2aHawaii
General Topics => Legal and Activism => Topic started by: Heavies on January 29, 2014, 07:27:16 PM
-
The committee(s) on PSM has scheduled a public hearing on 02-04-14 3:45PM in conference room 224.
Anyone going to be able to make this?
CHECK THE FEED POSTER FOR UPDATES AND SUBMIT TESTIMONY (https://2ahawaii.com/index.php?board=12.0)
Submit your testImony NOW. Lets get this ball rolling, Oppose all anti bills and support all pro bills!!! we need thousands of submissions, SPREAD THE WORD!
-
SB2938 Online Firearms Registration (that still needs station visits)
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2938&year=2014 (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2938&year=2014)
-
SB2257 "Digitally" manufactured firearms and ammunition
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2257&year=2014 (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2257&year=2014)
Please get this thrown out!!!! This bill is just absurd!! Conceivably it could ban all modern firearms? No CNC parts? :wtf:
-
SB2050 Firearms; Registration
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2050&year=2014 (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2050&year=2014)
Support this one. Waiting 14 days when you have already been vetted, Nooooo Neeeeed.. ;)
-
Anyone going to be able to make this?
CHECK THE FEED POSTER FOR UPDATES AND SUBMIT TESTIMONY (https://2ahawaii.com/index.php?board=12.0)
Submit your testImony NOW. Lets get this ball rolling, Oppose all anti bills and support all pro bills!!! we need thousands of submissions, SPREAD THE WORD!
ok guys
you need to register for the site to testify
sign in and click the testify button on the upper right
then say for or against and state your reason
your testimony will be sent to the appropriate committee
-
Signed in, testified, sent'em in.
-
Testimony sent
But
I'm not on island , can't go.
-
Keep em rolling in! Even if you can't get there submit testimony. I wish they would have these things when I am not working!!!
-
SB2257 "Digitally" manufactured firearms and ammunition
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2257&year=2014 (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2257&year=2014)
Please get this thrown out!!!! This bill is just absurd!! Conceivably it could ban all modern firearms? No CNC parts? :wtf:
Submitted on SB2050. Would like to see what other people are submitting on 2257. This bill seems kinda nuts. My read is that they make it illegal to even make toy guns digitally or any part that could be used in a gun.
Also interested in what people are submitting on SB2938. Not sure if I support that or not. Seems kinda weird and pointless.
Update: Thought I'd tell people what I said on SB2050. I basically said that even if the 14 day waiting period serves a purpose as a cooling down period (which I don't actually concede), it serves no purpose whatsoever on subsequent purchases. An instant NICS check could be performed when apply for subsequent permits.
-
Submitted on SB2050. Would like to see what other people are submitting on 2257. This bill seems kinda nuts. My read is that they make it illegal to even make toy guns digitally or any part that could be used in a gun.
Also interested in what people are submitting on SB2938. Not sure if I support that or not. Seems kinda weird and pointless.
2938 is funky. I would not mind some kind of online, however, how is it going to be paid for? It isn't really clear on that. ?.. it says revenue generated by registering fees, but the only fee allowed to be charged is the FBI fingerprinting fee. So what fee is paying for the web processing? ??? Also, not really trusting the gov with any info online now days. They are much easier to hack than big corporations, so it has been said, and big corporations have been losing data alot lately.
-
SB2257 "Digitally" manufactured firearms and ammunition
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2257&year=2014 (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2257&year=2014)
Please get this thrown out!!!! This bill is just absurd!! Conceivably it could ban all modern firearms? No CNC parts? :wtf:
SB 2257 line 21: unless the person possesses a license to manufacture firearms
Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't this allow modern firearms though the manufactures or other places of buisiness that have the license? My understanding that this bill is addressing an issue that a current law already covers.
This bill looks to be a feeble attempt to address 3D printing. IMO there is a lack of understanding of how parts are manufactured in general. Does anyone know what existing law covers this. For example: a AR-15 lower assembly (80%), what law dictates that it will be serialized upon assembly?
-
Registered and testimony submittted! :thumbsup:
Unfortuneately I won't be able to attend due to work. :(
-
SB 2257 line 21: unless the person possesses a license to manufacture firearms
Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't this allow modern firearms though the manufactures or other places of buisiness that have the license? My understanding that this bill is addressing an issue that a current law already covers.
This bill looks to be a feeble attempt to address 3D printing. IMO there is a lack of understanding of how parts are manufactured in general. Does anyone know what existing law covers this. For example: a AR-15 lower assembly (80%), what law dictates that it will be serialized upon assembly?
While the bill allows manufacture, I was looking at section (c) "It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly or intentionally possess, sell, deliver, barter, trade, gift, transfer, or acquire any firearm manufactured through the use of digital manufacturing technology."
