Proposed Hawaii law would prevent gun seizures during emergencies

[shadowrider]

HONOLULU (AP) - A bill preventing the government from seizing legal firearms during an emergency has been passed by the Hawaii Legislature.

The full Senate voted 21-0 Friday to approve the measure after it already passed the House.

The proposal prohibits the seizure of firearms or ammunition when the government invokes emergency powers during a disaster.

It gained momentum after February's tsunami warning, when lawmakers said their constituents asked if their weapons could be taken in an emergency situation.

Gun-rights activists have pursued this kind of law since Hurricane Katrina, when New Orleans police confiscated guns in an attempt to restore order.

The bill now advances to Governor Linda Lingle.

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/global/story.asp?s=12326819

[proteus_lives]

1. Good. I hope she signs it.

[sharesunited]

2. Definitely smell the stank of the NRA all over THAT one!

[jazzhound]

3. Definitely smell the stank of willful ignorance and bigotry

all over your postings.

[meegbear]

4. Oh SNAP girlfriend!

[spin]

10. Try living in the aftermath of a hurricane ...

and you might have some appreciation of the value of a firearm for self defense.

You are basically on your own. Even if you can contact the police in case of a problem, they may be unable to reach you. Fallen trees tend to block roads after a severe storm. Many streets are flooded and totally impassible.

If you are in your home and had the commonsense to stock up on food and water, you have a good chance of surviving until services are restored. One of your biggest fears, and it is a real one, is falling prey to a gang of looters. A 12 gauge shotgun is an effective deterrent in such situations. You are basically living in a lawless society and such a society emboldens the worst among us.

To have the authorities stop by your house and confiscate your firearms in an emergency violates your rights to self defense. They can't protect you and they take away your means to protect yourself.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. In Hawaii? Surely not even you are that dumb

[Callisto32]

23. MMMMMM, gunpowder and cordite.

[damntexdem]

5. More American idiocy.

In the case of an extreme emergency, I hope that the authorities ignore the law, if it becomes law.

[shadowrider]

6. If you're not willing to personally guarantee their safety after a disaster

or have a reasonable way they CAN defend themselves without a weapon, speak up.

They have a right to defend themselves by any means necessary.

[sharesunited]

7. Hat tip to a sensible person.

[PavePusher]

11. Are you volunteering? n/t

[X_Digger]

12. You're advocating breaking the law? How nice. n/t

[Euromutt]

14. Not just breaking the law, but undermining its rule

In essence, advocating tyranny. Delightful.

[Euromutt]

13. Political Science 101: authority is the LEGITIMATE exercise of power

An executive branch of government that knowingly and deliberately violates the law ceases to be legitimate.

[benEzra]

16. Yeah, because in a natural disaster,

More American idiocy. In the case of an extreme emergency, I hope that the authorities ignore the law, if it becomes law.

Yeah, because in a natural disaster, you REALLY want to pull first responders away from rescuing people so that they can go take guns from homeowners; you REALLY want victims to fear and distrust the authorities; and you REALLY REALLY want authorities to go rogue and illegally threaten lawfully-armed victims with lethal force in order to make them comply with tinpot edicts.

:sarcasm:

In New Orleans, with people drowning in their attics or stranded and starving in flooded neighborhoods, and thousands stranded in the Superdome, what the hell were the California Highway Patrol, DEA, and Oklahoma National Guard doing in undamaged high-and-dry neighborhoods kicking in doors, cuffing homeowners, and stealing their guns?

I'm a member of my local CERT team, and I can say that if we ever have a Katrina in this area (or even another Floyd), the last thing on authorities' minds will be to go paramilitary on the victims. It just makes no sense, and taking that threat off the table helps disaster preparedness all around.

[oneshooter]

17. Texas passed a similar law last year.

Are you volunteering to give up your arms during an emergency?

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[friendly_iconoclast]

18. Vice-President Cheney, is that you?

You will, of course help the State of Hawai'i defend itself against the inevitable lawsuits should they attempt such
an un-Constitutional act, amirite?

[Callisto32]

24. Congratulations! You just won a free pair of jack-boots!

For real?

You've got problems that only a professional can help.

[d_r]

8. Think about it, this makes sense.

Hawaii is made up of islands. If zombies come, folks are going to be stuck on an island with the zombies. They'll need guns. Pretty much the same thing goes for alien invasions.

[shadowrider]

9. Forget "Alien" invasions, how about "Home" invasions. THOSE aren't a figment of the imagination

No home defense allowed?

