Just up, House Public Safety Committee unanimously passed SB2938 WITH AMENDMENTS. Those amendments are not posted yet, so no idea whether they are serous or minor changes. It was 7 ayes, 0 nays, and 3 excused absences.

I'm rather surprised, since the testimony against it included the Attorney General, Police Chiefs of Oahu and Maui, the "Injury Prevention Advisory Committee", and Americans for Democratic Action... all of whom have impressive looking logos on their stationery.

No written testimony from HRA, but I'd assume they were there in person and hopefully corrected some false claims by the opponents and guided the amending process.

No video or audio yet... last committee meeting it took a week to get the audio (only) available.

When they post the amended version (SD3) I will post about it if no one else does so first.

By the way, does anyone know the current status of the storage means for the current registration data? Is it "paper only" in file cabinets, or is some or all of it computerized and thus subject to hacking? I've had instances where the clerk went back into the office to find out something, like the address of the current owner, and they re-appeared within a minute, which leads me to believe that the data is already computerized (or they have a really really good cross-referenced filing system), which would work against the argument that any online computerized data transfer would jeopardize the security of that information. Thanks.

Okay, for reference, here is SB2938 SD2 as passed by the Senate committees:

(c)  No later than July 1, 2015, the department of the attorney general, in collaboration with the county police departments, shall establish and operate a statewide online registration process for registering firearms that generally requires no more than two visits to the respective county police station per registration.  Any funds received from county firearm registration fees shall be used to pay for costs incurred by the registering county and online registration processing costs incurred by the department of attorney general.

As amended by the House Public Safety Committee it (HD1) now reads:

SECTION 1.  The purpose of this Act is to establish a working group to study the feasibility of implementing a statewide online firearms registration process.
     SECTION 2.  (a)  There is established an online firearms registration working group, to be placed within the department of the attorney general for administrative purposes, to study the feasibility of implementing a statewide online firearms registration process.
     (b)  In considering the feasibility of implementing a statewide online firearms registration process, the working group shall review the current firearms registration process, concerns or problems with the current process, and methods to address these concerns or problems in addition to an online registration process.
     (c)  The attorney general or the attorney general's designee shall serve as the chair of the working group, which shall also include:
     (1)  The chiefs of police of the Hawaii police department, Honolulu police department, Kauai police department, and the Maui police department, or the respective chief's designee; and
     (2)  A representative from the Hawaii Rifle Association.
     (d)  No member shall be made subject to chapter 84, Hawaii Revised Statutes, solely because of that member's participation as a member of the working group.  Members shall serve without compensation.
     (e)  The working group shall submit a written report of its findings and recommendations, including any proposed legislation, to the legislature no later than twenty days prior to the convening of the regular session of 2015.
     (f)  The working group shall cease to exist on June 30, 2015.
     SECTION 3.  This Act shall take effect on July 1, 2050.

In other words, they're making a "working group" to study the issue that is made up of all the bureaucrats that oppose it: the attorney generals office and the county police chiefs... PLUS one person from HRA. What are the odds that the currently controlling bureaucrats are going to change their minds and decide to give firearm owners even a tiny break like only having to go to the police station twice? I rather doubt they will even toss us that minuscule crumb. Our only hope rests with tossing out the current legislative balance and electing Second Amendment friendly legislators (haha) or hoping the courts (in however many years it would take) give us some relief. I don't want to be "negative" (i try for "realistic"), but seriously? I suppose it's possible that the bill 1. might not even pass in any form, even just creating a working group composed of 83% die-hard opponents; 2. the joint committee could be influenced to pass the senate version; 3. the governor will veto it, or 4. It will pass in the original version and by the end of next year we will only have to miss work parts of two days instead of three days to exercise a fundamental individual natural civil unalienable right guaranteed by the Constitution. Such a deal! 

Makes me want to move to Texas. 

