Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case (Read 9143 times)

Q

London808

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #1 on: February 29, 2016, 08:31:00 AM »
Always wondered about this part "  the requirement that registration applicants present their firearms in person at police headquarters." 
My understanding is that they ruled it unconstitutional as it created additional burden on the firearms owner with no reason linked to public safety,

Now HPD (and i believe all Hawaii police) requires the same to regsiter a firearm, When i read the law i can see no mention of requiring presentation of the firearm at a police station for registration.

 §134-3  Registration, mandatory, exceptions.  (a)  Every person arriving in the State who brings or by any other manner causes to be brought into the State a firearm of any description, whether usable or unusable, serviceable or unserviceable, modern or antique, shall register the firearm within five days after arrival of the person or of the firearm, whichever arrives later, with 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 a place of business nor residence, the person's place of sojourn.  A nonresident alien may bring firearms not otherwise prohibited by law into the State for a continuous period not to exceed ninety days; provided that the person meets the registration requirement of this section and the person possesses:

The only mention that i can see that would imply that the firearm must be present to register would be this section in the same law
 (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.

Now do i go and try and register a firearm without having it on me, So for example i purchased it on a Saturday. Go to register it on a Monday and not take the firearm with me as i have to go to other places and due to Hawaii's restrictive transportation/possession laws it would be impossible/impractical for me to carry on my day.
"Mr. Roberts is a bit of a fanatic, he has previously sued HPD about gun registration issues." : Major Richard Robinson 2016

eyeeatingfish

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #2 on: February 29, 2016, 08:45:53 AM »
Always wondered about this part "  the requirement that registration applicants present their firearms in person at police headquarters." 
My understanding is that they ruled it unconstitutional as it created additional burden on the firearms owner with no reason linked to public safety,

This would make things too much easier. Imagine just mailing in a registration like you do when transferring a car.

London808

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #3 on: February 29, 2016, 09:20:12 AM »
This would make things too much easier. Imagine just mailing in a registration like you do when transferring a car.
ii. Bringing the firearm, D.C. Code § 7-
2502.04(c)
The District argues that the “requirement that the firearm
be made available for inspection allows MPD to verify that
the application information is correct and that the firearm has
not been altered or switched with another firearm.” The
District, however, has offered no evidence — let alone
substantial evidence — from which it can be inferred that
verification will promote public safety. The district court
acknowledged as much when it noted that not one of the
District’s four experts “specifically addresse[d] the
requirement that registrants bring the gun to be registered
with them.” Heller III, 45 F. Supp. 3d at 59. The district
court nonetheless deemed it a “common-sense inference” that
“if in-person appearance is necessary to verify the identity of
the registrant, then physically bringing the gun is similarly
necessary to verify the character of the registered weapon.”
Id. Yet common sense suggests a person would not go to the
trouble of obtaining a registration certificate for a weapon
other than a weapon in his possession. On the contrary,
common sense suggests that bringing firearms to the MPD
would more likely be a threat to public safety; as Heller
maintains, there is a “risk that the gun may be stolen en route
or that the [would-be registrant] may be arrested or even shot
by a police officer seeing a ‘man with a gun’ (or a gun case).
"Mr. Roberts is a bit of a fanatic, he has previously sued HPD about gun registration issues." : Major Richard Robinson 2016

punaperson

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #4 on: February 29, 2016, 09:47:01 AM »
This would make things too much easier. Imagine just mailing in a registration like you do when transferring a car.
I sent multiple queries to the Chief Kubojiri regarding only the third required in-person visit to the police station (a 35 minute each way drive for me) where one is doing nothing more than merely picking up the finalized permit. I asked what the justification was for not mailing these out, as the county and state mail drivers licenses and state ID cards, etc., and banks and credit card companies mail credit cards, and the federal government mails passports and social security cards, etc., all "sensitive" security documents (far more useful to criminals for fraud and theft than any county "firearms permit") that they entrust to the USPS. The responses, literally were "We've always done it that way." Again, that's what counts as "reasoning" and "logic" in justifying policies that obviously are not "reasonable" nor "logical" but merely another form of inconvenience/harassment for Hawaii citizens wishing to exercise their pre-existing rights and not be deemed criminals by the "authorities".

I then wrote to all the county council members and relayed the stupid thoughtful response of the chief, and not one single one of them cared either. Like it or lump it... you peon.

