Posted on 05/24/2016 11:00:56 AM PDT by rarestia
Hawaii could become the first state in the United States to enter gun owners into an FBI database that will automatically notify police if an island resident is arrested anywhere else in the country.
Most people entered in the "Rap Back" database elsewhere in the U.S. are those in "positions of trust," such as school teachers and bus drivers, said Stephen Fischer of the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services Division. Hawaii could be the first state to add gun owners.
"I don't like the idea of us being entered into a database. It basically tells us that they know where the guns are, they can go grab them" said Jerry Ilo, a firearm and hunting instructor for the state. "We get the feeling that Big Brother is watching us."
Supporters say the law would make Hawaii a leader in safe gun laws. Allison Anderman, a staff attorney at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said the bill was "groundbreaking," and that she hadn't heard of other states introducing similar measures.
(Excerpt) Read more at bigstory.ap.org ...
And if someone rented a gun at the range for the CCW qualifying test, then nobody knows for sure if they have a gun already.
And in some states CCW holders don’t need to go thru the NICS when they buy a gun from a FFL dealer, just the 4473 form gets filled out.
If it’s from a private party, then they get a bill of sale from the seller, and no form 4473.
Hawaiian state government: F*** the constitution.
Hawaiian state constitution: f*** white people & beat up haoles wherever you see them to da max, bruddah.
I’ve heard that gun background checks are supposedly destroyed after 6 months. However, a friend purchased a collectible Colt on Gunbroker. Two years and an out-of-state move later, ATF contacted him and confiscated the firearm. A “routine” review of purchases found the item. My theory is that these records never go away, they just get renamed and put in another file category.
And you best not object, if you know what's good for you.
You might beat the rap, as they say, but you won't beat the ride.
Yep. Anytime you have filled out a 4473 there is a chain of ownership. The ATF is notorious for bringing copy machines with them when they audit a FFL so they can copy off the 4473. In CA the state ties your DL# to your handgun ownership. I have heard scanner chatter to that effect as a DL# is run to look for handgun ownership.
With islands involved, I suspect there will be an increase in ‘tragic boating’ accidents.
>And don’t give me that nonsense that it’s illegal for them to retain that information.
There’s a detail of distinction: Yes, it’s illegal to do so, but who’s going to do what to prosecute?
***
Course, you could always setup a ‘what if’ w/ family and friends: If they EVER bought an XYZ and didn’t like it, you’d very much take it off their hands for what they paid.
Private sale, no ‘straw purchase’ per se, no registry.
The only people who can be charged with gun registration “crimes” are law abiding citizens.
A criminal cannot be prosecuted for lying on Form 4473 or any other registration violation. Providing legitimate information would constitute self-incrimination and is a violation of the Fifth Amendment.
that’s what I have thought for years
It's time for the "[And] [So] It Begins" drinking game! Every time someone posts the ominous, dire and spooky
"[And] [So] It Begins"
- we take a drink!!
And so it begins....
And So It Begins.....
And so It begins
And so It begins
And So It Begins....
And so it begins
And so it begins.
And so it begins...
And so it begins.
And so it begins...
So it begins...
And so it begins.
And so it begins:
And so it begins.
So it begins,
So it begins.
And so it begins
and so it begins.....
And so it begins.
and so it begins.
And so it begins
And so it Begins….
A Romney we can respect (So it begins)
And So It Begins (Dollar Warnings)
And So It Begins! (And so it begins)
And so it begins....
(And So It Begins)
And so it begins again.....
School Is Renamed For Obama (And so it begins...)
So it begins.
And so it begins.
And so, it begins.....
And So It Begins...
And so it begins!
And so it begins.
And so it begins.
(so it begins...)
And so it begins.
And So It Begins.
And so it begins:
And so it begins...
And so it begins....
And So It Begins
(So it begins)
And so it begins?....
and so it begins.
So it begins.
And so it begins......
And so it begins..............................
So it begins.
And so it begins.
So it begins.
And so it begins.
So it begins.
It Begins…
So it begins.
It begins.
It begins.
and so it begins......
and so it begins......
It Begins"
And so it begins.
And so It begins…
"It Begins Again"
It Begins...
IT BEGINS: Ryan Releases Presidential Ad
It Begins...
It begins: In wake of California...
It Begins...Trump-Haters...
It Begins Again:...
So it begins.
While this list is not complete, it demonstrates the fun you and your family can have at home while kissing your own butts goodbye!!
So bottoms up everyone!
Begins so, it does.
The bureaucratic scum would never consider such actions for illegals.
Icksnay on the Oatsnay,,,,
BINGO!
They have no intention of finding out the names and addresses of violent criminals who have guns. Only legal, non-violent gun owners. So they can take guns from the non-violent people and deliberately and intentionally leave guns in the hands of violent criminals.
United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit.
NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC. et al., Appellants, v. Janet RENO, Attorney General of the United States, Appellee.
No. 99-5270.
Decided: July 11, 2000
Before: SENTELLE, TATEL and GARLAND, Circuit Judges. Stephen P. Halbrook argued the cause for appellants. With him on the briefs was Richard E. Gardiner. Michael S. Raab, Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, argued the cause for appellee. On the brief were David W. Ogden, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Mark B. Stern, and Susan L. Pacholski, Attorneys, and Wilma A. Lewis, U.S. Attorney. The National Rifle Association challenges a Justice Department regulation providing for temporary retention of data generated during background checks of prospective firearms purchasers, as required by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. According to the NRA, the Brady Act requires immediate destruction of personal information relating to lawful firearm transactions. The Attorney General interprets the statute differently, arguing that temporary retention of data for at most six months is necessary to audit the background check system to ensure both its accuracy and privacy. Finding nothing in the Brady Act that unambiguously prohibits temporary retention of information about lawful transactions, and finding that the Attorney General has reasonably interpreted the Act to permit retention of such information for audit purposes, we affirm the district court's dismissal of the complaint.
The case was heard by a panel of 3 Judges, namely, Judges, Tatel, Garland, and Sentelle. Two of the 3 Judges, Tatel and (Merrick) Garland, ruled in favor of the Attorney General, against NRA, thereby affirming the decision of the lower Court, against NRA. Judge Tatel wrote the opinion for the majority. Judge Garland, Obama’s nominee to replace Justice Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court during 1Q2016 agreed with both the decision and the reasoning of Judge Tatel, thereby making Judge Tatel’s opinion essentially Judge Garland’s as well. Judge Sentelle wrote a scathing dissenting opinion. Read more: http://www.ammoland.com/2016/04/the-reno-case-illustrates-judge-garlands-danger-to-the-second-amendment/#ixzz49i62IZHT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.