from the article:

In a letter to about 30 medical marijuana card holders on Oahu, the police said “you have 30 days upon receipt of this letter to voluntarily surrender your firearms.”

will they really come to your house and confiscate your firearms, or are they trying to trick you into surrendering them voluntarily?

also, what if you have a prescription for MJ but never actually pick anything up?  are you actually using it?
what if you cancel your prescription, do you still need to surrender your firearms?
in Hawaii, they are using a MJ credit card to buy medical MJ and not cash, so there is a record of you actually buying it.  what if the records show that you never actually bought any?

from the article:
will they really come to your house and confiscate your firearms, or are they trying to trick you into surrendering them voluntarily?

I think we all want to know this, as its definitely going to set a precedent.

Talking with friends and family in blue over the years regarding the topic of registrations being used for confiscation, and none of them want to come to your house and attempt to take your guns by force.

It wouldn't be hard though; the police just need to show up with more guys and bigger guns.  Pot smokers are generally the most docile people in society and are crazy paranoid, so I highly doubt they'd put up a fight.

from the article:
will they really come to your house and confiscate your firearms, or are they trying to trick you into surrendering them voluntarily?

also, what if you have a prescription for MJ but never actually pick anything up?  are you actually using it?
what if you cancel your prescription, do you still need to surrender your firearms?
in Hawaii, they are using a MJ credit card to buy medical MJ and not cash, so there is a record of you actually buying it.  what if the records show that you never actually bought any?

I dont remember where the exact law was posted.  But it basically states that they have the authority to come to the house and you need to show them where the firearms and ammunition are.  If they discover any additional guns or ammunition, they will seize those too.

The "voluntary" surrender is easier for you because you don't have cops traipsing around your house and potentially finding more than whatever it is youre supposed to surrender at the station in the first place.  The "voluntary" surrender also gives you the ability to sell or give away your firearms.

For other cases, I think with felony charges and TROs, they don't give you the opportunity to offload your firearms somewhere else.

---------------------------

Edit:   The section talking directly about search warrant for firearms and searching for them is related to a RO.  But (g) says that any disqualification complies with (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.

§134-7 (3)

At the time of service of a restraining order involving firearms and ammunition issued by any court, the police officer may take custody of any and all firearms and ammunition in plain sight, those discovered pursuant to a consensual search, and those firearms surrendered by the person restrained. If the person restrained is the registered owner of a firearm and knows the location of the firearm, but refuses to surrender the firearm or refuses to disclose the location of the firearm, the person restrained shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. In any case, when a police officer is unable to locate the firearms and ammunition either registered under this chapter or known to the person granted protection by the court, the police officer shall apply to the court for a search warrant pursuant to chapter 803 for the limited purpose of seizing the firearm and ammunition.

(g) 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 [b]134-7.3.[/b]

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol03_ch0121-0200d/HRS0134/HRS_0134-0007.htm

from the article:
will they really come to your house and confiscate your firearms, or are they trying to trick you into surrendering them voluntarily?

also, what if you have a prescription for MJ but never actually pick anything up?  are you actually using it?
what if you cancel your prescription, do you still need to surrender your firearms?
in Hawaii, they are using a MJ credit card to buy medical MJ and not cash, so there is a record of you actually buying it.  what if the records show that you never actually bought any?

I believe they still allow you to grow your own (10 plants?) for personal use, but not for sale to other patients.  So, you could be using without buying from a dispensary.

Whether you use or not, the firearms rules require a year wait after giving up the MM card, plus a doctor's evaluation letter saying you are "no longer addicted".

good info, guys
I forgot about growing your own

good info, guys
I forgot about growing your own

And this.  A poster at CB mentioned it.

"For others, it might be legal and advantageous for married couples to delegate these two activities. The wife might legally obtain a Hawaii Medical Cannabis 329 Registration Card, which permits growing not to exceed ten (10) plants and possessing no more than 4oz of usable cannabis jointly between a registered patient and caregiver. The husband might legally own the firearms. "

Not one HRA supporter/member has anything to say about Harvey's comments/the HRA's stance? 

