Ummm, the 1986 FOPA seems pretty clear that a federal database of gun owners is illegal....it is NOT just about "information sharing" and the fact that you entirely dismiss the very legitimate concerns others and myself have expressed, is disturbing....

I am not dismissing any concerns. I share the concerns as evidence by my comments about one danger of gun registration lists.

Being arrested for domestic violence does not give HPD the ability to take away your guns.

You are claiming that rap back will give HPD the ability to take away your guns just for having an arrest so prove it. Not my job to disprove your unsupported claim. If you know Hawaii gun laws so well then feel free to point it out.

Like I said earlier, if the new law would give HPD the ability to take guns for an arrest alone then I would be against it, but I haven't seen it anywhere in the law that this is the case.

You know, one way I spot Liberals is they always try to make the person that disagrees with them go find supporting information and facts to disprove the Libtard rather than do the work themselves.  Their hope is the other side is too busy or disinterested, and the Progressive-loving dimwits win the debate by default!

Even so, here's the info.  Try and find opposing info, if you can.

1.  No charges or judgment required.  HPD just needs "reasonable grounds to believe."  RAP-BACK can provide those grounds if someone in another state files a DV complaint.

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol03_Ch0121-0200D/HRS0134/HRS_0134-0007_0005.htm

2.  This section says you just have to be bound over for trial for a felony (which we all know the majority of gun possession charges may be).  At that point, the HPD can seize (their word) you firearms if you fail to transfer them -- tough to do if you are bound over in NY!! 

Any person disqualified from ownership, possession, control, or the right to transfer ownership of firearms and ammunition under this section shall surrender or dispose of all firearms and ammunition in compliance with section 134-7.3.

§134-7  Ownership or possession prohibited, when; penalty.  (a)  No person who is a fugitive from justice or is a person prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition under federal law shall own, possess, or control any firearm or ammunition therefor.

     (b)  No person who is under indictment for, or has waived indictment for, or has been bound over to the circuit court for, or has been convicted in this State or elsewhere of having committed a felony, or any crime of violence, or an illegal sale of any drug shall own, possess, or control any firearm or ammunition therefor.

That's how it reads TODAY.  Once we are all identified as RAP-BACK persons of interest, the state can mess around with the "if-then-else" clauses all they want!

You know, one way I spot Liberals is they always try to make the person that disagrees with them go find supporting information and facts to disprove the Libtard rather than do the work themselves.  Their hope is the other side is too busy or disinterested, and the Progressive-loving dimwits win the debate by default!

So instead of you being required to provide proof that something you claim to exist does, you expect me to provide proof that it doesn't? You might as well claim to be god and make me prove you aren't. Maybe I shouldn't use that example, don't want to stroke your ego.

Even so, here's the info.  Try and find opposing info, if you can.

1.  No charges or judgment required.  HPD just needs "reasonable grounds to believe."  RAP-BACK can provide those grounds if someone in another state files a DV complaint.

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol03_Ch0121-0200D/HRS0134/HRS_0134-0007_0005.htm

Do you read the information you link? Sigh... Let me post where your own link disproves what you claimed.

(a)  Any police officer who has reasonable grounds to believe that a person has recently assaulted or threatened to assault a family or household member may seize all firearms and ammunition that the police officer has reasonable grounds to believe were used or threatened to be used in the commission of the offense.


They can seize the firearm IF they have reason to believe the firearms were used in the assault or threatening. Notice that it also only mentions the firearms that are used in the incident, not a blanket removal of all firearms.

2.  This section says you just have to be bound over for trial for a felony (which we all know the majority of gun possession charges may be).  At that point, the HPD can seize (their word) you firearms if you fail to transfer them -- tough to do if you are bound over in NY!! 

That's how it reads TODAY.  Once we are all identified as RAP-BACK persons of interest, the state can mess around with the "if-then-else" clauses all they want!

Being arrested for a felony does not mean you are bound over so again, merely being arrested does not mean HPD can take all your guns.
http://www.sheltonlegal.com/Information/Ask-a-Lawyer/What-Does--Bound-Over--Mean-/what-does--bound-over--mean-.html

You do bring up a valid concern at the end of your reply though. What happens if we are in rapback and then they try to change laws on when they can take back guns. Hard to predict what would happen in this state but I am sure a legal battle would ensue and it would definitely address a serious constitutional question.