• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hawaii's database for gun owners

jdog21

jdog21

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
3,677
Reaction score
785
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Since December of 2016 Hawaii's law took affect SB. 2954 "Rap Back" system. Which states everyone who brings a gun into the state or buys a gun has to have their name, social security #, Drivers licenses or state issued ID, their residence address, and their description information placed into an FBI database. So the state can know who owns a gun and what type of gun that is, and also states when the police can come and confiscate those weapons for example if someone commits a crime or is deemed unfit mentally by a psychiatrist.

How does this not violate FOPA and why hasn't this been challenged in court yet?
 
jdog21 said:
Since December of 2016 Hawaii's law took affect SB. 2954 "Rap Back" system. Which states everyone who brings a gun into the state or buys a gun has to have their name, social security #, Drivers licenses or state issued ID, their residence address, and their description information placed into an FBI database. So the state can know who owns a gun and what type of gun that is, and also states when the police can come and confiscate those weapons for example if someone commits a crime or is deemed unfit mentally by a psychiatrist.

How does this not violate FOPA and why hasn't this been challenged in court yet?
Click to expand...

Link please?
 
Kal'Stang said:
Looks to me like a form of registration. So yeah, it would appear to violate FOPA.
Click to expand...

Isn't FOPA just a restriction on the federal government?
 
Rucker61 said:
Isn't FOPA just a restriction on the federal government?
Click to expand...

In essence yes. It also stops the government from making a registry of gun owners in the US. What Hawaii has apparently done is made it to where anyone in Hawaii, be they just visiting or living there, that owns a gun to be required to register with the FBI as a person owning a gun. And the only way to get off that registry is to actively petition for it to be removed, which isn't that easy of a process and involves a lawyer...at least for those that have felonies which are the only ones that are supposed to be on that system. Other than that system I don't know how someone that does not have a felony record get off of it.
 
Rucker61 said:
Isn't FOPA just a restriction on the federal government?
Click to expand...

Kal'Stang said:
In essence yes. It also stops the government from making a registry of gun owners in the US. What Hawaii has apparently done is made it to where anyone in Hawaii, be they just visiting or living there, that owns a gun to be required to register with the FBI as a person owning a gun. And the only way to get off that registry is to actively petition for it to be removed, which isn't that easy of a process and involves a lawyer...at least for those that have felonies which are the only ones that are supposed to be on that system. Other than that system I don't know how someone that does not have a felony record get off of it.
Click to expand...

According to https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926
No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s  authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, this seems to be legally problematic.
 
jdog21 said:
According to https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926
Click to expand...
Selective quotation = legal fail

The Attorney General may prescribe only such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter, including—
(1) regulations providing that a person licensed under this chapter, when dealing with another person so licensed, shall provide such other licensed person a certified copy of this license;
(2) regulations providing for the issuance, at a reasonable cost, to a person licensed under this chapter, of certified copies of his license for use as provided under regulations issued under paragraph (1) of this subsection; and
(3) regulations providing for effective receipt and secure storage of firearms relinquished by or seized from persons described in subsection (d)(8) or (g)(8) of section 922.

No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s [1] authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.
(Emphasis added)

FOPA does not restrict state legislatures. What it does is restrict the Attorney General of the United States from issuing rules or regulations that require records to be maintained (by either the federal or state governments).

So, Jeff Sessions cannot order, out of thin air, that the ATF and/or individual states develop brand-new databases to track firearm owners. However, the state of Hawaii can submit the names of firearm owners to an FBI database, and use it to determine whether a resident who commits a felony in another state should be barred from owning firearms in Hawaii. (That's what the 2016 law does, by the way.)

We should add there is nothing unconstitutional about Hawaii's law. What it does is submit names to an existing FBI database, so if a Hawaii resident is arrested for a crime in another state, Hawaii police are notified, and can determine if that individual is thus barred from owning a firearm. (Hence the nickname "Rap Back.") There is no element whatsoever of the 2nd Amendment or subsequent jurisprudence which says that an individual state is obligated to allow someone who commits a violent felony in another state to possess a firearm whilst in Hawaii.
 
Last edited:
Visbek said:
Selective quotation = legal fail

The Attorney General may prescribe only such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter, including—
(1) regulations providing that a person licensed under this chapter, when dealing with another person so licensed, shall provide such other licensed person a certified copy of this license;
(2) regulations providing for the issuance, at a reasonable cost, to a person licensed under this chapter, of certified copies of his license for use as provided under regulations issued under paragraph (1) of this subsection; and
(3) regulations providing for effective receipt and secure storage of firearms relinquished by or seized from persons described in subsection (d)(8) or (g)(8) of section 922.

No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s [1] authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.
(Emphasis added)

FOPA does not restrict state legislatures. What it does is restrict the Attorney General of the United States from issuing rules or regulations that require records to be maintained (by either the federal or state governments).

So, Jeff Sessions cannot order, out of thin air, that the ATF and/or individual states develop brand-new databases to track firearm owners. However, the state of Hawaii can submit the names of firearm owners to an FBI database, and use it to determine whether a resident who commits a felony in another state should be barred from owning firearms in Hawaii. (That's what the 2016 law does, by the way.)

We should add there is nothing unconstitutional about Hawaii's law. What it does is submit names to an existing FBI database, so if a Hawaii resident is arrested for a crime in another state, Hawaii police are notified, and can determine if that individual is thus barred from owning a firearm. (Hence the nickname "Rap Back.") There is no element whatsoever of the 2nd Amendment or subsequent jurisprudence which says that an individual state is obligated to allow someone who commits a violent felony in another state to possess a firearm whilst in Hawaii.
Click to expand...