[struggle4progress]

19. I never thought of firearms as a defense against tsunamis, but

we don't get many tsunamis here in the Carolina Piedmont

There's a tornado or a hurricane every now and then, though. When Fran tore everybody up fifteen or so years ago, there were lots of stories about neighbors checking in on neighbors; I suppose some of them could have been looking for an opportunity to steal nice TVs, but mostly it seemed to be "Sorry the tree fell on your car. Are you OK? Can I give you a ride to the grocery?" I guess the next time I hear reports of a big whirlwind, I should head down to my local gunshop and see if I can frighten the spinner off by brandishing a loaded revolver

[benEzra]

20. I think this is aimed more at

preventing New Orleans style confiscations.

The scenario you paint, of neighbors helping neighbors, is an accurate one in most areas. Throwing in some New Orleans style door kicking, homeowner cuffing, and gun theft under color of law doesn't help the situation, though. Especially when those first responders are being pulled from search and rescue to do so, as in the New Orleans debacle.

[struggle4progress]

22. What happened in New Orleans bears examination, but it seems to me

that the issues go far beyond "over-reaching government confiscates guns." The DU archives should contain news stories from the time, indicating that a first reaction of some Republican political theorists was Hey! A disaster will enable us to turn New Orleans red! Misleading press coverage then created an inaccurate impression of violent dangerous rioting slum residents, which created fear in surrounding areas and prevented hungry thirty people from leaving the city for safer ground. Meanwhile, the Federal authorities, controlled by a group of ideologues whose primary belief was "the Federal government can do nothing good," did ... well, nothing. In the end, large numbers of New Orleans residents were essentially deported to other parts of the country

The actual responses, and (sometimes sadly more important) actual lack of responses, to the New Orleans tragedy served specific political interests. Professional first responders, and a number of would-be volunteers, were prevented from doing search-and-rescue work in the early days -- because preventing such work served those interests.

[GreenStormCloud]

26. While there were definately many issues with Katrina, that does not mean...

...that gun confiscations were NOT an issue. Since this is the Guns forum, then that is the issue that we are looking at. Looting after a major disaster is a serious problem. Most people will want to help each other, but a few human predators will see the civil breakdown as a chance to run wild. Those people have to be defended against, and the civil authorities aren't able to do it. You have to defend yourself.

[benEzra]

27. Oh, I agree.

But the footage of National Guard soldiers, DEA, and CHP going door to door, roughing up survivors, stealing their guns, and hauling some of them off to internment facilities went far beyond mere purposeful neglect, and moved into something even more frightening, IMO. The ABC affiliate interviewed an Oklahoma Guard soldier, fresh from Iraq and in full combat gear, who talked about the possibility of having to shoot American citizens in the context of the door-to-door confiscations. That is something straight out of B-movies and pessimistic survivalist novels, and there it was being talked about on national TV like it was OK.

That and other footage got a whole lot of play nationwide, and as a result there was an immense amount of discussion on the gun boards after Katrina about how, as a homeowner, to keep a low profile and keep your presence in your home hidden from the authorities after a natural disaster. As a CERT volunteer myself, I think I can say that if the first responders are seen as the "bad guys" by the survivors in the aftermath of a disaster, your effectiveness is going to go all to hell, and you've monkeywrenched search-and-rescue, aid distribution, and recovery efforts immensely. First responders need that trust to be effective.

That's why, IMO, this type of no-confiscations legislation is important even if confiscations ARE exceedingly rare---because the legislation helps defuse some of that post-Katrina mistrust, and clarifies both to the citizens and to the authorities that opportunistic gun confiscation is completely out of bounds.

[slackmaster]

21. If they could come up with a law that would prevent gun JAMS during emergencies

That would be even better.

[Callisto32]

25. Except they would be about as effective as prohibitions.

[one-eyed fat man]

28. Here's why.....

If you were a) jacked up, b) held at gunpoint, or c) politely asked to hand over your firearm as you a) left town, b) went about your business or c) tried to help your neighbors in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, you might be eligible to get your illegally confiscated gun back if you follow the rules established by the court. According to the terms of the permanent injunction against the city, issued in October 2008, the city has to “make an aggressive attempt to return any and all firearms which may have been confiscated during the period August 29 to December 31, 2005.”

The New Orleans PD website and the procedures to get back the guns they told the judge they didn't take.....if they still have them. (That's those that some cop didn't keep because it was too nice to throw in the river.)

http://www.cityofno.com/pg-50-138-hurricane-katrina-firearms.aspx

The information you must provide and forms you need to have filled out.

http://www.cityofno.com/Portals/Portal50/Resources/Firearm%20Release%20Form.pdf