So I curious if anyone has an actual case of a person getting caught with an unregistered firearm. And no prior felonys. I have yet to find one. This is an awesome tool
http://www.courts.state.hi.us/legal_references/records/jims_system_availability.html

Well registration wasn't required until 1992 or 1993 (can't remember which) so I am sure lots of people here in Hawaii have legally owned but unregistered firearms. I have not heard of any cases concerning prosecution over an unregistered firearm, nor any cases about someone prosecuted over possession of a high capacity magazine (at least where that was the primary issue,and not tacked onto other charges).

That is a neat tool!

have several firearm bought in the 80 by my dad.
these do not require registration even if transferred

have several firearm bought in the 80 by my dad.
these do not require registration even if transferred

If transferred,  aren't you required to register?   I thought that was the law in Hawaii?

that's what I thought!

brought it to the window and was told it didn't need to be registered.

took it back home.

    HRS134-3 (b)  Every person who acquires a firearm pursuant to section 134-2 shall register the firearm in the manner prescribed by this section


since I did not get the firearm by 134-2 it does not require registration
Registration was not mandatory for rifles and shotguns acquired in the state of Hawaiʻi prior to July, 1994.

if you were 18 before 1994, your dad gave them to you!!!

Grandpa guns.

    HRS134-3 (b)  Every person who acquires a firearm pursuant to section 134-2 shall register the firearm in the manner prescribed by this section


since I did not get the firearm by 134-2 it does not require registration
Registration was not mandatory for rifles and shotguns acquired in the state of Hawaiʻi prior to July, 1994.

Incorrect, did you even read 134-2?

§134-2  Permits to acquire.  (a)  No person shall acquire the ownership of a firearm, whether usable or unusable, serviceable or unserviceable, modern or antique, registered under prior law or by a prior owner or unregistered, either by purchase, gift, inheritance, bequest, or in any other manner, whether procured in the State or imported by mail, express, freight, or otherwise, until the person has first procured from the chief of police of the county of the person's place of business or, if there is no place of business, the person's residence or, if there is neither place of business nor residence, the person's place of sojourn, a permit to acquire the ownership of a firearm as prescribed in this section.

So you got it as a gift "or in any other manner", you need to have a permit to acquire, which means you need to register it (per 134-3).

I wouldn't count on police to know the law. If you have questions on stuff like that, state AG is the place. If you have a letter from them that's a different story.

Incorrect, did you even read 134-2?

§134-2  Permits to acquire.  (a)  No person shall acquire the ownership of a firearm, whether usable or unusable, serviceable or unserviceable, modern or antique, registered under prior law or by a prior owner or unregistered, either by purchase, gift, inheritance, bequest, or in any other manner, whether procured in the State or imported by mail, express, freight, or otherwise, until the person has first procured from the chief of police of the county of the person's place of business or, if there is no place of business, the person's residence or, if there is neither place of business nor residence, the person's place of sojourn, a permit to acquire the ownership of a firearm as prescribed in this section.

So you got it as a gift "or in any other manner", you need to have a permit to acquire, which means you need to register it (per 134-3).

I wouldn't count on police to know the law.

I'm pretty sure he's saying that he "acquired" it prior to 1994 when he was of legal age and before registration was required. It's a pretty unusual circumstance and not many will fall into that category.

I'm pretty sure he's saying that he "acquired" it prior to 1994 when he was of legal age and before registration was required. It's a pretty unusual circumstance and not many will fall into that category.

Okay yeah that makes sense. I read it as he meant that since his dad bought it pre-reg that somehow it was grandfathered in.

I'm pretty sure he's saying that he "acquired" it prior to 1994 when he was of legal age and before registration was required. It's a pretty unusual circumstance and not many will fall into that category.

yeap!

have several firearm bought in the 80 by my dad.
these do not require registration even if transferred

Just to be clear, if you were to transfer them today, they would need to be registered by whoever received them.  Right?

shhh
don't ask don't tell
 


if the long gun was purchased before 1994 no records exsist , except the old 4473 which HPD are unable to access. think of King's sporting goods (long out of business).


but  they would want you to register the pre 1994 non-registered firearm.

like i said there is no proof of when the firearm transferred!

Well registration wasn't required until 1992 or 1993 (can't remember which) so I am sure lots of people here in Hawaii have legally owned but unregistered firearms. I have not heard of any cases concerning prosecution over an unregistered firearm, nor any cases about someone prosecuted over possession of a high capacity magazine (at least where that was the primary issue,and not tacked onto other charges).

That is a neat tool!

While this is true for rifles and shotguns, handguns have been registered since Hawaii was a territory.  So the only way that could work for a handgun is if you're about 90 years old and you have a handgun that was made back in the 30s.

From my understanding, before Hawaii registered long arms, you needed an individual purchase permit for each long arm like you do for handguns. So wouldn't the rifle or shotgun have been registered on the individual permit to purchase form?

Jared,

Good question, I don't know myself. I know handguns have been registered since territorial days, somehow I scrubbed that out when I was writing my post. I just wish that this state would get with the 21st century, having to go to HPD for registration is asinine when the FFL has to verify all the information at point-of-sale and send the transfer information to HPD. If California can run its firearm registration system electronically, so can this state.

Granted I wish there was no registration or waiting period beyond the 5 mins for the NICS check (which HPD does when they run your permit application, plus the mental health check) but I am realistic. This is, and always will be, a Democrat progressive utopia, I don't see anything changing unless its via the Federal court system.

Jared,

Good question, I don't know myself. I know handguns have been registered since territorial days, somehow I scrubbed that out when I was writing my post. I just wish that this state would get with the 21st century, having to go to HPD for registration is asinine when the FFL has to verify all the information at point-of-sale and send the transfer information to HPD. If California can run its firearm registration system electronically, so can this state.

Granted I wish there was no registration or waiting period beyond the 5 mins for the NICS check (which HPD does when they run your permit application, plus the mental health check) but I am realistic. This is, and always will be, a Democrat progressive utopia, I don't see anything changing unless its via the Federal court system.

It can change and it slowly is. Hawaii is not as anti gun as it used to be. It was about a decade ago that they were considering license to possess firearms and ammo.

Firearms registration numbers have been on the rise. More people are owning guns and the more people you introduce to shooting and the idea of self defense, it contributes to the paradigm shift.

You gotta know that it frustrates to gun grabbers to no end that registration numbers have tripled since 2000.