London808

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #5 on: February 29, 2016, 10:45:10 AM »
Well i need to buy an AR lower so i guess we will find out if i can register it without having it with me.
"Mr. Roberts is a bit of a fanatic, he has previously sued HPD about gun registration issues." : Major Richard Robinson 2016

punaperson

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #6 on: February 29, 2016, 10:52:33 AM »
Well i need to buy an AR lower so i guess we will find out if i can register it without having it with me.
That'd be a firearm with a serial number, so they need to see it to verify the number.

nathanm14fan

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #7 on: February 29, 2016, 11:06:57 AM »
Unfortunately for us this case is not binding on any court other than than DC circuit. It does give ammunition for having the law changed, but it will be up to the legislature or the judiciary to change it, and you know the state will fight it despite this ruling.

London808

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #8 on: February 29, 2016, 11:08:13 AM »
That'd be a firearm with a serial number, so they need to see it to verify the number.
Where in the states laws does it say that, i cant seem to find it.
"Mr. Roberts is a bit of a fanatic, he has previously sued HPD about gun registration issues." : Major Richard Robinson 2016

zippz

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #9 on: February 29, 2016, 11:45:17 AM »
I don't think anything that requires registration needs a state official to view the actual item.  Like cars, bicycles, mopeds, etc.

Good point on why the permits/registration can't be mailed in like any other official documentation.  I didn't really think about this before because "i've always done it that way."  The only reason I can see is they don't want to be liable if the mail doesn't get to the person before the 5 day expiration date to get the permit, which is also stupid and not in the law.

London808

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #10 on: February 29, 2016, 11:51:26 AM »
I don't think anything that requires registration needs a state official to view the actual item.  Like cars, bicycles, mopeds, etc.

Good point on why the permits/registration can't be mailed in like any other official documentation.  I didn't really think about this before because "i've always done it that way."  The only reason I can see is they don't want to be liable if the mail doesn't get to the person before the 5 day expiration date to get the permit, which is also stupid and not in the law.

They have the online registration for HPD,  You still have to go down to sign (photo fingerprint) and show the firearm, The problem is the law says that the forms have to be uniform throught the state AND that they have to be prescribed by the attorney general.

§134-3  section b reads (in part) "The registration shall be on forms prescribed by the attorney general, which shall be uniform throughout the State, and shall include the following information: "

"Mr. Roberts is a bit of a fanatic, he has previously sued HPD about gun registration issues." : Major Richard Robinson 2016

punaperson

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #11 on: February 29, 2016, 11:57:38 AM »
Where in the states laws does it say that, i cant seem to find it.
Don't know the statute offhand, but it is considered a "firearm" and you can call any local gun store, or any local police department, or the local ATF and they will assure you that a lower cannot be transferred without permit to acquire/long gun permit, etc.

London808

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #12 on: February 29, 2016, 12:01:46 PM »
Don't know the statute offhand, but it is considered a "firearm" and you can call any local gun store, or any local police department, or the local ATF and they will assure you that a lower cannot be transferred without permit to acquire/long gun permit, etc.

I was referring to the part where i have to present it for inspection
"Mr. Roberts is a bit of a fanatic, he has previously sued HPD about gun registration issues." : Major Richard Robinson 2016

punaperson

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #13 on: February 29, 2016, 12:06:40 PM »
I was referring to the part where i have to present it for inspection
You mean you expect them to take your word for it as the accuracy of the serial number you recite to them? Not gonna happen. Oh, and don't forget: ""Enclosed container" means a rigidly constructed receptacle, or a commercially manufactured gun case, or the equivalent thereof that completely encloses the firearm."

I could be 100% wrong. Let us know what you find out.

ren

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #14 on: February 29, 2016, 01:03:26 PM »
after going through background checks, mental and other medical issues...why should HPD trust you that the firearm you are saying you are registering is actually THE firearm?  ::)  :wacko: You need to bring the firearm and SHOW them! :grrr:
Why? Because the State of Hawaii govt. doesn't trust you, the firearm owner.
But, we will trust our judges to do the right thing i.e. http://khon2.com/2015/08/05/former-charter-school-principal-accused-of-stealing-100000-pleads-guilty/   :grrr:
Deeds Not Words

nathanm14fan

Re: Pro-Gun Victory in "Heller III" Case
« Reply #15 on: March 02, 2016, 08:34:17 AM »
You mean you expect them to take your word for it as the accuracy of the serial number you recite to them? Not gonna happen. Oh, and don't forget: ""Enclosed container" means a rigidly constructed receptacle, or a commercially manufactured gun case, or the equivalent thereof that completely encloses the firearm."

I could be 100% wrong. Let us know what you find out.

The irony of course being that they trust the gun dealer or a private seller to fax/mail them their notice of transfer to the buyer, and the information on it.