This bill helps to assure complete accurate information is included in background checks. It's a common sense bill.
HB159
House · 2025 sessionBipartisanDied in HouseMental health reporting for gun checks
AIAuthorizes New Hampshire courts and the department of safety to report certain mental health adjudications to the national firearms background check system and establishes a process for relief from resulting firearm possession disqualifications.
(New Title) authorizing the state to report mental health data for firearms background check purposes and providing for processes for voluntary surrender of firearms following certain mental health-related court proceedings and for relief from mental health-related firearms disabilities.
Status
Died on the table in the House · March 13, 2025- ✓Introduced
- ✕House
- Senate
- Governor
- Law
Division of testimony
407 submissionsHatched = form letter · 45 of 407 written submissions (11%) came from organized campaigns
Argument digest · AI-generated
from 136 of 179 written submissionsHB159 would authorize New Hampshire to report certain mental health-related court records to the national firearms background check system (NICS) and create processes for voluntary firearm surrender and later relief from firearms disabilities. Supporters, including several with clinical or personal experience with gun violence, frame it as a common-sense public-safety measure that closes a reporting gap and can prevent suicide or crisis violence; a much larger number of opponents, including two large form-letter campaigns, argue it infringes on Second Amendment rights by enabling firearm confiscation without adequate due process, stigmatizes people who seek mental health care, and is largely a repeat of last year's rejected HB1711.
- Closes a gap in national background check reportingSupport19 of 136 reviewed
Supporters argue NH currently fails to report mental-health-related firearm disqualifications to NICS, making background checks incomplete, and that the bill closes this loophole.
- Prevents suicide and harm during mental health crisesSupport17 of 136 reviewed
Supporters argue that keeping firearms from people experiencing a serious mental health crisis, especially those involuntarily committed, protects both the individual and the public from harm, including suicide.
- Personal or professional experience supports the billSupport5 of 136 reviewed
Some supporters, including clinicians and people personally affected by gun violence or suicide, describe firsthand experience that they say demonstrates the need for the bill.
- Reasonable, common-sense, bipartisan measureSupport3 of 136 reviewed
Supporters describe the bill as a reasonable, common-sense step that has drawn support from both Second Amendment advocates and public-safety advocates across party lines.
- Cites specific shootings as justificationSupport3 of 136 reviewed
Some supporters point to specific incidents, such as the New Hampshire Hospital shooting and the 2023 Maine mass shooting, as evidence of the consequences of incomplete background-check data.
- Confiscation without due process infringes Second AmendmentOppose53 of 136 reviewed · 45 via form letter
Submitters argue the bill allows firearms to be seized based on mental health proceedings without adequate due process protections, calling this an unconstitutional infringement of Second (and sometimes Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth) Amendment rights.
“This bill infringes on our Second Amendment rights by allowing firearm confiscation based on mental health proceedings without proper due process.”
— form letter, submitted 32 times · #398398 — read full submission →
“HB159 represents a dangerous infringement on our Second Amendment rights by allowing the confiscation of firearms based on mental health proceedings without proper due process.”
— Jason Bradt, Hollis · #401240 — read full submission →
“Due process is denied thousands under “red flag” laws. None were charged with a crime, arrested or convicted before gun confiscation.”
— Brady Owens, Nashua · #404949 — read full submission →
- Bill is a repeat of last year's defeated HB1711Oppose13 of 136 reviewed
Submitters note the bill is essentially a reintroduction of HB1711, which was rejected in the prior session, and argue it should be rejected again for the same reasons.
- Bill will discourage people from seeking mental health careOppose13 of 136 reviewed
Submitters argue that fear of losing firearm rights will deter people from voluntarily seeking mental health treatment, stigmatizing treatment-seekers and worsening outcomes.
- Slippery slope toward broader gun control / red-flag lawOppose11 of 136 reviewed
Submitters characterize the bill as a red-flag-style law that could be misused or expanded, allowing rights to be stripped based on subjective judgment or malicious accusations rather than a criminal act.
- Doesn't address the underlying problemOppose5 of 136 reviewed
Submitters argue that if someone is genuinely dangerous they should be treated or kept from society entirely, that other means of harm remain available, and that the bill targets only gun owners without improving mental health care.
- Privacy concerns over sharing mental health recordsOppose5 of 136 reviewed
Submitters express distrust of government handling of sensitive mental health and medical records once reported to state or federal databases.