Every state should do this
 
Visbek said:
We should add there is nothing unconstitutional about Hawaii's law. What it does is submit names to an existing FBI database, so if a Hawaii resident is arrested for a crime in another state, Hawaii police are notified, and can determine if that individual is thus barred from owning a firearm. (Hence the nickname "Rap Back.") There is no element whatsoever of the 2nd Amendment or subsequent jurisprudence which says that an individual state is obligated to allow someone who commits a violent felony in another state to possess a firearm whilst in Hawaii.
Click to expand...

Except of course that it also includes anyone just visiting Hawaii also. And it isn't just a background check, its requiring that you register with the FBI that you own a gun. In order to get off that list once you're on it is to petition the FBI to get your name removed. Which is no small matter. Also this law isn't affecting just criminals, it is affecting law abiding owners just on the possibility that they might commit a crime.

And yes, that last paragraph that you highlighted in red forbids that any sort of records be maintained by any federal or state facility. Which means that the state should not be requiring any law abiding citizen register their gun with the FBI in order to exercise their 2nd Amendment Rights.

There's nothing wrong with Hawaii being notified if one of their residents was arrested. But there is most definitely something wrong with them requiring that their guns be registered.
 
Kal'Stang said:
You'll have to get past FOPA and a persons Right to Privacy to get it done. This law will eventually be challenged and struck down.
Click to expand...

Well no you dont. FOPA is a federal restriction not a state one
 
vegas giants said:
Well no you dont. FOPA is a federal restriction not a state one
Click to expand...

Incorrect:

No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s [1] authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Incorrect:

No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s [1] authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.
Click to expand...

Dude pot is illegally federally in the same manner. And yet I can legally get high
 
vegas giants said:
Dude pot is illegally federally in the same manner. And yet I can legally get high
Click to expand...

Show me the federal law that prohibits States from making pot legal. I've shown you the law that prohibits States from making a registry of guns. (which btw Hawaii's law does not do as it is using a federal database to house this registration which is most definitely barred from making a registration of gun owners).
 
Kal'Stang said:
Show me the federal law that prohibits States from making pot legal. I've shown you the law that prohibits States from making a registry of guns. (which btw Hawaii's law does not do as it is using a federal database to house this registration which is most definitely barred from making a registration of gun owners).
Click to expand...

It is a schedule 2 drug in the same classification as heroin. Are you kidding?
 
Kal'Stang said:
Except of course that it also includes anyone just visiting Hawaii also.
Click to expand...
So what? Those individuals are under the jurisdiction of the state of Hawaii and its laws. If it's legal for Hawaii residents, then it is legal for anyone in Hawaii's jurisdiction.

Or perhaps you imagine that someone visiting Hawaii is exempt from its laws?


And it isn't just a background check, its requiring that you register with the FBI that you own a gun.
Click to expand...
Incorrect.

It does not enter any sort of gun-tracking database at the FBI. The FBI is not creating a new database on the orders of the AG alone (that is barred by the FOA). The FBI database in question is part of the Next Generation Identification system, and it contains the names of many law-abiding citizens. The system it's used to make sure that people working in sensitive fields like education, financial services, security services or health care who are arrested in one state cannot simply cross state lines, and get a job in a field where they're not supposed to work.

This is not like being on a No Fly list. Being on the list has no effect whatsoever on any job prospects or gun ownership. You aren't flagged simply because you're in the database. It only has any effect at all if you commit a crime while you are registered in the database. In which case, the state of Hawaii surely has both the interest and legal right to know that you've committed a crime relevant to whether you should possess a firearm whilst a resident or visitor to that jurisdiction.


And yes, that last paragraph that you highlighted in red forbids that any sort of records be maintained by any federal or state facility.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. It bars the Attorney General of the United States from setting up a new database to track gun ownership on his/her own. That's why I pointed out that taking the final paragraph out of context leads you to the wrong conclusion.


There's nothing wrong with Hawaii being notified if one of their residents was arrested. But there is most definitely something wrong with them requiring that their guns be registered.
Click to expand...
Nope. There is nothing wrong with that at all.

If Hawaii wants to create its own gun registry and its own database, that is not barred by either the 2nd Amendment nor the FOA. Numerous states require the registration of some or all firearms, including (as best I can tell) IL, HI, NJ, NY, CA, MD, and DC. You may not like it, but state gun registries are 100% legal and constitutional.

It would be against the FOA for the federal government to create a national gun registry without an act of Congress. But that's not what his happening, thus this is legal and constitutional.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Incorrect...
Click to expand...
Again, you're taking it out of context. The FOA only applies to the Attorney General of the United States, and federal agencies. It does not restrict the states, many of which have already made their own registration databases, several of them doing so after the passage of the FOA.
 
These restrictions are exactly the kinds of things I do not want to see happen in my state
 
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The 2nd Amendment specifically cites the legal rights and protections of US citizens to keep and bear arms in a manner that is uninfringed. The states cannot supersede Constitutional mandates.

But I suppose all those that think this is a good thing are equally excited about letting the states make up their own laws governing marriage, Gay Rights, etc.....
 
VanceMack said:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The 2nd Amendment specifically cites the legal rights and protections of US citizens to keep and bear arms in a manner that is uninfringed. The states cannot supersede Constitutional mandates.

But I suppose all those that think this is a good thing are equally excited about letting the states make up their own laws governing marriage, Gay Rights, etc.....
Click to expand...

Good thing this is all constitutional
 
vegas giants said:
Dude pot is illegally federally in the same manner. And yet I can legally get high
Click to expand...
No, you can't. Marijuana is still illegal in the entirety of the United States.

And it is a Schedule I drug, not Schedule II.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom