Can someone from Senator Fevella's(or other pro-gun legislator) district ask him to introduce legislation to streamline the registration process?  We need a corresponding legislator in the House to assist as well.  We need to ask our pro-gun legislators to introduce legislation to adopt a system similar to Illinois' Firearms Owner Identification Card(FOID).  Their FOID is good for 10 years and allows people to purchase guns similar to our Permit to Acquire(PTA) system.  Our system requires us to submit a PTA for every handgun.  It makes no sense to have to fill out a page full OF THE SAME INFORMATION every time for multiple handgun purchases.  HPD ALREADY HAS THIS INFORMATION ON FILE for current gun owners.  Why do we need to repeatedly provide the same information, just give us a FOID so we don't have to submit information HPD already has.   It's probably wishful thinking that Hawaii legislators would allow a 10 year FOID and probably require a 1 year renewal, but it's better than having to senselessly fill out multiple PTAs for information that is already on file.  We should also ask for an amendment on the two week waiting period for current gun owners.  It makes no sense to have people who already own guns have to go through a waiting period.  And doesn't the Rap Back system obviate the need for continued background checks for current gun owners(or is that a Federal requirement)?

I thought about this before.  Issue with the FOID is instead of registering the firearm, you're now registering the person.  And you can't have firearms without the FOID.  So if a person just has one gun for their lifetime, they have to continue to get FOIDs while they own their gun.

Filling out forms is a PITA and could be more efficient.

I thought about this before.  Issue with the FOID is instead of registering the firearm, you're now registering the person.  And you can't have firearms without the FOID.  So if a person just has one gun for their lifetime, they have to continue to get FOIDs while they own their gun.

Ahhh, that explains why their cards are good for 10 years.

Filling out forms is a PITA and could be more efficient.

Simple solution is to adopt the long gun process for handguns.  Both long gun and pistol registration process gives you the same paper permit.  The only difference is more paperwork for pistols.  Maybe this is what we should ask for from pro-gun legislators to introduce.

I contacted my representative a few years ago about such an idea, having the permit to purchase be an ID card good for something like 5 years. He didn't sound interested but he said he would be willing to write up a bill and propose it but he also wanted more than just a suggestion. He said that he would want things supporting statistics and information or the police department supporting the idea. Basically stuff that would show that the bill would address a problem and do it effectively.

I haven't done a lot beyond my discussions with the representative unfortunately. If we could get a firearms group to jump on the idea and statistics from HPD on how many man hours are spent maybe we could make some sort of case for not only streamlining it for us but also saving the city money.

I contacted my representative a few years ago about such an idea, having the permit to purchase be an ID card good for something like 5 years. He didn't sound interested but he said he would be willing to write up a bill and propose it but he also wanted more than just a suggestion. He said that he would want things supporting statistics and information or the police department supporting the idea. Basically stuff that would show that the bill would address a problem and do it effectively.

I haven't done a lot beyond my discussions with the representative unfortunately. If we could get a firearms group to jump on the idea and statistics from HPD on how many man hours are spent maybe we could make some sort of case for not only streamlining it for us but also saving the city money.

Maybe someone other than HIFICO could do a UIPA for the info.  Cause they're the ones doing meaningful stuff in HI.  Let others help out.

At least your rep was open to drafting a bill. My rep told me to make the bill and email it to him and he will present it about CCW in 2016 or so.  I copied and pasted the NV law, but changed the words like Nevada to Hawaii.

I thought about this before.  Issue with the FOID is instead of registering the firearm, you're now registering the person.  And you can't have firearms without the FOID.  So if a person just has one gun for their lifetime, they have to continue to get FOIDs while they own their gun.

Filling out forms is a PITA and could be more efficient.

The obvious breakdown in the current system is a person could have already purchased a number of guns under individual pistol and long gun permits.  Then suppose they become addicted to meth, have an untreated mental health problem, etc. 

