Wanted to let you guys know that you need to get involved when these bills get introduced.  Last year Hawaii Rifle Assoc and the NRA walked the floors and visited all the senators and reps.  In testimony there was only about 5 of us who showed up.  One of the senators said that there are thousands of gun owners in Hawaii, so only a small amount of people was against this RAP BACK bill.  Not that it is law it is even hard to get rid of this law.  PLEASE EVERYONE GET INVOLVED NOT WITH ANY ANTI GUN LEGISLATION.  HRA and NRA is doing their part, but we need the numbers, no only 5 people showing up during testimony.

Police can come and take away your guns simply by a statement and allegation.  Read article below.

Article in Star Bulletin:     
Hawaii’s law-abiding gun owners once again face an openly hostile piece of legislation that will not only infringe upon but, in certain cases, permanently strip individuals of their Second Amendment rights.
Generally, a severe action is responsible for loss of constitutionally guaranteed rights, such as a criminal conviction or mental adjudication. However, under Senate Bill 898, all that is needed to permanently revoke an individual’s Second Amendment right is simply an allegation. SB 898 is a poorly written bill that would make otherwise lawful gun owners guilty until proven innocent, based on a subjective opinion and little evidence.
If signed into law, SB 898 will allow confiscation of firearms and ammunition if a law enforcement officer suspects that an individual could be a danger to themselves or society. Simply put, a confiscation warrant can be issued if the court is merely presented with probable cause, at which point law enforcement will arrive at the individual’s home to search and seize all firearms and ammunition — with no notice or warning. Only after confiscation will another hearing occur, this time to decide if that person will lose their Second Amendment rights for life.
Perhaps most disturbing is the absurdly low evidentiary standard used in obtaining the warrant and at the subsequent hearing. To confiscate a firearm, the court only needs a law enforcement officer’s claim that an individual is dangerous. To then permanently prohibit an individual from firearm ownership, the court only needs “clear and convincing” evidence — a far cry less than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” required for criminal conviction. Hawaii’s gun owners face a law that will label them as guilty before they are even presented with a warrant, in a process that wouldn’t even meet evidentiary standards for a petty theft conviction.
Additionally, SB 898 is alarmingly vague. While citing “documented, credible evidence” as a viable reason to revoke a constitutionally prohibited right, no examples or guidelines are given. The court can consider “any other pertinent factors” in making their ruling, but again these factors are undefined with no parameters. The words of disgruntled neighbors, spurned acquaintances and other unfriendly individuals could result in loss of Second Amendment rights for life. To say that this system would be ripe for abuse is a laughable understatement.
The bill’s supporters will argue that guns need to be kept away from dangerous people, no matter the cost or inconvenience. While we can all agree that dangerous people should not have access to firearms, SB 898 burdens and threatens Hawaii’s law-abiding gun owners but does nothing to address legitimately prohibited people. The confiscation of firearms and permanent revocation of the Second Amendment based on accusations will not deter criminals, but is a dangerous infringement for lawful citizens. The criminal justice system has historically used legitimate and deeply scrutinized evidence in its proceedings. Not so under SB 898.
Hawaii has a history of hostility toward gun owners, and this bill is further evidence of that. That the state Senate is willing to consider restricting constitutional rights based on accusations and scanty evidence is proof of that hostility. This is unacceptable and just plain wrong.

The differences really come into play with the starting path of the bullet and the unrifled portion of the chamber ahead of the rifling, called the leade. A narrower (less diameter) leade keeps the bullet from tipping as it moves forward, which enhances accuracy. A larger leade allows for more buildup and gunk and thus greater reliability.

At the end of the leade is the rifling. To prevent bullet mangling, the rifling has an angle on its front face to allow the bullet to slide in and smoothly begin rotating. The steeper this angle (within reason) the more quickly the bullet is controlled by the rifling and thus potentially delivering greater accuracy. However, the steeper the angle, the more the bullet “stalls” on engaging the rifling and the greater the pressure spike.


The 5.56 chamber has a slightly longer leade and shallower rifling angle, allowing the 5.56 cartridge to be loaded to higher pressures.
A shallower angle on the rifling—in effect, a longer ramp—also creates a longer effective leade, as the ogive of the bullet has to travel a greater distance before it engages shallow-angle rifling than it would with steep-angle rifling.[/color]
When the .223 was invented, it was meant as a benchrest and varmint round. As such, accuracy was paramount. Velocity was a good thing, but not if it meant losing accuracy. So the .223 was designed with a short leade and steep rifling engagement, which is fine for shooting varmints or targets.

When the Army was forced to adopt the M16, however, it tried to avoid adoption by moving the goalposts, insisting on 500 yard penetration performance. To get that, the designers had to boost pressure and velocity. To control pressure (and also to get full utility out of tracer ammo, which uses bullets nearly twice as long as typical full metal jacket ammo), they modified the shape of the leade and rifling angle. And later, taking advantage of the longer leade and gentler angle, ammo makers tuned the 5.56 round to maximum performance using that extra margin.

.223 Remington chamber
By contrast, the .223 Remington has a shorter leade and sharper rifling angle, the design stemming from a desire for top accuracy.
Today, the difference can be marked. The leade on a proper 5.56 chamber is twice or more than that of a .223 chamber, and the onset angle of the 5.56 rifling creates a ramp with four times the distance. Firing .223 in a .223 chamber, or a 5.56 chamber, is not a problem. But firing real-deal 5.56 ammo in a .223 chamber can be a big problem.

The SAAMI-spec maximum average pressure for the .223, measured at the middle of the case, is 55,000 psi. The NATO spec for 5.56 is determined by SAAMI’s European counterpart, CIP. CIP measures at the case mouth and lists the 5.56 pressure spec of 62,000 psi. Measured at the case middle as SAAMI does, it shows 60,000 psi—so either way it’s higher than the .223.

But the problem isn’t just pressure. That CIP pressure of 62,000 psi? It is measured in a 5.56 chamber. If we take the same round, which shows 60,000 psi per SAAMI (which is already 5,000 psi over the .223 max) and put it into a .223 chamber, things get ugly. The pressure spike piles onto an already over-pressure round.

Read more: http://www.rifleshootermag.com/2012/02/02/5-56-and-223-are-they-different/#ixzz38FkRLxQW

You won't be able to erase your gun registration here in Hawaii.  If you sell your guns out of state, just make the person you sell or give it to can legally own a firearm.