State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal (Read 3536 times)

changemyoil66

State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« on: February 28, 2022, 02:00:01 PM »
But the bill was already passed into law. This probably sat on someones desk for a year and they only found it now (AG's office).

Then add in HPD is saying the current law is written wrong because the FBI is not allowing them to use the FBI system to run background checks on the licensed sellers. Nothing in the law states a federal background check has to be done on the licensed sellers. So basically, HPD is making their own policy and requiring a federal background check.  This is why no one is allowed to sell a taser in Hawaii yet.

RSN172

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #1 on: February 28, 2022, 02:52:26 PM »
I know for a fact that there are a few people, non LEO,  who have Tasers.  What would happen if they used it in self defense? If it is supposedly legal, why would it matter if it was legally purchased on the mainland and brought here? Inquiring minds want to know.

changemyoil66

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #2 on: February 28, 2022, 03:02:27 PM »


I know for a fact that there are a few people, non LEO,  who have Tasers.  What would happen if they used it in self defense? If it is supposedly legal, why would it matter if it was legally purchased on the mainland and brought here? Inquiring minds want to know.

All depends on the officer and if they know the law or not. The plaintiff on the lawsuit went into hpd open carrying it and had no issues. He open carries all the time.



Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Flapp_Jackson

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #3 on: February 28, 2022, 06:12:00 PM »
But the bill was already passed into law. This probably sat on someones desk for a year and they only found it now (AG's office).

Then add in HPD is saying the current law is written wrong because the FBI is not allowing them to use the FBI system to run background checks on the licensed sellers. Nothing in the law states a federal background check has to be done on the licensed sellers. So basically, HPD is making their own policy and requiring a federal background check.  This is why no one is allowed to sell a taser in Hawaii yet.

My active imagination tells me the legislature passed the law with enough poison pills injected into it to make it untenable, but when the time came to actually implement it, they saw just how poorly it was crafted.

Can't build a yo-yo if the plans are for a sewing machine!

Nope.  The law was intentionally crafted to PREVENT anyone from actually selling or acquiring a Taser.  No different than having a law that lays out the process for getting a Carry License only to include a hurdle nobody can clear -- that being the Chief of Police approving it.

Lawyers -- If we didn't have them, we wouldn't need them!
"How can you diagnose someone with an obsessive-compulsive disorder
and then act as though I had some choice about barging in?"
-- Melvin Udall

changemyoil66

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #4 on: February 28, 2022, 08:33:24 PM »
The funny part is in the brief, the state says beck is causing them to work.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

DocMercy

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #5 on: March 06, 2022, 09:40:38 AM »
Then add in HPD is saying the current law is written wrong because the FBI is not allowing them to use the FBI system to run background checks on the licensed sellers. Nothing in the law states a federal background check has to be done on the licensed sellers. So basically, HPD is making their own policy and requiring a federal background check.  This is why no one is allowed to sell a taser in Hawaii yet.

Most of the potential Taser sellers are FFL holders. The law should be rewritten so that FFL status qualifies a store to sell Tasers.
If the hangup is in vetting civilian buyers, then they should open the gates to those how have permits to acquire long guns, and Taser training certificates (got that, bro). We've already passed the rapback check and jumped through the hoops for weapon safety.

Have you written to the state legislators so that they can contact HPD? Run for the state senate so we can have an insider in the government.

Flapp_Jackson

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #6 on: March 06, 2022, 11:30:53 AM »
Most of the potential Taser sellers are FFL holders. The law should be rewritten so that FFL status qualifies a store to sell Tasers.
If the hangup is in vetting civilian buyers, then they should open the gates to those how have permits to acquire long guns, and Taser training certificates (got that, bro). We've already passed the rapback check and jumped through the hoops for weapon safety.

Have you written to the state legislators so that they can contact HPD? Run for the state senate so we can have an insider in the government.

There's no requirement for RAPBACK registration to own a Taser.  Unless I missed it in the law's text, is there any mention of RAPBACK as it relates to Tasers?  If such a requirement exists, they would be charging the same RAPBACK fee to buy Tasers as they do to firearms buyers.

There's no requirement for a hunter's ed or handgun safety course affidavit to own a Taser.

There's no accommodation to skip the background check for subsequent Taser purchases if you purchase in a 12 month period.

Those are all features and requirements of the Long Gun Permit to Acquire.

You'd be trying to fit a square peg in a round hole just to satisfy one Taser requirement:  a single background check for purchase.

Like I said, the goal was to prevent as many Tasers being sold as possible by making the process complicated and onerous.

Yes, they could make it easier for firearms owners to buy Tasers by piggy-backing on the long gun permit, but then that would mean Taser buyers would be applying for long gun permits.  That makes  it easier for more people to buy firearms who didn't initially intend to buy them -- oh, the horror!   :shake:


"How can you diagnose someone with an obsessive-compulsive disorder
and then act as though I had some choice about barging in?"
-- Melvin Udall

changemyoil66

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #7 on: March 06, 2022, 12:52:50 PM »
There's no requirement for RAPBACK registration to own a Taser.  Unless I missed it in the law's text, is there any mention of RAPBACK as it relates to Tasers?  If such a requirement exists, they would be charging the same RAPBACK fee to buy Tasers as they do to firearms buyers.

There's no requirement for a hunter's ed or handgun safety course affidavit to own a Taser.

There's no accommodation to skip the background check for subsequent Taser purchases if you purchase in a 12 month period.

Those are all features and requirements of the Long Gun Permit to Acquire.

You'd be trying to fit a square peg in a round hole just to satisfy one Taser requirement:  a single background check for purchase.

Like I said, the goal was to prevent as many Tasers being sold as possible by making the process complicated and onerous.

Yes, they could make it easier for firearms owners to buy Tasers by piggy-backing on the long gun permit, but then that would mean Taser buyers would be applying for long gun permits.  That makes  it easier for more people to buy firearms who didn't initially intend to buy them -- oh, the horror!   :shake:
Pretty much this.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

changemyoil66

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #8 on: March 06, 2022, 01:05:38 PM »


Most of the potential Taser sellers are FFL holders. The law should be rewritten so that FFL status qualifies a store to sell Tasers.
If the hangup is in vetting civilian buyers, then they should open the gates to those how have permits to acquire long guns, and Taser training certificates (got that, bro). We've already passed the rapback check and jumped through the hoops for weapon safety.

Have you written to the state legislators so that they can contact HPD? Run for the state senate so we can have an insider in the government.

I was testifying to the committee (i was 1 of like 6 present in the zoom)  that this law, which was a bill at the time sucks. I also spread the word to oppose this via coconut wireless and here. I did write to both senate and house back in Jan regarding the delay. I will not run for office anytime soon.

Youre missing what i posted. HPD is going beyond what the law states by trying a federal check of which FBI is saying no. The AG stated this as well. HPDs SOP sucks whether intentional or not. They could have 1 SOP for FFLs would be automatically licensed to sell tasers.

The hang up is not vetting buyers, its vetting sellers. Im sure once HPD is forced to issue selling permits (SOH permititng dept), the next hang up will be on the buyers background. The law also states the seller has to do the background. It doesnt specify what type. So a accessable ecourt should be sufficient. But ill bet HPD is gonnna jack that up too.

No one here has passed the HPD required RAPBACK because the FBI admitted no one is enrolled in it (gun buyers). This is a separate issue.

A taser cert also isnt a background check. The law states the seller must do the check. Not HPD or the FBI or any other department. So ecourt. IIRC its like $23.50 each.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

DocMercy

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #9 on: March 10, 2022, 08:52:51 AM »

The hang up is not vetting buyers, its vetting sellers. Im sure once HPD is forced to issue selling permits (SOH permititng dept), the next hang up will be on the buyers background. The law also states the seller has to do the background. It doesnt specify what type. So a accessable ecourt should be sufficient. But ill bet HPD is gonnna jack that up too.

A taser cert also isnt a background check. The law states the seller must do the check. Not HPD or the FBI or any other department. So ecourt. IIRC its like $23.50 each.


We need some links that back up your perceptions. Firearms International had dozens of tasers in their inventory when I took their $150 certification course. They had the students (voluntarily) provide the last 4 digits of their social security number, for a future background check. Every student was allowed to test a taser on a dummy target. What the heck do you mean about vetting sellers? Some dealers have already imported the devices into the state. FFL dealers have jumped through more hoops and background checks than any other merchants. I have no interest in allowing Longs or Walmart to sell tasers.

