Hearing is 24 hours later on 2/27 @ 10am

This one bans someone under 21 from buying ammo.

They changed the bill so they can poses it if engaged in hunting or target shooting.

https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2845&year=2024

What are the good rhetorical talking points to oppose this bill?


The age to buy a long gun or hand gun is 21, right?

What happens if you're under 21, legally own a gun in another state, and then move to Hawaii?

What programs are there in the state that teach minors and under 21's to shoot? (Other than the US military that is.  )


No person who is less than twenty-one years of age shall own, possess, or control any ammunition for any firearm; provided that this subsection shall not apply to:
(1) Law enforcement officers as defined in section 701-118;
(2) Wardens, superintendents, and keepers of prisons, penitentiaries, jails, and other institutions for the detention of persons accused or convicted of an offense;
(3) Members of the armed services or reserve forces of the United States or the Hawaii National Guard, while performing their official duties or while traveling to or from their places of duty; and
(4) Individuals engaged in hunting or target shooting pursuant to section 134-5.

Can you be a law enforcement officer or a jail guard if you're under 21?

When it says "engaged in hunting or target shooting pursuant to section 134-5", what is 134-5? Anybody who has ever shot a gun is "engaged in target shooting" in some capacity, right?

What are the good rhetorical talking points to oppose this bill?


The age to buy a long gun or hand gun is 21, right?

What happens if you're under 21, legally own a gun in another state, and then move to Hawaii?

What programs are there in the state that teach minors and under 21's to shoot? (Other than the US military that is.  )


No person who is less than twenty-one years of age shall own, possess, or control any ammunition for any firearm; provided that this subsection shall not apply to:
(1) Law enforcement officers as defined in section 701-118;
(2) Wardens, superintendents, and keepers of prisons, penitentiaries, jails, and other institutions for the detention of persons accused or convicted of an offense;
(3) Members of the armed services or reserve forces of the United States or the Hawaii National Guard, while performing their official duties or while traveling to or from their places of duty; and
(4) Individuals engaged in hunting or target shooting pursuant to section 134-5.

Can you be a law enforcement officer or a jail guard if you're under 21?

When it says "engaged in hunting or target shooting pursuant to section 134-5", what is 134-5? Anybody who has ever shot a gun is "engaged in target shooting" in some capacity, right?

This bill is technically in violation of 10 U.S. Code § 246, not including any clarifications related to recent supreme court rulings.

This bill is technically in violation of 10 U.S. Code § 246, not including any clarifications related to recent supreme court rulings.

Hawaii has it's own version of the militia law as well. But is citing that a winning argument to the suburban mom afraid of mass shootings?

"I think 18-year-olds should be able to buy ammunition, even though they can't buy guns, because they're legally members of the unorganized militia"... I just don't know if that's a very persuasive argument to somebody who is already leery of guns.

Now if we could say "this law is obviously unconstitutional and is only going to be struck down by a court after an expensive legal battle", then I think that is persuasive... But is it necessary true?


I think any sort of shooting club would be in a great place to testify against this, if they logistically function by having their under-21 members buy ammo and then meeting their instructor at the range with it. Under-21 hunters as well could do something similar.


Is there any sort of ID check requirement when we buy ammo currently? I'll admit I haven't noticed.

Barring 18-20-Year-Olds From Purchasing Handguns Unconstitutional

The case is Fraiser, et al v. ATF, and the 4 plaintiffs in that case say that they tried
to purchase a handgun, and a federal firearms dealer (FFL) denied the purchase
based solely on their age. Plaintiffs were all over 18 years and under 21 years of
age when they attempted to purchase the handguns. All were law-abiding citizens,
had no criminal history and could otherwise purchase firearms.

Judge Payne ruled on the case in May of this year, denying the State's motion to
dismiss the case, and granting plaintiffs' summary judgement.

And then the appeal ...

