2aHawaii
General Topics => Legal and Activism => Topic started by: punaperson on June 29, 2016, 08:05:05 PM
-
I wouldn't be the least surprised to see at least a few, if not all, of some version of these proposed laws appear in the next Hawaii legislative session. Forewarned is forearmed. Unless you've been disarmed. Then you're pretty much totally screwed.
The following is an email from California Assemblyman Brian Jones about the votes tomorrow. Read 'em and weep. The Dems in California have a large majority, not as big as Hawaii (no place else could hope to match this "progressive" paradise... lowest voter turnout and very low overall education level of the populace. Of course in California a significant number of the Dem voters don't even speak English...), so the bills have a high probability of passing the Assembly:
Tomorrow, Thursday, June 30, the Majority Party of the California State Assembly will be attempting to swiftly pass a sweeping number of bills that would further restrict the individual rights, provided by the US Constitution, of lawful owners of firearms and rifles throughout our state. This was a last-minute maneuver [bills with totally different content and subject matter, not gun related, were gutted, all text deleted, and the new anti-gun text was inserted] to force these bills through with limited transparency and dialogue. As you would guess, I will be voting against all of these. If you do not live in East County, I encourage you to contact your Assemblymember and encourage them to vote against these measures.
Here is a list of bills and a brief summary:
SB 880 (Hall) – all firearms with detachable magazines = prohibited assault weapons
SB 894 (Jackson) – creates a crime for failure to report stolen firearm within 5 days and/or report recovery of the firearm within 48 hours.
SB 1235 (De León) – amends Newsom’s initiative – requires a separate background check each time ammunition is purchased or transferred [Give a friend a round at the range, go to jail!]
SB 1446 (Hancock) – criminalizes possession of “large-capacity magazine” no matter when or how acquired.
AB 857 (Cooper) – requires person who manufactures or assembles a firearm to first apply for and receive a unique serial number from DOJ
AB 1511 (Santiago) – prohibits loaning of firearms.
SJR 20 (Hall) – calls for federal study on “gun violence.”
AB 1135 (Levine) - Assault weapons - bans firearms with bullet buttons
AB 1673 (Gipson) - Requiring registration of gun parts -
AB 1695 (Bonta) - Making it a crime to falsely report your gun was lost or stolen and making that crime subject to a 10-year prohibition on owning/possessing firearms
AB 1674 (Santiago) – Limits all guns, not just handguns, to one purchase a month
-
Rainbow boy has already said that he thinks we need guidelines for buying ammo at the meeting, so mass shooters cannot stockpile ammunition.
Willie had also made references towards it.
-
Didn't Willy make mention of ammo laws like Kali? He kept on saying nobody wants to ban guns but didn't mention about banning ammo.
If the Kali laws pass, Kali will have the highest amount of "felons" in the nation.
HI will try to copy, because DONKEYS see, DONKEYS do.
-
Most of the bills passed today. Here is a photo of the gloating morons [EDIT: sorry, I left it out earlier as I got distracted by seeing the head moron say that stupid stuff. (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/images/smilies/facepalm.gif)]. I use that word advisedly, as the Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De Leon is on the left, famous for his claim that a "ghost gun" with a "30 caliber clip has the ability to disperse 30 bullets within half a second. 30 magazine clip in half a second.". :rofl: He's authoring and making laws about guns. :crazy: I wouldn't be the least surprised to see some of the same crap here next January.
(http://www.trbimg.com/img-57758141/turbine/la-pol-kevin-de-leon-kevin-mccarty-miguel-santiago-20160630/600)
https://youtu.be/iJmFEv6BHM0 (https://youtu.be/iJmFEv6BHM0)
These passed today:
AB 1664 (Levine & Ting): AB 1664 would extend the definition of an assault weapon to include all semi-automatic rifles and pistols with a removable magazine and that use “bullet button”. For example, an AR-15 would be included in this.
AB 1673 (Gipson): AB 1673 would take the definition of a firearm and extend to it include any unfinished frames or receivers that can be converted into a weapon. This bill could make any object that is associated with a firearm subject to the same regulations that apply to firearms.
AB 1674 (Santiago): AB 1674 would add to the current restrictions that are placed on an individual in regards to how many firearms they can purchase in a 30 day period. Current law states that only one handgun can be purchased in this time period but if this legislation is passed, long guns would fall under this restriction as well.
AB 1695 (Bonta): AB 1695 would require the Attorney General to send individuals a pamphlet regarding all firearm laws, how to safely store your weapon, and gun trafficking. This measure would result in wasteful government spending as criminals will not be receiving these pamphlets, only law-abiding gun owners who are already aware of this information.
AB 2607 (Ting): AB 2607 would allow an employer, coworker or mental health worker to file a restraining order on an individual to keep them from owning a gun. This individual would not be allowed to defend themselves until 21 days later. In this time, they would have their right to bear arms stripped from them, regardless if the claims were true or not..
SB 1235 (De León): SB 1235 requires background checks for ammunition purchasers, licenses to sell ammunition, and collection of sale information. Restrictions on ammunition purchases, creates a DOJ database of ammunition owners. Bans internet / out of state ammunition purchase.
SB 880 (Hall, Glazer): SB 880 redefines assault weapons to encompass specified guns capable of accepting any type of detachable magazine. Bans common and constitutionally protected firearms that have magazine locking devices.
SB 1446 (Hancock): SB 1446 prohibits the possession of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Confiscation of lawfully acquired, standard capacity magazines that can hold over 10 rounds.
SB 894 (Jackson): SB 894 requires the reporting of a lost or stolen gun within 5 days of when a person knows or reasonably should have known of the theft or loss. Victimizes victims by criminalizing the failure to report lost and stolen firearms.
-
That's horrible. I wouldn't doubt seeing it introduced in Hawaii. We nee that non profit that's in the other thread!
-
What really needs to be done is stop them before it even gets to that point. Trying to fight these laws in the courtroom is like trying to piss upwind.
Get registered to vote, get everyone you know registered to vote, VOTE 2A as the first issue that concerns you.
-
Heavies is right.
If you don't want this to happen here, if you want real change in our state and the C&C, get your ass into the voting booth and get people like Espero, Hirono, Schatz, and Ige out of our government.
The only problem is that the republican party is even weaker than the libertarians in this state. What we need to do is stage a Trump style takeover of the party here and toss all the deadwood out. Guys like Sen. Slom can't stay in office forever, more's the pity. We need some new blood.
-
Gov brown signed today
Most of these bills were on a different topic and were gutted and re-written beyond public comment
Everyone needs to realize that this is entirely legal here in Hawaii during "crossover" in "conference committee "
We must be vigilant at all times, people
Or else rap back is going to seem minor
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
the rap back initiative was just a litmus test for Hawaii legislators.
I foresee next year worse bills along the lines of Cali.
-
So an AR-15, is now an "assault weapon" does that mean they are banned in CA now?
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
-
the rap back initiative was just a litmus test for Hawaii legislators.
I foresee next year worse bills along the lines of Cali.
i agree
bloomberg and his people are going to smell blood in the water...
-
Nevermind misread the post.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
-
Details of each bill have links at the site:
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/07/robert-farago/breaking-california-governor-brown-signs-vetoes-gun-control-bills/
California Governor Jerry Brown has wielded his executive pen on the raft of gun control measures informally known as “Gunpocalypse.” Brown signed the following bills:
AB 1135 – “Assault Weapons” Ban
AB 1511 – Criminalizes Loaning Firearms
AB 1695 – Expansion of Prohibitions and Threatening Letters from DOJ to Gun Owners
SB 880 – Expands “Assault Weapons” Ban to Include “Bullet Button” Semi-Auto Rifles, Pistols
SB 1235 by Senator Kevin De León (D-Los Angeles) – Ammunition
SB 1446 – Ban on ALL Magazines that were Designed to Hold More than 10 Rounds
Governor Brown vetoed the following bills:
AB 1673 – Expands Definition of “Firearm” to Include Non-Firearm Materials
AB 1674 – Expands the 30-day purchase limit to all firearms; deletes the “private party” exemption
AB 2607 – Expanding Gun Violence Restraining Orders
SB 894 – Mandatory Law Enforcement Reports for Lost or Stolen Firearms
Hat tip: Firearms Policy Coalition
-
and these are the same people who pass laws in regards to to other facets of our society. Imagine the issues of abortions, women's rights etc. Fucking morons. All dressed up with titles as lawmakers with little going on in their minds.
-
and these are the same people who pass laws in regards to to other facets of our society. Imagine the issues of abortions, women's rights etc. Fucking morons. All dressed up with titles as lawmakers with little going on in their minds.
Neither critical thinking skills nor being honest about the (non)effects, easily foreseen "unintended consequences" and/or true goals of legislation they propose and vote for has never been a requirement for public office. And that will never change. It works just the way they like it as it is. That's why Hawaii also has no recall, no term limits, no initiative, nor any referendum possibilities that could possibly attempt to hold the politicians even slightly accountable.
-
That background check to buy ammo is nasty. At least owners in Calif. have the option of traveling to Nevada or Arizona to pick it up.
Banning possession of all those 20-30 round magazines. Somehow I do not foresee a massive turn-in happening any time soon.
-
That background check to buy ammo is nasty. At least owners in Calif. have the option of traveling to Nevada or Arizona to pick it up.
Banning possession of all those 20-30 round magazines. Somehow I do not foresee a massive turn-in happening any time soon.
I'm sure all the people who do not "turn them in" will transfer them to another state, as prescribed by law. :rofl:
-
Was speaking to an older gentleman about the new Cali laws. He has a bunch of hand guns and rifles, but still would not come out and support anything 2a. Said if the make them in Hawaii we have to follow them. WTF!?! I really don't get it. Passive local attitude??
-
Was speaking to an older gentleman about the new Cali laws. He has a bunch of hand guns and rifles, but still would not come out and support anything 2a. Said if the make them in Hawaii we have to follow them. WTF!?! I really don't get it. Passive local attitude??
on a different subject but similar attitude.
A friend of mine is a member of union 1260 and asked about his opinion of the leadership doubling dues and nepotism.
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/31931528/exclusive-union-paid-business-manager-relatives-more-than-600k (http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/31931528/exclusive-union-paid-business-manager-relatives-more-than-600k)
He said that its only $200 a month and its not worth anything to be concerned about.
-
Was speaking to an older gentleman about the new Cali laws. He has a bunch of hand guns and rifles, but still would not come out and support anything 2a. Said if the make them in Hawaii we have to follow them. WTF!?! I really don't get it. Passive local attitude??
The plantation mentality. Generations have been raised on it. It's why the dimocrats have been in power for 50 years. Keep your head down, don't make waves or you'll piss off the boss. Take what they give and don't complain, remember to say thank you so they don't feel like you're ungrateful.
If Ige were to declare all guns illegal tomorrow these people would be down at the firearms division 15 minutes early to turn in their firearms, just to make sure they wouldn't be late to give up their rights.
-
The plantation mentality. Generations have been raised on it. It's why the dimocrats have been in power for 50 years. Keep your head down, don't make waves or you'll piss off the boss. Take what they give and don't complain, remember to say thank you so they don't feel like you're ungrateful.
If Ige were to declare all guns illegal tomorrow these people would be down at the firearms division 15 minutes early to turn in their firearms, just to make sure they wouldn't be late to give up their rights.
What's sad is there are more than a few on here who would do the same, even though they talk about supporting 2A rights.
We know who they are!
If you're guided by compromise, feelings and trust of government, you'll be in that line, too!
-
I don't quite understand the strategy of the government on these bans ("assault weapons" and "high capacity magazine", etc.). They must now know, from the consistent experience of other states that the compliance rate is at maximum 20%. And all those 20% are obviously law-abiding citizens. Not one criminal with a firearm, almost all of which are illegally possessed in the first place, will be turned in. So they have gotten rid of zero guns are that highly likely to be used in committing crimes. Is the hypothesis that eventually, in 50 or 100 or 200 years that the remaining guns and magazine, etc. will be turned in as the firearms are transferred to new owners upon the old-age incapacitation or death of those who illegally kept them? Or that with "only" 80% remaining in civilain hands that the rate of theft will thus be diminished by 20% and there will be 20% fewer criminals with guns?
The other side of it is that many people who believe they have a ("natural" if not "legal") right of self-defense using the best tool possible will not only not obey the "turn 'em all in Mr. and Mrs. America" (Feinstein), but will actively create "work arounds" and obtain more of the forbidden items that will in no way be tracked in the first place (no NICS checks, 4473s, etc.). If that IS the case, there would end up being MORE not fewer (untraceable) firearms and magazines, etc. in the public sector.
And of course there will never be any causal connection to anything remotely resembling "lower crime rates" or "enhanced public safety".
I don't get it. It makes no sense. I'm tempted to put on my tinfoil hat and say "They must be up to something".
-
I don't quite understand the strategy of the government on these bans ("assault weapons" and "high capacity magazine", etc.). They must now know, from the consistent experience of other states that the compliance rate is at maximum 20%. And all those 20% are obviously law-abiding citizens. Not one criminal with a firearm, almost all of which are illegally possessed in the first place, will be turned in. So they have gotten rid of zero guns are that highly likely to be used in committing crimes. Is the hypothesis that eventually, in 50 or 100 or 200 years that the remaining guns and magazine, etc. will be turned in as the firearms are transferred to new owners upon the old-age incapacitation or death of those who illegally kept them? Or that with "only" 80% remaining in civilain hands that the rate of theft will thus be diminished by 20% and there will be 20% fewer criminals with guns?