- Practical costs: taxpayer expense and slow relief processOppose4 of 136 reviewed
Submitters object that relitigating an already-rejected bill wastes taxpayer money, and separately criticize the process for restoring firearm rights as slow and burdensome.
- Research shows mental illness is a weak predictor of violenceOppose2 of 136 reviewed
Submitters cite research indicating mental illness accounts for only a small share of violent crime, arguing the bill unfairly singles out people with a mental health history.
- NH already has low gun crime; problem is overstatedOppose2 of 136 reviewed
Submitters argue New Hampshire already has low rates of gun crime and homicide, so the bill addresses a problem that does not meaningfully exist in the state.
Generated by claude-sonnet-5 (claude code agent) on Jul 20, 2026. Quotes are verbatim excerpts, verified against the cited submission before publication. Summaries are AI interpretation of the record, not part of it.
Form-letter campaigns
45 of 179 written submissions (25%)45 submissions match 2 shared templates; 134 are individually written.
- Opposition to HB159Oppose32 submissions on this bill
The bill is opposed because it is argued to infringe on Second Amendment rights by allowing firearm confiscation based on mental health proceedings without due process.
The letter · submitted 32 times I am deeply concerned about HB159, which seems to be a reintroduction of last year's HB1711. This bill infringes on our Second Amendment rights by allowing firearm confiscation based on mental health proceedings without proper due process. It stigmatizes individuals seeking mental health support and sets a dangerous precedent for gun control.
- Oppose HB159: Second Amendment ConcernsOppose13 submissions on this bill
The template argues that the bill infringes on Second Amendment rights by allowing firearm confiscation based on mental health proceedings without proper due process.
The letter · submitted 13 times Subject: Oppose HB159 - A Repeat of HB1711 Dear Members of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee, I am deeply concerned about HB159, which seems to be a reintroduction of last year's HB1711. This bill infringes on our Second Amendment rights by allowing firearm confiscation based on mental health proceedings without proper due process. It stigmatizes individuals seeking mental health support and sets a dangerous precedent for gun control. As members of the New Hampshire Firearms Coalition, NH's Only No-Compromise Gun Rights Organization, we stand firm on protecting our constitutional rights without compromise. Please vote NO on HB159 to protect the rights of New Hampshire citizens. This bill could: Deter law-abiding citizens from seeking mental health treatment due to fear of losing their rights. Lead to the disarmament of individuals based on temporary or misjudged mental health evaluations without thorough due process. Establish a precedent for broader gun control measures under the guise of public safety. Sincerely, Theodore Sattley
Detected by text-similarity clustering; campaign names are AI-generated.
Complete and accurate information is necessary when selling lethal weapons to individuals. The man who committed the mass shooting in Maine over a year ago had exhibited many mental health problems which people tried to flag to prevent him from getting access to guns. They failed. This information should be available should be available in the national background check database so that no matter where a person tries to buy a gun, the information is available. We don't need any more tragedies like what occurred in Maine.
Dear Members of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee, I am deeply concerned about HB159, which seems to be a reintroduction of last year’s HB1711. This bill infringes on our Second Amendment rights by allowing firearm confiscation based on mental health proceedings without proper due process. It stigmatizes individuals seeking mental health support and sets a dangerous precedent for gun control.
Property should not be seized for any reason without proper due process protections. Please vote no on HB159.
Guns terrify me. In the hands of the wrong people they can do extensive damage in a matter of seconds. If one of the roles of government is to protect people, I think it makes sense to try to do whatever possible to keep guns out of the hands of people who could possibly misuse them. I realize this is somewhat discriminatory against people with mental health problems, but, in this case, I believe safety comes first. Thank you for reading this.