That person has no need to go out and buy another gun should they be planning on creating havoc.  They are already in possession of firearms.

Without a mechanism to update their status with regards to being a safe, responsible gun owner, they will fly beneath the radar until they get caught doing something illegal.  At that point, you're locking the barn door after the cows have gotten out.

If they "register the person," as you said, then there would be a background check and review of medical records periodically assuming the person wants to continue owning guns.  As it stands, that doesn't happen in HI without the submission of another permit application.

RAPBACK was supposed to fill this void, as sort of a running background check system.  Anything that's reported to the system regardless of the state it happened in is updated in RAPBACK, and HPD is notified.  HPD can then decide if a review of the individual's fitness to own guns needs to take place.

Of course, RAPBACK has never been implemented for gun owners as far as I have seen, but it does focus on a potential solution for the permit problem -- identify  adverse changes more often than "whenever they buy another gun -- if ever."

I think an FOID would be a good compromise between total 2A freedom and what we have now.  Walk into a gun shop with a current FOID, and leave with whatever you want to buy -- no wait period required.

That's the other stupid thing.  Why enforce a 2 week waiting period for someone who already owns firearms?  Is that newly acquired gun the one we ought to care about as opposed the 30 he already has at home?

Here's a first stab at coming up with a justification. 



Assumptions:

• you apply for a annual permit like the long gun process once, but it applies to all guns and good for year
• registration application includes only your permit number and gun information (make/model, s/n, barrel length, action type)
• HPD uses your identification information on file and the information from your application(above) to print out your firearm permit

So you apply for your annual gun permit once.  Every time you go to register a gun, you just submit your gun info and dealer name.  HPD prints out your gun permit with your personal information they have on file and the gun information you provide.  The time saved is the gun owner no longer needs to fill out the application and supporting documents every time he/she registers a gun.  The officer saves time because he does not have to review your personal information, handgun safety course affidavit, health/doctor information, etc. every time you register a gun.  Those are already on file and info has be checked for accuracy.  More time can be saved for the gun owner if we don't even have to supply the permit number and gun info, I believe the dealer sends this info to HPD after purchase.  Only private party transfers would have a requirement that the new owner supply the gun information to HPD.

But in addition to the time/money saved by going to new system, the other supporting argument to the legislator is that the PTA  process provides no additional protections to the public...currently, both handgun and long gun permit processes require the same background check and waiting period.

And if we can get a legislator to draft a bill we should also amend the 2 week waiting period and make that requirement apply only for first time buyers. People with registered firearms would be exempt from this requirement.

Another change badly needed is to have this procedure completely online, but that would cost a lot and the likelihood of it being funded in small.  But this is about moving government into the 21st century, everything is going online.

Here's a first stab at coming up with a justification. 



Assumptions:

• you apply for a annual permit like the long gun process once, but it applies to all guns and good for year
• registration application includes only your permit number and gun information (make/model, s/n, barrel length, action type)
• HPD uses your identification information on file and the information from your application(above) to print out your firearm permit

So you apply for your annual gun permit once.  Every time you go to register a gun, you just submit your gun info and dealer name.  HPD prints out your gun permit with your personal information they have on file and the gun information you provide.  The time saved is the gun owner no longer needs to fill out the application and supporting documents every time he/she registers a gun.  The officer saves time because he does not have to review your personal information, handgun safety course affidavit, health/doctor information, etc. every time you register a gun.  Those are already on file and info has be checked for accuracy.  More time can be saved for the gun owner if we don't even have to supply the permit number and gun info, I believe the dealer sends this info to HPD after purchase.  Only private party transfers would have a requirement that the new owner supply the gun information to HPD.

But in addition to the time/money saved by going to new system, the other supporting argument to the legislator is that the PTA  process provides no additional protections to the public...currently, both handgun and long gun permit processes require the same background check and waiting period.

And if we can get a legislator to draft a bill we should also amend the 2 week waiting period and make that requirement apply only for first time buyers. People with registered firearms would be exempt from this requirement.

