Ige Signs Rap Back: Hawaii Gun Owners to be Placed in FBI Database

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • rob-cubed

    In need of moderation
    Sep 24, 2009
    5,387
    Holding the line in Baltimore
    See 18 U.S.C. 926, which became law pursuant to the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. It prohibits federal governments and STATES from maintaining such registries as Hawaii's.

    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 recordedat 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.”

    From the wording, this “List” is all ready prohibited by law and should be a slam dunk to get it enjoined before it goes into effect. Am I wrong or missing something here ....... ?

    Huh, I thought that was just Federal.

    In that case the MSP's database of gun ownership is illegal. As is New York's. Or potentially any state that has someone other than the FFL making the NICS check.
     

    Southwest Chuck

    A Calguns Interloper.. ;)
    Jul 21, 2011
    386
    CA
    Huh, I thought that was just Federal.

    In that case the MSP's database of gun ownership is illegal. As is New York's. Or potentially any state that has someone other than the FFL making the NICS check.

    Yup. So is CA's registration. I'm sure AG Loretta Lynch will get right on it and sue all those States into compliance. ;)
     

    Rab1515

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 29, 2014
    2,081
    Calvert
    Why isn't this a higher priority on the lawsuit scale? Seems like a very clear cut case to (non lawyer) me. Granted all cases like this take a substantial amount of money.
     

    Mark75H

    MD Wear&Carry Instructor
    Industry Partner
    MDS Supporter
    Sep 25, 2011
    17,243
    Outside the Gates
    Why isn't this a higher priority on the lawsuit scale? Seems like a very clear cut case to (non lawyer) me. Granted all cases like this take a substantial amount of money.

    Here's your answer:

    Yup. So is CA's registration. I'm sure AG Loretta Lynch will get right on it and sue all those States into compliance. ;)
     

    pcfixer

    Ultimate Member
    May 24, 2009
    5,953
    Marylandstan
    https://www.oathkeepers.org/navyjack-its-time-for-an-adult-discussion-about-gun-control/

    The next time you hear the President tell you that we need to ban “assault rifles” because they are “weapons of war”, you tell him that what he and other politicians have sarcastically labeled as “assault rifles” are significantly less lethal than a standard semi-automatic hunting rifle. At close range, like was the case in Orlando, the so called “assault rifles” are no more lethal than a shotgun or standard handgun. You tell the President that since the expiration of the 1994 “assault weapons” ban, violent crime and murder have fallen to historic lows in our nation. You tell him that you know that his attempts to ban semi-automatic weapons will put you and your loved ones in greater danger from crazed murderers and terrorist that will certainly disregard his silly edicts.
     

    motorcoachdoug

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    It is time that this be brought to Hogans attention. Since that rabid anti 2A AG will never tell him about this law and since his not doing his duty hmm under artical 5 of the MD Constitution he could be removed for not doing his job. I wonder who would be able to remove him ??? Also mabe send a copy of this to every Demorat in the AG as well. Making sure Mike & Mike get a copy of this. I would love to see their faces when they read this hehehe... What do you think of this idea?
     

    rbird7282

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 6, 2012
    18,689
    Columbia
    It is time that this be brought to Hogans attention. Since that rabid anti 2A AG will never tell him about this law and since his not doing his duty hmm under artical 5 of the MD Constitution he could be removed for not doing his job. I wonder who would be able to remove him ??? Also mabe send a copy of this to every Demorat in the AG as well. Making sure Mike & Mike get a copy of this. I would love to see their faces when they read this hehehe... What do you think of this idea?



    They don't care. Only thing to make them comply is a court order (which they may or may not ignore), removal from office, or arrest.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    delaware_export

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 10, 2018
    3,210
    i scanned about 2/3 through. for the lawyer folks... how do you read between that many redacted lines?

    i mean... the one thing i got was that their administrator was on vacation and they had to wait until the end of march...
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,402
    Messages
    7,280,317
    Members
    33,450
    Latest member
    angel45z

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom