Committee recommends against universal background checks, three-day waiting period after hours of testimony

Hundreds of Granite Staters and a dozen witnesses filled the Criminal Justice and Public Safety hearing room on April 12 as lawmakers debated House Bill 56, a proposal to require a background check for any firearm transfer in New Hampshire and impose a minimum 72‑hour waiting period before a transferred firearm may be taken into possession.

The committee voted in executive session to recommend the bill be declared “inexpedient to legislate” (ITL), 8–7, after extended public testimony and questioning. The recommendation means the committee will not move HB 56 forward to the full House.

Why it mattered: Sponsor Representative David Muse (R‑Portsmouth) said the bill closes a gap that allows private transfers to occur without a background check, exposing convicted felons, domestic abusers and some people adjudicated as a danger to themselves or others to a pathway to firearms. He told the committee the bill also establishes a 72‑hour buffer that could reduce impulsive gun suicides.

Supporters’ case: Dozens of supporters, including Moms Demand Action volunteer Marcella Dubey, physicians and bereaved family members, urged passage. Dr. John Henke, speaking for the New Hampshire Psychiatric Society, told the committee that “the use of a gun greatly increases the risk that violence to self or others will result in a fatality” and that waiting periods and background checks are associated with reduced firearm suicides and homicides. Donna Moore described the 2021 suicide of her 21‑year‑old son after he legally bought a gun minutes before using it; she said a delay of even 24 hours could have given him time to reconsider.

Moms Demand Action and other witnesses cited multi‑state research and peer‑reviewed estimates presented at the hearing that waiting periods can reduce firearm suicides (quoted ranges at the hearing: roughly 7–11% in some studies) and can reduce homicides in some analyses. Witnesses supporting the bill also described the case of a Portsmouth man who was arrested after posting a video threatening a school; supporters said universal checks could have created an extra barrier to the weapons he had available.

Opponents’ case: Opponents – including business owners, gun collectors, the state director of the National Rifle Association and the New Hampshire Gun Owners organization – said the bill would burden lawful private transfers, harm small businesses and prevent immediate access for people who say they need guns for self‑defense. Several witnesses, including gun‑shop operators and members of firearms‑rights groups, contended criminals do not obey transfer laws and that delays would shift sales across state lines, citing anecdotal evidence of shopping patterns.

Several witnesses raised specific constitutional and practical objections. Retired trauma surgeon Nick Paranchevitch described treating gunshot victims and supported measures that reduce availability to people at high risk, while others testified that waiting periods would imperil domestic‑violence survivors who say they might need immediate access to a firearm. The NRA representative and local gun‑industry witnesses emphasized existing federal background checks through the NICS system (the National Instant Criminal Background Check System) for federal firearms licensee (FFL) sales and argued the state requirement would duplicate or deter lawful conduct.

Key provisions discussed: Under the draft text presented at the hearing, private transfers where neither party is an FFL would require initiation of a background check by an FFL; certain exceptions are carved out (gifts or inheritances between immediate family, temporary transfers between hunters and target shooters, and other narrow exceptions listed in the bill). The waiting period would run from the time the background check is initiated; if the check itself remains pending longer than 72 hours the transfer would not occur until the check clears.

Committee reaction and vote: In executive session Representative Rhodes moved the committee recommend ITL; Representative Prue seconded. After roll‑call the committee voted 8 in favor of ITL and 7 opposed. The committee minutes record that supporters and opponents each made forceful points about safety and rights, but the committee chose not to advance the measure.

Votes at a glance from this hearing (committee actions) - HB 56 (universal background checks; 72‑hour waiting period): Committee recommendation — Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL). Motion carried 8–7 (mover: Rep. Rhodes; seconder: Rep. Prue). (See actions section below for roll call breakdown.) - HB 207 (repeal prohibition on certain impact weapons/knuckled implements): Committee recommendation — Ought to Pass. Committee voted to recommend passage; bill will move forward (motion carried; roll called in executive session). - HB 352 (prohibit firearms at polling places): Committee recommendation — Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL). Motion carried 8–7 in executive session; proponents and opponents debated voter intimidation versus rights to carry. - HB 381 (state exemption to some federal firearms regulation to provoke commerce‑clause litigation): Committee recommended NOT to pass; motion carried by 8–7 (committee will not advance the measure). - HB 506 (time limits and process to return firearms and property seized under court order after order vacated): Committee recommended Ought to Pass as amended (unanimous vote reported). The amendment directs courts to issue return orders promptly after Department of Safety response and provides an administrative pathway for citizens to retrieve property. - HB 609 (clarify preemption to include nonlethal self‑defense tools and to limit agency rulemaking): No committee recommendation recorded; sponsor and a number of witnesses testified and the committee appointed a subcommittee to consider amendments.

What the record shows: The hearing record includes lengthy direct testimony from survivors, clinicians, law‑enforcement personnel, firearm dealers and advocacy groups on both sides. Several witnesses cited state suicide counts and percentages of suicides involving firearms (witnesses gave varying figures; for example one speaker cited 54.64% for 2022 in New Hampshire, another testimony referenced the state figure that a majority of firearm deaths are suicides). Witnesses also cited federal background‑check mechanisms and state experience in other statutes. The committee took the position not to advance HB 56.

What this means next: The ITL recommendation means HB 56 will not proceed from this committee to the full House for a floor recommendation. Supporters who want to pursue universal background checks or waiting periods could seek rehearing by the committee, bring a revised bill in a future session, or pursue other statutory changes.

Sources and limitations: This article is based on the committee hearing and executive session transcript of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee on April 12, 2023. Quotations and statistics in testimony are attributed in the record to named witnesses; where witnesses gave different figures, the article reports the range and cites the speaker or organization (see speakers and provenance below). The article does not infer enforcement details beyond what was presented at the hearing.

Ending note: HB 56 drew split testimony that tracked familiar national lines: public‑health and suicide‑prevention advocates pressed for a universal‑check, cooling‑off approach; gun‑rights and pro‑business witnesses stressed immediate access for lawful owners and economic and constitutional concerns. The committee’s narrow ITL recommendation reflects that split.