Another change badly needed is to have this procedure completely online, but that would cost a lot and the likelihood of it being funded in small.  But this is about moving government into the 21st century, everything is going online.

Good breakdown on the possible dollar cost. If we could actually get someone at HPD to cooperate in giving us some sort of official estimate that would really help.

My idea was that the firearm purchase permit would be a card with a photo and name on it along with a unique identification number. One concern with a 5 year permit on paper was that if HPD had revoked a permit or the person had been convicted of something they had no way of getting the paper permit back and stopping the person from buying a firearm. A card with a photo and ID number would allow the seller to contact HPD and ask if the permit is still valid. It would also provide protection for the seller.

If you are interested in working more on this maybe we could team up and try to get more support on this. At least we know my rep would be willing to write up and submit the bill for review but we would need to get a bit more supporting information.

Here's a first stab at coming up with a justification. 



Assumptions:

• you apply for a annual permit like the long gun process once, but it applies to all guns and good for year
• registration application includes only your permit number and gun information (make/model, s/n, barrel length, action type)
• HPD uses your identification information on file and the information from your application(above) to print out your firearm permit

So you apply for your annual gun permit once.  Every time you go to register a gun, you just submit your gun info and dealer name.  HPD prints out your gun permit with your personal information they have on file and the gun information you provide.  The time saved is the gun owner no longer needs to fill out the application and supporting documents every time he/she registers a gun.  The officer saves time because he does not have to review your personal information, handgun safety course affidavit, health/doctor information, etc. every time you register a gun.  Those are already on file and info has be checked for accuracy.  More time can be saved for the gun owner if we don't even have to supply the permit number and gun info, I believe the dealer sends this info to HPD after purchase.  Only private party transfers would have a requirement that the new owner supply the gun information to HPD.

But in addition to the time/money saved by going to new system, the other supporting argument to the legislator is that the PTA  process provides no additional protections to the public...currently, both handgun and long gun permit processes require the same background check and waiting period.

And if we can get a legislator to draft a bill we should also amend the 2 week waiting period and make that requirement apply only for first time buyers. People with registered firearms would be exempt from this requirement.

Another change badly needed is to have this procedure completely online, but that would cost a lot and the likelihood of it being funded in small.  But this is about moving government into the 21st century, everything is going online.

HIFICO has a lawsuit pending about the 2 week wait period.

Good breakdown on the possible dollar cost. If we could actually get someone at HPD to cooperate in giving us some sort of official estimate that would really help.

My idea was that the firearm purchase permit would be a card with a photo and name on it along with a unique identification number. One concern with a 5 year permit on paper was that if HPD had revoked a permit or the person had been convicted of something they had no way of getting the paper permit back and stopping the person from buying a firearm. A card with a photo and ID number would allow the seller to contact HPD and ask if the permit is still valid. It would also provide protection for the seller.

If you are interested in working more on this maybe we could team up and try to get more support on this. At least we know my rep would be willing to write up and submit the bill for review but we would need to get a bit more supporting information.

Or, the gun store can do what the many mainland stores do. Check NICS. This could be anywhere from 5 minutes, up to an hour. I was at  a Vegas gun store and the clerk was on the phone for an hour.

If only anti gun groups put their money to an online or more reliable/faster system, it could be done. this is how you know they're full of shit when they say they want "stricter background checks".  Becasue after a certain amount of time on a NICS check, a no reply is an automatic approval.

Here's a first stab at coming up with a justification. 



