Hawaii Seeks Confiscation of Certain Semi Auto Rifles


PDA






readyeddy
January 28, 2013, 02:15 PM
http://www.nraila.org/legislation/state-legislation/2013/1/hawaii-2013-legislative-session-begins-with-a-battle-for-our-second-amendment-rights-in-the-aloha-state.aspx

Hawaii Senate Bill 219 makes possession of so called "assault weapons" a class C Felony. No grandfather clause and no compensation for confiscated guns.

If you enjoyed reading about "Hawaii Seeks Confiscation of Certain Semi Auto Rifles" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MErl
January 28, 2013, 02:21 PM
I was not aware of Hawaii's massive crime problem that requires such drastic measures. Anyone care to enlighten me?

I would hope that the bill is DOA, good luck.

Texan Scott
January 28, 2013, 02:38 PM
Have they heard of the Bill of Rights? Even if they're not fond of #2, sounds like they need to read #s4&5.

JERRY
January 28, 2013, 02:41 PM
good for hawaii, those poor folks have been voting in anti gun rights politicians for decades, its about time they get what theyve been voting for....God bless them, everyone.

Carne Frio
January 28, 2013, 02:49 PM
Democrats in action; aloha !

PRM
January 28, 2013, 02:53 PM
Its what the anti crowd wants for all of us...

Justin
January 28, 2013, 02:55 PM
But no one is trying to take your guns!

/sarcasm

BCCL
January 28, 2013, 02:55 PM
Wow, I thought Hawaii had already pretty much banned semi-auto stuff.

readyeddy
January 28, 2013, 02:57 PM
Quite a few of Hawaii's Democrats are "A" rated by the NRA. Enough so that confiscation has been prevented so far. But the times they are challenging, and the struggle for our rights continue.

readyeddy
January 28, 2013, 02:58 PM
All semi auto rifles are legal in Hawaii. At least for now.

JERRY
January 28, 2013, 02:59 PM
Quite a few of Hawaii's Democrats are "A" rated by the NRA. Enough so that confiscation has been prevented so far. But the times they are challenging, and the struggle for our rights continue.

are these the same "A" rated folks who are against shall issue ccw?

Texan Scott
January 28, 2013, 03:09 PM
I often refer to the non-Texas states collectively as the "upper 49". It has been brought to my attention more than once that Hawaii is actually further south; all I can say is that I don't think of them as being to our south so much as they are to our LEFT. WAY to the left.

XD 45acp
January 28, 2013, 03:22 PM
Oh NO!!!! What is Dog the Bounty Hunter gonna do without his Semi Auto Paintball gun????

Deer_Freak
January 28, 2013, 03:26 PM
The Hawaiians have voted in congressmen that have an A+ rating. I pray they have done the same at the state level. The people of Hawaii are our brothers. They don't deserve to be disarmed.

Tom488
January 28, 2013, 03:43 PM
good for hawaii, those poor folks have been voting in anti gun rights politicians for decades, its about time they get what theyve been voting for....I am constantly amazed how some 2A supporters will turn on their brothers and sisters. By your logic, the US having now voted for BHO twice, deserves what it gets too, right? I thought the whole concept of "inalienable rights" and guarantees by the BOR were to specifically PREVENT the majority from depriving the minority of said rights? Yet here you are, cheering that fellow Americans are facing the possible confiscation of their lawfully-owned property, and violation of their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution.

I truly don't get it....

readyeddy
January 28, 2013, 03:54 PM
That's right! Hawaii is at the southern tip of the US. Even a lot of folks in Hawaii aren't aware of this fact.

Don't want to cause any tension on THR. States with stronger 2A supporters deserve to be proud.

But if this law does pass, we can expect lawsuits to challenge the constitutionality of the law, and that could create a precedent for all of us if it reaches the US Supreme Court.

We should all join pro-2A organizations to fight this battle on as many fronts as needed.

JERRY
January 28, 2013, 03:56 PM
not against hawaiin folks at all, im all for state's rights and them governing themselves.

just because the people of my state vote one way doesnt make it right for other states. if hawaiin folks wanted shall issue ccw and no restrictions on their guns they would have voted that way. who am i to force my views on them as they apply to just their own state?

HOOfan_1
January 28, 2013, 03:59 PM
I am constantly amazed how some 2A supporters will turn on their brothers and sisters. By your logic, the US having now voted for BHO twice, deserves what it gets too, right? I thought the whole concept of "inalienable rights" and guarantees by the BOR were to specifically PREVENT the majority from depriving the minority of said rights? Yet here you are, cheering that fellow Americans are facing the possible confiscation of their lawfully-owned property, and violation of their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution.

I truly don't get it....

