The hearing is the next day on 2/12 at 3pm, testimonies are due 24 hours prior.


https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=363&year=2025

Log in

CLick "Submit testimony"

Currently, state and county law enforcement are unable to
bring charges against an individual in possession of a firearm
that has been deconstructed, which makes it difficult to reduce
the potential for gun violence. This loophole is known to
criminals and has been used to evade enforcement of the gun laws
as no charges can be sought against a person in possession of
all the parts necessary to create a firearm because the weapon
is not considered "operational".

This is absurdly incorrect, right? Can I really escape a "place to keep" charge just by taking the barrels off my shotgun or separating my AR upper from my lower?

I'm assuming that this is only true in the context of unserialized receivers, where it's not really a "firearm" unless it's functional. So a serialized stripped AR lower is a firearm, but a 3-D printed stripped AR lower is not a firearm.

Is this correct?

I hope so, or else I just sounded really foolish in my right-under-the-wire written testimony.

This logic will never fly in court, but then again we have lots of activist judges who tie things up unnecessarily for years.

I'm hoping when Trump gets his injunctions tossed out by the Supreme Court it will put the fear in a lot of judges.

Not totally opposed to Musk's impeachment idea, since that would REALLY accelerate the process.

Currently, state and county law enforcement are unable to
bring charges against an individual in possession of a firearm
that has been deconstructed, which makes it difficult to reduce
the potential for gun violence. This loophole is known to
criminals and has been used to evade enforcement of the gun laws
as no charges can be sought against a person in possession of
all the parts necessary to create a firearm because the weapon
is not considered "operational".

This is absurdly incorrect, right? Can I really escape a "place to keep" charge just by taking the barrels off my shotgun or separating my AR upper from my lower?

I'm assuming that this is only true in the context of unserialized receivers, where it's not really a "firearm" unless it's functional. So a serialized stripped AR lower is a firearm, but a 3-D printed stripped AR lower is not a firearm.

Is this correct?

I hope so, or else I just sounded really foolish in my right-under-the-wire written testimony.

HIFICO testifed that the DLE temporary chief was wrong.  They can charge someone with the "lower receiver", aka the serialized and registered part.  HIFICO called the DLE out on something else too, but I Can't rememeber. It's int he other threads for the HB bills.

HIFICO testifed that the DLE temporary chief was wrong.  They can charge someone with the "lower receiver", aka the serialized and registered part.  HIFICO called the DLE out on something else too, but I Can't rememeber. It's int he other threads for the HB bills.

Okay, but what about if it's an unserialized, homemade "lower receiver"? Like a 3d-printed one? Is THAT where the current law is unclear?

I said that what they really need to do is reckon with how to deal with homemade guns, rather than simply cast the prosecutorial net as wide as possible and make it illegal to possess parts that can be readily purchased and shipped around.

Okay, but what about if it's an unserialized, homemade "lower receiver"? Like a 3d-printed one? Is THAT where the current law is unclear?

I said that what they really need to do is reckon with how to deal with homemade guns, rather than simply cast the prosecutorial net as wide as possible and make it illegal to possess parts that can be readily purchased and shipped around.

Those are already illegal.

Those are already illegal.

Always? Is there currently no legal channel to get a serial number engraved and register a homemade firearm?


And at what point is a homemade firearm a firearm? Based on what the bills claim, it sounds like only when it's actually functional.

they trying to make them illegaler...

Those are already illegal.

Always? Is there currently no legal channel to get a serial number engraved and register a homemade firearm?


And at what point is a homemade firearm a firearm? Based on what the bills claim, it sounds like only when it's actually functional.

It has to be done at a FFL before you take possession, so even a P80 has to be engraved before you touch it.

It has to be done at a FFL before you take possession, so even a P80 has to be engraved before you touch it.

So there is no legal way for me to register a made-at-home forearm, unless I have an FFL?

It has to be done at a FFL before you take possession, so even a P80 has to be engraved before you touch it.