Assumptions:

• you apply for a annual permit like the long gun process once, but it applies to all guns and good for year
• registration application includes only your permit number and gun information (make/model, s/n, barrel length, action type)
• HPD uses your identification information on file and the information from your application(above) to print out your firearm permit

So you apply for your annual gun permit once.  Every time you go to register a gun, you just submit your gun info and dealer name.  HPD prints out your gun permit with your personal information they have on file and the gun information you provide.  The time saved is the gun owner no longer needs to fill out the application and supporting documents every time he/she registers a gun.  The officer saves time because he does not have to review your personal information, handgun safety course affidavit, health/doctor information, etc. every time you register a gun.  Those are already on file and info has be checked for accuracy.  More time can be saved for the gun owner if we don't even have to supply the permit number and gun info, I believe the dealer sends this info to HPD after purchase.  Only private party transfers would have a requirement that the new owner supply the gun information to HPD.

But in addition to the time/money saved by going to new system, the other supporting argument to the legislator is that the PTA  process provides no additional protections to the public...currently, both handgun and long gun permit processes require the same background check and waiting period.

And if we can get a legislator to draft a bill we should also amend the 2 week waiting period and make that requirement apply only for first time buyers. People with registered firearms would be exempt from this requirement.

Another change badly needed is to have this procedure completely online, but that would cost a lot and the likelihood of it being funded in small.  But this is about moving government into the 21st century, everything is going online.

Someone posted  some years ago that the average firearm division cost is $1,000,000 a year.

Or, the gun store can do what the many mainland stores do. Check NICS. This could be anywhere from 5 minutes, up to an hour. I was at  a Vegas gun store and the clerk was on the phone for an hour.

If only anti gun groups put their money to an online or more reliable/faster system, it could be done. this is how you know they're full of shit when they say they want "stricter background checks".  Becasue after a certain amount of time on a NICS check, a no reply is an automatic approval.

If I understand correctly there are problems with the NICS system. Many agencies do not report to the NICS like they are supposed to which means the system is not always a reliable check.

I think it would be better to go for small changes to the existing system rather than trying to get one big change such as having the gun store do the checks.

If I understand correctly there are problems with the NICS system. Many agencies do not report to the NICS like they are supposed to which means the system is not always a reliable check.

And yet, they are still being funded with our money.

The U.S. faces many criminal threats, including financial and health care fraud, transnational
and regional organized criminal enterprises, crimes against children and human trafficking,
and public corruption. Criminal organizations — domestic and international — and individual
criminal activity represent a significant threat to security and safety in communities across the
nation.

A critical tool in protecting the Nation from those who wish to do us harm is the National Instant
Criminal Background Check System, or NICS. The goal of NICS is to ensure that guns don’t
fall into the wrong hands, and ensure the timely transfer of firearms to eligible gun buyers.
Mandated by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 and launched by the FBI on
November 30, 1998, NICS is used by Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to determine whether
a prospective buyer is eligible to buy firearms. NICS receives information from tens of thousands
of FFLs and checks to ensure that applicants do not have a criminal record and aren’t otherwise
prohibited and therefore ineligible to purchase a firearm. In the first complete month of operation
in 1998, a total of 892,840 firearm background checks were processed; in 2022, approximately
2.6 million checks were processed per month, for a total of 31.6 million processed in 2022.

While most checks are completed within minutes by electronic searches of the NICS database,
a small number of checks require examiners to review records and resolve missing or incomplete
information before an application can be approved or rejected. Ensuring the timely processing of
these inquiries is important to ensure law abiding citizens can exercise their right to purchase a
firearm and to protect communities from prohibited and therefore ineligible individuals attempting
to acquire a firearm. To ensure the FBI maintains this capability, the FY 2024 Request includes an
additional 27 positions (including 1 Special Agent and 26 Professional Staff) and $8.4 million.