The other side of it is that many people who believe they have a ("natural" if not "legal") right of self-defense using the best tool possible will not only not obey the "turn 'em all in Mr. and Mrs. America" (Feinstein), but will actively create "work arounds" and obtain more of the forbidden items that will in no way be tracked in the first place (no NICS checks, 4473s, etc.). If that IS the case, there would end up being MORE not fewer (untraceable) firearms and magazines, etc. in the public sector.
And of course there will never be any causal connection to anything remotely resembling "lower crime rates" or "enhanced public safety".
I don't get it. It makes no sense. I'm tempted to put on my tinfoil hat and say "They must be up to something".
They are up to the same thing they were in the 70s. There was a push to ban semi-auto handguns. Reasoning said since they were used in most gun crimes, that would reduce crime. It's the same faulty logic that lead to banning the Saturday Night Specials. Ban a type of gun associated with the most shootings, you'll have the biggest reduction in shootings.
The logic is flawed, but it's irrelevant. They use stats to confuse and lie to the public. In reality the Sat Night Special ban caused more deaths. People in bad areas couldn't afford new guns after the ban, so they were defenseless, and the crooks started using better guns with larger calibers. More people died from shootings whereas before the .22 and .25 caliber Sat Night Special injuries were often survived.
So, the criminals started using Semi-auto pistols as the rounds rivaled the .38 and .357 rounds formerly favored by crooks. So the anti-gunners went after all semis, saying "only criminals have any use for these killing machines." Sound familiar?
But that effort failed, mainly because cops and the public started arming themselves with semis. Once it became a commonly owned gun for self defense purposes, there was no way to have a ban pass.
Enter the "assault weapons!" Even though the platform was around for decades, not many people were fans. Eventually the numbers owned started to rise, and the gun grabbers targeted them. After a few high profile shootings involving AKs and ARs/M16s, the fear mongering started again..
The goal is never to save lives, even though the blind followers believe that's the objective. The goal is to ban as many guns at once as possible, then move on to the next type, until all guns are banned or unobtainable.
Here's the irony. By banning the AR for 10 years, then letting the law sunset, the popularity of the gun exploded! Now the AR is the most common rifle owned in the US, making it nearly impossible to totally ban based on the "in common use" criteria. The antis basically created a situation that might prevent them from ever succeeding as long as we the people keep taking them to court.
-
I don't quite understand the strategy of the government on these bans ("assault weapons" and "high capacity magazine", etc.). They must now know, from the consistent experience of other states that the compliance rate is at maximum 20%. And all those 20% are obviously law-abiding citizens. Not one criminal with a firearm, almost all of which are illegally possessed in the first place, will be turned in. So they have gotten rid of zero guns are that highly likely to be used in committing crimes. Is the hypothesis that eventually, in 50 or 100 or 200 years that the remaining guns and magazine, etc. will be turned in as the firearms are transferred to new owners upon the old-age incapacitation or death of those who illegally kept them? Or that with "only" 80% remaining in civilain hands that the rate of theft will thus be diminished by 20% and there will be 20% fewer criminals with guns?
The other side of it is that many people who believe they have a ("natural" if not "legal") right of self-defense using the best tool possible will not only not obey the "turn 'em all in Mr. and Mrs. America" (Feinstein), but will actively create "work arounds" and obtain more of the forbidden items that will in no way be tracked in the first place (no NICS checks, 4473s, etc.). If that IS the case, there would end up being MORE not fewer (untraceable) firearms and magazines, etc. in the public sector.
And of course there will never be any causal connection to anything remotely resembling "lower crime rates" or "enhanced public safety".
I don't get it. It makes no sense. I'm tempted to put on my tinfoil hat and say "They must be up to something".
You believe you are dealing with rational people.
Democrats are not rational, they are emotional.
Everybody on this site will obey the law.
Everybody on this site will disarm.
Even if every gun owner in Hawaii got up and used the ballot
box, they will still be defeated, like Jews in Nazi Germany.
So move or do something interesting and fight.
Passive aggression. Use legal means to kill this state.
I don't like tourists, let's chase them all off.
I don't like cops, let's pay them all $15 per hour.
make them dis-arm when off duty, and arm them with Tasers only,
on duty. After all we don't have guns here anymore, it is the law.
You get the idea?
I could live forever, never see another cop, and live happily.
-
You believe you are dealing with rational people.