The same weird logic was thrown around when New York voted in their ridiculous law

JERRY
January 28, 2013, 04:26 PM
dont states have a right to govern themselves?

new york senate has a republican majority, they could have stopped the current mag restrictions but didnt, thats not what the people of that state wanted or they would have elected different folks.

nationally we got what we deserved political wise, the truth of the matter is that nationally we get semi conservative or liberal leaders on a rotational basis....until the welfare folks out number the working folks....

states like hawaii and new york have habitually voted for decades in a row for liberal politicians, be they republican or democrat they were liberals none the less and they voted for them time and time again. thats what they want.

you dont see states swing from liberal leaders to conservative leaders every so many years....they usually stay the course with what they want state wise without interference from the voters of other states.

Cosmoline
January 28, 2013, 04:41 PM
HA is AK's evil Spock when it comes to gun control. But the fact remains they do a lot of gun tourism from the Asian nations and have a lot of hogs to shoot. I doubt this will get far.

We're HA's evil Spock when it comes to weather.

Airbrush Artist
January 28, 2013, 04:46 PM
Dog LOL,Thats the first thought that crossed my Mind.AK Paint Ball.Those clowns were at a Book store in a shopping Mall when My wife I were shopping at. ,UM how do I say this Respectfully? ,Um ,I can't ...They are Trash...

HOOfan_1
January 28, 2013, 04:58 PM
new york senate has a republican majority, they could have stopped the current mag restrictions but didnt, thats not what the people of that state wanted or they would have elected different folks.


You seriously think every person in New York wanted to have AWBs registered, and mags limited to 7 rounds???

You seriuosly think that the wishes of any sort of majority should be able to violate the rights of others?

Those are not the principles this country was built upon

JERRY
January 28, 2013, 05:09 PM
oh no, on the federal level there is the electoral college, state level is popular vote just the way the constitution intended.

nobody in new york (state) government is saying you cant have a gun, they just restrict the kind of gun....state wide only, not nationally. there are restrictions on speach called slander and so on.....dont put the failures of new yorkers on my back. this is a state only problem that they need to correct or live with.

where is all the uproar over the one gun a month buying limit, 5 day waiting periods, no standard cap mags, no shall issue ccw, no open carry and all that jazz that occurs everyday in other states?

InkEd
January 28, 2013, 05:42 PM
Why don't they spend the resources and focus on THE GIGANTIC METH PROBLEM they have instead?

Tony50ae
January 28, 2013, 05:49 PM
Will that even be legal with no compensation? Glad I moved a couple of years ago to Louisiana. Heck we just strengthened our state second amendment here. Still I have a couple of friends there that would be affected by this if it passes.

tarosean
January 28, 2013, 11:33 PM
new york senate has a republican majority, they could have stopped the current mag restrictions but didnt, thats not what the people of that state wanted or they would have elected different folks.

You honestly think the people of the state wanted their elected officials to pass a half baked bill in the middle of the night and toss the democratic process out the window with no vetting, discussion, etc. ?

JERRY
January 29, 2013, 12:16 AM
elections have consequences...

Warp
January 29, 2013, 12:18 AM
I often refer to the non-Texas states collectively as the "upper 49". It has been brought to my attention more than once that Hawaii is actually further south; all I can say is that I don't think of them as being to our south so much as they are to our LEFT. WAY to the left.

Yet open carry is illegal. This continues to baffle me.

Do note that a lot of those states north of Texas have vastly superior carry laws. ;)

Browning
January 29, 2013, 12:46 AM
I am constantly amazed how some 2A supporters will turn on their brothers and sisters. By your logic, the US having now voted for BHO twice, deserves what it gets too, right? I thought the whole concept of "inalienable rights" and guarantees by the BOR were to specifically PREVENT the majority from depriving the minority of said rights? Yet here you are, cheering that fellow Americans are facing the possible confiscation of their lawfully-owned property, and violation of their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution.

I truly don't get it....
I don't think that gun owners in the South, West and the Pacific Northwest are 'turning' on other gun owners. It's just that the majority of proposed gun control legislation and anti-gun attitudes in general come from blue states and that legislation effects us too if enacted on the Federal level. Those attitudes that are repeated over and over again on the nightly news effects us to, luckily more and more people are catching onto their game and are seeing it for what it is.

So to some degree since the majority of the population in the East, northern Midwest, California and Hawaii seem to want draconian gun-control some in the pro-2A camp have the attitude of...'Fine, if that's what they want then give it to them' because most of us know that both crime and violent crime will sky rocket the way it did in Australia and the UK after their gun bans. Basically to let the anti-freedom crowd get exactly what they asked for and let them stew in it for awhile.

Second Amendment supporters who are living in those blue states don't deserve this. For the most part as they generally voted the right way, organized, did what they could and they're just outnumbered by the bleating sheep in those states.

It sucks, but they're caught in the middle. I wish them the best, but I don't feel the same way for the people who live around them who don't care about their rights.