I read it as it would be legal to manufacture if you have license, but not for anyone in Hawaii to own, under penalty of class C felony
Also section (e) "For purposes of this section, "digital manufacturing technology" means the use of an integrated, computer-based system comprising simulation,, three-dimensional visualization, analytics, and various collaboration tools to create product and manufacturing process definitions simultaneously. "Digital manufacturing technology" includes but is not limited to computer numerical control mills, three-dimensional printers, and laser cutting machines."
I read this as pretty much any thing thought of and designed on or by computer, which is pretty much all newer firearms, parts, accessories. :o
IANAL though, and political/legal jargon is confusing, at best, for me... ;D
-
While the bill allows manufacture, I was looking at section (c) "It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly or intentionally possess, sell, deliver, barter, trade, gift, transfer, or acquire any firearm manufactured through the use of digital manufacturing technology."
I read it as it would be legal to manufacture if you have license, but not for anyone in Hawaii to own, under penalty of class C felony
Also section (e) "For purposes of this section, "digital manufacturing technology" means the use of an integrated, computer-based system comprising simulation,, three-dimensional visualization, analytics, and various collaboration tools to create product and manufacturing process definitions simultaneously. "Digital manufacturing technology" includes but is not limited to computer numerical control mills, three-dimensional printers, and laser cutting machines."
I read this as pretty much any thing thought of and designed on or by computer, which is pretty much all newer firearms, parts, accessories. :o
IANAL though, and political/legal jargon is confusing, at best, for me... ;D
You and me both. I just like to have as much information as I can in an effort to make an intelligent argument prior to associating my name with anything. I will be submitting a testimony shortly. Thanks.
-
Submitted on SB2050. Would like to see what other people are submitting on 2257. This bill seems kinda nuts. My read is that they make it illegal to even make toy guns digitally or any part that could be used in a gun.
Also interested in what people are submitting on SB2938. Not sure if I support that or not. Seems kinda weird and pointless.
Update: Thought I'd tell people what I said on SB2050. I basically said that even if the 14 day waiting period serves a purpose as a cooling down period (which I don't actually concede), it serves no purpose whatsoever on subsequent purchases. An instant NICS check could be performed when apply for subsequent permits.
Thinking about 2938, I don't support this. It will cost a lot to implement correctly and ensure data is not hacked. Registration of personal firearms is not needed in any case as this serves only to locate presently legal firearm owners in the case of confiscation. I do not trust the city/state to keep my personal/medical information safe anywhere online. It might make the process a little easier, but registering firearms with the state is, IMHO, an illegal and unnecessary standard that we must comply with. Vetting of individuals for the purpose of determining if they are fit to possess a firearm is needed, this process ought to be owned by the firearm dealer in the first place, and criminals don’t care about any law and are not be effected one bit, in the registration permitting process. Therefore, I cannot support making a process, in which i don't believe in, easier.
-
Thinking about 2938, I don't support this. It will cost a lot to implement correctly and ensure data is not hacked. Registration of personal firearms is not needed in any case as this serves only to locate presently legal firearm owners in the case of confiscation. I do not trust the city/state to keep my personal/medical information safe anywhere online. It might make the process a little easier, but registering firearms with the state is, IMHO, an illegal and unnecessary standard that we must comply with. Vetting of individuals for the purpose of determining if they are fit to possess a firearm is needed, this process ought to be owned by the firearm dealer in the first place, and criminals don’t care about any law and are not be effected one bit, in the registration permitting process. Therefore, I cannot support making a process, in which i don't believe in, easier.
I submitted testimony opposed to this bill. I don't trust the government in securing our data online. And who knows if some law maker changes their mind and propose to make it public like a searchable database (i.e. sex offenders database).
-
Only a few days left! Send em in!!!
-
This could be the feeler hearing to determine if they will bring up the AWB bills and other BS legislation that was deferred last year. Don't be complacent. This is to show that gun owners in Hawaii have the force to make changes!!!
-
This could be the feeler hearing to determine if they will bring up the AWB bills and other BS legislation that was deferred last year. Don't be complacent. This is to show that gun owners in Hawaii have the force to make changes!!!
i agree
we have to hit all of these bills HARD
-
i agree
we have to hit all of these bills HARD
testimony submitted
-
Testimony submitted.
SB2050 removal of 14 day wait period - supported
Get rid of inefficiency with the process.
SB2257 digitally manufactured firearms - opposed.
This makes no sense. Does it ban anything that uses computers to manufacture?
SB2938 online firearm registration - opposed.
1. Writes about charging a fee for county registration. So does that mean we have to pay every time we register a firearm?
2. Also it is costly to implement.
3. Lastly, I'd rather not have my data online where someone messing up will get that data released on the Internet.
-
SUBMIT YOUR TESTIMONY if you haven't yet!
You have 30 minutes left to submit a testimony for it to be counted by tomorrow's meeting (1:45pm).
-
SB 2257 line 21: unless the person possesses a license to manufacture firearms
Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't this allow modern firearms though the manufactures or other places of buisiness that have the license? My understanding that this bill is addressing an issue that a current law already covers.
This bill looks to be a feeble attempt to address 3D printing. IMO there is a lack of understanding of how parts are manufactured in general. Does anyone know what existing law covers this. For example: a AR-15 lower assembly (80%), what law dictates that it will be serialized upon assembly?
Any type of homemade firearm do NOT require registration or serial numbers by federal laws (BATF) . Under the GCA 68'. In hawaii all types of firearm must be registered by state law only under HRS.
Making homemade firearms do not require any type of license or permits state or federal.
-
The committee meeting is at 3.45 tomorrow (tues) 2/4/14 in Conference Room 204
-
Any type of homemade firearm do NOT require registration or serial numbers by federal laws (BATF) . Under the GCA 68'. In hawaii all types of firearm must be registered by state law only under HRS.
Making homemade firearms do not require any type of license or permits state or federal.
This part of the bill I find ridiculous.
It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly or
intentionally use any firearm, ammunition, or any piece or part
thereof, manufactured through the use of digital manufacturing
technology, that:
-(1) When fully assembled or in pieces or parts, resembles
or depicts the shape or nature of a firearm,
ammunition, or any piece or part thereof;
(e) For purposes of this section, "digital manufacturing
technology" means the use of an integrated, computer-based
system comprising simulation,, three-dimensional visualization,
analytics, and various collaboration tools to create product and
manufacturing process definitions simultaneously. "Digital
manufacturing technology" includes but is not limited to
computer numerical control mills, three-dimensional printers,
and laser cutting machines.
So if I used a 3d printer to make some home made snapcaps I'm doing something illegal since it resembles ammunition.
If I used a digital Silhouette Electronic Cutter to make a gun sticker since I'm doing something illegal since it the sticker resembles the share or nature of a firearm and was manufactured digitally.
This bill is so bad it could even affect airsoft folks.
-
Testimony is available online for SB2050 (ending waiting period for already registered firearm owners) to be heard in PSM committee this afternoon.
Fifty-four (54) pages. All FOR 2050, with ONE prominent exception. The first page is from HPD stating their OPPOSITION. They imply that 2050 would preclude them from performing a background check. It, of course, does no such thing. It would merely make it so that Hawaii would be like the vast majority of states in the United States that perform the checks via the NICS system. Other states do not have higher crime rates due to using the NICS system. I don't know why HPD would imply that they could not perform an adequate background check if 2050 is implemented. Why misrepresent the bill? I don't get it. Or maybe I do.
Thanks to all who took the time to send in comments/testimony. The people have clearly spoken. Now let's see what "our" legislators do! :geekdanc: :wtf:
-
Testimony is available online for SB2050 (ending waiting period for already registered firearm owners) to be heard in PSM committee this afternoon.
Fifty-four (54) pages. All FOR 2050, with ONE prominent exception. The first page is from HPD stating their OPPOSITION. They imply that 2050 would preclude them from performing a background check. It, of course, does no such thing. It would merely make it so that Hawaii would be like the vast majority of states in the United States that perform the checks via the NICS system. Other states do not have higher crime rates due to using the NICS system. I don't know why HPD would imply that they could not perform an adequate background check if 2050 is implemented. Why misrepresent the bill? I don't get it. Or maybe I do.
Thanks to all who took the time to send in comments/testimony. The people have clearly spoken. Now let's see what "our" legislators do! :geekdanc: :wtf:
the scarier one we need to hit HARD is that one about the mental health professional check needed every year or two
-
Just read submitted testimony for SB2257 and can't understand why HRA supported it. Did they even read the bill? Only the HRA and Maui PD supported this bill.
-
the scarier one we need to hit HARD is that one about the mental health professional check needed every year or two
Josh Green's bill (SB2957, not yet scheduled for a hearing) has it down to every 90 days (required exam within 90 days prior to EACH permit application). I'm guessing soon it'll be a required chip implant that will constantly send data... and if it looks borderline at any time, they'll come and get you and your guns. (What about knives and blunt objects?) Of course they'll have no evidence that the "chip" actually evaluates anything that can factually predict that you are, or are not, about to do something bad, but hey, they don't care about that. Because now they don't have any test to give that can reliably indicate that you won't do something bad in the next 90 days, and they still want that to be a "law". But they don't care. At least they are trying to do SOMETHING. For the children. Or something.
