In March of 2006, the petitioner went to the office of the Dover City Attorney to discuss pending litigation in which he was the plaintiff. During the meeting, he removed a loaded pistol from his pocket, and placed it on the desk as a “prop” in a story he was telling. The conversation was described as “unusual and heated,” and a city employee who overheard the conversation became worried about the petitioner and his conduct with the weapon.
This conduct was reported to the respondent police chief, who had also received negative reports of the petitioner’s conduct at a neighborhood meeting, and reports that the petitioner refused to speak with police investigators regarding his actions. Based upon these three pieces of information, the Chief revoked the petitioner’s license to carry the concealed weapon. The petitioner appealed this action to the Dover District Court, which upheld the decision following a one and a half day evidentiary hearing. The District Court made factual findings, including that the petitioner had been “reckless” in his behavior, and further found that the statute did not serve to restrict his right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the New Hampshire Constitution.
The petitioner did not appeal these factual findings, but instead appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the District Court had erred in its findings regarding the constitutionality of the statute under the New Hampshire Constitution.
The Court thoroughly reviewed these arguments, and determined that the statute was a reasonable set of restrictions upon the fundamental right of all citizens to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the New Hampshire Constitution. The Court rejected petitioner’s argument that the statute must be reviewed under the “strict scrutiny” test, finding that all other state courts that had considered the issue also rejected a review using this test. Although the petitioner argued that the statute was “void for vagueness,” the Court determined that any person of average intelligence could determine the types of behavior with a firearm that could result in a loss of the license to carry it as a concealed weapon. As applied in this case, using a loaded weapon to tell a story while in a public place was determined to constitute “just cause” to revoke the license.