My testimony was turned in to the committee
The amendment does nothing to make the original bill better, just changes the language
This bill not only shares the support of Second Amendment defenders as well as those who wish to see common sense legislation passed for public safety, it also has the near unicorn status of being one that enjoys a bi-partisan sponsorship. And yet once again we will hear from the opposition about the hyperbolic hardships and hypothetical injustices that would be imposed on those who might temporarily lose their right to bear arms during a crisis. Frankly, I’m appalled that such reasons are even spoken about when lives and families can be destroyed when people who are in crisis are able to retain and use a gun to harm themselves or others without any recourse to an intervention by caring friends, family or community. HB159 would help ensure that people with documented and significant history of mental illness are prevented from accessing the most effective means of doing harm to themselves or others. As for the hypothetical inconvenience and hyperbolic injustices the opposition raises, I would like to remind the Committee of the very real inconveniences, injustices and public safety issues at play when people in crisis resort to using guns to solve a temporary problem they are experiencing. Families are destroyed and this bill could help prevent that. A close family friend of mine had guns taken from his home during a mental health crisis. He and his family happened to live in a state that reported the incident to NICS which prevented him from purchasing a gun for a period of time afterwards and safely allowed the removal of guns from his home. His wife was able to protect herself, her husband and her two sons from the possibility of gun violence during this crisis. Because of these laws, today, this family is celebrating birthdays, anniversaries, graduations and weddings together. They had the chance to heal without the threat of gun violence. At these hearings I hear all the time that ‘guns don’t kill people, people kill people’. I heard it last year testifying for HB1711 and I expect it will be the same this year. We're not talking about law-abiding, people who are not in an emotional crisis that has impaired their judgement. We're talking about people that need our help to keep themselves and others safe in our communities. I'd like to hope I won't be copying this same testimony next year. I especially hope another tragedy does not occur that could have been prevented by the passage of HB159. This year let us not make the quest for a single, perfect solution to the problem of gun violence become the enemy of the good a bill like this might do to prevent people in crisis from harming themselves or others. Please vote in favor of HB159
The shooting at the New Hampshire Hospital in which a security officer was killed by a former patient should have been a “wake up” call for the NH legislature. There is no good reason that such data should not be provided to the National database. It does not reveal the nature of the individual’s illness, physician -patent privileged information or HIPAA information, just that he/she was involuntarily committed. In this instance, public safety clearly outweighs any residual privacy
We need public safety!
I am committed state laws, like HB 159, are critical to ensuring the effectiveness of federal background checks by authorizing complete and accurate records. I care about the safety and well being of the people that make up our communities across the granite state. This a common sense, effective, efficient approach and want all that can be done to minimize gun violence and suicide by gun. Please do what is best for our state, our children and our future generations. Thank you.
Subject: Oppose HB159 - A Repeat of HB1711 Dear Members of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee, I am deeply concerned about HB159, which seems to be a reintroduction of last year's HB1711. This bill infringes on our Second Amendment rights by allowing firearm confiscation based on mental health proceedings without proper due process. It stigmatizes individuals seeking mental health support and sets a dangerous precedent for gun control. As members of the New Hampshire Firearms Coalition, NH's Only No-Compromise Gun Rights Organization, we stand firm on protecting our constitutional rights without compromise. Please vote NO on HB159 to protect the rights of New Hampshire citizens. This bill could: Deter law-abiding citizens from seeking mental health treatment due to fear of losing their rights. Lead to the disarmament of individuals based on temporary or misjudged mental health evaluations without thorough due process. Establish a precedent for broader gun control measures under the guise of public safety. Sincerely, Robert Wm. Henderson
To the Members of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee, I am writing in opposition to HB159. As with the similar (same) HB1711 last year, this bill infringes on the public’s Second Amendment rights by allowing firearm confiscation based on mental health proceedings without proper due process. New Hampshire has a large population of legal firearm owners, and yet a very low gun crime rate. Although I’m sure HB 159 was well intended, it would actually stigmatize individuals seeking mental health support and sets a dangerous precedent for gun control This bill could: • Deter law-abiding citizens from seeking mental health treatment due to fear of losing their rights. • Lead to the disarmament of individuals based on temporary or misjudged mental health evaluations without thorough due process. • Establish a precedent for broader gun control measures under the guise of public safety. I ask you to please vote NO on HB159 to protect the rights of New Hampshire citizens. Thank you for your time and consideration, Dan Keleher
As a public safety issue, I absolutely support authorizing NH to report mental health data to the national background check system. This act goes a long way to ensuring the effectiveness of federal background checks by authorizing complete and accurate records. This is a common-sense step in the ability for communities to protect their citizens by having accurate records on mental health data. Many lives could be saved with this measure, which doesn't infringe one bit on a citizen's right to bear arms. This is about having up-to-date and accurate data so that we can protect our loved ones - and ourselves.
We must take every step possible to avoid school shootings. This law is critical to ensuring the effectiveness of federal background checks by authorizing complete and accurate records.
