To ALL Granite State Residents:
A Man was taken into Custody Today for Possessing a Pellet Gun and a Small Pocket Knife in The Local High School.
Unless Mistaken, I Thought that it was PERFECTLY LEGAL to have a Pellet Gun and a Small Knife in a School in New Hampshire.
I can not find a Single New Hampshire Law that SPECIFICALLY Prohibits The Possession of any of These Items in a School-Safe Zone,
as that Term is Defined under Section 193-D:1 of New Hampshire Law.
However, that Law DOES PROHIBIT Acts of Violence, which Include Violations of RSA Chapter 159, within such Zones.
Funny thing is..., though..., that RSA 159 of New Hampshire Law does NOT Prohibit Pellet Guns at all, and Small Pocket Knives are Legal
in New Hampshire and are Subject to State-wide Preemption under RSA 159:26(I) and (II).
Although The Media will NEVER ADMIT to any of This..., I have a Suspicion that The Police are FULLY AWARE of This, because; The only
Criminal Charge that The Man Faces is a Simple Violation for Criminal Trespassing under RSA 635:2(IV).
However..., it would be Nice if The MEDIA would Report on Things Accurately for a Change, and not based on Wild Emotion.
A Man was taken into Custody Today for Possessing a Pellet Gun and a Small Pocket Knife in The Local High School.
Unless Mistaken, I Thought that it was PERFECTLY LEGAL to have a Pellet Gun and a Small Knife in a School in New Hampshire.
I can not find a Single New Hampshire Law that SPECIFICALLY Prohibits The Possession of any of These Items in a School-Safe Zone,
as that Term is Defined under Section 193-D:1 of New Hampshire Law.
However, that Law DOES PROHIBIT Acts of Violence, which Include Violations of RSA Chapter 159, within such Zones.
Funny thing is..., though..., that RSA 159 of New Hampshire Law does NOT Prohibit Pellet Guns at all, and Small Pocket Knives are Legal
in New Hampshire and are Subject to State-wide Preemption under RSA 159:26(I) and (II).
Although The Media will NEVER ADMIT to any of This..., I have a Suspicion that The Police are FULLY AWARE of This, because; The only
Criminal Charge that The Man Faces is a Simple Violation for Criminal Trespassing under RSA 635:2(IV).
However..., it would be Nice if The MEDIA would Report on Things Accurately for a Change, and not based on Wild Emotion.
Last edited:
