2aHawaii
General Topics => Legal and Activism => Topic started by: HiCarry on February 11, 2015, 10:46:41 AM
-
Mance v. Holder, opinion in pdf. US District Court for the Northern District of Texas holds that the ban is unconstitutional on its face and as applied. A resident of Washington, DC (which now allows handgun in the home, if registered) wanted to buy from a Texas FFL, because the only FFL in DC charges $125 to do the paperwork. The court holds that the GCA prohibition on the sale fails strict scrutiny, and also intermediate scrutiny, and enjoins enforcement of the restriction. Another win for the industrious Alan Gura!
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2015/02/ban.php (http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2015/02/ban.php)
-
i look forward to future trips while picking up all the pistols i want to bring back. vegas gonna get even more of my money now.
-
Great! Only 47 years to get that obviously unconstitutional crap overturned! Of course it's not really over yet as the government is expected to appeal... so, a few more years. Maybe they'll announce a decision on the 50th anniversary of the Brady Act... wouldn't that be sweet?
A few excerpts from David Codrea's article (http://www.examiner.com/article/federal-court-rules-interstate-handgun-transfer-ban-unconstitutional (http://www.examiner.com/article/federal-court-rules-interstate-handgun-transfer-ban-unconstitutional)):
[T]he judgment noted the Brady instant background check system was not available when the prohibition on interstate transfers was enacted. Because that capability now exists, Judge O’Connor noted, the government’s “argument fails to take into account the current version of the 1968 Gun Control Act, nor does it address how simply crossing state lines under the modern regime can circumvent state law.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that Defendants have not shown that the federal interstate handgun transfer ban is narrowly tailored to be the least restrictive means of achieving the Government’s goals under current law,” O’Connor explained. “The federal interstate handgun transfer ban is therefore unconstitutional on its face.”
“Accordingly, the Court DECLARES that 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(3), 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(3), and27 C.F.R. § 478.99(a) are UNCONSTITUTIONAL, and Defendants are ENJOINED from enforcing these provisions,” the opinion concluded. Noting that the government’s arguments failed even under intermediate scrutiny, any challenge to the ruling appears extremely problematic for [Attorney General Eric] Holder and [BATFE Director B. Todd] Jones.
-
The GCA prohibition?
-
So... If I visit another state, can I purchase a pistol, bring it back to Hawaii, and register it without having previously gotten a Hawaii permit to acquire? :-\
-
.
-
Any gun transactions that take place under another state's jurisdiction means that as long as you are inline with THAT STATE'S laws, you don't need to follow Hawaii's.
So if you purchase a firearm in California :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:, Hawaii laws don't apply to you unless it is illegal for you to own a fire arm or that specific firearm if you plan to bring it back to Hawaii.
Awesome! And I was thinking of Alaska... :D :shaka:
-
So... If I visit another state, can I purchase a pistol, bring it back to Hawaii, and register it without having previously gotten a Hawaii permit to acquire? :-\
Been doing that to bypass Hawaii permit system since forever. . Just buy it (firearms) from a different State and fly it back on a commercial flight.
However, most states still restrict sales of handgun to residents only. Rifles and private sales are no hassle in most states and don't require a NICS either. Cash and carry
There are no laws , under USC (interstate commerce) or HRS that restricts out of State purchases of firearms. HPD is never happy but, the law does not prohibit this type of purchase.
-
Seems FFL dealers in other states are hesitant to jump on the bandwagon yet. BATF will surely not support the ruling, and tell FFLs such.
-
Seems FFL dealers in other states are hesitant to jump on the bandwagon yet. BATF will surely not support the ruling, and tell FFLs such.
My understanding is that if this ruling is upheld you will be able to buy a handgun out-of-state of residency, but that handgun must conform to all the laws of your state of residency. With so many complex rules about exactly what is or isn't lawful, or how many "features" (barrel length, mag capacity, overall weight, mag well placement, etc., etc.) of what kind are or are not allowed in different states, it's no wonder that an FFL would be unwilling to risk their license by selling something that is illegal under, say California's prohibited list. I'd guess you'd have to be an attorney studying all those state laws full-time to render an accurate opinion on every gun that might be returning to every state.
-
My understanding is that if this ruling is upheld you will be able to buy a handgun out-of-state of residency, but that handgun must conform to all the laws of your state of residency. With so many complex rules about exactly what is or isn't lawful, or how many "features" (barrel length, mag capacity, overall weight, mag well placement, etc., etc.) of what kind are or are not allowed in different states, it's no wonder that an FFL would be unwilling to risk their license by selling something that is illegal under, say California's prohibited list. I'd guess you'd have to be an attorney studying all those state laws full-time to render an accurate opinion on every gun that might be returning to every state.
At that point isn't it the buyers responsibility to know what he is bringing into the state where the law Is concerned? The FFL is only responsible for the laws in the state in which the transaction takes place. As long as the firearm is sold legally in Tx, then it's your problem if it's illegal in Hawaii when you try to register it here. This is no different than current laws other than allowing you to buy in another state and alleviate the second FFL transfer.
Much like how PCSing military have to verify they are not breaking any laws every time we move.
-
At that point isn't it the buyers responsibility to know what he is bringing into the state where the law Is concerned? The FFL is only responsible for the laws in the state in which the transaction takes place. As long as the firearm is sold legally in Tx, then it's your problem if it's illegal in Hawaii when you try to register it here. This is no different than current laws other than allowing you to buy in another state and alleviate the second FFL transfer.
Much like how PCSing military have to verify they are not breaking any laws every time we move.
