Good point. Perhaps they're referring to the entire process including getting the permit to acquire? Meaning it's really 2 visits for long gun/shotgun and 3 visits for handgun.

That's what everyone is assuming they mean.  But keep in mind the long, proud history our legislature has of doing good things in support of 2A rights, and ask yourself, is this a benign-yet-ignorant step forward, or a cleverly worded additional burden? 

That's what everyone is assuming they mean.  But keep in mind the long, proud history our legislature has of doing good things in support of 2A rights, and ask yourself, is this a benign-yet-ignorant step forward, or a cleverly worded additional burden?

"Ignorant" for sure, given any answers I've ever seen to questions related to Second Amendment issues from most of them. Possibly "deceitful". More likely, just in my personal opinion, you're talking about a "semantic" difference between "registration" and "the registration process". After all, once you've 1. applied for the "permit to acquire" (which I assume is the only step that would be amenable to online fulfillment... and of course could be done right now today on the phone), and 2. picked up the "permit to acquire" (assuming you are still alive 14 to 20 days later) and then actually acquire the firearm and 3. take it to the police station for them to confirm it matches the information on the "permit to acquire" application and permit... what would an additional step/burden actually be? Take it to a different police station to verify the first police station confirmed the serial number, etc. correctly? Well, actually, now that I think about that, it does rather seem like a "common sense gun safety regulation, for the children". 

Whatever happen to opening up additional weapons registration offices on the Windward and Leeward side of the island? I would think that would be a better solution. Wasn't that one of the recommendations from the NRA?

From Senator Espero's office re deadline for scheduling hearing before House Judiciary Committee:

Aloha From the Office of Senator Espero,
Thank you for submitting testimony in support of Senator Espero’s “Firearm Online Registration” bill (SB2938). It has moved along nicely through the legislative process so far. Right now it is referred to the House Judiciary Committee. This committee must have a hearing for this bill for it to remain alive. Chair Representative Karl Rhoads has not set a hearing date for this bill, and the deadline is fast approaching.  If this bill does not get a hearing by Thursday of next week, it will die. If you can kindly contact Rep. Rhoads office to persuade him to hear the bill, that would be great. If enough people contact him, perhaps he will be inclined to put this bill on a hearing agenda. Rep. Rhoads’ contact information is below, as well as the bill information.
 
Representative Karl Rhoads, Chair
House Judiciary Committee
Tel: (808)586-6180
Email: RepRhoads@Capitol.hawaii.gov
 
SB2938 (Public Safety; Statewide Online Firearms Registration; Working Group ($))
Establishes a working group to study the feasibility of implementing a statewide online firearms registration process.
 
Link to the bill:  http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2014/bills/SB2938_HD1_.htm
 
Thank you for anything you can do to move this measure along in an effort to make it law.
 
Sincerely,
Venus Delos Santos
Office of Senator Will Espero
415 S. Beretania St., Rm. 231
Honolulu, HI  96813
(808)586-6766
Espero2@Capitol.hawaii.gov

If they don't even want to merely hold a hearing, much less a vote (which would likely end in defeat anyway), on a bill to create a "working group", composed of 83% opponents to the idea of any kind of partial online registration to merely "study" the question... I'll repeat myself: Seriously?! 

That's what everyone is assuming they mean.  But keep in mind the long, proud history our legislature has of doing good things in support of 2A rights, and ask yourself, is this a benign-yet-ignorant step forward, or a cleverly worded additional burden?

Tom, you're a man of intelligence and reason...I'm trying to figure out when you became so skeptical? Did you go to a shiny hat party and drink the kool-aid? 

     SECTION 1.  The legislature finds that the registration of firearms is intended for all gun owners in the State.  The registration process is necessary for public safety to insure that a firearm is properly registered to an individual who is qualified and capable of owning firearms.  However, the legislature finds that the current firearms registration process is inefficient and requires excessive visits to county police stations, wasting time and money.

     The legislature further finds that the establishment of an online firearms registration process will streamline the registration process for firearm owners and registration officials, providing for a more efficient registration process.

What I get is: 1) They acknowledge the current inefficiency and 2) believe online registration will streamline the process.  I am well aware of how the legislature can twist or totally screw up a bill along the way, but even with amendments, the purpose generally remains true. So I doubt that they'll come up with "extra" steps just to screw with firearms owners.

Has no one pointed out that, as things stand, registration only takes one visit to the police?

I believe the legislative intent is mixing permits to acquire with registration.  Is it not?

This can work both ways:

1.) streamline the process saving lots of money (how many people work firearms...)
2.) Put more officers back on the streets
3.) Take credit for saving money and putting officers on the streets.

Tom, you're a man of intelligence and reason...I'm trying to figure out when you became so skeptical? Did you go to a shiny hat party and drink the kool-aid? 

Well, the hats and kool-aid were both free if you just went to the meeting.....

Aloha From the Office of Senator Espero,

Thank you for submitting testimony in support of Senator Espero’s “Firearm Online Registration” bill (SB2938). It has moved along nicely through the legislative process so far. Right now it is referred to the House Judiciary Committee. This committee must have a hearing for this bill for it to remain alive. Chair Representative Karl Rhoads has not set a hearing date for this bill, and the deadline is fast approaching.  If this bill does not get a hearing by Thursday of next week, it will die. If you can kindly contact Rep. Rhoads office to persuade him to hear the bill, that would be great.  If enough people contact him, perhaps he will be inclined to put this bill on a hearing agenda.  Rep. Rhoads’ contact information is below, as well as the bill information.

 

Representative Karl Rhoads, Chair

House Judiciary Committee

Tel: (808)586-6180

Email: RepRhoads@Capitol.hawaii.gov
I contacted Rhoads via e-mail. Now we'll see.

Online registration will never happen if it takes positions away from the depts, whether the chiefs are pro- or anti- 2a. It's bad gov business to loose positions.

Online registration will never happen if it takes positions away from the depts, whether the chiefs are pro- or anti- 2a. It's bad gov business to loose positions.

Oh, I'm pretty sure they'd be able to "make work" for any employee(s) that could possibly be displaced by taking your name, address, etc. and the make, model, caliber, barrel length, and serial number of a firearm (and agree to relinquish all your medical privacy rights) over the internet or phone rather than in person. Never been a problem for any government agency in the past.

Online registration will never happen if it takes positions away from the depts, whether the chiefs are pro- or anti- 2a. It's bad gov business to loose positions.

Yeah, God forbid they are forced to actually go out on the streets and attempt to prevent crime or catch criminals. That would be too much to ask.