Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Firearms Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs action on one firearm measure, defers related magazine bill after marathon testimony
Summary
Lawmakers approved moving one firearms ban forward after broad public testimony and deferred a related high-capacity magazine bill for later work; public testimony ran strongly for and against limits.
The House Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs on March 13 debated multiple firearms bills and took mixed action: it deferred Senate Bill 308 (SD2), which would expand magazine limits, and moved forward Senate Bill 401 (SD2) after adopting amendments that insert companion language from the House (HB893 HD1) and deferring the effective date.
The committee hearing produced lengthy public testimony that included veterans, gun-safety advocates, legal scholars, and many private citizens. Testifiers presented sharply divided views over constitutional rights, public-safety consequences and enforcement practicality.
Department of Law Enforcement Director Mike Lambert testified in support of limiting certain magazines and of the 50-caliber restriction. "We stand in strong support of this bill," Lambert said of SB 308 and again for SB 401 when it was considered. The Honolulu Police Department and the Department of Law Enforcement framed their support in terms of public-safety risk and balancing grandfathering for existing owners.
Gun-safety advocates urged stronger limits. Olivia Lee, senior counsel for policy at Everytown for Gun Safety, urged restoration of an earlier draft that would have applied a 10-round limit across firearm types. "The state should do everything it can to preserve its current 10 round limit for pistols, and absolutely not expand to a 30 round limit for other firearms," Lee said.
Opponents argued the bills are unconstitutional and would penalize law-abiding owners while doing little to deter criminal behavior. Multiple testifiers cited U.S. Supreme Court precedent; Michael Rice testified that the measures violate decisions including Heller and Caetano. Others warned about grandfathering complications and magazine compatibility across platforms.
Key technical and policy problems discussed included how the bills treat magazines that fit multiple firearm families, the reach and effect of grandfathering clauses (SB401 exempts magazines obtained before Jan. 1, 2026 in some drafts), and practical enforcement concerns raised by police and several testifiers.
Public view counts: the committee clerk reported hundreds of written statements — for SB308 the clerk reported 28 in support, 268 in opposition and 8 comments; for SB401 the clerk reported 135 in support, 247 in opposition, and 2 with comments.
Committee action: the committee deferred SB308 (SD2) for additional work and moved SB401 (SD2) forward by inserting the House language (HB893 HD1) and defecting the effective date. During the roll call the committee chair announced that Representative Shimizu recorded a "no" vote on the SB401 action; Representatives Cochran and Garcia were excused from that recorded vote.
Why it matters: advocates for stricter limits cite studies tying high-capacity magazines to higher fatality counts in mass-shooting incidents; opponents counter that most shootings involve illegal firearms and that magazine limits would disproportionately affect lawful owners and raise constitutional challenges.
Clarifying details: SB401’s SD2 language as discussed would exempt detachable magazines in excess of 30 rounds that are designed for or capable of use with any firearm other than a pistol and that were obtained before Jan. 1, 2026. The committee instructed staff to insert HB893 (HD1) language and to defect the bill’s effective date to allow the House language to be used going forward.
Where it goes next: SB308 was deferred for later committee decision. SB401 was moved out with the committee’s amendment inserting the House language; the committee recorded a single named no vote (Representative Shimizu) and recorded excusals for Representatives Cochran and Garcia.
Ending: lawmakers said they will continue to reconcile constitutional concerns and technical drafting (compatibility and grandfathering) as the measures move through the process.
Speakers quoted in this article come from the March 13, 2025 hearing transcript and include law-enforcement officials, public witnesses and committee members.
