Sunday, April 04, 2010


Guns don’t kill people, legislators do

by Larry Geller

I didn’t know about this very bad bill, SB358, until I read about it this morning in Ian Lind’s article, Holding the legislature at gun point:

SB 358 is a doozy. It’s a crazy gun rights bill introduced by Sen. Sam Slom that prohibits any restrictions on legally-owned guns during any form of emergency, natural disaster, or civil crisis.

So who will be responsible if some crazy blows away some innocent tourists or citizens of Hawaii? The Right is fond of the phrase “Guns don’t kill people, people do” or something like that. Which people? Obviously, the nut who pulls the trigger, and also the greedy nut who sold the gun.

But let’s not stop there. If this bill passes and someone is killed as a result, we’ll have to add, “… and legislators kill people.”  Which ones specifically? Here’s a list of those who voted in favor of this bill in committee so far (in either 2009 or 2010), in no particular order:

Espero, Bunda, English, Gabbard, Galuteria, Kidani, Hemmings, Taniguchi, Takamine, Nishihara, Slom, Hanohano, Aquino, Awana, Keith-Agaran, M. Lee, Nakashima, Saiki, Souki, Takumi, Yamashita, Pine,  Rhoads, Karamatsu, Ito, Belatti, B. Oshiro, Souki, Tsuji, Wakai, Marumoto, Thielen

The text of the bill is here, but I can’t easily snip from it, since the file is another of those scanned images (dear Capitol webmaster: these are in violation of Section 508, you know…). Google also won’t find it, in case anyone might search for it, because it’s not a text file. Intentional or not, scanning bills as images effectively keeps the text under the radar.

Now, Hawaii is different you might say. We don’t have gun nuts here. Yes we do. And they can easily get training in “an exciting and wide assortment of firearms.” If they’re really keen, they can learn to use “some of the baddest weapons on the planet.” See links in this article. Yes, right here in Hawaii.

SB358 would arm these folks.

What happens when people can own and use “some of the baddest weapons on the planet” and law enforcement is prohibited from taking them away? You may have read about the growth of militias and armed skinheads on the Mainland. If Hawaii becomes a gun haven, what will keep them out? Check out this YouTube video about one of the Mainland groups:

So now you see why I included the list of legislators who voted for this bill along the way. If it passes and becomes law, they will bear responsibility for what comes of it. No way can it be anything good. Hawaii needs lawmakers who vote “no” on pro gun nut bills.

The bill is up for a floor vote. You can email or call your representative, or reach all of them at in one single email. Mention the bill number, and say something in your own words about it. Let any groups you are associated with know about this bill. Act now, before our legislators do something we’ll all regret.


I believe the UH is quickly losing credibility and honor amongst the community. With the push for GMOs, environmental law dismantling, level 4 biological and warfare testing, experimentation and obscene connections to CIA for recruiting and other purposes such as influencing legislation related to gun control and overall autonomy of their institution by refusing to take state funds (they also need to be reminded they sit atop Hawaiian land granted to them for specific reasons). The UH is under threat of being exploited by numerous entities.
Any recommendations, proposals or urgings should be taken with a grain of salt until such time that it once again becomes a genuine learning institution. Maybe the dean and several other higher-ups need to go.
The legislators, it always appears, are easily influenced and unable to function when seduced by these entities; they are made to believe they will become a part of ʻsomethingʻ in the larger picture. Which is completely bogus, they are just being used.
Should be a protest to TAKE BACK THE UNIVERSITY from self-serving wannabes that donʻt belong anywhere but a prison cell.

I am curious as to why this is in the billʻs text?:::

(B) Compulsory RHo blood typing on females of child bearing age or younger, and such other compulsory blood typing as may be approved by competent medical authority[.];

The blood typing is in the current law, which was repeated in the bill text. It seems to have been in there already, I know not why.

Thanks. Noticed that there are no hearings scheduled for this on the site but it also looks like there might be one today. I canʻt tell:
4/1/2010 H Forty-eight (48) hours notice Tuesday, 04-06-10.

Post a Comment

Requiring those Captcha codes at least temporarily, in the hopes that it quells the flood of comment spam I've been receiving.

<< Home


page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Newer›  ‹Older