Here is the Roll Call who voted yes to Restrict Fishermen.  32 Republicans voted against fishermen in NH.  Here is the Roll Call who knew SB 89 was a bad bill and will hurt NH.  13 Democrats went with us.

Read the press release below.  Thank you all for your support and help on this bill.  I wished the outcome was better but remember one thing.  The NH Fish and Game can not and will not enforce this law.

House Republicans Comment on House Passage of Bill Restricting Fishermen

CONCORD – Today House Republican Leader Gene Chandler (R-Bartlett), and members of the House Fish and Game Committee, Assistant House Republican Leader Elisabeth Sanders (R-Danville) and Rep. John Burt (R-Goffstown) offered the following comments in reaction to the passage of SB89, a bill that would restrict the types of tackle New Hampshire fishermen can use, based on anecdotal evidence of loon deaths possibly due to ingesting lead. The bill passed 225-142.

House Republican Leader Gene Chandler (R-Bartlett)

“Although it’s very sad that lead may have caused the death of a handful of loons, there is not enough evidence to ban an entire type of tackle that fishermen use. Fishermen come to New Hampshire from all over the region to fish in our lakes and rivers. Fish & Game Department has indicated this law would be nearly impossible to enforce. We need more study before we pass any measure as drastic as this bill. Our state’s sportsmen and outdoor industry deserve as much.”

“Last year’s interim study committee concluded that more time was needed to thoroughly examine this issue and that no legislation should be introduced in 2013. Until we have a conclusive report, this legislation is premature.”

Assistant House Republican Leader Elisabeth Sanders (R-Danville)

“After spending 6 hours listening to committee hearing testimony on SB89, and after much research to learn more facts, I am very disappointed that SB89 passed. It seems that the wishes of our anglers have been replaced with exaggerated tales of disaster. I believe that before more restrictive laws are enacted, additional unbiased studies should take place. The bill did not have the support of the Fish and Game department and commissioners. The average loss of 5-6 adult loons per year due to lead ingestion is tragic. The loss of angler confidence in our legislative decisions may have the unintended consequence of the tragic loss of fishing related revenue.”

Rep. John Burt (R-Goffstown), House Fish & Game Committee

“The science behind this legislation is unproven. We shouldn’t base a legislative decision affecting a $1.2 billion industry in New Hampshire on an unproven claim. The majority of our committee supported the recommendation of the Fish and Game Department on every bill, except for SB89. I believe we should have listened to them, the enforcement agency, and not have rushed to pass this bill they say is unenforceable they say won’t save any loons.”
###

Please read below and watch the video for more information on SB 89 and why it is not needed to save the Loons.  The current law works.  I am all for saving as many Loons as we can but bottom line SB 89 will not save one Loon.  This is a feel good bill and NH deserves better then that from our New Hampshire Representatives.  The Loons are doing very well.  Their numbers are up.  The below information and video will explain all of this.

Click the below links for more information.

Hearing for SB 89 is April 25th at 12:30.    Page 1103  Room 305-307 LOB                             
SB 89 Bill click here.         Status on SB 89          
E-mail the House Fish and Game Committee, HouseFishandGameAndMarineResources@leg.state.nh.us                   
E-mail the full House of Representatives,   HReps@leg.state.nh.us

The first 12 minutes have the most information and at minute 16:45 and 19:30 you will see charts that will help you under stand why SB 89 is not needed. Click on the youtube link in the lower right hand of the video and you will go to the youtube site for a better picture.

New Hampshire anglers . . .If Senate Bill 89 were to pass you would lose all of your traditional fishing jigs. This bill would prohibit the sales and use of leadhead jigs that are 1 oz. or less. This is essentially ALL of our traditional freshwater jigs. How much would it cost you to dump all your jigs and replace them (if they were even available) with more expensive metals such as tungsten?

How big is the New Hampshire loon population “problem” that it needs a special legislative fix? Here are some of the facts: Since the loon counts were started in 1975, the overall loon population has continued to steadily increase to the present day.
About how many loons die on average every year where a small lead object was found in a carcass? Answer: 5.3.individual birds. Last year there were 638 adult loons in NH (an all-time high). Lest we forget, our Fish & Game Dept. manages fish and wildlife to the overall population, not individual fish, deer, or birds as if they were pets.

