A reasonable gun regulation for all of us
In Hawaiʻi, we are taking just one small step toward a future free of gun violence by asking legislators to ban “bump stocks,” and other modifications that increase the rate-of-fire of a firearm beyond what the manufacturer intended.
Currently, House Bill 1908 and Senate Bill 2046 both seek to ban these types of rate-of-fire accelerator modifications.
This is a gun control reform that everyone should be able to get behind. It does not infringe upon an individual’s reasonable right to bear arms.
Having attended multiple hearings for these two bills now, it is clear that the primary argument from Second Amendment activists is that the language in these bills could be interpreted to restrict other kinds of modifications to triggers that, rather than increase the rate-of-fire, simply make it easier to pull the trigger of whatever gun they are added too.
Citing personal injuries to trigger fingers, nerve damage in the wrist and old age or frailty as reasons for these “ease-of-squeeze” trigger modifications, the opposition makes a reasonable point.
I think it is perfectly fair for people with disabilities, or who are too weak to pull factory triggers on their licensed and legal firearms, to expect that they may modify their triggers so that they can still participate in their Second Amendment right to reasonably bear arms in the course of hunting, defending themselves and/or engaging in legal gun sports. However, I will also insist that it is absolutely reasonable for the rest of us to expect common-sense regulations on rate-of-fire-increasing modifications as well.
I therefore call on gun-control activists and Second Amendment activists to work together to tighten the language in these bills.
Just as we require seat belts, standardized written and road testing, periodic license renewal, vision testing, annual safety inspections and insurance for vehicles — regulations intended to limit the damage an individual can cause intentionally or accidentally—we ought to require common sense regulations on firearms for the exact same reason.
No one is talking about taking away legally obtained firearms that are appropriate for hunting, self-defense or legal gun sports. We’re simply talking about ensuring that there are no loopholes that could allow someone to effectively and legally turn a semi-automatic weapon into a machine gun.
To use the car analogy one more time, we’re not even asking for regulations consistent with seat belts, regular testing, safety inspections or insurance. All that we’re asking for is regulations consistent with preventing owners from attaching a rocket booster to the back of their cars like Batman. And I think that’s something that we should all be able to get behind.
