Currently HRA is in support of SB2257.


SB2257 Prohibits making or selling digitally manufactured firearms unless licenced by ATF, and prohibits carrying one or the parts thereof.  The National Firearms Act (NFA) permits making guns for personal use if they are registered with ATF.  HRA suggests that amendment to the bill, subject to the usual HRS 134 restrictions. .

 


Under current laws anyone can make a homemade firearm without a license or permit.
This bill would not only prohibit a homemade firearm but any type of parts.

All HRA members please contact HRA and OPPOSE this bill.



For your information, per provisions of the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968, 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44, an unlicensed individual may make a “firearm” as defined in the GCA for his own personal use, but not for sale or distribution.

HRA testified yesterday in person in opposition to this bill
the bill was held in committee

many of us have asked HRA for clarification and are awaiting an answer

I'm glad the NRA-ILA submitted testimony.

I'm glad the NRA-ILA submitted testimony.

yes, but the leg puts more weight behind the testimony of HRA

Good that HRA clarified their opposition to the bill. The written testimony they submitted looked like they supported it.

Confirmed
Oral testimony HRA changed their views to OPPOSE the bill?

Where did this bill get deferred  to?

Confirmed
Oral testimony HRA changed their views to OPPOSE the bill?

Where did this bill get deferred  to?

Yes, in oral testimony HRA changed their position.   Was kind of a dramatic moment, actually.   When Sen Espero was reading the supports/opposes, he said HRA supports and Dr. Cooper stood up and announced that HRA had reevaluated and was now opposing.   Went to the mic and testified as to why. 

My understanding is that deferred means the bill enters limbo.

The other interesting moment is when Sen. Espero called for the vote on the electronic registration bill, he joked that the since the attorney general's office had not appeared at the committee meeting, that the bill would be amended to have their office build/run the registration system.  This addressed the core of HPDs criticism of the bill.

Confirmed
Oral testimony HRA changed their views to OPPOSE the bill?

Where did this bill get deferred  to?

deferred means it will no longer be discussed by that committee
and it will not proceed to the senate floor for a vote
technically, it can be revived next year

deferred means it will no longer be discussed by that committee
and it will not proceed to the senate floor for a vote
technically, it can be revived next year

Not quite. The bill could be "revived" if this was the first year of the biennial. But it's not, so any bill not surviving this year is dead. They can re-introduce a bill with the same language, but it'll be like starting fresh and not reviving something that was "sitting" in the legislature....

Not quite. The bill could be "revived" if this was the first year of the biennial. But it's not, so any bill not surviving this year is dead. They can re-introduce a bill with the same language, but it'll be like starting fresh and not reviving something that was "sitting" in the legislature....

mahalo, hicarry