Our current NH statute on lead fishing tackle was implemented 13 years ago and after much thoughtful discussion by all the stakeholders and including Senator Carl Johnson who at the time was a Director on the Loon Preservation Committee. They all agreed. That statute prohibited lead sinkers of 1 oz. or less and leadhead jigs that were less than 1” along the longest axis. This was the first statute of its kind in the USA. Maine, Vermont, and New York then followed New Hampshire’s lead although the NH statute was (and still is) twice as stringent as those other states. All these states got it right . . . they are still right. BTW, Vermont’s loon population has been increasing too despite not have a ban on any size jig. The scientific evidence demonstrated that the lead objects found in loon carcasses was relatively small with the majority being less than 0.2 oz. It made sense that loons might mistake small lead sinkers or jigs on the bottom of the lake as suitable grit. Too, it was possible for 4” to 6” perch (preferred prey of the loon) to ingest a small jig, break the line, flounder around thereby attracting the attention of a loon that then eats the whole works.
Now the loon people and environmentalists are attempting to over regulate New Hampshire’s anglers by banning the larger traditional jigs. After many years of insisting that loons were picking lead sinkers and jigs off the bottom for grit, they have now abandoned that idea because it is ridiculous to think that a loon is going to mistake a big 1 oz. bass jig for a small piece of grit. It is also ridiculous to think that a little 4 – 6” perch could even get a large bass jig in its mouth much less break off 12-20 lb. test line and then be eaten by a loon. So now they say the loons are acquiring the large jigs because bigger fish are being eaten by loons so they want to ban those large jigs. They also speculate now that some loons are somehow acquiring larger 3/8 to 1 ½ oz. jigs, but the loon’s digestive system is eroding the metal down to less than 0.2 oz. This is speculation because there are no scientific studies on loons that prove this to be the case. Lawmakers should not make new law based on speculation.
This legislative bill would hurt fishing in many ways. First, we do not want to follow the lead of Massachusetts by over regulating our citizens. Second, there would be a very significant cost burden for anglers, and especially members of the bass fishing community. It would hurt all NH retailers who sell fishing tackle. It would wipe out our many small fabricators that make and sell jigs. Tungsten jigs (if you could find them in a store) would be too expensive for the 11 – 17 year kids in our Junior Bassmaster clubs thereby discouraging more youths from getting involved in bass fishing.

This legislative bill just plain does not promote fishing. It does the just the opposite by over regulating our sport and wiping out an entire class of important traditional fishing lures. It would do this without any assurance that it would save a single bird.

You need to take action right now or risk losing your traditional fishing jigs . . . defend your freedom . . . don’t let the environmentalists and anti-fishing groups take it from you.

What you need to do right now . . . phone, send a note, or an e-mail to the 19 members of the House of Representatives Fish & Game committee. Here is the e-mail address that will be sent to all of them: HouseFishandGameAndMarineResources@leg.state.nh.us

Thank you so much for your time,
Representative John A.Burt,
Goffstown   Fish and Game Committee

I called US Senator Ayotte and US Senator Shaheen’s office a week ago asking them what their stance is on the upcoming Second Amendment bills that will be before them.

Senator Ayotte sent the below response and I thank her.  I have not heard back from Senator Shaheen’s office yet.

Contact US Senator Ayotte office or US Senator Shaheen office.

Reply from Senator Ayotte

Senator Kelly Ayotte [senator@ayotte.senate.gov]

Actions
To:  Burt, John
Thursday, April 04, 2013 12:14 PM

April 4, 2013
Dear Representative Burt:

Thank you for contacting me regarding recent gun control proposals and other efforts to reduce violence.  I appreciate hearing from you.

Like all Americans, I was shocked and deeply saddened by the murders of innocent children and educators in Newtown, Connecticut.  As the mother of two young children, it is difficult to imagine the pain felt by the parents of the children who were murdered.  My thoughts and prayers remain with the victims, their families, and the Newtown community.

As President Obama said, “no single law or set of laws will eliminate evil.”  In the wake of this horrific tragedy, I welcome a renewed and thoughtful discussion in Washington and across the country about how we can best prevent senseless acts of violence.

