The diversion has already taken place. SB401 was the only material hardware ban that made it out of committee, and was the least impactful one. (It lowered the max caliber limit from "over 50 cal" to "50 cal"; if somebody had the time and money to wildcat a 50 BMG into a 499 FUKR, then the law would have zero practical effect other than inconvenience.) The mag bans and "assault weapon" bans didn't make it out of committee. And SB401 only made it out of committee because Awa did a realpolitik deal with Karl Rhoads.

But then they copy-and-pasted (gut-and-replaced) the mag bans and assault weapon bans from the failed bills into this bill.

Since the average Democrat in the house will vote Yes on anything that bans guns, it passed with flying colors. It'll probably pass the Senate too, our only hope being that it's watered down or Constitutionally-rejected by virtue of being a gut-and-replace.

They've been trying to pass this for decades and it looks like they finally did. Because A. gut-and-replace tactics and B. because Awa got played hard.

I agree.

It was odd that the HB893 (the OG rifle/mag ban) didn't get a hearing in rhodes or elefante's committee's in the senate. They knew what was going to be SB401 and it's conversion.

We are aware of all the other firearm bills that are still alive.

Time to Gut and replace  you know....

This is super dangerous. The disarmament campaign comes at the same time that they are radicalizing their base, which has already resulted in violence.

I'm not on social media but it seems like there's a lack of appreciation for the position they are putting us in. Maybe the 2a attorneys are looking forward to a huge payout for nailing the state on the violation of gut and replace statutes, but we all have to survive the summer first.

that's not how it works...

This is super dangerous. The disarmament campaign comes at the same time that they are radicalizing their base, which has already resulted in violence.

I'm not on social media but it seems like there's a lack of appreciation for the position they are putting us in. Maybe the 2a attorneys are looking forward to a huge payout for nailing the state on the violation of gut and replace statutes, but we all have to survive the summer first.

Time to Gut and replace  you know....

wasn't there a ruckus a few years back where the legislators did a "gut and replace" on something else and it got everybody's panties in a bunch?  I forgot what the specifics were in that case, I don't think it was 2A-related, but the slime-ball tactic made the news.

that's not how it works...

I’m just trying to make it make sense because this feels like a surrender

I don't follow politics so I don't know what it means when someone said, "awa got played hard".

Brenton is a former coworker and acquaintance, so this interests me. Someone please elaborate. Keep it simple.

So what does "Senate disagrees with House Amendments" mean? From the bill tracker today:

4/8/2025   S   Senate disagrees with House amendments.
4/8/2025   S   Received from House (Hse. Com. No. 578).

I’m just trying to make it make sense because this feels like a surrender

It'd be more of a bitter defeat than a surrender.

The Supreme Court could make the whole concept of an "assault weapons" ban moot with Snope v Brown, or mag limits with Ocean State v Rhode Island or Hanson v DC.
And there will undoubtedly be challenges to SB401 in the state courts if it does pass in its current gut-and-switched form.

In the meantime keep taking people shooting and creating as inclusive an environment around guns as possible.

I don't follow politics so I don't know what it means when someone said, "awa got played hard".

Brenton is a former coworker and acquaintance, so this interests me. Someone please elaborate. Keep it simple.

I'm just a parrot, but Awa sits on the Justice committee in the state Senate and usually votes no on these bills, so they don't usually make it out of committee. He voted yes on this one. Rumor is (I'm not sure how credible it is) that it was a deal for Awa to vote for the most-innocuous of firearms bans in exchange for the gun grabbers to support one of his bills related to foreign ownership of property. That could all be wildly inaccurate, I'm pretty new to the sport of state congress watching.

awa was the deciding vote in committee for the .50 cal ban
he voted yes because he made a deal with rhoads to do it in exchange for his ban on foreigners buying real estate bill getting a hearing
so the bill advanced to the house where they amended it to it's current state...

I don't follow politics so I don't know what it means when someone said, "awa got played hard".

Brenton is a former coworker and acquaintance, so this interests me. Someone please elaborate. Keep it simple.

I don't follow politics so I don't know what it means when someone said, "awa got played hard".

Brenton is a former coworker and acquaintance, so this interests me. Someone please elaborate. Keep it simple.

Awa has been a good 2A supporter since he got into office. I spoke to him once and his reply on an anti 2A bill was he stated  "automatic no".

He voted to support the original SB401, which bans 50 cals.  So we found it odd why he would support this bill.  He voted no on all the other anti 2A bills this year as well and since he took office.  With his yes vote, the bill got enough votes to pass committee as Buenaventura and Gabbard voted no.  Awa voting no would have killed this bill.

He needed the head chair (Rhodes) to accept to give his bill about banning foreigners buying land in Hawaii.  The last year he tried to get this bill traction, it didn't go anywhere. (SB242)

I never was told this by Awa himself, but those involved with behind the scenes things in the legislature said that this is what happened. Awa also voted no on the senate floor vote when the bill just banned 50 cals. Why would he vote yes in committee, then no on the floor?  That makes zero sense.