Sellers for long guns have to follow the rules of the state. That could make it difficult for people like CA, NY etc.
-
The state they were sold in. Not the state of residence of the purchaser. Correct?
-
The state they were sold in. Not the state of residence of the purchaser. Correct?
Some quotations from the Mance v Holder decision (citations omitted):
Under the law, FFLs may transfer rifles and shotguns to nonresidents so long as the FFL and recipient meet in person and the transfer fully complies with the legal requirements of both states.
A Texas FFL must ensure that a Sacramento, California resident who purchases a rifle is legally entitled to do so under federal, Texas, California, and Sacramento law.
While a California FFL in San Diego might have to research the local hadgun restrictions in place for a Sacramento, California resident purchaser, some 500 miles to the north, nothing prevents an out-of-state FFL from Reno, Nevada, from conducting the same research to ensure that a handgun transaction with a Sacramento resident, some 100 miles away, comports with federal, Nevada, California, and Sacramento restrictions.
* * * * * *
There are several mentions in the decision about a Point of Contact (POC), a person designated by any state to be informed of any NICS checks on the residents of that state when purchasing any firearms in a non-resident state, including the specifics of the firearm(s), so they can determine if that firearm is legal in the resident state. Does anyone know if Hawaii has a POC?
If someone purchased a firearm (long gun or handgun) that did not comply with state law, that firearm could be stored in a legal locality, rather than imported into the state, and thus if a POC did contact the owner re the Hawaii-illegal firearm the owner might have to provide evidence that the firearm is being kept at another location. I doubt that would be a constitutionally legal procedure without a warrant or subpoena, but I wouldn't be at all surprised to see it happen, given all the other unconstitutional laws re Second Amendment civil rights in Hawaii.
-
There are several mentions in the decision about a Point of Contact (POC), a person designated by any state to be informed of any NICS checks on the residents of that state when purchasing any firearms in a non-resident state, including the specifics of the firearm(s), so they can determine if that firearm is legal in the resident state. Does anyone know if Hawaii has a POC?
I don't know about a POC, but I'm positive our gun registration system is designed by a POS!
>:D
-
So just from reading these comments I have a couple questions. I just bought a scar 17 from California but was under the impression I need a "permit to acquire" before I could send it here and keep it with me. That's not true? Since I bought it in California I can ship it to myself WITHOUT a permit to acquire and all I would need to do is register it at the hpd? Or is that blurring the legal lines to the point where I could get bones over pretty good by the state here? If I can send my rifle over I'm gonna do that right now lol, I appreciate the input
-
So just from reading these comments I have a couple questions. I just bought a scar 17 from California but was under the impression I need a "permit to acquire" before I could send it here and keep it with me. That's not true? Since I bought it in California I can ship it to myself WITHOUT a permit to acquire and all I would need to do is register it at the hpd? Or is that blurring the legal lines to the point where I could get bones over pretty good by the state here? If I can send my rifle over I'm gonna do that right now lol, I appreciate the input
You can ship a rifle you own to yourself in another state and then register it with HPD. No problems. Just tell HPD that you're bringing it in from out of state.
-
I have a question in regards to all of this and maybe someone out there can chime in with some good info or suggestions. I'm planning a trip to Colorado Springs in a bit and was gonna bring a pelican case with me so I could possibly bring back some firearms. Does anyone know if I can purchase handguns or rifles from their local gun shops and bring them back with me then register at HPD or will there be problems? I'm assuming Colorado does a 15 minute background check and then I can purchase whatever I want. Or do they restrict purchases to residents only? Anyone with past experience purchasing firearms from there?
-
So just from reading these comments I have a couple questions. I just bought a scar 17 from California but was under the impression I need a "permit to acquire" before I could send it here and keep it with me. That's not true? Since I bought it in California I can ship it to myself WITHOUT a permit to acquire and all I would need to do is register it at the hpd? Or is that blurring the legal lines to the point where I could get bones over pretty good by the state here? If I can send my rifle over I'm gonna do that right now lol, I appreciate the input
First, don't confuse "Permit to Acquire" with "Registration." Two totally different animals.
Having said that, the HPD will likely have you apply for a long gun permit. That's probably optional, but since you're there, might as well. It's good for a year and as many long guns as you can afford!
A permit isn't needed to register a rifle you own. The permit is only for transferring ownership. Once it's yours, even if acquired out of state, all you have to do then is show it to the officers at the firearms section and fill out the registration form.
They do have a time they stop accepting out-of-state registrations, so don't show up after 2:30. If there's a line, you could miss the cut-off. They have to run the serial of out-of-state guns to make sure it's not reported stolen or some other situations.
The law is you have to appear to register within 5 days of arrival in Hawaii.
From the HPD website:
Out of state registrants need to take firearm(s), in person, to the Main Police Station Firearms Section no later than 5 calendar days from arrival.
Out of state registrants are encouraged to arrive at the Firearms Unit no later than 3:00 pm. The out of state registration process can be lengthy.
If there is a line, we may not be able to accommodate you. There is no 14-day waiting period for Out-of-State Registration.
You need the following when you register your firearm:
A $16.50 FBI fingerprinting fee. Cash only, exact change.
Valid photo identification
The firearm for inspection
If you were born outside the United States, bring proof of citizenship such as
an Original US Passport,
Original Naturalization Certificate,
Original Born Abroad Certificate,
or if you are in the military your Enlisted (ERB) or Officer (ORB) Record Brief will suffice only if the document states you are a United States Citizen.
http://www.honolulupd.org/information/index.php?page=gunmain (http://www.honolulupd.org/information/index.php?page=gunmain)