-
Just read submitted testimony for SB2257 and can't understand why HRA supported it. Did they even read the bill? Only the HRA and Maui PD supported this bill.
Probably for the same reason that they went against the NRA-ILA now with SB2257, as they did against the NRA-ILA last year with SB69 wherein the HRA encouraged our legislators to require registration by someone bringing in an "unusable, unserviceable" (my dictionary says "unrepairable") firearm. Now, don't ask me what that reason would be, but it's probably the same reason.
-
Just read submitted testimony for SB2257 and can't understand why HRA supported it. Did they even read the bill? Only the HRA and Maui PD supported this bill.
wow, we're screwed
legislators put a lot of weight into what the HRA says
-
wow, we're screwed
legislators put a lot of weight into what the HRA says
Perhaps someone from HRA could inform us as to how they reach decisions about supporting or opposing proposed legislation, and how many people (and what percentage of their membership that is) are involved in those decisions. Also if there is any polling of HRA members as to their preferences for legislation or agreement, or lack thereof, with HRA positions (assuming the HRA positions are not democratically decided by a vote of all members). Just curious.
-
Perhaps someone from HRA could inform us as to how they reach decisions about supporting or opposing proposed legislation, and how many people (and what percentage of their membership that is) are involved in those decisions. Also if there is any polling of HRA members as to their preferences for legislation or agreement, or lack thereof, with HRA positions (assuming the HRA positions are not democratically decided by a vote of all members). Just curious.
I was severely disappointed in their testimony for SB2257. Maybe there is some strategical maneuvering going on, but that testimony doesn't even reflect federal law correctly.
-
I was severely disappointed in their testimony for SB2257. Maybe there is some strategical maneuvering going on, but that testimony doesn't even reflect federal law correctly.
Well, if there is some "strategical maneuvering" going on, that's not the kind of thing we "little people" are privy too. We'll just have to trust that our "betters" are doing what's best for us, right? :shake: :wtf:
-
Expressed my disappointment on their Facebook page... It's as if they didn't even read the bill.
-
I was listening to the Mike Buck show the other day, not sure but I think he was talking to David Chang of the GOP. The subject of pro gun legislation came up and the guy said basically there is no real push for the pro gun agenda.
-
Expressed my disappointment on their Facebook page... It's as if they didn't even read the bill.
Was at the committee meeting. HRA switched positions and opposed the bill. Committee deferred the bill (which places it in limbo if I understand the process right)
-
Was at the committee meeting. HRA switched positions and opposed the bill. Committee deferred the bill (which places it in limbo if I understand the process right)
interesting
i wonder why they changed positions
-
Update on committee meeting:
SB2050 - passed with amendments to add budgeting and require the attorney general to set the system up
SB2257 - Deferred
SB2938 - passed with amendments
-
Next bill that has a scheduled hearing is SB2590 (Espero, etc).
SB2590 Firearms; LEO; Alcohol; Prescription Medicine
Prohibits LEO from carrying when consuming alcohol and prescription drugs
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2590 (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2590)
Public hearing 2/7/2014 1:00pm Conf Room 225
-
Was at the committee meeting. HRA switched positions and opposed the bill. Committee deferred the bill (which places it in limbo if I understand the process right)
I'm glad that they changed their mind. I sent Dr. Cooper an email but figured that it was already too late. Maybe they were able to take a look at the NRA-ILA testimony before. Good news, though.
-
HRA will not be holding the annual meeting this year. ???
-
Was at the committee meeting. HRA switched positions and opposed the bill. Committee deferred the bill (which places it in limbo if I understand the process right)
yes, deferring the bill means it will not go to the floor for a vote
some or all of the bill can be added in the future to other bills, so we still need to be vigilant
-
Dr. Cooper indicated in his testimony that the bill would effectively ban all modern firearms. He also said that digital milling technology is used to produce parts for antique firearms as well.
-
Dr. Cooper indicated in his testimony that the bill would effectively ban all modern firearms. He also said that digital milling technology is used to produce parts for antique firearms as well.
After reading the bill, that is the conclusion I can up with as well. I opposed.
-
I sure hope that this great opposition to gun control gives them pause about resurrecting the AWB bills that where differed last year.
-
I sure hope that this great opposition to gun control gives them pause about resurrecting the AWB bills that where differed last year.
i believe the AWB bills that were deferred from 2013 are not scheduled for committee
this means they are not able to be brought to the floor
the provisions in the AWB can be added to any bill at any time, so we still need to be vigilant