Hawaii becomes first U.S. state to place gun owners on FBI database - Polidicks

[url]http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0ZA3IP[/url] [quote](Reuters) - Hawaii's governor signed a bill making it the first state to place its residents who own firearms in a federal criminal record database and monitor them for possible wrongdoing anywhere in the country, his office said. The move by gun control proponents in the liberal state represents an effort to institute some limits on firearms in the face of a bitter national debate over guns that this week saw Democratic lawmakers stage a sit-in at the U.S. House of Representatives.[/quote] Glad to see that some action is FINALLY being taken.

[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50601850][url]http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0ZA3IP[/url] Glad to see that some action is FINALLY being taken.[/QUOTE] Do you not see the potential legal ramifications of this?

ALL gun owners? Uhh...

They realize this just strengthens opposition nationally right?

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;50601860]Do you not see the potential legal ramifications of this?[/QUOTE] Anti-Gun doesn't care, in fact many of them are in full support of the legal ramifications.

Well, that's going to make the state vote for Trump just to get rid of this.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;50601896]Anti-Gun doesn't care, in fact many of them are in full support of the legal ramifications.[/QUOTE] I get that, but it sets a precedent that can spill over into other things other than guns. That's the problem.

Does the President even have the power to reverse this?

Uh, what the fuck? Yeah no, this is fucked in everyway possible.

Isn't crime really fucking low in Hawaii? This is unecessary as fuck lol. Last mass shooting in Hawaii was Xerox in 1999.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;50601905]I get that, but it sets a precedent that can spill over into other things other than guns. That's the problem.[/QUOTE] "But guns are a dangerous thing to human lives," so said my first thoughts. What else is dangerous? Data theft. We cyberpunk soon.

[QUOTE=Chaitin;50601910]Does the President even have the power to reverse this?[/QUOTE] Obama protect gun owners? As much as I like him, especially over our current options, that seems highly unlikely.

No I mean legally speaking if Trump gets in.

Well now we can see if a gun owner database will actually help deter crime or if it's just a kneejerk reactionary move, I guess.

Jesus christ, they've tossed in potentially hundreds of law-abiding citizens in with actual convicts to "wait and see [I]when & if[/I] they commit a crime". This isn't just bad for gun rights, this is bad for civil rights in general. Becoming a police state like this is only going to strengthen the resolve of pro-gun activists.

Haha here we go.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50601949]Jesus christ, they've tossed in potentially hundreds of law-abiding citizens in with actual convicts to "wait and see [I]when & if[/I] they commit a crime". This isn't just bad for gun rights, this is bad for civil rights in general. Becoming a police state like this is only going to strengthen the resolve of pro-gun activists.[/QUOTE] We're already owned by corporations so it's great seeing us go another step towards a dystopia.

[QUOTE=GhillieBacca;50601916]Isn't crime really fucking low in Hawaii? This is unecessary as fuck lol. Last mass shooting in Hawaii was Xerox in 1999.[/QUOTE] So they should only do shit once they get shot up? The worst mass shooting the in US happened 2 weeks ago.

This is bad for everyone's civil rights.

I don't really see how this is infringing on civil rights, it's essentially just tracking firearms. The only real problem is that they're being grouped with criminals. Still, it's probably one of the safest routes you can take at this point.

[QUOTE=Jmax;50601978]So they should only do shit once they get shot up? The worst mass shooting the in US happened 2 weeks ago.[/QUOTE] Do you understand the concept of "innocent until guilty" or is it that if you own a gun you're prone to being guilty to start?

Funny to see you all surprised, Hawaii has always had notoriously strict gun rights. This is an extra slap in the face for locals in Hawaii too, they're already xenophobic of mainland-America cultures and the government.

[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;50601991]I don't really see how this is infringing on civil rights, it's essentially just tracking firearms. The only real problem is that they're being grouped with criminals. Still, it's probably one of the safest routes you can take at this point.[/QUOTE] Gun registrations already exist for tracking firearms.

criminalizing law abiding citizens based on arbitrary criteria? hey, it's the [B]exact reason[/B] the founding fathers wanted to make sure the people have access to weapons

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50601996]Do you understand the concept of "innocent until guilty" or is it that if you own a gun you're prone to being guilty to start?[/QUOTE] My point is, stating how long ago since the mass shooting in Hawaii doesn't mean anything.

[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;50601991]I don't really see how this is infringing on civil rights, it's essentially just tracking firearms. The only real problem is that they're being grouped with criminals. Still, it's probably one of the safest routes you can take at this point.[/QUOTE] No law-abiding, non-criminal citizen should be on a federal database without consent. No exceptions. [quote]monitor them for possible wrongdoing anywhere in the country, his office said.[/quote] There's no fair legal assumption that any wrong doing is going to ever be committed because someone owns a gun. This gives precedent to further discrimination in the guise of stopping crime. "well we put everyone who lives in the ghetto on a list because they [I]might[/I] commit crime." "Well we put every Muslim on a list because they [I]might[/I] be a terrorist" (something that's been talked about, I remind you.) All in the name of safety, right?

This is just bullshit.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50602001]criminalizing law abiding citizens based on arbitrary criteria? hey, it's the [B]exact reason[/B] the founding fathers wanted to make sure the people have access to weapons[/QUOTE] while this does go a bit far, saying that the founding fathers wanted to make sure we had access to weapons on account of these things currently happening is akin to saying darwin wanted access to knowledge of evolution so we could find out there are parallel universes. Every single time a thread like this pops up you are on here saying it infringes on the rights of the common american because of "What the founding fathers intended" but neglect to realise in 1775-76 they had access to cannon and musket, not assault rifles and semi-automatics. Truth is in nowhere did every single founding father say that everyone should have access to guns to violently overthrow their government based on tyranny. in fact that is the exact opposite of what they intended by a "peaceful revolution." as an added state/federal rights level, you consistently say that states should have more power over regulation in certain terms, but when it comes to the issue of guns and state's rights, it's suddenly a non-issue. Truth be told we cannot know what the founding fathers [I]intended[/I] but we can know what they didn't intend, and that is for massacres and mass shootings to happen on a nearly daily basis. To do nothing is a perversion on the tenants of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and to do something, and issue of the "rights" of citizens.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;50602046]So on top of guns being prohibitively espensive, the 6 hour training course, and the 14 day waiting period, and registering the weapon with the police, you get put on an FBI list as well. I mean it's just another step towards the islands being turned into gun free zones. It flys in the face of justice, but whatever, it's for the children, right?[/QUOTE] Firearms being banned in hawaii isn't a bad thing, and by playing off "It's for the children!" is a misnomer. Hawaii has different demographics as well as is nearly 6 hours removed from the mainland. if they wanted to ban guns by all means they could, moreso better off than the 49 other states, with higher regulatory action, it could be gun free and be kept gun free.

[QUOTE=TheDestroyerOfall;50602079]but neglect to realise in 1775-76 they had access to cannon and musket, not assault rifles and semi-automatics. [/QUOTE] "The founding fathers were clearly too stupid to understand the concept of technological innovation and growth with weapons despite a couple centuries prior man was fighting with swords instead of guns"