One thing's for sure. HRA won't fight it.

Harvey thinks it's cool they are giving gun owners 30 days to turn 'em in ( and acting like he never took a drink of alcohol in his life. Must be part of the Reefer Madness generation)

"Harvey Gerwig, head of the Hawaii Rifle Association, partially agreed, saying, “A person who is taking medicine shouldn’t be deprived of their Second Amendment rights.”

But Gerwig also said he considers the state’s medical marijuana program “a fraud on many levels.”

“You’ve got people who are using it for drug purposes, not for medicine,” he said. “In those cases I don’t think they should have a firearm.”

Gerwig credited the police department for giving people 30 days to give up their guns instead of seizing the weapons immediately. But he said it might still be hard for people to sell their firearms within that time frame, noting handguns take at least two weeks to transfer ownership."

Who would think Espero would be on our side:

State Sen. Will Espero said it doesn’t make sense to take guns away from medical marijuana patients.

“They should be going after the real hardcore criminals and bad guys versus patients who need some assistance with their health care needs,” Espero said.

http://www.civilbeat.org/2017/11/honolulu-police-tell-medical-marijuana-patients-to-give-up-their-guns/

I'll jump in the fire.  I pretty much agree with the HRA's stance and comments.  Logically, it is against the law, and taking another stance is unwinnable, legally or politically.    Mandatory registration should have never been passed into law in Hawaii, then there wouldn't be such a predicament today.


Willy, he's and asshole and idiot.  He'll say or do anything if he think it'll get him, or keep him, some votes.  He doesn't give a rats ass about gun owners or the 2nd.

We're screwed.

Medical marijuana users. Illegal. No 2A right. Subject to confiscation.
Aren't prescription pain killers illegal without a prescription, but legal with and users can own guns.
The Feds could raid every dispensary in all the legal states by the letter of the law and shut 'em all down. But they don't.
You would be looking at years behind bars if you're caught working in a pot shop for the amount you're in "possession" of with intent to distribute.
Heck, nevermind the State trying to defy federal law to be a sanctuary city.

As soon as the Legislature passes:
No bump stock
No "assault weapons"
No high capacity mags over 10 rounds

They'll all be illegal and unwinnable, politically or legally.
(9th circuit and all and SCOTUS won't touch it we just found out.)
So why try to fight any of it.

State law on firearms and medical marijuana could be changed with the editing of one or two words, but we won't fight for it.
Worse than not fighting it or speaking out against it, HRA agrees and thanks the HPD for giving firearm owners 30 days to sell off or transfer all their 2A rights.

Meanwhile the illicit marijuana market just got stronger.

(Sorry for the rant Heavies. I know you're a politically active member. I'm just frustrated. Seems like this is the first shot in a crazy political year for Hawaii and we take it lying down. Worse than lying down. By approving of more needless restrictions of our 2A Rights here in Hawaii. "Thank You Sir, may I have another" )

We're screwed.

Medical marijuana users. Illegal. No 2A right. Subject to confiscation.
Aren't prescription pain killers illegal without a prescription, but legal with and users can own guns.
The Feds could raid every dispensary in all the legal states by the letter of the law and shut 'em all down. But they don't.
You would be looking at years behind bars if you're caught working in a pot shop for the amount you're in "possession" of with intent to distribute.
Heck, nevermind the State trying to defy federal law to be a sanctuary city.

As soon as the Legislature passes:
No bump stock
No "assault weapons"
No high capacity mags over 10 rounds

They'll all be illegal and unwinnable, politically or legally.
(9th circuit and all and SCOTUS won't touch it we just found out.)
So why try to fight any of it.

State law on firearms and medical marijuana could be changed with the editing of one or two words, but we won't fight for it.
Worse than not fighting it or speaking out against it, HRA agrees and thanks the HPD for giving firearm owners 30 days to sell off or transfer all their 2A rights.

Meanwhile the illicit marijuana market just got stronger.