Maybe this will explain some of the comments you've been seeing. Like it or not, that's where it's coming from.

NYH1
January 29, 2013, 01:16 AM
Being from a anti-gun state sure does suck, I'm from New Yorkistan, I know!

I b!tch at my parents all the time about two things-
1) Not being millionaires.
2) Not living in a more gun friendly state.

Number 2 is by far a bigger issue for me though!

I guess my wife and I will have to be the ones that break the New Yorkistan cycle and get out of here. Hopefully soon.

NYH1!

Queen_of_Thunder
January 29, 2013, 01:46 AM
What do you expect from a state that thinks spam is great to eat.

Farnorthdan
January 29, 2013, 02:05 AM
I often refer to the non-Texas states collectively as the "upper 49". It has been brought to my attention more than once that Hawaii is actually further south; all I can say is that I don't think of them as being to our south so much as they are to our LEFT. WAY to the left.



Umm yea, sure hope your not including Alaska in your upper 49 stats, AK has some of the best state gun laws in our country and is one of only 2 states that dont even require a CCL.

goon
January 29, 2013, 02:42 AM
I agree that it isn't right to say all New Yorkers or Hawaiians or residents of Connecticut deserve to be abandoned.

The Constitution enumerates rights that pre-exist it or any form of government. The right to self defense is one of those rights.
Even in Hawaii.

readyeddy
January 29, 2013, 05:02 AM
Spam is good to eat, in moderation. Try it, you'll like it!

The folks who talk about the importance of voting the right way offer good advice. Keep track of your politicians and vote wisely.

Those that feel our pain and wish all the best exemplify the Aloha spirit. You're all an inspiration to those who need the support.

You all are the best friends one could hope to have in these troubled times. Keep your powder dry and God bless.

FIVETWOSEVEN
January 29, 2013, 05:35 AM
Yet open carry is illegal. This continues to baffle me.

Do note that a lot of those states north of Texas have vastly superior carry laws.

And that's why I want to move to Arizona considering they have better gun laws.

Hacker15E
January 29, 2013, 07:15 AM
So to some degree since the majority of the population in the East, northern Midwest, California and Hawaii seem to want draconian gun-control some in the pro-2A camp have the attitude of...'Fine, if that's what they want then give it to them' because most of us know that both crime and violent crime will sky rocket the way it did in Australia and the UK after their gun bans. Basically to let the anti-freedom crowd get exactly what they asked for and let them stew in it for awhile.

I know this is not your personal POV, but such a belief is astounding. While there might be some truth in it, rarely are rights and liberties returned after they are taken away, especially one that is 'dangerous' like RKBA.

A future increase in crime will be seen as reason for more draconian crackdowns on some other freedom...it will most assuredly not result in the return of previously-stifled liberties.

Deltaboy
January 29, 2013, 07:21 AM
I like Spam but the proposed law in HI is a farce.

Cesiumsponge
January 29, 2013, 08:29 AM
I'm still waiting for the type of person that comes in and follows up the idea of "you get what you voted for" with, "If you don't like Hawaii's laws, move out of there" . How many of you moved out of the USA and ridiculed the USA when we passed the 1994 AWB or 1968 GCA? I mean...you deserved what you voted in, right?

HOOfan_1
January 29, 2013, 08:53 AM
elections have consequences...

So I guess if Obama pushes through gun control it is just as much your fault as anyone elses...because "elections have consequences"


This conitual talk about the gun owners in New York getting what they deserve is PURE TRIPE.

There is only so much voting and politicing that can be done. If you can't get people on your side into office, that does not mean that you didn't try. Look how long it took to get Jim Crow laws cast out...and that was just because people in the government actually saw what a travesty they were and wanted to make sure the majority didn't steal the rights of the minority.

To compare New York's newest gun laws to slander is also completely off base....

Browning
January 29, 2013, 09:09 AM
I know this is not your personal POV, but such a belief is astounding. While there might be some truth in it, rarely are rights and liberties returned after they are taken away, especially one that is 'dangerous' like RKBA.
Of course. Freedom is usually won with blood and sweat and given away on a whim for the promise of increased security.

That's why I hope that people from NY take this fight to the door steps of the politicians who voted for this crap.

A future increase in crime will be seen as reason for more draconian crackdowns on some other freedom...it will most assuredly not result in the return of previously-stifled liberties.
Yeah, I know. After this search and seizure laws will be screwed with and the people of NY won't be secure from random stop and frisk searches and gun confiscation. After that they'll change the 1st Amendment so they don't have to hear them complain about it and so that they can't organize to defend against it. Probably use some of those nifty laws in the 'Patriot Act' against US citizens.

Seems like some parts of America are headed one way and some parts are headed in the other. Going to definitely clash at some point.

psyopspec
January 29, 2013, 09:30 AM
scha·den·freu·de - [shahd-n-froi-duh]; noun: satisfaction or pleasure felt at someone else's misfortune.