Democrats are not rational, they are emotional.
Everybody on this site will obey the law.
Everybody on this site will disarm.
Even if every gun owner in Hawaii got up and used the ballot
box, they will still be defeated, like Jews in Nazi Germany.
So move or do something interesting and fight.
Passive aggression. Use legal means to kill this state.
I don't like tourists, let's chase them all off.
I don't like cops, let's pay them all $15 per hour.
make them dis-arm when off duty, and arm them with Tasers only,
on duty. After all we don't have guns here anymore, it is the law.
You get the idea?
I could live forever, never see another cop, and live happily.
I agree with some points but the bold underline is dumb.
-
I agree with some points but the bold underline is dumb.
A skinny little man using passive aggression took on the
British empire and beat it by doing stupid.
That country is called India.
-
A skinny little man using passive aggression took on the
British empire and beat it by doing stupid.
That country is called India.
Gandhi took leadership of the Congress in 1920 and began escalating demands until on 26 January 1930 the Indian National Congress declared the independence of India. The British did not recognise the declaration but negotiations ensued, with the Congress taking a role in provincial government in the late 1930s. Gandhi and the Congress withdrew their support of the Raj when the Viceroy declared war on Germany in September 1939 without consultation. Tensions escalated until Gandhi demanded immediate independence in 1942 and the British responded by imprisoning him and tens of thousands of Congress leaders. Meanwhile, the Muslim League did co-operate with Britain and moved, against Gandhi's strong opposition, to demands for a totally separate Muslim state of Pakistan. In August 1947 the British partitioned the land with India and Pakistan each achieving independence on terms that Gandhi disapproved.
Sounds like the British got tired of all the escalating demands, and to teach the Indian leaders a lesson, split the land, giving away some of it to Pakistan for the Muslims.
While India finally did gain independence, it was while Ghandi had been in prison for 5 years. Doesn't sound to me like he "beat" the British. More like they got tired of fighting the Indian Congress (not just one skinny passive-aggressive PITA) & the Muslims, too.
-
I guess this:
SB 880, Hall. Firearms: assault weapons.
(1) Existing law generally prohibits the possession or transfer of assault weapons, except for the sale, purchase, importation, or possession of assault weapons by specified individuals, including law enforcement officers. Under existing law, “assault weapon” means, among other things, a semiautomatic centerfire rifle or a semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has any one of specified attributes, including, for rifles, a thumbhole stock, and for pistols, a second handgrip.
This bill would revise this definition of “assault weapon” to mean a semiautomatic centerfire rifle, or a semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of those specified attributes. The bill would also define “fixed magazine” to mean an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without disassembly of the firearm action.
...might make a rifle with this new bullet button legal since you have to separate the receivers.
https://youtu.be/XedaFH6pC1o
I was pondering if simply separating the lower from the upper constitutes "disassembly of the firearm action." Then I realized, the action includes the DI or piston parts, the BCG, the upper itself (feed ramps, bolt chamber and what not), and the buffer tube assembly. Separating the receiver separates the buffer parts from the BCG -- disassembled! :thumbsup:
-
Sounds like the British got tired of all the escalating demands, and to teach the Indian leaders a lesson, split the land, giving away some of it to Pakistan for the Muslims.
While India finally did gain independence, it was while Ghandi had been in prison for 5 years. Doesn't sound to me like he "beat" the British. More like they got tired of fighting the Indian Congress (not just one skinny passive-aggressive PITA) & the Muslims, too.
I commend on your grasp of history.
I took some shortcuts in my response,
I'm used to a less anal audience.
I'm trying to say without advocating
something illegal, a way to counter the
people of this state that are out to deprive
you of your rights, your freedom , and your life.
Democrats will starve without tourist money.
I don't need or want tourist money.
Cops will kill you in order to keep their
well paying jobs, Since all they do is kill,
clean up messes, and write revenue generating
citations, I don't need them either.
If Oahu gets tired of the Big island and sets us free,
that would be a blessing.
Happy 4th! I'm shooting black powder, doing it
safe and legal.
-
You had to figure someone would get one of these up re the California "Gunpocalypse" bills. Here it is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdr7nQNPPaI
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdr7nQNPPaI)
-
You had to figure someone would get one of these up re the California "Gunpocalypse" bills. Here it is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdr7nQNPPaI
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdr7nQNPPaI)
Hey Puna guy, PM me. We have work to do.
Nice video but spelling and grammar won't do.
Lets kill the Democrats. "kill" is a metaphor for you
anal Oahu guys.
I will not comply.