My draft:
We are writing to express to you our opposition of the newly introduced House Bill #441. This bill strives to expand government regulation of firearms and ammunition, not for criminals, but for law-abiding citizens.
The presented statistics don’t fall well within the realm of “common senseâ€, a term used commonly by corporations like the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence when referring to gun control. The statistics suggest that a decrease of firearm ownership has existed for over two decades. We disagree. Firearms, by design, are made to last for generations. In fact, have actively used firearms have a lifespan exceeding fifty years. Overall, firearm exports and production have increased fairly consistently for multiple decades. This leads us to question, if more guns are being manufactured, and more guns are being purchased, how does common sense rationalize that firearm ownership is declining?
While it may be true, at least from a social aspect, that firearms have become somewhat unacceptable, that doesn’t equate to a drastic reduction of households that contain firearms. The exact opposite may in fact be true. Due to the negative stigma attached to firearms, people are inherently less likely to report or disclose their firearm ownership. In 2006, firearm production data recorded by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), past Gallup polls, and surveys by the Department of Justice showed that an estimated 40-44% of households may possess firearms. This is contrary to the proposed thirty-six percent quoted by Mr. Oshiro. Statistical inconsistencies are certainly a grave concern with this proposed legislation; you are being misguided.
There is no doubt to any person or party that the current economy is in severe distress. This strain and tension is not present in Hawaii alone, but is present throughout the nation as a whole. During the course of the 2011 State of the Union address, President Obama encouraged law makers to help remove red tape and regulations that burden small business owners. It is clear much of this red tape is prohibiting our entrepreneurs from developing and furthering their dreams -- the American dream, a successful and thriving business. We ask that you not increase the red tape. Our local dealers work very hard to do the right thing. They do not need an increased burden placed on them. Do not vote for House Bill #441.
House Bill #441 calls for the legislature to enact restrictions on the sale of ammunition. It requires that all firearms be sold with safety devices. It also requires that small business owners follow additional rules and regulations set forth by the Attorney General. These laws and regulations are unknown to anyone at this time. How would one vote for a bill that proposes undocumented regulations? That would simply be irresponsible. Additionally, House Bill #441 calls for the banning of the .50BMG rifle and ammunition for reasons which are at this time undisclosed. Also, increased restrictions on the storage of firearms within the home are proposed. There is nothing proposed here that will deter criminals. New regulations will only infringe on law-abiding citizens.
I. SAFETY DEVICE REQUIRED
House Bill #441 proposes that the law requires, “All firearms sold in this state by a dealer licensed under section 134-31 and all firearms manufactured in this State shall include or be accompanied by a firearms safety device.†Unless that person 1.) owns a gun safe; and the purchaser presents an original receipt for purchase of the gun safe, or other proof of purchase or ownership of the gun safe, to the dealer. The dealer shall maintain a copy of this receipt or proof of purchase with the dealer’s record of sales of firearms. This law will require more oversight and expenditure by the government. It is not in our fiscal interest to further increase expenditures while a huge deficit looms above us.
This increased record keeping also comes at the expense of the law-abiding dealers. Requiring them to keep additional documents demands additional storage, which in turn requires additional space, something which comes at a premium here on the islands. Additionally, there are no storage duration requirements set forth in the bill. A licensed dealer would not even know when they could clear out of some of this excess material. Lastly, firearms are already designed with multiple “safety†devices (i.e., Slide lock, trigger safety, grip safety, firing pin blocks). These safety systems are already incorporated into the design of most modern firearms. This section of House Bill #441 is nothing more than an encroachment on free commerce. Vehicles are one of the largest causes of human death; just as the government can’t require a “safety†device prohibiting its use, nor can the government force its citizens to purchase safety devices for firearms. Citizens have the right to choose whether or not they want, or even require a safety device. As such, that decision is the sole choice of the firearm owner – not yours. There is no significant government interest in dictating to its citizens that they purchase safety devices.
II. AMMUNITION PURCHASE
House Bill #441 proposes to modify the law to require that ammunition purchases require proof of a registered firearm, specifically in that caliber, prior to purchase. This section of proposed legislation is heavily flawed.