That was my understanding of the law. I remember Wgs had a p80 lower and I asked "i thought those were illegal " they said it would be serialized before the buyer took ownership.

That why this bill seems so stupid. They're literally admitting to letting "criminals" walk. They're catching people with things that are by their definition is illegal and then letting them free. Just because the firearm is in pieces. Yet it's illegal just to own or have in possession?
 It's like seeing a person with a stockpile of fireworks and saying that's fine to have it just as long as they're not caught lighting them...

The current bills and laws in existence are totally stupid. 

So stupid that it seems a genius drafted it for the purpose of throwing the 2a community into shambles.

It's a blitzkrieg by the anti-gun movement.

So there is no legal way for me to register a made-at-home forearm, unless I have an FFL?

I mean, you can try to register it as this is a separate topic about your 5th amendment right (self incriminate). The word on the street is guys reg firearms after the 5 day window when from out of state and HPD hasn't busted anyone since you're there trying to do the right thing.  But you still broke the law by not registering it until then.

But to answer your question simply, the FFL has to have a serial number on it first, before you take possession.

The drum I'd like to beat on for all of this "ghost gun" legislation, which SB363 is trying to pretend like it is, is that what we really need is an established legal channel for registering a home-made gun.

It's completely the wrong approach to cast these super wide nets and prohibit things that aren't prohibited anywhere else in the country, while people are begging to be able to bend over backwards just for a way to do something legally.

The drum I'd like to beat on for all of this "ghost gun" legislation, which SB363 is trying to pretend like it is, is that what we really need is an established legal channel for registering a home-made gun.

It's completely the wrong approach to cast these super wide nets and prohibit things that aren't prohibited anywhere else in the country, while people are begging to be able to bend over backwards just for a way to do something legally.

THey don't want you to own any guns, let alone to make one. Cause they believe like someone also here beleives that registration is needed.

THey don't want you to own any guns, let alone to make one. Cause they believe like someone also here beleives that registration is needed.

My question is always "what is the argument I can win here and now?" What is a sympathetic argument to those who aren't already HIFICO members?

"Section 17 says so" is an important argument to make but doesn't have a great history of success here.

Explaining that it's legal elsewhere, that it's legal to make a gun out of state and get it engraved before coming into Hawaii, but there is no way to legally get one engraved in Hawaii... Asking why we can legally buy firearms but have no way to build them ourselves... Even people afraid gun ownership should see the illogic there.

I personally would love a legal channel to build a NylAUG.

My question is always "what is the argument I can win here and now?" What is a sympathetic argument to those who aren't already HIFICO members?

"Section 17 says so" is an important argument to make but doesn't have a great history of success here.

Explaining that it's legal elsewhere, that it's legal to make a gun out of state and get it engraved before coming into Hawaii, but there is no way to legally get one engraved in Hawaii... Asking why we can legally buy firearms but have no way to build them ourselves... Even people afraid gun ownership should see the illogic there.

I personally would love a legal channel to build a NylAUG.

There really is no argument that you can make because those who support this, can't have their minds changed. It's the entire no vote, no grumble theory.  The only thing that might have them vote against this bill is ovewhelming numbers of opposition, which we aren't getting. 

The best way to get people on the record is to provide them with relevant, specific talking points. It takes some effort to tease effective sloganeering out of some of the really rambling bills like this.

The best way to get people on the record is to provide them with relevant, specific talking points. It takes some effort to tease effective sloganeering out of some of the really rambling bills like this.

The chicken fighters don’t typically use elevated arguments. They just show up in large numbers and scare the crap out of the legislators

DLE head said that places to keep don't apply as long as the gun is disasembled.

THe bill that was written by senators states the same.

Today, HPD said the same.

So this means, you can buy a gun at a store and no longer have to go straight home, as long as the gun isn't operational.  You can also go walking around with it if you choose to.

Ammo places to keep still applies.