(Sorry for the rant Heavies. I know you're a politically active member. I'm just frustrated. Seems like this is the first shot in a crazy political year for Hawaii and we take it lying down. Worse than lying down. By approving of more needless restrictions of our 2A Rights here in Hawaii. "Thank You Sir, may I have another" )

I agree with you 100%

Just saying it's was the logical course to take.  Until a different angle can be pursued, it would be counter productive to take a stance that cannot be won.  IMHO, a smart move. 

We're screwed.

Medical marijuana users. Illegal. No 2A right. Subject to confiscation.
Aren't prescription pain killers illegal without a prescription, but legal with and users can own guns.
The Feds could raid every dispensary in all the legal states by the letter of the law and shut 'em all down. But they don't.
You would be looking at years behind bars if you're caught working in a pot shop for the amount you're in "possession" of with intent to distribute.
Heck, nevermind the State trying to defy federal law to be a sanctuary city.

As soon as the Legislature passes:
No bump stock
No "assault weapons"
No high capacity mags over 10 rounds

They'll all be illegal and unwinnable, politically or legally.
(9th circuit and all and SCOTUS won't touch it we just found out.)
So why try to fight any of it.

State law on firearms and medical marijuana could be changed with the editing of one or two words, but we won't fight for it.
Worse than not fighting it or speaking out against it, HRA agrees and thanks the HPD for giving firearm owners 30 days to sell off or transfer all their 2A rights.

Meanwhile the illicit marijuana market just got stronger.

(Sorry for the rant Heavies. I know you're a politically active member. I'm just frustrated. Seems like this is the first shot in a crazy political year for Hawaii and we take it lying down. Worse than lying down. By approving of more needless restrictions of our 2A Rights here in Hawaii. "Thank You Sir, may I have another" )

I'm no pot smoker, never was, and likely never will be, but it really does bother me when one segment of our population is attacked in this manner.  marijuana users today, people with medical issues tomorrow, ARs the next day, etc. 

And it's pretty irritating how most gun owners just take a "sux2bu" position.  "hey you got to deal with rapback, I got all my guns already sux2bu".  "hey your ARs are getting taken away, I dont like ARs. sux2bu". "10 round handgun mags, I just shoot skeet. sux2bu"   etc etc.  And like I said about rapback earlier and the guys pretty much gloating they don't need to deal with it, what makes you think they're not going to change the law and make you subject to it?  The law is brand new, and it's the next logical step for them to take.  Apply for rapback or "voluntarily" turn in all your firearms and ammunition in 30 days.  While you're at the police station, we'll have you fill out this form to submit your medical records and whether or not you have a medical marijuana card too.   And it's not like they DONT already have all your information if you've registered guns in the past.... Only gunowners with all their guns unregistered will fly under the radar.

When you realize the final endgame of chipping away at 2nd amendment rights is to pretty much make EVERYTHING illegal, you realize that all law abiding gunowners should be supported no matter what their interest is in.   The gun community in hawaii is already very small, if you divide it up into factions that only care about specific things, it's becomes even tinier.  And yes, that is their objective, as many liberals interpret the 2nd amendment in that a "well regulated militia" = national guard, therefore private citizens have no rights to gun ownership.

Not one HRA supporter/member has anything to say about Harvey's comments/the HRA's stance? 

I believe that Harvey's comments were just like last time with bump stocks
he made personal comments while in the role of HRA president, and the press went with it, making it look like that was HRA's view
I like Harvey a lot, and he is a smart man doing a thankless job very well
but he needs to realize what happens when you speak to the press as a leader of an organization
unless you preface it with "speaking personally" or "my personable opinion is", you run the risk of having this happen
and sometimes, in editing, the reporter/editor/producer leave those out anyways, either on purpose or to reduce length of the segment

I agree with Harvey's stance on it.  In the end, MJ is a schedule 1 narcotic and deemed illegal federally.

 So if somethings illegal on the fed level, but legal on the state side, it's still illegal and can be enforced by other LEO agencies (DEA/FBI) if they wanted to.  And it goes the other way also, legal on fed level, but illegal on state (use suppressor reference).

He has to speak on the behalf of the HRA and not promote legal gun owners to do anything illegal. The law's the law.

Maybe the NRA and MJ farms should team up to fight the feds and make MJ legal federally.  But I'm sure big pharma would fight against them also.

I'm not sure the history of the people who got the letters, but when I took my handgun class last year, the 1st thing the instructor asked before starting was "who here has a medical MJ perscription?"  Then he explained why he asked.  So basically, if you had one, leave the class because you're wasting your time.

UPDATE: HPD will not enforce order requiring marijuana card holders to turn in guns ... but future permits will be denied.

"HONOLULU (HawaiiNewsNow) -
A letter sent to all medical marijuana card holders ordering them to turn in their firearms and ammunition by the end of the yearwill not be enforced and should be disregarded. 

Well, confiscation could not be easily enforced because of the 4th amendment and all the Ex Post Facto law in the constitution.  Not that it stopped the police before.  But when you have an amendment other than the 2nd involved then  they are much less likely to win in court and probably dont want to pay out all those lawsuits they would loose. 

Well, confiscation could not be easily enforced because of the 4th amendment and all the Ex Post Facto law in the constitution.  Not that it stopped the police before.  But when you have an amendment other than the 2nd involved then  they are much less likely to win in court and probably dont want to pay out all those lawsuits they would loose.

This outcome was what I was hoping for.  The police were abusing their access to the MM patient registration lists.  They state on the MM website the police would retain access to the list of patients for public safety, so they can see if a person in possession of the drug is registered to legally have it.  Nothing was said about using the list to backdoor the firearms registration process and confiscate guns. 

When you signed a permit application, you gave HPD permission to access you healthcare records for the purpose of doing a background check for a permit.  That permission ended when the permit was approved/rejected.  HPD was not given perpetual access to your medical records, so the MM registration should be off limits to the firearms section.  Matching that list to gun registrations or permit applications exceeded their limited purpose of that background check.

It'll be interesting to see how the legislature addresses this, because you know they will. 

The Honolulu Police Department said it is reviewing a controversial policy requiring legal marijuana patients to surrender their guns because pot is considered a federally illegal drug.

The policy review follows community backlash since news of the letters sent to at least 30 cannabis users spread nationally this week via marijuana websites and the media. 

surprise surprise, community backlash and publicity does work.

When you signed a permit application, you gave HPD permission to access you healthcare records for the purpose of doing a background check for a permit.  That permission ended when the permit was approved/rejected.  HPD was not given perpetual access to your medical records, so the MM registration should be off limits to the firearms section.  Matching that list to gun registrations or permit applications exceeded their limited purpose of that background check.

When I moved here I called the HPD firearms division just to see how much power I had as a physician.  They said (right or wrong) that I could report any of my patients at any time for anything I see fit to disqualify a patient from firearm ownership.  If I called the police about a patient that would normally be a huge HIPAA violation (unless they were actively suicidal or homicidal).  But the medical records waver supposedly gave me permission to call them at any time. 

You can see how easily the medical records permission form can be abused by the police but your physician as well.  I would personally never sign that form or register a firearm with the state.   

surprise surprise, community backlash and publicity does work.

With the troubles the police department has had to deal with lately, I'm sure they are trying to perform damage control.  I find it interesting that the new chief says she didn't know about the letter.  Is the department used to having that much latitude to do their jobs that they can bypass the chief's office on something like this letter?  I'm hoping this turns into a teachable moment for the whole department on what not to do in the future.

With the troubles the police department has had to deal with lately, I'm sure they are trying to perform damage control.  I find it interesting that the new chief says she didn't know about the letter.  Is the department used to having that much latitude to do their jobs that they can bypass the chief's office on something like this letter?  I'm hoping this turns into a teachable moment for the whole department on what not to do in the future.

In government, there is delegation of authority.  it is not feasible for the chief to approve everything that passed through the department personally.  If she delegates to her commanders, then they can take actions in her name.  But it is her duty to understand the types of things they are doing using her authority, and put it to a stop if she doesn't agree with it.  The responsibility of what HPD does ultimately rests with the chief (In other agencies, it's the Director) so ignorance is not a good excuse.  I do understand that she's new to the job though.