Moving forward, we need to be careful to ensure that we do not infringe on the constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans.  As a former murder prosecutor, I believe our focus should be on enforcing current federal laws to ensure that criminals and those who are “adjudicated as a mental defective” by reason of being a danger to himself or others (as defined by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives at 27 C.F.R. Section 478.11 and prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm under 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(4)) do not possess firearms.  We also should engage in an honest discussion about improving our mental health system, while working with law enforcement and local community leaders on school safety measures.  These are areas where I believe we can achieve bipartisan consensus.

On January 16, 2013, President Obama issued a Presidential Memorandum outlining proposals to reduce gun violence.  These proposals include a so-called “assault weapons” ban, universal background checks, prohibiting high-capacity magazines, increasing access to mental health services, and school safety measures.  Subsequently, on January 24, 2013, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) introduced S. 150, a bill that would ban 157 firearm makes and models and also limit magazine capacities to 10 or fewer rounds.  Other proposals may be offered, and I will certainly review each carefully.

First, any discussion about reducing violence must begin with our Constitution.  Our Bill of Rights clearly protects the right to self-defense.  The Second Amendment to the Constitution states:  “… the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  In 2008, the United States Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller (554 U.S. 570) that the Second Amendment does, in fact, confer an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

As well as respecting constitutional limits, I believe that our laws should protect the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.  I appreciate that many New Hampshire citizens possess firearms for recreation, hunting, and self-defense.  In fact, my husband, who is an Iraq war veteran, often participates in shooting competitions at our local fish and game club.  Based on my experience as a prosecutor, I do not believe we will stop criminals or mentally ill individuals intent on illegally obtaining and misusing firearms by restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens.

With those principles as a guide, I do not support a so-called “assault weapons” ban or arbitrary limits on magazine capacities as contained in Senator Feinstein’s bill.  This legislation is very broad, banning many common models of semi-automatic firearms lawfully owned by citizens, including three very popular models of rifles.  While the legislation would grandfather current firearm owners, allowing them to keep the newly banned guns, it would also take the unusual and confiscatory step of requiring the forfeiture of those firearms to the government upon the owner’s death.

It is important to understand that there was an “assault weapons” ban in effect from 1994 to 2004.  A report submitted in 2004 to the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and the National Institute of Justice evaluated the effectiveness of the ban.  That study, conducted by Christopher S. Koper, Daniel J. Woods, and Jeffrey A. Roth of the Jerry Lee Center of Criminology at the University of Pennsylvania, found no statistically significant evidence that either the “assault weapons” ban or the ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds had reduced gun murders.

I do believe that there are improvements we should make to our existing background check system to stop criminals and others prohibited from possessing firearms under federal law from obtaining them.  For example, all federally licensed firearms dealers are required to contact law enforcement to conduct a National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) search regardless of where they sell the firearms.  However, there is a deficiency in what records are being entered into NICS.  Although it is illegal to sell or transfer a firearm to an individual who is adjudicated as mentally incompetent, many states, including New Hampshire, are not entering all relevant records into NICS.  It also appears that in many states, including New Hampshire, once an individual is in the system as mentally incompetent, there is no way to appropriately petition to be removed from this list if he or she has received treatment and is deemed to have recovered.

Following the Virginia Tech tragedy, the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA; Public Law 110-180) was enacted to, among other things, encourage states to make more records available for use during NICS background checks.  However, according to a July 2012 Government Accountability Office report, only 12 states dramatically increased the number of mental health records available for use during NICS background checks, and most states made very little progress in entering these records.  As of October 2011, there were four states that had not submitted any mental health records at all, and 17 states that had submitted fewer than 10.  New Hampshire had only submitted two records.  Some states have not entered these records because of concerns that privacy laws, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA; Public Law 104-191), prevent them from providing mental health records to NICS.

We must eliminate legal barriers to ensure that records of individuals who are adjudicated as mentally incompetent get included in the NICS index.  We also need to more effectively enforce current laws.  Astonishingly, according to the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia, of an estimated 80,000 people who failed background checks under NICS (e.g., fugitives, domestic abusers, felons, and mentally ill individuals), the DOJ prosecuted only 44 for attempting to purchase a firearm-essentially sending a signal that individuals who are prohibited by law from owning a gun won’t be punished for breaking the law by trying to obtain one.

