Opponents misstate ‘stand your ground’ law
To the editor:
I would like to clear up a misconception that has been published and republished in every paper that has covered the recent public hearing for House Bill 135, which would repeal parts of the so-called “Stand Your Ground” law in New Hampshire.
The primary sponsor of the bill, Representative Stephen Shurtleff, claimed in his testimony to the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee that part of the law he wants to repeal, RSA 627:1-a, protects someone from civil litigation if they accidentally injure or kill an innocent bystander while defending themselves. The law that he refers to is this:
“A person who uses force in self-protection or in the protection of other persons ..., in the protection of premises and property ..., in law enforcement ..., or in the care or welfare of a minor ..., is justified in using such force and shall be immune from civil liability for personal injuries sustained by a perpetrator...” (emphasis added).
Throughout the entire proceedings, Rep. Shurtleff and other supporters of HB 135 claimed that under current law, innocent bystanders who are injured or killed have no legal recourse. This is a complete falsehood. Feel free to look it up yourself.
One finds themselves speculating whether Rep. Shurtleff and his co-sponsors and supporters simply haven’t read the law that they wish to repeal, or whether they are deliberately and blatantly misrepresenting the law to further their own cause. In either case, they have no business proposing legislation to “fix” something that isn’t broken, and so-called investigative journalists have no business parroting false information that is so easily verified.
How to find missing EBT recipients
To the editor:
With regards to the 19,000 EBT card recipients that the Department of Transitional Assistance (welfare department) could not find, I have a suggestion.