I'm not trying to tie the rapback fee and the PTA for long guns to the eventual buyer requirements for purchasing a taser. But those of us who have gone through these checks should be allowed to bypass any future hurdles HPD is thinking about creating for Taser possession. I am offering HPD an avenue to avoid a hangup they may have with a federal background check on civilians who are not legal firearms owners. They can deal with these members of society later.

Taser possession is legal for CA citizens who meet certain requirements. I have no idea how they verify that a citizen is not felon, without going through NICS, but if CA has a workable solution, HPD should contact them asap. After all, LAPD saved HPD's hide by capturing two murder suspects in the Concrete Kupuna case.

https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/penal-code/22610/
« Last Edit: March 10, 2022, 09:34:29 AM by DocMercy »

changemyoil66

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2022, 09:27:43 AM »
We need some links that back up your perceptions. Firearms International had dozens of tasers in their inventory when I took their $150 certification course. They had the students (voluntarily) provide the last 4 digits of their social security number, for a future background check. Every student was allowed to test a taser on a dummy target. What the heck do you mean about vetting sellers? Some dealers have already imported the devices into the state. FFL dealers have jumped through more hoops and background checks than any other merchants. I have no interest in allowing Longs or Walmart to sell tasers.

I'm not trying to tie the rapback fee and the PTA for long guns to the eventual buyer requirements for purchasing a taser. But those of us who have gone through these checks should be allowed to bypass any future hurdles HPD is thinking about creating for Taser possession. I am offering HPD an avenue to avoid a hangup they may have with a federal background check on civilians who are not legal firearms owners. They can deal with these members of society later.

So were you able to buy the taser from Firearms International? Or anyone else able to buy?  Your reply would answer your own question.  "Vetting sellers" is mentioned in the law. A seller must have a permit to sell. A background check and other stuff required in order to sell a taser.  The dealers can have them, but cannot sell until they get their sellers permit. Read HRS134-81 to 85 or so. That big chunk of requirements is to sell tasers.

But with regard to my predictions about HPD, after seeing how they operate over the years, I don't expect anything to go smoothly with them. Evidence is RAPBACK which no one is enrolled in per FOIA FBI emails, closure during covid so no one could get a PTA, the jacked up RSVP system which cause people months upon months to get an appointment (those who don't have time to refresh every 3 minutes), CCW denials, measuring of barrels to verify length (caught on video), etc...

Certain stores were told by HPD that HPD has to do the background check on the buyers.  This was told during a dealers class.  Then another store stated the purchaser must go online themselves to do their own background check and bring in the printout.  Again all of this is in violation of the law.  Both are word of mouth told to me by those who were told this info direct. So it's not phone game kind of coconut wireless.

What you mentioned about HPD doing the background on civilians is against how the current law is written. The seller must do the check, not HPD , the AG, or done by yourself.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2022, 09:35:29 AM by changemyoil66 »

DocMercy

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #11 on: March 10, 2022, 11:33:06 AM »
CMO, since you have studied this issue in great detail, is the underlying problem that HPD believes it can re-purpose the NICS application to perform criminal background checks for non-firearm possession? We can understand why the FBI would balk. To Hawaii citizens, this would constitute Impossibility, Frustration of Purpose, and Impracticability in the law, and allow us to sue the state. I am trying to offer the state an off ramp. Why don't they allow the sellers to use the state's eCrim system? At $5 a pop it is not cheap, but not exorbitant either. It's not perfect, as it would allow out-of-state crimes to go undetected. However, the failure/misrepresentation of the applicant could be a felony punishable by 2 years in prison.

https://ecrim.ehawaii.gov/ahewa/login.do;jsessionid=F2D892B6C4D25BD352A679F2C18307B6.hcjdcapp

changemyoil66

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #12 on: March 10, 2022, 11:59:35 AM »
CMO, since you have studied this issue in great detail, is the underlying problem that HPD believes it can re-purpose the NICS application to perform criminal background checks for non-firearm possession? We can understand why the FBI would balk. To Hawaii citizens, this would constitute Impossibility, Frustration of Purpose, and Impracticability in the law, and allow us to sue the state. I am trying to offer the state an off ramp. Why don't they allow the sellers to use the state's eCrim system? At $5 a pop it is not cheap, but not exorbitant either. It's not perfect, as it would allow out-of-state crimes to go undetected. However, the failure/misrepresentation of the applicant could be a felony punishable by 2 years in prison.