While I believe there is much we can do to improve our background check system and enforce existing laws, I do have concerns with “universal” background check proposals that retain the records of law-abiding citizens in a way that could be used to create a firearms registry that would infringe on privacy rights.  I also believe we should respect the current rights of law-abiding citizens to transfer their firearms to family members.

Finally, any discussion of how we stem violence must address the deficiencies in our mental health system.  We should re-examine our laws to ensure they are effective.  Having worked with law enforcement, I recognize that there are not enough treatment options for mentally ill individuals.  A 2006 DOJ study found that 56 percent of state prisoners, 45 percent of federal prisoners, and 64 percent of local jail inmates suffer from mental health challenges.  There appears to be a bipartisan consensus that there is much more we can do to improve our mental health system.

That is why I have joined Senator Al Franken (D-MN) in introducing the Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Act, which would expand mental health services available to inmates.  I also worked with Senators Mark Begich (D-AK) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) to introduce the Mental Health First Aid Act, which is designed to expand mental health first aid training in communities across the nation.

In the weeks ahead, I am willing to work with any of my colleagues who are serious about finding solutions that will prevent mass shootings without infringing on Americans’ Second Amendment rights.  With a firm commitment to our Constitution, I will carefully review and evaluate all proposals to reduce violence.  While there are no easy answers to address mass gun violence in our society, there are steps we can take right now to ensure our background check system is fully enforced while working to improve early intervention with mentally ill individuals.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me.  As your Senator, it is important to hear from you regarding the current issues affecting New Hampshire and our nation.  Please do not hesitate to be in touch again if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,
Kelly A. Ayotte
U. S. Senator

KAA/sr

Not that long ago I was campaigning in Goffstown. Went to 1,000 doors. The Republican party said we better speak of jobs, jobs and more jobs. Well to the voters that were home I spoke about jobs if they brought it up but what I spoke of mostly was, “if you do not vote for me and my friends this is what the Dems will do to you”. Then I would tell the voters all the taxes the Dems will raise on the NH people. Below is what is before the House of Representatives Wednesday April 3rd.

I thank the voters of Goffstown for allowing me to say NO on the below new taxes.
NH House Calendars and Journals
Find your local NH Representative      Look up a House or Senate Bill

Goffstown, would you like to keep your State taxes low and have the State live within the current budget as I do?  Then call or e-mail your Goffstown Representatives.  Here is their contact information.  If you would like to contact all the NH State Representatives just e-mail, HReps@leg.state.nh.us

I know I will vote against these new taxes and I believe Representative Hikel, Meaney, Pratt and Warden will also join me.  Now our friend Representative Ruth Gage may not think as we do and may vote for these new taxes as she has voted with the Democrats I believe 100% of the time this year.  So maybe a polite e-mail or phone call may help Rep Gage understand that it is not ok to raise the State spending by so much.  Remember be polite to all the Reps you contact.

Representative John A. Burt, 624-5084 home, john@burtnh.com home e-mail.  Representative Ruth Gage, 497-4018, ruth.gage@leg.state.nh.us                       Representative John Hikel, 860-7891, john.hikel@leg.state.nh.us                     Representative Richard Meaney, 351-5042, richard.meaney@leg.state.nh.us                    Representative Cal Pratt, 497-4337, calvin.pratt@leg.state.nh.us                    Representative Mark Warden, 391-2888, mark.warden@leg.state.nh.us

Budget
• 10.2% increase in spending
• Grows government by 5% per year when the economy is growing, at best, 2% per year
• Built on tens of millions of dollars in inflated revenue estimates
• Allows the Governor to use any one of 300 dedicated funds as an ATM with minimal input from the legislature
• Suspends business tax reforms passed by the prior legislature that would ease tax burdens on business community
• Raises the tobacco tax by 30 cents
• Includes revenue from the raise in the gas tax of 12 cents
• Increases a number of other taxes and fees
• Diverts Highway Fund dollars to the Department of Safety at a rate higher that allowed by statue
• Includes Medicaid Expansion that will cost the state millions to implement and if federal funding drops, the state will be liable for hundreds of millions in costs
• This bill raises the cap on costs counties pay for long term care, which downshifts $7million in costs to county governments.
• Includes a moratorium on school building aid
• Includes a moratorium on charter schools
• Ends the school choice tax credit program
• Underfunds Corrections Dept. overtime, and possibly other line items, that would allow those agencies to can by statue, ask for more money from the fiscal committee during the biennium when they run out