I'm surprised we don't have a word for this English. I could put it into colloquial speech, but the language wouldn't be THR appropriate.

I heard from a mallard recently that it's okay to simultaneously believe in state's rights and the inalienable rights of an individual. They are not mutually exclusive.

Hugo
January 29, 2013, 09:50 AM
Dumb move Hawaii State Government. This crap is what you burn calories on? Pathetic! Harassing and persecuting the hunters and legal gun owners will really help that horrible feral hog problem too that is destroying the rainforest. Great work. Deal with crime and meth labs you idiots!

Fire these fools in the next elections Hawaii voters, or it will get worse!

LNK
January 29, 2013, 09:50 AM
I guess my wife and I will have to be the ones that break the New Yorkistan cycle and get out of here. Hopefully soon.

NYH1!

A little advice, start the dialog as early as possible. My wife and I started this conversation a couple of years ago with our respective families. They poo-pooed it at first. We just bought a house in E. TN last summer, and are in the process of getting it ready for us to move there. We are strong constitutionalists, and have no desire of bringing MA down there. We will assimilate to our new state. Now our families are excited about this change of geography. Takes a while, but they come around.....

Good luck..

LNK

22-rimfire
January 29, 2013, 10:01 AM
But no one is trying to take your guns!

Says it all.... you see, THEY really are trying to take your guns. It is just a matter of time and circumstance before attempts for outright banning of firearm ownership will happen, or making it so restrictive that only the wealthy would be willing to go through the hassles to own a gun.

CLP
January 29, 2013, 11:41 AM
Because the government would rather have a needy and dependent population rather than one that's independent, hard working, and lives happily with only a very limited government.

readyeddy
January 29, 2013, 12:14 PM
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2013/bills/SB219_.htm

Correction: the Bill also bans certain semi auto handguns and semi auto shotguns. Pure insanity.

Cosmoline
January 29, 2013, 01:34 PM
I'm actually happy to see it go that far. It makes it more difficult to pass and easier to attack. It has the virtue of being an HONEST statement of the anti-gun position. Yes they do want to grab the guns, yes they do want to throw us all in prison.

Sam Cade
January 29, 2013, 02:06 PM
And that's why I want to move to Arizona considering they have better gun laws.

Consider KY.

We have trees and everything isn't covered in spines and/or envenomed.

Also, fewer relocated Californians.

Honoluludan
January 29, 2013, 03:22 PM
Aloha all, well I guess i'll use this as an intro as well. I love my spam and I love my guns.
The author of SB219 said he is not supportave of the proposal.
http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/8705/Honolulu-Hundreds-Rally-in-Defense-of-Second-Amendment.aspx

Honoluludan
January 29, 2013, 03:28 PM
From our State Constitution
RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

Section 17. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. [Ren Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]

http://hawaii.gov/lrb/con/conart1.html
Not all of us voted for the people in office now, even if they are hometown boys. We do what we can.

Deer_Freak
January 29, 2013, 03:30 PM
There is a difference between mob rule and democracy. Some things should not be put up for a vote. Since the police are not obligated to defend individuals the right to self defense should not be put up for a vote. If one wants to be defenseless that is an individual choice.

readyeddy
January 29, 2013, 03:34 PM
Great news on the lack of support for the Bill. Let's keep it that way.

Cosmoline
January 29, 2013, 04:33 PM
Aloha all, well I guess i'll use this as an intro as well. I love my spam and I love my guns.
The author of SB219 said he is not supportave of the proposal.

Good to hear and welcome to THR! 50 has a different perspective on firearms than 49, but I don't think Hawaii is interested in becoming some battlegruond for extreme measures like this.

I'm hoping to get down there soon. Nothing like getting on a plane at 20 below and getting off the plane a few hours later at 80 above.

1858
January 29, 2013, 04:48 PM
What do you expect from a state that thinks spam is great to eat.


Spoken like someone who's never eaten spam musubi!! :D

I lived in Hawaii for more than 20 years so I'm following this very closely. Hawaii doesn't have a firearms problem so the state legislature needs to focus on far more important and pressing issues.

Ryanxia
January 29, 2013, 04:54 PM
I hope the Hawaiians are committed and will stand strong. Could easily be the tipping point for losing your/our Rights.

AABEN
January 29, 2013, 05:01 PM
good for hawaii, those poor folks have been voting in anti gun rights politicians for decades, its about time they get what theyve been voting for....God bless them, everyone.
IF it starts there we all are in trouble!!

AABEN
January 29, 2013, 05:07 PM
Sounds like Acorn has been busy as all heck! They are the people that put BHO in!!

If you enjoyed reading about "Hawaii Seeks Confiscation of Certain Semi Auto Rifles" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!