To The Honorable Committee Members of House Criminal Justice and Public Safety, Please vote ITL on HB159. The bill is a wide sweeping form of soft gun control. It violates one's privacy and Constitutional rights while unnecessarily broadening the reach of State Government. Additionally, this will also prohibit someone, who may benefit by receiving counselling, from seeking treatment for fear of gun confiscation. Sincerely and Respectfully, Rep. Marie Louise Bjelobrk Grafton 5 - Benton, Haverhill, Landaff, Piermont and Warren
I strongly support.
PLEASE kill this bill. This bill not only threatens our Second Amendment rights but does so in a manner that bypasses due process and privacy. Results of passing this bill would result in punishing one without due process, being adjudicated and found guilty of any crime. It eliminates due process. This bill interferes with patient privacy and the doctor patient relationship. NO gun owner who's aware of this type of legislation would ever seek help from a mental health professional knowing it puts them at high risk of unjustly losing the Second Amendment rights and enduring a legal nightmare without ever having committed a crime. This is a dangerous threat to our freedoms and guarantees an open door to more gun control. Currently in America 24% of women, 11% of men take anti-depressant / anti-anxiety medications. An estimated 41% of Americans suffer untreated depression/anxiety symptoms. If this bill passes potentially 41% of NH residents would be subject to losing their Second Amendment rights without due process. Clearly, this 41% are not out committing firearms related crimes. This would be tantamount to taking driver's licenses away from anyone discovered purchasing an alcohol product in fear they may commit a drunk driving crime. Please Kill this bill. With all due respect, Dr. Walter Moore
Mental health requires maintenance just as physical and oral health and taking care of your health should not remove ones second amendment rights, especially when studies show that your logic is not substantiated by science. "Studies consistently indicate that, even among mass murders and shootings, mental illness is a factor in a minority of these events (Duwe 2004, Fox & DeLateur 2014, Stone 2015, Taylor 2016, Vossekuil et al. 2002)", it is estimated that only about 4% of criminal violence can reasonably be attributed to mentally ill individuals (Metzl & MacLeish 2015, Swanson 1996). Furthermore, "Because an overwhelming percentage of people with mental illness are not violent, and because the occurrence of serious mental illness is relatively low, this means that even if all of the association between mental illness and violence could somehow be eliminated, we would still have to confront 96% of the violence in the United States (Swanson 2008, 2015)." (Rozel & Mulvey, 2017). This lack of association is even clear in the context of NH, which according to NAMI New Hampshire (2021), 221,000 adults in New Hampshire have a mental health condition (19% of the total NH adult population). 25% of those with a condition (57,000) have a Serious Mental Illness (5% of all NH adults), and 25% of those with SMI (14,250) have been arrested at least once in their lifetimes, which represents 6% of adults with a mental health condition, and only 1% of the total NH adult population. This bill would pillage the privacy of the many to target a few while increasing stigma surrounding mental health treatment. Please oppose this government overreach and actually look at studies and statistics instead of the media. Thank you, Alyx References: NAMI New Hampshire. (2021). Mental health in New Hampshire. https://www.nami.org/NAMI/media/NAMI-Media/StateFactSheets/NewHampshireStateFactSheet.pdf Rozel, J. S., & Mulvey, E. P. (2017). The link between Mental illness and firearm violence: Implications for social policy and clinical practice. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 13(1), 445–469. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-093459
This bill was defeated last year as it should have and reintroduced under HB159. This bill threatens to allow the government to seize firearms based on mental health proceedings, setting a dangerous precedent without proper due process. This may cause law abiding gun owners not to seek any type of mental health care when faced with temporary life challenges. Oppose this bill.
I oppose HB 159 as an infringement on my rights. A false accusation could seriously affect my rights with no means of defense. I believe in the premiss innocent until proven guilty.
This is just a resubmission of last years HB1711. It was voted down then, and is should be voted down now.
I am concerned that adopting HB159 would force individuals, on the fence about seeking treatment from a medical professional, to consider forgoing such treatment due to a fear of losing their second amendment rights and further deteriorate.
without due process this a threat to Indvidual's freedom
Don’t create standardized responses for individual, unique situations. Centralizing decision-making to a system that does not provide due consideration will unnecessarily limit the rights of many. This bill does not allow for enough due consideration of Individual circumstances. Please do not pass this bill.