First and foremost, the personal information on the registrations is prohibited from disclosure.
HRS §134-3(b) All registration data that would identify the individual registering the firearm by name or address shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed to anyone, except as may be required for processing the registration or as may be required by a law enforcement agency for the lawful performance of its duties or as may be required by order of a court.
Second, citizens are allowed to lend their rifles or shotguns to others.
HRS §134-4(c) Any lawfully acquired rifle or shotgun may be lent to an adult for use within the State for a period not to exceed fifteen days without a permit; provided that where the rifle or shotgun is to be used outside of the State, the loan may be for a period not to exceed seventy-five days.
In fact, restricting citizens from purchasing ammunition essentially voids us from lending our rifles in accordance with the statute. There are many tourist who make trips to Hawaii and come to hunt and fish. This proposal burdens the hunting industry.
Additionally, firearm instructors and training organizations, such as the Hawaii Defense Foundation, Lessons in Firearm Education, and the Hawaii Rifle Association’s education programs commonly purchase and utilize ammunition for a wide variety of firearms, many of which they do not own personally. Sport shooters also frequently purchase ammunition for their friends’ and family’s firearms. Firearm owners, especially those who are active in training, will many times have an various barrels, which can change the caliber for their firearm; these barrels allow the owner to train effectively and also reduce costs of higher caliber ammunition. Restrictions such as those proposed in House Bill #441 are certain to infringe upon the Second Amendment. As such, the rights to purchase ammunition and to properly train with our firearms are constitutionally protected.
If we were trying to legislate criminals out of ammunition there are a few points to review. First, ammunition is readily available, not just in Hawaii, but everywhere. Even if this law did prevent criminals from purchasing ammunition, it won’t stop them from committing burglary, theft, or from stealing our legally purchased ammunition. The criminals are already prohibited from buying firearms; however, our laws don’t seem to stop them from acquiring or using them. Second, ammunition is easily created. Many residents reload or ship ammunition in from the mainland. Finally, for a person visiting the island for less than three days, they are not required to have a permit. The government is forbidden from denying the right to self-defense. We hope that you will not endeavor on a course to burden our civil rights.
III. DISCLOSURE AND STORAGE
The proposed legislation attempts to make disclosure of the source of information which caused a denial of a permit prohibited. This is a blatant violation of the due process guaranteed by the United State constitution. If the government denies a person the ability to protect themselves with a firearm, the burden is on the state to disclose why. Attempting to hide and prohibit disclosure will not stand to constitutional muster. Additionally, it has no true utility whatsoever. If a person signed a waiver, informing the state of the location where his or her records were, and was then denied for a “mental health†reason, logic would dictate that the person could reasonably identify who the “source†was, since they gave it to the police in the first place.
In regards to the change in storage requirements, as proposed for HRS §134-10.5, we would like to inform you that storage requirements have already been ruled on by the United States Supreme Court, and are forbidden by federal case law (District of Columbia v. Heller; 128 S.Ct. 2783, 2008). In Heller, legislation that required firearms to be bound by trigger locks within the home was determined to violate the core of the Second Amendment – the right to self-defense. Anything that restricts or prohibits the immediate utilization of a firearm, at a minimum inside the home, is a violation of the Second Amendment, and will fail to pass legal scrutiny. Don’t take our word for it; ask for an opinion from your Attorney General, that is part of his legal duty to you.
In closing, we hope that you carefully and thoughtfully review this document and House Bill #441; it is also important that you review the United States Constitution and current Second Amendment jurisprudence. Failure to do so could be a costly measure for both firearm owners and tax-payers. Please refrain from infringing on the law-abiding citizens of Hawaii. We do not wish to be infringed upon further. These laws will not stop criminals; it will only hurt legal firearm owners. While Mr. Oshiro states that you “have worked to provide law enforcement with the necessary tools to prevent gun-related fatalities in Hawaii and will continue to do so in the future,†we ask you, “When will you provide us with the tools to protect ourselves from the criminals who plague our island?†Help us protect our families. Please vote “NO†for House Bill #441.