House Democrat 2013 Legislation

CACR2- This Constitutional Amendment seeks to allow for graduated taxes.
HB 168- This bill is a 33% tax increase on beer.
HB 185- This bill is a 25% increase on home fuel.
HB 330- This bill would allow for counties to adopt county wide income taxes.
HB 617- This bill is was an 83% and then a 67% increase in the gas tax, which will cost NH families and businesses hundreds of millions of dollars.
HB 659- This bill increases the tobacco tax by 20cents, something what will directly hurt our state’s border businesses.
HB 287- This bill eliminates all voter identification requirements past last year.
HB 582- This bill repeals the “early offer” system that was past last year.
HB 544- This bill would delete the prohibition on a state-based health exchanges, allowing for ObamaCare implementation in NH.
HB 135- This bill would repeal NH’s “Stand Your Ground Law”.
HB 370- This bill would repeal NH’s school choice tax scholarship program.

Here is true leadership at it’s best.  Bill O’Brien past Speaker of the House has an amendment to HB 617.  Rep Campbell, (D) Nashua wants to charge an extra 15 cent gas tax per gallon.  This will hurt the people of NH and our business.  Below is Representative O’Brien’s message.  Please e-mail all Reps at HReps@leg.state.nh.us and ask them to support Rep O’Brien amendment.

Please call your local Rep also and tell them to support Rep O’Brien’s amendment.  We vote on this Wednesday so we need you today.  Below is Rep O’Brien message.

Watch WMUR Close UP with Josh McElveen Sunday morning at 10:00am.

Rep David Campbell and I talk about the new 15 cent gas tax per gallon that Rep Campbell wants you to pay. I oppose the gas tax.

Josh McElveen did a great job and even asked Rep Campbell about his famous e-mail. “The Gift that keeps on giving”.

Please watch WMUR’s Close UP with Josh McElveen and let me know where you stand on the 15 cent gas tax increase that Rep Campbell says we need and I say we have enough money for the NHDOT and we just need to spend it more wisely.

Rep Campbell’s 15 cent tax is House Bill 617. We will be voting on the bill Wednesday March 6th. You have time to e-mail all the State Representative at HReps@leg.state.nh.us and let us know that the Government should live with the budget they currently have now as you are living within your current home budget.

Thank you for watching,
Representative John A. Burt
Goffstown.

I will be talking on the House floor Wednesday February 27, 2013.  I will be speaking against House Bill 617-FN-A-LOCAL.  The new 15 cent gas tax hike over the next 4 years.

I ask my fellow NH State Representatives please do not do this to the citizens of NH.  I ask the voters to make your voice heard and please e-mail all Reps at HReps@leg.state.nh.us and tell them, NO to this new tax.  There will be a roll call on this bill  which will record our vote on this bill. I will forward that information to you Wednesday night to call out all those reps who voted for this new 15 cent gas tax and who feels your pain in this economy and voted NO.

HB 617 is an economic killer for the lower income worker . They struggle to own a car and keep it running and we are going to do this to them.

We do not need this new tax as we have enough money in the Department of Transportation budget to repair our roads and bridges that truly need repair.  One thing we need to do is fire the top tier of the DOT.  If we have that many bridges ready to fall in and a private company was running it, heads would roll.  But not in the Government.

I am hearing why some of these bridges are placed on the Red List.  In most cases the bridges are fine just the new standards from the Feds make the bridges in noncompliance.  So my question is what is the real number of bridges that truly need to be replaced?

Union Leader John Distaso interviews former Speaker of the House Bill O’Brien and here is a small part of the story.  Click here for the full story.

