In New Hampshire law, RSA 631:4 makes "Criminal Threatening" a crime. The law begins:



> 
> A person is guilty of criminal threatening when: (a) By physical
> conduct, the person purposely places or attempts to place another in
> fear of imminent bodily injury or physical contact; or ... (etc)
> 
> 
> 


This seems like kind of sweeping statement. By comparison the Massachusetts statute (275 Section 2) specifically says that for an act to be criminal threatening, the action threatened *must be a crime*. The New Hampshire does not say this at all. In fact, simply threatening to "place another in fear of imminent...physical contact" is a crime. So, by that standard every high school linebacker would be a criminal because they put the fear of "imminent physical contact" into their opponents.


Also, we can think of many other situations where people are put into "fear of bodily injury" or "contact". Without the constraint that the contact would be unlawful, the law seems to be absurdly open ended.


So, assuming that the law is defective, is there any remedy for this in court? Can a defendant argue that a law is invalid because it is defective?



Is the New Hampshire version of a criminal threatening law defective?