In 2022, Congress demonstrated its united faith in the role NICS plays in our country’s public
safety and a desire to make it even stronger with passage of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.
This legislation added dating relationships as a disqualifying consideration for misdemeanor crimes
of domestic violence prohibitions; enhanced checks on persons under the age of 21 by requiring
additional outreach to state and local agencies where the person resides to inquire about the
existence of any possibly disqualifying juvenile records; allows certain FFLs to receive information
from the NCIC gun file necessary to verify if a firearm had been reported stolen before buying it
second hand; and allows FFLs to access NICS for the purposes of voluntary background checks on
current and prospective employees to help combat illegal firearms trafficking. The FBI has implemented
all aspects of the BSCA with the exception of the two latter parts as they require the promulgation of
regulations. Those proposed regulatory changes are in process and are a priority to complete. Since
the passage of the BSCA, the FBI has conducted over 86,400 expanded background checks on
persons under the age of 21. The vast majority are proceeded quickly. However, a total of 750 checks
have been denied under the new process. As a result of the expanded outreach enabling NICS to issue
denials based solely on information it obtains, NICS issued 151 denials.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/federal-bureau-of-investigation-budget-request-for-fiscal-year-2024

We are also funding the Fix NICS Act, a separate DOJ effort to fix the deficiencies in the NICS background check system.

https://www.justice.gov/usdoj-media/dag/media/1247581/dl?inline

We sure are spending a ton of money on something you believe is so broken we need yet another background check system funded by tax payers yet again at the state level.

is it common for the government to keep dumping money into a broken system without fixing it? 

Is it common that the solution for all broken federal systems is to create a second system to "fix" it?

Is it common that the solution for all broken federal systems is to create a redundant system at the state level?

Did you read how NICS is a "CRITICAL TOOL IN PROTECTING THE NATION?"  How can a broken system be called critical?

Do you see the real problem now?  if a government program isn't working, it's almost impossible to defund it.  Instead, we keep shoveling money into the furnace.

But, hey, as long as we have extra money for Ukraine to fight Russia, I guess we can afford a few billion for broken DOJ systems that don't do what they promised to -- as well as another program to fix it, and a third state program to do the same exact thing.

If I understand correctly there are problems with the NICS system. Many agencies do not report to the NICS like they are supposed to which means the system is not always a reliable check.

I think it would be better to go for small changes to the existing system rather than trying to get one big change such as having the gun store do the checks.

U think HPD"s system is any better?  I know a bunch of guys who bought guns and only later (often years later) got a letter saying they need a medical waiver or turn their guns in. 

How about Ballards time as Chief and the pakalolo letters, only to be rescinded 3 weeks later. So anyone who already turned their guns due to the 30 day timeline, oh well.

Or the failed RAPBACK that the FBI stated cannot be used by HPD for what they wanted to use it for. Yet we all paid for it and it passed as law. This was only discovered due to a UIPA request, which was 99% redacted. But enough was visible to prove this.  Why didn't HPD testify against this, why don't our lawmakers delete this law?  Where is all of our money since the RAPBACK system was never implemented?

U think HPD"s system is any better?  I know a bunch of guys who bought guns and only later (often years later) got a letter saying they need a medical waiver or turn their guns in. 

How about Ballards time as Chief and the pakalolo letters, only to be rescinded 3 weeks later. So anyone who already turned their guns due to the 30 day timeline, oh well.

Or the failed RAPBACK that the FBI stated cannot be used by HPD for what they wanted to use it for. Yet we all paid for it and it passed as law. This was only discovered due to a UIPA request, which was 99% redacted. But enough was visible to prove this.  Why didn't HPD testify against this, why don't our lawmakers delete this law?  Where is all of our money since the RAPBACK system was never implemented?

Fees like that fall into a black hole called "The General Fund."  Once it's in that vacuum, it gets spent on whatever the legislature needs (or wants) to spend it on.

There's no separate fund earmarked for RAPBACK.  Just another money grab by the state government that benefits the state's budget, not the public.

And yet, they are still being funded with our money.
https://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/federal-bureau-of-investigation-budget-request-for-fiscal-year-2024

We are also funding the Fix NICS Act, a separate DOJ effort to fix the deficiencies in the NICS background check system.

https://www.justice.gov/usdoj-media/dag/media/1247581/dl?inline

We sure are spending a ton of money on something you believe is so broken we need yet another background check system funded by tax payers yet again at the state level.

is it common for the government to keep dumping money into a broken system without fixing it? 

