great!

[CNHT]

RSA 39:2 & 3 are correct references. The language you refer to does not exist in School Warrant RSA 197:6.  It does refer to only allowing  only minor textural changes.

RSA 32:18-a is exception.

Petition Warrants have been highly modified over the years at DB's.  I haven't had any success with the AG.  The legislature this past year declared "no" meant "no" on municipal budget warrant mandates regarding appropriations.   

My understanding is that the people can change amounts of money requested by the governing body HOWEVER citizens petitioned warrant articles are a right of FREE SPEECH and are NOT to be changed unless by the signatories who originally submitted the petition.

We have a lawyer's opinion on this.

[CNHT]

Where is Clement's Superior  Court appeal?  He has 22 days to put his money where his mouth is.

Hmm, as I said, he doesn't know the NH law like we do....

[CNHT]

RSA 673:18 II involves doing away with zoning and planning commissions....(hmmm)

I'm not sure how that's being used. I just know that 197:6 states that citizens petitions are NOT subject to the provisions of RSA 32.

[Dave Ridley]

Jane that was a nice letter!  It was so...simple!  I like the way you just tossed the word libertarian in there as tho it were assumed that libertarian is automatically good heh heh

[Dave Ridley]

Aries the Union Leader will print almost every letter it receives under 200 words and very few above 200 words I believe.  So your letter is possibly too long for them.

I do think many papers frown on you sending your letter to multiple papers but it's probably hard for them to tell you are doing it.   this would become an issue if you become a frequent LTE writer. definitely you will have to send to each of them separately.

[CNHT]

Jane that was a nice letter!  It was so...simple!  I like the way you just tossed the word libertarian in there as tho it were assumed that libertarian is automatically good heh heh

Thanks!

Well TRUE R's are libertarians if you look back at the platform. There is nothing in there that states we don't want gays to marry, etc.
We just want less gov't, MUCH less. And that includes marriage stuff.
So to me, true Rs are libertarians....and the people, not the GOP itself, who call themselves Rs are the ones who most think like us.


PS - Freedom is a simple concept and requires little explanation or apology!

[Dave Ridley]

for a list of NH places to send LTEs visit:

http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=1205.0

it also has the list of talk radio shows and web forums in-state

[Dreepa]

I don't know if he every posts here but Bradley Keyes (FS) who lives in Epsom had an LTE published today.  (Not online yet)

[aries]

Aries the Union Leader will print almost every letter it receives under 200 words and very few above 200 words I believe.  So your letter is possibly too long for them.

I do think many papers frown on you sending your letter to multiple papers but it's probably hard for them to tell you are doing it.   this would become an issue if you become a frequent LTE writer. definitely you will have to send to each of them separately.

I noticed that and I'm shortening it for the UL right now. I'm also going to shorten the original for the Democrat and Monitor.
Also, I'd love if it goes in the Keene Free Press as well!

[aries]

I sent my shortened one to the Union Leader first. I'll revise and shorten the original for the other papers later on.

Here it is:

Last October Florida got a "shoot first" law and became the first to back up their right to bear arms with a right of self-defense. The NRA will lobby in all states for similar legslation.
   
Currently, if you're publicly attacked, and shoot, you face legal troubles and possibly a criminal record. You may also be sued. Self-defense is an accepted reason to carry, but the law expects one to _try_ running before shooting. Should an armed woman turn her back on a rapist? A shoot first law in NH would allow self-defense without fear of months in court. Many have used guns for self-defense. In this largely rural state, where police are not around every corner, this law is necessary.

Opponents overlook that one must be attacked or adequately threatened by an aggressor to shoot. Nobody can simply claim to feel threatened and open fire. Additionally, Florida's law (S.0436.) leaves room for judicial interpretation.

Whether or not you bear arms, it's your right. Chances are, somebody you know carries a gun, probably for self-defense. Don't let good people fall victim to humiliating prosecution for defending their inalienable right to life. Please contact your state representatives in support of Shoot First.

It was really hard cutting out so much stuff to get it down to 200 words, but according to the word count site google gave me, it is exactly 200.

*** I don't usually get the Union Leader, so if you see it in there please tell me!

[CNHT]

for a list of NH places to send LTEs visit:

http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=1205.0

it also has the list of talk radio shows and web forums in-state

Also CNHT links has all that info.

[Kat Kanning]

I'll put it in the Keene Free Press.  What name should I put down for you, aries?

[aries]

I'll put it in the Keene Free Press.  What name should I put down for you, aries?

Matt Covey (From Twin Mountain as well if you want)
Thanks

This is the final verson I'm sending out to all the papers (except UL of course), if you could please print this for consistency:

Last October Florida got the nation's first successful "shoot first" law. As the NRA rejoiced this surprisingly libertarian move, and the Brady Campaign cried foul, Floridians became some of the first to back up their right to bear arms with a right to use them for self-defense. The NRA will lobby in all states for similar legislation.
   
Currently, if you're publicly attacked, even in your vehicle, and shoot, you face legal troubles and possibly a criminal record. You may also be sued by the attacker or his family. This differs from in your home, where an intruder is always there illegally, and shooting him is nearly always lawful.

Self-defense is a constitutionally accepted reason to carry a weapon, so why does using one for self defense carry such harsh penalties?  Current law, which has been marred by inconsistent court decisions, expects a person to make an attempt to flee the scene before opening fire. Would you demonize a young woman who defended herself from a rapist rather than trying to run? A shoot first law in NH would allow self-defense without fear of months in court. Many have used guns for self-defense. In this largely rural state, where police are not at every street corner, this law is necessary.

Opponents overlook that one must be attacked or adequately threatened by an aggressor to shoot. Their claims that one can simply say they feel threatened and open fire are false. Florida's law (S.0436.) leaves room for judicial interpretation, and the police may judge whether the shooter was justified, and if they determine that he was not in immediate danger, make an arrest.

Whether or not you bear arms, it's your right to do so. Chances are, somebody you know carries a gun, probably for self-defense. Don't let honest citizens carrying guns legally and without criminal intent fall victim to humiliating prosecution for defending their inalienable right to life. Please contact your state representatives in support of a Shoot First law.

[CNHT]

I submitted this to about 10 papers throughout the state as well as Keene Free Press:


To the editor,

This is an open letter to the Governor and his Attorney General regarding RAMPANT, unprosecuted (up to 30%) voter fraud.

This problem might cost us a sales/income tax if NOT PURSUED and STOPPED.

A most high profile case to illustrate the point: It is a recorded fact that one Geoff Wetrosky voted in the Manchester city elections. He then fled back to South Dakota where he lives and always has lived. While he was in NH getting paid by John Kerry, he stayed at the home of Kathy Sullivan, NH Democrat Chair. The bottom line is, DOES HE LIVE HERE NOW and what is his legal domicile in NH? If he has none, what will be done about his illegal vote?

This is a perfect example of what a good percentage of voters did in the last election; they voted and then left the state for their REAL place of domicile.

Meanwhile, a kid doing a prank was heartily prosecuted proving the bias of the AG's office!

It's time for the Governor to own up to this and order his AG to do the job she should, without prejudice!