https://ecrim.ehawaii.gov/ahewa/login.do;jsessionid=F2D892B6C4D25BD352A679F2C18307B6.hcjdcapp

I don't remember of hand what system HPD is trying to access, but it does require the FBI's involvement. Of which they said no.  So the AG stated that HPD is doing it wrong in their brief.  Same FBI in FOIA request stated no one is in their RAPBACK system.  Even though we all paid for it and completed the form and is required by law to purchase a gun in HI.

The state needs no off ramp, they just have to abide by the law.  I'm sure HPD has some kind of internal/state database that they can input someone/somethings info and get a report.  So in your situation, HPD would run Firearms International and see what pops up. If there is nothing, then issue the permit to sell tasers. It's very simple, HPD is either trying their best to delay the process or incompetent.  Or maybe both. And since they're a FFL, they also have to reg all guns with HPD, so they're already in some kind of data base with them as a FFL.

The sellers should use the ecrim system and just increase the price of a taser by $5, no big deal. But you have HPD telling certain sellers what to do, which is wrong by the way.  And the sellers didn't read the law and never bucked back and stated that they're (HPD) is wrong to their face. 

Then you have another store who's requiring the buyer to bring in their own ecrim check, which again means the store never read the law either.

So all in all, this is a cluster fuck cause people don't read. And the way it's written is very simple and not in legaleze.

But a light at the end of the tunnel is coming. The lawyer who represented Roberts vs. Connors (Shikada) is dealing with it.  That's how we found out about HPD getting denied by the FBI and they're just sitting on it not knowing what to do next. So if HIFICO didn't inquire, then HPD would still be sitting on the background checks for sellers not knowing what to do until someone does something like how HIFICO did.

I  hope that by the end of this month, the permits to sell are issued.

This brings me to my next vent about stores charging $150-200 for a class that isn't required by law. The law states "informational briefing", which should be 10 mins tops and free of charge. IMO, stores who charge for a "class" are just trying to capitalize on the situation.  Should a class be taken, of course it has benefits, but it shouldn't be required to buy a taser.  And we learned during covid that 1 cannot buy  a handgun because no handgun safety classes were offered during lock down.  People had to wait for the range to open again. 

This is why we cannot order 1 from Amazon and the fact that Amazon would need a permit to sell as well.

changemyoil66

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #13 on: March 16, 2022, 09:28:55 AM »
Bushido Arms ETA 1-2 weeks before the sellers should start receiving their permits to sell via Bushido's FB/IG,

6716J

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #14 on: March 17, 2022, 01:02:06 PM »
........

This brings me to my next vent about stores charging $150-200 for a class that isn't required by law. The law states "informational briefing", which should be 10 mins tops and free of charge. IMO, stores who charge for a "class" are just trying to capitalize on the situation.  .......

you mean a certain gun club in the 808?
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.

changemyoil66

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #15 on: March 18, 2022, 09:07:16 AM »
you mean a certain gun club in the 808?
Theres other non club places doing the same.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

RSN172

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #16 on: March 18, 2022, 11:03:29 AM »
So da guys who wen get Tasers by mail order from da mainland bak in January wat?  Dey Tasers illegal? Get arrest if get caught wit um?

hvybarrels

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #17 on: March 18, 2022, 12:50:42 PM »
I have friends who've actually used them a few times. They said it makes people pee their pants. Try not to do it on the nice rug, or at least put down some plastic first.
“Wars happen when the government tells you who the enemy is. Revolutions happen when you figure it out for yourselves.”

RSN172

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #18 on: March 18, 2022, 01:02:31 PM »
I have friends who've actually used them a few times.

In Hawaii? Or mainland?

6716J

Re: State trying to put a stay on tasers being legal
« Reply #19 on: March 18, 2022, 01:15:14 PM »
Theres other non club places doing the same.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I wonder if X marks the spot
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.