Is it common that the solution for all broken federal systems is to create a second system to "fix" it?

Is it common that the solution for all broken federal systems is to create a redundant system at the state level?

Did you read how NICS is a "CRITICAL TOOL IN PROTECTING THE NATION?"  How can a broken system be called critical?

Do you see the real problem now?  if a government program isn't working, it's almost impossible to defund it.  Instead, we keep shoveling money into the furnace.

But, hey, as long as we have extra money for Ukraine to fight Russia, I guess we can afford a few billion for broken DOJ systems that don't do what they promised to -- as well as another program to fix it, and a third state program to do the same exact thing.

#1. I didn't advocate for an additional background system to be created. I advocated only for a photo ID style permit that was good for 5 years to be created using the existing background checks our police departments already perform. I just pointed out that because the NICS system has a bunch of holes in it that it is hard to suggest that is sufficient.

#2. Are you arguing against the NICS system, that it should be abandoned entirely?

U think HPD"s system is any better?  I know a bunch of guys who bought guns and only later (often years later) got a letter saying they need a medical waiver or turn their guns in. 

How about Ballards time as Chief and the pakalolo letters, only to be rescinded 3 weeks later. So anyone who already turned their guns due to the 30 day timeline, oh well.

Or the failed RAPBACK that the FBI stated cannot be used by HPD for what they wanted to use it for. Yet we all paid for it and it passed as law. This was only discovered due to a UIPA request, which was 99% redacted. But enough was visible to prove this.  Why didn't HPD testify against this, why don't our lawmakers delete this law?  Where is all of our money since the RAPBACK system was never implemented?

HPD would be able to perform additional checks beyond what an FFL could do so I do think it is more comprehensive.

I don't doubt HPD has made mistakes though.

Rapback was never implemented nationally but it could still theoretically operate on a state level if I understand it. I don't know whether HPD currently uses it to get notified if someone gets arrested on a neighbor island or not but it is supposed to be able to accomplish that.

HPD would be able to perform additional checks beyond what an FFL could do so I do think it is more comprehensive.

I don't doubt HPD has made mistakes though.

Rapback was never implemented nationally but it could still theoretically operate on a state level if I understand it. I don't know whether HPD currently uses it to get notified if someone gets arrested on a neighbor island or not but it is supposed to be able to accomplish that.

No, RAPBACK cannot work at the state level with regard to firearms.  The FBI told HPD/AG that's not what it's for.  HPD doesn't use it for firearm owners as no one is enrolled in it, even though we all paid and any gun bought after 2016, it's required by law.

#1. I didn't advocate for an additional background system to be created. I advocated only for a photo ID style permit that was good for 5 years to be created using the existing background checks our police departments already perform. I just pointed out that because the NICS system has a bunch of holes in it that it is hard to suggest that is sufficient.

#2. Are you arguing against the NICS system, that it should be abandoned entirely?

NICS only gets 'some' data from states that would reject certain gun buyers. 

NICS is not required for a private sale.

How much money do you think we should continue wasting on a background check system that routinely has more false positive denials than legit denials each year, and which we already saw was ineffective in at least 2 mass shootings?

At this point, it's a massive data collection nightmare.  States are not reporting the data needed to properly classify gun buyers because it's not mandatory and the feds are not picking up the cost.  Seems like there are laws on the books that requires new laws that include resource requirements from the states have to also include funding to the states.

As usual, NICS was a program that promised great things but wasn't fully thought out or funded to make it happen.

In short, I'd support scrapping NICS.  Then ALL the states that want to keep guns out of the wrong hands would do what HI and other gun control states have done -- create a more effective system instead of dumping money and our hopes of increased safety into a very broken program.

As long as NICS exists, most states will not bother to add their own background check system on top of it.  It's redundant and wasteful.