Citizen in a RepublicNH Bill Briefing
← All bills

HB 1642 · 2026 · House · Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee

Extreme risk gun protection orders

AI-generated

relative to extreme risk protection orders.

Creates a court process allowing law enforcement officers, family or household members, or intimate partners to petition for extreme risk protection orders temporarily restricting a person's access to firearms when they pose a significant risk of harm to themselves or others.AI-generated

Status

Killed in the House — Inexpedient to Legislate · February 12, 2026
  1. ✓Introduced
  2. ✕House
  3. Senate
  4. Governor
  5. Law

Analysis

This bill establishes a procedure for issuing extreme risk protection orders to protect against persons who pose an immediate risk of harm to themselves or others.

From the bill's official ANALYSIS section.

In the bill's words

Quoted verbatim from the bill as introduced. Passages chosen from the operative text.Computed by this site

““Extreme risk protection order” means a temporary, ex parte, or final order issued pursuant to this chapter to temporarily restrict access to firearms by individuals who are found to pose an immediate or significant risk to themselves or others.”
RSA 159-G:1
“The district division of the circuit court shall have jurisdiction over all proceedings under this chapter.”
RSA 159-G:2
“A petitioner may seek relief under this chapter by filing a petition, in the county or district where the petitioner or respondent resides, alleging that the respondent poses a significant risk of causing bodily injury to himself or herself or others by having a firearm or any ammunition in his or her custody or control or by purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm or any ammunition.”
RSA 159-G:3
“A petitioner may request, and the court may enter, a temporary extreme risk protection order with or without actual notice to respondent.”
RSA 159-G:4

Official record

Bill page — docket & status

gc.nh.gov · the authoritative source

Sponsors

Rep. Loren SeligDPrime
  • Rep. David MeuseDDeputy Ranking Member· Criminal Justice and Public Safety
  • Rep. Christine SeibertDRanking Member· State, Federal, and Veterans Affairs
  • Sen. Rebecca Perkins KwokaDMinority Leader

Also: Rep. Timothy HorriganD, Rep. Chris MunsD, Rep. Luz BayD, Rep. Paige BeaucheminD, Sen. Debra AltschillerD

Public testimony

329 signed in online · 73 wrote testimony

72% support28% oppose0% neutral

ForERPOs are a due-process tool to prevent crisis violence

AgainstViolates due process rights

AI-generatedLeading arguments, summarized by the testimony tool.

Read the arguments

In their wordsVerbatim, exactly as submitted

“A Extreme Risk Protection Order is a risk-based, time-limited civil order that follows due process to temporarily remove access to firearms for those at extreme risk of harming themselves or others. Maine passed a Red Flag with 63% of the vote.…”
— ELISSA Davis, Meredithsupports
“Extreme Risk Protection Orders are proving to work in reducing gun violence in states where they have been implemented, An overwhelming number of Granite Staters believe NH should have a Red Flag law.”
— Nancy Brown, Hopkintonsupports
“An Extreme Risk Protection Order is a risk-based, time-limited civil order that follows due process to temporarily remove access to firearms for those at extreme risk of harming themselves or others. Maine passed a Red Flag with 63% of the vote.…”
— Amanda Antonucci, Mont Vernonsupports
“This bill violates citizens rights to due process and I strongly oppose it. You notice that states that have such laws have mass killings while we do not. Guns should not be confiscated with a judicial hearing where the accused can present evidence against it !”
— Bradley Louth, Hamptonopposes
“Protection orders don't protect. Ask the mom in Berlin who was killed last year. I prefer to end protection orders. Lacking that, kill this LSR.”
— tom luther, claremontopposes
“ITL. Now and forever. Not a recommendation, just do it. Red flag laws are widely abused in every state that has enacted them. Polk County, FL, and their blowhard Sheriff Grady Judd are a good one to look at for numbers.…”
— Simon Berrio, Daltonopposes

Verbatim excerpts of submitted testimony, quoted from the testimony tool.

Read the testimony · as of Aug 12, 2026

Votes

yeanay
Starting text: Bill as introduced
  • Jan 23, 2026HouseCommittee report· regular calendar: Inexpedient to Legislate9–3
    Overall
    75% yea
  • Feb 12, 2026HouseRoll callInexpedient to LegislateAdopted206–153How they voted
    Overall
    57% yea
    Party-line vote
    Republicans
    199–0100% yea
    Democrats
    7–1534% yea

Hearings and debates

  • Jan 14, 2026Public hearingHouse Criminal Justice and Public Safety6:21:27–6:30:519m 24slocated in the stream transcriptPublic Hearing
  • Feb 12, 2026Floor debateHouse floor59:27–1:09:5810m 31slocated in the stream transcriptInexpedient to Legislate — adopted, roll call 206-153

Timestamps locate where this bill is taken up in the chamber's YouTube stream.

Legislative history

  1. Jan 7, 2026HouseIntroduced 01/07/2026 and referred to Criminal Justice and Public Safety HJ 1 P. 29
  2. Jan 14, 2026HousePublic Hearing: 01/14/2026 02:00 pm GP 159
  3. Jan 23, 2026HouseExecutive Session: 01/23/2026 12:00 pm GP 159
  4. Jan 23, 2026HouseMajority Committee Report: Inexpedient to Legislate 01/23/2026 (Vote 9-3; RC) HC 6 P. 11
  5. Feb 2, 2026HouseMinority Committee Report: Ought to Pass
  6. Feb 12, 2026HouseInexpedient to Legislate: MA RC 206-153 02/12/2026 HJ 4 P. 19

Coverage

No reporting linked yet.

Documents (PDF)

Bill text & amendments link direct to gc.nh.gov; committee reports stream from the state record.