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

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

Because you can't register what you don't possess, and you can't possess what you are required to register until you are granted a "permit to acquire", and you can't acquire a "permit to acquire" without applying for a "permit to acquire", all three stages are considered part of the registration process. At least that's how I understand it.

Because you can't register what you don't possess, and you can't possess what you are required to register until you are granted a "permit to acquire", and you can't acquire a "permit to acquire" without applying for a "permit to acquire", all three stages are considered part of the registration process. At least that's how I understand it.

Unless you bring it in from points outside of Hawaii.


Only one visit is enough.

Unless you bring it in from points outside of Hawaii.

Only one visit is enough.

If there is no transfer because you already possess them, the first two stages are moot. Just make sure you show up within 5 days to tell them all about yourself and your firearms... because they said so, that's why.

Didnt apply for a permit  (long gun or pistol) in years.

   

Right on! 

 

But still perfectly legal!

Because you can't register what you don't possess, and you can't possess what you are required to register until you are granted a "permit to acquire", and you can't acquire a "permit to acquire" without applying for a "permit to acquire", all three stages are considered part of the registration process. At least that's how I understand it.

Nope.  The first two steps are permitting.  First you apply for a permit to acquire, then you return to pick up your permit to acquire.  We may colloquially refer to the whole process as registration, but that word only appears in one section, HRS 134-3.  And we are talking about laws here, literal wording.   

    (b)  Every person who acquires a firearm pursuant to section 134-2 shall register the firearm in the manner prescribed by this section within five days of acquisition. 

Even the section on registration makes reference to the fact that acquisition is a separate process. 

So, what we're potentially looking at is a bill that, if it passes, could ADD a trip to the police station to this whole process.

What about person not acquiring firearms accordingly to 132-2?

What about person not acquiring firearms accordingly to 132-2?

What about them?

What about them?

If it wasn't  acquired pursuant to section 134-2  no registration is required in five days.

Such as C&R people do not need to physically go to HPD to register..
     (c)  Dealers licensed under section 134-31 or dealers licensed by the United States Department of Justice shall register firearms pursuant to this section on registration forms prescribed by the attorney general and shall not be required to have the firearms physically inspected by the chief of police at the time of registration.

Yet, C&R people still make a trip to HPD.
C&R is a DOJ licensed dealer/collector, correct?

If it wasn't  acquired pursuant to section 134-2  no registration is required in five days.

Wait, what?

Registration is required on all firearms brought into the state.  C&R, carried on a plane, whatever.  You know that.

The point I'm making is that, in the world of legalese where semantics count for everything, registration currently requires only one visit to the police.  This new bill could allow them to require a second visit.

What I mean was C&R guy can just fax in their registration like a FFL does.

FFL in hawaii just fax in their firearms for registration.

In all , there  is in place a system that allows remote registration by fax. and no physical visit is required.
Firearms not obtained by 132-2 such as dealers under 134-31 or DOJ licensee.

HRS 134-3(c)
........."shall not be required to have the firearms physically inspected by the chief of police at the time of registration."

The point I'm making is that, in the world of legalese where semantics count for everything...

And we are talking about laws here, literal wording.   

Wondering if you listened to the Baker v. Kealoha oral arguments before the Ninth Circuit? A couple of the judges, especially Callahan, questioned Baker's attorney, Richard Holcomb, about whether he was "stretching" the truth about the laws regarding where and how exactly it is legal to drive with a firearm and where and how to use them. When Holcomb pointed out that what he was claiming, was what the law actually literally stated, her response was (paraphrased) "Yes, but that's not how it actually works." In other words, what the law says, the semantics, the literal wording, doesn't really matter if we say it doesn't matter because you know what the law "means" and how it's actually enforced, or could be enforced, or might be enforced, or is selectively enforced... or something. 

So no matter what the literal wording, those words will always be subject to interpretation, no matter how seemingly clear their meaning might be to someone. E.g. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

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

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.

What I mean was C&R guy can just fax in their registration like a FFL does.

FFL in hawaii just fax in their firearms for registration.

Oh, now THAT would be cool!!!