As some of you know, there was a bill (SB358) introduced last year, and carried over to this session, that would have prohibitted the "authorities" from taking your firearms during a declared state of emergency. There was some discussion about it on another thread http://2ahawaii.com/index.php?topic=292.0 and the fact it is sitting in committee with a "poison pill" provision that will, unless deleted, effectively kill the bill for the year.

I was re-reading the testimony for the bill and came across what Gen.Lee, the Adjuant General (Head of State Civil Defense) submitted. I copied it below and submit it for your consideration because I think it offers an interesting glimpse into the way the "authorities" think about us. Can someone please explain to me how allowing law abiding citizens to keep their legally owned firearms to protect themselves when the "authorities" are going to be least likely to be able to do so, would "frustrate law enforcement officials in the maintenance of law and order before, during, and after major emergencies and disasters?"

Note also that one of the reasons "they" don't support it is because it removes their authority to require "re-registration" of firearms....wonder how that would work? Sort of like Katrina when instead of helping folks out, law enforcement utilized their limited resourses to search out and confiscate firearms, even to the point of assaulting a little old lady. They'll tell you you have to "reregister" your guns, and when you try to do just that, they'll confiscate them...at least they won't have to go barging into your house like they did in Katrina....

STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
TESTIMONY ON SENATE BILL 358
A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO FIREARMS
PRESENTATION TO THE
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND MILITARY AFFAIRS
BY
MAJOR GENERAL ROBERT G. F. LEE
DIRECTOR OF CIVIL DEFENSE
February 3, 2009
Chair Espero and Committee Members:
I am Major General Bob Lee, Director of Civil Defense, State Department of Defense.
am providing written testimony on Senate Bill 358.
The proposed bill amends HRS Chapter 134 by prohibiting State and county law
enforcement from seizing firearms or ammunition during an emergency or disaster.
The proposed bill further prohibits State and county law enforcement to suspend or
revoke permits and licenses to carry firearms and ammunition during emergencies and
disasters. It also voids the authority to require the reregistration of firearms.
We do not support this bill.
Given the many disasters the State has experienced in the last two decades including
the National state of emergency brought on by the tragic terrorist attacks on the World
Trade Center, New York City, in 2001, there was not one instance where the seizure of
firearms and ammunition was invoked under HRS Chapter 128. In view of the general
threat of terrorism that our Nation faces, we believe that the proposed bill is not
necessary and may frustrate law enforcement officials in the maintenance of law and
order before, during, and after major emergencies and disasters.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide written testimony on Senate Bill 358.

HiCarry,
I read this when you recommended we go through the testimony a while back. I am really shocked by this person's thinking. It just goes to show you that some people don't think things through at all.

If anything, seizing firearms could be more dangerous than just letting them be.

The only reason I could see any danger for them is if they are trying to force people out of their homes and they don't want to leave. But then I bet confiscation, in this case, would be just as dangerous.

It just doesn't make sense.

I don't mean to be flippant, but you, and everyone should be concerned about how "this person" thinks. For those that don't know who he is, here's a link:
http://hawaii.gov/dod/adjutant-general-biography
Adjutant General is a political appointment. Think about this...in 2002 Linda Lingle (a Republican) appointed him. His duties include being head of the State Civil Defense. So we have a Republican appointee, who in times of disaster appears to believe it is OK to not only seize legally owned firearms, but also that he should be able to require you to re-register your guns. And, most of all, believes lawful gun owners, exercising their Second Amendment right at a time civil authorities will be least likely to provide even basic services, could "frustrate" law enforcement authorities in times of disaster. Forget, for the moment, how criminals might "frustrate" those lawful citizens just trying to hold onto their belongings,

This. to me, is a very scary mind set for such a powerful person....it is difficult to imagine how things would go if a disaster struck and he is in charge. Now imagine a Democratic Gov. who appoints a Adj. Gen. with views generally associated with that party's platform. What so you think his (or her) views on the subject will be and what actions might they take if a disaster struck??