Guns in Hawaii

[konadave]

The following story shows how moronic the state gun laws are.

I have a handgun needing repair. There are no gunsmiths in the state that want to touch it. So I contact the manufacturer and they are happy to fix it. They remind me that even though I can send them the gun to them directly they have to send it back to an FFL (Federal Firearms Dealer) due to Hawaii state laws. So I contact an FFL and talk to him for a while. He informs me that Hawaii state law requires him to fill out a particular form for EVERY gun that is delivered to him from out of state. This form is the same form he has to fill out for every gun he buys from the manufacturer and in essence transfers possession of the gun to him. So technically speaking if I want to have a gun fixed on the mainland I will not own the gun when it arrives at the FFL. Now here is where it gets better. Now that the FFL owns the gun it has to be treated just like any other transaction. So in order for the FFL to give it back to me I have to take the hunter safety course and pass the test and obtain my handgun permit first. Huh? Does this make sense to anyone here? And I am including those who approve of the gun control laws here.

It gets better. I was talking to someone at the Big Island Gun Club who told me that a particular FFL had held a gun that was sent to him for ransom/black mail. It apparently was a VERy expensive gun. I forgot what he did to finally force the FFL to transfer the gun back to him but it was a nasty scene to say the least.

This is the type of thing that happens when you have moronic uninformed congress people trying to restrict a product that by our constitution states should not be restricted. JMHO

"Fear the government that fears your gun" Thomas Jefferson

The Kona Forum
http://www.konaforum.com

Da Kine Web Hosting
http://www.DaKineHosting.com

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former". --Albert Einstein

[Kelena]

Yes, it makes sense. Take a hunter safety course (that is why you have the gun, isn't it? No? Is there another reason?). Pass it, so no one gets killed accidentally while you are "hunting". Then get your permit.
Wipe your brow. That was a lot of work!!!

Now, instead of joining a paddling club and slicing through Keahou Bay in the sunshine, join a gun club on the Kona side. Spend lot a lot of time shooting at moving paper assailants. Make sure your ear protectors are on tight! But most of all, have fun! This is Hawaii!

[Guest]

Makes a lot of sense to me as well. The state does not want handguns here and will deter you as much as they can. The fewer legal handguns we have, the fewer illegal handguns we'll have.
Learn a musical instrument instead.

[konadave]

Glen and Mauka,

If the idea is to keep guns from entering the state then what I stated still makes no sense whatsoever. What makes more sense is to make the person bringing the gun in when they move here to get the permit first. Not AFTER they already have the gun here and have already registered it. Think about it. What I just said here makes more sense if that is what the state is really trying to do. You cannot escape the fact that the morons in the state just created another reason for reasonable people to not want to register the guns in the first place. And the morons just created another avenue for not honest FFL's and others to break the law.

If the state really wants to prevent guns from entering then they need to keep guns from entering the first time, every time. Not just the few guns that get sent to the mainland for repair. That just plain does not make sense to me. Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating this I am just saying trying to keep one gun from entering the state that previously was in the state will have little to no effect on the number of guns in the state and entering the state. It is obvious to me that this is just a by-product of the moronic laws that have been passed at the state level.

Now Mauka, I don't understand your statement. If we have fewer legal handguns, how does that equate to having fewer illegal handguns? My guess (and it is only a guess) is that more handguns come into the state without ever being registered than the other way around. And I would guess that this includes normally law abiding citizens that either don't know the laws or the ones that do know the law and just never registers them. And don't forget the illegal smuggling of guns into the state only for the purpose of sale to criminals. I am sure this occurs as well. So I ask you how does fewer legal handguns equate to fewer illegal handguns. Sorry, I just don't get it?

Glen, I am all for strict safety training for all gun owners. Don't get me wrong, I think this should be mandatory. But after the gun is already purchased and owned? Really I would think it should be a prerequisite to gun ownership, not the other way around. Please explain to me how requiring safety training after ownership helps the situation and honestly keeps guns out of the hands of the already legal owner?

Please don't take what I am posting as an argument. It is not meant to be. I am trying to understand your line of thinking and really want to know answers to my questions. Thanks!

The Kona Forum
http://www.konaforum.com

Da Kine Web Hosting
http://www.DaKineHosting.com

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former". --Albert Einstein

[Guest]

Mauka
Makes a lot of sense to me as well. The state does not want handguns here and will deter you as much as they can. The fewer legal handguns we have, the fewer illegal handguns we'll have.
Learn a musical instrument instead.

With respect to you Mauka, then you agree with the registration laws that Hawaii has imposed on it’s citizens? What if the state of Hawaii said that you must know how to play a musical insterment before you were allowed to own one. Maybe you should have your trumpet registered before you were allowed to play it. See how silly this is, yet you agree with the silly gun control laws of Hawaii.

“Learn a musical instrument instead”

Why would I want to do this, I have guns for self and family protection and no other reason. I’m not a hunter per say. Would you prefer that I protect my family from home invasion with a banjo? That is if I had a licence to own one.
1.


The Lack Toons

[dobanion]

If someone "doesn't like guns" then it's pointless to ask them any questions of the validity of gun laws. They approve of anything that makes gun ownership more restrictive, not out of logic, but principle.

Now, how do you folks feel about compound bows?

[Bullwinkle]

about the same way as a single shot rifle with a silencer - grin

I was looking at a pellet rifle - the modern ones capable of 1000 - 1200 ft per second velocities - good enough for plinking without all the registration hassle

Ill save the serious shooting for Utah

[birdmove]

I have a few pellet guns, and they can and do allow some real accuracy for those of us that like to shoot targets.Just do a bit of research so you don't get one that is inconsistent.

I would be all for mandatory firearm safety for everyone, but this runs into the anti-gunners. Most of them don't want it.I think they don't want to legitimize firearms in any way.

Shooting firearms for accuracy is very much a dicilpline.An attempt to control your body,breathing,even, in the high end of competition, awareness of your own heartbeat.That's the kind iof dedication it takes to shoot a group that measures close to zero (center to center-a perfect group measures 0.0") at, say, 100 yards.

As I think I mentioned, I don't hunt, yet have reloaded and fired maybe 20,000 rounds or more without ever shooting anyone or commiting a crime over 45 years of shooting and competing.

Jon

Jon in Puyallup, Wa.

[Kapohocat]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dobanion

If someone "doesn't like guns" then it's pointless to ask them any questions of the validity of gun laws. They approve of anything that makes gun ownership more restrictive, not out of logic, but principle.

Now, how do you folks feel about compound bows?

---

I disagree with you. I dont like guns. But I do not approve of making it more restrictive as it is not my right to tell you cant have a gun any more than I can say that you cant use mustard a car because I DONT like it. Simplistic comparison, yes, but still true.

[Guest]

Mustard doesn't kill or have an "accident."