The appeal of a fundamental right should be a good point for their opponents.

SB 600 would not discriminate against visiting or relocating young adults as it would mirror the same, current minimum age requirement of 21 years of age for Hawaii residents for newcomers.

Also HB295 is up regarding domestic abuse and protective orders, it's a single committee bill.  It lowers the requirements to things like humiliation and controlling behavior and can remove gun rights from the accused.

I'd urge everyone to read HB295, HD1 and submit your opposition testimony this morning.

https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2019/bills/HB295_HD1_.HTM

From my testimony:

Here we have another case of “good intentions” having the “unintended consequences” of putting us on the infamous road to hell.

By expanding the definition of “domestic abuse” to include non-violent “emotional abuse” you will have opened up a Pandora's box of unlimited possibilities for legal action by anyone who, without any act of physical contact, let alone violent contact, renders the self-determined judgment that they have been “humiliated” or “intimidated” and thus “frightened”. Just so you know that I'm not making that up, nor exaggerating, that's the actual definition in the bill of "coercive behavior".
.....
Now a “glance” that someone interprets as “intimidation” is cause for arrest? (Person A:You shouldn't intimidate me with that kind of “look”! Person B: I wasn't trying to intimidate you. A: Yes you were! B: No I wasn't.)
* * * * *
I'd suggest people look at the testimony of an attorney, Thomas D. Farrell, who handles such matters, including divorce and child custody litigation, as submitted to a previous committee hearing on the bill (starts on page 6).

https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/Session2019/Testimony/HB295_TESTIMONY_CPC-JUD_02-21-19_.PDF

I'd urge everyone to read HB295, HD1 and submit your opposition testimony this morning.

https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2019/bills/HB295_HD1_.HTM

From my testimony:

Here we have another case of “good intentions” having the “unintended consequences” of putting us on the infamous road to hell.

By expanding the definition of “domestic abuse” to include non-violent “emotional abuse” you will have opened up a Pandora's box of unlimited possibilities for legal action by anyone who, without any act of physical contact, let alone violent contact, renders the self-determined judgment that they have been “humiliated” or “intimidated” and thus “frightened”. Just so you know that I'm not making that up, nor exaggerating, that's the actual definition in the bill of "coercive behavior".
.....
Now a “glance” that someone interprets as “intimidation” is cause for arrest? (Person A:You shouldn't intimidate me with that kind of “look”! Person B: I wasn't trying to intimidate you. A: Yes you were! B: No I wasn't.)
* * * * *
I'd suggest people look at the testimony of an attorney, Thomas D. Farrell, who handles such matters, including divorce and child custody litigation, as submitted to a previous committee hearing on the bill (starts on page 6).

https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/Session2019/Testimony/HB295_TESTIMONY_CPC-JUD_02-21-19_.PDF

Hearing Friday, March 15... testimonies due Thursday, March 14, 10 AM.

COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY, VETERANS, & MILITARY AFFAIRS

NOTICE OF HEARING

DATE: Friday, March 15, 2019

TIME: 10:00 AM

PLACE: Conference Room 430

A G E N D A

SB 600

(SSCR817)

RELATING TO FIREARMS.

Provides that no person less than 21 years of age shall bring any firearm into the State.


SB 621, SD1

(SSCR1020)

Status

RELATING TO FIREARMS.

Requires a person to report the person's lost, stolen, or destroyed firearms to the appropriate county police department.  Establishes penalties for failure to report.  (SD1)


SB 1466, SD2

(SSCR802)

RELATING TO GUN VIOLENCE PROTECTIVE ORDERS.

Establishes a process by which a law enforcement officer or family or household member may obtain a court order to prevent a person from accessing firearms and ammunition when the person poses a danger of causing bodily injury to oneself or another.  Takes effect 2/1/2020.  (SD2)

Had 4 Hifico members attend the PVM hearing on Friday.  Also had about 6 mom's Mom's Demand Action,

One positive note is Takayama asked HPD if RAPBACK was connected to the FBI.  HPD said it was not and kept getting pushed back, but could happen in April.  Takayama amended HB1466 to not charge RAPBACK fees until it works.  I had a conversation with him in January about Rapback and I told him we suspect it's not working.  He was really interested in that.  Also noted that HCJDC had a surplus of funds from the fees, not just from rapback.

I'm sure Rep Lee will strip the amendment out in the next committee hearing.

sorry to be a monday-morning QB here from the comfort of my armchair.

I'm thinking that we, the 2A community, would be better off given that Willie Espero's Rapback itself will never be repealed, to have a Rapback that isn't working instead.  If that's the case, would we be better off if HPD is not really motivated to get it to work?  if HCJDC is threatened with a loss of funds, that would motivate somebody to get it to work so that they can keep the money?  on the other hand, if they're not threated with the loss of "$42 per", things would stay at the status quo, and nobody's the wiser?
in essence, each first-time registrant pays a $42 bribe to to not make the Rapback connection to the FBI?  hey, that's how it's done in a banana republic, "cross my palms with silver".  I doubt they'd be willing to write a $42 check to everybody sofar that's paid in, that's not going to happen.

sorta like the idiot french engineer, when faced with a guillotine that's not working, looks at it and says, here, let me fix that for you, before it's his turn.

just a thought.  and thanks guys for fighting the good fight.  Thank You!

Bigger picture: If you paid the new "one time fee" of $42 with the justification of needing to be entered into RAPBACK, you should sue if that's not being done.

If the money isn't being used as directed by law, it's a fraud on gun owners. Has that money been misappropriated? Did the former police chief use the funds to help his crooked lawyer wife pay for drugs? Where is that money? What's it being spent on?

Enquiring minds.

sorry to be a monday-morning QB here from the comfort of my armchair.

I'm thinking that we, the 2A community, would be better off given that Willie Espero's Rapback itself will never be repealed, to have a Rapback that isn't working instead.  If that's the case, would we be better off if HPD is not really motivated to get it to work?  if HCJDC is threatened with a loss of funds, that would motivate somebody to get it to work so that they can keep the money?  on the other hand, if they're not threated with the loss of "$42 per", things would stay at the status quo, and nobody's the wiser?
in essence, each first-time registrant pays a $42 bribe to to not make the Rapback connection to the FBI?  hey, that's how it's done in a banana republic, "cross my palms with silver".  I doubt they'd be willing to write a $42 check to everybody sofar that's paid in, that's not going to happen.

sorta like the idiot french engineer, when faced with a guillotine that's not working, looks at it and says, here, let me fix that for you, before it's his turn.

just a thought.  and thanks guys for fighting the good fight.  Thank You!