Republican former House speaker Bill O’Brien said Monday Campbell’s language was “incautious” and could lead many House members to oppose the proposal.
“That’s certainly language that I don’t think he’ll use in debate unless someone asks him about his use of it,” O’Brien said. “And someone just might ask him about it.
“How many times do we have to be reminded that email is a very dangerous thing?” asked O’Brien. “We tend to write emails as if we’re talking to each other, but it’s in writing and it lives there.”

Union Leader Article, “Tom Thomson, a tree farmer from Orford, urged the panel not to endorse the bill,saying it would increase the cost of consumer goods, such as food.
“During a recession is not the time to be increasing taxes and fees on either our citizens or our businesses,” he said.

Union Leader Article, “Another View: Proposal to raise the gas tax will hurt NH families, businesses.”

Here is a PowerPoint that the Prime Sponsor sent to all Reps.  It has information about the Red Listed bridges.

Here is the pork, yes even in NH we can keep up with the pork in DC, just on a smaller number.  This was sent to the Prime Sponsor earlier today.

Eagle-Tribune Article,   “It’s out of control,” said Andy Carace, owner of Pest-End Exterminators and Pro-Tech Lawn Care, which operates offices in Plaistow, Derry and Methuen.  “We must be spending $15,000 to $20,000 a month,” with more than half of a 28-person workforce on the road, Carace said.  Company fuel expenses have doubled since President Obama took office, he said.”

If the House passes this bill please contact the Senate and tell them this is the wrong time.  Fix the misspending in the DOT and fix the bridges that need fixing and leave the ones that are fine but just out dated.  We can fix them later.

Vermont Dems must have read the Vermont Constitution and it is clear. “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” God bless the Constitution.

“Vermont has the oldest unrestricted concealed carry laws in the nation; similar laws have recently been adopted in Wyoming, Alaska and Arizona.” NH should follow.

I will continue to fight for this right in the New Hampshire State House.

Read the full story here.

Second Amendment to the United State Constitution.

We here in Goffstown have great teachers and support staff yet the top administration is a huge problem.  Miss Buckley and Mountain View Middle School principal Jim Hunt of MA should step down or be fired.  Our schools are not being run as efficient as they can be and that our children and tax payers deserves.

Here is a video of my TV show, NH Politics with John Burt on this matter.  My guest is Donna Pinard.

Donna Pinard works hard for our schools, and tax payers and keeps us informed with her own show on Goffstown Community Access Television “School Board Watch”.

Donna Pinard and I talk about MVMS, the administration, school budget, remodeling of our grade schools and much more.

Send me an e-mail on your thoughts on the show.  john@burtnh.com

The Second Amendment is under attack and I need your help.  Bottom line if we lose any of our Second Amendment rights will lose our rights of any kind in the future.

Public Hearing: 1/22/2013     1:30 PM      L O Building, room 204

That is the building behind the State House.

I would guess with as many people that I understand will show up they may move the hearing to Representatives Hall in the State House, second floor.  Take the stairs to the left if that happens.  Next to a huge picture of the civil war.

If you come please sign up to speak.  Even if it is to say, “NO I want the full right to protect my family where ever I am in NH”.  Just that little may help.

Here is the link to the full bill HB 135.

Here is the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee.  You can e-mail the committee.  Put your e-mail in your own words to stop this repeal.  I am a State Rep and I represent the whole state and my constituents are from Goffstown.   They also represent the whole state.

Here is the link to find a House or Senate bill.  Just type in HB 135 in the third box down on the left.  That will get you the information on this bad bill.  Type in another bill number to see that House or Senate bill.

To find your State Representative.  Your House Calender full of upcoming House Bills.

Below is only part of the bill.  Rep Shurtleff is very misguided in this bad for NH House Bill and please do your part and let him and the committee hear that from you.  Our children’s future depends on it.

House Bill 135 – AS INTRODUCED

2013 SESSION              13-0281                    04/09

AN ACT relative to physical force in defense of a person and relative to the definition of non-deadly force.

SPONSORS: Rep. Shurtleff, Merr 11

COMMITTEE: Criminal Justice and Public Safety                              ANALYSIS

This bill:

I. Eliminates the provision allowing a person to use deadly force anywhere he or she has a right to be.

II. Amends the definition of non-deadly force.

III. Repeals the provision granting civil immunity for the use of force in certain circumstances.