Hawaii’s law-abiding gun owners once again face an openly hostile piece of legislation that will not only infringe upon but, in certain cases, permanently strip individuals of their Second Amendment rights.
Generally, a severe action is responsible for loss of constitutionally guaranteed rights, such as a criminal conviction or mental adjudication. However, under Senate Bill 898, all that is needed to permanently revoke an individual’s Second Amendment right is simply an allegation. SB 898 is a poorly written bill that would make otherwise lawful gun owners guilty until proven innocent, based on a subjective opinion and little evidence.
If signed into law, SB 898 will allow confiscation of firearms and ammunition if a law enforcement officer suspects that an individual could be a danger to themselves or society. Simply put, a confiscation warrant can be issued if the court is merely presented with probable cause, at which point law enforcement will arrive at the individual’s home to search and seize all firearms and ammunition — with no notice or warning. Only after confiscation will another hearing occur, this time to decide if that person will lose their Second Amendment rights for life.
Perhaps most disturbing is the absurdly low evidentiary standard used in obtaining the warrant and at the subsequent hearing. To confiscate a firearm, the court only needs a law enforcement officer’s claim that an individual is dangerous. To then permanently prohibit an individual from firearm ownership, the court only needs “clear and convincing” evidence — a far cry less than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” required for criminal conviction. Hawaii’s gun owners face a law that will label them as guilty before they are even presented with a warrant, in a process that wouldn’t even meet evidentiary standards for a petty theft conviction.
Additionally, SB 898 is alarmingly vague. While citing “documented, credible evidence” as a viable reason to revoke a constitutionally protected right, no examples or guidelines are given. The court can consider “any other pertinent factors” in making their ruling, but again these factors are undefined with no parameters. The words of disgruntled neighbors, spurned acquaintances and other unfriendly individuals could result in loss of Second Amendment rights for life. To say that this system would be ripe for abuse is a laughable understatement.
The bill’s supporters will argue that guns need to be kept away from dangerous people, no matter the cost or inconvenience. While we can all agree that dangerous people should not have access to firearms, SB 898 burdens and threatens Hawaii’s law-abiding gun owners but does nothing to address legitimately prohibited people. The confiscation of firearms and permanent revocation of the Second Amendment based on accusations will not deter criminals, but is a dangerous infringement for lawful citizens. The criminal justice system has historically used legitimate and deeply scrutinized evidence in its proceedings. Not so under SB 898.
Hawaii has a history of hostility toward gun owners, and this bill is further evidence of that. That the state Senate is willing to consider restricting constitutional rights based on accusations and scanty evidence is proof of that hostility. This is unacceptable and just plain wrong.
———
Amy Hunter is media liaison for the NRA (National Rifle Association)’s Institute for Legislative Action.
Correction: An earlier version of this story meant to call the right to bear arms a “constitutionally protected right,” not a “constitutionally prohibited” one, as was inadvertently written.