So it sounds like Awa is learning how to play politics. Which isn't a good thing. A bill that wasn't as bad as it is now was passed and changed to a huge bill.  Rhodes is no noob to the game, he was thinking 4 steps ahead.  The OG assault weapon/mag ban bill died as it never got any senate hearings.  This is only possible if 2 committee's failed to even put it on the schedule, PSM (Elefante) and JDC (Rhodes).  I assume both Rhodes and Elefante knew what would come about with SB401 and wanted to avoid it coming thru the senate committees as it would likely die.  Last years assault weapon ban, Buenavenutra was the deciding vote and Rhodes said he would change it to make her happy, he didn't change it (he screwed her).  So it's likely she would have voted no on HB893.  Combine her no vote with no's from Awa and Gabbard, the bill dies.

So what does "Senate disagrees with House Amendments" mean? From the bill tracker today:

4/8/2025   S   Senate disagrees with House amendments.
4/8/2025   S   Received from House (Hse. Com. No. 578).

It'd be more of a bitter defeat than a surrender.

The Supreme Court could make the whole concept of an "assault weapons" ban moot with Snope v Brown, or mag limits with Ocean State v Rhode Island or Hanson v DC.
And there will undoubtedly be challenges to SB401 in the state courts if it does pass in its current gut-and-switched form.

In the meantime keep taking people shooting and creating as inclusive an environment around guns as possible.

I'm just a parrot, but Awa sits on the Justice committee in the state Senate and usually votes no on these bills, so they don't usually make it out of committee. He voted yes on this one. Rumor is (I'm not sure how credible it is) that it was a deal for Awa to vote for the most-innocuous of firearms bans in exchange for the gun grabbers to support one of his bills related to foreign ownership of property. That could all be wildly inaccurate, I'm pretty new to the sport of state congress watching.

Any SCOTUS ruling will take time.  Which HI's thing is F-U, sue us. So until SCOTUS decides, the law is still on the books.  THen it needs a lawyer to spend time/money to sue HI after SCOTUS rules.  Usually, the lawyer can sue for lawyers fees, but if HI changes the law before the lawsuit is over, then they get zero.  HI knows this and is why they have done what they've done all these generations.

not a rumor
awa said it publicly...

So what does "Senate disagrees with House Amendments" mean? From the bill tracker today:

4/8/2025   S   Senate disagrees with House amendments.
4/8/2025   S   Received from House (Hse. Com. No. 578).

It'd be more of a bitter defeat than a surrender.

The Supreme Court could make the whole concept of an "assault weapons" ban moot with Snope v Brown, or mag limits with Ocean State v Rhode Island or Hanson v DC.
And there will undoubtedly be challenges to SB401 in the state courts if it does pass in its current gut-and-switched form.

In the meantime keep taking people shooting and creating as inclusive an environment around guns as possible.

I'm just a parrot, but Awa sits on the Justice committee in the state Senate and usually votes no on these bills, so they don't usually make it out of committee. He voted yes on this one. Rumor is (I'm not sure how credible it is) that it was a deal for Awa to vote for the most-innocuous of firearms bans in exchange for the gun grabbers to support one of his bills related to foreign ownership of property. That could all be wildly inaccurate, I'm pretty new to the sport of state congress watching.

not a rumor
awa said it publicly...

Where? Twitter?

This makes me disgusted and angry.
That's all I can say.

4/8/2025   H   Received notice of disagreement (Sen. Com. No. 774).
4/8/2025   S   Senate disagrees with House amendments.
4/8/2025   S   Received from House (Hse. Com. No. 578).


Is the disagreement between Senate and House a normal thing? A positive sign?

Is it possible to see these House Comms and Senate Comms somewhere? They're numbered which makes me assume they must be archived?

4/8/2025   H   Received notice of disagreement (Sen. Com. No. 774).
4/8/2025   S   Senate disagrees with House amendments.
4/8/2025   S   Received from House (Hse. Com. No. 578).


Is the disagreement between Senate and House a normal thing? A positive sign?

Is it possible to see these House Comms and Senate Comms somewhere? They're numbered which makes me assume they must be archived?

Normal, just means they passed different versions of the bill and have to negotiate during conference committee, then revote on it. 

It'd be more of a bitter defeat than a surrender.

We're all talking like it's over already, but there's still a chance to bring a mass awareness campaign and get the chicken fighting mokes to start hassling their reps and turn this thing around.

Who's in charge of that? Why isn't more being done to get a crowd together and get this on the news?

Whoever picks up the ball gets all my 2a donation money this year.

young guns and a former hifico director (and member here) were on KITV at 4:30
will likely repeat later

We're all talking like it's over already, but there's still a chance to bring a mass awareness campaign and get the chicken fighting mokes to start hassling their reps and turn this thing around.

Who's in charge of that? Why isn't more being done to get a crowd together and get this on the news?

Whoever picks up the ball gets all my 2a donation money this year.

Normal, just means they passed different versions of the bill and have to negotiate during conference committee, then revote on it.

When will we know more? What's the next step?

When will we know more? What's the next step?

https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessions/session2025/orderoftheday/SOD_04-08-25_.htm

I believe all bills between H.C. 562 through H.C. 620 have the same status as SB401. Everything under this section. “ Returning the following Senate Bills which passed Third Reading in the House on April 4, 2025, in an amended form:”