If the Court were to exclude 18-to-20-year-olds from the Second Amendment’s
protection, it would impose limitations on the Second Amendment that do not exist
with other constitutional guarantees…

Because the statutes and regulations in question are not consistent with our
Nation’s history and tradition, they, therefore, cannot stand…

For the reasons set forth above, PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR DECLATORY
JUDGEMENT (ECF No. 57) will be granted and DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR
ENTRY OF JUDGEMENT IN A SEPARATE ORDER (ECF No. 53) will be denied.

https://www.concealedcarry.com/law/monumental-ruling-18-20-year-olds-can-purchase-handguns-judge-rules/

More details on the first ruling:

https://www.concealedcarry.com/law/prohibiting-18-20-year-olds-from-purchasing-handguns-unconstitutional-federal-judge-says/

Hawaii has it's own version of the militia law as well. But is citing that a winning argument to the suburban mom afraid of mass shootings?

"I think 18-year-olds should be able to buy ammunition, even though they can't buy guns, because they're legally members of the unorganized militia"... I just don't know if that's a very persuasive argument to somebody who is already leery of guns.

Now if we could say "this law is obviously unconstitutional and is only going to be struck down by a court after an expensive legal battle", then I think that is persuasive... But is it necessary true?


I think any sort of shooting club would be in a great place to testify against this, if they logistically function by having their under-21 members buy ammo and then meeting their instructor at the range with it. Under-21 hunters as well could do something similar.


Is there any sort of ID check requirement when we buy ammo currently? I'll admit I haven't noticed.

The Hawaii law specifies 18 years and older.

However, the federal law is more important in that it classifies ALL able bodied males, aged 17-45, in the unorganized militia, who can be called into service when necessary. The Hawai'i law basically makes the militia part of the Army and/or Navy guard.

Interestingly enough, the Governors are supposed to structure the militia and provide the framework for activation, training, armament, etc , all of which is supposed to be in line with the ANG. In this light, depriving citizens 18 years and older from access to and training with the same arms as the ANG is therefore in violation of Hawai'i's militia law as well. One could factor in the inability to purchase ammunition into this argument, but there currently are no Regulations for either the Hawai'i Defense Force and Naval Militia that specifies how the militia is to be armed. The government would need to clarify if they are to provide members of the militia with arms or if we are to provide our own arms.

I actually looked at the first section of the revised version.
It said that Arizona has age restrictions.... What??

The fact is that only FFL's cannot sell ammo to young folks.
Other than that, kids are good to go.
This is deceptive authoring by the writer of this law.
From what I see, the passage of all of these proposed laws is dependent on fooling the uninformed reader with half-truths.

---
Just a thought here...
Personally, I am not a religious fanatic. I don't even go to church. But I ain't stoopid either.

 I do recall reading or hearing something about the devil and deception.
Social media is full of deception.
A.I. just made it worse.
Is it any wonder why our country and the world seem to be going crazy?

There you go....

5/1/2024      

House Passed Final Reading as amended in CD 1 with Representative(s) Ward voting aye with reservations; Representative(s) Garcia, Gates, Kila, Kong, Pierick, Souza voting no (6) and none excused (0).
Senate Passed Final Reading, as amended (CD 1). Ayes, 21; Aye(s) with reservations: none. Noes, 4 (Senator(s) Awa, Fevella, Gabbard, Richards). Excused, 0 (none).

 The purpose of this measure is to prohibit:

     (1)  A person from selling ammunition to a person under the age of twenty-one; and

     (2)  A person under the age of twenty-one from owning, possessing, or controlling ammunition, with exceptions.

     Your Committee on Conference finds that setting a minimum age requirement to purchase, own, or possess ammunition that conforms to the existing minimum age requirement to purchase, own, or possess a firearm in the State will help to ensure the safety of residents and reduce incidents of gun violence in the State.  Accordingly, this measure will improve public safety and conform the State's laws regulating ammunition with the State's existing firearm laws.

     Your Committee on Conference has amended this measure by making it effective upon its approval.

     As affirmed by the record of votes of the managers of your Committee on Conference that is attached to this report, your Committee on Conference is in accord with the intent and purpose of S.B. No. 2845, S.D. 2, H.D. 1, as amended herein, and recommends that it pass Final Reading in the form attached hereto as S.B. No. 2845, S.D. 2, H.D. 1, C.D. 1.