2aHawaii
General Topics => General Discussion => Topic started by: Jwall_e808 on May 23, 2025, 08:53:02 PM
-
Thoughts? Think we will be able to have some silencers while hunting or at the range?
-
There's a recent court case i think that might allow them in Hawaii soon but I'm not sure
-
https://youtu.be/k5JC2NSGNMo?si=CXfMQD3aS36ACYi3
Well, probably will never mean sheet here in HI. But thought I post it anyway.
-
How our State will deal with hearing protection...
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f1/17/28/f117287a500d5e1f653b51599d0284e5.jpg)
but if you fly model airplanes they will sure to send someone out to listen to you...
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2025/05/24/model-airplane-hobbyists-fear-snag-moved-power-lines/
-
I am sure Komrade Karl will be all over this, like flies on sh!t.
he probably already has the text draft ready to go, provided to him by Everytown, verbatim, funded by USAID and NIH.
-
Here’s another video got posted a few hours ago..
https://youtu.be/7vQuMBbLxGA?si=A6_LHLjsYT9X_w_U
-
If a Suppressor is a firearm as the DOJ is now declaring it is, Hawaii can't make it illegal to own or can they? :popcorn:
-
If a Suppressor is a firearm as the DOJ is now declaring it is, Hawaii can't make it illegal to own or can they? :popcorn:
Based on the cases I've read lately, the argument over what's a firearm is a catch 22 problem.
If you say a suppressor is a firearm so buyers have to jump through the same background check hoops as for firearms, then suppressors are by definition protected by the 2A and are not subject to outright banning if they aren't within certain exceptions, like WMDs.
On the other hand, if you call a suppressor an accessory and NOT a firearm, then there's no requirement for anyone to jump through the hoops to own one. Alone, a suppressor presents no danger to anyone.
This judge walks through the arguments as they relate to California's magazine restrictions/capacity limits. The government argues that a magazine is an accessory and therefore not afforded the same 2A protection as a firearm. Yet magazines designed for certain semi-auto firearms having > 10 rds are being controlled not as accessories, but as part of a firearm that allegedly makes them more lethal and dangerous. When the later argument is applied to other parts of a firearm, they backtrack to the rebuttal that the difference between what is a firearm vs. what is a firearm accessory is somehow well defined.
That second part has never been truly challenged in the Supreme Court. Before Bruen, the safety of the public at large was allowed to be considered in gun laws (balancing test). Post-Bruen, balancing tests are no longer allowed when determining the application of 2A protections.
This video ia a little long and somewhat complicated in some sections, butt the Judge does an excellent job of explaining things for the average person to grasp.
https://youtu.be/ainmfS5dMnw
-
Suppressors should be sold the same way as the tools displays at the auto parts store checkout counter. Grab n’ go.
-
Based on the cases I've read lately, the argument over what's a firearm is a catch 22 problem.
"If you say a suppressor is a firearm"
HRS 134-1 (3) (the third (3) ) :wacko:
" "Firearm" means any weapon, for which the operating force is an explosive, including but not limited to pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns, automatic firearms, noxious gas projectors, mortars, bombs, and cannon."
-
If it gets us suppressors I'll gladly call it a firearm and get a background check all they want. Better than nothing.
-
If it gets us suppressors I'll gladly call it a firearm and get a background check all they want. Better than nothing.
Sadly this will do nothing for residents in states like ours that ban suppressors or other NFA items by name. You would have to have legislation changing the language in HRS 134 to give us the ability to own suppressors regardless of the HPA and its possible passage at the federal level.
-
The way forward is to legalize them for limited use here, to control the deer and sheep. Then for hunting in general. Then have legislators see what they actually do, then eventually legalize it for everyone.
-
The way forward is to legalize them for limited use here, to control the deer and sheep. Then for hunting in general. Then have legislators see what they actually do, then eventually legalize it for everyone.
I can see how that would make sense.
After all the “just the tip” approach is how they stripped away our rights in the first place
-
There's a recent court case i think that might allow them in Hawaii soon but I'm not sure
There is not.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Coincidentally, today is "National Save Your Hearing" Day, which is celebrated each year on May 31.
I would be curious to know if a suppressor affects accuracy on a rifle.
-
Possibility of suppressors being legal in Hawaii?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u6pSomzxR4
-
Possibility of suppressors being legal in Hawaii?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u6pSomzxR4
It will still cost a lawsuit, our lawmakers wont change a law in good faith.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Supreme Court rulings are just their opinion. Doesn't mean Hawaii has to follow them as if they are legal mandates or anything.
:geekdanc: :crazy:
-
https://youtu.be/irZX_qSHyE0?si=P4474nshWOqquRpv
-
Just wondering.
I would think all the people that live around the range would be happier if suppressors were allowed. They would help cut down on some of the noise
-
Just wondering.
I would think all the people that live around the range would be happier if suppressors were allowed. They would help cut down on some of the noise
That's a good point. You could build suppressor only ranges in places where neighbors would otherwise complain.